Posted in Christianity on December 31, 2013| 6 Comments »
The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2013 annual report for this blog.
Here’s an excerpt:
The Louvre Museum has 8.5 million visitors per year. This blog was viewed about 140,000 times in 2013. If it were an exhibit at the Louvre Museum, it would take about 6 days for that many people to see it.
Posted in christian apologetics, Christian worldview, Christianity, Genesis, Presuppositional Apologetics, presuppositionalism, Reformed, Theology, Vern Poythress, tagged vern poythress on December 31, 2013| Leave a Comment »
It’s great to see the teaching of the Christian worldview going worldwide. Dr. Vern Poythress recently taught in Taiwan on the topic of Why the Beginning is Important. He has a translator who communicates his teaching into Mandarian. Enjoy!
Posted in 2013 highlights, biblical worldview, Christianity, Presuppositional Apologetics, presuppositionalism, Reformed, tagged Top Ten on December 30, 2013| 6 Comments »
2013 is about to leave us and 2014 is coming.
Here are the top ten posts with the greatest views written this year:
1.) Kermit Gosnell and the irony of the coat hanger back alley argument
2.) Chuck Smith is now with the Lord: a Calvinist Eulogy
3.) Free on PDF: Systematic Theology by Louis Berkhof
4.) The Domain for Truth Interviews Mike Gendron Concerning Roman Catholicism
5.) Interview with a Calvinistic Dispensational Presuppositionalist: Fred Butler
6.) Bart Ehrman’s Case Against Jesus as God in Did Jesus Exist?
7.) Shepherd’s Conference 2013 Schedule
8.) Interview with Dr. Michael Vlach Concerning Presuppositional Apologetics and Dispensationalism
9.) Joseph Prince: Tongues, The Key To A Spirit-Led Life? Part 1
10.) Testimony: Lesbian Feminist Professor encounter with Presuppostional and Worldview Apologetics
Posted in Book Review, Julian Assange, Politics, Wikileaks, tagged Wikileaks on December 30, 2013| 3 Comments »
In today’s “selfie” age, it’s not enough that the news is news but the process of getting the news has become news itself. But as fast as something has gone viral just as instantly does something fade away in the midst of the next information tid bit. Case in point: Wikileaks. This book is about Julian Assange the founder and spokesman of Wikileaks. The book is written by a journalist from the Guardian an established English newspaper company that cooperated with Wikileaks to publicize some of the US secret cables Wikileaks released. He writes from the third person and it was odd to see instances in the book where David Leigh came up in the third person instead of “I.”
What’s Good:
• Interesting background information behind Wikileaks including the motive and ideology that drove Assange and Private Manning.
• Reveals the back story of the relationship of the mainstream media with Wikileaks
• Honesty of the author’s portrait of Assange, warts and all. One gets the sense that this guy is an egomanic, self-important, undisciplined, unhygienic, paranoid man yet an opportunist, tries to speak out against oppressors, etc.
• Gives us more background to the rape accusation against Assange and also his reluctant confession that it was not a CIA love nest sting.
What’s Bad:
• Sometimes the book overstretch its claim of US military wrong doing in Iraq and Afghanistan uncovered by Wikileaks and at the end of the day, it definitely was not the bombshell that some were expecting it to be.
• Anti-climatic ending of the major news organizations who secretly cooperated with Wikileaks rushing to published stories from the cables. It was so anti-climatic to an interesting topic.
• Redundant feel when the book summarizes something and then quotes the document or online chat using the same words and phrase.
Reflection
I believe our current government has too many secrets and a healthy republic require a more transparent and open government if it’s going to ever be accountable to the people. To that end, I sympathize with Wikileaks even though we are probably coming from a different political spectrum. I’m surprised at how immature both Manning and Assange could get and yet one gets the feeling that one has met such characters before in one’s own life people like Manning and Assange. They are more of a cross section of guys in this generation more than perhaps the author realized. I find Assange as a person to be quite repulsive: the author did a good job filling in the details of one of the accuser against Assange for being sexually wronged by him. Assange is a guy that doesn’t know how to handle women and handle them roughly. I thought the book in telling the story of Assange and Manning could have noted more explicitly the blatant ironies of the two of them. For instance, Assange is strongly for all information to be public—yet ironically, he react strongly against certain information about himself being made public. He says there’s people out there who are ought to smear him from the US government but he goes ahead and smears the women’s reputation and deliberately lies about them and their ideology. Assange runs an organization that has the name “leak” in it but strongly disapproves and threatens editors of the press for acquiring leaks from his own Wikileaks. He even said leaks of the stolen US government cables from Wikileaks is criminal. Oh the irony. It’s very hard to live a consistent worldview that’s reductionistic.
