Fidelity

At Drewdog’s prompting and his lending to me Doug Wilson’s book ‘Fidelity’ (I was too cheap to buy it), I will throw out some thoughts about plural marriage in the Bible.

First of all, I was impressed by Doug’s honest look at the subject. Many things he says in the book are radical and unlike any I have ever seen in print. Here are a few examples:

The polygamist and all his wives, if they profess faith, should be received into the membership of the church.

Polygamy cannot be considered a sin in the same way that adultery is.

… the church should forbid leadership to polygamists and reluctantly tolerate membership for polygamists.

I think these statements are good, consistent statements that do justice to the whole counsel of scripture, not just isolated sections.

There are also some arguments he makes that are very common and orthodox, but may commit some fallacies.

“We should start by understanding that monogamy is required by Creation Norm” - Hasty Generalization, Non sequitor
Perhaps polygamy was not intended before the fall, but that is irrelevant. The fall altered everything, and this side of resurrection, we cannot truly regain what was lost in the Garden:
- Most Christians don’t live in nudist colonies.
- Most Christians are not Vegetarians (Or Vegans, Gen 1:29-30)
- Incest is not allowed today as it would have been at that time.
Adam and Eve's marriage as an archetype should extend only as far as other passages (i.e. Matt 19) point to the first marriage as an ideal.
It seems strange to me that the cornerstone of such a major doctrine depends primarily on interpretation of a narrative and not a clearer, didactic teaching passage.

“If polygamy were a positive good, there would be no reason to restrict it.” (referring to the OT Law) - False Dilemma?
Food and Drink is a positive good, but there are limits.
Sleep is good, but the sluggard or lazy person is foolish.

"When a man is polygamous, it puts him in a position where he can father more children than he can be a father to." - Slippery Slope and Contradiction
If children were a positive good, there would be no reason to restrict it. Fathering children, of course, is a positive good, but Doug is adding restrictions to fathering children.

“God Forbids polygamy in the ordinances of creation and redemption, but polygamy may be tolerated only among those not suitable for leadership in the church.”
Polygamy has always been sinful...most of the time...

Much, much more could be said, but I don't want this post to get too long.

I'll just close by saying that polygamy is a tricky subject to harmonize in Scripture, and Doug Wilson's piece is the best I have read from a mainstream Christian scholar.

Read more

As Requested

Looking down Giles street, past the Giles' St. Cafe is the B & B.


Unfortunately, pubs being darkly decorated and dimly lit, pictures from the inside weren't useful with my camera. I think that means one thing if you want to see the inside...Road Trip!! Come on, what think ye? Let's get going.

Read more

Name that Place

I have nothing pithy to say at the moment, so in honor of some of the pub's favorite authors, I thought I'd post a few pictures taken in 2004.


I'll let you guess the locations.

Read more

Textual Reliability¹Historical Reliability

As Christians, we believe that we have good evidence to believe the New Testament was accurately copied (e.g. # of MSS; early dating of those MSS; and accuracy of those MSS). From this evidence, often times, some Christians assume that somehow this proves that the Bible is true and warrants our belief. Not everyone agrees with this. Some people, namely skeptics, claim that the New Testament was not accurately copied, that it contains too many errors. Therefore, some skeptics assume that the New Testament cannot be trusted, and therefore Christianity must be false. I think both of these cases are simply a case of "it doesn't follow." Consider:

1) Many skeptics have claimed that the New Testament is "full of errors" (200,000 of them) and cannot be trusted. From this claim, many people fear that if this were true then somehow Christianity must be false. Now, we know that this simply isn't true, the Bible isn't "full of errors" and in fact of all the textual variants that we have none of them affect a major doctrine.

This is beside the point, however. To say that Christianity must be false because there are 200,000 errors in the New Testament simply doesn't follow. Let's suppose that someone could prove all 200,000 errors. This would indeed invalidate the textual reliability of the New Testament, but this wouldn’t invalidate the historical reliability of the New Testament. There is still plenty of external evidence (e.g. archeology, early Christian writers, ancient secular sources)which would support the claims of Christianity. If these supposed errors were true it would only prove that we have an unreliable text.

2) After going through all of the evidence for the textual reliablity of the New Testament some think that this is enough to warrant belief in what the New Testament says. However, this is a category mistake since it (again) confuses textual reliability with historical reliability. The question isn't "Do you believe what the New Testament says?" but "Do you believe that the New Testament is accurately copied?"

What is my point? Perhaps it might be to make sure that you don't try and prove more than the evidence suggests. What are your thoughts?

Read more

Uncle Steve

Well, one of the pub's best friends, Uncle Steve, just paid us all a visit out here on the left coast; and it was so good to see him and his family. Steve and his wife were recently blessed with a beautiful baby girl, and this was our first chance to meet her.

If you've ever met Steve, then you know that he always has a good story to tell, and his last visit did not disappoint. One anecdote that stuck with me was the following: Steve and his family, as well as his siblings, went to his parents' house for the holidays, as they do most years. When his sister first saw the newest addition to the family, she said to Steve, "Wow, she looks exactly like you." Steve replied, "Really?" His sister promptly added, "Oh don't worry, it looks good on her."

We miss you guys already.

Read more

Paulindromeemordniluap

Hey Paulindrome, I know that you have some good things to say. Your deadline is up; therefore, please brew up some good thoughts and poor them out in a post soon. Noos tsop a ni tuo meht roop dna sthguoht doog emos pu werb esaelp, erofereht; pu si enildaed reuoy. Yas ot sgniht doog emos evah uoy taht wonk I, Emordniluap yeh.

Read more

Our Ultimate Hope

What is the ultimate hope of the Christian? I’ll give you a hint; it’s not heaven. Now hear me clearly: I’m not saying that we don’t look forward to heaven (a term that will be fleshed out in later blogs); we do indeed. But the ultimate hope of the Christian is more than just the idea of heaven-- it is inextricably tied to Christ and His work. The ultimate hope of the Christian is resurrection. Consider Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 15:20-28:

But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep. For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ's at His coming, then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. The last enemy that will be abolished is death…. When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all.

Paul here is saying that Christ is the type or model of every Christ follower. He is the first fruits. You’ll recall from the Old Testament that the practice of giving the first and best crop to God in thankfulness for his provision is always followed by the harvesting of the entire crop. In the same way, just as Christ (the first fruits) has been resurrected and glorified bodily, so shall we (the entire harvest) be resurrected bodily. Our hope is not that we will someday enjoy eternal disembodied bliss, floating around on clouds in the presence of God. Our hope has to do with the final and eternal defeat of sin and death, and the resurrection of all creation! I would like to emphasize here the point that eternity will not be less physical, it will me more physical. Let us not forget that God created the heavens and the earth, and everything therein, and it was very good. And when Christ returns, not only will we be resurrected, but there will be a redeemed heaven and earth. One way you can think about this is that not only do Christians get to go to heaven, but creation gets to go too.

In his book entitled, The Resurrection of the Son of God, N.T. Wright says of this text, “Paul is trying to teach the Corinthians to think eschatologically… of the way in which the future has already burst into the present, so that the present time is characterized by a mixture of fulfillment and expectation, of ‘now’ and ‘not yet’, pointing towards a future in which what happened at the first Easter will be implemented fully and the true God will be all in all” (333, Italics added).

May we be inspired by the truth that we are living between the First and Second Advent of Christ. May our prayer be that of Jesus; that His kingdom may come and His will be done on earth as it is in heaven. May our hope be the resurrection.

Read more