Review of Biblical Literature – 10/13/2008

Edward Adams
The Stars Will Fall from Heaven: Cosmic Catastrophe in the New Testament and Its World
Reviewed by Lorenzo DiTommaso

William Sanger Campbell
The “We” Passages in the Acts of the Apostles: The Narrator as Narrative Character
Reviewed by Jean-François Racine

Andrew D. Clarke
A Pauline Theology of Church Leadership
Reviewed by Stephan Joubert

Benjamin Fiore
The Pastoral Epistles: First Timothy, Second Timothy, and Titus
Reviewed by Korinna Zamfir

Bas ter Haar Romeny, ed.
The Peshitta: Its Use in Literature and Liturgy: Papers Read at the Third Peshitta Symposium
Reviewed by Robert A. Kitchen

Daniel Hillel
The Natural History of the Bible: An Environmental Exploration of the Hebrew Scriptures
Reviewed by Norman Habel

Werner G. Jeanrond and Andrew D. H. Mayes, eds.
Recognising the Margins: Developments in Biblical and Theological Studies
Reviewed by Peter R. Rodgers

Matthew Levering
Ezra and Nehemiah
Reviewed by Ralph W. Klein

R. J. R. Plant
Good Figs, Bad Figs: Judicial Differentiation in the Book of Jeremiah
Reviewed by Mark Brummitt

Fernando F. Segovia and R. S. Sugirtharajah, eds.
A Postcolonial Commentary on the New Testament Writings
Reviewed by Jonathan A. Draper
Reviewed by Hans Leander

Robert B. Stewart, ed.
Intelligent Design: William A. Dembski and Michael Ruse in Dialogue
Reviewed by Christopher Heard

Ilse Wegner
Eine Einführung in die hurritische Sprache
Reviewed by Ignacio Marquez Rowe

Stephen Westerholm
Understanding Matthew: The Early Christian Worldview of the First Gospel
Reviewed by David C. Sim

Battle for the Beginning MP3 Audio by John MacArthur

Brian says:

John MacArthur‘s podcast on oneplace.com recently featured a series of talks entitled: The Battle for the Beginning. Although not reflecting the complete content of his series, this 20 part podcast covers the main material of his view of the Genesis creation narrative. Contrast his young-earth view with William Lane Craig‘s old-earth view (available on his podcast as well) in order to have a firm grasp of both angles. I found both the young-earth view and old-earth views very informative.

This batch will also be added to The Ultimate Apologetics MP3 Audio Page.

Part 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |

12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20

Enjoy.

The Law and Laws: A Biblical Overview

The above article is something worth reading if you are interested in understanding the use of the Law in Scripture and how it applies to us today. Here is an excerpt:

I. Introduction

Paul says in Romans 7:14 that “the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.” Our attitude towards God’s law ought to mimic the Apostle Paul’s positive attitude. A very important interpretive principle should guide and direct our understanding and our application of God’s law to our lives and the lives of others, a principle that is often neglected or dismissed in this day and age: the principle of periodicity.

The Princeton scholar, Geerhardus Vos, summed this up well at the beginning of his book on Biblical Theology by stating:

  • The method of Biblical Theology is in the main determined by the principle of historic progression. Hence the division of the course of revelation into certain periods. Whatever may be the modern tendency towards eliminating the principle of periodicity from historical science, it remains certain that God in the unfolding of revelation has regularly employed this principle. From this it follows that the periods should not be determined at random, or according to subjective preference, but in strict agreement with the lines of cleavage drawn by revelation itself. The Bible is, as it were, conscious of its own organism; it feels, what we cannot always say of ourselves, its own anatomy. The principle of successive Berith-makings (Covenant-makings), as marking the introduction of new periods, plays a large role in this, and should be carefully heeded.

Therefore, one of the foundational principles of correctly interpreting the Scriptures is that one respects and listens to the covenantal context of any given passage in Scripture when the meaning is being interpreted and application is made. To better understand the law, one must apply the principle of periodicity in studying the function of the law in the pre-fall, post-fall, and New Testament eras.

