2009-07-27

Turretinfan responds to some arguments that Psalm 58 doesn’t teach original sin. The objector has a few presuppositions: i) Guilt can only come from what you personally do. But in undercutting imputed guilt you undercut imputed righteousness. ii) The age of accountability precludes it. Also, original sin isn’t like a slime, like contracting a physical disease. Original sin actually has three aspects: i) Guilt of Adam’s first sin. ii) Absence of original righteousness. iii) Corruption of nature. Now, it is pointed out that this is poetry. But what the objector misses is that this also means there is parallelism, which Ps. 58 is full of. http://turretinfan.blogspot.com/2009/06/psalms-583-vs-kerrigan-skelly.html

TGC has a series by DA Carson on the temptation of Adam and Eve, Joseph, Hezekiah, Jesus, and the believer. Carson Sermons on Temptation

Adams has a short tribute to John Calvin, noting his pastoral work and concern for the person on the street. He even asked for his meager salary to help other pastors. John Calvin

Challies has a quote of Whitefield forcing a child to pray, apparently giving several blows to the obstinate child, and then rewarding him with figs when he did. A Humble but Flawed Servant

T-fan takes issue with Challies criticism of Whitefield for ‘breaking a child’s will’, asking what standard of judgment Challies is using and on what basis he thinks Whitefield is wrong. Whitfield Criticized for Breaking a Child's Will

Bird quotes some comments on Calvin’s theology at two points. i) It cannot be integrated with the Eastern Orthodox notion of theosis, since Calvin had dispensed entirely with the idea of the interpenetration of natures. Believers only share in Christ’s human nature, not divine, and if not divine, then there is no divinisation. ii) As to whether Calvin held to a twofold communion with Christ, one being sanctification/governing by the Spirit, directing us, and the other is granted by participation in Christ’s righteousness, it is very odd to treat justification as a form of communion if justification is understood along the lines of imputation of alien righteousness. Calvin and Theosis

Burk quotes an article in CT which asks whether the gay marriage debate is over and argues that shifting views on marriage are due to a radical individualism which has caused capitulation among evangelicals. Basically, evangelicals are hypocrites here - arguing for the sanctity of marriage while divorcing/approving of remarriage at damaging rates; arguing that the state can insist on certain values while failing to submit to even the local church; and saying that marriage is about more than self-fulfillment while with the tide of culture delaying marriage until we experience ‘life’, and then delaying children until we enjoy each other for a few years. Is the Gay Marriage Debate Over-

Jeremy Pierce offers some excellent points on Blomberg’s “Calminian” post (which is really just Molinism with a fancy name). He explains why it doesn’t work (as summarized here previously). Moreover, he writes, “I don't think freedom requires this absolute power to do something contrary to what we actually do. Libertarians insist that our choices can't be explained by any events within us, but I think freedom makes no sense unless our character and internal nature lead to our choices. When I want my choices to be free, what I want is for my own desires and character to lead to what I do in the right sort of way. So freedom doesn't conflict with being caused. It requires it. This compatibilism about freedom and predetermination is exactly what Calvinists have long insisted on.” At the end of the day his middle ground just isn’t a middle ground. http://parablemania.ektopos.com/archives/2009/07/calminianism.html

“While speaking at the National Press Club luncheon, Democratic Congressman John Conyers(D-Mich.), who is also the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, mocks the need to read bills before voting on them, because it takes two lawyers to interpret them and more than two days to work through them! And this from the chair of the Judiciary Committee????” More Irresponsible Behavior from Our Congress