I hope the title of this article reveals the importance of the doctrine of imputation. Many conservative evangelicals pushed back on Evangelicals and Catholics Together in 1994. Charles Colson represented evangelicals and Richard John Neuhaus represented the Catholics. The gospel was watered down. “We affirm together that we are justified by grace through faith because of Christ.” (click to open). But the indispensable word "alone” was left out. Salvation is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. R. C. Sproul wrote Justification by Faith Alone to correct this biblical error.
Read moreFreedom of the Will verses Bondage of the Will
Are the unsaved responsible for believing the gospel of Christ's death, burial, and resurrection that we witness or preach? Do they have a choice? Are unbelievers only the passive recipients of regeneration? These questions have been debated for centuries. Michael Barrett (click to open) writes articles on this debate between Augustine/Pelagius, Luther/ Erasmus, Calvin/Arminius, and John Edwards/John Wesley. The debate rages today between proponents of Free Will and the Bondage of the Will. My thoughts on the debate are that some who teach the freedom of will promote a free will that is too free. Some who contend for the bondage of the will advocate a will that is to bound.
Read moreBart Ehrman verses Lee Strobel on Inerrancy
Jesus authoritatively declared, “Thy Word is Truth” (John 17:17)! It is up to you to believe His claim that God’s Word is trustworthy or to reject as contradictory. Those who believe in the inerrancy of Scripture and those who reject the truthfulness of Scripture have the same evidence and yet come to opposite conclusions. The same is true with Christ as the Son of God. Those who receive Him and those who reject Him as Savior have the same facts. One repudiates and one accepts. I will give one example of each: Bart Ehrman and Lee Strobel.
Read more“How do you do theology?”
Theological Method answers the question, “How do you do theology?”
This post will utilize the type of systematic theology described by Erickson, in his chapter “The Method of Theology” where Erickson discusses “the process of doing theology.”[1] That process generally moves from exegesis to biblical theology to systematic theology.[2] After discussing biblical theology, Erickson added that he places historical theology after biblical theology: “While the utilization of history may take place at any one of several stages in the methodological process, this seems to be a particularly appropriate point.”[3] Erickson instructed that the process of doing theology is to move from exegesis to biblical theology to historical theology to systemic theology.
Read moreWill the church through social justice usher in the Millennium?
Gary North and Gary DeMar in the Christian Reconstruction Movement take social justice to another level. They teach that the church should practice social justice to reconstruct society in order to bring in the kingdom.
Read moreInerrancy of Scripture
Jesus authoritatively declared, “Thy Word is Truth (John 17:17)!” It is up to you to believe His claim that God’s Word is trustworthy or to reject as contradictory. Those who believe in the inerrancy of Scripture and those who reject the truthfulness of Scripture have the same evidence and yet come to opposite conclusions. The same is true with Christ as the Son of God. Those who receive Him and those who reject Him as Savior both have the same facts. One repudiates and one accepts. I will give one example of each: Bart Ehrman and Lee Strobel.
Read moreWhat is Progressive Revelation?
A. J. Jacobs gave what is now a well-known TED talk on My Year of Living the Bible in December 2007. He turned that speech into a book entitled: The Year of Living Biblically: One Man's Humble Quest to Follow the Bible as Literally as Possible. This book was on the NYT bestseller’s list for three months.
A. J. Jacobs, who is an agnostic, did this experiment for one year. Here is the reason for his experiment: “I'm concerned about the rise of religious fundamentalism, and people who say they take the Bible literally, which is, according to some polls, as high as 45 or 50 percent of America. So, I decided, what if you really did take the Bible literally? I decided to take it to its logical conclusion and take everything in the Bible literally, without picking and choosing.”
Here is his first takeaway from one year of seeking to prove the Bible cannot be taken literally: “The first is, thou shalt not take the Bible literally. This became very, very clear, early on. Because if you do, then you end up acting like a crazy person and stoning adulterers.” God’s chosen people in the OT was the nation of Israel. When Jesus came and offered the kingdom and himself as king to the nation, Israel rejected him. In response, Jesus postponed the kingdom and set aside Israel temporarily. The church today is the people of God not the nation of Israel. While God commanded capital punishment for certain sins in the OT with the nation of Israel, God does not command the church to put to death its members for any sin. God takes sin just as seriously today as He did in the Old Testament. According to 1 Corinthians 5, the church does not stone adulterers in this age but rather the church disciplines them.
Read moreIs the future millennium on earth "carnal?"
Augustine in his City of God refers to “Chiliasts” or the “Millenarians” as those who believe in a literal future 1000 years enjoyed by those who are raised in the first resurrection. Augustine rejects this view because the “Chiliasts” and “Millenarians” have carnal and not a spiritual view of the 1000 years: “They assert that those who then rise again shall enjoy the leisure of immoderate carnal banquets, furnished with an amount of meat and drink such as not only to shock the feeling of the temperate.”[2] Ryrie counters this false accusation: “Since when is the church only spiritual and the kingdom only carnal?”[3] In 1 Corinthians 3:3, Paul accused the church at Corinth of being “carnal.”
