Non-exhaustive thoughts on theonomy

Non-exhaustive thoughts on theonomy

Preface: Well done

Published originally November 1, 2008. My pastor quietly and without theological explanation (well-done, sir) snuck the word 'theonomy' into sermon #2 that I attended. Following is my brief work on theonomy, revised for June 25, 2023 and an entry on academica.edu.

Theonomy

N.H.G. Robinson and D.W.D. Shaw note that theonomy is an interpretation of a person’s life when ultimate ethical authority is found in the divine will. Autonomy would be self-imposed authority. Robinson and Shaw. (1999: 567). They reference Paul Tillich and note that he states that theonomy is a law or principle which brings together the law of people with the ground and source of all being. Robinson and Shaw. (1999: 567). For some autonomy and theonomy may be understood as the immanent and transcendent aspects of the ethics of theism. Robinson and Shaw. (1999: 567). These seem like reasonable definitions, although Tillich’s does not read as particularly Christian. God would be more than the ground and source of all being. God is the infinite (without logical contradiction), eternal, personal God that has revealed himself and laws that reflect his nature and will for humanity. Salvific revelation is provided through the Hebrew Bible and especially the New Testament.

From: Monergism/Theonomy 

This article is from 2008. The link is no longer the same. However, the material is originally cited from Monergism/Theonomy.

Updated for 2023 Monergism/Theonomy

Dr. Van Til taught us that "There is no alternative but that of theonomy and autonomy" (Christian-Theistic Ethics, p. 134). Every ethical decision assumes some final authority or standard, and that will either be self-law ("autonomy") or God's law ("theonomy"). While unbelievers consider themselves the ultimate authority in determining moral right or wrong, believers acknowledge that God alone has that position and prerogative. The position which has come to be labeled "theonomy" today thus holds that the word of the Lord is the sole, supreme, and unchallengeable standard for the actions and attitudes of all men in all areas of life. Our obligation to keep God's commands cannot be judged by any extrascriptural standard, such as whether its specific requirements (when properly interpreted) are congenial to past traditions or modern feelings and practices. 

Greg Bahnsen from What Is "Theonomy"? 

In my view, Van Til’s statement is true if one defines theonomy in very general terms only. Christians can certainly disagree on specific concepts concerning God’s law, and some will attempt to follow God and his law and not consider themselves theonomists, and/or necessarily be considered theonomists by all others involved. 

Theonomy can be defined simply as adherence to God's law, which would make all Christians, especially Reformed Christians, into theonomists. Here I define the term more narrowly as a school of thought within Reformed theology which prefers literal, specific, and detailed applications of Mosaic civil laws to modern civil government. The word "prefers" gives us some leeway. At points, the theonomists, like the rest of us, apply the law only in general and non-literal ways. But they tend more than the rest of us to prefer the specific and the literal. 

John Frame from Penultimate Thoughts on Theonomy 

I think that Frame’s definition is quite helpful. 

From: Theonomy The word "theonomy" derives from the Greek words “theos” God, and “nomos” law. 

From: IIIM/Reformed Answers 

Answer by Ra McLaughlin 

Question Aren't all Reformed Christians theonomists to one extent or another? To what extent are the moral and civil aspects of the Mosaic law still applicable today? Is it legitimate to claim, as modern advocates of theonomy do, that many of the divines at the Westminster Assembly were in fact theonomists? 

Answer No, not all Reformed Christians are theonomists, not even to a small extent. Some are, but some definitely are not. Of course, one difficulty in answering this question is that no single definition or understanding of theonomy exists. 

Here we see an apparent difference in opinion from Van Til especially and perhaps Frame.

I am Reformed and although I seek via the triune God, to do God's perfect will, I do not embrace the term 'theonomist' for myself.

McLaughlin is possibly looking at the definition of theonomy in specific terms. 

He continues: 

Rather, theonomy is variously defined by various people. Some theonomists contend that there are only two options: theonomy and autonomy -- either one accepts God's law, or one rejects it and establishes himself in God's place. It is this argument that most often leads people to say that all Reformed Christians are theonomists to some degree because all Reformed Christians respect the authority of God's law. By this move, theonomists often try to win the argument simply by a linguistic ploy: they define themselves as the only alternative to a rejection of God's authority. In reality, however, theonomy is not the only option. Theonomy is not just the acceptance of the authority of God's law. If that were the definition of "theonomy," then no one ever would have coined the term, and there would be no disagreement over the issue. 

McLaughlin is looking at the concept of theonomy is narrow terms. 

