Corridors of My Mind

For those interested in Covenant Theology Read:
THE MARROW OF MODERN DIVINITY
by Edward Fisher

Ezekiel 37:11 Then He said to me, “Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel; behold, they say, ‘Our bones are dried up and our hope has perished. We are completely cut off.’ 12 “Therefore prophesy and say to them, ‘Thus says the Lord GOD, “Behold, I will open your graves and cause you to come up out of your graves, My people; and I will bring you into the land of Israel. 13 “Then you will know that I am the LORD, when I have opened your graves and caused you to come up out of your graves, My people. 14 “I will put My Spirit within you and you will come to life, and I will place you on your own land. Then you will know that I, the LORD, have spoken and done it,” declares the LORD.’” (Emphasis mine.)

Matthew 27:52 The tombs were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; 53 and coming out of the tombs after His resurrection they entered the holy city and appeared to many. (Emphasis mine.)

I don't recall anyone ever pointing this out, I'm sure it has been in some commentary somewhere...It seems to me that the graves were opened in fulfillment of this prophecy. I have wondered for a long time, the significance of the dead saints being raised and walking through Jerusalem. But it seems that the prophecy was for those in whom God would put His spirit and that He would make them to walk upon the land of Israel. This prophecy is characteristic of many Ezekiel passages which refer to the New Covenant. In this case the only "saints" that could be raised were O.T. believers/saints. But in other passages where promises are given to the living, it appears that they are to the Jewish Christians and "Gentile" Christians; given our N.T. understanding of the mystery which is Christ in us...Every Christian truly is a "Jewish" Christian...This goes against our modernistic thinking, though; but Paul said it:

Romans 2:28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. 29 But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.

If I could summarize; there is only one sense to the prophetic passages but there can be many applications. Thus, either the specifically Jewish orientation of the prophecy contains the real sense with the fact that all Christians are "true Jews" as an application or else the sense is really going for a promise aimed at all believers in the N.T. era with an application specifically directed at the Jews. Divorcing non-Jewish Christians from the promises in the O.T. Prophets seems to result in misapplication of the texts or maybe even missing the real sense of the passages; I withhold any conclusions either way on my part as of yet.

We fail because we do not think covenantally. Most evangelical Christians would be hard pressed to even describe what the covenant is...let alone to think in terms of it. I have described the covenant in an earlier post...

Is it wise for a young Christian to be attempting to tackle the most difficult book in the Bible to exegete? Does the fact that it is so mysterious have any strange attraction? Of course it does. So what does one do when you get this 'end-times bug?' You read a good book, that's what I did. A book that clears the apocalyptic haze not muddies the water...that is what is needed. With no knowledge of the Greek language, without establishing the interpretive hermeneutics, without consulting the works of the respected authorities; where does one intend to go?

Update: This is especially true for those intending to working as a minister of the Gospel...First things first:
1. Survey the broad themes; become a student, learn.
2. Study in greater detail; become a scholar, find out what others have learned.
3. Research the minutiae; become an expert, understand its grave implications.
Explain, Interpret, Exegete. There is a [super-]natural order to things...follow it.

Recently, someone I know was accused, in an informal debate, of making the Bible mean whatever he wanted it to mean and ignoring what it plainly said.

Now listen closely, have you ever said something but did not actually mean what you say? Why? Maybe you were using a figure of speech or exaggerating for effect or trying to get a reaction out of someone. Was the Bible not written down by men who also used these common elements? Especially, in the prophetic literature...you have lots of verses which are obviously not supposed to be taken at face value (i.e. Jesus is not a real lamb 'standing as if slain,' but we get the metaphor).

This is naturally followed by the next question; how do you interpret the figures not so obviously interpreted? But the fallacy in the question is easily exposed. The obviousness or not is a very subjective assertion; what is obvious to one may not be obvious to another. Thus we must go back to a principle which changeth not: that is that Scripture interprets Scripture.

The fact is that very little in Biblical exegesis does not rely on another passage from the Bible. Incredible as it seems, ignorance of what the Bible says in all of its boring glory does not allow for speculative interpretations nor does it excuse one for falsely accusing a brother who has the Biblical knowledge on which an interpretation depends when you do not...

Now, I haven't posted photos on here in a while for a reason...But I thought this one had to be posted...My two Covenant boys learning to obey mommy and daddy so that they may live long...

Ezekiel 5:9 'And because of all your abominations, I will do among you what I have not done, and the like of which I will never do again. 10 'Therefore, fathers will eat their sons among you, and sons will eat their fathers; for I will execute judgments on you and scatter all your remnant to every wind.

What we see here is an example of God's pronouncement of judgment. In other passages we see the same curse mentioned...but why was this curse added to the Deuteronomy curses in the first place? If nothing else, because God knew the future. Note that He says that He has not actually brought this curse to bear before and that He will do so in a very specific capacity and that He will never do so again (which could be figurative, in order to emphasize the gravity of the situation). It is an earthly judgment reserved for the severest of offenses: rejecting God and whoring after other gods. The next question is, when was/will this fulfilled?

What is the Law-Word of God? Is it the KJV, NASB, or NIV? Is it the manuscripts in Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, et al.? Are all of them the Law-Word of God or none of them?

For one who holds to the inerrancy and infallibility of the Law-Word of God, these questions may seem disconcerting.

I am currently studying this issue to have my conscience settled and for a paper I will write on the topic (makes my work light since I want to know the information). Here I will lay out some of my thoughts on the subject.

I heard first the arguments for the priority of the Greek from which the KJV was written. I was led to believe that the Greek manuscripts which were translated from until the last century were the pure text and that the more recently discovered manuscripts had been edited, for instance, by gnostic sects which had hidden them away and had incidentally preserved them.

The first books that I picked up on the subject of text versions were both arguing against modern translations. Their method was to compare the English KJV translation to other modern English translations. They argued that other versions significantly reduced verses in support of, most notably the doctrine of Christ's deity. They argued for a majority text tradition and invoked the theory of providential preservation.

More recently I have read a book by D.A. Carson on textual criticism. I took him to be Reformed Presbyterian initially but I don't know how he could have some very liberal leanings as far as altering Scripture is concerned and still be "Reformed." I thought he made many good points and nearly convinced me to be a textual critic...compelling anyways. But the more I look into it, the approach of textual criticism seems be atheistic as if somehow you can approach the issue neutrally...Oh sweet autonomy!

KJO proponents are on an extreme position. Proponents of the critical-text are on an extreme position. Proponents of the priority of the Majority/Byzantine text-type take external science into account as well as internal theological evidence. They seem to moderate the two extremes in a healthy way. It would place one much closer to KJO to side for the Majority text, but these are generally God-fearing evangelical Christians, than the textual-critics side, which is the side of intellectualizing to a fault the issue in question. Apparently, as one was wont to say, simple issues like evolution have been settled by science but are not accepted by some religious types. Well, I'm a religious type that will never accept an unproven theory as equivalent to experimental science.

Other issues I had with the Alexandrian prioritists were the use of statistical analysis, evolutionary concept of memes, mathematical analysis, etc as intellectual arguments. Sure, that is what is used in science but the Law-Word of God is not a scientific derivative and should not be treated as such.

I think the issues of theology, psychology, geography, history/tradition etc play a role as well as scientific modes of inquiry. Let us not use one to the exclusion of the other, but let us take both when they can both be of assistance and see where they lead us.

Jeremiah 20:17 Because he did not kill me before birth, So that my mother would have been my grave, And her womb ever pregnant.

I really think this provides some grotesque imagery in consideration of one of America's favorite past-time: abortion. Abortion is "killing before birth." No denying that. Even if it isn't murder, it is killing something that was alive...

But it is murder and that's what makes it worse. You have turned an instrument of life into a chamber of death. God gave sexual intercourse, a wonderful thing, between a man and his wife. This act serves a two-fold purpose: bonding the couple and producing offspring. Lord knows that if sex wasn't how children were made and they were made in some neutral fashion as to be a chore, then we as a human race would've died out long ago by disobeying His command to be fruitful and multiply.

The womb ought to be a haven not a hades, safe not sheol, help not hell, peaceful not purgatory, life not death...

1 Timothy 5:16 If any woman who is a believer has dependent widows, she must assist them and the church must not be burdened, so that it may assist those who are widows indeed.

Who is the Church? And why are Christians so financially burdened? Do we not want to be in the position to assist when called upon? There is no excuse for the Church of Christ to be impotent today given our improved wealth and standard of living, as compared to the first century Church for instance.

The more we have, the more we want. Christians need to stop being so fearful when talking about money. They need to avoid beggars in clerical robes and give to the real beggars. They need to help when it is in the power of their hand to do it. Christ will come back and we will reconcile all accounts with Him. Christians also need to tithe. Don't be fooled by my soft way of making that last statement.

http://www.garynorth.com/public/4188.cfm

http://www.gasbuddy.com/Trip_Calculator.aspx

Visiting family for Christmas?

What are the chances that a meteor will crash into the earth and end all life?

the probability of occurrence is less than 0.01% in ten thousand years, i.e., less than one chance in one hundred million (10-8) per year. This is roughly equivalent to the probability estimated for mass global extinction of life caused by the impact of an extra-terrestrial body on the Earth (Crowe et al., 2006).

Now you know...

Source: NRC Report

http://www.christianciv.com/eschatology_bs_TOC.htm#TOC

The bible study I was going to write...someday. If you are nervous about the future of Christianity or the future in general go through this study.

Pre-Exilic Prophets ( Isaiah, Jeremiah, Hosea, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah)

Exilic/Post-Exilic Prophets ( Ezekiel, Daniel, Joel, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi)

Note which Propets are which. This will aid in the study of the action-packed tomes.

