Interesting comment from Reformation21 on commentaries: “if you want doctrinal insights and applications, you need to look at older commentaries… while the technical exegesis is in some respects improved of late, the sense of the message of the text has regressed. If our commentaries reveal anything, we are becoming more technically acute but also less receptive of the prophetic message of the text for us. Does this indicate a professionalization of the exegetical calling, so that we are more skilled in working over the Word and less atuned to sitting under the Word? Yes, I think it does.” Working Over or Sitting Under the Word (Rick Phillips)
Witherington is reviewing Jesus, Interrupted. “Bart Ehrman, so far as I can see, and I would be glad to be proved wrong about this fact, has never done the necessary laboring in the scholarly vineyard to be in a position to write a book like Jesus, Interrupted from a position of long study and knowledge of New Testament Studies. He has never written a scholarly monograph on NT theology or exegesis. He has never written a scholarly commentary on any New Testament book whatsoever! His area of expertise is in textual criticism, and he has certainly written works like The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture, which have been variously reviewed, not to mention severely critiqued by other textual critics such as Gordon D. Fee, and his own mentor Bruce Metzger (whom I also did some study with).” http://benwitherington.blogspot.com/2009/04/bart-interrupted-detailed-analysis-of.html. HT: Ben Witherington Critiques Bart Ehrman
Swan writes, in light of Dave Armstrong saying regarding the NCAB (a Bible to which Armstrong contributed the insert notes) contains “some theologically liberal errors” in the verse notes, that “according to Mr. Armstrong I have the following attributes: "clueless, ignorant, dense, know-nothing, slanderer, nit wit, anti-Catholic imbecile desperate for attention, liar, and spewer of idiotic nonsense." I would rather be all these things than be the person knowingly selling a corrupt translation of the Bible with liberal notes, claiming the product is something a person should own. A theologian of glory would sell such a product, a theologian of the cross would rather starve.” The Biblical Text of the NCAB- daringly redacts, rearranges, or otherwise mistranslates the sacr
Courtney on Genderblog asks women, “Godly men will be looking for godly wives, so how are we supposed to live?” and says, i) Be saturated in the Word of God, love theology – if you love Jesus, you will love His word, and study it, etc. This is also essential for teaching women and children. ii) Don’t be on a quest for a husband, but cultivate a contentment in Christ, striving not to ‘take over’ situations with false intuitions when you meet a man. Being pursued means what it implies – waiting. iii) Manipulation is a woman’s forte. Don’t do it. Don’t usurp male leadership when looking for it in trying to pursue a man by manipulation. iv) a woman’s pursuit of God is not a means to finding a godly husband. None of this is easy, but don’t be worldly. Qualities of a Godly Woman- Part 1
Philosopher Kant thought that the true nature of the world is external to the sensing agent and was not accessible for beings limited in their sentient existence to the sensible world (or phenomena). He thought we can only know about how things appear to us, not things in themselves. Philosophy Word of the Day – Sensible World
“In preparation for public speaking, according to one commentator, the ratio of grind to glamour is three to one. The glamour of five minutes of productive words can only be achieved by the grind of (at least) fifteen minutes of reading, researching and hard thinking. Preaching, of course, is not soundbite; it is not polished rhetoric; its effect does not rest on the irresistible logic of the preacher's argumentation, but on the irresistible grace of the preacher's God. But preaching, like oratory, is public speaking, and demands our highest attention, and our conscientious preparation. Shall we offer to the Lord that which has cost us nothing?” Reflections on Sacred Rhetoric (Iain D Campbell)
Hays has some remarks for an apostate. Hays isn’t some kid running a blog. He’s pushing 50 and in failing health. He doesn’t expect to be here for decades more. If he lost faith, Triablogue would be a testimony against him. And when people lose faith, they seem compelled to make sure that everyone else goes down with them. Apostates and other atheists are dangerous because they are social engineers. Their ideas aren’t harmless ideas. Atheism robs us of everything we care of in life, it robs us of beauty, and our mental life, reducing it to meaninglessness and mere chemistry. ‘Apostasy is Good Friday without the prospect of Easter. McGrath denies the empty tomb. And by denying the empty tomb, he entombs us all. Buried alive.’ The Last Puritan