But in fact, theonomy represents a distinct perspective within the Reformed community that is different from the majority view. If this were not the case, we would not see the battles waged over it that we see today. Personally, I do not think that all the charges against theonomists are legitimate, just as I do not think that the theonomists' charges against others are legitimate… 

The theonomists are not completely unified in their own understanding of theonomy, but in my observation there is a unifying theme in most of their thinking. It seems to me that theonomy is an emphasis or tendency to apply the Law in ways that are more similar to the original applications of the Law than the applications made by non-theonomists. That is, theonomy regularly expresses the tendency to apply the Law in ways that are more rigidly defined by the actual examples and statements in Scripture. At first, this might seem like a positive definition of theonomy, as if they were truer to Scripture than the non-theonomists are. I would suggest, however, that the opposite is true… In the case of rejection, one denies the authority or applicability of the Law. For example, Dispensationalists commonly deny the applicability and authority of any Old Testament command that is not reiterated in the New Testament. Theonomists sometimes accuse non-theonomic Reformed theologians of rejecting the ceremonial and civil law, though as I have already stated this is a false characterization. Non-theonomists affirm the continuing binding authority of the moral aspects of all Old Testament laws… 

Hebrews makes it clear that there is a new covenant in Chapter 9: 11-28, and in Chapter 12: 24. I reason there is room for consideration and debate in how Old Testament and old covenant principles transfer over to the new covenant within the New Testament. We know specifically from Hebrews 7-12 that the old covenant sacrificial system was made obsolete by the atoning sacrifice and related resurrection of Christ. 

We know via Galatians 2:16-21 that we are not justified by the works of the law but through faith in Christ. We also can see from Romans 4 that Abraham, who was prior to Moses, was justified by faith and therefore I reason that no sinner has ever been justified by the works of the law, but the new covenant does replace the old. Jesus makes it clear in Matthew 5: 17-20 that he did not come to abolish the law and the prophets, but came to fulfill them. I do not see the need for Christians to follow Old Testament ceremonial law, as the atoning work and resurrection of Christ has put followers in a place where these ceremonies are obsolete, although we do have some new ceremonies such as baptism and the Lord’s Supper. 

The traditional Reformed perspective on the Law has been modified application, and both theonomists and non-theonomists think they fall into this camp. The difference between them, in my opinion, is that the theonomists tend to make fewer modifications, they tend toward facile immitation even though they do not hold that position in total. If we can imagine a continuum of views ranging from modifying everything (which almost looks like rejection) to modifying nothing (which looks pretty much like facile immitation), theonomists are closer to the end of the spectrum that modifies nothing than are non-theonomists. Regardless of who is in the middle, though, it is clear that there is a distinction between the two groups (they fight with one another enough to prove that). In this view, clearly not all Reformed Christians are theonomists. One does not earn the label "theonomist" simply by believing that the law is still applicable in some ways. 

Obeying God’s laws for the Christian should be a desire of one regenerated (John 3, Titus 3, 1 Peter 1) in Christ. Romans 10: 4 states that Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. The law of God for Christians can be summed up from Matthew 22 and Mark 12 as we are to love God first and foremost and secondly we are to love our neighbour as ourselves. 

My negative thoughts on theonomy arise in that we cannot as Christians expect to force our morality and ethics on non-believers who are the majority in Western society. When God’s Kingdom is culminated the citizens will be regenerated believers that will willingly through transformation follow God’s law by nature. If there is a plain literal millennium of one thousand years, or any amount of time, the rebellion that takes place after the period is over in Revelation 20: 7-9 shows me that although God’s millennium Kingdom will have God’s law, it will not have citizens forced to believe in God. I reason this as the persons Satan would bring together to oppose God would not be regenerate. As well, even if hypothetically Biblical Christians were the majority in the Western World, I would advise people to be very careful concerning embracing theonomy that is not with divine love, enforced through the culminated Kingdom of God, with God the Son, as King. 

Would many of us really want Christians, that still possess sinful natures having the power of life and death over us? Consider this in light of theological disagreement. Would one want the state informing you what your theology should be? I would find this intellectually frightening as this type of theonomy would work hand in hand with theocracy. Potentially corrupted leadership at the top of the ‘Christian government’ could bring about persecution for those that disagree with the state, and at times these thinkers may be intellectually and Biblically closer to the truth.

I do not embrace the Western World, as it is in its present overly secularized state. I would prefer to see a Biblical Christian Church with much more influence within Western society in order to promote Christian morality and ethics, but not rule, in regard to law and order. 

BARCLAY, WILLIAM (1976) The Letters of James and Peter, Philadelphia, The Westminster Press. 

BAVINCK, HERMAN (1918)(2006) Reformed Dogmatics Volume 2: God and Creation, John Bolt (gen.ed.), Translated by John Vriend, Baker Academic, Grand Rapids. 

