(publicado primero en Evangelium, Vol. 2, Número 2, Mar/Abr 2004) Traducción de Donald Herrera Teran Introducción La palabra «Evangelio» es tan familiar y se usa tan frecuentemente que es posible perder de vista su significado genuino, «buenas nuevas.» Este asunto es vital . . . Continue reading →
September 2012 Archive
The Translation of Theos in the New World Translation
Robert H. Countess, “The Translation of ΘΕΟΣ in the New World Translation” Bulletin of the Evangelical Theological Society 10 (1967): 153-60.
Warfield on Justification
by B. B. Warfield Professor of Didactic and Polemic Theology Princeton Theological Seminary, 1887-1921 [NB: This essay was originally published in The Christian Irishman, Dublin, (May 1911), 71. It was reprinted in John E. Meeter, ed., Selected Shorter Writings of Benjamin B. . . . Continue reading →
Horton on Hellenism and Open Theism
Michael S. Horton, “Hellenistic or Hebrew? Open Theism and Reformed Theological Method” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 45 (2002): 317-41,
The Importance of Being More Than Earnest
THE IMPORTANCE OF BEING MORE THAN EARNESTOriginally published in Modern Reformation (Sep/Oct 1996) Doctrine. Theology. For many evangelicals these words are as pleasant as the phrase, “impacted tooth!” That theology is irrelevant to Christian life has essentially become a received dogma. Nevertheless, . . . Continue reading →
Substance and Accidents
[This essay was published in the Christian Renewal, April 30, 2001] One of the great needs of the hour in our churches is that we should learn to set theological priorities, to recover an old and very useful distinction between what is . . . Continue reading →
Iustitia Imputata Christ: Alien or Proper to Luther’s Doctrine of Justification?
“Iustitia Imputata Christi: Alien or Proper to Luther’s Doctrine of Justification?” in Concordia Theological Quarterly 70 (2006): 269–310.
Baptism and the Benefits of Christ
“Baptism and the Benefits of Christ: The Double Mode of Communion” in The Confessional Presbyterian 2 (2006): 3–19.
Theses Theologicæ (Theological Propositions)
Introduction Since the medieval period, theologians have stated theology in the form of brief, sometimes provocative, propositions to be discussed. 1. Prolegomena Theology requires proper distinctions. The Protestant scholastics distinguished properly between archetypal (theology as God knows it in himself) and ectypal . . . Continue reading →
Synopsis of the Three Forms of Unity: Belgic Confession, Heidelberg Catechism, Canons of Dort
Belgic Confession (1561), Heidelberg Catechism (1563) & the Canons of Dort (1619) Explanation This harmony differs from many of the others in that it begins with the Confession which recognizes its natural pedagogical and chronological priority over the Catechism and the Canons. . . . Continue reading →
Notes on Belgic Confession Article 15
An earlier version of this essay was published as “The Belgic Confession- Article 15: Sin,” Christian Observer 173.24 (December, 1, 1995). rev. 29 January 2008 As we understand the gospel, a proper doctrine of sin is central to the gospel message. To . . . Continue reading →
Notes on a Possible Difficulty in Belgic Confession Article 14
Rev. 28 January 2008 [An earlier version of this essay was published in Christian Observer 173.23 (December 1, 1995): 23.] We believe that God created man out of the dust of the earth, and made and formed him after his own image . . . Continue reading →
What the Bible is All About
R. Scott Clark, “What the Bible is All About” Modern Reformation 16.2 (March/April 2007) 20-24
Hermeneutics and the Creation Wars
Hermeneutics and the Creation Wars You have heard by now of the worship wars, i.e., the contest between the competing claims about how we ought to worship. There is another battle stirring in our churches, over the proper interpretation of Genesis 1. . . . Continue reading →
This Christian Life
[Published originally on the Westminster Seminary California website] Next to The White Horse Inn, one of my favorite radio programs is This American Life starring Ira Glass. I stumbled across this show several years ago, and for a while I did not . . . Continue reading →
The Splendor of the Three-in-One God: The Necessity and Mystery of the Trinity
Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one!” In contrast to the polytheistic religions of her neighbors, Israel was made deeply conscious of the fact that there is only one God (hence, the term, “monotheism”). The monotheistic doctrine of . . . Continue reading →
How Did We Come to Faith? Election and Predestination
[This essay was first written c. 1988. It has been revised several times since] Introduction: Jesus’ Hard Words Why should we study what the Bible says about how we came to faith in Jesus? Isn’t it enough to simply believe and let . . . Continue reading →
Richard Muller on Open Theism
Richard A. Muller, “Incarnation, Immutability, and the Case for Classical Theism,” Westminster Theological Journal 45 (1983): 22-40. RESOURCES Subscribe To The Heidelblog! Download the HeidelApp on Apple App Store or Google Play The Heidelblog Resource Page Heidelmedia Resources The Ecumenical Creeds The . . . Continue reading →
A Reformed Critique of Alcoholics Anonymous
Note: This article was first written in 1987. It was first published in the Reformed Herald in 1989. It appears here with only minor revisions. Since I first posted this essay on the web in 1999, it has generated more response than . . . Continue reading →
The Israel of God (traditional Chinese characters)
神的以色列 The Israel of God 作者：司考特»¢克拉克R. Scott Clark 歷史神學與系統神學副教授 西敏斯特加州神學院 2003 版權所有 序言 Introduction 末世論(Eschatology)這一個詞的含義遠比我們所說會在最后的日子裡將要發生的那些事來得多。我們在末世論中所說得我們要做的事都源於神在歷史裡的作為。 爭論的中心是關於«神的以色列»的問題(加拉太書 6:16)。當然，這不是一個新問題。主在世間的事工期間，以及在他復活后升天前，門徒一次次問他，«主啊，你復興以色列國，就在這時候嗎？»(使徒行傳 1:6). 事實上，一種廣為流傳的拉比式的普遍觀念是彌賽亞應該是一個強大的政治軍事人物，有著大衛般的力量和才干»”»”«大衛殺死萬萬» (撒母耳計上 18:7)。約翰福音 6:14-15 記載著， 眾人看見耶穌所行的神跡，就說：«這真是那要到世上來的先知。» 15耶穌知道群眾要來強迫他作王，就獨自又退到山上去了。 而與一些人所想的不同，建立一個地上的國度是與他到來的初衷格格不入的。而且，在他的生命的最后時刻，在他得勝的時刻，他並不是要建立一個地上的王國，而是為了實現預言。 «錫安的居民哪，不要懼怕；看哪，你的王來了，他騎著小驢來了。» (約翰福音 12:15; 以賽亞 40:9; 撒迦利亞 9:9). 耶穌教導他的門徒等人，他來並不是為了他們所盼望的國度，而是來拯救眾人脫離罪惡。最終，當以色列民眾無法再忍受他拒絕接受他們的末世論，他們對歷史的計劃，他們在十字架上釘死了他。經上說， 祭司長、經學家和長老也同樣譏笑他，說：«他救了別人，卻不能救自己。如果他是以色列的王，現在可以從十字架上下來，我們就信他。 (馬太福音 27:41-42) 令人心痛的是，很多基督徒也同意這些祭司長和經學家。傳統的時代論(Dispensationalism)長期以來認為法利賽人對聖經有著正確的解釋方法，隻是得到了錯誤的結論*1。 時代論前千禧年派(Dispensational-Premillennial)相信神對亞伯拉罕起了誓(創世紀15和17章)，會給他地上的民。因此， 在時代論中，神的本意是要建立這樣的一群人。而猶太人拒絕了第一個提議(或耶穌拒絕了他們的條件！)，那就一定會在千禧年時有一個地上的，猶太人的，聖地 上的國度。 根據時代論，神衷心創建這樣一個地上的民族，這是道成肉身，童女生子和耶穌在世上事工的重要原因。如果人們接受了神的這樣的提議，那麼耶穌就不會死了。在這樣的主題下，他們認為耶穌在十字架上的贖救的死隻是神對以色列民族計劃中的一種快樂的副產品。 . . . Continue reading →