McCant (1991) explains that New Testament doctrines were presupposed within, but not fully systemized. I reason there are clearly biblical doctrines, but systemization and developed theology occurred over the ages.
MCCANT, JERRY W. (1991) ‘The Development of Doctrine in the New Testament’, in David Alan Black and David S. Dockery (eds.), New Testament Criticism and Interpretation, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House.
2010 Theodicy and Practical Theology: PhD thesis, the University of Wales, Trinity Saint David, Lampeter
Early this morning I listened to this video sermon from Pastor Michael Phillips, once again. My original posting is linked below, and I reuse some of this work, although edited. In this part two, I am looking to review and also add some information. This presentation will be non-exhaustive as is the intent of a Blogger article.
Pastor Michael Phillips, that has presented many beneficial sermons online, that I have reviewed, discusses Puritanism and the Puritans often. He is significantly influenced by the movement, it seems. Phillips in the sermon connects Oliver Cromwell, Lord Protector of the Commonwealth of England, Scotland and Ireland from 1653 to 1658; with the Puritan movement. Cromwell is a direct ancestor of a good friend of mine that shall only be named if he/she feels so led to comment in the comments section.
Oliver Cromwell (1599:1658)
Oliver Cromwell was within the Independent puritan group according to the Cairns. (336). Quote: 'Cromwell and Milton were Independents' (336). In the video, Phillips states that Cromwell was a Congregationalist (14:39 to 14: 50 mark).
Historians from the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries were confident that Cromwell was a puritan, an Independent, the leader and defender of the civil war sects. And it was confidence, Davis explained, that helps us understand why Cromwell’s religious beliefs remained comparatively understudied up until the 1980s. There were, of course, warning signs that things might be more complicated. The great Samuel Gardiner was able to describe Cromwell as ‘the foremost Independent of the day’, and then within a few pages of that assertion point out that ‘in the sectarian sense indeed, Cromwell never attached himself to the Independent or any other religious body’.1
1 J.C. Davis, ‘Cromwell’s religion’, in J. Morrill (ed.), Oliver Cromwell and the English Revolution (Harlow, 1990), 181-7; S.R. Gardiner, Oliver Cromwell (London, 1899), 28-9. See also, J.C. Davis, Oliver Cromwell (London, 2001), chapter 6.
Cited
Compelling evidence, therefore, consistently aligns Cromwell closer with Independent, congregational, or at least democratic forms of puritan nonconformity. But the evidence for Cromwell being a member of a gathered church is ultimately never forthcoming. And, throughout the civil wars he probably came to see the value, even necessity, of not publicly aligning himself with one church movement. If the evidence (or Cromwell) refuses to confirm his ‘Independency’, to what extent did he express himself in line with congregational or independent ideas?
Cited
At no point can we easily pin him down as an ‘Independent’ or congregationalist. Nor can we show that he was a member of any gathered church. But there are good reasons to think that Cromwell resisted any formal denominational association. Davis has rightly pointed us towards Cromwell’s anti-formalism and desire for godly unity. We should also add politics to our analysis, for Cromwell was the greatest politician of the revolution. Liberty of conscience and godly unity were political necessities from his earliest days in the army to his time as Lord Protector. They developed from the realities of puritan divisions and the necessities of war. Cromwell’s ability to appear to be all things to all men was equally studied and no doubt sprang from the same imperatives.
So, was Cromwell an Independent? He was far too much the politician to admit that to contemporaries or to us. Would he have been an Independent had he not rose to power? That’s a moot point, for Cromwell sounded most like an Independent when he was working for godly unity and the preservation of the parliamentary cause. He sounded most like an Independent when he was acting most publicly as a leader.
---
The Western Civilization textbook states 'Cromwell found it difficult to work with the Parliament, especially when its members debated his authority and advocated once again the creation of a Presbyterian state church.' (511). Further...'Unable to establish a constitutional basis for a working government, Cromwell had resorted to military force to maintain the rule of the Independents' (511).
A political union with the Independents, minimally. His exact religious beliefs remain under debate in scholarship.