BAVINCK, HERMAN (1918)(2006) Reformed Dogmatics Volume 3: Sin and Salvation in Christ, John Bolt (gen.ed.), Translated by John Vriend, Baker Academic, Grand Rapids. 

BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

BROWING, W.R.F. (1997) Oxford Dictionary of the Bible, Oxford, Oxford University Press. 

BRUCE, F.F. (1987) Romans, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1539)(1998) The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book II, Translated by Henry Beveridge, Grand Rapids, The Christian Classic Ethereal Library, Wheaton College. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/institutes.html

CALVIN, JOHN (1539)(1998) The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book IV, Translated by Henry Beveridge, Grand Rapids, The Christian Classic Ethereal Library, Wheaton College. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/institutes.html

CALVIN, JOHN (1540)(1973) Romans and Thessalonians, Translated by Ross Mackenzie, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1543)(1996) The Bondage and Liberation of the Will, Translated by G.I. Davies, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1550)(1978) Concerning Scandals, Translated by John W. Fraser, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1552)(1995) Acts, Translated by Watermark, Nottingham, Crossway Books. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1553)(1952) Job, Translated by Leroy Nixon, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1554)(1965) Genesis, Translated by John King, Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust. 

CRANFIELD, C.E.B. (1992) Romans: A Shorter Commentary, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

COAD, F. ROY (1986) ‘Galatians’, in F.F. Bruce (gen.ed.), The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Marshall Pickering/ Zondervan. 

ELWELL, WALTER AND YARBROUGH, ROBERT W., Third Edition (2013) Encountering The New Testament, Grand Rapids, Baker Academic.

HUGHES, PHILIP, EDGCUMBE (1990) A Commentary On The Epistle To The Hebrews, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

MOUNCE, ROBERT H. (1995) The New American Commentary: Romans, Nashville, Broadman & Holman Publishers.

MURRAY, JOHN (1937-1966)(1977) Collected Writings of John Murray, Vol. 2: Select Lectures in Systematic Theology, Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust. 

NUTE, ALAN G. (1986) in 'Titus', The International Bible Commentary, F.F. Bruce, General Editor, Grand Rapids, Zondervan/Marshall Pickering.

ROBINSON, N.H.G. AND SHAW D.W.D. (1999) ‘Theonomy’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Ltd.

SHEDD, WILLIAM G.T. (1874-1890)(1980) Dogmatic Theology, Volume 1, Nashville, Thomas Nelson Publishers.

SHEDD, WILLIAM G.T. (1874-1890)(1980) Dogmatic Theology, Volume 2, Nashville, Thomas Nelson Publishers.

SHEDD, WILLIAM G.T. (1874-1890)(1980) Dogmatic Theology, Volume 1, Nashville, Thomas Nelson Publishers. 

SHEDD, WILLIAM G.T. (1874-1890)(1980) Dogmatic Theology, Volume 2, Nashville, Thomas Nelson Publishers.

 

My Mom sent me this picture. Who is the wizard?

 

Images: Google 

The Black Death/Plague: A perspective

Benbulbin, Northern Ireland (trekearth.com)

The Black Death/Plague: A perspective

Preface

This article was originally published on Blogger, 2008-10-22. Even though it was kind of a one-off article for me, according to Blogger statistics, it has for years had the most all-time pageviews on this website. Updated 2024-01-20.

Historian Cairns states that the Black Death in 1348-49 took away about 1/3 of the persons in Europe with a painful death. Cairns (1981: 248).

Edited portions according to: 

Doc Player.net

History Boise State

Black Death: ORB

History of Western Civilization
E.L. Skip Knox
Boise State University

The Black Death serves as a convenient divider between the central and the late Middle Ages. The changes between the two periods are numerous; they include the introduction of gunpowder, increased importance of cities, economic and demographic crises, political dislocation and realignment, and powerful new currents in culture and religion. Overall, the later Middle Ages are usually characterized as a period of crisis and trouble. The portrait should not be painted unrelievedly bleak, but the tone is accurate enough and echoes voices from the era itself.

The Black Death did not cause the crisis, for evidence of the changes can be seen well before 1347. But the plague exacerbated problems and added new ones, and the tone of crisis is graver in the second half than in the first half of the century. Standing at the century's mid-point, the plague serves as a convenient demarcation.

The Black Death erupted in the Gobi Desert in the late 1320s. No one really knows why. The plague bacillus was alive and active long before that; indeed Europe itself had suffered an epidemic in the 6th century. But the disease had lain relatively dormant in the succeeding centuries. We know that the climate of Earth began to cool in the 14th century, and perhaps this so-called little Ice Age had something to do with it.

