May 2nd, 2012
Where is God? Jesus is in heaven. Well, where’s that? We know it’s a physical dimension so it’s just a reality removed from our spatiotemporal world. The doctrine of omnipresence states that God is causally present everywhere. This is merely stating the obvious. What’s the evidence from Scripture concerning God’s presence?
“If the statements it [the Bible] contains concerning matters of history and science can be proven by extra biblical records, by ancient documents recovered through archeological digs, or by the established facts of modern science to be contrary to the truth, then there is grave doubt as to its trustworthiness in matters of religion.” – Gleason Archer
Consider 1 Thess. 5.19-21. How do you test Scripture? Well, test it for internal consistency, like contradictions and dissimilarities. To test Scripture using Scripture to verify that what it is true is fallacious and circular reasoning.
January 31st, 2012
There’s that one question that has plagued Christians on anthropological origins. Many young earth creationists claim there cannot be any gaps in the genealogy, which is what leads us to dating the time frame of the earth being young. Old earth creationists, like myself, believe that there are gaps in the genealogy. The question is whether it explains anything at all and how much does it explain?
The genealogies are adequate but not complete. No matter how you read the genealogies, you must concede that there are gaps. For example Mt. 1.8:
Asa the father of Jehoshaphat, Jehoshaphat the father of Jehoram, Jehoram the father of Uzziah.
However, 1 Chron. 3.10-12 reads it differently:
Asa his son, Jehoshaphat his son, Jehoram his son, Ahaziah his son, Joash his son, Amaziah his son, Azariah [also called Uzziah] his son.
read more »
January 12th, 2012
Theology Thursday is a new feature on the blog, which gives a brief introduction to a theological person of significance.
Theologian: Paul Tillich (1886-1965)
General summary of his theology: Tillich’s reasoning tends to reflect the romanticism of the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries and is intuitive rather than excursive. He expressed a theme of the relationship between the infinite and the finite. The infinite is known as the infinite only in relation to the finite. Tillich also incorporated symbolism. Any finite thing may have the double capacity to be both what it is and to participate in and point beyond itself to the infinite. This is not to say that he didn’t think systematically as well.
According to Tillich, religion comes by means of a systematic use of paradox. Religion is the state of being ultimately concerned or that which concerns us ultimately our being or not being at all. Religion must always be translated into political action. This is not being who I am or where I am, but, being or not being at all. This has to do with the absolute abyss of negativity and nothingness.
read more »