Manata has some material on the history of war here, to the effect that, “we will first look at two popular causes of war people like to bandy about—religion and irreligion—and declare a pox on both houses. Next, we will speculate that the causes of war are multiple.” Lennon, Maher, Dawkins, village atheists and others have blamed religion (‘religion poisons everything’). But “After a blistering survey of “the bloodiest century of all,” Meic Pearse could claim that irreligion “has proved more lethal than religion ever was.” If this is called a ‘political religion’, it becomes an unfalsifiable dogma through word-smithing. It’s naive to think war follows either religion or irreligion. The causes of war are vastly more complex. i) even after a massive study on genocide and mass killing; James Waller could not confidently assert that he fully understands the causes. ii) the causes can be looked at from the “standpoint of economics, politics, history, ideology, ethics, and various other disciplines” iii) Thomas Farr finds that it is the degree to which a country allows religious freedom to flourish that plays a major role in expressions of civility antithetical to warmongering. iv) suicide terrorism isn’t so clean-cut: most were “well beyond adolescence, most were secular, and many—the overwhelming majority in some groups—were women.” It’s not cooked up in the mind of some religious fanatic (based on massive research by Pape). Rather, it ‘is the “strategic logic” of terrorists “to compel modern democracies” to withdraw their forces from what the terrorists “consider to be their homeland.”’ The reality is that killers are normal – and they have our faces. War Pigs
These claims by some friendly neighbourhood atheists are … lacking? Easter Ignorance
Hays responds to an Molinist interlocuter. Here’s some points: i) determinism doesn’t rule out alternate possibilities – supralapsarian Calvinism holds that God chose a particular end with its means out of possible ends with corresponding means. ii) Calvinism distinguishes between divine agency and human agency, and the conditions for each are not interchangeable. iii) Appeals to alternate possibilities that fail to distinguish between the psychological process of deliberation and the extramental structure of the world is fatally ambiguous. iv) As libertarian Kane defined choice.” The Molinist doesn’t like philisophical/technical definitions, think that this is ordinary language: ”A choice involves the power to instantiate alternate possibilities” The latter is loaded with metaphysical assumptions, the former describes it in terms of psychological dynamics. v) in Calvinism, the freedom of the creature is more limited than the freedom which libertarianism imputes to the creature, and this isn’t an argument for either. It’s just an observation. vi) In this instance, the interlocuter’s definition of choice is opposed to his own view – in “Molinism, God is the only agent who can instantiate alternate possibilities. It’s God who determines which possible world to actualize, not the human agent.” There are possible worlds in which people would do A, B, or C, but God picks which to instantiate. vii) From a Molinist standpoint, in what sense is God’s knowledge temporally prior? If God is contemplating possible worlds, then that would be apart from time since time itself would be a result of instantiating a possible world. Of course, Molinism fails to explain how God can know the future actions of free agents. viii) God knows what is going to happen because God decreed the outcome and God also executes his decree through primary and secondary causation. Molinistic determinism
Engwer has some thoughts on the Craig/Carrier debate. i) Craig had said that the witness of the Holy Spirit is one way of being convinced (apart from a historical argument, which he focused on in this debate), so the question of why Jesus didn’t appear to more people is rather weak, given this alternative. ii) Carrier attempted to argue that the gospels are not a historical genre, against much scholarship, the perception of the earliest writers in history, and even the early enemies of the faith (sources provided). iii) Carrier relies on parallels with the Old Testament echoes as found in the NT, but if material sometimes is parallel and sometimes isn’t parallel to something in the OT, what connects this diversity? Well, the historical life of Christ described using these echoes would, much like how we allude to literature, movies, etc. iv) Carrier makes a few weak arguments, like the idea that unique material in a Gospel isn’t true, but when there is a similarity, it disproves the historicity because it’s clearly an adaptation. v) Regarding Carrier's claim that "nobody" outside the gospels seems to have seen the darkness at the time of the crucifixion, see here. Julius Africanus suggests that there was corroboration from multiple non-Christian sources. vi) Engwer provides links to various treatments of aspects of the resurrection; e.g. there's much in Paul's writings that suggests that hallucinations are unlikely; others may have known of the resurrections in Matthew 27; etc. vii) Carrier repeatedly refers to the Christians who saw the risen Christ as "fanatical" followers of Jesus, but all of the gospels agree in portraying the witnesses as discouraged and doubtful, with a mixture of belief and unbelief. viii) Engwer provides some arguments against the hallucination speculations. There’s a lot of arguments from silence made by Carrier. Craig Debate On The Resurrection
An unbeliever poses that ‘they made it all up’ saying ‘hearsay’ is weak, as a naturalistic explanation for the evidence of the resurrection. Hays points out that i) this argument has no consideration for the best explanation. Is every explanation for every possible claim in history ‘obvious’? ii) is the claim that hearsay evidence weak based on extensive firsthand research and observation? Or does he rely on second-hand info for that claim? iii) Does he have firsthand evidence that the Gospel writers made stuff up? If not, then by his own yardstick his naturalistic explanation for Mt 27:52 is “extremely weak.” iv) Isn’t the claim that people fabricate historical evidence a historical claim? Doesn’t that very claim rely on historical evidence that people fabricate historical evidence? How is his claim exempt from his own skepticism? An obvious natural explanation
Hays comments on a deconversion testimony. “it’s striking how formulaic these deconversions stories generally are. A young man grows up in a legalistic, fideistic, insular Christian environment. At some point he’s exposed, for the first time in his adult life, to a teacher or writer who’s hostile to the Christian faith. The instant he encounters an opposing view, his childhood faith evaporates on contact. And he finds this a liberating experience.” i) How in the world can this be the experience in the age of American media, TV, etc? Are these apostates Amish farmhands? ii) Apostasy is often the result of false expectations. The Bible, on the other hand, doesn’t build these up – it records the existence of unbelievers. iii) A lot of people must read the Bible without applying it to themselves or the world around them. The first time they read some objection, their faith shatters. iv) Deconversion testimonies rely on emotional appeals. Hays doesn’t relate to their naive experience, and therefore the arguments have no effect on him: He wonders how anyone could be that clueless to begin with. v) “For folks who pride themselves on being freethinkers, this groupthink mentality ought to disturb them. The degree to which their apostasy is formulaic, stereotypical, culturally conditioned, should be deeply disturbing.” vi) Their wooden view of inerrancy, requiring full transcripts without summaries and with infinite precision, is a feature of apostasy. They make no allowance for the fact that a narrative need not be sequential, for hyperbole, numerology, rounding, narrative compression. They read like children – they’re functionally illiterate. vii) They often don’t bother to read the other side. viii) They suffer from grass-is-greener, feeling deprived, and needing to catch up on all the fun stuff they missed. Hays has the following advice for parents. i) Don’t be overbearing – giving too much to rebel against. ii) If your kids are miserable in church, find out why. iii) The world likes to glamorize evil. By contrast, you should – in a controlled environment - expose your kids to the ugly underbelly of evil. iv) teach them how to read (list of scholarship provided). I was a teenage zombie
Hays quotes John Montgomery on the existence of ghosts. There is volumes of literature on this. They are definitely real – at lest some are. Some simply refuse to accept it because it jeopardizes their faith in non-Christian materialism; in Christian judgment after death; etc. He gives these explanations: i) Ghosts as telepathic hallucinations arising from the minds of the living. ii) Ghosts as telepathic hallucinations arising from the minds (brains) of the dead. iii) Ghosts as residual human aura – not the actual person himself, but the aura is ‘jarred’ by severe trauma, and fades over time. iv) Ghosts as the dead themselves, on their way to the reward determined once for all by their relationship or lack of relationship with Christ on earth. v) Ghost as the damned sent back to haunt the living or as Satanic counterfeits of the dead. vi) Ghosts as the saved sent back to earth by God for a special mission. Ghoulies and ghosties and long-leggety beasties
