Monday, September 13, 2010

Inerrancy of the Bible

Written for Dr. Frank James, History of Christianity II, Reformed Theological Seminary, Orlando, May 2003.

Historical Background of the Debate

There seem to be two lines of thought on the how the debate over inerrancy began. Not surprisingly, the two views of history appear to be divided down the lines of the parties in the debate. Both sides accuse the other of starting it!

Open Theism

By Daniel L. Sonnenberg, 2003.

Open theism, as propounded by Sanders, Rice, Pinnock and others seems to be a hearty attempt to make God more palatable for the modern mind and to solve some long standing theological mysteries. However, Frame, Piper, Ware and others show that this system of thought is, in the end, untenable according to Scripture and potentially dangerous to the church. An evaluation of these two systems will demonstrate the present author’s agreement with the latter view.

Old Testament Exegesis, Analysis of 2 Chronicles 15.1-19

By Daniel L. Sonnenberg, 2002. 

Introduction

As Christians, we have received a measure of God’s blessing in our deliverance from sin and death by Christ on the cross. For some Christians, that is as far as they want to go. However, that is not God’s will for our lives. Scripture urges us to continue to press forward in a life of obedience. As we continue to seek to obey God’s will in our lives, he blesses us for the purpose of expanding His kingdom on earth. We have the high calling as co-participants in Christ’s rule and reign of the earth that will one day be fully completed. In 2 Chronicles 15.1-19, the Chronicler sought to convince his audience that a life of obedience to God is rewarded by God’s blessing.

Position Paper: Hebrews 6:4-6

By Daniel L. Sonnenberg, 2003.

Theological and Pastoral Issues at Stake

The central theological and pastoral issue in Heb 6:4-6 seems to be whether true Christians can lose their salvation. This is an aspect of the doctrine of the application of redemption, the way in which the Holy Spirit applies the work of Christ to the lives of believers and unbelievers. Particularly, this refers to the perseverance of the saints. Historically, Wesleyan/Arminian theology has maintained that it is possible for Christians to lose their salvation because “election is conditional on man’s response, dependent on God’s foreknowledge of his faith and perseverance.”1[1]

 Man has free will and can therefore resist God’s grace either before or subsequent to salvation. A Christian who turns his back on the faith can therefore be eternally lost. Calvinist/Reformed theology has maintained that true Christians will be sustained to the end by the power of God, not by human will. Those who persevere to the end of their earthly lives in faith prove that they are true Christians, and those who only appear to be saved but fall away never had saving faith.

Summary of Major Positions

Critique of PBS Documentary, “From Jesus to Christ: The First Christians”

By Daniel L. Sonnenberg, 2002.

 The PBS Documentary, “From Jesus to Christ: The First Christians,” although demonstrating high production quality and detailed research into early Christianity, contains a number of misrepresentations and cannot conceal its writers’/producers’ presupposition that scripture does not speak authoritatively on matters of faith or history.

A Corporate Prayer for Christian Worship

Written for Dr. Steve Brown, Communication II, Reformed Theological Seminary, Orlando, December 2003.

O God, you are the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who, in his life, death and resurrection, reached out to us in love to pay the price for our sins. We glorify your name. We have sinned against you in our thoughts, our words and our deeds. We have forgotten you, we have ignored you, and we have deliberately disobeyed you. Forgive us our sins today and draw us near to yourself. We need you, and we love you.

We are gathered here in the name of your Son because he is the only true source of life, of truth, of healing for our souls. We are afraid of many things that are happening in our world. We fear attacks by terrorists, we fear losing our jobs, we fear that our families will break apart, we fear that we may never have a family of our own, we fear that we will not become all that you have called us to be. Calm our fears and give us your peace.

Study Guide for Chapter X: Baptism and the Lord's Supper in "Paul: An Outline of His Theology" by Herman Ridderbos

Written for Dr. Reggie Kidd, Acts and Pauline Epistles, Reformed Theological Seminary, Orlando, May 2003.

Section 64: Different Definitions of Baptism (396-406)

I. Introduction

A. Paul nowhere gives a detailed treatment of the meaning of baptism, but presupposes an understanding of it

B. Yet a very important doctrinal element is implied through traditional formulations and descriptions

II. Baptism as a cleansing bath OR cleansing from sin

Interview With a Retired Pastor

An interview with Rev. Horace and wife Tennie Hilton of Wrightsville Beach, NC for Dr. Jim Coffield, Introduction to Counseling, Reformed Theological Seminary, Orlando, October 2003.

I spent a couple of hours with a retired pastor and his wife this past week. We are on a first name basis, so I will refer to them as Horace and Tennie. Horace mentioned with pride that this year marks the fifty-fifth anniversary of his ordination. It is obvious that they both consider their years in the ministry well-spent in spite of some negative aspects, though they rarely focused their conversation on the negative. Horace retired from pastoral ministry at age sixty-five (he’s now eighty-two), but has continued preaching regularly in various pulpits during the intervening years. However, his health is failing now, so he is less able to get around. His first love is preaching, but he hated administration. He says that he developed clearer boundaries within his ministry in the later years, simply telling church leaders that they would have to find someone else to uphold the administrative end of things. Tennie learned a similar lesson. In the early days, she tried to involve herself in a variety of ministries all at the same time – women’s ministry, singing in the choir, serving in the nursery – but in later years, she realized that her energy was best spent one-on-one with people. She usually attended every service, so she adopted the strategy of sitting near the back so that she could slip out at the end of the service to greet people on the front porch when they came out. She said that that may be the only time she would see them and get to know them. They both noted that “people need a personal touch” from the pastor and his wife. The people need to know that you care about them. Horace made a practice of phone calling people on their birthday to wish them a "Happy Birthday," and he still calls many people today.

When I asked them about how they recovered from failures such as in their ministry in Knoxville, TN where they said things didn’t go very well,

Response to "The Healing Path" by Dan Allender

By Daniel L. Sonnenberg, 2003.
I really wanted to like Allender since Dr. Coffield said he was one of his favorite authors. But I found him difficult to read – all the way to the end. Like [John] Eldredge, he uses parabolic, poetic language to express himself in prose. I’ve been reading so much theology, it seems I would enjoy a change of pace, but I didn’t. However, once I got past the elusive, non-concrete “desire,” the “embrace,” the “dream of hope,” the “dance of love,” and the “wildness of God.” I was finally able to understand the thrust of his theme. And it’s great!

God’s perspective on pain and suffering, says Allender, is different from ours. It is the rare person, he says, who anticipates pain, let alone embraces it on arrival. We must learn to live in this fallen world with God’s perspective “from above” while living here below. God would lead us on a healing journey through this evil world, but we often stray from the path, missing out on the redemption he has in store for us in this life. Healing, he says, is not “the resolution of the past,” rather, it is “the use of our past to draw us into deeper relationship with God…”

The Ethics of Killing and Letting Die

By Daniel L. Sonnenberg, 2004. 

Introduction
Ethical questions regarding end-of-life care may seem to be a recent phenomenon based on late-breaking developments in biomedical technology. However, such cases have existed since the advent of Western medicine over two thousand years ago under Hippocrates (c.460-370 B. C.), the father of medicine. The ancient Hippocratic Oath attributed to him states in part, “I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect.” Cases such as that of Terry Schiavo, a Florida woman forty years of age said by some to be in a “persistent vegetative state” for nearly fourteen years, are illustrative of this dilemma that has been faced by medical personnel, ethicists, legislators, courts, government leaders and society for millenia. Ms. Schiavo had no advanced directive to indicate her wishes and her family is currently in disagreement over whether her life should continue to be sustained through medical intervention via a feeding tube or allowed to die of starvation since there is said by some to be little hope of recovery. Persons like Terry Schiavo, Karen Ann Quinlan and Jack Kevorkian have become household names in recent years as this debate has reached the American public in the news. The ethical issues regarding euthanasia (Greek for “good death”) are complicated. Those in favor of euthanasia say that there is no moral distinction between killing and letting die, while those opposed to aspects of euthanasia say that there is a moral distinction between the two. The U. S. Supreme Court, in its rejection of challenges to the constitutionality of laws which prohibit physician-assisted suicide, cited this distinction in explicit terms, but did not explain or defend it. In contrast, the Second Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals had previously stated that there was no distinction, reasoning that, if it were so, it would discriminate between those on life support who would be allowed to end their lives by removing such support, and those not connected to life support who would be denied similar access to death. Scripture indicates that killing of any kind apart from capital punishment, just war and self-defense are immoral, so it is important to make distinctions between modes of death both morally and legally.