II. The Principle of Periodicity and the Pre-Fall era

First, in the Garden of Eden, Adam was under a covenant of works: there was law. The Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF) states, “God gave to Adam a law, as a covenant of works, by which He bound him and all his posterity, to personal, entire, exact, and perpetual obedience . . .” (19.1). In that garden the tree of life and the testing tree of the knowledge of good and evil contained the seeds of the gospel. The tree of life was essentially a symbol of the best life that awaited Adam if he were to pass his probation in that garden. The tree of the knowledge of good and evil signified the law because it was given as a “trial of obedience and by sin (no less than that) [was] made the occasion of death and the minister of condemnation.”

Recognizing the role and application of the law as conditioned by the covenantal context is especially important in the differences evidenced between the pre-fall situation and that situation following the fall of mankind. For example, works play a fundamentally different role in the pre-fall covenant, a covenant of works, than they do in the post-fall covenantal period, in the covenant of grace. In the pre-fall covenant, works function as a condition of acquiring life; in the post-fall covenant they follow the act of justification and demonstrate that one has life in the Son.

Let’s now turn our attention to the periods after the fall…

[Continue Reading]

2008 National Desiring God Conference

The Power of Words and the Wonder of God

All the video from the conference is now online:

You can also read Dr. Piper’s message here. Abraham Piper provides this summary for us:

The way we talk can undercut the cross. This much is clear in 1 Corinthians (1:17; 2:1). But does all eloquence minimize the gospel? Does the pursuit of verbal impact necessarily preempt the power of Christ?

Both George Whitefield and Jonathan Edwards were eloquent, each in his own way. Did this “empty the cross of its power”? More than that, the Bible itself contains many portions that are nothing less than eloquent. How do we make sense of this?

A pointer is found in the context of 1 Corinthians. Here Paul makes clear that there is a kind of eloquence that exalts self and therefore cripples the cross. But this isn’t the only brand of eloquence. There’s another kind, a distinctly Christian eloquence, that humbles self and exalts Christ.

Our eloquence will never be the determining factor in causing someone to believe the gospel, but it still makes a difference. We can hope for at least 5 benefits from Christian eloquence:

  1. keeping interest
  2. gaining sympathy
  3. awakening sensitivity
  4. speaking memorably
  5. increasing power

[HT: Abraham Piper]

The N.T. Wright Project

Some students from Princton Theological Seminary have started a research project for the purpose of studying the foundational works of theology by N.T. Wright. Here is their description of the project:

Rarely in the course of our seminary study do we have the opportunity to study theologians whose work is currently transforming the life of the church. Tom Wright is one such theologian, and a small group of us at Princeton Theological Seminary, together with one of our professors, Ross Wagner, have decided to spend this semester immersed in Wright’s work. We hope to carefully read some of his most foundational writings and to engage each other through this blog on the issues and ideas which emerge from this study. From time to time we will have guest authors from a wide spectrum contribute, and we also invite those of you in church, parachurch, or seminary communities to read and respond to our blog posts as a way of keeping this project closely grounded in the church today. Welcome and enjoy!

I encourage everyone to keep up with this blog, especially if you don’t have the ability to read Bishop Wright’s works in full by yourself. These students will be summarizing and analysing and discussing much of what he has written and I think we will all benefit from their work. May God bless this project!

LORD, Language, & Liturgy

Pastor Jeff Meyers, over at Corrigenda Denuo, has posted three very helpful articles (12 points in all) on the topic of the Hebrew name for God, Yahweh. This is a very interesting subject to me and I encourage you all to read it and consider what he has to say about it. I would tend to agree that there is no reason we should keep translating the word “LORD” or “Lord” when that is not specifically what the name means. Yahweh is not simply a title, as “Lord” or “LORD” is. It is God’s covenant name and we need to recognize that when we study, teach, and worship the Triune God with that name.

Here are the articles:

Lord, Language, & Liturgy – Part I
Lord, Language, & Liturgy – Part II
Lord, Language, & Liturgy – Part III

Here is a good excerpt regarding what I mentioned above:

1. Yahweh was given to Israel as God’s “memorial name” (Exod. 3:15). This personal name of God was revealed to Israel so that they might use it in prayer and thus remind God of his covenant so he would act for them. God’s personal name for Israel was not “Lord” but “Yahweh.” As Psalm 20 says, “Some trust in chariots and some in horses but we will memorialize the name of Yahweh our God.” The name of the God of Israel was not “Lord” or “LORD” but Yahweh. They were to call on God to remember (that’s what “memorialize” means) his covenant by using the name he gave them for that purpose. I should say here also that all the gnostic theologizing about what this name really “means” is a distraction. Yahweh is not a “term” that refers to something else, like God’s infinite majesty or whatever. Yahweh is a concrete name given to the Israelites to use, to call out in prayer and praise in their worship.

