tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2934219918554432299.post5021337298743942707..comments2023-05-17T01:09:54.656-07:00Comments on The Evangelical Calvinist In Plain Language: The Deplorable State of Evangelical Exegesis and Exposition: A Word from John Webster Applied to John MacArthur and David JeremiahBobby Growhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06831009618873548948noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2934219918554432299.post-64389255969325799662013-03-09T09:25:19.042-08:002013-03-09T09:25:19.042-08:00Apologies if you have answered this in another pos...Apologies if you have answered this in another post, just point me there. <br /><br />So how do we understand <br />Romans 1:19–20 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. <br /><br />It appears to me to say that man can know something about God through His attributes that are able to be perceived in nature. I wouldn’t say that they can come to a saving knowledge of God/ Christ, they need to hear the word (Rom 10:14)<br /><br />You seem to be saying that any knowledge derived from the creation can only lead to man understanding God from the perspective of creation (i.e. themselves) – thereby that knowledge will be completely flawed and can never be enough of a starter (?) to lead them to seek the truth. <br /><br />Or can it be a place to start from? <br /><br />I understand that nature in itself can never lead to a saving knowledge of Jesus or the Triune nature of God. <br />stevezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11138766250820193250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2934219918554432299.post-20539059492571072892012-05-11T10:51:22.008-07:002012-05-11T10:51:22.008-07:00CT,
No, my broader point about NT, is what is art...CT,<br /><br />No, my broader point about NT, is what is articulate in Col 1.15ff; i.e. that Christ is the point and telos of creation and that Creation is filled with God in Christ's pleroma (or Calvin's 'theater of God's glory' qualified) or fullness or plenitude. If so, then the key to knowledge of God is not the collapse of grace into nature; but the key is Christ who through the analogy of the incarnation and the Chalcedonian distinction (constructively construed) brings grace and nature together in his homoousion person, thus avoiding the impersonal dualism that NT works from (pitting nature and God against each other as it does). In short, if nature was created for Christ, and in Christ (with all the distinctions like uncontingent/contingent honored); then there can be no such thing as Natural Theology w/o sliding into some sort of christological heresy. Which leads me to assert, along with Athanasius (and all those who follow that tradition), that "Natural Theology done properly leads to Arianism" not to the Triune God.<br /><br />We are simply at much different points, it appears, CT; and thus I don't think we will have fruitful discussion around this. I, with Barth, think Natural Theology (unqualified in very modifying ways, like TF Torrance does) is akin to the 'anti-Christ' ... just to be clear.Bobby Growhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06831009618873548948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2934219918554432299.post-86597347124033661242012-05-10T18:24:11.752-07:002012-05-10T18:24:11.752-07:00The Bible/proper teaching of the Bible is necessar...The Bible/proper teaching of the Bible is necessary redemption. That is what I gain from the long Ephesians quote. That is the same thing that Westminster etc have said for centuries.<br /><br />That the unbeliever does not know because he does not seek is actually a great point. But if the problem is simply one of seeking, that means that whether or not, one has a Bible or Christian missionary is irrelevant for the purpose of natural theology/natural law/natural revelation.<br /><br />The reason that God's breaking in beyond what He has revealed in General Revelation is because of the rebellion against that which was already revealed.<br /><br />The point of natural theology for the unbeliever is to help the unbeliever to see his rebellion and why he needs Christ vs. Islam, Atheism, Jehovah's Witnesses etc.<br /><br />The point of natural theology for the believer is to properly ground the various assertions of Christianity vs. those those assertions that people claim properly belong to Christianity.<br /><br />Natural theology done properly points to the Truine God.ChristianTraderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11996055597249229702noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2934219918554432299.post-54561992473549643222012-05-10T12:21:03.990-07:002012-05-10T12:21:03.990-07:00CT,
First, restrain from snarky-ness (which your ...CT,<br /><br />First, restrain from snarky-ness (which your "Um" signifies), or you will not be commenting here much further.<br /><br />Second, to answer you question on "any knowledge of God;" the answer is yes, they have a knowledge of God which is projected from themselves (or they by biblical standards can only be idolaters). This is because of the <i>homo in se incurvatus</i>, or more commonly phrased, 'the bondage of the self-will'. They don't seek the true God, they seek a god fashioned like unto themselves---so to speak.<br /><br />2a. So based on what the Bible says they can only worship the creation rather than the Creator; because they are ensnared by themselves (given the definition of 'falleness' Gen 3 to Rom 3), and cannot have a genuine understanding of the Triune Christian God w/o the breaking in of God himself in Christ upon their enslaved situation.<br /><br />Third, "what has been revealed ..." is Jesus Christ. So the theo-logical consequent to this (or reductio) is that your question leads to the reality that folks w/o the revelation of God in Jesus Christ cannot know anything about the true God [this isn't any different than what the Apostle Paul noticed as he wrote here (about the Gentile-Pagan world): <i>1 Therefore remember that at one time you Gentiles in the flesh, called “the uncircumcision” by what is called the circumcision, which is made in the flesh by hands— 12 remember that you were at that time separated from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. 