Redemptive History and Psalm 3

Listening to a recent sermon on Psalm 3, I noted the preacher's insistence on the abiding validity of the imprecatory psalms. This became an issue back in the 1990's when some Theonomist-inspired leaders began to call for their use in the context of the Clinton presidency. The problem for them is that intuitively most Christians see a problem or conflict with their employment given the commands and general ethos of New Covenant spirituality - and the command to turn the other cheek and to love one's enemies. They're right, and yet the contemporary situation (with the call to use imprecatory psalms) is indicative of even greater doctrinal and theological problems.

Heresy and the Challenge to Elohim Thrones

In Jude we read of evil men crept in unawares, men who pollute the Church and corrupt its life and message. How do they do this?

Jude tells us they promote the 'way of Cain' who killed out of malice, pride, and a desire for standing before men and God. They also fall into the 'error of Balaam' who manipulated the word and corrupted the office of prophet. He hired out his services as he sought financial gain. And Jude also refers to the 'gainsaying of Core' who opposed Moses and sought to usurp his authority. His aspirations and actions served to subvert to the divine oracle.

Peter and Hosea on Israel's Identity and Place in This Age

In his first epistle, Peter quotes Hosea 1.9-10 suggesting that the fulfilment of the Children of Israel being as the sand of the sea is found in the Gentile inclusion. Hosea hints at this and the New Testament confirms it in uncertain terms.

1 Peter 2 speaks of the disobedient who stumble - an indication of apostasy. The Holy Nation is now comprised of people who formerly were not a people but are now the people of God (echoing Hosea).

Isaiah 47 and Babylonian Exceptionalism

 Many Christians in the United States embrace the notion of American Exceptionalism - the notion that the nation due to its unique historical position and role is above common judgments. As it is the representative of liberal democracy and freedom and the focus of good in the world, it cannot be judged by the same standards as other nations. At times it must tackle tough and nigh on impossible tasks resulting in situations that would cause other nations to fall under severe judgment. The US must be exempt from such charges and condemnations. It cannot be held to the same standard.

Dancing Around Paul's Imperative for Women to be Silent in the Church

https://www.crossway.org/articles/what-does-it-mean-that-women-should-remain-quiet-in-church-1-timothy-2/

Burk misses the flow of Paul's argument in 1 Timothy 2. He is an apostle charged with bringing salvation to all mankind. On that basis he exhorts men and women - targeting (as it were) certain points or characteristics which he (and the Holy Spirit of course) deemed universal.

Men are to lift holy hands eschewing the male tendency toward wrath and doubt and we could spend a fair bit of time exploring these characteristics, how men are more given to pride and anger and are less naturally given (we might say) toward faith which is something quite different from the normal Evangelical definition of faith as simple knowledge and assent.

The Prophets and Christ

Theological Modernists and the academy argue that Isaiah was written by two different authors. Chapters 1-39 were written by Isaiah ben-Amos - the Isaiah we all know. Chapters 40-66 were written by another prophet in the exile (the so-called Deutero-Isaiah) who often tries to mimic the style of Isaiah and yet due to the seeming predictive prophecy in those chapters, it could not be the same person - or so it is argued. The naming of Cyrus in chapters 44-45 comes into play as the idea that Isaiah ben-Amos in the 8th century BC could name a future king of the 6th century is deemed impossible. Therefore they argue the second portion of the book was composed by a prophet in the exile period who knew Cyrus by name. And yet because he pretended to place himself in the past and predict the name of the king, he would in fact be a liar. This is not an issue for modernist theologians. This is because these theologians and scholars are unbelievers who reject the notion of revelation. The Bible for them is a series of moral tales and traditions. God may speak through the words but there is nothing unique about the Scriptures. For them, God is just as likely to speak through the writings of another religion or through inspirational figures of our own day.