Isaiah 3:12
O My people! Their oppressors are children, And women rule over
them. O My people! Those who guide you lead you astray And
confuse the direction of your paths.

Posted post-election...Even though we will not have a woman VP for the next four years it is still a valid question to ask; what is the Bible's position on this subject?

https://downloads.channel8.msdn.com/

http://www.microsoft.com/student/discounts/theultimatesteal-us/default.aspx

Heyah!

Find out here: http://www.scstatehouse.net/cgi-bin/zipcodesearch.exe.

Results for 29445-9614:

U.S. Senators
Senior - U.S. Senator Lindsey O. Graham
Junior - U.S. Senator Jim W. DeMint

U.S. House District 1 - U.S. Representative Henry E. Brown, Jr.

Your South Carolina State Senator is SC Senate District 37 - Senator Lawrence "Larry" K. Grooms

Your South Carolina State Representative is SC House District 117 - Representative Thomas "Tom" M. Dantzler

Now I can figure out who to vote for in the State races...Too bad I don't have any SC Constitution Party Candidates running in my districts. There a few of them:

Declared Candidates for the 2008 Elections:

South Carolina - Constitution Party of South Carolina

Candidate: Frank Waggoner

Office Sought: U.S. Congress - District 5
Ballot Status: Ballot Access Secured
Residence: , SC

Candidate: Polly Nicolay

Office Sought: State Senate - District 1
Ballot Status: Ballot Access Secured
Residence: , SC

Candidate: John Langville

Office Sought: State Senate - District 7
Ballot Status: Ballot Access Secured
Residence: , SC

Candidate: Patricia. Matthews

Office Sought: State House - District 104
Ballot Status: Ballot Access Secured
Residence: , SC

Candidate: Matt Jarfi

Office Sought: Horry County Council District 6
Ballot Status: Ballot Access Secured
Residence: , SC

Update: Links fixed!

http://www.scstatehouse.net/index.html

Posting post-election...sry 'bout that...

Revelation 14:3 And they sang a new song before the throne and before the four living creatures and the elders; and no one could learn the song except the one hundred and forty-four thousand who had been purchased from the earth.

I hope you do. If you do not, ask me and I will tell it to you. I hope by then you will discover what it takes to really learn the song.

Mercantilism gave governments an excuse for privation of their countrysides for the benefit of their "country" or royal coffers. (Terms to google: Jean-Baptiste Colbert, Louis XIV)

Physiocrats or economistes came into existence under authoritarian France. They coined the term laissez faire. They applied the enlightenment ideals of freedom and liberty to economics during a time of growing enlightenment in the culture at large. (Terms to google: Francois Quesnay)

Adam Smith was an intellectual heir to the physiocrats and also English. His Wealth of Nations popularized free market theory. (Terms to google: Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations)

Carl Menger and others in Austria (I do believe they were also under an authoritarian government) had amazing insights into what really drove the market's pricing of goods: demand. The next generation of Austrian free market economists Ludwig von Mises, Frederick Hayek, explained the trade cycle in terms of economic theory thereby discovering the source of the "boom-and-bust" cycle. (Terms to google: supply and demand, Ludwig von Mises, Frederick Hayek, Austrian economics)

Today there is a thriving school of thought call Austrian economics. Ludwig von Mises Institute is the de facto headquarters. Some famous or infamous people associated with it are Ron Paul, Lew Rockwell, Murray Rothbard, et al. (Terms to google: austrian theory of the trade cycle, Murray Rothbard)

To aid in the learning process I am including a list of links to sites promoting liberty in politics and economics:

"The Ludwig von Mises Institute is the research and educational center of classical liberalism and the Austrian School of economics."

I also subscribe to GaryNorth.com which is where I get most of my knowledge from. But it costs $15 a month. You can get most of the same information for "free" but you'll have to work harder for it (it'll only cost you time...).

Congressman Ron Paul's website.

Lew Rockwell blog and site.

Constitution Party. I vote for their candidates.

Chuck Baldwin's website (Constitution Party Candidate 2008).

Chalcedon Foundation. A Christian educational organization.

Campaign for Liberty.

Ron Paul Archives.

Gary North Archives. And his Freebooks website.

If this list isn't daunting enough Google: Murray Rothbard, Ludwig von Mises, Carl Menger, Frederick Hayek, Frederick Bastiat, Adam Smith...

Lawmakers steamed over ritzy AIG retreat after bailout

It depends on the reason why.

I will not, because I will vote my conscience. I cannot in good conscience vote evil into office and thereby be a part of perpetuating evil in our elected leadership.

But I have colleagues who I deeply respect voting for the candidate whom I would call "the lesser of two evils." Are they wrong in taking this course of action? I think not, if their actions are well reasoned. By this I mean that they actually have valid reasons for voting for a major party candidate. Their "good" reasons alone I cannot take issue with...So why do two people who hold such similar beliefs take actions so dissimilar?

I have concluded that we are approaching this particular issue from different perspectives. I am a conscience voter. I believe my friends are approaching the issue from a practical/pragmatic viewpoint. The next question is: How ought one to presuppose this issue? I don't think this question is valid however. I don't think that it is wrong to decide to vote by conscience or vote by what is practical, so long as the issues are clearly understood.

Not one of us believes in salvation by state. This is fundamental. This must never be lost on those who like to debate politics from a distinctively Christian perspective. Another issue which may cause some division is that; that which is pure cannot be elicited from that which is impure. Politicians with faulty views will fix nothing. I hope my friends are keeping this in mind. A vote for a major party candidate will at best slow the descent into chaos. There will be no reversal in policy. If they understand this then I fully support them in their vote; in fact I could almost join them...But I think we need people like me as well as them.

One faction votes to slow the descent into chaos while working for restoration; the other faction votes only for the candidate which "would" bring political restoration while working to bring this country to a point where they would actually vote for him (i.e. "restoration," s.a.a.).

Conclusion: Note that both factions must work for restoration. To ignore this critical element is truly casting a wasted vote (even if the vote is an abstention; God bless the political dissenters). Ultimately salvation is by the cross. Preaching Christ crucified is what will bring restoration. Preaching Christ's Lordship over every area of life will bring restoration. Obedience to the preaching is what will bring restoration.

In response to a comment; Gary North on his Q&A forum:

If the FED is not private "at all," then why do all the 12 regional Fed banks have .org in their web addresses? Why do they all pay postage, unlike the Board of Governors?

The Board of Governors has .gov. It is a government institution. It mails out under the government's frank.

You learn something new everyday. The FED really is a monstrous hybrid from Jekyll sland.

Depression, recession, mild downturn...What do these words mean anyways?

Did anyone see this coming? Yes. I was warned by those who study economic theory. By all indications as of the end of 2007 we were heading for recession.

If you want to learn more check out this required reading list: The Recession Reader

Third Parties and Political Presumption, Gary DeMar

I understand the point being made. And I agree that we ought not ignore local politics, but by the same token we ought not swing to an extreme in the opposite direction.

In my mind, I have to make one of two choices: vote my conscience or abstain. I will not vote for evil when it is in my hand to vote for righteousness. Don't waste your vote!

So far it looks like my candidates will be:
President/VP - Chuck Baldwin/Darrell Castle (Constitution Party)
U.S. Senate (SC) - Bob Conley (Democrat)
U.S. House - District 1 - NONE
Anyone running below that doesn't appear to have competition and I haven't (yet?) evaluated their platforms.

Are you registered? Too late if you are not, but if you've forgotten where you need to vote check out the SC State Election Commission website.

Berkeley Co. Candidates

Charleston Co. Candidates

Dorchester Co. Candidates

Dan,

I was thinking of Deut 17:14-17;

14 “When you enter the land which the LORD your God gives you, and you possess it and live in it, and you say, ‘I will set a king over me like all the nations who are around me,’ 15 you shall surely set a king over you whom the LORD your God chooses, one from among your countrymen you shall set as king over yourselves; you may not put a foreigner over yourselves who is not your countryman. 16 “Moreover, he shall not multiply horses for himself, nor shall he cause the people to return to Egypt to multiply horses, since the LORD has said to you, ‘You shall never again return that way.’ 17 “He shall not multiply wives for himself, or else his heart will turn away; nor shall he greatly increase silver and gold for himself. (NASB)

But, there was no mention of a census! I was wrong. Obviously there were principles laid out here that may be taken to cover the way in which David carried out his census.

The passage you spoke of was II Sam. 24 and its parallel is in in I Chron. 21.

My footnotes (Geneva) make some good points:

II Sam. 24:2 For the king said to Joab the captain of the host, which [was] with him, Go speedily now through all the tribes of Israel, from Dan even to Beersheba, and number ye the people, that I may know the (c) number of the people.

(c) Because he did this to try his power and so to trust therein, it offended God, else it was lawful to number the people, Exod. 30:12; Num. 1:2.

I Chron. 21:1 And (a) Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.

(a) He tempted David, in setting before his eyes his excellency and glory, his power and victories, read 2 Sam. 24:1.

21:3 And Joab answered, The LORD increased his people an hundred times so many as they [be], O my lord the king: [are] they not all my lord’s servants? wherefore doeth my lord require this thing? why should he be a cause of (c) trespass to Israel?

(c) It was a thing indifferent and usual to number the people, but because he did it of an ambitious mind, as though his strength stood in his people, God punished him.

Conclusion: Numbering the people was not itself a sin. But, it could be a sin if done for the wrong reasons as evidenced by the scriptural account with David, Joab, et al.

Find your Representative in the roll call for the vote on the bailout...er, Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008.

My SC Rep Brown is down. Whoever the Democrat running against him may get my vote...

"Nobody really wanted to do this" and yet they did. They didn't want to vote against "their conscience," so they ignored the voters who put them in office. Pardon me!? Honorable Sir/Madam, I am your conscience. You are answerable to me, not Wall Street bankers. But I guess I have no sway with you because I don't pander to you. But I thought you worked for me...

If you (reader) want to make a difference, know that we are in the fight for the long haul.

1. Educate yourself (Google: campaign for liberty, restore the republic, ludvig von mises institute, austrian economics, Christian economics, gary north, ludvig von mises, frederick hayek, carl menger, murray rothbard, laissez faire, austrian theory of the trade cycle, rousas john rushdoony, david chilton, greg bahnsen, ron paul, constitution party, howard phillips, etc.)

2. Stay away from D.C./get involved locally ("All politics is local.").

3. Educate/catechize/indoctrinate your children in the same, thereby perpetuating the growing ranks of freedom lovers (who will do the same, and on and on and on).

Senate roll call vote on the bailout bill.

Senate roll call vote on the bailout amendment.

Update: Gary North's post that inspired my call to arms: A Civics Lesson for Very Slow Learners: American Voters

Lawmakers quickly point fingers after bailout fails

A link was passed my way and I thought I'd pass it on. Although I think it applies more to new construction, it should still offer many tips to current homeowners.

http://www.dougrye.com/

Conservatives: 'Take a breath' before passing bailout

"Nobody wants to do this. Nobody wants to be involved in this. Nobody wants to take the chance, but I would argue... if we do nothing, we are jeopardizing our economy, jobs and people's retirement security," [Rep. John Boehner of Ohio, the top Republican in the House] said.

"[I]f we do nothing" is exactly what this country needs from you Sir. Please do nothing and allow the economy to right itself.

Commentary: Christian bookstore's shameful actions

Story Highlights
Lifeway stores put Christian magazine behind counter

Magazine featured female pastors on its cover

Lifeway has no respect for freedom of the press, Martin says

Lifeway, Southern Baptist Convention should apologize, he says

What gives religion a bad name? Behavior so described and responses of the like. Yes, it is true the bookstores should have been more professional. But deal with it on that level. The moment you start making it a religious issue then professionalism isn't what the true story is about, but the real story is one of retaliation for hurting his wife's feelings.

We can deal with the polemics in another forum but to give your interpretation of doctrine is to add insult to injury. Furthermore you undermine the authority of scripture by claiming that not all of scripture is God breathed and given by Him. Even when Paul said "this is my own thoughts," was he not carried along by the Spirit?

John 20:22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit.

Interesting, C.S. Lewis makes use of this picture of Christ with his character of Aslan. God breathing is an amazing thing. Oh, what wonders wrought by the very breath of God!

Whether He meant for them then to receive or later to receive, it would seem very awkward if it was Jesus returning only in a different form. Other passages would also be awkward to read if there are not three distinct persons in the Godhead.

2 Chronicles 32:25 But Hezekiah gave no return for the benefit he received, because his heart was proud; therefore wrath came on him and on Judah and Jerusalem. 26 However, Hezekiah humbled the pride of his heart, both he and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the wrath of the LORD did not come on them in the days of Hezekiah.

And that folks is the only mention of sin in Hezekiah. Not that he was nearly perfect or any other such nonsense, but it goes to show you that no one is perfect. Even those we would highly esteem are not perfect. I do not remember where I read this but someone pointed out that the only person mentioned in the Bible (besides Jesus) who is mentioned without a speaking of his sin is Joseph (assuming that Jesus did not sin and for Joseph it is not spoken of).

Even after these verses it goes on to laud Hezekiah with more praise. Just remember, he was but a man. Getting beyond that however he is worthy of looking up to and we should all strive to be like him (amongst others we should be like of course). He came out of a time of wickedness and restored a godly social order. No he was not perfect but what he did was acceptable to God so that God would heal the land. I pray that we too could restore a godly social order and that we might do the right thing if not in exactly the right way but that God may still heal our land.

2 Chronicles 32:8 "With him is only an arm of flesh, but with us is the LORD our God to help us and to fight our battles." And the people relied on the words of Hezekiah king of Judah.

Does this apply today? Could we say that "God is with us" when we go to battle (i.e. given a just war)? Does this mean we wouldn't have to fight or be the best war fighters we could be?

I think that would be an extremist view of the verse. Notice in the second part of the verse that God would "help" them and "fight" their battles. But God cannot help those who do nothing. God could fight the battle for those who do nothing but it appears that He wouldn't always do that. So given the case that He 'merely' helps, what is the scenario? Men fight with all their ability and they win because God has deemed it so. That is true in any case. If we win or lose it is because God has deemed it so.

So when was the last time that America won? Makes you wonder...

2 Chronicles 32:17 He also wrote letters to insult the LORD God of Israel, and to speak against Him, saying, "As the gods of the nations of the lands have not delivered their people from my hand, so the God of Hezekiah will not deliver His people from my hand." 18 They called this out with a loud voice in the language of Judah to the people of Jerusalem who were on the wall, to frighten and terrify them, so that they might take the city. 19 They spoke of the God of Jerusalem as of the gods of the peoples of the earth, the work of men's hands. 20 But King Hezekiah and Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz, prayed about this and cried out to heaven. 21 And the LORD sent an angel who destroyed every mighty warrior, commander and officer in the camp of the king of Assyria. So he returned in shame to his own land. And when he had entered the temple of his god, some of his own children killed him there with the sword. 22 So the LORD saved Hezekiah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem from the hand of Sennacherib the king of Assyria and from the hand of all others, and guided them on every side.

Selections from the narrative:

2 Chronicles 30:3 since they could not celebrate [the Passover] at that time, because the priests had not consecrated themselves in sufficient numbers, nor had the people been gathered to Jerusalem.

9 "...For the LORD your God is gracious and compassionate, and will not turn His face away from you if you return to Him."

but they laughed them to scorn and mocked them. (vs. 10)

11 Nevertheless some men of Asher, Manasseh and Zebulun humbled themselves and came to Jerusalem. 12 The hand of God was also on Judah to give them one heart to do what the king and the princes commanded by the word of the LORD.

15 Then they slaughtered the Passover lambs on the fourteenth of the second month. And the priests and Levites were ashamed of themselves, and consecrated themselves and brought burnt offerings to the house of the LORD. 16 They stood at their stations after their custom, according to the law of Moses the man of God; the priests sprinkled the blood which they received from the hand of the Levites. 17 For there were many in the assembly who had not consecrated themselves; therefore, the Levites were over the slaughter of the Passover lambs for everyone who was unclean, in order to consecrate them to the LORD. 18 For a multitude of the people, even many from Ephraim and Manasseh, Issachar and Zebulun, had not purified themselves, yet they ate the Passover otherwise than prescribed. For Hezekiah prayed for them, saying, "May the good LORD pardon 19 everyone who prepares his heart to seek God, the LORD God of his fathers, though not according to the purification rules of the sanctuary." 20 So the LORD heard Hezekiah and healed the people. (Emphasis mine.)

25 All the assembly of Judah rejoiced, with the priests and the Levites and all the assembly that came from Israel, both the sojourners who came from the land of Israel and those living in Judah. 26 So there was great joy in Jerusalem, because there was nothing like this in Jerusalem since the days of Solomon the son of David, king of Israel. 27 Then the Levitical priests arose and blessed the people; and their voice was heard and their prayer came to His holy dwelling place, to heaven.

2 Chronicles 31:20 Thus Hezekiah did throughout all Judah; and he did what was good, right and true before the LORD his God. 21 Every work which he began in the service of the house of God in law and in commandment, seeking his God, he did with all his heart and prospered.

God requires holiness.

God accepts less.

God requires absolute obedience to a rigid standard.

God helps us to keep His law by direct aid through the Holy Spirit and by declaring us righteous because of the work of Christ on the cross.

Perfectionism is an unachievable earthly ideal. In heaven we will be perfect. Moderation and a heart that desires/loves God is an achievable earthly concept.

God wants true worshipers, He wants people who will come to His marriage supper when He invites them, He wants people who are poor in spirit, He wants obedience rather than sacrifice, He wants us to be fully devoted to Him.

In our current state we will not give God what He requires without Him first giving it to us to give to Him. All in all we will become more like Him each day and will continue this process of growth through all of eternity. If this is true then why fret the small stuff? Worry first about the big picture: am I saved? do I love God and follow Him? am I giving Him His due in my life? in every area of my life? and so on...working towards the details understanding that God still does require holiness.

John 18:38-40 38 Pilate said..."I find no guilt in Him.

John 19:1-42 1 Pilate then took Jesus and scourged Him.

John 19:7 The Jews answered him, "We have a law, and by that law He ought to die because He made Himself out to be the Son of God." 8 Therefore when Pilate heard this statement, he was even more afraid; 9 and he entered into the Praetorium again and said to Jesus, "Where are You from?" But Jesus gave him no answer. 10 So Pilate said to Him, "You do not speak to me? Do You not know that I have authority to release You, and I have authority to crucify You?" 11 Jesus answered, "You would have no authority over Me, unless it had been given you from above; for this reason he who delivered Me to you has the greater sin."

A response only the Son of God would give. Any mere mortal would have cowered at the thought of the loss of his life but Jesus had no reason to fear. Previously Pilate said "Behold, the Man!" but after this exchange with Jesus, Pilate was a bit more subdued and said "Behold, your King!" Even Pilate was afraid of what might God do to him if he had Jesus crucified.

But his superstitious fear was not greater than his fear that the people would spread the word that Pilate was an enemy of Caesar. His immediate situation was at stake and this proved to be a stronger incentive for Pilate, but to try and become an outsider to this Jewish affair he "washes his hands" of the situation and "Then delivered he him therefore unto them to be crucified."

2 Chronicles 29:36 Then Hezekiah and all the people rejoiced over what God had prepared for the people, because the thing came about suddenly.

Did Hezekiah restore a godly order on his own initiative? Was it by God's direction? Is free will and sovereignty antithetical?

