In the previous installment we considered the role of Scripture in faith. Now we turn to its object. I think they’ve largely gone away but a few years back team-building “trust exercises” were all the rage. The producers even got the Duck . . . Continue reading →
Last time we saw that faith is a gift. The Evangelical Theological Society met in Baltimore this week. They discussed the inerrancy of Scripture. My former colleague and now frequent critic, John Frame, gave the plenary address defending the inerrancy of Scripture. . . . Continue reading →
In the first four parts of this series we looked at what Heidelberg Catechism Q/A 21 says about the three aspects of faith (knowledge, assent, and trust). Faith, however, has an object. It always does. A mere historical faith looks to the . . . Continue reading →
In part 3, we compared the Romanist (Tridentine) definitions of faith and justification to the Reformed definitions of faith and justification. According to Rome, in the Council of Trent, anyone who teaches that sinners are declared righteous before God only (sola) on . . . Continue reading →
In part 2 we considered the nature of assent. There is a third aspect to the Reformed definition of faith: trust. This is the crux of the disagreement between Rome and the Reformation over nature of faith in the act of justification. . . . Continue reading →
In part 1 I began to sketch the outline of Heidelberg Catechism Q. 21 on true faith by looking at the three aspects of true faith: knowledge, assent, and trust. In this post I want to consider the second aspect of true . . . Continue reading →
One of our favorite television shows is set in NYC and revolves around an Irish Roman-Catholic family in law enforcement. It’s a kind of book end to the Duck Dynasty. Like the latter, it features a strong family with a strong religious . . . Continue reading →
There is a Modernist creed. It is a short creed but it is highly influential and it is the default view of many Americans who think of themselves as Christians. That creed says 1) Humans are basically good and getting better; 2) . . . Continue reading →
Throughout its history the church considered as organism, i.e., its people, has often been tempted to go back to Egypt, as it were. We have often been tempted to look back to where we were in redemptive history rather than appreciating where . . . Continue reading →
One of the more frustrating things about getting older is that I seem to spend more time looking for things. It’s such a waste of time. It would be great if someone would just tell me where my keys are. Because we . . . Continue reading →
When we’re at odds with another person sometimes things come to such a state that the only thing for it is a go-between, someone who is trusted by both parties. This is true for relations between God and humans. We often look . . . Continue reading →
“17. Why must he also be true God? That by the power of His Godhead He might bear in His manhood the burden of God’s wrath, and so obtain for and restore to us righteousness and life.” Almost from the beginning of . . . Continue reading →
In March I promised to post this and then promptly forgot. I was asked to write a brief introduction to the Heidelberg Catechism for a Danish translation of the catechism. Here it is. § Introduction Considering its principals, the Heidelberg Catechism (1563) . . . Continue reading →
Here’s more info on the conference. Thanks to Jon Payne for the photos.
During this season, which many Christians call “Holy Week,” I am perversely drawn to Saturday. Perhaps it is because the Saturday between “Good” Friday and Resurrection Day is, for others a sort of relief. For them it is a day off from the . . . Continue reading →
This is the 450th Anniversary of the Heidelberg Catechism (1563). The HB, of course, is devoted to explaining and applying the catechism and to pointing you to worthy resources to that end. This is one of them. Here’s my jacket blurb: As a . . . Continue reading →
Just out: “Introduktion” in Heidelberg-katekismen af Zacharias Ursinus of Caspar Olevianus, ed. and trans. Silas Riisager Dahl (Denmark: Forlaget Latria, 2013). It’s available here. I’ll post the English version later.
Last time we saw that there’s nothing new in “biblical theology.” The Christian church has been doing a form of what we “biblical theology” for a very long time. This is because the gospel may be considered as a topic or as . . . Continue reading →
Go the reference room (virtual or real), find a encyclopedia entry on “Biblical Theology” and one will likely find an entry that begins in the 19th century liberalism. Depending upon which entries one reads, one might find reference to the Dutch Reformed . . . Continue reading →
The folks at Logos asked me to let you know about these resources. Its the Baker Academic Heidelberg Catechism Collection (2 vols.) It includes the introduction to the Heidelberg Catechism edited by Lyle Bierma, Charles D. Gunnoe Jr., Karin Y. Maag, and . . . Continue reading →