These guidelines test the “distance” between a given theological proposal and the actual textual references alleged to lend them authority. As already mentioned in previous posts, all the major non-negotiable doctrines of the Christian Faith have a strong affinity with the wording of the biblical text. Under the “Grid of Category Formulations” of these “Rules of Affinity” all these first level doctrines are C1 and C2 doctrines. Doctrinal propositions which are arrived at by the consent of several converging biblical …
Category: Articles
Review of Greg Forster, The Joy of Calvinism, Wheaton: Crossway, 2012, pbk, 205 pages This new book by Greg Forster is written to set the record straight as regards what Calvinism is. The author feels that Calvinism is often misrepresented by non-Calvinists, so he writes to help them understand this theology. Forster’s book joins the shelves of books along the same lines that have been written by Calvinists. That said, what he has produced is to be commended for its …
See ‘The Rules of Affinity’ post These “rules” are only rules to the degree that one allows them be rules or ground-rules. Ones hermeneutics will tend to determine how friendly they will be toward these ideas. All the doctrines listed below can be established via C1 or C2 formulations, with some C3’s supporting. Even if, due to a blind spot, I may be inferring more than is there in the text, I can be corrected with these same rules. None …
Introduction What I call “The Rules of Affinity” are a relatively straightforward device whereby a theological proposition (e.g. that a sinner is justified by faith) is compared with the texts of scripture by which it is supported to disclose how closely those passages agree with the proposition in question. Thus, a theological proposition may be adduced which has either direct “one-on-one” relation to a text of the Bible (e.g. justification by faith, or that God created the world), or strong …
We have been considering the centrality of the Person of Jesus for an understanding of ourselves in the created order. We continue with a look at the Prologue to John’s Gospel. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. – John 1:1-3 So again, this shows us …
This is a revised transcript of a lecture of mine on “The Cruciality & Pre-existence of Christ.” Thought you’d enjoy the change of pace. Introduction For the Christian, without the Lord Jesus Christ life means nothing. Whatever other people say; however the non-Christian tries to answer the question of meaning, the Christian sees no answer to the big questions of life; no remedy for the plight of man, without Jesus Christ. In the Lord Jesus is truly the explanation for …
Parameters of Meaning – Rule 6: Beware of basing an interpretation on the shifting sands of a supposed “genre”; especially “apocalyptic.” Make sure the interpretive decision is well grounded. Rule 5 is here. Over the last generation or so there has been a great stir in scholarly circles about “genre.” Genres are literary types or kinds. They can be broken down from larger kinds like, for instance, “narrative” into smaller branches. There are a lot of these smaller genre-types. …
This post will be my final say in my debate with Steve Hays. It’s becoming personal and I never intended that to happen. This responds somewhat “scatter-gun” to the posts below. I have decided to hone in on the most salient topics from my point of view. http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2012/02/hermeneutic-of-suspicion.html http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2012/02/signs-of-times.html http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2012/02/what-did-first-hearers-hear.html http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2012/02/back-to-future.html http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2012/02/types-shadows.html Steve’s latest offering: http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2012/03/rocinante-to-rescue.html lowers the bar considerably and is a pugnacious and emotion-driven effort paying still less regard to my words even when printing them. If you …
I’m going to do one more post after this one, with perhaps a summary of the main points later on. I have enjoyed and benefitted from this interchange. I hope Steve Hays can say the same, although his online manner is not encouraging. Readers only of his blog will come away thinking Henebury just doesn’t get it (e.g. “As usual, Henebury can’t follow the argument.”). I wonder how many other of Hays’ interlocutors would say the same thing? Indeed, I …
I’m going to have to be more selective with Steve Hays’s posts. It is important to me not to misrepresent him, even while I may spot tendencies which I believe he should be more forthcoming about. The pace that Hays goes at it is almost impossible to keep up. This addresses parts of Salva veritate plus. Before kicking off in earnest here’s another example of taking the “plain-sense” for granted. It comes from the title of chapter 5 of …