Here’s an encouraging sermon on the hope of the new heaven and earth, the hope of the intimacy of beholding God, the hope of seeing moral perfection and holiness, and being holy, the hope of no more pain or suffering or sin, and that this hope is so that we will overcome in this world and not be overcome. A new hope
Hays responds to an atheist. i) God is not all-loving. God is good because God is just. It’s not always a good things to be equally loving. Do you show love to a sniper while he’s shooting people by trying to talk him down? That fails to show love to his victims. ii) God executed the flood because of moral wickedness. iii) Is the destruction of animals wrong in the atheist’s view? Where’s the secular argument for animal rights? Doesn’t natural selection result in mass extinction? Is that an argument against it? iv) A just judge has a right and duty to punish the wicked. v) Objections against the Mosaic law are feeble, in that it is adapted to the socioeconomic hardships of ANE culture – something that exists because of the very people (Midianites) that these atheists seem to feel sorry for. vi) The post responds to a number of objections on the basis of God exacting justice in the OT, which, naturally, neglect the justice part. vii) The atheist is too obtuse (or morally bankrupt, or perhaps illiterate) to bother to distinguish between a record of a terrible event and the endorsement of that event. viii) The atheist actually says the law endorsed selling girls as sex-slaves! AS one commentator pointed out, “The practice of selling minors is well attested in the ancient Near East. Parents who were in debt, or unable to support their families, sold children in the markets…In this section of Exodus we learn that Hebrew parents could sell their daughters into conditional slavery…In the Old Testament, this girl is not a slave-girl in the usual sense that we understand the term. She is better protected, and is not to be treated as other salves. As we shall see in the following verses, the law presupposes that she will marry either her master or his son. Therefore, she has the status of a married woman and she is to be treated kindly and with the utmost respect,” ix) Why does this atheist have moral problems with any of this anyway? From a secular standpoint, why be moral? Ali Baba and the godless naifs
Ehrman objects to the character of God in the ordeal of Job, claiming that God caused all of Job’s horrific suffering to win a bet, even when he was innocent. Hays responds: i) It’s simply obtuse to raise an objection to a story, when that objection is a narrative presupposition in the story! ii) Job is innocent in a narrow sense, like a man falsely accused of a crime. There’s no one-to-one correspondence between his ordeal and a sin. iii) No one is sinless. iv) Since Job is a sinner, there’s no injustice in withdrawing blessings from him – he’s not entitled to them. v) It’s not to win a bet. God isn’t proving a point to Satan. The unspoken party here is the reader. The book exists to make a point to them. Job's ordeal
Hays comments on some chapters on NT textual criticism and NT canon in Ehrman’s book Jesus Interrupted. “Ehrman disregards textual evidence for the early formation of the NT canon (e.g. David Trobisch) as well as intertextual evidence for the NT canon.” Moreover, Ehrman just ignored his critics. Now, Ehrman alleges a cover-up, but he can only provide this conspiracy theory be reconstructing which really happened, which means that enough evidence survived from the losing side to do this, which means his theory that the winning side wrote history is false. His prove disproves himself. Ehrman has become the conspirator, presenting only one side of the evidence, engaged in his own coverup. And this isn’t effective against those who sift the evidence and tradition and doing exegesis for themselves. Ehrman's conundrum
Hays warns against “theological chauvinism.” e.g. Overemphasis on Reformed creeds is the mirror-image of Eastern Orthodoxy. Our calling isn’t to be faithful to the theologians that went before us. They had their own unique situations. We are to be faithful to God in our own situations. We can surely learn from them. But that would go both ways. “We're not living in the 5C or the 17C. We must apply the word of God to the world of God in which God has placed us. The answers are not always the same. Even in the Bible itself, we see some adaptation to the demands of the moment (e.g. Num 27:1-11).” There’s a school of contemporary Calvinism that treats the Bible like a forest, and now that we’ve got the lumber to build our fort, its merely scenic. Now we can live inside our creeds and confessions – no need for windows, just mirrors! There’s a tendency to look at Reformed history now rather than the Scriptures. i.e. its a cult mentality : dispense with Bible studies and jump into creeds. Sola credo