The plague moved along the caravan routes toward the West. By 1345 the plague was on the lower Volga River. By 1346 it was in the Caucasus and the Crimea. By 1347 it was in Constantinople.

It hit Alexandria in the autumn of that year, and by spring 1348, a thousand people a day were dying there. In Cairo the count was seven times that.

The disease travelled by ship as readily as by land—more readily—and it was no sooner in the eastern Mediterranean than it was in the western end as well. Already in 1347, the plague had hit Sicily.

What was this disease? Bubonic plague is the medical term. It is a bacillus, an organism, most usually carried by rodents. Fleas infest the animal (rats, but other rodents as well), and these fleas move freely over to human hosts.

The flea then regurgitates the blood from the rat into the human, infecting the human. The rat dies. The human dies. The flea's stomach gets blocked and it eventually dies of starvation. It's a grim disease for everyone.

Symptoms include high fevers and aching limbs and vomiting of blood. Most characteristic is a swelling of the lymph nodes. These glands can be found in the neck, armpits and groin. The swelling protrudes and is easily visible; its blackish coloring gives the disease its name: the Black Death.

The swellings continue to expand until they eventually burst, with death following soon after. The whole process, from first symptoms of fever and aches, to final expiration, lasts only three or four days. The swiftness of the disease, the terrible pain, the grotesque appearance of the victims, all served to make the plague especially terrifying.

Bubonic plague is usually fatal, though not inevitably so. Today, we have drugs that can cure it, if administered in time. But if the victim is already at risk, through malnutrition or other illness, it is more deadly. There were plenty of people in the 1340s who were at risk.

Even so, historians have been hard pressed to explain the extraordinary mortality of the 1348 outbreak. Our best guess is that there was more than one variety of plague at work in Europe.

There are two other varieties of plague: septicaemic plague, which attacks the blood, and pneumonic plague, which attacks the lungs. The latter is especially dangerous as it can be transmitted through the air. Both these two are nearly 100% fatal.

It seems likely that some form of pneumonic plague was at work alongside the bubonic plague in those awful years. But the many accounts we have describe mainly the bubonic form. The next two pages are two contemporary accounts of the plague. (Please check link)

Contrary to what you might think, the reaction from public officials, and from many churchmen, was that this calamity was not the vengeance of God upon a sinful world but was a disease. Authorities took what steps they could to deal with it, but of course their effectiveness was limited.

When the government acts to prevent or control a calamity, but the calamity persists, people turn to other cures. Many believed that the disease was transmitted upon the air, probably because the smell from the dead and dying was so awful. So, the living turned to scents to ward off the deadly vapors.

One of the worst effects of the plague was that it came not once, but over and over. It was never as bad as the first instance. In some cases the plague was as virulent but it was more limited in geographic scope. A couple of times it covered Europe again, but not with such devastation.

It was this recurrence that so reduced the population of Europe, as countries never really had the chance to recover properly before another outbreak would occur. All through the second half of the fourteenth century, every generation was visited by the plague. It struck again and again in the 15th century, but less frequently.

Those were the worst centuries, but there were local epidemics for another two hundred years. Parts of Europe did not recover their pre-plague population until the 17th century.

New World Encyclopedia: Black Death

This is a new source for the 2024-01-20 article revision, as the second source I had used previously no longer has a link.

Cited excerpts

The Black Death, also known as the Black Plague, was a devastating pandemic that first struck Europe in the mid-late-fourteenth century (1347–1351), killing between one-third and two-thirds of Europe's population. Almost simultaneous epidemics occurred across large portions of Asia and the Middle East, indicating that the European outbreak was actually part of a multi-regional pandemic. Including Middle Eastern lands, India, and China the Black Death killed at least 75 million people. The same disease is thought to have returned to Europe every generation with varying degrees of intensity and fatality until the 1700s. Notable later outbreaks include the Italian Plague of 1629–1631, the Great Plague of London (1665–1666), the Great Plague of Vienna (1679), the Great Plague of Marseille (1720–1722), and the 1771 plague in Moscow. The disease was completely eradicated in Europe only at the beginning of the nineteenth century, but survives in other parts of the world such as Central and Oriental Africa, Madagascar, Asia, and the Americas— including the United States. The initial fourteenth century European event was called the "Great Mortality" by contemporary writers and, with later outbreaks, became known as the "Black Death." It has been popularly thought that the name came from a striking symptom of the disease, called acral necrosis, in which sufferers' skin would blacken due to subdermal hemorrhages. 

