I am a dispensationalist . . . I think. Below is my explanation of my view. While the term “Progressive Covenantalism” suggests a hybrid between Covenant Theology and Progressive Dispensationalism, it is not really meant to. My view is simply Progressive Dispensationalism with two changes: 1) The emphasis is on the continuity brought about by the single covenant of redemption, not made between the members of the Trinity (as in Covenant Theology), but between God and mankind, represented by Adam. 2) The change of name. I don’t like the word “dispensationalism.” Sadly, it has lost its effectiveness due to the increadible amount of misrepresentation due to ignorance of its history and development. Therefore, I think it should be superseded (oh yeah, how was that for a play on words my young replacement theologians?). Anyway, here is a brief video clip describing what Progressive Covenantalism is. I have inserted the charts so that you can see them better. Continue Reading »

 

 Progressive Covenantalism [6:14m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (674)

There is still time to enroll. The Theology Program online Summer semester begins June 3. Enroll today.

Support Reclaiming the Mind Ministries as we make theology accessible. Donate today.

↑ Grab this Headline Animator

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Provided by
 
D.A. LaGue

 

 Historical Renewal: William Wilberforce [4:55m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (399)

Can a man be a Christian and a politician?  This question plagued a rising member of the English parliament in 1785, as the young politician contemplated how he should live out his newfound faith.

William Wilberforce was born in 1759 in Hull, England.  He was raised in a wealthy home, educated at Cambridge and won his first seat in Parliament at 21 years of age.  Although small in appearance and plagued with physical difficulties, he was a gifted and persuasive speaker and was soon known as ‘the nightingale of the House of Commons.’  By the age of 24, he was already a powerful force in the British government. Continue Reading »

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

How can Protestants justify their belief in sola fide (salvation by faith alone) when it does not seem to be existent prior to the sixteenth century? How do Catholics explain their belief in the Assumption of Mary when it was not dogmatized until the twentieth century? How do Orthodox justify their under-developed and often unbiblical beliefs concerning the atonement? 

During the recording of Theology Unplugged today, Greg Cromartie (the ”muddying the water guy”) asked me a very difficult question that I have yet to make any definitive decision about. This should not surprise many of you knowing that there are many issues which I have yet to decide upon and many about which I assume that I, out of necessity, must be comfortable concerning my indecision until Christ comes. But the question touched on something that I feel is very important. Therefore, my indecision is an uncomfortable one. The issue has to do with the “doctrine of” the development of doctrine. Continue Reading »

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

My daughter Katelynn has always been as sharp as a whip. She loves to learn. At church, people used to get kicks out of her understanding of theological issues. When she was six she came to me and saw that I was reading the Greek New Testament and asked if she could learn. Within the month she started reading Greek. She has known the Gospel since she could listen. I watched a home video of her tonight. She was two-years-old. In the video I asked her where Jesus was and she pointed to the sky. Why? Because I told her that is where God is. She simply believed what I said.

Continue Reading »

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

In my last blog, I noted that the standard doctrine of preservation assumes that the text is accessible by God’s people down to the very words and down through the ages. But since the Old Testament text demonstrably has places in which scholars must resort to conjecture, this doctrine of preservation does not seem to match the historical data. This leaves defenders of the doctrine in the uncomfortable position of having to argue one of two things: (1) the doctrine is only true for the New Testament, which thus makes one methodologically a Marcionite; (2) the doctrine is true for both testaments, but we haven’t found all the manuscripts yet; however, this also must mean that accessibility is not the reason for preservation since the preserved text is not even completely accessible yet. Either of these views really negates the value of the doctrine, for it was originally framed to cover both testaments and to speak of accessibility. Continue Reading »

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

What is the “True” church? #3

What is the definition of a true church? Here we will continue our discussion of what a legitimate church. Are we supposed to “start” a church in order for a church to “true” or does church simply happen? In other words we pose the question of whether a local church is purely an intentional endeavor. With the obscurities concerning the “how to” of a local church in the New Testament, many have dogmatized a certain way to do church failing to recognize that it is the principles that ultimately matter, not so much the particular way which we implement those principles.

 

 The True Church 3 [33:40m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (2475)

Continue Reading »

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Here is the situation: We are born with a propensity, bent, inclination to sin. Therefore, we cannot help but sin - it is our nature. Yet when we do act according to our nature and sin, we are held guilty by God and ultimately condemned to eternal punishment. Not only this, but we are already condemned for the sin of another - namely Adam - before we commit any personal sins. We are held guilty for something someone else did. Umm . . . Check please. I did not vote for this. I did not ask to be this way. I did not even have a chance. This seems unjust.

Continue Reading »

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Sitting out on the back porch this evening with my mother, we watched a popular Baptist radio and television preacher teach on compromise. His lesson was a good lesson in principle. The basic thrust was taken from the story of Solomon. Solomon was given a promise that if he followed the Lord as his father David he would not lack a descendant on the throne of Israel. Yet Solomon compromised by disobeying God’s command and took many wives.

The preacher used this story wisely to explain the danger of compromise. Like any preacher, he had examples that would take the eternal principle of compromise and contextualize it for our day so that we might see the immediate danger that we face (since most of us don’t have the temptation to take too many wives!). Yet, the examples he gave evidenced the misplaced priorities of many in the church to misdirect the application of the principles to acts that in-and-of-themselves did not represent compromise. Continue Reading »

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

As soon as I heard about the TIME (8-23-07) article, “Mother Teresa’s Crisis of Faith,” I commented to my husband that the publication of her personal letters telling of this decades-long “crisis” might very well become her greatest legacy. Then I read the article, which I discovered included a similar statement from Rev. James Martin, an editor of America, a Jesuit magazine. Speaking of her crisis, he comments: “It may be remembered as just as important as her ministry to the poor. It would be a ministry to people who had experienced some doubt, some absence of God in their lives.” Continue Reading »

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

1. I will finish my series on imputation on Monday. 

2. Ben Witherington writes on authorial intent hermeneutics. His three basic guidelines: 1) It means what is means, not what you want it to mean or your presuppositions determine it means. 2) Context is king. No proof texting. This is one of the biggest interpretive problems in the church today.  3) Genre Matter. You have interpret according to the rules of engagement determined by the type of literature. Oh that people would embrace these principles. Here is an excerpt. Continue Reading »

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Continuing with our subject of the difficult doctrine of imputation, we now move to an interpretation of Romans 5. The question has come down to this: Is it possible that Adam’s sin has been credited or imputed to us in such a way that all men are born guilty of this sin of another before we ever exercise any personal sin. Evangelical Protestants and Catholics would say yes. Eastern Orthodox and Arminians would say no.  Continue Reading »

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Provided by
 
D.A. LaGue

 

 Polycarp [4:05m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (414)

In 155 A.D., an eighty-six year old man was brought out to the jeers of a crowded Roman arena.  As he was about to be nailed to a pyre and burned at the stake, he told the soldiers, ‘Leave me as I am.  The one who gives me the strength to endure the fire will also give me strength to stay quite still on the pyre, even without the precaution of your nails.’ Continue Reading »

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

In the last post we discussed the problem of Original Sin, especially from an Evangelical Reformed perspective. Are we condemned for the sin of another. Let’s get some basic terminology down so that we can surf this wave with more balance.

Proposed three types of sin:

Personal Sin: Sins committed by the individual. All people have personal sin (Romans 3:23; 1 John 1:10)

Inherited Sin: The physical and spiritual corruption which produces a bent and inclination toward sin and a natural enmity toward God (Eph. 2:3; John 8:44; Jer. 13:23; Ps. 51:5). This sin is mediated (inherited) directly from our parents.

Imputed Sin: God’s immediate declaration of guilt to every individual for the sin of Adam.  This sin is “imputed” (or credited) to all people as if they had committed the sin.

Here is where the traditions fall with regards to these three. Continue Reading »

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Here is the trailer for the new Intelligent Design (ID) movie with Ben Stein. It looks like it is well done with a bit of humor that is going to drive many people mad. Get ready . . .

Now, I want everyone to notice who is a rebel along with me and Ben. Yes, you can check right here. Those of you who know me will know exactly who I am talking about! Oh yeah! Continue Reading »

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

The concept of “Original Sin” has long been a vital part of Christian Orthodoxy yet is being challenged and redefined by many in the Church today. Even conservatives are beginning to question the validity of the traditional Evangelical understanding of the doctrine asking questions of its legitimacy in its current form of understanding.

Perhaps John Calvin defines Original Sin most concisely as “The deprivation of a nature formerly good and pure.” More specifically, from a Reformed Evangelical perspective, it refers to the fall of humanity from its original state of innocence and purity to a state of corruption and guilt (distinguished later).  It is the cause of man’s translation from a state of unbroken communion before God to one of spiritual death and condemnation. Continue Reading »

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!