Calling for a Return to the Doctrinal Ideals and Kingdom Ethics of the First Reformation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jTld1nmkq4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpVz4okhdRU
Several weeks ago I caught Jordan Cooper's videos dealing with the Ethiopian Orthodox man and the Knechtle's over questions regarding the Early Church. The videos of the exchange went viral and have been the source of considerable discussion. It's been something of a boon to Orthodox and Catholic apologists at the Knechtle's were demonstrably incapable of defending their position.
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/article/beginning-at-the-end-of-all-things/
The theology and thought of Abraham Kuyper (1837-1920) is riddled with contradictions. On the one hand contemporary Dominionists wishing to posit a monistic view of society will quote Kuyper's famous dictum : 'There is not a square inch in the whole domain of our human existence over which Christ, who is Sovereign over all, does not cry, Mine!'
It's a pretty bold statement suggesting the boundaries of the Kingdom are all encompassing and there can be no room for dissent.
https://firstthings.com/pope-francis-my-worst-protestant-nightmare/
https://wng.org/opinions/an-office-of-great-cultural-significance-1746424321
These articles left me baffled but they demonstrate how cultural and political motivations have taken over and now drive the thinking of most Christians. Trueman in particular surprises me as he once passionately argued for a kind of sober detachment but now is at the forefront of culture war battles even being promoted by and collaborating with the likes of Charles Colson protege John Stonestreet.
https://gospelreformation.net/dear-pastor-may-my-child-take-the-lords-supper/
Spinnenweber is to be commended as he covers all the bases and his treatment of the subject is fair. Unfortunately his conclusions are completely wrong.
I encountered this on a website - an argument against transubstantiation by means of empirical deduction. It reminded me of what some have called the Baconian epistemology of Fundamentalism which is closely related to the Common Sense Realism so dominant in the early days of America. The pastor in question appeals to a perceived problem with the bread....
https://www.crossway.org/articles/is-the-lords-supper-jesuss-actual-body-and-blood-1-corinthians/
On one level this article had moments in which it was a blessing to read. And yet another part of me wanted to crumple up the paper and throw it across the room.
We can agree that the Lord's Supper is not a repeated sacrifice as understood in the Roman Catholic Mass and while some of the Lutheran hair-splitting and insistence on ubiquity is not always helpful, Naselli's rendering of the Supper as merely symbolic does not account for the Scriptural data.
https://g3min.org/art-that-accords-with-sound-doctrine/
This G3 article represents yet another attempt to formulate a Christian theology of art. It's clear enough that since the Scriptures don't speak to this - and verses have to be grasped at, the exercise is not one of doctrinal elaboration but philosophy cast in theological terms.
The recent death of Steve Schlissel (1952-2025) has rekindled some of the discussions regarding Federal Vision - something I also touched on in a recent piece.
War abroad will always mean war waged against the population at home. Contrary to the rhetoric of someone like Biden or the pipe dreams of the Libertarians, we are headed toward a period of authoritarian rule and where it's absent - there will be chaos. Either option represents a form of dystopia. It's inescapable.
https://www.str.org/w/will-god-be-in-pain-for-eternity-as-he-watches-people-suffer-in-hell-
I will desist from an extended critique of Greg Koukl and the advice he dispenses on his programme. There are quite a few things that could be said about the other segments of this episode that I found problematic. In fact, I rarely find myself ever agreeing with him about much of anything. But one particular aspect of this show struck me.
https://credomag.com/article/natural-theology-and-van-til/
Classical Theology in this case is in reference to Aristotelian-driven Scholastic Theology and Thomism. This group (Credo Magazine) represents the Thomist revival in Reformed theology. It's sort of ironic that all of this is starting to really take off after the 2017 death of RC Sproul who championed it - but didn't live to see it.
That said, the issues are complicated as there are also strong Scholastic tendencies and tensions within Van Tillian circles as the commitment to Confessionalism is retained. The advocates of 'Classical Theology' have a point in that the Scholastic ethos was dominant at the time the confessions were produced in the 17th century.
Dolezal's admission of mutabilist language being present in the text and his resort to nonliteral, accommodationist, and anthropomorphic arguments in order to fit the language of Scripture into his theological grid has the potential if not the tendency to generate more problems than it solves. Once again, one is driven to think of the patterns exhibited in historical theology and the role such 'rationalist' systems-driven thinking has played. The road from rationalist scholasticism to theological liberalism is in fact a short one. The dynamics of Scripture don't lend themselves to such rigid constructions and there's a tendency (even a drive) to refine and ultimately compress both Trinitarianism and the hypostatic union into ever monistic and more coherent frameworks. It begins innocently enough, pushing to the edge of orthodoxy. But in another generation it's redefined and in another lost altogether.
After following the Dolezal-Divine Simplicity controversy for some years now, I found this review of his book 'All that is in God' to be helpful. I have been quite open over the years that I'm not a real fan of John Frame. I remember being rather put off by his Worship in Spirit and Truth back in 1996 and yet despite my differences I'm always curious to read his works and see what he has to say. His take is often a bit different and always challenging, even when I think he's wrong.
I recently had a nice long chat with an Anglo-Catholic priest and we discussed the issue of authority and how their understanding differs from Rome and its Magisterium, from the models that seek to place Scripture, Reason, and Tradition on par, and Protestant understandings of Sola Scriptura.
Driving home from a rather High-Church Anglican service, I reflected on the many different understandings of worship and the relationship (if any) between our service and the celestial or heavenly realm.
If it was our duty to redeem culture or apply Christian teachings to society, the end result would not be in keeping with the vision of Right-wing Republicanism. A study of Europe and the rise of Christian Social Teaching (of which Abraham Kuyper is the Reformed representative) reveal that those wrestling with these questions are just as likely to come to very different conclusions than what has emerged within the American theological and political spectrum. For these Americans, 'Biblical' turns out to be something that arose within a specifically American context and mindset.
Once
again this is a sad but increasingly common story. It's a case of not
only abuses but wrongly framed and absolutized doctrines and ethics
that are unable to function in light of the dynamics of Scripture and
in the real world. The end result is frustration and overreaction.
Modern Christians lament the sixteenth century Copernican Shift which initiated the reformulation of not just cosmology but epistemology and more fundamental questions such as meaning, teleology, and to what extent truth can be ascertained. If man and the Earth he inhabits is not the centre of the universe, then just what does that say?
At certain times it hits you. Someone you know dies and that someone was a lost person, and you think about their life and you wonder what was it for?