Posted in assurance of salvation, Christianity, Perseverance of the Saints, Reformed, Salvation, Theology, tagged perseverance of the saints on December 28, 2013| 19 Comments »
a. Introduction
i. Our study of Christian assurance of salvation begins with an exposition of the doctrine of the Perseverance of the Saints which is foundational and shapes how Christian ought to understand assurance of salvation.
ii. Outline
1. Definition of Perseverance of the Saints and Eternal Security
2. Why is Perseverance of the Saints important for Christian assurance
3. Foundation: The Sovereignty of God
4. Passages demonstrating God’s elect will never be lost
5. Passages demonstrating God’s elect will persevere in their faith and works
b. Definition of Perseverance of the Saints and Eternal Security
i. The doctrine of the perseverance of the saints “teaches very specifically that they who have once been regenerated and effectually called by God to a state of grace, can never completely fall from that state and thus fail to attain to eternal salvation, though they may sometimes be overcome by evil and fall in sin. It is maintained that the life of regeneration and the habits that develop out of it in the way of sanctification can never entirely disappear.”[1]
ii. “Eternal Security is the teaching that God shall with no uncertainty bring into their eternal inheritance those who are actually justified—delivered from the curse of the law and have the righteousness of Christ reckoned to their account—and who have been begotten by the Spirit of God. And further it is the teaching that God shall do this in a way glorifying to Himself, in harmony with His nature and consistent with the teaching of Scripture concerning the nature of those who are called saints.”[2]
iii. “The perseverance of the saints means that all those who are truly born again will be kept by God’s power and will persevere as Christians until the end of their lives, and that only those who persevere until the end have been truly born again.”[3]
c. Why is doctrine of Perseverance of the Saints important for Christian assurance
i. Assurance must be based on a biblical view of eternal Security.
ii. “Eternal Security is a doctrine that complements and completes other truths. It is the truth which establishes a Christian in assurance of salvation. The doctrine of election in itself cannot do this. Justification cannot do this. The doctrine of sanctification cannot do this. Not even the doctrine of glorification does so. Yet each of these is incomplete without Eternal Security. Election, Justification, Sanctification, and Glorification are all hypothetical—mere possibilities—until Eternal Security complements and completes them by showing how they are applied to specific individuals. And it is also practical because it brings believers to assurance of salvation, which according to many Scripture passages they are to have.”[4]
d. Foundation: Beginning with the Sovereignty of God
i. Note: The fact that those born again will have eternal security of their salvation rests on the basis of God’s Sovereignty.
ii. “But our God is in the heavens; He does whatever He pleases.” (Psalm 115:3)
This verse indicates God has the capacity to fulfill what He pleases.
iii. “Whatever the Lord pleases, He does, In heaven and in earth, in the seas and in all deeps.” (Psalm 135:6)
1. Note again, this verse indicates God has the capacity to fulfill what He pleases.
2. Note the second half of the verse emphasis of this truth everywhere: “heaven,” “earth,” “seas” “and in all deeps.”
iv. “Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things which have not been done, Saying, ‘My purpose will be established, And I will accomplish all My good pleasure’;” (Isaiah 46:10)
1. One other way God expresses His Sovereignty is through omniscience (Isaiah 46:10a)
2. Note the second half of the verse stating His purpose will be accomplished.
v. Isaiah 14:27—God’s purpose cannot be overthrown.
e. Passages demonstrating God’s elect will never be lost
i. John 3:16—Contra Arminians, how can eternal life be eternal life if it’s not eternal life?
ii. Eternal security because of Jesus’ promise: “and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand.” (John 10:28)
1. Those who are given eternal life will not perish.
2. Nor will anyone snatch them away.
iii. Eternal security because of Jesus’ prayer: “Therefore He is able also to save [a]forever those who draw near to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them.” (Hebrews 7:25)
1. Note that the subject is Jesus.
2. Jesus “is able also to save [a]forever”
3. Whom can He save forever? “those who draw near to God through Him,”
How? “since He always lives to make intercession for them.”
iv. Eternal security because of God’s Power: “to obtain an inheritance which is imperishable and undefiled and will not fade away, reserved in heaven for you, 5 who are protected by the power of God through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.” (1 Peter 1:4-5)
1. Note verse 4’s language of eternal security: “inheritance,” “imperishable,” “will not fade away,” “reserved in heaven for you”
2. Note the basis of this is in verse 5a: “protected by the power of God ”
3. How do we access it? “through faith for a salvation” (verse 5b)
v. Other passages: Romans 8:38-39, 1 Thessalonians 5:9, 1 Corinthians 1:8, Hebrews 13:5,
[1] Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1996), 546.