References

ISBN links support NWE through referral fees 

Appleby, Andrew B. “The Disappearance of the Plague: A Continuing Puzzle.” Economic History Review 33(2) (1980): 161-173. BBC. Black Death and Plague “Not Linked.” Retrieved September 3, 2019. 

Boccaccio, Giovanni. The Decameron. NY: Penguin, 2003. ISBN 0140449302 

Deaux, George. The Black Death 1347. New York: Weybright and Talley, 1969. ISBN 0241015146 

Derr, Mark. "New Theories Link Black Death to Ebola-Like Virus." New York Times. Science Section. October 2, 2001. 

Dols, Michael W. The Black Death in the Middle East. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University, 1977. ISBN 069103107X 

Gottfried, Robert S. The Black Death. New York: The Free, 1983. ISBN 0029123704 

Herlihy, David. The Black Death and the Transformation of the West. Cambridge: Harvard University, 1997. ISBN 0674076133 Ibeji, Dr. Mike. Black Death. Retrieved September 3, 2019. 

Institute for Advanced Technology in the Humanities. Plague and Public Health in Renaissance Europe. Retrieved September 3, 2019.

Kelly, John. The Great Mortality, an Intimate History of the Black Death, the Most Devastating Plague of All Time. NY: HarperCollins Publisher In., 2005. ISBN 0060006927 

Kreis, Steven. Satan Triumphant: The Black Death. Retrieved September 3, 2019. 

Marks, Geoffrey. The Medieval Plague: The Black Death of the Middle Ages. New York; Doubleday, 1971. ISBN 0385006306 

McNeill, William H. Plagues and People. New York: Anchor Books, 1976. ISBN 0385121229 The Middle Ages. The Black Death: Bubonic Plague. Retrieved September 3, 2019. 

Myadel. Eastern Europe Plagues and Epidemics 1300-1918. Retrieved September 3, 2019. 

Petrarch. The Portable Petrach. NY: Penguin, 2005. ISBN 0142437840 

Physorg.com. Biologists discover why 10% of Europeans are safe from HIV infection. Retrieved September 3, 2019. 

Scott, Susan, and Duncan, Christopher. Return of the Black Death: The World's Greatest Serial Killer. West Sussex; John Wiley and Sons, 2004. ASIN B000PY4534 B000PY4534

Slack, Paul. “The Disappearance of the Plague: An Alternative View.” Economic History Review. 34(3) (1981): 469-476. 

Urban Legends Reference Pages. Ring around the Rosie. Retrieved September 3, 2019.

Velendzas MD, Demetres. CBRNE-Plague. Retrieved September 3, 2019.

Ziegler, Phillip. Black Death. NY: HarperPerennial, 1971. ISBN 0061315508  

Opine

Quote

Contrary to what you might think, the reaction from public officials, and from many churchmen, was that this calamity was not the vengeance of God upon a sinful world but was a disease. Authorities took what steps they could to deal with it, but of course their effectiveness was limited.

Without direct knowledge of God's plans, I would not opine that problems of evil such as the Black Death are primarily a result of God's vengeance. The Church exists in a sinful, fallen, corrupt creation. A sinful, tainted Church is Biblically consistent with human corruption described in Romans 3. All humans beings have sinned and fall short of the glory of God as in Romans 3: 23. People will die as sinful (Romans 6: 23), the salvific work of Christ, for everlasting life, the only remedy, post-mortem.

Cairns explains that medieval church history went from 590-1517 Cairns. (1981: 163). He notes that church-state relations were very important in this era and a distinct Western Civilization emerged from both Christian and classical foundations. Cairns (1981: 165). Cultural Christianity was the norm in the 14th Century in Western Europe. A church-state reality means that is difficult to measure how many people in existence were actually biblical Christians, trusting in the applied atoning and resurrection work of Jesus Christ for justification and sanctification in salvation.

Jesus stated in regard to knowing God in Matthew 7:13-14, that few persons enter by the narrow gate, and the wide and broad way of destruction is found by many. William Barclay points out, that Luke 13:24 is presenting a similar idea which may have come from the same original source, but reached the author of Luke from a different tradition. Barclay (1975: 97). In Luke, Jesus explains that many will strive to enter by the narrow gate, but shall not be able to. Barclay (1975: 97).

I reason that a society of cultural Christianity in a fallen world does not necessarily and likely produce a society where most of the citizens are actually Biblical Christians. Only God himself can provide election/salvation as he wills (Romans, Ephesians). Christ noted that few found salvation and so I can reasonably conclude election to salvation is also given to few. 





BARCLAY, WILLIAM (1975) Introduction to the First Three Gospels, Philadelphia, The Westminster Press.

BRUCE, F.F. (1987) Romans, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

CAIRNS, EARLE E. (1981) Christianity Through The Centuries, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House.

