Too busy to finish the pieces on “The Future of an Allusion (Pt.4),” or “Christ at the Center (Pt.4d), so here’s my choice of the 20 best reasons why we ought not reinterpret the OT by the NT. I have not yet heard a decent argument against any of these points: See Forty Reasons for not Reinterpreting the OT by the New Introduction It seems to be almost an axiom within contemporary evangelical Bible interpretation that the New Testament must …
Category: Hermeneutics
When one is associating a belief with the text of Scripture it is never wise to choose texts from obscure, debated or overly figurative portions of the Bible. Why go to a vision of Zechariah when you can go to an epistle of Paul for the same doctrine? When tying a doctrine concerning the Church to Scripture we find good men like F. Turretin running to the song of Solomon. Surely it is unwise to appeal to the Song of …
Steve Hays has written a little post in response to part of mine on What the Bible Really Really Says. That is fair enough since I referred to him. Once more he is very selective, and once more he entirely disregards the same proof of intertextual continuity in regard to the land promises in the OT that I included in the article. Steve doesn’t like “the plain sense.” He writes as though he takes it for granted. We all do. …
Just a few days ago I shared on Facebook a fine article on the biblical view of homosexuality. It is written by Kevin DeYoung, and, if you have not yet read it, is well worth your time: http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/kevindeyoung/2012/05/16/what-the-bible-really-still-says-about-homosexuality/ As you can see, the article carries the title “What the Bible Really Still Says About Homosexuality.” Without detracting one iota from DeYoung’s piece, I want to use it to drive home an important truth which we need to meditate on carefully. …
Previous Post A Little More Clarification on the Function of the Rules In my so-called “Rules of Affinity” I am seeking to accomplish one main task. That task is to uncover the degree of affinity between any statement of a doctrine or part doctrine, and the biblical references which are brought in to support it or defend it. All of us know that Christians with different theological outlooks claim that their views are biblical. But in reality just saying “I …
I thought I would put this up here as I put a little effort into it and I need to post 🙂 Some of the men in our Church are reading through the new book edited by D. A. Carson & T. Keller, The Gospel as Center. I was given the chapters on Scripture and Creation to write about. Here is what I wrote about chapter 3, “The Gospel and Scripture: How to Read the Bible.” “Hello, Pastor asked me …
Previous Post 1. In this piece I shall match up more theological beliefs with these “Rules of Affinity” in order to show the negative use of those rules. I have tried to find respected sources to interact with so as not to be accused of soft-targeting. This is from G. K. Beale, A New Testament Biblical Theology, 32: Adam was to be God’s obedient servant in maintaining both the physical and spiritual welfare of the garden abode, which included dutifully …
These guidelines test the “distance” between a given theological proposal and the actual textual references alleged to lend them authority. As already mentioned in previous posts, all the major non-negotiable doctrines of the Christian Faith have a strong affinity with the wording of the biblical text. Under the “Grid of Category Formulations” of these “Rules of Affinity” all these first level doctrines are C1 and C2 doctrines. Doctrinal propositions which are arrived at by the consent of several converging biblical …
See ‘The Rules of Affinity’ post These “rules” are only rules to the degree that one allows them be rules or ground-rules. Ones hermeneutics will tend to determine how friendly they will be toward these ideas. All the doctrines listed below can be established via C1 or C2 formulations, with some C3’s supporting. Even if, due to a blind spot, I may be inferring more than is there in the text, I can be corrected with these same rules. None …
Introduction What I call “The Rules of Affinity” are a relatively straightforward device whereby a theological proposition (e.g. that a sinner is justified by faith) is compared with the texts of scripture by which it is supported to disclose how closely those passages agree with the proposition in question. Thus, a theological proposition may be adduced which has either direct “one-on-one” relation to a text of the Bible (e.g. justification by faith, or that God created the world), or strong …