[2] Arthur W. Pink, “Preface” in Eternal Security. <Accessed at http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/Security/sec_foreword.htm>
[3] Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing Houses, 1994), 788.
[4] Arthur W. Pink, “Preface” in Eternal Security. <Accessed at http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/Security/sec_foreword.htm>
Posted in 2013 highlights, Book Review, Books, Christianity, Reformed, Theology, tagged 2013 highlights, Top Ten on December 27, 2013| 4 Comments »
I have been able to read a lot of books this year at a larger scale than before (nearly a hundred thus far and the year isn’t quite over yet). Most of the books have been reviewed here on our blog. The following are what I consider the top 10 books that I have read in 2013. It wasn’t easy picking out only 10. These 10 books have greatly encouraged me to worship God more and/or gave me a better understanding of God, the Bible and the Christian worldview.
Enjoy the list and looking back at the reviews!
1.) Against the Gods: The Polemical Theology of the Old Testament by John D Currid
So much debate today about the Old Testament and it’s relationship with the Ancient Near East backdrop. This book is an important discussion of the polemical theology of the Old Testament as well as an apologetic for the likes of Peter Enns.
Purchase: Westminster | Amazon
2.) The Stone And The Glory by Greg Harris
An excellent work on a little known group of Messianic prophecies that’s part apologetics, deep devotional, biblical theology, and worship of Jesus. Talk about a Christ-centered exposition that leads to a love of the Savior and doxological apologetics!
Purchase: Amazon
3.) Fearless: The Heroic Story of One Navy SEAL’s Sacrifice by Eric Blehm
Gutwrenching. An incredible book that gives insight of a life a Christian in Navy SEALS team six. Made me appreciate so much more the guys who sacrificed so much in serving our country in Special Operations Forces.
Purchase: Amazon
4.) One Nation Under Therapy by Christina Hoff Sommers, Sally L. Satel
Very insightful book that’s not a Christian book into the culture of ours and the problem with pop psychology and therapy. There is so much in this book!
Purchase: Amazon
5.) God with Us by Scott Oliphint
I like the way Oliphint brought in philosophy, historical theology, Scripture and Van Til into this discussion of Theology Proper. There’s something about the way we intergrate different field of study to nuance our theology that makes me want to worship God with all our mind!
Purchase: Westminster | Amazon
6.) Review: Is God Anti-Gay? by Sam Allberry
This small work surprisingly turned out to be one of my favorite work for counseling on this subject.
Purchase: Westminster | Amazon
7.) Joel and Obadiah by Irvin Busenitz
I like this book because it’s what I like my commentary to be like–lexical insight, grammatical details that leads to implications and interacting with various interpretative issues and landing on a conclusion on the basis of exegetical reasoning. Edifying!
Purchase: Westminster | Amazon
8.) What Every Christian Needs to Know about the Qur’an by James R. White
Excellent scholarly work minus the sensationalism one sometimes find with pseudo-apologist. Dr. White is definitely the real deal when it comes to Christian apologetics addressing Islam.
Purchase: Westminster | Amazon
9.) Jihadist Ideology and the War on Terror by Mary Habeck
One of the best work I’ve read on the ideology of Jihad. Nuance and very very informative.
Purchase: Amazon
10.) The Man Christ Jesus by Bruce A. Ware
Excellent treatment on the topic of the humanity of Christ!
