Owen’s view of the multi-functional utility of the Decalogue comports with his view of abrogation (see below), Jeremiah 31:33, 2 Co. 3:3, and Matthew 5:17, and also with many of his theological contemporaries. There is a way to understand Owen on abrogation which both eliminates the Decalogue from the New Covenant and preserves it (see below). Relatively speaking, as the Decalogue functioned under the Old Covenant, it has been abrogated. Absolutely speaking, as the Decalogue represents and summarily comprehends the Moral Law as to its substance, it has not and cannot be abrogated. It has more than one function.
RBTR is a theological journal I have editied since 2004. We have good news! I just received the proof copy of RBTR VI:2. The new cover really looks nice and I think the contents are worth reading. Articles include: 1. JUDGMENT BEGINS AT THE HOUSE OF GOD: A THEOLOGY OF MALACHI, Robert Gonzales Jr. 2. […]
In this second episode (you can watch episode #1 here), Dr. Wadlron discusses his approach to a course he just finished teaching at MCTS – the Doctrine of God. Here’s something Dr. Waldron asserts and discusses in the interview, “I believe Evangelicals need to be re-taught the doctrine of the Trinity.” If you haven’t subscribed […]
The end of the Bible is the end or goal of the beginning to which Adam failed to attain.
Wells interacts with Exod. 20:8 in less than one page. He offers what in my mind gives the appearance of a cavalier dismissal of this text with these words: “This text, of course, contains the command to keep a Sabbath. It clearly addresses only Israelites and others who live within their land, so it does not seem to be relevant under the New Covenant” (29). He then adds, “Despite that fact many find an argument in the word “remember”” (29; emphasis mine). He assumes that an assertion is a fact. Something seems wrong-headed about that.
In part I of this series of posts, I said: Too often while reading contemporary authors on the law in the life of believers, I find myself asking the question, “Haven’t these guys read the great minds of the past on this issue?” Sometimes I get the feeling (remember – feelings are “nothing more than feelings”) […]
Evaluating practical issues of local church ministry biblically, theologically, and pastorally. Really good stuff here by Pastor Brian Croft
Canonical structure refers to the final form of our English Bibles primarily – both order and content. This discipline is often called canonical criticism. Canonical criticism is defined as follows: An approach that seeks to interpret the biblical books with respect to their authoritative status and theological context within the Bible. Canonical criticism thus focuses […]
In my last post, I said, “In my next post I will interact with Wells, where he says, “[w]hen we look at those [i.e., verses in Moses’ writings concerning the Sabbath] we find that each speaks only of what Israelites and people living in her land must do” (26). On page 29, he makes a […]
Canonical structure can help us with interpreting the Bible. The shape in which the Bible comes to us appears to have a theology behind it. Though we do not believe that inspiration extends to the shape of the canon, this does not mean that we cannot gain insight from it in terms of how the […]