Shelley explains that Cromwell and his regiment, the Ironsides, were never defeated (in agreement with the video) and that Cromwell instilled in his men a sense of Christian discipline and mission (316).
Puritanism
Collinson explains puritanism... 'Many distinct and mutually discordant movements reflecting the influence of their personal founders are embraced within historic Puritanism.' (484).
M.A. Noll writes the Puritanism is 'A loosely organized reform movement originating during the English Reformation of the sixteenth century. The name came from efforts to 'purify' the Church of England from who felt that the Reformation had not yet been completed.' (897). The Puritans also attempted to purify the Church and society. (897).
Further from Noll:
'Convictions. Puritanism generally extended the thought of the English Reformation, with distinctive emphases on four convictions: (1) that personal salvation was entirely from God, (2) that the Bible provided the indispensable guide to life, (3) that the church should reflect the express teaching of Scripture, and (4) that society was one unified whole.' (898).
The Puritans made theological contributions to the 'Reformed idea of salvation'. (898).
In his evaluation, Noll explains that the Puritans, are theologically similar to other separate Christian groups such as the Franciscans, Protestant Reformers, Jesuits and Anabaptists, the early Methodists and Reformed Dutch of the late nineteenth century (900), who forsook the world system for the gospel and God.
These Puritans were stated as 'transfixed by the glories of redemption and who went far in redeeming the world around themselves.' (900). In agreement with these other groups, the Puritans sought first the Kingdom of God and his righteousness. (900).
These explanations are in a basic agreement with the sermon as (paraphrased) Phillips teaches that Puritanism is not a denomination, such as Anglican, Presbyterian or Baptist, but is various theological movements that influence followers within various denominations.
It seems to me this would be similar to Evangelism, as a movement and not a denomination, which is within various movements within several denominations.
Those that are Puritans would have some basic similarities such as from Collinson: 'Puritan piety rested upon scripture and was in only a few instances mystical.' (484). Similarly, those within Evangelism have in common the preaching and teaching of the good news. Evangelical, Evangelicalism is derived from evangelion: gospel, good news, states Fackre (191).
This evangelical approach, as opposed to, for example, the church-state model of Christendom in the middle ages which emphasized obedience and allegiance to institutionalized, politicized, Christianity sanctioned by the state (s).
Strong's Concordance
euaggelion: good news Original Word: εὐαγγέλιον, ου, τό Part of Speech: Noun, Neuter
Transliteration: euaggelion
Phonetic Spelling: (yoo-ang-ghel'-ee-on)
Definition: good news I agree that the Christian Church should primarily be biblical.
However, contrary to puritan ideals as described by Phillips, western societies and culture and throughout world, society and culture are not unified. Shelley opines that Puritanism influenced the later evangelical church, especially in the United States of America and the idea of a nation under God. (310).
The Kingdom of God is as not yet culminated on the new earth and new heavens and it was presented by Jesus Christ in the gospel in an initial stage only. This realm can be influenced by the gospel through movements such as Puritanism, agreed. However, this realm for which the gospel was presented in, is fallen (Genesis 1-3, Romans) and will not be primarily transformed into the Kingdom of God by the works of any Church movement, but by the recapitulation work of the Lord, himself with his people being in attendance (Revelation 21-22, 2 Peter 3).
CAIRNS, EARLE E. (1981) Christianity Through The Centuries, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House.
COLLINSON, P. (1999) 'Puritanism', in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Limited.
NOLL, M.A. (1996) 'Puritanism', in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.
FACKRE, GABRIEL (1999) 'Evangelical, Evangelism', in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Limited.
SHELLEY, BRUCE L. (1982) Church History In Plain Language, Waco, Texas, Word Books.
SPEILVOGEL, JACKSON J. (1991)(1994) Western Civilization, Los Angeles, West Publishing Company.
Photo is from Blizzak and Bridgestone on Facebook.
Twitter version
A theodicy (defence of God in regards to the problem (s) of evil) can be adjusted in order to better assist persons in the Christian Church by being adaptable in message without compromising Biblical and intellectual integrity.
PhD version
A theodicy can be adjusted in order to better assist persons in the Christian Church by being adaptable in message without compromising Biblical and intellectual integrity.
Bonus
I had an interesting Gmail/email interaction with Sir Robin today. I did some reading after...
The following tables give an overview of notable finds of hominin fossils and remains relating to human evolution, beginning with the formation of the tribe Hominini (the divergence of the human and chimpanzee lineages) in the late Miocene, roughly 7 to 8 million years ago.
Cited
The early fossils shown are not considered direct ancestors to Homo sapiens but are closely related to direct ancestors and are therefore important to the study of the lineage.
I am not a scientist, and I can accept that evolution exists, not Darwinian evolution with a secular, naturalistic, worldview. But as a philosopher of religion and theologian, 'not direct ancestors', 'but closely related to direct ancestors' allows for debate and interpretations. Are these fossils demonstrating the same species, or similar species in regards to DNA and ontology? These creatures exist within same and similar ecologies and environments.
Further, notably within Christian theism, all creatures come from the same initial divine source (Genesis 1, Colossians 1).
King James Bible (KJV)
In regards to God the Son
Colossians 1: 16-17
16. For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17. And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist.
I am not claiming that human beings are ontologically, exactly the same today as they were at creation. There has been the fall (Genesis 3) and the flood (Genesis 6-9), as key biblical events of change. The fall corrupted the nature of humanity (Romans 1-6), for example. But I do reason that humanity was created rationally and fell rationally.
Fossils or organisms that show the intermediate states between an ancestral form and that of its descendants are referred to as transitional forms. There are numerous examples of transitional forms in the fossil record, providing an abundance of evidence for change over time.
Cited
Our understanding of the evolution of horse feet, so often depicted in textbooks, is derived from a scattered sampling of horse fossils within the multi-branched horse evolutionary tree. These fossil organisms represent branches on the tree and not a direct line of descent leading to modern horses.
Similar. Not a direct line. All horses or horselike?
Theologically, if they were all horses, this would be far less important than the issue of the creation and evolution of humanity, as horses or horselike creatures are not documented in biblical manuscripts to have been made in the image and likeness of God (Genesis 1:26-27), with in philosophical terms, significant moral and ethical responsibility to each other and most importantly, to their creator, God.
If God, did create humanlike creatures through evolution that spiritually and mentally lacked the image and likeness of God, they were not human beings. Even if they evolved into human beings, which is not my position as a non-scientist, Christian, Reformed theologian and philosopher of religion.
On the idea that Adam and Eve in Genesis 1-3 can perhaps be fictional the question should be asked: "then where does sin come from?, and why did Jesus Christ, the God-man, come to earth to rescue us from Adam’s sin?" The apostle Paul in Romans 5:12-21 seems to clearly portray a literal Adam as falling, and thus a literal Christ is needed for restoration. I think if Adam is deemed as not necessarily literal true man, then Christ may just as well be fiction, and this basically challenges the core of the Christian faith.
The Oxford Dictionary of Science
Cited
Evolution
The gradual process by which the present diversity of plant and animal life arise from the earliest and most primitive organisms...(304). This is believed to have taken place the last 3000 million years. (3 billion, my add). (304).
Cited
Most controversial, however, and still to be clarified, are the relationship and evolution of groups above the species level. (304). In other words, evolution from scientifically reasoned species to species.
OXFORD DICTIONARY OF SCIENCE (2010) Oxford, Oxford University Press.
God’s word, although an unchanging message must be interpreted for each era. This in no way allows for an overhaul of major, traditional Christian doctrines from traditional and Reformed perspectives.
He explains that systematic theology draws upon the entire Bible and does not exegete texts in isolation. Erickson (1994: 21). It attempts to analyze and understand Scriptural teachings in a harmonized way. Erickson (1994: 21). He makes it clear that Biblical doctrines may not necessarily be maintained precisely with the same form of expression as they were in Biblical times, and notes philosophical truth can be found from other sources. Erickson (1994: 37).
ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.
