Defund Planned Parenthood Petition
Martyred for the Gospel
The burning of Tharchbishop of Cant. D. Tho. Cranmer in the town dich at Oxford, with his hand first thrust into the fyre, wherwith he subscribed before. [Click on the picture to see Cranmer's last words.]
Daily Bible Verse
Collect of the Day
LORD God, who seest that we put not our trust in any thing that we do; Mercifully grant that by thy power we may be defended against all adversity; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
BibleWorks
Thursday, December 01, 2011
Growing in Knowledge: An Internal Good Work? Gordon H. Clark, Quote of the Day
Now morality is indispensably important. But not all good
works have the form of external action. It is no invitation
to steal, if one insists on internal good works--on thinking
correctly. In this verse the words say, "growing in the
knowledge of God." Gordon H. Clark
Recently I had a dispute with a Presbyterian pastor over why his church did not teach new members of his congregation the theology of the Westminster Larger or Shorter Catechism. His response was that this constitutes "legalism". I was suprised by this assertion, needless to say. Why the surprise? Well, during my many visits to the church in question the pastor continually pounded the congregation with the third use of the moral law: "This is your duty! Abstain from evil. Do good. Come to church! Tithe!" Etc., et. al. ad infinitum ad nauseum.
Gordon H. Clark makes some interesting comments in this regard in his commentary on Paul's epistle to the church at Colossae:
May the peace of God be with you!
Charlie
Recently I had a dispute with a Presbyterian pastor over why his church did not teach new members of his congregation the theology of the Westminster Larger or Shorter Catechism. His response was that this constitutes "legalism". I was suprised by this assertion, needless to say. Why the surprise? Well, during my many visits to the church in question the pastor continually pounded the congregation with the third use of the moral law: "This is your duty! Abstain from evil. Do good. Come to church! Tithe!" Etc., et. al. ad infinitum ad nauseum.
Gordon H. Clark makes some interesting comments in this regard in his commentary on Paul's epistle to the church at Colossae:
[Colossians 1:10] [so as] to walk worthily of the Lord, toward all pleasing, in every good work, bearing fruit and increasing in the knowledge of God . . .My response to the pastor in question was that I find it strange that you object to the third use of the moral law in relation to the study of the Reformed catechisms when it seems to me that your major emphasis in your ministry in the pulpit is in fact the preaching of the third use of the law! Is it not a command of God that Christians should learn wisdom and knowledge and grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ? (2 Peter 3:18). It seems to me that a more balanced approach to pastoral ministry and the pulpit would include instruction in the Reformed standards and the Westminster Confession of Faith and the Larger and Shorter Catechisms. To emphasize the moral law above all else tends toward the very legalism the pastor is protesting against. All knowledge would include the logical system of theology drawn from Scripture, the system we know as the Westminster Standards. When so-called "Presbyterian" churches are ashamed of their own doctrinal standards and hide them to gain new members they are being indirectly dishonest. If the sound preaching of Scripture is important, it follows that preaching the whole counsel of God is required, not simply highlighting morality or moralism. The doctrine of particular atonement, the Trinity, the incarnation of Christ and a whole host of other doctrines and logical propositions in Scripture undergird the morality of the Ten Commandments. As Gordon H. Clark rightly pointed out:
Although the knowledge of God in the previous verse cannot be limited to the commands of morality, the knowledge is designed to promote morality. We must try to please the Lord in all things. The translation above is awkward, but the phrase "toward all pleasing" is a faithful reproduction of Paul's wording. . . . We are required to do every good work. Good works are those prescribed by the Ten Commandments and their implications as given in all the precepts throughout the Bible.
In the history of the church, every so often, groups emerge that consider an emphasis on God's commands as legalistic and non-Christian. "Free from the law," they sing, "O blessed condition: I can sin as I please and still have remission." What these people do with chapters 6, 7, and 8 of Romans is hard to understand. Here in Colossians Paul urges us to every good work, producing fruit and growing in the knowledge of God.
. . . Paul prays that God may grant increase of knowledge to the Colossians. And with this, the New Testament emphasis on knowledge also increases.
Contrasted with those who hold the law in contempt are others who, rightly enough, condemn murder, adultery, and theft, and stress holy actions: but here they stop; and this, however, is not enough. The text speaks of "every good work." Now morality is indispensably important. But not all good works have the form of external action. It is no invitation to steal, if one insists on internal good works--on thinking correctly. In this verse the words say, "growing in the knowledge of God." Gordon H. Clark, Colossians: Another Commentary on an Inexhaustible Message. (Jefferson: Trinity Foundation, 1979), pp. 26-27.
