On a number of occasions, I have heard sincere believers thank God for his miraculous work in answering prayer. This type of testimony often gives me theological heart burn. On a few occasions, I have attempted to reason with a sincere believer making this claim. I make the point that a believer who trusts in a God who uses providence is just as much an act of faith as those in biblical times who occasionally had their prayers answered with a miracle. While excluding the miracle of regeneration, I explain why miracles do not take place today and that God has been working through providence since the closing of the New Testament canon. Earlier this morning, I rejoiced to read a great blog entry by Phil Johnson who uses a real-life illustration to make this same type of clarification about miracle and providence.

In this post, he clearly distinguishes between between “superstition” and “miracle” (you can see this distinction about 2/3 of the way into the entry). In reference to miracle, he helpfully defines a miracle as “a particular kind of sign—an unmistakable display of supernatural power calculated to confront unbelief and provoke awe—with the purpose of authenticating an agent of divine revelation. True miracles are not merely arbitrary displays of God’s power; they are manifestly supernatural and are themselves a form of revelation.”

Phil further clearly maintains that in God’s providence he still answers the prayer of faith. His conclusion is worth noting: “The faith that sees the hand of God in the natural outworking of divine providence (and understands that God is sovereign over every detail of everything that happens) is not a lesser faith than the kind of belief that can only see God at work when He intervenes in spectacular, supernatural, and miraculous ways.” This is an entry you do not want to miss. To read it fully, go to “Miracles and Acts of Providence“

HT: Mark Snoeberger

Technorati Tags:
Biblical Christianity, Theology

On January 25, we began looking at the nature of creation in my Biblical Creation class. Initially, I covered the events treated in Genesis 1:1-31. After this, we began looking at the duration of each of the six days in the creation week. Initially, I covered the events treated in Genesis 1:1-31. After this, we began looking at the duration of each of the six days in the creation week.

As I have defended in the Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal, each day of the creation week was a normal literal day. I treated two of five arguments that support the 24-hour day view: (1) the semantics of the singular use of “day” and (2) “evening” and “morning” as qualifiers of “day.” In reference to the first argument, the Hebrew word translated as “day,” yom is always used of a literal day when it_ appears alone as a singular noun (for an excellent treatment of 24-hour day view, see Gerhard F. Hasel’s “The ‘Days’ of Creation in Genesis 1,” Origins journal 21 [1994]: 5–38. About the second point, the qualifying expression “evening” and “morning,” used with the conclusion of each day of creation week, supports the literal day interpretation. A literal understanding of “day” is consistent with other Old Testament uses of “evening” and “morning.” Further, the general framework for each of the creation days also indicates that “evening” and “morning” are used to describe the completion of each day.

On February 8, I will finish a defense of literal creation day and then answer a number of common objections.

Technorati Tags:
Biblical Creationism, Seminary Life

DBTS started the spring semester of 2010 on Monday evening, January 18. One of DBTS’s professors teaches a Monday class each semester. This semester is my turn to teach the Monday night class and I am teaching one of my favorite courses Biblical Creationism.

On January 18, we covered the course requirements and the first five pages of our notes on the class introduction. With the introduction, we looked at four reasons for studying biblical creationism and the content that we will cover in the class. In a nut shell, here is the content I will cover.

If you are interested in looking at the bibliography for this class, you can download it from here.

Technorati Tags:
Biblical Creationism, Seminary

With our first seven posts (for the last post, click here), we have looked at three principles for interpreting Proverbs. With this post and the next, we will look at the fourth guideline.

IV. Observing Literary Clues in a Specific Context.

I will give a brief overview of the literary features that are found in paragraphs of proverbial material and in one-verse units.

A. Three Literary Clues

When examining units containing more than one verse, there are many literary clues on which to focus. We will examine three of these.

1. Repetition

This is a major device in biblical poetry for showing emphasis. In the Hebrew text of Proverbs 30:11–14, the Hebrew word translated as “kind” in NASB stands at the head of each verse.