Psalm 85:1 O LORD, You showed favor to Your land; You restored the captivity of Jacob. 2 You forgave the iniquity of Your people; You covered all their sin. Selah. 3 You withdrew all Your fury; You turned away from Your burning anger. 4 Restore us, O God of our salvation, And cause Your indignation toward us to cease. 5 Will You be angry with us forever? Will You prolong Your anger to all generations? 6 Will You not Yourself revive us again, That Your people may rejoice in You? 7 Show us Your lovingkindness, O LORD, And grant us Your salvation.

8 I will hear what God the LORD will say; For He will speak peace to His people, to His godly ones; But let them not turn back to folly. 9 Surely His salvation is near to those who fear Him, That glory may dwell in our land. 10 Lovingkindness and truth have met together; Righteousness and peace have kissed each other. 11 Truth springs from the earth, And righteousness looks down from heaven. 12 Indeed, the LORD will give what is good, And our land will yield its produce. 13 Righteousness will go before Him And will make His footsteps into a way.

I guess it is God. But don't think that human responsibility is denied by affirming God as sovereign. Just because it may not make sense right now to affirm both doesn't mean you should throw one of these biblical truths away. Hezekiah did some amazing things, inspiring really. But God also worked out some wonderful things through Hezekiah and Judah/Israel. So we ought to pray that what we do is God's will because He is going to get His way no matter what. And we should be thankful when what we do is acceptable to God.

John 18:36 Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not of this realm."

Note that Jesus is not saying that His kingdom is not in this world but that it is not of or from this world. It is not like the kingdoms of this world but it is in this world as it is "within [us] (Luke 17:21)" Again note that He has asked the Father "thy kingdom come" to this world and that "But if I cast out devils...the kingdom of God is come unto you (Mat 12:28)." and on and on and on. Over and over you hear that the kingdom is near; know that the kingdom is here. Based on what Jesus said, the kingdom came with the coming of the King of kings. His ascension marked His inauguration. The kingdom is not like the kingdoms of this world, thus it is not of this world; but don't make the mistake in thinking that it is not currently here among/within us. We are in the kingdom of His dear Son even now. There is more yet to come, but that is another story...

Post

John 18:4 Then Jesus, knowing all that would happen to him, came forward and said to them, "Whom do you seek?" 5 They answered him, "Jesus of Nazareth." Jesus said to them, "I am he." Judas, who betrayed him, was standing with them. 6 When Jesus said to them, "I am he," they drew back and fell to the ground. 7 So he asked them again, "Whom do you seek?" And they said, "Jesus of Nazareth." 8 Jesus answered, "I told you that I am he. So, if you seek me, let these men go." 9 This was to fulfill the word that he had spoken: "Of those whom you gave me I have lost not one."

May we only be meek, like Jesus...?

Meek:
1 : enduring injury with patience and without resentment : mild
2 : deficient in spirit and courage : submissive
3 : not violent or strong : moderate

A. Not true. Jesus was bold as well. Notice that He was bargaining with the Roman soldiers for the lives of His disciples. He was also scathing at times using ideas such as "snakes" and "rotting corpses" when referring to some people.

Jesus was perfect. We ought to be like Him. Not only are we to be meek like Him we are also to be bold like Him. No, we are not perfect, but there is a whole body of literature encompassing confrontational Christianity: imprecatory Psalms, apocalyptic literature, and wise warnings all with vivid descriptions of the despicability of the spiritual state of the people you talk to and enloy the company of every day.

We don't need to unload all of this at once on the people around us but we need to remember that no matter how nice they are, they are not going to heaven without salvation. And how shall they be saved if they do not hear? Have blessed feet...Be bold about your faith.

B. Notice the authority with which Jesus spoke. The soldiers "drew back and fell to the ground" when Jesus spoke "I am he." That is the power of God. Don't expect for others to do this when you speak in boldness, but speak with boldness anyways and don't fear what persecution may come...You can be wise, circumspect, and shrewd in some senses though, note that.

C. Election: "Of those whom you gave me I have lost not one." His disciples were elect for sure but what about everyone else not recorded by scripture as such? Are we elect? "I do not ask on behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in Me through their word (John 17:20)."

It appears that the immediate application of what Jesus spoke directly referred to His disciples. But I think he places a caveat to be reckoned with. Much/if not all (there's my caveat) of what He says may also refer to "those also who believe," which would include all covenant keepers of today as well.

Ergo, you may take rest in the fact that Jesus will not lose you if so be that you really are in Him. Seek to be sure that you are in Him and take rest.

LORD, let all of these things mentioned happen/cause them to happen so "That they may know that You alone, whose name is the LORD, Are the Most High over all the earth (Psalm 83:18)."

As Christians we take the Law-Word of God to be our ultimate presupposition, for it is God's revelation to us. The Scriptures teach that God is the Most High. In theological/philosophical language we say that God is and that God is Sovereign.

If these thoughts are not the starting point of our thinking then we have already gone astray from our very intellectual "birth." Yes, original sin has even influenced our intellect besides will and emotions; thus it is imperative that we rely on the Word alone to give us the foundations of thought and life.

Following this then, get rid of any ideas of autonomy. Just say no to: natural law theory and instead embrace some degree of theonomy (be pro-God's law), rationalism and instead let God remain true and every man a liar (even if it doesn't make sense to our human reason) and autonomy and instead embrace sovereignty (because the LORD He is the Most High).

John 17:6 "I have manifested Your name to the men whom You gave Me out of the world; they were Yours and You gave them to Me, and they have kept Your word. 7 "Now they have come to know that everything You have given Me is from You; 8 for the words which You gave Me I have given to them; and they received them and truly understood that I came forth from You, and they believed that You sent Me. 9 "I ask on their behalf; I do not ask on behalf of the world, but of those whom You have given Me; for
they are Yours; 10 and all things that are Mine are Yours, and Yours are Mine; and I have been glorified in them.

20 "I do not ask on behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in Me through their word; 21 that they may all be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me. 22 "The glory which You have given Me I have given to them, that they may be one, just as We are one; 23 I in them and You in Me, that they may be perfected in unity, so that the world may know that You sent Me, and loved them, even as You have loved Me.

Did Jesus Christ give His life a sacrifice for all men's sins or the sins of those God gave Him? And not only the elect that were there with Him, but all of the elect in Jesus' "past," present and "future"...

2 Chronicles 25:4 However, he did not put their children to death, but did as it is written in the law in the book of Moses, which the LORD commanded, saying, "Fathers shall not be put to death for sons, nor sons be put to death for fathers, but each shall be put to death for his own sin."

Yet God will "[visit] the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation (Deuteronomy 5:9)." Although God does this He does not allow us to judge others in this manner. We are not God. We must judge based solely on the actions of the individual...Similarly Jesus Christ "of thine own mouth will I judge thee (Luke 19:22)"...Remember sin is ethical, not metaphysical.

Note: God imputes sin but I'm not sure if He condemns solely based on imputation alone. That is a tough issue to answer, which I cannot at this moment.

Every Christian is a priest. He needs no mediator to go to God. What about she...? Neither does she.

What I'm getting at is the priesthood of women. Is a female Christian a priest? Emphatically, yes! We all know Him. So what happens when I'm gone? Do I leave my boy in charge of the house in some patriarchal fashion with my wife simply as the young child's caretaker or is my wife in charge when I'm gone.

Patriarchal tendencies in conservative Christian circles would lead you to behave in such a way as to affirm the priesthood of only male Christians; at least this is my perception. But this subverts the Biblical idea that we are a nation of priests.

When I'm gone: school/work or deployed for six months; my wife will act as the priest of the home to facilitate the spiritual/religious life of our family. When I'm home it should be no different except that I will too act as a priest. And for those who think I'm attempting to subvert lines of authority, I'm not. Just think of me as the high priest of my home and my wife as a priest who functions in my stead when I'm gone.

Psalm 35:20 "For [they that hate me without a cause] speak not peace: but they devise deceitful matters against them that are quiet in the land."

I am not a conspiracy theorist. In my mind their is no point theorizing about what the Bible forbids us to think about (Eph. 5:12). Especially when I already know that there are those that "devise deceitful matters against them that are quiet in the land."

Title: Let us lay wait...

2 Chronicles 24:21 "So they conspired against him and at the command of the king they stoned him to death in the court of the house of the LORD."

2 Chronicles 24:25 "And when they were departed from [Joash], (for they left him in great diseases,) his own servants conspired against him for the blood of the sons of Jehoiada the priest, and slew him on his bed, and he died: and they buried him in the city of David, but they buried him not in the sepulchres of the kings. 26 Now these are those who conspired against him: Zabad the son of Shimeath the Ammonitess, and Jehozabad the son of Shimrith the Moabitess."

2 Chronicles 25:27 "From the time that Amaziah turned away from following the LORD they conspired against him in Jerusalem, and he fled to Lachish; but they sent after him to Lachish and killed him there."

Psalm 83:3 "They make shrewd plans against Your people, And conspire together against Your treasured ones. 4 They have said, "Come, and let us wipe them out as a nation, That the name of Israel be remembered no more." 5 For they have conspired together with one mind; Against You they make a covenant:"

John 15:8 "My Father is glorified by this, that you bear much fruit, and so prove to be My disciples."

The presence of fruit doesn't make a tree. This is a fallacy involving confusion between the antecedent and the consequent. You can say however that the presence of fruit proves a tree (id est: under two conditions:

1. Tree "X" bears "X" fruit [universal affirmative].
2. Only tree "X" bears "X" fruit [universal negative; to see the negative more clearly it can be re-phrased as 'No other tree but tree "X" bears "X" fruit.'].)

A logical case could be made to prove a tree by its fruit, but the fruit does not precede the tree. It cannot make the tree from which it came. Likewise morals/ethics do not save. One cannot make himself right with God by repenting, he must first be restored by God (Psalm 80:19) before he can repent.

Are works necessary? Absolutely. How else are you going to prove to be Christ's disciples?

2 Chronicles 21:11 Moreover, he made high places in the mountains of Judah, and caused the inhabitants of Jerusalem to play the harlot and led Judah astray.

A government cannot make a nation righteous, but it can lead the people astray. This should be a warning to anyone Christian who may want to get invovled in politics. The state brings only negative sanctions to the nation. The church is to bring the positive sanctions.

Get all the humanitarians out of the government and into the church where they would be more effective (t.i.c.). The Christian in government should have as his priority to prevent/minimize abuses of the tool negative sanctions (a.k.a. "the sword"), but should not be mistaken if he thinks that the state should be used for positive sanctions. Peace will not come by the sword.

2 Chronicles 20:32 [Jehoshaphat] walked in the way of his father Asa and did not depart from it, doing right in the sight of the LORD. 33 The high places, however, were not removed; the people had not yet directed their hearts to the God of their fathers.

This was an indictment against Jehoshaphat; he did good but he failed in other areas. He did not tear down the "pagan shrines" (NLT) and the people did not change their hearts towards God. It is interesting to note that the latter was part of the indictment of Jehoshaphat's reign. No; government cannot save you, but how much influence can the government have on the hearts of a people?

2 Chronicles 27:2 [Jotham] did right in the sight of the LORD, according to all that his father Uzziah had done; however he did not enter the temple of the LORD. But the people continued acting corruptly.

There again another mention of the king's shortcoming(s) followed closely by the ethics of the nation.

2 Chronicles 28:19 For the LORD humbled Judah because of Ahaz king of Israel, for he had brought about a lack of restraint in Judah and was very unfaithful to the LORD.

How is it that sin is so easily propagated? Why do we say that you cannot force a nation to be Christian but we see all throughout history the forcing of nations to anti-God religion...Ahaz forced Judah/Israel to worship the gods of the Assyrians...But God is faithful in that He retains His remnant.

Psalm 78:65 Then the Lord awoke as if from sleep, Like a warrior overcome by wine.

God is not like man...Oftentimes anthropomorphisms are used to characterize God's actions. But don't make the mistake in thinking God is like man.

Rather man ought to aspire to be like God. And what is God like? You'll have to read His Law-Word to find out.

Rep. Ron Paul Asks Only “Secure Borders” Presidential Candidate to Join His Press Conference:

Chuck Baldwin of Constitution Party to be Joined by Border Agent’s Wife

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Constitution Party presidential candidate Chuck Baldwin (www.Baldwin08.com) will join former GOP presidential candidate Rep Ron Paul (R-Tex.) at a News Conference at 10:30 a.m. on Wednesday, September 10, 2008, at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C.

Baldwin, who joined other constitutionalists at Ron Paul’s “Shadow Convention” on September 2 in Minneapolis, will be joined by Monica Ramos, wife of imprisoned Border Patrol agent Ignacio Ramos. Baldwin has called for the immediate pardon and release of Ramos and Jose Compean, who are serving 11 and 12 year sentences for attempting to uphold immigration law.

Congressman Paul, who is expected to present non-negotiable points voters must demand from a presidential candidate, invited Chuck Baldwin, the only anti-illegal immigrant amnesty presidential candidate, to the September 10 News Conference. Baldwin, a long-time critic of the open-borders policy,will join concerned Americans attending the annual Hold Their Feet To The Fire Radio Row protest and Lobby Days sponsored by the Federation for American Immigration Reform(FAIR) Congressional Task Force.(www.feettothefire08.com)

Baldwin, a popular political commentator on national TV shows, is a radio talk show host, author of two books, and pastor of the Crossroads Baptist Church in Pensacola. Florida. He is the only candidate who received an “EXCELLENT” rating by pro-secure borders group Numbers USA .

The group rated Obama and McCain “abysmal” and rated Libertarian Party candidate Bob Barr “bad” on the immigration issue. (http://www.baldwin08.com/files/ImmigrationIssues.pdf)

“The United States government aids and abets illegal criminals, and jails its own law enforcement agents for doing their job. Despite these injustices, both parties controlling our government offer us more of the same with identical pro-amnesty presidential candidates,” Baldwin said.

“Neither Obama nor McCain will end the invasion from the south, nor have they called for the release of our brave border agents. I am the only candidate representing the 75% of Americans who want illegal immigration and amnesty to end.”

In April 2008, Chuck Baldwin was elected by delegates of the nationwide Constitution Party to be their presidential candidate. The CP, founded in 1992, was initially called the U.S. Taxpayers Party. It is the fifth political party to be recognized by the Federal Election Commission. It's expected to be on the ballot in almost every state.

____________________________________________________

You can read it online here.

Just further proof that voting "Republican" is a completely wasted vote. Sarah Palin seems to be conservative...Great. What is she going to do when someone else (McCain) gets elected...That's what I thought.

If you want a better political climate in America vote CP, especially if you're a Christian; you won't have to compromise your values for a bowl of porridge.

2 Chronicles 16:12 In
the thirty-ninth year of his reign Asa became diseased in his
feet. His disease was severe, yet even in his disease he did not
seek the LORD, but the physicians.

I don't think that the Bible is here being antogonistic to medicine but the abuse of it. God must be first. All else comes second to Him.

Once the proper order is established, then all things are lawful, though maybe not expedient.

Borrowed from http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/articles/sup_infr.htm

I liked this table comparing the alternate views of the logical order of the decrees of God (not chronological order).

Note: Click on the picture for a better view.

Deuteronomy 21:22 And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be to be put to death, and thou hang him on a tree:

23 His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged [is] accursed of God;) that thy land be not defiled, which the LORD thy God giveth thee [for] an inheritance.

Galatians 3:13 Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed [is] every one that hangeth on a tree:

Trees represent life. Especially the tree of life. But in general trees represent life. In the garden which was in Eden God gave man the fruit of every tree to eat as food save one. Trees = life.

What happens when you turn an instrument of life into an instrument of death? You are cursed. This is not some voodoo hex I'm talking about, it is simply the sanctions God imposes upon sin. Blessings for obedience and curses for disobedience. If you turn tools of life into tools of death you are cursed and the curse of God is upon you/your nation.

Abortion is an obvious reference. But what about hanging on a tree? If you kill/are killed by hanging on a tree this is the curse of God. The Roman nation was cursed and is no longer around today. Jesus Christ was cursed. (Sounds kind of sacrilegious to say.)

Maj. premise: Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree.
Min. premise: Christ was hanged on a tree.
Concl: Christ was cursed.

But that is not to say that Christ was paying a penalty for a sin He committed...He was paying the penalty for sin. Again He was cursed.

Isaiah 53:5 But he [was] wounded for our transgressions, [he was] bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace [was] upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

I Peter 2:24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.

Copied from Blue Letter Bible.

Thanks be to God for His sovereignty and providence without which none could be saved.

Just Politics as usual...And people don't see it.

If you do, read Sarah Palin as Stalking Horse and Sugar and Spice and Everything Nice?.

The answer for America is not a dream of a better America but a reality of a better America. You want reality...People are stupid, lazy, power-hungry, greedy, gluttonous, and such the like...I apologize if you take offense to my calling you out, but it is necessary.

Truth is the only answer. Not edited truth, mind you. Austrian economics and Libertarian politics have a measure of truth but they are not enough to solve the real problems. "Larceny in our hearts" can only be solved by the Lord Jesus Christ.

Weathering the storm...(7:23pm)

Borrowed from http://www.weather.com/maps/news/atlstorm8/floater5_large.html?from=hp_main_maps.

Coming to you live from Goose Creek...Well, almost live. The picture is from about 24 minutes ago.

(7:47pm)

(8:49pm)

If you didn't know, now you do:

23-39 mph wind speeds = Tropical Depression

40-74 mph wind speeds = Tropical Storm

74-95 mph wind speeds = Category I Hurricane

96-110 mph wind speeds = Category II Hurricane

111-130 mph wind speeds = Category III Hurricane

131-155 mph wind speeds = Category IV Hurricane

>155 mph wind speeds = Category V Hurricane

Data collected from http://www.weather.com/newscenter/hurricanecentral/2008/hanna.html

Did FBI Scientists Identify a Single, Unique Flask?

We are slowly getting more information about the FBI's lack of a case against Bruce Ivins. When we first learned of his suicide, we were told that he was the anthrax killer. Period. Then we got a statement that there was some technology developed by the FBI for the purpose of this case. Is this why nearly 7 years passed before an arrest was made?

The full briefing was still skimpy on the details, and not very convincing. But what we were told is that the anthrax was traced to a single flask that was in Bruce Ivins’ possession at Ft. Detrick. Then, Science Magazine reported on a "close reading" of the four relevant paragraphs in the 25-page written brief. We now had a better idea of what exactly this new technology was, although the FBI refused press access to its staff scientists.

Read more.

It saddens me to think there may be more to the tragic story than meets the uncritical eye.

[Excerpt from] Chapter 43: The Ninth Commandment

Protecting Others’ Reputations

As we have seen, one of the major emphases of the ninth commandment and the confessional expositions of it is that we should not distort the truth in order to hurt a neighbor. Scripture emphasizes this concern in many contexts. Like American law, for example, it insists that when someone is accused of wrongdoing, the burden of proof is on the accuser: “innocent until proven guilty.” In the Old Testament, this burden is expressed by the requirement of “two or three witnesses.” This principle bears obviously on capital crimes (Deut. 17:6), but also on all other charges of wrongdoing:

A single witness shall not suffice against a person for any crime or for any wrong in connection with any offense that he has committed. Only on the evidence of two witnesses or of three witnesses shall a charge be established. (Deut. 19:15; cf. Heb. 10:28)

Jesus incorporates this teaching into his plan for discipline within the church:

If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses. 17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. 18 Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed1 in heaven. 19 Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. 20 For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I among them. (Matt. 18:15-20)

It is, of course, possible and legitimate for a Christian sometimes to ignore the sins of others, for “love covers a multitude of sins” (1 Pet. 4:8). If we made an issue of every sin that someone else commits, we would be tied up every hour in confrontation and ecclesiastical litigation. But when we see a definite need to correct the other person, either for his own good or for the good of the church, Jesus gives us the pattern for doing it. That pattern is not to talk about the sinner behind his back (gossip), but to confront him directly.12 If that confrontation doesn’t bring restoration, then the accuser is to bring “two or three witnesses” (cf. 2 Cor. 13:1, 1 Tim. 5:19). If that second confrontation fails, the accuser should pursue formal church discipline, trusting the promise of Christ’s presence (verse 20) even through this distasteful process.

But note especially here the protection of the accused: by open confrontation rather than gossip, by a burden of proof on the accuser, by many in the church participating in the process, by the presence of Christ, who judges all things rightly.

A further protection is this: Paul urges those who would confront others at the same time to confront themselves:

Brothers, if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness. Keep watch on yourself, lest you too be tempted. (Gal. 6:1)

One who would correct others should, as Jesus says, take the plank from his own eye before removing a speck from someone else’s (Matt. 7:3-5). One who would correct someone else should not sit on a high horse; he should set aside his pride, understanding that sin afflicts us all. Indeed, Satan uses the very process of correction to tempt the accuser to pride.

According to Gal. 6:1, harshness is another barrier to godly correction. When we are dealing with someone else’s sin, we need to ask regularly if we are approaching him gently. Gentleness is an important character trait in Scripture, and it is often compromised in the anger of confrontation.

The reputation of a person is a delicate thing, not easily restored after it is compromised. When someone accuses another of wrongs through gossip, inadequate testimony, and/or harsh confrontation, he does great harm. Note the concern that God himself has for his own great name (Ex. 32:11-14, Josh. 7:9, etc.)

I believe that this is one area where Christians today have often grieved the Lord. Many churches today have no formal church discipline, so there are no protections for those who are accused, and often the local gossip determines the outcome of a dispute. People start whispering, a negative consensus develops, and the target of the criticism leaves the church.

Further, Christians have often attacked one another with a total neglect of biblical standards of evidence. One might think that theologians, at least, would be careful to judge disputes fairly, gently, and cautiously; but in my judgment they are often the worst offenders.13 In theological controversy, writers often delight in distorting the words of one another, reading them in the worst possible (or worse than possible) sense. Many writers invoke the rhetoric of anathema and condemnation, without any adequate argument, and without any meaningful attempt to seek peace.

Such controversialists often invoke the example of Luther and Calvin in this regard. I think these Reformers were themselves too quick with insulting epithets and anathemas. But for the most part they justified these epithets with careful biblical argumentation. I do not see a similar care in many of the self-appointed modern guardians of orthodoxy. It is true, also, that the prophets, Jesus, and Paul often used strong language against their opponents. They used that strong language against oppressors of the poor, against Pharisees who burdened the people with unbiblical moral standards, and against Judaizers, who wanted to force Gentiles to become Jews before receiving the grace of God in Christ. But they were very gentle with others they disagreed with: Jesus with the woman of Samaria (John 4), Paul with Christian vegetarians and day-observers (Rom. 14). Present-day defenders of the faith often fail to make such distinctions.

Many theological controversialists today set themselves up as internet gurus, declaring brothers and sisters to be excommunicate on their say-so alone, showing contempt for the authority of the church, which alone God has authorized to make such judgments, and violating God’s standards requiring protection of the accused. Many of these have no conscience about spreading lies to anybody who will hear. It never occurs to them that they have a responsibility to protect the reputations of fellow Christians, even those they disagree with.

In part, the problem is due to the failure of church discipline in most contemporary congregations. Denominationalism has played a role in this failure (cf. Chapter 24). An accused person, or a false accuser, can easily leave one church and join another if they are threatened by discipline. Or they can express their opinions on the internet, with little or no church oversight.

It is time for Christians to recognize that this behavior is sin. It is gossip, often slander, and Christians should not support it. The church needs to wake up to the problem. Theology, especially on the internet, needs to become accountable to the body of Christ. We need to demonstrate to the world that we adhere to God’s standards of evidence, and that we deal with sin in a way that in principled, but also gentle and winsome. 14

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Emphasis mine.]

I am dealing with Christians on the internet who do not seem to like to buy and sell in the truth. By this I mean they are quick to offer invectives of the great reformed men of history, calling them essentially Manicheans, Gnostics, pagans, etc. They doubt the salvation of men such as Augustine, Calvin, et al.

They do not even seem to have their factual information straight at times. If they were simply wrong in their assessments of things, I think it would be easy to show them where they err. But they are not only wrong, they are also proud and mockers of Calvinists (Lord forgive me if ever I mock others, especially publically), they do not study the arguments of Calvinism but promulgate the anti-Calvinistic arguments they have studied, they oft misrepresent Calvinism or in the least argue a straw-man which is not Calvinism.

In short, they want to believe what they want to believe. And how, pray tell, do you as a rhetor approach such who think in this manner?

Habeas Corpus is pretty important to freemen. Re-educate yourself here and here.

It is not a good thing to suspend petitions of Habeas Corpus. What is true about presidents who suspend this "Great Writ?" What is true is that liberty is not their primary concern.

Old Abe was one of those president's who suspended that Great Writ. Here is a book that seeks to re-educate people on why suspension of said law is/was a bad thing and to explain the sort of person who would do such a thing.

Bahnsen comments on when children should take communion:

"How about children? Well not children who don't understand these things because at Passover, remember, the child who took the meal had to say 'father what do these things mean?' The child had to be a discerning, understanding child. But now how young can the child be? The answer to that question is 'I don't know.' You bring me a two-year-old who can give me a two-year-old profession of faith and we'll have that two-year-old take the Lord's Supper. Some will say well that's not possible. I don't know, I don't know enough about human psychology to tell you whether it is or not, but if it happens I'm not going to say God's word says eleven years old before you can join the church. There's nothing like that. And if we're going to be true to our principles as Reformed people we should not impose prerequisites that the Bible doesn't impose. There's no age requirement for the Lord's Supper."

Found at Covenant Media Foundation; on the bottom of their homepage.

Maybe.

I just purchased covenanthearts.com. (Next task: read a lot.)

I plan on moving this blog to that site if I can; probably to something like covenanthearts.com/blog. It'll be powered by WordPress.org I think. It may be built with Weebly, or Google Sites but everything has to be compatible...So, we'll see.

Soon I hope to start selling some of my favorite books and my favorite publishers' books. Publishers will include Institute for Christian Economics, Dominion Press, and Christian Liberty Press (CLP). CLP offers a distributorship program making this possible. We will also sell a few books put out by No Greater Joy Ministries on child training and marriage. This will also be made possible by a similar program. American Vision also sells materials wholesale.

In the long run I hope to be able to start a Christian Daycare in the Charleston area with the namesake of the newly acquired domain.

Update (9/7/08): I don't think the book-selling is going to happen. Honestly, it will be a lot of time spent for little reward. Frankly I need to redeem the time and this is not the way to do it right now. I still hope to do this thing though. And I will still keep the site because I do want to name a Christian Daycare ministry/local Christian educational ministry by the same name.

Here are homeschooling curricula to consider:

Robinson Curriculum

Cost: $195, or $275 w/G.A. Henty collection on CD. Saxon math textbooks ordered separately (avg $61 eaX9).

Focus: Christian Worldview. Math and Science to develop reason.

The ultimate "teach-yourself" and "all-in-one" system (except for the Saxon math textbooks which must be ordered separately). Five Stars (*****).

Principle Approach - FACE

Cost: $217.50/$229.70(?) for Noah Plan Curriculum Guide Package. $199.95 for Principle Approach Foundational Set. Note that additional books would more than likely need to be purchased. See the Product Guide for more info.

Focus: Christian Character and Christian Political Involvement.

The method the founding fathers used. That is how it is advertised. They sell a book that teaches the Christian History of the Constitution, but this is at odds with the idea that the "ratification of the United States Constitution in 1787–88 was not an act of covenant renewal. It was an act of covenant-breaking: the substitution of a new covenant in the name of a new god." (source: Dr Gary North, part 3 of Political Polytheism). You be the judge. Three Stars (***).

Christian Liberty Academy School System

Cost: Tuition varies from $200-$545 depending on type of enrollment and grade. Electives cost extra and would probably be desired by most. Additional resources are offered through Christian Liberty Press.

Focus: Christian Worldview and Academics.

For those who want to homeschool and have the prestige of a private school (with CLASS administration enrollment) the CLASS system is for you. Two Stars (**).

Veritas Press

Cost:~$1000 a year (my estimate)

Focus: Classical Christian Education

This is the traditional Greek/Roman styled system of learning. One Star (*).

Old Fashioned Education

Cost: Mostly free; some materials must be purchased.

Focus: Christian Worldview. Free online books/textbooks and primary source documents.

Similar sites: Simply Charlotte Mason and Ambleside Online

Provides many free resources/links for a homeschool curriculum for "students" of all ages (beneficial and cheap for adults to brush up on some learnin'). Will most likely have to be supplemented with purchased materials. Three Stars (***).

Then of course there is the "'Shelly-esque' (as in Mary Shelley) hybrid of multiple curriculums (sic)." I plan on using the Robinson Curriculum supplemented with books I already own and resources from some of these other educational organizations. Five Stars (*****).