The trouble with Judaizers and the later Jews was not their divorce of religious knowledge from life, but the fact that their ethical theory was not Christian.It would do the modern Judaizers good to remember that morality is impossible without the doctrines of grace as they are expounded in the various Reformed confessions and creeds, including the Westminster Standards, the Anglican Formularies, and the Three Forms of Unity. The emphasis on a mystical union with Christ without such intellectual content is in essence anti-intellectualism and irrationalism. In the end it turns out that the theology of Cornelius Van Til has been more influenced by Neo-Orthodoxy than by classical Reformed theology and the doctrinal standards of classical Calvinism.
Christianity also obligates us to certain norms of morality. But without the intellectual orthodoxy, the Ten Commandments cannot be defended. (Ibid., pp. 25-26).
May the peace of God be with you!
Charlie
--
Reasonable Christian Blog Glory be to the Father, and to the Son : and to the Holy Ghost; Answer. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be : world without end. Amen. 1662 Book of Common Prayer
Institutionalized Relativism: Vanderbilt University :: The Program in Theology and Practice
The following quote is from the Vanderbilt University website:
The fellowship in question has a stipend of $17,500 per year for a period of up to six years for the completion of the Ph.D. program in theology. While the propositional truth claim states that this program is open to anyone and everyone from any religious tradition or faith or even no faith tradition at all, it implies that the program is open to atheists as well. The program, however, reverses or contradicts itself in the paragraph below the heading. The assertion is made that "the most important thing is not assent to some particular body of doctrine . . ." That assertion would rule out anyone who actually believes what their own faith tradition teaches! In other words, one can come "from" such a faith tradition but to actually assent to what one's own faith believes and teaches would exclude one from receiving a fellowship in this religious studies program. In essence what we have here is institutionalized relativism, irrationalism, and even atheism. How this school of theology claims to be open to all while excluding the vast majority of students who assent to the propositional truth claims of their own faith tradition is a mystery since such an assertion violates the law of contradiction. It logically follows that a Presbyterian who assents to the Westminster Standards consistently cannot receive a fellowship at Vanderbilt University. It would apply equally to the Muslim or the Roman Catholic who assented to their own doctrinal propositions.
One is left wondering how the university claims to offer fellowships to all while not offering the fellowship equally to all? Is this not a logical contradiction? I guess logic is not a high point of Vanderbilt University.
Vanderbilt University :: The Program in Theology and Practice
Is this fellowship open to people of all faith traditions – or no particular tradition at all?
Yes. The fellowship is open to all. Over the life of the program we hope to work with fellows formed in and between a rich variety of communities. The most important thing is not assent to some particular body of doctrine, but the ability to reflect critically and theologically on religious practices, and the ability and desire to teach such reflection to people preparing for ministry.
The fellowship in question has a stipend of $17,500 per year for a period of up to six years for the completion of the Ph.D. program in theology. While the propositional truth claim states that this program is open to anyone and everyone from any religious tradition or faith or even no faith tradition at all, it implies that the program is open to atheists as well. The program, however, reverses or contradicts itself in the paragraph below the heading. The assertion is made that "the most important thing is not assent to some particular body of doctrine . . ." That assertion would rule out anyone who actually believes what their own faith tradition teaches! In other words, one can come "from" such a faith tradition but to actually assent to what one's own faith believes and teaches would exclude one from receiving a fellowship in this religious studies program. In essence what we have here is institutionalized relativism, irrationalism, and even atheism. How this school of theology claims to be open to all while excluding the vast majority of students who assent to the propositional truth claims of their own faith tradition is a mystery since such an assertion violates the law of contradiction. It logically follows that a Presbyterian who assents to the Westminster Standards consistently cannot receive a fellowship at Vanderbilt University. It would apply equally to the Muslim or the Roman Catholic who assented to their own doctrinal propositions.
One is left wondering how the university claims to offer fellowships to all while not offering the fellowship equally to all? Is this not a logical contradiction? I guess logic is not a high point of Vanderbilt University.
Vanderbilt University :: The Program in Theology and Practice
Addendum: In My Humble Opinion: Evolution and the Young Adult Exodus
Humble? I guess we should all become Muslims so the Muslims will join our church as well? The sloppy logic of this post at the Aquila Report is inexcusable. If reason and so-called "objective" science trumps revelation, we should just all become atheists. As Gordon H. Clark put it: "We shall eiher deny God and accept atheism, or we shall have to try revelation." Christian Philosophy, page 300. PCUSA? Christian Reformed Church? Both denominations are liberal. The PCUSA now will ordain practicing homosexuals. Human reason ultimately fails and leads to irrationalism, liberalism, and immorality.
To read the article click here: In My Humble Opinion: Evolution and the Young Adult Exodus
Addendum: First, it seems to me that this article presupposes that the cause of the exodus of young people is that the conservative churches somehow force young people to leave because those churches stand on the doctrine of creation ex nihilo rather than a creation by "theistic" evolution. Both science and theology reject theistic evolution. Science rejects theism in favor of materialistic atheism because of the metaphysical presuppositions of science. Theology rejects the idea that science can speak authoritatively on metaphysical issues when science is restricted to empirical evidences. Secondly, it has not been established that the rejection of the metaphysical assertions of science by the church is the actual cause of the alleged "exodus of young people" from the churches. It might be that the atheistic and materialistic worldview of the wider culture is responsible for the unbelief of younger generations. After all, the state has virtually outlawed any response of the churches in the public education system. That means that students who have no religious affiliation have had no opportunity to hear any response from a theological or philosophical point of view. Instead they are given the state politically correct party line or propaganda that "evolution is a fact".
That amounts to a secular and atheistic dogma enforced by the law of the state. Such dogma has by no means been empirically verified since the evolutionary process takes place on such a grand scale in both geographical extent, geological extent, and in the length of temporal time that such an assertion amounts more to a presupposed dogma than to pure empirical science. Science should stick to what it can actually demonstrate firsthand. Evolution cannot be reduplicated in a laboratory. Pointing to the many errors in interpreting the fossil evidence in the past it is certain that "scientific facts" will change in the future. How it is that entirely new species can be invented from a few sparsely scattered fragments of bones dated to a million years ago is perplexing. That is especially true when in one decade the Neanderthal is supposed to be a pre-human species linking the primates to modern civilized homo sapiens only to discover that the two allegedly different species interbred and lived in the same time periods. Might it not be just as possible that the two are both human and simply have different racial features? How can science absolutely prove any of these wildly contradictory speculations when the evidence available is fragmentary at best?
Historiography, archeology and science are all open to these same criticisms. These "sciences" are approximations at best. When the government starts making theories and speculation state dogma it is not long before religion is either annihilated by totalitarianism or rendered mute by state propaganda. One needs only to observe communist China to see the results of such state oppression and suppression of theological sciences. As Gordon H. Clark said, reason unaided leads to irrationalism and by no means can lead to knowledge. That is why the revelation of God in the inspired verbal propositions of Scripture ought to be at least considered.
To read the article click here: In My Humble Opinion: Evolution and the Young Adult Exodus
Addendum: First, it seems to me that this article presupposes that the cause of the exodus of young people is that the conservative churches somehow force young people to leave because those churches stand on the doctrine of creation ex nihilo rather than a creation by "theistic" evolution. Both science and theology reject theistic evolution. Science rejects theism in favor of materialistic atheism because of the metaphysical presuppositions of science. Theology rejects the idea that science can speak authoritatively on metaphysical issues when science is restricted to empirical evidences. Secondly, it has not been established that the rejection of the metaphysical assertions of science by the church is the actual cause of the alleged "exodus of young people" from the churches. It might be that the atheistic and materialistic worldview of the wider culture is responsible for the unbelief of younger generations. After all, the state has virtually outlawed any response of the churches in the public education system. That means that students who have no religious affiliation have had no opportunity to hear any response from a theological or philosophical point of view. Instead they are given the state politically correct party line or propaganda that "evolution is a fact".
That amounts to a secular and atheistic dogma enforced by the law of the state. Such dogma has by no means been empirically verified since the evolutionary process takes place on such a grand scale in both geographical extent, geological extent, and in the length of temporal time that such an assertion amounts more to a presupposed dogma than to pure empirical science. Science should stick to what it can actually demonstrate firsthand. Evolution cannot be reduplicated in a laboratory. Pointing to the many errors in interpreting the fossil evidence in the past it is certain that "scientific facts" will change in the future. How it is that entirely new species can be invented from a few sparsely scattered fragments of bones dated to a million years ago is perplexing. That is especially true when in one decade the Neanderthal is supposed to be a pre-human species linking the primates to modern civilized homo sapiens only to discover that the two allegedly different species interbred and lived in the same time periods. Might it not be just as possible that the two are both human and simply have different racial features? How can science absolutely prove any of these wildly contradictory speculations when the evidence available is fragmentary at best?
Historiography, archeology and science are all open to these same criticisms. These "sciences" are approximations at best. When the government starts making theories and speculation state dogma it is not long before religion is either annihilated by totalitarianism or rendered mute by state propaganda. One needs only to observe communist China to see the results of such state oppression and suppression of theological sciences. As Gordon H. Clark said, reason unaided leads to irrationalism and by no means can lead to knowledge. That is why the revelation of God in the inspired verbal propositions of Scripture ought to be at least considered.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
