Any Text Without A Context is Pretext for a Prooftext (Updated)

So said my homiletics (preaching) prof, Derke Bergsma. I don’t know if that aphorism was original to Derke (he often quoted R. B. Kuiper to us in class, e.g., “Men, there are three points to every sermon, the text, the text, the . . . Continue reading →

Dare to Be on the Daniel Plan?

‘Dare to Be a Daniel” is one reason to adopt Mr Murray’s view that, in public worship, we should sing only God’s Word (I reached the same conclusion in RRC). Not only is the song itself tacky but its way of interpreting . . . Continue reading →

Straining at Hermeneutical Gnats and Swallowing Exegetical Camels

Kathy Keller has reviewed the new book by Rachel Held Evans, A Year of Biblical Womanhood. Held Evans is frustrated with evangelical “complementarianism” so she set out to live as if there were no New Testament and as if Jesus’ hadn’t fulfilled . . . Continue reading →

S-T-O-P Means Stop (or Does it?)

In 25 years of ministry one of the most profound changes I’ve seen is the growing inability and/or unwillingness of Americans to read texts according to the intent of the author. One of the major reasons for this change was the mutation . . . Continue reading →

Why the Reformation Cannot Be Avoided

Joel writes in response to the post, “Is the Gospel Preached or Lived?” to ask for a response to his post responding to criticisms of the expression “living the gospel.” The substance of the post is to observe that the NT uses . . . Continue reading →

Bavinck On Gospel In The Narrow Sense

And indeed, strictly speaking, there are no demands and conditions in the gospel but only promises and gifts. Faith and repentance are as much benefits of the covenant of grace as justification (and so forth). Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, 4.454 (HT: James . . . Continue reading →