Read moreThe Doctrine of Sin defends Penal Substitution (Part six)
Charles Ryrie showed the sinfulness of sinners by explaining the imputation of Adam’s sin directly to sinners and the inheritance of sin indirectly from Adam through the parents of each succeeding generation. Ryrie explained the difference:
Imputed sin is transmitted directly from Adam to each individual in every generation. Since I was in Adam, Adam’s sin was imputed to me directly, not through my parents and their parents. Imputed sin is an immediate imputation (that is, directly, not through mediators between Adam and me). This contrasts with how the inherited sin nature is transmitted. It comes to me from my parents, and theirs from their parents, and so on back to Adam. Inherited sin is a mediate transmission since it comes through all the mediators of generations between Adam and me.[1]
Read moreJustification: Protestant vs. Catholic
I am borrowing my title from Dr. Gavin Ortlund who presents a very informative YouTube video on the differences and similarities between Protestants and Catholics on the doctrine of justification. He notes some important differences such as Protestants hold to imputed righteousness which is forensic. Imputed righteousness transpires at the moment of faith in Christ and is a completed judicial act. Catholics advocate infused righteousness which is based on observing the sacraments throughout his/her life.
Read moreThe Influence on One Life
The influence of Jonathan Edward’s sermon, “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God,” is legendary. It has been called the most well-known sermon in American history. Edward’s influence, however, was greater with his family. Jonathan and Sarah had eleven children. For one hour before dinner, Edwards would gather his children together and help them with schoolwork and talk about their day. Edwards wrote, “Every house should be a little church.”
Read moreFinding Jesus in the Old Testament
When I took high school biology, my biology teacher whom I considered very intelligent, started teaching us the theory of evolution as fact. This view totally contradicted what my pastor had preached and taught from God’s Word. My biology teacher was very convincing, and I began to doubt if God was who my pastor declared him to be. I was very confused. What I was struggling with was a huge worldview question: Where did I come from?
Read moreTwenty-five Advanced Soteriological Questions
Question Fourteen: Does God’s Word teach Infant Baptism?
Covenant theologians like Robert Murray advocate the necessity and salvic merit to infant baptism. Robert L. Saucy points out "the difficulty involved in trying to distinguish the efficacy of baptism as it applies to adults and infants is noted by Reformed theologian John Murray. His attempt to maintain the same significance for both in the following quotation appears to contradict the clear biblical principle of salvation by faith.”[1]
Read moreWho is your favorite theologian and why?
I was once asked “Who is your favorite theologian and why?” Here was my answer.
I have different theologians that I like and use for different reasons. I like Charles C. Ryrie’s Basic Theology for my Bible Doctrine and Systematic Theology students. Ryrie remarks that he did not write Basic Theology for the professional theologian. I find little that I disagree with in Ryrie’s Basic Theology. I know he is not as deep as other theologians but that was not his purpose in Basic Theology. He revealed his scholarship in other writings. He also helps me in communicating doctrines to church members who also are not professional theologians.
Paul Enn’s The Moody Handbook of Theology is also good for my purposes but he covers Biblical, Historical, Systematic, Dogmatic, and Contemporary Theology, which cuts back on the Bible doctrine content.
S. H. Strong (1836 -1921) was the leading Baptist theologian for about one hundred years. Millard Erickson (1932-) replaced him as the premier Baptist theologian.
I also like and use Wayne Grudem’s Systematic Theology to add depth to Ryrie. I like his coverage of the attributes of God. He also has a good argument for baptism by immersion. I disagree with Grudem on a number of issues. Grudem has two editions to his Systematic Theology. He changed some of his views in the second edition.
I like to read Michael Horton’s Christian Faith for even more depth than Ryrie and Grudem. Horton in some of his writings has a strong defense of cessationism and actually refutes Grudem’s continuing gift of prophecy which is powerful coming from a Reformed theologian.
I like Mike Stallard’s journal articles on dispensationalism, eschatology, and theological method (click to open).
Recently I have been reading Matthew Barrett at Credomag.com (click to open). He is the Systematic Theologian at Mid-Western Baptist Theological Seminary in Kansas City, Missouri. Barrett adds Historical Theology to Systematic Theology and addresses current issues in theology. Barrett in his podcast interviews contemporary theologians.
Coming back to Charles Ryrie, in his Dispensationalism in 1995, he gives a scholarly reply to progressive dispensationalism. In his Dispensationalism Today in 1965, he responded to Covenant Theology. Ryrie wrote 32 books which have sold over 1.5 million copies. His study Bible has sold 2.6 million copies. The Ryrie Study Bible, Balancing the Christian Life, and Basic Theology have been best sellers. I mention these facts to show the influence of Ryrie not only in Academia but among rank-and-file Christians who have benefited from his writings put on their level. Of course, he impacted Bible scholars by teaching Systematic theology and serving as dean of doctoral studies at Dallas Theological Seminary. His influence was broad and lasting.