Purchase: Westminster | Amazon
Posted in Bible, Bible Commentary, Book Review, Christianity, D. Edmond Hiebert, exegesis, Philemon, Titus, tagged D. Edmond Hiebert on December 26, 2013| 4 Comments »
This is a commentary on both the book of Titus and Philemon and is a good example of why you can’t judge a commentary by its size. Although it is small, it is a valuable commentary for devotional reading as well as a wonderful resource for the exegete. I first used this book as part of my research for sermon preparation for a series through Philemon largely because I found the author’s other books insightful in studying the Scripture. It turned out to be a pretty good commentary and was on par with some of the technical exegetical commentaries that were several times bigger than its size. A year after I used this book in studying Philemon, I picked this book up again as an aide for my devotional reading through the book of Titus; once again I enjoyed the author’s insight of Scripture. For instance, Hiebert has a good discussion of what else we know of Titus from other passages from the New Testament—this is helpful and one sees a portrait of a man of God whom Paul trusted for the work of the ministry. I also thought Hiebert did a good summary of five reasons why 2 Timothy 2:13 is referring to Jesus as “great God and Savior” and not God the Father. Like his other commentaries Hiebert dispenses a fair amount of lexical insights that contribute to one’s understanding of the passage. I wished this commentary would still be in print. I had to borrow it from the Library. I recommend this work as well as other works by the author.
You can get this book over at Amazon.
Posted in Christianity, Christmas, Merry Christmas, Theology, Veritas Domain on December 25, 2013| 4 Comments »
Merry Christmas! Here are three short links that I appreciated reading this week.
Posted in American Independence, Benedict Arnold, Book Review, History, providence, tagged Benedict Arnold on December 24, 2013| 4 Comments »
I am reviewing this book from the perspective of the Christian worldview.
For most American, no name symbolizes betrayal and treason like the name Benedict Arnold. Yet for most people, no other historical details usually accompany the name besides the fact that he lived during the Revolutionary War and eventually sided with the British. This book is an excellent read of the story of Benedict Arnold and the author wrote it in a narrative form that feels like a novel. Halfway into the book my mind started comparing Benedict Arnold to Judas who betrayed Jesus; not that the two committed the same level of betrayal but the journey were similar in that they were on one side before their allegiance switched—and switched over for the sake of money. This is a story of someone who was ambitious from the start—in the beginning of the revolutionary we read of a businessman name Benedict Arnold who hilariously went up to a group of militia from another state and audaciously told them he has authorization from his own state to be their commanders. Despite the soldiers laughing, Benedict Arnold went on to become one of America’s finest general who was highly esteemed by none other than Washington himself. Arnolds’ exploits of military genius and courage is also balanced by problems that always arise whenever he has free time and has to deal with politics. It definitely confirms the principle that free time often gives us time to entertain our inner depraved thoughts, what all of us if we truly understand our hearts ought to be careful of. Also, Arnold’s inability to understand the politics around him—whether it’s inter-colonial rivalries or the jealousy of Continental Congress over the military—only led to his frustration and paranoia of assuming that there people really out to destroy him with defamation. This wasn’t help when he was bypassed for promotion or had commanders who didn’t report fairly his contribution in battles. These seed of wanting recognition more than he got led him to eventually turn against the very cause he was fighting for—and willing to now turn his allegiance to the British. How Arnold was caught is itself an amazing story of providence. Matter fact the whole story of Arnold’s military life is filled with many acts of providences that is more than mere coincidences. I recommend this book for one’s reading pleasure and perhaps some lesson about human nature and man’s condition—then and now.
Posted in Uncategorized on December 23, 2013| 1 Comment »
Here is another PDF of a lesser known work by Cornelius Van Til!
Recently it has been brought to my attention that despite his lengthy work addressing the concept, there are still people today who will make the claim that Dr. Van Til was an idealist (or suggest an influence on him and him unaware of it). This is because of similarities people project between Immanuel Kant and Van Til concerning transcendentalism. Rest assured, Dr. Van Til not only was not an idealist, but clearly against idealism, and quite aware of idealism, as you will be able to prove with this work. On with the formal details…
View original post 242 more words
Posted in Apologetic Links, christian apologetics, Christianity, Cornelius Van Til, Greg Bahnsen, Presuppositional Apologetics, presuppositionalism, Reformed, Theology, Van Til on December 22, 2013| Leave a Comment »
More links on Presuppositional apologetics! There’s quite a bit more links this time than usual, so enjoy!
What in the World is the World?: A Brief Contrast Between Materialist and Biblical Perspectives
The Bahnsen Conference – Lecture Two: Dr. Joel McDurmon
Biblical Apologetics: Audio Messages by R.C. Dozier
Apologetic Evangelism 101: Readying Ourselves to Engage the World
Is Nature the 67th Book of the Bible?