CALVIN, JOHN (1539)(1998) The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book II, Translated by Henry Beveridge, Grand Rapids, The Christian Classic Ethereal Library, Wheaton College.

CALVIN, JOHN (1539)(1998) The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book IV, Translated by Henry Beveridge, Grand Rapids, The Christian Classic Ethereal Library, Wheaton College. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1543)(1996) The Bondage and Liberation of the Will, Translated by G.I. Davies, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

COAD, F. ROY (1986) ‘Galatians’, in F.F. Bruce (gen.ed.), The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Marshall Pickering/ Zondervan.

COURSON, JON (2005) Application Commentary, Thomas Nelson, Nashville. 

CRANFIELD, C.E.B. (1992) Romans: A Shorter Commentary, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

DUNNETT, WALTER M. (2001) Exploring The New Testament, Wheaton, Crossway Books. 

ELWELL, WALTER AND YARBROUGH, ROBERT W., Third Edition (2013) Encountering The New Testament, Grand Rapids, Baker Academic. 

ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House. 

FOULKES, FRANCIS (1989) Ephesians, Grand Rapids, Inter-Varsity Press. 

FRANCE, R.T. (1985) Matthew, Grand Rapids, IVP, Eerdmans. 

ELLISON, H.L. (1986) ‘Matthew’, in F.F. Bruce (ed.), The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Zondervan. 

ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House. 

GUNDRY, ROBERT (1981) A Survey of the New Testament, Grand Rapids, Zondervan. 

HARPUR, GEORGE (1986) Ephesians in The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Zondervan. 

HOEHNER, HAROLD, ThD, PhD (1985) The Epistle To The Romans, Institute of Theological Studies. 

MOUNCE, ROBERT H. (1995) The New American Commentary: Romans, Nashville, Broadman & Holman Publishers.

SCHRECK, ALAN (1984) Catholic and Christian, Ann Arbor, Michigan, Servant Books.

SHEDD, WILLIAM G.T. (1874-1890)(1980) Dogmatic Theology, Volume 1, Nashville, Thomas Nelson Publishers. 

SHEDD, WILLIAM G.T. (1874-1890)(1980) Dogmatic Theology, Volume 2, Nashville, Thomas Nelson Publishers.

The Orthodox Study Bible, New Testament and Psalms, (1993) Saint Athanasius Orthodox Academy,Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee. 

WHALE, J.S. (1958) Christian Doctrine, Glasgow, Fontana Books. 

Canadian Thanksgiving

Maple Ridge, BC

Today is Canadian Thanksgiving. I am not a huge fan of turkey meat and so we are having chicken.



Browning explains that in the Hebrew Bible an animal sacrifice was offered in gratitude for favours received. The meat was shared with the donor and the priest. Browning (1997: 367). Browning notes that in Judaism a thanksgiving berakah was offered at meals and that Jesus Christ gave thanks at the Lord's Supper. Browning (1997: 367). W.A. Van Gembren explains that the Biblical teaching on offerings and sacrifices is at the centre of redemptive history. Van Gembren (1996: 788). I realize animal sacrifices took place for atonement in the Hebrew Bible.

I am not stating that Canadian Thanksgiving is a Biblically based holiday, but I am stating that in both the Hebrew Bible and New Testament giving thanks to God is an intellectually reasonable and good thing to do. (See comment).

As a Christian I am thankful to be chosen in Christ (Ephesians 1), through grace through faith unto good works (Ephesians 2: 8-10). I am thankful that in line with Roman 8: 28-30, all things work for good to those who love God, to those called according to his purpose. This perspective is also a central point in my MPhil and PhD theses.

There is no greater honour and pleasure than serving the one and true Biblical God.

I am thankful to live in a democratic country, even though as with the Western world in general terms society and governments seem increasingly against God. I am thankful for my blogs and the teaching and learning that takes place. I am thankful for my fellow bloggers, readers, and commenters. I am thankful for our debates to a point, although at times we risk becoming turkeys! I am thankful for my blogs and that I can continue to ask the Lord that I will objectively deal with issues and attempt to tone down confrontational language, as I do not want to be a turkey!

I am thankful for all spiritual and physical blessings.

C.E.B. Cranfield comments that although God can will grievous and evil things to occur, God in Christ works these things towards the greater good, in particular in the context of salvation, for those that know Christ. Cranfield (1992: 204). Evil and sin are not to be confused with goodness and obedience, but as God willingly allows evil things to occur, his purposes and motives are pure. As Calvin noted, God’s motives would remain pure even while horrendous evils take place, and God need not be less than perfectly good. Calvin (1543)(1996: 40)

I am not thankful for my own sin and the sin of others, sleep apnea, vitreous floaters, the fact that my PhD has still not been reviewed, or for some of the unecessary arguments that take place while blogging on-line and via email. But, I can be thankful that God can and does use evils for the greater good, as an infinite God can use all finite events and actions for the greater good, and this takes place for those in Christ.