Here’s a brief description of the Alexandrian allegorical method of interpretation, with the suggestion that it derived from a philosophical system that was alien to the Bible, which viewed creation as intrinsically evil, and salvation as ‘inward’ discovery, thus discarding history. The Bible then became a prop for one’s own ideas. “The Antiochian school reacted against such an approach and underscored the historicity of the Bible, namely that the latter consists of texts written by individuals to others at a given time of human history in the specific language as well as mindset of that time. Consequently, a given text can have only the one meaning intended by its author.” Eastern Orthodox hermeneutics
On reading church history, it could be used to say anything one wants. “Should more weight be given to Leo the Great’s legates at the Council of Chalcedon, who referred to him as universalis papa, or to Gregory the Great, who pointedly objected when Eulogius of Alexandria referred to him as universalis papa? Should we regard as particularly significant the fact that St. John Chrysostom appealed to Pope Innocent of Rome after his deposition from the see of Constantinople, or should we also take into account the fact that he appealed as well to Venerius of Milan and Chromatius of Aquilea?”” To be deep in history
In both Darwinism and Christianity, feelings are predetermined / programmed. “From a Darwinian standpoint, our instincts lack the force of moral imperatives. We can override them. And nothing constrains us to obey our feelings–except the misguided sense that we should care. It’s a trick of the mind. Evolutionary brainwashing.” In Christianity, such feelings have moral imperative. They ought to be had. Awareness of programming allows the Darwinist to discard it as amoral. It tends to amorality. For the Christian, awareness allows the opportunity to embrace his duty, in the confidence that such feelings were architected by supreme wisdom. “In secular ethics, parents sacrifice their children (abortion, infanticide) for the parents’ welfare. In Christian ethics, parents sacrifice themselves for their children’s welfare.” Darkness Visible
Citing the WCF against the existence of ghosts isn’t much of an argument. Moreover, it was written against Purgatory, the Limbus Patrum, or the Limbus Infantum. Ghosts are a separate issue. i) Scripture attests the existence of ghosts; i.e. the apparitions of Samuel, Moses, and Elijah. ii) necromancy is forbidden in Scripture, but forbidden because it taps into a genuine, albeit illicit, experience. Restless spirits
Piper points out that a massive difference between the OT and the NT is that now all conscious glorifying of God should be “through Jesus Christ.” He cites a number of Scriptures. “With every thought about God and every affection for God, we should be mindful of Jesus Christ. God-consciousness should be Christ-consciousness.” God-consciousness Is Christ-consciousness
Abraham Piper points to a Matt Chandler message, to the effect that the Gospel is for broken sinners – Chandler was sitting through a minister’s terrible message on sex, which employed a rose, which was broken by the audience, and the question, “Who wants that rose?” “Anger welled up within me and I wanted to say, "Jesus wants the rose!" That's the whole point of the gospel: While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.” The Point of the Gospel- Jesus Wants the Rose!
Here’s an interesting comment on distinctions in conversion experiences across culture (gradual versus instantaneous, corporate versus individualistic, etc). How Culture Affects Conversion
Dietrich Bonhoeffer died 64 years ago on April 9. He was hanged. Here’s a snippet from a famous paragraph. “When Christ calls a man, he bids him come and die.” Dietrich Bonhoeffer Was Hanged Today
Here’s a reminder from Piper this Easter, that, for Christians, death’s sting is gone, for the sting of death is a person’s sin, and that sin was dealt with fully at Calvary, where Christ atoned for it. A Conversation with Death on Good Friday
Bayly makes the decent point that many Christians are probably amusing themselves to hell. Check your MP3 player – what’s in your playlist? From one Christian monarch to another- amusing ourselves to Hell
CT used to have substantial articles (e.g. progressive revelation, inerrancy, the Trinity, original sin, justification, sanctification, the Day of Judgment, hell, etc., all of them written by learned pastors and theologians.). Now its filled with useless, ambivalent, shallow, liberal garbage. “CT is a good barometer of the health of the evangelical church and the patient is sick.” He was nice and funny and normal