2. “Lord” is a title not a name. You can make the word “Lord” into all caps, italicize it, bold it, or whatever, but that doesn’t change the fact that it means “Master” or “Sir” and is not a name, certainly not God’s revealed personal name. So when one translates passages like “Let them praise the name of Yahweh” as “Let them praise the name of the LORD” you muck up the meaning badly. In fact, this is not really a translation at all but an altering of the text for some external purpose. God’s revealed name in the Hebrew Scriptures is not “Lord” or “LORD” but Yahweh.

3. The abbreviation YAH is not replaced with LORD in our English translations. We still say and sing “hallelujah,” which means “praise Yah[weh].” Why don’t we sing “hallelu-LORD”? Silly, you say? Just as silly as replacing YHWH with Lord. If saying the whole name is so spiritually hazardous, why isn’t saying part of the name just as dangerous? But YAH was not even replaced by superstitious Jews who refused to say the whole name for fear of judgment. In addition to Hallelujah we still have all the proper names that include Yahweh in them, like Joshua (Heb: Yah-shua – “Yahweh saves”). The best we can say is this is inconsistent; the worst is that it’s evidence of how stupid this superstitious avoidance of the name Yahweh really was and is.

4. Later Jews superstitiously refused to vocalize the name. I’ll get to when this happened in a moment. But the practice of replacing Yahweh with Lord was an act of rebellion, pure and simple. God gave this name for the Jews to use in memorial prayers, Psalms, and worship. Not using it means that they thought they were wiser than God. This is part and parcel with the Pharisaical “fencing of the law.” In order to avoid transgressing the 3rd Word (“taking the name of Yahweh in vain”) the wily Pharisaical Jews decided to just avoid the word altogether. And we want to follow that tradition?

Islamic takeover of U.S. already under way

Even though I do not believe that Barack Obama is a Muslim today, what will it mean to the Western World if a Muslim-named man becomes president of the United States of America? Well, some say it will be good and help Muslim’s reconsider their negative view of America. Possible… but there is an even bigger problem that comes right along with that understanding: Islam wants to expand and fill the whole earth with their religion and it will not benefit us to have someone with Muslim ties in his past who might just help the whole Muslim world along as they seek to takeover the U.S. The problem is not appearance, instead, the problem revolves around the fact that Muslim people will fight until their way of life is implemented on everyone around them in whatever culture they move to.

The below article is a very telling story of what happened to Lebanon, a former nation of Christian principles and a liberty, and what is already beginning to happen here in our own United States of America. Do not be fooled, Islam is the greatest enemy to freedom in this world today.
Here is an excerpt from the article:

An expert on terrorism is warning the United States should be fighting Islamization, which she believes already is under way. And author Brigitte Gabriel should know: She watched it happen in her native Lebanon.

“Lebanon used to be the only majority Christian country in the Middle East,” Gabriel told radio talk show host Andrea Shea King in a recent hour-long interview “Most people today do not know that. We were the majority, the Muslims were the minority, but as the years went by, the Muslims became the majority because of their birth rate, but also because of our open-border policy.

“We welcomed everyone into our country,” Gabriel said, and people didn’t realize that the “minority,” the Muslims in the society, “was not tolerant” and “did not believe all people were equal.”

“They tried to impose their way of thinking on us, and they succeeded,” she said.

The result, Gabriel said, was that a radical terrorist organization tied to Islam, Hezbollah, now rules in Lebanon.

As WND reported, Gabriel is fearful that terrorists believe now is the time to strike at America, while it is distracted by financial tension and election turmoil. She expressed the concerns during an interview with KSFO’s Barbara Simpson, when she also discussed her new book, “They Must Be Stopped: Why We Must Defeat Radical Islam and How We Can Do It.”

[Continue Reading]

Jesus said, "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life."

Show Buttons
Hide Buttons