From:

history

Thanksgiving, or Thanksgiving Day (Canadian French: Action de grâce), is an annual one-day holiday to give thanks for the things one has at the close of the harvest season. Some people thank God for this bounty.[1] The holiday is celebrated on the second Monday in October...

Thanksgiving is a statutory holiday in all jurisdictions, with the exception of the provinces of New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador. Where a company is regulated by the federal government (such as those in the Telecommunications and Banking sectors), it is recognized regardless of status provincially.[2][3][4][5][6]
As a liturgical festival, Thanksgiving corresponds to the English and continental European Harvest festival, with churches decorated with cornucopias, pumpkins, corn, wheat sheaves, and other harvest bounty, English and European harvest hymns sung on the Sunday of Thanksgiving weekend and scriptural selections drawn from biblical stories relating to the Jewish harvest festival of Sukkot...

History of Thanksgiving in Canada

The history of Thanksgiving in Canada goes back to an explorer, Martin Frobisher, who had been trying to find a northern passage to the Orient. In the year 1578, he held a formal ceremony, in what is now the province of Newfoundland and Labrador, to give thanks for surviving the long journey. The feast was one of the first Thanksgiving celebrations in North America, although celebrating the harvest and giving thanks for a successful bounty of crops had been a long-standing tradition throughout North America by various First Nations and Native American groups. First Nations and Native Americans throughout the Americas, including the Pueblo, Cherokee, Cree and many others organized harvest festivals, ceremonial dances, and other celebrations of thanks for centuries before the arrival of Europeans in North America [7]. Frobisher was later knighted and had an inlet of the Atlantic Ocean in northern Canada named after him — Frobisher Bay...

Starting in 1879 Thanksgiving Day was observed every year but the date was proclaimed annually and changed year to year. The theme of the Thanksgiving holiday also changed year to year to reflect an important event to be thankful for. In the early years it was for an abundant harvest and occasionally for a special anniversary.

References
^ a b The Globe and Mail
^ http://www.gnb.ca/0308/FactSheets/04.pdf
^ "Thanksgiving - is it a Statutory Holiday?". Gov.ns.ca. Retrieved on 2008-10-13.
^ "CHAPTER E-6.2" (PDF). Retrieved on 2008-10-13.
^ "RSNL1990 CHAPTER L-2 - LABOUR STANDARDS ACT". Assembly.nl.ca. Retrieved on 2008-10-13.
^ http://www.hrsdc.gc.ca/en/lp/spila/clli/eslc/stat_hol.pdf
^ The History of Thanksgiving - First Thanksgiving

This is music dedicated to Chucky, Bobby, Jamie, Jason/GGM, and Simon, some my friends that are fans of progressive music.


Xanadu 8-18-2004


Freewill 6-27-1990


Mahavishnu Orchestra: Resolution


Mahavishnu Orchestra: Dawn from Syracuse 1972.

BROWNING, W.R.F. (1997) Oxford Dictionary of the Bible, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

CALVIN, JOHN (1543)(1996) The Bondage and Liberation of the Will, Translated by G.I. Davies, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

CRANFIELD, C.E.B. (1992) Romans: A Shorter Commentary, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

VAN GEMBEREN, W.A. (1996) ‘Offering and Sacrifices in Bible Times', in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.

Thrilling MPhil survey questions on the problem of evil

Whistler, BC

As some of you know, I completed questionnaires for both my PhD and MPhil research theses through Wales. Below are some selected survey questions from my MPhil.

For a change of pace, I included questions and subjects dealing with the problem of evil that have been dealt with less than some other topics on my blogs. In other words, I deleted questions primarily dealing with hell, free will and determinism which have been discussed in many articles.

I plan to publish my PhD questionnaire once the thesis is passed.

http://thekingpin68.blogspot.com/2006/01/mphil-wales-2003.html

CHAPTER SIX

Conclusion

1. The Survey

For my surveys, I have received fifty each, completed of Anglicans and Baptists who have attended a post-secondary denominational college, University or seminary, or are members of one of those denominations who have studied religion at a post-secondary level.

There were no other stipulations I set in drawing up the survey. I was not concerned with age, sex or theological position. I was simply looking for people who met the educational and denominational requirements. I used both regular mail and email to send out the questionnaires, and received back forms via both formats.