For those who need to keep up their Greek, JT recommends: The UBS Greek New Testament: A Reader's Edition. (Recently a paperback edition has been published, too.) Here’s a portion of a quote by Philip Towner from the preface: “My own experience of reading, teaching and translating the Greek of the New Testament convinces me that familarity and "fluency" only come when the text can be read continuously and synthetically. But much of the focus in university and seminary teaching of the Greek New Testament today is on delivering to the students (by way of software and disjointed, abbreviated teaching strategies) analytical tools mainly designed to give access to dictionaries and commentaries. What is needed to ensure a next generation of scholars and translators of the Greek New Testament is the assurance that there will be those who can actually read the text without undue dependence upon "tools." And for this to happen, there must be a renewed emphasis today on reading the Greek text and concentration on developing resources which genuinely faciliate the acquisition of this skill.” The UBS Greek New Testament- A Reader's Edition
The Iowa Supreme Court's decision on the redefinition of marriage shows an abandonment of reason in place of feelings as the standard of public consensus. The tyrants in the courts don’t recognize their own character as they overturn centuries of civilization in a day’s work. Law, Feelings, and Religion at the Bar in Iowa
Driscoll says, ‘don’t be clever on Easter, be clear.’ Easter Preaching- Be Clear, Not Clever
Here’s Jonathan Edwards on the paradoxical appearance of the divine glory of Christ by way of His great humiliation. “When the fruit of it came to appear, and the mystery and ends of it to be unfolded, in the issue of it, then did the glory of it appear; then did it appear, as the most glorious act of Christ that ever he exercised towards the creature.” Christ's Glory in Humiliation
Genderblog draws three points about work (ordained by God in Genesis 2) from Colossians 3: 1. We are to work with integrity in mind - Christians are not just to give superficial service to their employer. 2. We are to work with our identity in mind - Christians are ultimately working for Jesus Christ, not a company. Here’s a quote on something to be wary of in work from Riken: "The dominant work ethic in the Western world today is economically based. It values work as a stepping stone to the acquisition of either goods or prestige. The deficiencies of this work ethic are that it is sometimes insufficient to motivate people to their best work, it induces many people to overwork, it devalues unpaid work, and it ignores more enlightened motivations and rewards for work". 3. We are to work with intentionality in mind - It is so easy to waste time in the work place. Intentional Manhood, Part VII- Work
Bird has some thoughts on Hengel’s comments on the textual tradition of the Gospels in the 2nd century. Hengel thinks the texts were to some degree ‘fluid’, being influenced by a ‘richer’ parallel tradition. He asserts that before 150 AD the words of Jesus were not quoted too frequently and there was a lack of concern with quoting them exactly. He doesn’t think the tradition in the manuscripts was arbitrary, “and thwe should differentiate between oral tradition/catechetical praxis and the transmission of the text by early scribes.” He posits early Christian scriptoria around the turn of the century. He holds that Christian teachers of that time were "inspired by the eschatological gift of the Spirit of God, who was the true expositor of the biblical text". 1) Based on the apostolic fathers, Bird thinks that Jesus’ words were quoted frequently. 2) Bird is ambivalent on whether the scriptoria are ‘conservative’ and the inspired teachers ‘creative.’ Martin Hengel on the NT Text in the Second Century
Why, with such apparent resolve, did Christ have such agony and sorrow in Gethsemane? “That cup was constantly in view as he prayed in Gethsemane. What cup? "THIS CUP"--not some future cup. The cup that was symbolized in the feast (Matt. 26:27,28) was now actual: God was placing it in the Savior's hands and it carried the stench of hell.” Don’t read Gethsemane with dry eyes. It’s not a field study but a sanctuary for our faith. (Challies quoting The Cross He Bore) The Cross He Bore - Man of Sorrows
Faith has both renunciation and reliance. We must renounce any reliance upon our works in themselves as the means of relation with God, be it losing or gaining God’s acceptance through them. “We must place our reliance entirely on the perfect obedience of the sin-bearing death of Christ as the sole basis of our standing before God.” The Means of Relating to God
The full humanity of Christ was on display in Gethsemane, as we see his fear and anguish before the awful judgment of God. It was Ambrose who said, "He grieved for me, who had no cause of grief for himself; and, laying aside the delights of the eternal Godhead, he experiences the affliction of my weakness." The Cross He Bore - Prayerful Submission
