Doxoblogy | theoldadam on What’s your style of… |
 | Joe on Barack’s a rock sta… |
 | hugh akston on Barack’s a rock sta… |
 | Jeremy Weaver on Barack’s a rock sta… |
| hugh akston on Barack’s a rock sta… |
Baptist Press (BPNews) Contra Tenebra Lux Pastor Steve Weaver's Blog Riddleblog Amazing Grace and Old Chevy'sAsk me some questions.
Guys, this Law thing was just supposed to last a week and, quite frankly, it’s wearing me out. Soooo…Ask me some questions. Leave your questions in the comments of this post or email them to me. My email address can be found on my profile page.One rule that applies [...]
Filed under: Uncategorized | 8 Comments »
The Law does not annul or add to the Abrahamic Covenant, which is described by Paul as a Covenant of Promise. (Gal 3:15-1
The Covenant made to Abraham was a promise to bless him and his offspring. This blessing consisted of two parts,1) God would be their God, and2) God would [...]
Filed under: Uncategorized | 3 Comments »
Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to read the quote by Kim Riddlebarger in the Faithful Sampler in the left sidebar. Then go to this post and read the last comment, which was made sometime last night.
Now, answer these three questions for me (you don’t have to actually respond here unless you [...]
Filed under: Uncategorized | 8 Comments »
According to John Calvin, and the majority of those who came after him, the Law has three uses. Those three uses are pedagogical, civil, and didactic.
To say that the Law has a Pedagogical use is to say that it teaches us our sin. Paul says,
“…I would not have known what it is [...]
Filed under: Uncategorized | 12 Comments »
The law is used in two ways; first, for this worldly life, because God has ordained all temporal laws and statutes to prevent and hinder sin. But here some one may object: If the law hinder sin, then also it justifies. I answer: Oh! no, this does [...]
Filed under: Uncategorized | No Comments »
Is there really any other kind? Isn’t this just a redundancy?
If it is God’s Law then it is moral. We have a moral obligation to comply with it. And consider the implications if God gave a law that wasn’t moral.
What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! [...]
Filed under: Uncategorized | 5 Comments »
Let me make one thing clear before I begin. I do not have a problem with dividing the Law into three parts (civil, ceremonial, and moral) in order to understand the Law as a whole. The problem that I find is this, there are those who would divide the Law of Moses, which [...]
Filed under: Uncategorized | 5 Comments »
A question I received via email last week;
Did Paul consider himself to be writing “inspired” words? Or did he think it was just another letter? What about the other writers of the NT?
Although this is not part of the question, I think it is helpful that we recognize that the Old Testament prophets [...]
Filed under: Uncategorized | 3 Comments »
I’ll be honest with you, I haven’t had a lot of time to respond to Peter’s critique of my view that the Mosaic Law should not be divided into three separate parts. So consider this a non-response. A full response will come either Monday evening or Tuesday morning.
I have read both posts and [...]
Filed under: Uncategorized | 2 Comments »
Peter Nelson has responded to my last post on the Law. Tolle Lege!
Looks like he’ll be a good debate partner.
Filed under: Uncategorized | 1 Comment »