11There is a kind of man who curses his father; and does not bless his mother.

12There is a kind who is pure in his own eyes; yet is not washed from his filthiness.

13There is a kind—oh how lofty are his eyes! And his eyelids are raised in arrogance.

14There is a kind of man whose teeth are like swords; and his jaw teeth like knives, to devour the afflicted from the earth, and the needy from among men (bold print reflects my emphasis).

The Hebrew term translated in NASB as kind places an emphasis on those characterized by whatever is described in this context. This term is best correlated with a group of society having similar characteristics. It is not just an occasional individual but a group within the society who are characterized in this context by showing disrespect for their parents, self-righteousness, arrogance, and oppression of the needy.

2. Synonyms

The use of synonyms will also show an emphasis in a passage. This is demonstrated in Proverbs 6:20–35. After an exhortation to follow his commandments in vv. 20–23, Solomon provides his “son” with a proverbially packaged treatment of “You shall not commit adultery.” He uses a number of synonyms to describe a potential partner in adultery. She is called an “evil woman,” an “adulteress” (v. 24), a “prostitute” who has cheap price tag and a “married woman” who “hunts down a precious life” (v. 26). She is also characterized in v. 25 as having “beauty” and knowing how to use her eyes (“eyelashes”). The build up of synonyms shows that the adulteress is an evil and cunning foe of God’s moral will.

Through the use of synonyms for wisdom and folly, as well as examples of each, the overall unifying theme of Proverbs 1–9 is an extended conflict between wisdom and folly. The addressees of these chapters are encouraged to choose wisdom over folly (for a fuller development, see Ryken, Words of Delight, pp. 317–19).

3. Other Literary Features

Certain literary aspects of a given text may show the emphasis of a passage. For example, the numerical saying places an emphasis on the enumerated item that corresponds to the highest digit in the last line. In Proverbs 30:18–19 the sage indicates that there are four items which are too wonderful for him to understand. The emphasis of the text is on the fourth enumerated item, “the way of a man with a virgin” (see earlier discussion of poetic parallelism with the first principle of interpretation).

More needs to be developed about observing literary clues, but this will have to wait for the next post.

Technorati Tags:
Proverbs, Wisdom literature

I did a post on November 23 about Dr. Terry Mortenson’s response to William Dembski’s theodicy. In the current issue of the Answers Research Journal, Terry initially provides evidence that supports a young-earth creationist position followed by his response to the treatment of the age of the earth presented in three well-known theologies (Erickson, Grudem, and Lewis & Demarest). Here is the abstract for this article.

In the past few decades there has been a growing controversy in society and in the Church over evolution and the age of the earth. Some Christians accept the idea of billions of years, as taught by the scientific establishment, while others contend that Scripture requires that we believe that creation is only a few thousand years old. Systematic theology texts are influential in this debate as they are used in the training of future pastors, missionaries, and seminary and Christian college professors and are also read by many lay people, thus affecting the Church’s witness. After briefly explaining the evidence in defense of the young-earth creationist view and why this subject is important, three deservedly respected theology textbooks will be examined regarding their teachings on the age of the earth. It will be argued that in spite of their many helpful remarks, these scholars have not adequately explained the biblical truth on this subject nor have they persuasively defended their old-earth positions and provided convincing rebuttals to the young-earth view. On this subject then, I conclude, these systematic theology texts are not helping but rather hindering the Church in her witness in our evolutionized world.

To read the full article, go to the Answers Research Journal.

Technorati Tags:
Biblical Creationism, Theology

The scandal known as Climategate started on the night of November 19 when a compressed file with 1,073 emails and about 3,600 other files showed up as a download in Siberia. These emails and files had been removed from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit, in the United Kingdom. To get quick information about key facts with this scandal, check out “Fast Facts About Climategate.”