An angel from heaven ministered to Christ. Christ’s sorrow was unto death, and the angel ministered to Him that He might not die in the garden. He ministered to Christ that Christ might suffer more, not stopping short in the Garden. And it is strange: A creature sent to minister to the Creator! The Cross He Bore - Strengthened to Suffer
Christ recommends the book, The Bookends of the Christian Life, playing on the metaphor of what happens when you load a bookshelf without them. One bookend is the righteousness of Christ; the other is the power of the Holy Spirit. The Bookends of the Christian Life
Christ’s hour was also Satan’s hour. In the wisdom and sovereignty of God, this moment was predestined. Satan was unleashed without restraint upon Christ. He would lay assault on the second Adam – but this time, he wouldn’t fair so well. The Cross He Bore - Satan's Hour
Bird quotes Hengel: “"Therefore nothing has led research into the Gospels so astray as the romantic superstition involving anonymous theologially creative community collectives, which are supposed to have drafted whole writings." In other words, the Gospels are not simply the products of hypothetical (or fictitious?) groupings known as Gospel communities.” Gospel Audiences- Martin Hengel
In light of what happened to the Jews in AD 70, when the Romans laid waste to Jerusalem, Adams asks: “It is dangerous to reject God, to oppose Him, to kill His servants in His Name. What will happen to our generation—one blessed with such dissemination of truth-that has been neglected, rejected, opposed?”
Patton has observed a lot of anger and bitterness in atheism. “They are upset because, according to them, they spent much of their life believing a lie parallel to that of Santa Clause. Now they have been set free from irrationality and now have the freedom to think (that is why they refer to themselves as “free thinkers”). They seek to help others to become free thinkers.” He comments on one lengthy thread of mocking Christianity, when one individual asks, “where did it all come from?” Their answer? “Aliens.” Patton says, “Let us just set aside the fact that this does not solve anything since we have to answer where the aliens came from. Let us also set aside the presumption that these people may not be atheists but alien worshipers (alitheists?). Let us also not refer to this as the “Alien of the Gaps” answer (at least not right now). There is something more fundamental that I would like to ask:” Can one legitimately belittle any detail of the biblical creation story on the grounds of intellectual integrity and replace it with a belief that aliens seeded our planet and remain in good standing rationally? How much worse is a snake talking than a creature from another planet talking? I Don’t Believe a Snake Talked but I Do Believe Aliens Seeded Our Planet
Here’s something to consider in light of Romanist twistings of Matthew 1:18 and the perpetual virginity of Mary: “Are you married? If so, try telling your father-in-law this: "I did not have relations with your daughter until we got engaged." See what he thinks of that. After all, if your father-in-law is as perceptive as you are, there's no way he'll make a spurious assumption about pre-marital relations between the two of you based on such a statement.” Then try telling him your statement has nothing to do with what happened after you got engaged. Help with Matthew 1-18 and Mary
The reality is that worldliness isn’t just a problem for North Americans with electricity. Pride and lust and coveting and having the heart set on the things of this world is as much a problem in straw huts as mansions. Remember – the Bible warned against these things to people in primitive conditions. The issue of worldliness is not in the things themselves, but in the heart that finds its ultimate joys and hopes in them. Worldliness without Electricity
Challies writes that our culture has transformed evil into entertainment. He lists numerous examples (porn, macabre pictures, etc), but then zeroes in on Watchblogs, which report bad and seedy things in the churches. He points out that much of the news and information we get has no value, providing this quote: "In both oral and typographic cultures, information derives its importance from the possibilities of action." The bad news isn’t actionable. It doesn’t change a thing about how you live. You just stew on it and think about it. Watchblogs are really reducible to entertainment – a huge amount of bad information about things so distant that it really has no other effect on us. “It does nothing to further my faith or to cause me to grow in godliness.” He exhorts Christians to abandon this, and to focus on what is good instead of what is evil. To know the truth so well that the shifting form of error always stands in stark contrast to it.
No comments:
Post a Comment