If sin is only an act of the free will and precipitated by choice alone, then what of common curse? Why do I suffer the curse of having to work all the days of my life by the sweat of my brow (and my wife experience the pain of childbirth)? If it only affects Adam in a very real sense, what then is the significance of Adam's sin? Why is it then when we come to Christ that He has promised us an abridgment (to some extant) of the common curse?

Common curse besides being taught by Scripture is seen empirically in that most people do not like to work hard. Most people do not want responsibility. Pareto's Law says that 20% of the people own 80% of the wealth. The 20-80 rule has been applied to many fields concerning man. It sometimes may be 10-90 or 30-70 but it does not deviate very far from 20-80. It can be seen in any organization that 20% of the people accomplish 80% of the work. Sorrow has driven man to despise God-glorifying work.

God has promised that there will always be a remnant (common grace). This is the 20%. He also says that some follow the law even though they do not know it. It can be said with some certainty that humanity would have resorted to utter chaos had it not been for the enterprising of the 20% in commerce and leadership. "Entropy" takes its toll. The Holy Spirit's work in restraining evil and the maintenance of the remnant is the only reason we are where we are today.

Classical theism shows a continuity between the Fall of mankind with Adam and the redemption of mankind by the second Adam. Then over time the effects of the fall from paradise are reversed. We began in paradise then were banished. But just like Paradise Lost ends we too "shalt possess A Paradise within."

We are told to do everything for the glory of God. But if the whatsoever applies to everything then it applies to the previously sorrowful labors. Women too may be saved in childbirth (ask my wife, the first birth was a bit rough but the second...well, read Christ Centered Childbirth). It is purported that nations will bow the knee to Christ and the wolf shall dwell with the lamb as the effects of sin in this world are removed as the Gospel goes forth as a two-edged sword smiting the nations.

If every sin is only an act of the will then every sin is itself a fall of man and Adam's fall would not have the implications that classical theists say it has and that Romans says the second Adam came to change.

"For if Adam's fall did not, or did only in part, deprive the will of the freedom and power to do good, and original sin did not consist either in a culpable loss of an original supernatural gift, then in that same measure grace became dispensible and Christianity was robbed of its absolute character." (Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics: Vol3 Sin and Salvation in Christ, page 44)

By absolute character, Bavinck is referring to the fact that our salvation is monergistic or 100% dependent on the grace of God and that He saves us; our will in no way aiding the salvation of our souls.

Just as a person needs the nourishment of food so a Christian needs the nourishment of the word. It is not voluntary it is a requirement. Without the word there will be no knowledge of God, correct doctrine and of how to properly live before Him. The Scriptures attest to the fact that Christians must live according to Scripture. We must believe and obey. We must seek after wisdom and accept reproof. Then after we have grown in the faith we may seek after understanding mysteries as well. This is a gift given by God. But it cannot be employed without knowledge of His word. All Christians need to know the word for their livelihood, but more so do teachers and ministers need to be intimate with the word. For they cannot lead by example, reprove or correct others without knowledge of the truth. They would not know what are incorrect beliefs and practices. Today we have an emphasis on experiential religion: being and becoming instead of believing and obeying. These are untruths fed by wolves to the sheep of God. This further proves the point in that these wolves themselves do not truly understand the word. So the need is for all Christians and especially ministers to study the living word of God.

No. God said be fruitful and multiply.

What about non-procreative sex? In Augustine's day it was believed to be so.

I don't think so, but I have nothing concrete to prove so one way or another.

For more information on Augustine's views see:

Marriage and Virginity: Saint Augustine
Marriage And Concupiscence

This volume also contains Marriage and Concupiscence amongst other things:

St. Augustine Anti-Pelagian Writings: Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, Part 5

Jesse Morrel posted:

Augustine taught that concupiscence was sin. I read that in a Lutheran Theology book, which I don't own and I don't have handy. But from what I recall, Augustine argued that there was no sexual passion in the Garden. They would have reproduced and multiply without sexual desire. He said that it was only after they ate from the tree that their eyes were opened and they saw that they were naked, thus making the way for concupiscence. Now human nature has been changed, since we have this passion that would not have been in the Garden. That is why Julian mockingly said that Augustine thought that in the Garden, Adam and Eve would have reproduced by shaking children out of the trees.

Also, Augustine also taught that when Adam sinned, human nature was changed so that free will was lost. And this loss of free will (change of human nature) was not only the punishment of sin, but that it was sin itself.

'Human nature sinned differently when it still had the freedom to abstain from sin, from what is does not since that freedom is lost, when it needs the aid of a liberator. That was only sin; this is also the punishment of sin.' Augustine, V. 28.

"There is a necessary sin, from which man has not the freedom to refrain, which is not only sin, but is the punishment of sin." VI. 59.

In doing a bit more research on this and other topics what I have come across is surprising at first, then again not so strange as it first may seem.

Augustine like many others was a product of his time. That is to say he was influenced by his environment. He lived in a day and age when it was commonly held that non-procreative sex was sinful (Source: Bowen Simmons' review of Marriage and Virginity by Augustine). Not many people challenge what they are taught and fewer still challenge everything they are taught.

According to John Frame, Augustine was a Manichean, then a Platonist, and then a Neo-Platonist. Neo-Platonism had the greatest influence on his theology (Source: Apologetics lecture; free to download from ITunes).

Rather than being called church fathers they should be called church babies because the church was still in its infancy (My paraphrase of Frame quoting someone else.). For instance the doctrine of the trinity was not fully fleshed out until the 5th century AD. Until the Church declared what it believed as orthodox at the Council of Chalcedon there were very gnostic type views (i.e. Nestoriansim) prevalent and competing for adherence.

It seems that Augustine was anti-Manichean to the core. Have you ever met a person who switched sides on an issue? These people are relentless in rooting out everything they can that was affected by their former beliefs and spend the rest of their lives fighting against what lies they held to as "truth." (Source: Empirical observation)

You claimed that Augustine got his doctrine of sin -> Manicheans -> Gnostics. I asked where you got this information from and you referenced a Lutheran Theology book. This really doesn't do justice to my inquiry. I understand that you may have been convinced a long time ago that what you are saying now is true, but that is also the pitfall. If all you can do is make a vague reference to your past study then you probably need to re-research that point before publishing it.

Another book you have used: "A Historical Presentation of Augustinianism & Pelagianism from Original Sources" by Dr. Wiggers which by any account would appear to be impartial and therefore is a good primary source to cite. I checked up on this source and ran across a good article by A. A. Hodge, Outlines of Theology: Pelagianism, Semi-Pelagianism & Augustinianism.

There are, in fact, as we might have anticipated, but two complete self-consistent systems of Christian theology possible.

1st. On the right hand, Augustinianism completed in Calvinism. 2nd. On the left hand, Pelagianism completed in Socinianism. And 3rd. Arminianism comes between these as the system of compromises and is developed Semipelagianism.

Jesse has said: "A deeply devoted Calvinist recently told me, 'There are only two theologies that make sense to me, Calvinism and Open Theism.'" So I guess you already knew that.

This article has got to be read by anyone who wants to know more about the Augustinian-Pelagian controversy. I think some ideas in here ought to be heeded by everyone involved in the debate today:

The positions maintained by Pelagius were generally condemned by the representatives of the whole Church, and have ever since been held by all denominations, except professed Socinians, to be fatal heresy. They were condemned by the two councils held at Carthage A. D. 407 and A. D. 416, by the Council held at Milevum in Numidia A. D. 416; by the popes Innocent and Zosimus, and by the Ecumenical Council held at Ephesus A. D. 431. This speedy and universal repudiation of Pelagianism proves that while the views of the early Fathers upon this class of questions were very imperfect, nevertheless the system taught by Augustine must have been in all essentials the same with the faith of the Church as a whole from the beginning.

...the rationalistic spirit inherent in their system...

This kind of rationalism (IMHO) is what I've seen in this forum with the highly philosophical arguments for certain points of doctrine. I'm thinking about the Open Theism and The future as both Certain and Contingent threads. In fact a question was made that illustrates my fear and warning to all those who tread the paths of Semi-Pelagianism and Pelgianism.

originalsin has said: "Myquestion (sic) to the Open Theist is do they apply the same scrutiney (sic) to the Trinity as they do to free will and foreknowledge with consistancy (sic)? No matter how you cook it. The three in one God is a logical contradiction."

Socinianism was developed by these writers with consummate ability, and crystallized into its most perfect form, as a logical system. It is purely Unitarian in its theology-- Humanitarian in its Christology, Pelagian in its Anthropology-- and its Soteriology was developed in perfect logical and ethical consistency with those elements. A statement of its characteristic positions will be found below.

I see that to be consistent with the thoughts expressed by our gracious host will lead one to fatal heresies and will draw one away from established orthodoxy.

Below is Hodge's outline of Pelagianism as worked out in Socinianism, Semi-Pelagianism as worked out in Arminianism, and Augustinianism as worked out in Calvinism.

13. Give an outline of the main positions of the Socinian System.

THEOLOGY AND CHRISTOLOGY.

1st. Divine Unity.
This unity inconsistent with any personal distinctions in the Godhead.

Christ is a mere man.

The Holy Ghost is an impersonal divine influence.

2d. Divine Attributes.
There is no principle of vindicatory justice in God. Nothing to prevent his acceptance of sinners on the simple ground of repentance.

Future contingent events are essentially unknowable. The foreknowledge of God does not extend to such events.

ANTHROPOLOGY.
Man was created without positive moral character. The " image of God, " in which man was said to be created did not include holiness.

Adam in eating the forbidden fruit committed actual sin, and thereby incurred the divine displeasure, but he retained nevertheless the same moral nature and tendencies with which he was created, and he transmitted these intact to his posterity.

The guilt of Adam's sin is not imputed.

Man is now as able by nature to discharge all his obligations as he ever was. The circumstances under which man's character is now formed are more unfavorable than in Adam's case, and therefore man is weak. But God is infinitely merciful; and obligation is graded by ability. Man was created naturally mortal and would have died had he sinned or not.
SOTERIOLOGY.

The great object of Christ's mission was to teach and to give assurance with respect to those truths concerning which the conclusions of mere human reason are problematical. This he does both by doctrine and example.
Christ did not execute the office of priest upon earth; but only in heaven, and there in a very indefinite sense.

The main office of Christ was prophetical. He taught a new law. Gave an example of a holy life. Taught the personality of God. And illustrated the doctrine of a future life by his own resurrection.

His death was necessary only as a condition unavoidably prerequisite to his resurrection. It was also designed to make a moral impression upon sinners, disposing them to repentance on account of sin, and assuring them of the clemency of God. No propitiation of divine justice was necessary, nor would it be possible by means of vicarious suffering.
ESCHATOLOGY.
In the intermediate period between death and the resurrection the soul remains unconscious.

"For it is evident from the authorities cited, that they (the older Socinians), equally with others' constantly maintain that there will be a resurrection both of the just and of the unjust, and that the latter shall be consigned to everlasting punishment, but the former admitted to everlasting life." - B. Wissowatius.
"The doctrine of the proper eternity of hell torments is rejected by most Unitarians of the present day (1818) as in their opinion wholly irreconcilable with the divine goodness, and unwarranted by the Scriptures. In reference to the future fate of the wicked, some hold that after the resurrection they will be annihilated or consigned to 'everlasting destruction' in the literal sense of the words:but most have received the doctrine of universal restoration, which maintains that all men, however depraved their characters may have been in this life, will, by a corrective discipline, suited in the measure of its severity to the nature of each particular case, be brought ultimately to goodness and consequently to happiness." (--Rees's "Racovian Catechism," pp. 367, 368.)

ECCLESIOLOGY.
The church is simply a voluntary society. Its object mutual improvement. Its common bond similarity of sentiments and pursuits. Its rule is human reason.

The Sacraments are simply commemorative and teaching ordinances.

14. Give an outline of the main features of the Arminian System.

DIVINE ATTRIBUTES.
They admit that vindicatory justice is a divine attribute, but hold that it is relaxable, rather optional than essential, rather belonging to administrative policy than to necessary principle.

They admit that God foreknows all events without exception. They invented the distinction expressed by the term Scientia Media to explain God's certain foreknowledge of future events, the futurition of which remain undetermined by his will or any other antecedent cause.

They deny that God's foreordination extends to the volitions of tree agents and hold that the eternal election of men to salvation is not absolute, but conditioned upon foreseen faith and obedience.

ANTHROPOLOGY.
Moral character can not be created but is determined only by previous self-decision.

Both liberty and responsibility necessarily involve possession of power to the contrary.

They usually deny the imputation of the guilt of Adam's first sin.

The strict Arminians deny total depravity, and admit only the moral enfeeblement of nature. Arminius and Wesley were more orthodox but less self-consistent.

They deny that man has ability to originate holy action or to carry it on in his own unassisted strength--but affirm that every man has power to co-operate with, or to resist "common grace" That which alone distinguishes the saint from the sinner is his own use or abuse of grace.

They regard gracious influence as rather moral and suasory than as a direct and effectual exertion of the new creative energy of God.

They maintain the liability of the saint at every stage of his earthly career to fall from grace.

SOTERIOLOGY.
They admit that Christ made a vicarious offering of himself in place of sinful men, and yet deny that he suffered either the literal penalty of the law, or a full equivalent for it, and maintain that his sufferings were graciously accepted as a substitute for the penalty.

They hold that not only with respect to its sufficiency and adaptation, but also in the intention of the Father in giving the Son, and of the Son in dying, Christ died in the same sense for all men alike.

That the acceptance of Christ's satisfaction in the place of the infliction of the penalty on sinners in person involves a relaxation of the divine law.

That Christ's satisfaction enables God in consistency with his character, and the interests of his general government, to offer salvation on easier terms. The gospel hence is a new law, demanding faith and evangelical obedience instead of the original demand of perfect obedience.

Hence Christ's work does not actually save any, but makes the salvation of all men possible---removes legal obstacles out of the way,does not secure faith but makes salvation available on the condition of faith.

sufficient influences of the Holy Spirit, and sufficient opportunities and means of grace are granted to all men.

It is possible for and obligatory upon all men in this life to attain to evangelical perfection-which is explained as a being perfectly sincere-a being animated by perfect love --and doing all that is required of us under the gospel dispensation.

With respect to the heathen some have held that in some way or other the gospel is virtually, if not in form, preached to all men. Others have held that in the future world there are three conditions corresponding to the three great classes of men as they stand related to the gospel in this world - the Status Credentium ; the Status Incredulorum ; the Status ignorantium.
15. Give a brief outline of the main features of the Calvinistic System.

THEOLOGY.
God is an absolute sovereign, infinitely wise, righteous, benevolent, and powerful, determining from eternity the certain futurition of all events of every class according to the counsel of his own will.

Vindicatory Justice is an essential and immutable perfection of the divine nature demanding the full punishment of all sin, the exercise of which cannot be relaxed or denied by the divine will.

CHRISTOLOGY.

The Mediator is one single, eternal, divine person, at once very God, and very man. In the unity of the Theanthropic person the two natures remain pure and unmixed, and retain each its separate and incommunicable attributes distinct. The personality is that of the eternal and unchangeable Logos. The human nature is impersonal. All mediatorial actions involve the concurrent exercise of the energies of both natures according to their several properties in the unity of the single person.

ANTHROPOLOGY.
God created man by an immediate fiat of omnipotence and in a condition of physical, intellectual, and moral faultlessness, with a positively formed moral character.

The guilt of Adam's public sin is by a judicial act of God immediately charged to the account of each of his descendants from the moment he begins to exist antecedently to any act of his own.

Hence men come into existence in a condition of condemnation deprived of those influences of the Holy Spirit upon which their moral and spiritual life depends.

Hence they come into moral agency deprived of that original righteousness which belonged to human nature as created in Adam, and with an antecedent prevailing tendency in their nature to sin which tendency in them is of the nature of sin, and worthy of punishment.

Man's nature since the fall retains its constitutional faculties of reason, conscience, and free-will, and hence man continues a responsible moral agent, but he is nevertheless spiritually dead, and totally averse to spiritual good, and absolutely unable to change his own heart, or adequately to discharge any of those duties which spring out of his relation to God.

SOTERIOLOGY.
The salvation of man is absolutely of grace. God was free in consistency with the infinite perfections of his nature to save none, few, many, or all, according to his sovereign good pleasure.

Christ acted as Mediator in pursuance of an eternal covenant formed between the Father and the Son, according to which he was put in the law-place of his own elect people as their personal substitute, and as such by his obedience and suffering he discharged all the obligations growing out of their federal relations to law-by his sufferings vicariously enduring their penal debt by his obedience vicariously discharging those covenant demands, upon which their eternal well-being was suspended--thus fulfilling the requirements of the law, satisfying the justice of God, and securing the eternal salvation of those for whom he died.

Hence, by his death he purchased the saving influences of the Holy Spirit for all for whom he died. And the infallibly applies the redemption purchased by Christ to all for whom he intended it, in the precise time and under the precise conditions predetermined in the eternal Covenant of Grace-and he does this by the immediate and intrinsically efficacious exercise of his power, operating directly within them, and in the exercises of their renewed nature bringing them to act faith and repentance and all gracious obedience.

Justification is a Judicial act of God, whereby imputing to us the perfect righteousness of Christ, including his active and passive obedience, he proceeds to regard and treat us accordingly, pronouncing all the penal claims of law. to be satisfied, and us to be graciously entitled to all the immunities and rewards conditioned in the original Adamic covenant upon perfect obedience.

Although absolute moral perfection is unattainable in this life, and assurance is not of the essence of faith, it is nevertheless possible and obligatory upon each believer to seek after and attain to a full assurance of his own personal salvation, and leaving the things that are behind to strive after perfection in all things.

Although if left to himself every believer would fall in an instant, and although most believers do experience temporary seasons of backsliding, yet God by the exercise of his grace in their hearts, in pursuance of the provisions of the eternal Covenant of Grace and of the purpose of Christ in dying, infallibly prevents even the weakest believer from final apostasy.

Read the Article here.

Wednesday, December 31, 2008

Friday, December 26, 2008

Tuesday, December 23, 2008

Saturday, December 13, 2008

Sunday, November 30, 2008

Saturday, November 15, 2008

Monday, November 3, 2008

Saturday, November 1, 2008

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Saturday, October 25, 2008

Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Monday, October 20, 2008

Sunday, October 19, 2008

Tuesday, October 14, 2008

Thursday, October 9, 2008

Wednesday, October 8, 2008

Tuesday, October 7, 2008

Monday, October 6, 2008

Sunday, October 5, 2008

Saturday, October 4, 2008

Monday, September 29, 2008

Wednesday, September 24, 2008

Monday, September 22, 2008

Saturday, September 20, 2008

Friday, September 19, 2008

Thursday, September 18, 2008

Tuesday, September 16, 2008

Monday, September 15, 2008

Saturday, September 13, 2008

Friday, September 12, 2008

Thursday, September 11, 2008

Wednesday, September 10, 2008

Monday, September 8, 2008

Sunday, September 7, 2008

Friday, September 5, 2008

Wednesday, September 3, 2008

Wednesday, August 27, 2008

Sunday, August 24, 2008

Saturday, August 23, 2008

Friday, August 22, 2008

Cookies Notification

Blog Archive

Sites of Interest

Blog links

Labels

Coram Deo