Never Always Winter by Scott Oliphint
Just a Little Persecution? by James Anderson
Posted in assurance of salvation, Bible, Christianity, Reformed, Salvation, Sanctification, Theology, Veritas Domain on December 21, 2013| Leave a Comment »
We are going to have a weekly series of outlines every Saturday on the topic of Christian assurance of Salvation.
Why are we doing this series?
Our first post last week answer the question of why should we study on the topic of Christian assurance. You can check it out by clicking HERE.
I pray that God’s people will benefit from it.
As someone who is engage offline in evangelism (and from that, apologetics) I think it’s a joy to engage unbelief biblically. At the same, if one engages in biblical evangelism and apologetics, sometimes that also means dealing with the more practical issue that a believer has of whether or not they know for sure they themselves are Christians. Thus, an equipped apologist must not only be ready to deal with the nonbeliever but sometimes also to be equipped and ready with sound practical theology to encourage a believer’s assurance of their salvation.
Enjoy!
Posted in Apologetics, apologetics methodology, Book Review, Christianity, Cornelius Van Til, herman dooyeweerd, Presuppositional Apologetics, presuppositionalism, Rousas John Rushdoony, Theology, Theonomy, Van Til, tagged RJ Rushdoony on December 20, 2013| 5 Comments »
This is a book that has been recently published towards the end of 2013 by Chalcedon Foundation. This work is a compilation of writings by R.J. Rushdoony by his son Mark Rushdoony on the insight of the Christian apologist Cornelius Van Til. When I first heard about this work I wanted to get it because Rushdoony was one of Van Til’s early expositor, having written several works expounding his ideas and also applying his apologetics towards other areas as well. Rushdoony’s The One and the Many is one such example in which Van Til’s argument that the Trinity is the solution to the philosophical problem of the one and the many gets some more pages of application especially in the area of critiquing political philosophy. In Van Til and the Limit of Reasons, the first part of the book (chapters 1-3) was originally a booklet on Van Til that Rushdoony wrote for the Modern Thinkers Series in 1960. I have seen this booklet once at a used Christian bookstore years ago and haven’t been able to find it since, so I am happy to see it being republished as three chapters in this present work. I’m also happy that this will also reach a newer audience in our modern world of kindle and the internet. According to the beginning of the book, chapters four through seven are published for the first time. Chapter three is the longest chapter of the book and what seems to me the meat of the book. Rushdoony has a good and memorable analogy from the children story of the Emperor having no clothes to illustrate the task of Christian apologetics: we are exposing the uniblical worldview and philosophy around us as intellectually bankrupt and empty. In this chapter Rushdoony quotes heavily from Van Til’s syllabus Metaphysic of Apologetics and Van Til’s essay titled “Nature and Scripture” in a compilation work by Westminster Theological Seminary titled The Infallible Word. Van Til’s Metaphysic of Apologetics is better known by it’s later publication title A Survey of Christian Epistemology. On page 45 Rushdoony has an excellent discussion distinguishing the difference between ultimate and immediate starting point. This is helpful for readers who might be struggling with the objection that some people have that as human beings we practically begin our starting point with ourselves and what we experience. Van Til’s point was to distinguish between our immediate starting point and the foundation for those starting point, what he calls the ultimate starting point. One of the things I like about reading Rushdoony is following the trail of endnotes of the fascinating documentation of what people think and say. The first half of the book quotes work heavily from the first half of the twentieth century but the second half of the book even quote a work as recent as the 1990s (remember, Rushdoony died in 2001). For the end notes, there is a mistake in which chapter six is titled “Rationalism and Sentimentalism” and chapter seven is titled “The Irrationalism of Rationalism.” It should be the other way around. Examining the end notes and the date of the publication of the works cited made me realized at how old some of these chapters have been written—not necessarily a bad thing but it made me appreciate just how early Rushdoony came around to Van Til’s apologetics and further examine his heavy reading load in light of a Van Tillian framework. The fact that it was written very early also made it valuable to me in terms of historical insight; there are several instances I was surprised to see references to Herman Dooyeweerd. For instance chapter two suggests the optimism of Reformed philosophy during the early days of Dooyeweerd, Van Til and other translators of Dutch Reformed philosophy. I realized Rushdoony’s son in law later published The Twilight of Western Civilization and I can’t help but to imagine Rushdoony had something to do with it but in the end Van Til and Dooyeweerd ended up disagreeing.
