Shrill objections to Russia’s laws against homosexual behavior and Joyce Meyer! How do these fit together? Take a listen and find out!
Chapter 5 of Dr. Oliphint’s book has been posted on Monergism with permission. Go give it a read and tell us what you think!…Read more
There are frequent references to two texts in particular for the subject of mockery in a Christian context. So let’s be clear from the outset. I do believe that 1) The Scriptures both display and teach mockery and 2) That there is a proper time – and way – to engage in such mockery. The most appealed to texts in this vein are 1 Kings 18, and Galatians 5. Additionally, there are also Christ’s denunciation of the Pharisees in Matthew 23, and God’s mocking challenge to the idols, in Isaiah. So, while it’s plain in the Scriptures that both the …Read more
Excellent exposition from Romans 2, a text I’ve had occasion to look at as well. He also addresses other texts in a shorter fashion. Pay close attention to the various implications he draws out from the denial of universal moral law, along with other issues, that NCT demands. If I might be so bold, it might also be helpful to look over my paper in the first issue of In Antithesis, which addresses Romans 1 and the first part of 2.
I don’t think I’ve ever posted on this subject before – primarily because the majority of the support for this is internet-based, and non-systematized. Since the subject has come up on the facebook page, however, I decided to include this in order to address the topic, as we are on the subject of covenant, and as some brothers have said, the terminology itself gives the impression of taking the ‘high ground”, as it were. It may also be helpful for those who haven’t studied the topic at all before. It’s an introduction, and done a good while ago. On the …Read more
This is a wonderful exposition of Baptist Covenant Theology. Again, no homework. I only ask that you be mindful of what is taught, and what the implications are for the denial of that teaching – especially in the context of our methodology.
I don’t have any homework for you before this one. I would, however, invite you to think, very carefully, about what the nature of Adam’s headship would be, if this doctrine was denied – and what covenant that man could be said to be breaking. There are, of course, many implications to be found here – but I’ll leave you to ponder them for yourself.