Posts

Tackling Tradition 85: Does the Bible Condone The Stoning Of Non-Adult Children

Deuteronomy 21: 18 - 21 18  If someone has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and motherand will not listen to them when they discipline him,  19  his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town.  20  They shall say to the elders, “This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a glutton and a drunkard.” 21  Then all the men of his town are to stone him to death. You must purge the evil from among you. All Israel will hear of it and be afraid. Village Skeptics & other critics of the Bible sometimes assert that Deuteronomy 21:18 - 21 supports the stoning of children.      By way of reply… The Bible draws a distinction between the Moral Law of God (the Decalogue) & the civil code which is based upon it.    In context, Deuteronomy 21: 18 - 20 is part of the civil code, the body of Law based upon the Decalogue. It is therefore an ou...

The Biggest Lie Told During Pride Month

Generally speaking, Mike Winger is a pretty good Christian apologist, but like many theologically Evangelical (& Non-Evangelical) Christians these days, his heart & mind are still in the thrall of Liturgical Philosophy & Ecclesiastical Tradition.  According to him , the other side of the ecclesiastical ideological aisle is guilty of lying this time of year.   He could not be more wrong.   In truth, the biggest Pride month lie is the tradition bound view on homosexuality.  The reader is invited to refute this by way of using the Bible only & commiting no exegetical, epistemic, & logical fallacies.  First, let’s outline the texts of Leviticus 18 & Romans 1:18 - 32 together in tandem.    Why?  Because Leviticus 18 is inerrant & infallible case law, & Romans 1:18 - 32 is verbal, plenary inerrant & infallible didactic material that follows the same outline & serves as an inerrant, infallible commentary on L...

Calvinism & The Salvation of Infants

1. From the beginning a few held with Zwingli that death in infancy is a sign of election, and hence that all who die in infancy are the children of God and enter at once into glory. After Zwingli, Bishop Hooper was probably the first to embrace this view. It has more lately become the ruling view. 2.    At the opposite extreme a very few held that the only sure sign of election is faith with its fruits, and, therefore, we can have no real ground of knowledge concerning the fate of any infant; as, however, God certainly has his elect among them too, each man can cherish the hope that his children are of the elect. Peter Martyr approaches this sadly agnostic position. 3.Many held that faith and the promise are sure signs of election, and accordingly all believes and their children are certainly saved; but the lack of faith and the promise is an equally sure sign of reprobation, so that all the children of unbelievers, dying such, are equally certainly lost. The younger Spanheim...