Peter J. Leithart

Matthew 26:31-75 is organized mainly as a series of small chiasms The first is in verses 31-35: A. Jesus predicts the fall of the disciples, based on Scripture, vv 31-32 B. Peter protests, v 33 C. Jesus predicts Peter’s triple denial, v 34 B’. Peter protests again, v 35a A’. All . . . . Continue Reading »

Responding to Sinclair Ferguson’s defense of infant baptism in Baptism: Three Views , Anthony Lane attacks the use of “sign and seal” as the “controlling framework” for one’s theology of baptism.  He points out that for Ferguson the “proper” . . . . Continue Reading »

The notion that salvation is illumination is often criticized for being too intellectualist.  Jaroslav Pelikan sums up the criticisms of Athanasius’ use of this image by saying “the impression was almost unavoidable that the enlightenment given in salvation applied primarily to the . . . . Continue Reading »

Why the incarnation?  The eternal Son enters humanity to stretch it to its limits, and beyond.  By becoming flesh and living and dying and rising in flesh, the Son makes it big enough for God to dwell in. More precisely, the Spirit: The Son stretches out the flesh He assumes, so that it . . . . Continue Reading »

Every word we speak, Derrida argues, wanders off on its own, and we can’t protect or control it. True enough with regard to human words.  But God’s Word is a living Person, the eternal Son, a Word equal to the speaker with the resources to fend for Himself.  This Word, though . . . . Continue Reading »

In the previous post, Jim Rogers asked what can morally be done about enemies who use innocents are human shields?  That’s a difficult question, but I’ve found Daniel Bell’s discussion helpful ( Just War as Christian Discipleship: Recentering the Tradition in the Church . . . . Continue Reading »

Jim Rogers of Texas A&M takes some issue with my discussion of the justice of NATO bombings in Afghanistan and Pakistan.  I’ll briefly take up Jim’s questions about human shields in another post.  Here’s Jim’s response: [1][a] Yes, in general, but your post . . . . Continue Reading »

Athanasius points to the biblical teaching of creation from nothing to prove that creation is in its nature changeable.  It’s not simply that something comes from nothing is fragile, unstable, dependent; it also seems that creatures have a changeable nature because their origin is . . . . Continue Reading »

Athanasius argues that “Father” is preferable to the Arian “Unoriginate” as a name for the First Person.  It is more Scriptural, and it also names the First Person by reference to God the Son rather than by reference to the creation. Plus, “Father” is the . . . . Continue Reading »

Over the past sixty years, writes Dambisa Moyo ( Dead Aid: Why Aid Is Not Working and How There Is a Better Way for Africa ), Africa has received over $1 trillion in aid.  Study after study concludes that it has had minimal, or even negative effects on Africa’s economies: One study finds . . . . Continue Reading »