Before Climategate began on November 19, evidence was available to call into question global warming, even though ex-presidential candidate, Al Gore (I did not vote for him), disagreed (for starters with this evidence, go here, here, here, and here). Unfortunately, because of the foolishness of our President (as you might expect, I didn’t vote for him either!) and the majority of our Congressmen, the American public will have to pay for their arrogance.

However, what concerns me more than our flawed governmental leaders are the evangelicals who have signed the questionable Evangelical Call to Action on Climate Change (here is a list of the signatories). If you want more information about this evangelical compromise, check out Fred Butler’s “False Prophets (for some helpful links, go to Steve Hays’ “Linkfest on Climategate“). In the last few weeks, the recent exposé “Climategate: the Final Nail in the Coffin of ‘Anthropogenic Global Warming’?” should challenge us to be careful before we get on any evangelical bandwagon.

I have been skeptical of global warming for many years and even did my first post on it in the first few months when I started blogging. However, you should not take my opposition to the climate change movement to indicate that I have no concern about the environment. Because of the dominion mandate in Genesis 1, I have some level of concern for my stewardship in taking care of the environment. However, IMNSHO, most of our politically correct governmental leaders and some evangelicals have elevated climate change to a virtual apocalyptic nightmare and this is unbiblical. Since all of life is in the hands of an absolutely sovereign God, the heavens and earth will not be destroyed until he choses (2 Pet 3:12). However, until that time, let me suggest that we attempt to think biblically. For example, Genesis 8:22 contains a divine promise: “While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night, shall not cease.” If we believe God, we should regulate our lives by this promise.

Technorati Tags:
General Interest, Global Warming

Before I left for the annual meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, I ran out of time to do a post about a good journal article I read by Dr. Terry Mortenson in the Answers Research Journal: “Christian Theodicy in Light of Genesis and Modern Science: A Young-Earth Creationist Response to William Dembski.”

While at ETS, I was keenly reminded that biblical creationism is a foundational issue for developing a biblical worldview. How can one claim to hold to a literal Fall of Adam and curse on the created world order (Rom 5, 8), yet argue that there were millions of years of pain, suffering and death before the Fall? The truth is that this type of interpretation cannot be consistently defended with the Bible. Any denial of and apathy towards this subject among evangelicals is distressing and will minimize a consistent Christian witness. In keeping with the importance of biblical creationism and its relevance for developing an exegetical and theological Christian theodicy, let me encourage you to take some time to read Dr. Mortenson’s important critique of Dembski’s theodicy.

Here is the article’s abstract

The problem of evil is always a challenge for the Christian witness. Human suffering and moral evil are relatively easy for the apologist to explain, and the Fall of Adam is a key to that explanation. But the thornier question is that of natural evil (disasters like hurricanes, volcanoes, earthquakes) that kill not only people but innocent animals. In particular, if we accept millions of years of animal death, disease, and extinction before Adam was even created, how do we explain that in light of God’s attributes and purposes? William Dembski has published a 54-page response to this question. He explains his reasons for rejecting the young-earth creationist theodicy and several old-earth theodicies and proposes a solution that accommodates the millions of years of natural evil which evolutionary scientists insist occurred before man appeared. This paper will analyze and critique Dembski’s proposal, showing it to be inadequate and inconsistent with Scripture and contending that only the young-earth view gives an adequate and biblically sound answer to the problem of natural evil. It is there a powerful apologetic ot make the Christian witness effective in our evolutionized world.

To read a PDF of the full article, go here.

HT: Fred Butler

Technorati Tags:
Biblical Creationism, Fundamentalism, General Interest

This blog entry continues to develop our third guideline for interpreting Proverbs. With part six, we looked at the first five of ten forms found in this book. With this post, we will complete the third principle: identifying precise literary forms.

F. Better-Than Saying

This form is a variation of comparative sayings. This saying is designed to set forth priorities and values. Some have concluded that this type of proverb is a form of relativism advocated by the sages of Israel. Against this, it is more precise to view this as eliminating one element and affirming another (Hildebrandt, “Proverbs,” p. 242). “Better is a poor man who walks in his integrity than a rich man who is crooked in his ways” (Prov 28:6). To be rich and crooked is not a lifestyle to be valued, but there is value in being poor with integrity.

G. Numerical Saying

This type of saying is another subcategory of the saying. It is the dominant form used in Proverbs 30. The numerical saying will begin with a number line in the X/X + 1 pattern, where the second number is one digit larger than the previous number. The number line will also state the element that binds the list together. The number line is then followed by a list of items. The number of items in the list will correspond to the highest number in the number line. An example of this is Proverbs 6:16–19,

There are six things that the LORD hates,

seven that are an abomination to Him:

haughty eyes,

a lying tongue,

and hands that shed innocent blood,

a heart that devises wicked plans,

feet that make haste to run to evil,

a false witness who breathes out lies,

and one who sows discord among brothers.

As stated in the number line, Solomon lists seven things that God hates. In interpreting the numerical sayings, the final element listed is usually the author’s main point (Hildebrandt, “Proverbs,” pp. 241–42). In Proverbs 6:16–19, the zenith of abominable items to God is “one who sows discord among brothers.”

H. Example Story

An example story recounts an illustration or personal experience and how from experience he has learned a truth worth leaving to others. This form has three basic parts: an opening where the sage notes his experience, a story illustrating his point, and the moral conclusion. Proverbs 24:30–34 is an example of this (also see 7:6–23). The opening is in v. 30, the example story in vv. 31–32, and the moral conclusion in vv. 33–34 (Klein, Blomberg, and Hubbard, Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, p. 317).

I. Beautitudes

A beautitude is a pronouncement of blessing on someone by an authority figure. When this is used in wisdom literature, it provides a motivation to convince someone that blessing comes by following the advised course of action (see 3:13–14; 8:32, 34; 16:20; 20:7; 28:14; 29:18). Proverbs 20:7 reads like this: “The righteous who walks in his integrity—blessed are his children after him!” Because a man has a life of integrity, his children will be the beneficiaries from his integrity.

J. Acrostic Poem

An acrostic poem uses the Hebrew alphabet as a device for structuring. An acrostic poem is used in Proverbs 31:10–31 to describe the virtuous women. The acrostic poem connotes completeness by emphasizing that this woman’s qualities go from A through Z, from beginning to end, she is a most excellent woman. The point is that her virtuous character has been thoroughly presented.

With this post and the previous one, we have looked at the third principle for interpreting the book of Proverbs: identifying precise literary forms. In our next two posts, I will continue my series of posts by examining the fourth principle for understanding Proverbs.

Technorati Tags:
Proverbs, Wisdom literature

With part 5 of Interpreting Proverbs, we looked at the seven collections of proverbs that make up the book of Proverbs. With this and the next post, we will look at the third principle for reading this book.

III. Identifying Precise Literary Forms

This third guideline places proverbial literature into more precise literary forms. I am using the term “form” as a descriptive category denoting the manner in which wisdom material is presented (Garrett, Proverbs, p. 28). There are two predominant literary forms, instruction and saying, and eight secondary forms. We will briefly examine each of these.

A. Instruction

The instruction form is the dominant form found in Proverbs 1–9 and 22:17–24:22. It is a longer form of the admonition (a command or prohibition), usually involving one or more paragraphs explaining a number of related admonitions. The instruction is directed to “my son” or “sons” (which may include the concept of “disciple”) and generally provides a reason for the instruction. It generally praises wisdom and its attributes or provides a warning about the traps of folly and its disciples. The primary point of the instruction is to give advice on wisdom or a related subject or to provide a warning against folly or a related subject (Hubbard, Proverbs, p. 18).

B. Admonition

This is an abbreviated form of the longer instruction form, usually comprised of one to three verses. It expresses either a positive command or a prohibition followed by a motive clause. The motive clause provides a reason why the command should be followed. When we interpret the admonition, we should note the connection between the command and the motive clause. This connection is helpful in understanding the point of the admonition (Hildebrandt, “Proverbs,” in Cracking Old Testament Codes, p. 241). A command followed by a motive clause is found in Proverbs 4:23, “Watch over your heart with all diligence, for from it flow the springs of life.” The importance of this command is seen by the motive clause, viz., what is manifest in one’s life is an overflow from the contents of his heart.

C. Wisdom Speech

This is a subcategory of the instruction. In this type, wisdom as well as folly, wisdom’s antithetical form, is personified as a woman publicly proclaiming a message. For example, the lady wisdom cries out to deliver its recipients in Proverbs 1:20–33; 8:1–36; 9:1–6. The counterpart to the wisdom speech is folly. The lady folly calls aloud to mislead in 9:13–18 (Hubbard, Proverbs, p. 18).

D. Saying

The saying is the dominant form used in Proverbs 10:1–22:16 and 25:1–29:27. A saying is essentially a sentence involving two parallel lines. While the mood of the instruction form is imperatival, the mood of the saying is indicative. As filtered through special revelation, the force of a saying is found in the wisdom or folly displayed in human experience (ibid.).

E. Comparative Saying

The comparative saying is a subcategory of the saying. It generally uses a simile or metaphor to intensify the main point of the saying. An example of this is Proverbs 26:8, “Like one who binds a stone in a sling, so is he who gives honor to a fool.” In interpreting this type of saying, we must note the images being used, the main point of the proverb, and the connection between them. The image in the first clause is that of securely fastening a stone in the sling. The main point of the saying is in the last clause, “so is he who gives honor to a fool.” The point of this saying is that honoring a fool is as foolish as making it impossible for a stone to get out of the sling.

At other times, the lines may simply be in juxtaposition. “A whip is for the horse, a bridle for the donkey, and a rod for the back of fools” (Prov 26:3). The images in the first two clauses are the horse and donkey. The main point is in the last clause, “a rod for the back of fools.” The point of this saying is that the fool, being as difficult to control as the horse and the donkey, must be controlled by strong force.

In looking at the third principle for interpreting proverbs, we have examined the first five of ten literary forms used in the book of Proverbs. With the next post, we will look at the remaining five literary categories.

Technorati Tags:
Proverbs, Wisdom literature

On July 10 I did a post about a biblical creation seminar DBTS offered in this past spring semester. With this entry, I mentioned that the Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal would have a review of Coming to Grips with Genesis in its 2009 edition (to subscribe to the journal, go here). Last month volume 14 of the journal was released and in it Dr. Matt Postiff has a rigorous, yet positive review of this book (to get a great discount with purchasing the book, to the DBTS Store).

I highly recommend that you read Dr. Postiff’s review. He is the pastor of Fellowship Bible Church in Ann Arbor, MI. He has received a Bachelor’s, Master’s, and Ph.D. in computer engineering from the University of Michigan. After earning his Ph.D., he earned a Master of Divinity from Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary in 2005 and is currently writing his Master of Theology thesis on Middle Knowledge: “How God Knows Counterfactuals.” Lord willing, he should be awarded the Master of Theology degree in May of 2010 (to read more about Dr. Postiff, go to his church’s website).

Though Matt makes some recommendations to improve a second edition of Coming to Grips with Genesis, he highly recommends purchasing and using the book with these words: “The book is a scholarly, biblical, and comprehensive defense of the young-earth view. The authors easily achieved their immediate goal–to present the key arguments for the young-earth view. They also successfully raised the issue that the age of the creation has a serious impact on foundational truths of the Christian faith. Issues such as the sufficiency, authority, and clarity of Scripture and consistency in hermeneutics are indeed at stake. The authors wisely avoid the error of making the young-earth view a fundamental of the faith. A major strength of the book is that it is a compilation of works by authors whose expertise is particularly focused on the topics on which they write.” To read his full review, go here.

Technorati Tags:
24-hour day interpretation of the creation account, Biblical Creationism, General Interest