Not of the Hitchens-Dawkins-Harris variety, but of the seventeenth century variety. The four figures most often attacked for formulating a thoroughgoing atheistic perspective were Spinoza (for his biblical work as well as his metaphysics), Hobbes, La Peyrere (author of Pre-Adamites ), and Lodewijk . . . . Continue Reading »
I’ve finally had a chance to take a closer look at Peter Enns’s controversial Inspiration and Incarnation and wanted to jot down a few comments. (I’ve known Pete since my seminary days, but I’ll call him “Enns” here to maintain a measure of scholarly decorum). . . . . Continue Reading »
From Christianity and Liberalism : “The narration of facts is history; the narration of the facts with the meaning of the facts is doctrine.” “Although the ideals of the Cynic and Stoic preachers were high, these preachers never succeeded transforming society. The strange thing . . . . Continue Reading »
In Christianity and Liberalism , Machen acknowledged that “There are many who believe that the Bible is right at the central point, in its account of the redeeming work of Christ, and yet believe that it contains many errors.” Machen disagreed, but Machen did not believe that such views . . . . Continue Reading »
Thomas Reid’s “commonsense realism” gets beat up a lot, especially in contemporary evangelicalism. But in their history of the Bible in modern culture, Harrisville and Sundberg point (with some unnecessarily pejorative language) to some of the accomplishments of Reid’s . . . . Continue Reading »
“God is slick, but he ain’t mean.” Albert Einstein, 1946. Solid biblical theology, that. . . . . Continue Reading »
An infallible Scripture needs an infallible interpreter. So Catholics have argued, at least since the Reformation. Luther, of course, disagreed: “They must admit that there are many among us, godly Christians, who have the truth faith, spirit, understanding, word and mind of Christ, and why . . . . Continue Reading »
Melanchthon wrote, “The views of Erasmus might have caused greater tumults if Luther had not arisen to arrest them . . . all of this tragedy about the Lord’s Supper started from him.” Melanchthon had in mind Erasmus’s Neo-platonic disparagement of matter, which infected . . . . Continue Reading »
Zechariah predicts that Tyre will be dispossessed and her wealth cast into the sea (v. 4), and then the city will be “consumed with fire.” The verb is the common verb for “eating,” and the picture of an “eating fire” sends the mind back to the sacrificial system, . . . . Continue Reading »
Zechariah 9:1-4 focuses on the conquest of Tyre, the “wise” city, shrewd at least in amassing wealth (v. 3). But the celebratory description contains a subversive pun. The Hebrew for Tyre is tsor (“rock”), and Zechariah says that Tyre has built herself a fortress, a word . . . . Continue Reading »
Subscribe
Latest Issue
Support First Things