I wouldn’t necessarily recommend this as the first work for someone new to Presuppositional apologetics to read; it require some familiarity with Van Til’s theme and a knowledge of philosophers such as Kant, Hume, etc. But I would recommend this if you want to see how Van Til’s idea eventually shape Rushdoony, and in turn Rushdoony’s application of Van Til here and elsewhere.
Note: Available on Kindle.
Posted in Christian worldview, Christianity, Duck Dynasty, Phil Robertson, Sin, tagged Phil Robertson on December 19, 2013| 2 Comments »
Note: The following post involve discussion of body parts.
There’s a lot of controversy generated from GQ’s interview with Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty concerning his stance on a biblical view of homosexuality. GLAAD, the homosexual advocate group has written a piece of protest titled “Duck Dynasty’s Phil Robertson uses vile stereotypes to tell GQ his thoughts on LGBT people.” In the opening paragraph, GLAAD states that
GQ Magazine’s profile of Phil Robertson included some of the vilest and most extreme statements uttered against LGBT people in a mainstream publication.”
In which they quoted Robertson saying rather crass and frankly:
It seems like, to me, a vagina—as a man—would be more desirable than a man’s anus. That’s just me. I’m just thinking: There’s more there! She’s got more to offer. I mean, come on, dudes! You know what I’m saying? But hey, sin: It’s not logical, my man. It’s just not logical.”
I realize those are some strongly graphic and repulsive imagery but one must realize what’s vile about it is the actual behavior of sodomy itself. While not every homosexual engages in these acts, this is not something that is not unheard of within the homosexual lifestyle. However, I am puzzled if some were to see what Robertson has to say above as evidence of Robertson’s own vileness. It’s like the people who would say they are against those who describe the holocaust since it’s pretty vile–when the problem is not the people who are messengers of the problem, but the actual acts themselves are vile, and those who engage in it. Think also of how some react against abortion picture by attributing the extreme and vileness of the pictures to those protesting it.
GLAAD also included this citation from the interview as further proof of vile sterotyping that Phil engaged in:
Start with homosexual behavior and just morph out from there. Bestiality, sleeping around with this woman and that woman and that woman and those men,” he says. Then he paraphrases Corinthians: “Don’t be deceived. Neither the adulterers, the idolaters, the male prostitutes, the homosexual offenders, the greedy, the drunkards, the slanderers, the swindlers—they won’t inherit the kingdom of God. Don’t deceive yourself. It’s not right.”
Note how GLAAD has taken this quote out of it’s context and if one who reads this article by GLAAD without the original context one would assume that Phil Robertson is saying that starting with homosexual behavior will morph to other things like bestiality and promiscuity. In the original context of the GQ interview, what was asked of Phil is “What, in your mind, is sinful?“ Shame on GLAAD. Also notice that Phil’s comment of homosexual promiscuity that GLAAD wants to portray inaccurately that Phil is saying is itself not entirely “vile” stereotyping. Studies does confirm there’s a correlation between homosexuality and promiscuity in comparison of that with heterosexuals. Note, I’m not saying that there isn’t heterosexuals who are fornicators and have had many sex partners. Statistically homosexuals seem to have high promiscuity patterns. The famous study by Bell and Weinberg confirms this, and then there’s a University of Chicago study in 2004 by Edward O. Laumann in the book The Social Organization of Sexuality that definitely raises eyebrows.
I don’t want to argue about statistical analysis; at the end of the day this is what is the gist of GLAAD’s statement against Phil that seems to me maddening:
‘Phil and his family claim to be Christian, but Phil’s lies about an entire community fly in the face of what true Christians believe,’ said GLAAD spokesperson Wilson Cruz.”
Phil’s view that homosexuality is wrong…flies in the face of what true Christian believe?
This is not what Romans 1:24-27 teaches (among other verses):
24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would bedishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for [p]a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed [q]forever. Amen.
26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is [r]unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing[s]indecent acts and receiving in [t]their own persons the due penalty of their error.
But the story doesn’t end with Romans 1. While Romans 2-3 goes on to re-iterate our sins, and our offence towards God, the book of Romans also goes on to teach how we can be made right with God through God’s grace alone, through faith alone (TRUST ALONE) in Christ alone. All sinners can be made right with God by trusting in Jesus’ work on the cross, death, Resurrection and Ascension for their sins.
