The brilliant, entertaining, insightful Roy A Harrisville, former Professor of New Testament at Luther Theological Seminary, Saint Paul, Minnesota with an address on “legalism”…
Audio of Roy A Harrisville is hard to come by, but boy does he pack a rich picture of God into just a few minutes. Witty, deep, and humble he’s a real joy to listen to.
The audio is poor, but it’s well worth it:
Examining differences between the Masoretic text and the Septuagint.
Isaiah 53 is often quoted in support of the belief that on the Cross, God poured out his wrath onto Jesus. It is claimed that the crushing of the Messiah was God the Father’s handiwork, and it pleased him to do so. Our English Bibles read this way, but are they consistent with the original text? What does it say in the Bible Jesus knew?
We are Christians who are tired of non-Biblical Christianity. We do not subscribe to any particular denomination, nor any confession of faith other than that of the Early Church Councils. In order to know the God of the Apostles we believe we need to read the Bible they read (i.e. the Septuagint), and learn from them in context. We love theology. We love exploring ideas from across all streams of Christendom. We are learning as we go. Our goal is to sift out non-biblical ‘doctrine’ and stick with what Scripture ACTUALLY says (1 Cor 4:6).
Our names are Richard and Wendy. We are husband and wife and are based in the UK. For more info or if you’d like to meet in person, please e-mail us at email@example.com. We look forward to hearing from you!
References to Christ as a sin offering, a ransom, an atoning sacrifice, a passover lamb prove nothing about wrath or punishment
Proof Texts Unchecked
The arguments for PSA rely heavily on the same set of Bible verses. What is clear is that most of these are generic and common to all atonement theories. References to Christ as a sin offering, a ransom, an atoning sacrifice, a passover lamb prove nothing about wrath or punishment. These verses are also embraced within Ransom theory, Recapitulation, Scapegoat theory etc. Yet, despite their commonality across Atonement Theories, they are constantly traipsed out and used in defence of PSA. That Christ was pierced for our transgressions is universally acknowledged by all atonement theories, and so to bring it into the argument for PSA is surely an act of wilful misleading. Continue reading “What proponents of Penal Substitutionary Atonement (PSA) Theory need to address”
“God gave to Adam a law, as a covenant of works, by which he bound him and all his posterity to personal, entire, exact, and perpetual obedience, promised life upon the fulfilling, and threatened death upon the breach of it, and endued him with power and ability to keep it.
This law, after his fall, continued to be a perfect rule of righteousness; and, as such, was delivered by God upon Mount Sinai… ” – Westminster Confession
Many in Reformed circles hold that Adam was in a “Covenant of Works” with God. This is based on the wording of the Westminster Confession of Faith (see above) together with later developments in Reformed thought. Continue reading “God’s Covenant with Adam”
There are those who claim that the Law of Moses originated with Creation, so that the Law of Moses is merely a “republication”. There are problems with this from a logical perspective as well as from the clear witness of scripture.
So was the Torah operating before Moses? Let us see.
We conducted a Bible Study recently where we looked at just those scriptures which spelt out the reasons for the Incarnation. The focus of the study was limited to verses which explicitly state “he came because…” or “he was sent in order to…” or “for this reason he came..”. It took real discipline not to venture beyond the Incarnation and into e.g. the reasons for the cross. Continue reading “The Incarnation – A “Sola Scriptura” Bible Study.”
2 soundbites from the fabulous Brennan Manning:
For anyone who has been told that God cannot tolerate sinners and that God’s justice demands He must punish them, then this is a great antidote.
Brad takes a few liberties (e.g. technically Adam and Eve were banished from the garden so that they would not eat of the tree of life) but the white hot asbestos suit comment is, sadly, true. We think his presentation provides a necessary corrective to the dominant western view of the Gospel, and gives a more Christ-like picture of God. It is a breath of fresh air!
Brad Jersak – the gospel in chairs: