Filed Under (Paul's posts) by Paul on 30-01-2012
Print This Post
Last year a friend who advocates hyperpreterism explained to me the Greek grammar of 1 Corinthians 15:15, 16 indicated that the resurrection of the dead was occurring as Paul wrote the text. This was news to me as I could find no translations that supported the premise of my friend. Nor could I find any commentaries that addressed the issue. However, my friend was insistent that the Greek grammar in this text supported the idea the dead in Christ were “being” raised, not that they would one day rise from the grave. Additionally, I didn’t see anyone who claims to know Greek and at the same time claim to understand the importance of propositional truth claims stepping up to provide a detailed analysis to explain why the premise of my friend was simply untenable. So I requested from another friend who really does know Greek as well as the importance of God’s propositional truth claims as revealed in Scripture to provide a detailed analysis as to why the concept of “being” raised is not what is conveyed in 1 Corinthians 15:15. I thank Dr. Kenneth Talbot and Richard Glau for providing the following. I trust you all find the following article as informative as I have.
Resurrection:
Physical or Spiritual in 1 Corinthians 15:15-16?
by
Rev. Richard Glau, Th.M. Ph.D. (Candidate)
Assistant Professor of Exegetical Theology
Whitefield Theological Seminary
Rev. Kenneth Talbot, Ph.D., Th.D.
Professor of Theology and Apologetics
Whitefield Theological Seminary
Read the rest of this entry »
Comments (9)
Filed Under (Paul's posts) by Paul on 27-01-2012
Print This Post
We have previously noted here that Dr. G. K. Beale’s recommendation of Dr. R. T. France’s argument explaining what the term “gathering” means in Matthew 24:31. France’s position does not view 1 Thessalonians 4:14-17 and Matthew 24:30-31 in the same light as many modern day scholars who maintain that they point to one event at the consummation of history. However, Beale in his earlier writings, in particular his commentary on 1 Thessalonians 4:14-17 explains that the resurrection explicitly taught in the aforementioned text is implied in Matthew 24:31. Although that eschatological perspective has changed in his recently published book “A New Testament Biblical Theology.” Beale now places Matt 24:30-31 as occurring in AD70. In support of this changed position he directs the reader to France’s, “Jesus and the Old Testament” where France is discussing Matthew 24:31:
Read the rest of this entry »
Comments (19)
Ep.46a – Baptist Behaving Badly Reviewed
Ep. 46 is a followup to my critique of James White in Episode 45 wherein I respond to Dr. White’s responses.
Ep.47- Phil-ling up on Some Eschatology, Part One
In Ep.47 I am rebroadcasting my appearance on Phil Naessens’ show in which we are starting a series on understanding eschatology. The subject for this show was the importance of 1 Corinthians 15 and Psalm 110 in understanding the nature of the Messianic Kingdom. Enjoy!
Comments (3)
I have written before about the hyprepreterist whoring of Spurgeon, but the Beggar’s All blog today has another excellent example:
Charles Spurgeon, Full-Preterism, and Figurative Language
I would once again urge James Swan to stop following the rules of the heretics and their terminology of “full preterism.” He would never accept the hyperCalvinists being called Full Calvinists so I sincerely ask him to give those of us who are orthodox in our eschatology the same consideration and not denigrate orthodox preterism in that way. I speak as now a fellow Calvinist.
Comments (7)
From Pastor Richard Barcellos, “Some Thoughts on Hyper-Preterism”
Denying, or not being able to affirm without qualification, a future bodily and physical resurrection of the saints precludes a past bodily resurrection of Christ according to the logic of Paul in 1 Corinthians 15 verse 13. Moreover, no resurrection of Christ means our faith is in vain, we are still in our sins, and the gospel is destroyed. Hyper-preterism ends up denying an essential, core element of the gospel. Recall what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15 verse 1: “Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel…” First Corinthians 15 is an explication of Paul’s gospel! Hyper-preterism denies one of the major tenets of the Pauline gospel. Hence, hyper-preteris is heresy of the worst kind! It ends up denying the gospel itself! If one affirms Hyper-preterism, one denies the gospel. If one is with Hyper-preterism, one is without the gospel. If one is for Hyper-preterism, one is against the gospel.
Comments (0)
Filed Under (Paul's posts) by Paul on 17-01-2012
Print This Post
Wouldn’t you know it, the RINO’s get caught so they go quite. A friend of mine uses the term “crickets” which I think is accurate. As pointed out approximately two years ago Mike Sullivan wrote that he was going to get back to us when we challenged him to provide any evidence to support his assertion that “gather” meant resurrect as in “bringing dead people back to life”. This post here dates back to late 2010 and pointed out Mr. Sullivan had yet to produce something he claimed he would in May of that same year. Interestingly enough Mr. Sullivan maintained he same misrepresentation McKenzie did claiming G.K Beale’s position was that Matt 24;30-31 is dealing with the same event as described 1 Thess 4:14-17. Indeed had you read Mr. Sullivan back then you would have seen stuff like this, Read the rest of this entry »
Comments (24)
Filed Under (Paul's posts) by Paul on 14-01-2012
Print This Post
John tells us in chapter 19 of his Gospel when Pilate presented Christ Jesus he said “Behold the Man”. The late Harold O.J. Brown who was Professor of Systematic Theology at Trinity Evangelical International University explains the uniqueness of Christianity when compared against other world religions is, “Christianity consists of a message that claims to be absolutely true…From the very beginning, Christianity has taught that salvation and eternal life come by faith, and that faith consists in believing certain things about one historic individual, Jesus of Nazareth, called the Christ. The details of the message about his life, death, resurrection, and impending return and what each means are of life-and-death importance to the individual Christian.”[i] However, some would suggest the truth claims of Scripture are no longer important.
Read the rest of this entry »
Comments (10)
Filed Under (Paul's posts) by Paul on 12-01-2012
Print This Post
It appears the arguments offered here and here outlining the fact Duncan McKenzie is misrepresenting G.K. Beale has gotten the better of the hyperpreterist crowd over at PreteristCosmos. Why do I suggest this? Well, rather than attacking the argument offered by dealing with the quotes I’ve provide from Dr. Beale which explicitly and without question validate my claim the crowd over there has responded with nothing but Ad Hominem. Without any documentation, over the last couple of days I’ve been referred to as a “hooligan”, “pimp”, “dishonest”, disingenuous”, “political hit man”, “yappy little chiuaua”, “despicable”, “lowest of the low” and a “three year old on a temper tantrum” to name a few of the choice descriptions the opposition has provided in lieu of sound argumentation against the positions I’ve taken.
What is amusing is that while they accuse me of “name calling” simply because I point out the diagnosis of their malady offered by a professional, Professor of Theology , Dr. Roger Olson’s as it relates to Biblical matters. While they on the other hand truly do resort to Ad Hominem. The frustration from the opponents is understandable, when you can’t defeat the argument all you can do is resort to Ad Hominem. And while watching the Cosmos crew banter about is truly good comedy, I think the best example of Ad Hominem comes from John Scargy who is known in the community for some of his less than brilliant arguments.
The below quote is just an excerpt of what Mr. Scargy wrote. I don’t think I need to deal with Mr. Scargy’s false representation of when I held him accountable for misrepresenting N.T Wright. Nor do I have to point out the illogical connection between my qualified quoting of John A.T. Robinson versus Mr. Scargy’s use of the liberal in support of his heretical views on the goal of God’s redemptive plan. Mr. Scargy employs similar logic below which we will demonstrate ranks right up with the equation 1 + 1 = 3. Read the rest of this entry »
Comments (13)
Filed Under (Paul's posts) by Paul on 10-01-2012
Print This Post
Evidently McKenzie understands he has been exposed for incorrectly reflecting G. K. Beale’s position as discussed here. The linked blog documents that McKenzie (borrowing a chart from G. K. Beale), failed to accurately state the context of Dr. Beale’s commentary that supports the correct interpretation of the chart. Dr. Beale points out scholars hold alternative views with respect to Matthew 24, and that the resurrection of the dead is not explicitly taught in Matthew 24. Let’s examine McKenzie’s justification for his inaccurate reporting on Dr. Beale’s work. McKenzie writes:
Read the rest of this entry »
Comments (13)
Filed Under (Paul's posts) by Paul on 05-01-2012
Print This Post
Recently I came across this term “Binitarian” in Gordon Fee’s work, “God’s Empowering Presence, The Holy Spirit in the Letter’s of Paul”, recommended by Dr. Richard B. Gaffin Jr. Professor of Biblical and Systematic Theology, Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia. Dr. Fee describes the condition reflected by this term as “I believe in God the Father; I believe in Jesus Christ, God’s Son; but I wonder about the Holy Ghost. The Spirit has become God’s specter, if you will and unseen, less than dynamic vibrant influence, hardly God very God.” This view has been developed through the idiosyncrasies of some 20th Century N.T. scholarship which failed to recognize the functional distinctions between the Person’s of the Trinity, namely Christ Jesus and the Holy Spirit. Dr. Fee points out that this is caused from addressing “…the relationship between the risen Christ and the Spirit so as to blur the distinctions between them.” And in so doing some scholars have actually suggested in Pauline writings, “the Spirit and Christ are one and the same”
Read the rest of this entry »
Comments (0)
