*Editors Note: This is the third installment of blogs related to Textual Criticism authored by Dr. Timothy Decker....
How the Reformers, Protestant Orthodox, & Puritans Approached Textual Criticism: Part 1 | Timothy Decker
*Editors Note: This is the second installment of blogs related to Textual Criticism authored by Dr. Timothy Decker....
Does our confession require a printed text or indicate the need for a text critical methodology? | Timothy Decker
The historical reality is, the Confession appeals to the Hebrew and Greek textual tradition of Scripture. And as this textual tradition has within it, admitted by all, variations among them; the necessary result demands we engage in textual criticism.
There is much talk of ‘hyper-Calvinism’ – even though one rarely comes across hyper-Calvinists anywhere in the world. It is like the references to those who are ‘dead orthodox’ while, though they exist, meeting one is a rare encounter. So, there is some ignorance of what are the tenets and consequences of ‘hyper-Calvinism.’
“This view … could allow for the ‘man of lawlessness’ to be the Roman Catholic church in its exaltation of the Pope, the bishop of Rome, to the position of vicar of Christ, asserting his infallibility ex cathedra, his granting of dispensations, and proclaiming of the meritorious status of pilgrimages, the doctrine of transubstantiation and the continual sacrifice of Christ.”
“Some identify the hinderer as some power in society that is in competition with the goals of the lawless one. They see the Roman emperor as the hinderer…. Paul, however, indicates that the Thessalonians already know about the operation of hindrance of evil…”
The man of lawlessness, in the style of Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel 3:1-7 or Darius in Daniel 6:6-9, claims all the power and prerogatives of a god. He makes himself the final point of loyalty for all his subjects. He opposes every object of worship other than himself, exalts himself above them and even inserts his own authority above the God of the Bib
“False teaching produces false living.”
Throughout the New Testament the Sabbath principle retains its binding status. However, Romans 14:5-6, Galatians 4:9-11, and Colossians 2:16-17 are all often cited as evidence that the Sabbath is no longer binding.
Jesus is not abrogating the Sabbath when he claims his authority over it. Rather, by giving a divine interpretation of the Sabbath command, Jesus displays His own authority over His creation.