Answers to Twenty-Five Advanced Salvation Questions
Here is the second of twenty-five salvation questions answered:
2. What is Universalism?
Charles Ryrie lists the verses that universalists use to support their view: John 12:32; 1 Corinthians 15:22; Philippians 2:11, and 1 Timothy 2:4.[1] These verses, however, can be shown not to teach universalism. In John 12:32, Jesus said he would “draw all men unto myself.” Jesus also mentions judgment on His rejecters in 12:48. Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:22 promises that “in Christ shall all be made alive.” The promise is not to all but to all who are in Christ who will be resurrected in the first resurrection. John notes that there is a “first resurrection” and adds “Blessed and holy is he that has a part in the first resurrection: on such the second death has no part” (Revelation 20:5-6). Paul in Philippians 2:11 does predict “that every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord.” This is a future prophecy of all people including the unsaved bowing to the Lordship of Christ, but Paul does not promise that all unsaved are going to acknowledge Him as Savior. So many other Scriptures teach against second changes after death (Matthew 7:21-23; Luke 16:19-31; Revelation 20:11-15). 1 Timothy 2:4 like 2 Peter 3:8 expresses God’s desire or wish for all sinners to be saved not His determination that all unsaved will be saved. Another strong argument is the fate of the two human opponents of Christ: the antichrist and false prophet in Revelation. At Christ’s second coming, both are cast into “the lake of fire burning with brimstone” (19:20). One thousand years later after the millennium, Satan is “cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are” (20:10) and have been for 1000 years. Then John adds “and shall be tormented day and night forever and ever.”
[1] Charles Ryrie. Basic Theology (Chicago: Moody Press, 1986), 607.
Who Is Your Favorite Theologian?
Like preachers, I have different theologian that I like and use for different reasons. Ryrie remarks that he did not write Basic Theology for the professional theologian. I find little that I disagree with in Ryrie’s Basic Theology. I know he is not as deep as other theologians but that was not his purpose in Basic Theology. He revealed his scholarship in other writings. He also helps me in communicating doctrines to my church members who also are not professional theologians.
Paul Enn’s The Moody Handbook of Theology is also good for my purposes but he covers Biblical, Historical, Systematic, Dogmatic, and Contemporary Theology, which cuts back on the Bible doctrine content.
I also like and use Wayne Grudem’s Systematic Theology to add depth to Ryrie. I like his coverage of the attributes of God. He also has a good argument for baptism by immersion.
I like to read Michael Horton’s Christian Faith for even more depth than Ryrie and Grudem. Horton in some of his writings has a strong defense of cessationism and actually refutes Grudem’s continuing gift of prophecy which is significant coming from a Reformed theologian.
I like Mike Stallard’s journal articles on dispensationalism, eschatology, and theological method.
Coming back to Charles Ryrie, in his Dispensationalism in 1995, he gives a scholarly reply to progressive dispensationalism. In his Dispensationalism Today in 1965, he responded to Covenant Theology. Ryrie wrote 32 books which have sold over 1.5 million copies. His study Bible has sold 2.6 million copies. The Ryrie Study Bible, Balancing the Christian Life, and Basic Theology have been best sellers. I mention these facts to show the influence of Ryrie was not only in Academia but among rank and file Christians who have benefited from his writings put on their level. Of course, he impacted Bible scholars from teaching Systematic theology and serving as dean of doctoral studies at DTS. His influence was board and lasting.
Total Depravity
Have you seen the car tag, “I’m spending my children’s inheritance.” Comforting thought. Right? There is one inheritance most children wish had been spent by their parents. The inheritance of a sinful nature.
Charles Ryrie calls this sinful state “inherited sin” because it came from our parents. Reformed or Covenant brothers believe this sinful state like “imputed sin” came directly from Adam. Wayne Grudem is an example: “Our inherited corruption, our tendency to sin, which we receive from Adam” (Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994, page 497). Wayne Grudem calls this sinful state “inherited corruption” because Adam pasted his sin nature to his children.
Read morePostmillennialism and Christian Reconstructionism
Gary North and Gary DeMar in the Christian Reconstruction Movement take social justice to another level. They teach that the church should practice social justice to reconstruct society in order to bring in the kingdom.
Read moreVideo on Salvation
The imputation of righteousness, not the infusion of righteousness, is the only basis for the Gospel
“So important is eternal life that the Bible gives us many illustrations so that no one will miss the message. To the farmers, Jesus talked about soil and seed. To the shepherds, He talked about sheep. To beggars, He talked about a great feast that God had spread. To lawyers, He talked abut justification. To the housewife, He talked about a coin that had been lost and had to be found. But when you use the word ‘imputation,’ you find God speaking to the banker, because it is a financial term . . .. Our English word ‘imputation’ comes from the Latin word which means ‘to reckon, or credit, to one’s account.’ When you go to the bank or the savings and loan association and deposit money, imputation takes place. They deposit that on your account, and they write it on your record . . .. Right in the middle of that word ‘impute’ you have p-u-t, righteousness put to our account” (Warren Wiersbe, Key Words of the Christian Life, Lincoln: Back to the Bible, 1982, pages 55, 56, 58).
Read more