For my interviews, I selected five religious leaders from each denomination. These were a combination of people that I knew via my previous educational experiences, churches I had attended, and people that I had contacted via the Internet.

The findings from the surveys and interviews, and the examination of the four authors will shed light on the problem of evil and how it is being considered within two Christian groups. The statements within my survey were a result of my research on the problem of evil. I thought it best to make statements which seemed obviously required for the topic, and I wanted them to appear in a logical order. As well, I wanted to avoid only making statements that supported my own viewpoints on the topic. This means that I would make statements which could support an opposite viewpoint to previous statements. I wanted to demonstrate understanding of other viewpoints from my reading and, as well, I wanted the person filling out the survey to see a logical connection between statements and, that for the sake of consistency, to agree with one statement would sometimes mean that they could not agree with another.

I realize that this could be difficult for a person answering the questionnaire that had not researched the problem of evil, nor read any of my work, but I think a logical consistency in answers demonstrates better understanding of the topic. As well, a problem with the survey method is that the statements are short and do not always explain the full context of what is being stated. This can lead to confusion when answered. I was not, as accused by one person who answered my survey, trying to confuse Christians! I was simply attempting to put across relevant important statements on the problem of evil, and staying logical within that approach.

Statement sixteen:

This statement was stated as: The only true solution to the problem of evil is through the death and resurrection of Christ. Here we have 82% of Anglicans in agreement, 8% not certain, 10% in disagreement. With Baptists, there is definitely a stronger opinion, as 96% are in agreement, with 4% not certain. I placed this statement after the philosophical statements because I believe that the true solution to the problem of evil, in practical terms, is the work of Christ. His work leads to the culminated Kingdom of God where evil is arrested. At this point, the philosophical problem may still exist, but it is rather academic!

Statement eighteen:

This statement stated: The remedy set in motion through Christ’s atoning work on the cross will not culminate until Christ’s second coming. For Anglicans, 68% agreed, 18% were not certain, 14% disagreed. For Baptists, 66% agreed, 12% were not certain, and 22% disagreed. I am in agreement with this statement that obviously Christ’s work will not be culminated until he returns and fully establishes his kingdom.

Statement twenty:

The statement was: Satanic beings are a major force of evil. There was much more skepticism concerning these beings within the Anglican camp in comparison to the Baptist group; however, the ministry of Jesus and his Apostles interacted with Satanic beings and there is no scriptural indication that these beings would not exist today. With the Anglicans, 62% agreed, 18% were not certain, 20% disagreed. With the Baptists, 92% agreed, 6% were not certain, and 2% disagreed.

Statement twenty-one:

This statement was stated: Human suffering will decrease as the Gospel’s influence increases. For Anglicans 36% agreed, 20% were not certain, 44% disagreed. For Baptists, 36% agreed, 14% were not certain, and 50% disagreed.

Statement twenty-two:

This statement stated: Evil and suffering would decrease if the church were more obedient. With Anglicans, 32% agreed, 20% were not certain, 48% disagreed. With Baptists, 36% of the people agreed, 12% were not certain, and 52% disagreed. I am not dogmatic with the issue of how much evil and suffering would decrease if the Gospel had more influence in the world and if the Church were more obedient. Indeed, they are hypothetical statements, but I cautiously lean toward believing the world would be a better place if the Gospel was more prominent in it, and if Christians were less secular in their thinking and more Christ focused. It can be seen that groups can have large impact on public views. Hollywood and the New York media have had a great impact upon western society. For example, western acceptance of homosexuality and abortion on demand has likely been influenced by these two groups. So I think high profile segments of society can definitely influence morality, and morality relates to the amount of evil in society. I do think that a more prominent, loving Christian Church would limit evil somewhat within the world.

Statement twenty-seven:

This statement stated: The case of Job demonstrates that the evil experienced by an individual may not be related to their level of personal godliness. With both groups, 96% agreed and 4% disagreed.

This response is good to see because a Theology which insists that people suffering in the greatest measure are the greatest sinners, is very dangerous as it is error. Job was a very righteous man and he suffered greatly because God willed it for the greater good.

Statement thirty-three:

The thirty-third statement stated: Social conditioning plays a major part in the development of human evil. I think that social conditioning with laws, and social rules can help somewhat to prohibit sinful human nature from exploring and developing evil in greater measure. The fact that we as human beings require laws to live by, shows that our sinful nature needs to be kept in check in order to prevent greater amounts of evil from taking place.

With this statement, 62% of Anglicans agreed, with 20% not certain, and 18% disagreeing. In the Baptist group, 52% of responders agreed, while 20% were not certain, and 28% disagreed.

Funny church signs: