A Brief Theology of Human Death
The Bible portrays death as the consequence of human sin. Death was the sanction that God tied to the Garden of Eden stipulation: “Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die” (Gen. 2:16-17). And God’s expulsion of Adam and Eve from the Garden on account of their covenant breach and treason demonstrated that His threats were not empty. Death became the lot of Adam and his posterity. To borrow the apostle Paul’s language in Romans 6:23: “The wages of sin [became] death.” Read more 
The Covenant Context of the Fall, Part 5: Extra Evidence for a Creation Covenant
In our previous studies1 we’ve tried to make the case that God’s relationship with Adam was from the beginning covenantal in nature. Despite the fact that the early chapters of Genesis nowhere explicitly employ the Hebrew terms for “covenant” or “kingdom,” these ideas are implicit throughout the primeval narratives. In this study we’ll marshal some additional evidence from other parts of Scripture to support the notion of an Adamic or Primordial Covenant. Read more
Confessing the Faith: the 1689 for the 21st Century
I’m a fan of the Second London Baptist Confession of Faith of 1689. It’s basically a modest revision of the famous Westminster Confession of Faith and the Savoy Declaration. As such it serves as an excellent compendium of Reformed theology with a Baptist ecclesiology. But, as I’ve argued elsewhere, the Elizabethan English of these great 17th century confessions makes them less accessible to 21st Americans. For this reason, I’m happy to recommend a new update in Modern English. Read more
Justification by Faith Alone: Luther’s Quest and the Ultimate Question
What makes October 31st important to the Christian isn’t Halloween. Rather, this day commemorates the birthday of the Protestant Reformation. In light of this occasion, I’d like to initiate a series of posts on the great doctrine of justification. As we come to consider this doctrine, I’d commend to us the words of the Scottish theologian, James Buchanan: Read more
The Baptist Confession on Christian Liberty and the Conscience
Modern Christians seem to marginalize the doctrine of Christian liberty. The subject is rarely discussed in any systematic theologies. Even practical books on Christian living often gloss over the topic. For some, the doctrine of Christian liberty is just not that important in relationship to other doctrines of the faith. For others, the doctrine of Christian liberty is too controversial. Consequently, many modern Christians fail to give this doctrine the attention it deserves. Read more
A Defense of the Well-Meant Offer: God “Can’t Get No Satisfaction”?
Most opponents to the well-meant offer of the gospel admit that a straightforward reading of certain texts would lead to the conclusion that God desires some objectives that he hasn’t decreed (e.g., Deut 5:29). They retort, however, by insisting that such a conclusion is logically inconsistent and theologically impossible. Having debunked the charge of logical inconsistency in an earlier post, we began to address the alleged theological problem in our last post, arguing that God’s “preceptive will” reveals not only what God commands us to do but what he really wants us to do. Now we turn to another theological objection, i.e., the well-meant offer and God’s self-sufficiency. Read more
A Defense of the Well-Meant Offer: Will the Real “Will of God” Please Stand Up!
We’ve noted that the doctrine of the well-meant offer of the gospel is predicated on the belief that God may desire what he doesn’t decree (Part 1). Some within the Reformed community reject such an idea as biblically unwarranted, theologically unsound, and logically inconsistent (Part 2). In our first rejoinder to those who deny the well-meant offer, we pointed out that desiring and not desiring an objective is logically consistent when that objective is viewed intrinsically, on the one hand, and teleologically, on the other (Part 3). In this post, we’ll argue for the theological propriety of the well-meant offer. Read more
Confessions of a Recovering Legalist
Religious “Legalism” with a capital “L” is heresy. It’s the belief that one’s personal virtue and obedience to religious norms or standards merits God’s favor and/or salvation. This “do-it-yourself” religion is antithetical to the gospel of Christ and the Bible’s grace-based religion. “For by grace you have been saved through faith,” writes the apostle Paul. He goes on to remark, “This is not your own doing; it is the gift of God” (Eph 2:8). When asked what deeds God requires of men as a condition for eternal life, Jesus surprised his audience with the reply, “This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent” (John 6:29; see also John 3:16, 36; Acts 4:12; 16:30-31; Rom 10:9-13). Read more
Is Cultural Conservatism the Same as Theological Conservatism?
Churches that are faithful to the apostolic gospel are sometimes also the ones that are loyal to a culture becoming increasingly passé. In such a situation cultural conservatism can easily be mistaken for theological conservatism, for theological orthodoxy. In an age of confusing empirical pluralism and frankly frightening philosophical pluralism, in an age that seems to be stealing from us the Judeo-Christian worldview that prevailed for so long, it is easy to suppose that retrenchment and conservative responses on every conceivable axis are the only responsible courses for those who want to remain faithful to the gospel. Read more
The Pastor as a Theologian – Tom Ascol
A seminary professor and a pastor were walking through a cemetery, and as they came upon a grave, the professor said, “Look, there are two men buried in this grave.” When the pastor asked, “How do you know that?” The professor replied, “Because the tombstone reads, ‘Here lies a pastor and a theologian.’” Unfortunately, this dichotomizing mentality pervades the modern evangelical church. However, in the lecture below, Pastor Tom Ascol seeks to correct this thinking and argues for the pastor-theologian model. Read more