14 For he himself is our peace, who has made us both one and has broken down in his flesh the dividing wall of hostility 15 by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, 16 and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. 17 And he came and preached peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near. 18 For through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father. 19 So then you are no longer strangers and aliens,[d] but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, 20 built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, 21 in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. 22 In him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by[e] the Spirit. Eph 2.11-20</i>]; all they can do, left to themselves, is worship themselves and/or creation (which is how it is in so many situations). <br /><br />I don't know what else you can say to that; expect assert to the contrary, but then that is just assertion.Bobby Growhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06831009618873548948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2934219918554432299.post-1605945709886956532012-05-10T04:03:37.506-07:002012-05-10T04:03:37.506-07:00Um, I never said that God could not reveal himself...Um, I never said that God could not reveal himself through missionaries etc. The simple question is whether or not people without Christian missionaries/Bible translations in their own language etc. have any knowledge of God.<br /><br />Next, exactly what has been revealed is the point in question, so I don't see how your comment moves the discussion forward at all.ChristianTraderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11996055597249229702noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2934219918554432299.post-24531510290585329542012-05-05T20:20:18.051-07:002012-05-05T20:20:18.051-07:00ChristianTrader,
That is to argue from the conseq...ChristianTrader,<br /><br />That is to argue from the consequent; which is a non-starter. And it also seems to presume that God is unable to make himself known to such people through missionaries, Bible translators, etc. So your point fails on multiple fronts. We, as Christians, have to work from what is revealed and not speculate from what isn't. Your point operates from the latter.Bobby Growhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06831009618873548948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2934219918554432299.post-75710491253176196062012-05-05T19:48:21.014-07:002012-05-05T19:48:21.014-07:00If natural theology is not valid, then what does a...If natural theology is not valid, then what does a person born into a place without the Bible know about God or how God wants them to act? Nothing?ChristianTraderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11996055597249229702noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2934219918554432299.post-8124229658883146782012-05-05T18:44:41.321-07:002012-05-05T18:44:41.321-07:00Don't you normally have to ingest in order to ...Don't you normally have to ingest in order to be under the influence ;-) ... I outgested, so I think I'm okay ;-).Bobby Growhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06831009618873548948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2934219918554432299.post-79038056213156007412012-05-05T18:43:46.709-07:002012-05-05T18:43:46.709-07:00Thanks, Daniel ;-)!
I don't think either Jere...Thanks, Daniel ;-)!<br /><br />I don't think either Jeremiah or Mac have a "low view of inspiration," per se (but probably a defective one, yes). I am going to do in full post in answering your question about the primary and secondary and pulpit ministry etc. Stay tuned :-)Bobby Growhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06831009618873548948noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2934219918554432299.post-22499313899649004352012-05-05T16:41:33.783-07:002012-05-05T16:41:33.783-07:00Driving under the influence is against the law, Bo...Driving under the influence is against the law, Bobby. ;)Steve Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10297044571819912511noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2934219918554432299.post-50704949441218168202012-05-04T16:52:36.797-07:002012-05-04T16:52:36.797-07:00Bobby,
First, good job on not wrecking! Of course...Bobby,<br /><br />First, good job on not wrecking! Of course, you know better than to listen to J Mac and drive at the same time. ;-)<br /><br />I love Webster's explanation of Holy Scripture! How glorious and how powerful the Living Word is! When we understand the Word as the ongoing self-revelation of God, made perfect Reality in the Son, it should cause us to handle it with reverence,love, care, expectation, and anticipation. We should, ultimately, be brought to adore Jesus.<br /><br />I can see why you were saddened. I think you're making a pretty clear case for how one's grasp/view of Inspiration (or lack thereof) is feeding their exegetical approach. What role do you think, if any, ones view of Pastoral responsibility plays in the development of a series such as "The Coming Financial Armageddon"? In other words, do you think that such an exegetical approach (as the two had above) develops primarily as a consequence of a low view of inspiration? Or, do you think there are multiple factors, such as one's view of the pulpit's place in congregational ministry that are at play as well? I see both in play - even in my own ministry. There's certainly a tension that exists that has to be managed. I'd love to hear your view on how the Primary can and should feed the secondary issues in exegesis and (even) pulpit ministry.<br /><br />Thanks brother!<br />Danielfungettemyshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07573498004292530317noreply@blogger.com