That is a homosexual’s hope. That is also a heterosexual sinner’s hope as well: A Savior in the person and work of Jesus.
The Domain for Truth 
Review: The Pastoral Epistles by Gordon H. Clark
Posted in Bible, Bible Commentary, Book Review, Gordon Clark, Pastoral Epistles, Reformed, Theology, tagged Pastoral Epistles on December 29, 2013| 7 Comments »
I was disappointed with this commentary. Gordon Clark is best known as a Christian philosopher advocating an epistemology of Scripturalism. While I appreciate his contribution to Christian philosophy (with the caveat that I critically accept him and also reject certain views he hold, see my other reviews of his works), here in the Pastoral Epistles it is not up to the par with what I expected from how his followers talk about his commentaries on the Bible.
THE GOOD
–The commentary rightly stresses the objectivity of the Christian faith and that faith is no mere subjective experiences.
–The commentary also makes the observation that the Pastoral epistles emphasizes the importance of doctrines and teaching.
–I was encouraged with the comment on 2 Timothy 2:1-2 about teaching faithful men who can teach others
–The second appendix gives a good explanation of Presbyterian doctrine of ordination. Clark makes it clear that he is dependent upon the work of George Gillespie.
THE BAD
–Clark does not grasp the Greek aorist tense. For instance on page 17, we see him commenting that an aorist “refers to a single act in past time” which we see him assuming this again on page 48 concerning 1 Timothy 3:16. As is seen in the commentary (and for those familiar with Gordon Clark’s background), Clark is more well verse in Classical Greek than Biblical Greek.
–I wished Clark could have gone over in more details the qualification of what is expected of an elder in 1 Timothy 3 but Clark disappointingly stated, “Most of these qualifications require no exegesis” (39). One should see how other commentaries expound on 1 Timothy 3 exegetically.
–Commenting on 1 Timothy 1:17 Clark goes tangent to say about heaven that “the New Testament indicates that some organs will be missing—our stomachs, for example,” without any verse quoted or reference cited.
–He asserts on page 52, “That a convinced vegetarian can be a good Christian is doubtful. In any case, abstinence from foods must not be based upon allegedly divine dietary laws.” But what he conclude about vegetarians does not follow from 1 Timothy 4:3 since he does not take into account vegetarians who choose so out of preference and is not driven to be one because of divine dietary laws. Think of the guy who is vegetarian for health reason but loves Jesus.
–Clark’s rhetoric is unnecessarily inflammatory; for instance, in commenting on 1 Timothy 4:8, Clark writes about Olympians: “Even aside from the drugs they take to pep them up, and the medication used to desex the women contestants and turn them into masculine freaks, the athletes have chosen the wrong values and lead wasted lives” (55).
–He translate “saying” as “proposition” in 1 Timothy 4:9; I don’t know if there’s an exegetical basis to translate it that way.
–Concerning 1 Timothy 6:16, Clark believes the “light” here refers to truth but if this is the case then it leads one to hold a position that God is unknowable.
–More than once Gordon Clark writes that “there is little need of exegesis and explanation” (122). If you look up the same passage in another commentary you discover there are insights of something there in the passage.
— This carelessness of seeing no need of exegesis is disappointing when it comes to lists of words such as in 2 Timothy 3:1-4 where Clark states “most of the words need no boring, dictionary definition” (123). Clark’s commentary is seriously deficient in lexical insights. It is also disrespectful to the Word of God to say there’s no need for “boring” definition.
–The section on the book of Titus fail to discuss what we know of Titus from other passages from the New Testament, a glaring omission for a commentary.
–Clark translates “vain talkers” in Titus 1:10 as “fallacious reasoners” but he does not give any explanation for his unusual translation. I do believe vain talkers contrary to the faith will reason fallaciously or with wrong premise but I don’t think this truth means one should translate “vain talkers” to mean “fallacious reasoners” here for this passage.
–Commenting on Titus 3:6, Clark notes that the verse cannot be used to support water baptism by immersion but then says “the Lutheran practice of pouring is Scriptural; at least Scripture permits it” (169). Earlier in Titus 3:5 he denies that this passage is teaching baptismal regeneration so obviously 3:5-6 is not talking about water baptism. So if Titus 3:5-6 is not talking about water baptism, what other Scriptural support does he have for water baptism by means of pouring? Clark just asserts it without proving it.
Available on Amazon.
Read Full Post »