Search

You searched for 'Historical Theology'

I've found 3 results!

1689 Baptist Confession Chapter 2: Of God and of the Holy Trinity - Commentary

Simon Wartanian | 10,662 views | 30,008 words | 2:33:05 hours | 04 March 2015 20:55

...d="footnote-44" data-footnote-id="jdi13">^ Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology. p. 227.

^ Henry Alford. The Greek Testament. Taken from the TheWord Bible Software. In loc.

^ Gregory of Nazianzus, “On Holy Baptism,” Oration 40.41, in NPNF 2, 7:375. As quoted in: Greg R. Allison. Historical Theology: An Introduction To Christian Doctrine: A Companion To Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011). pp. 240-241.

^ John Frame, Systematic Theology. p. 512.

^ Gregg Allison, Historical Theology. p. 240.

^ Justin Taylor. What Do We Mean By “Person” And “Essence” In The Doctrine Of The Trinity? The Gospel Coalition.

...

1689 Baptist Confession Chapter 1: Of the Holy Scriptures - Commentary

Simon Wartanian | 10,419 views | 36,190 words | 3:04:27 hours | 04 March 2015 20:52

The 1689 Second Baptist Confession Of Faith Confession Commentary Reformed Baptist Chapter 1 Holy Scriptures Bible Canon Inspiration Authority Inerrancy Infallibility Apocrypha Old Testament New Testament Canon Sufficiency Sola Scriptura

...="http://theword.net/"TheWord Bible Software. In loc.

^ Catechism of the Catholic Church: With Modifications From The Editio Typica. (Double Day; 2nd edition, 2003). p. 31, number 80. Footnote reference removed.

^ Ibid., number 82.

^ Gregg R. Allison. Historical Theology: An Introduction To Christian Doctrine: A Companion To Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011). p. 44.

^ John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion. 1.7.2

^ John M. Frame. Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Christian Belief. (P&R Publishing, 2014). p. 595.

a, b Alan M. Stibbs, etc. The Scripture Cannot Be Broken: Twentieth Century Writings On The Doctrine Of Inerrancy. Edited By John Macarthur. (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2013). p. 205.

^ Wayne Grudem. Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994). pp. 74-75.

a, b, c, d, e John Calvin. Commentaries. Taken from the TheWord Bible Software. In loc.

^ Alan Stibbs, Scripture Cannot Be Broken, pp. 207-208.

a, b John MacArthur. The MacArthur Study Bible: English Standard Version. (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2010). p. 1904.

a, b, c, d, e, f Philip Schaff. A Popular Commentary on the New Testament. Taken from the TheWord Bible Software. In loc.

a, b, c Joseph Henry Thayer's Greek Definitions. Taken from the TheWord Bible Software. See reference for the Strong's number.

^ Catechism of the Catholic Church: With Modifications From The Editio Typica. (Double Day; 2nd edition, 2003). Number 120, p. 40.

^ Aaron Brake. Is the Apocrypha Scripture?

^ Flavius Josephus. The Complete Works of Josephus. Translated by William Whiston. (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1998). Against Apion, 1:8, pp. 929-930. Verse divisions omitted.

^ Gregg Allison, p. 38, n. 3. Numbering within brackets supplied by me.

^ Babylonian Talmud. Mas. Yoma 9b. The words of R. Abba. Words within bracket added by me because of the footnote attached.

^ Good News Translation (GNT). 1 Maccabees 4:41-46.

^ . 1 Maccabees 9:23-27.

^ Grudem, Systematic Theology. p. 57, footnote references removed.

^ John Piper. A Peculiar Glory: How the Christian Scriptures Reveal Their Complete Truthfulness. p. 48.

^ Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 31, his italics. As quoted in Adam Brake, Is the Apocrypha Scripture?

^ Eusebius. Ecclesiastical History. Book IV, chapter 26.

^ Ibid. chapter 22:8.

^ Ibid. n. 1244.

^ Clements First Letter to the Corinthians, chapters 57.

^ Eusebius. chapter 26, n. 1314.

^ Gregg Allison, pp. 48-49. Footnote references removed. Content with brackets not mine, but Dr. Allison’s.

a, b Roy E. Knuteson. Why We Reject The Apocrypha. p. 6.

^ Judith 1. United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

^ Metzger, An Introduction to the Apocrypha, 50-51. As quoted in Adam Brake, Is the Apocrypha Scripture?

^ Geisler and MacKenzie, Roman Catholics and Evangelicals, 167. As quoted in Adam Brake, Is the Apocrypha Scripture?

^ John Calvin. Institutes of the Christian Religion. Translated by Henry Beveridge. (Hendrickson Publishers Marketing, LLC, 2008). pp. 33-34. 1.7.5.

^ Grudem, Systematic Theology. p. 77.

^ John Calvin, p. 33. 1.7.4.

^ Sinclair B. Ferguson. The Authority, Sufficiency, Finality of Scripture. Monergism.com

a, b Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible. Taken from the TheWord Bible Software. In loc.

^ The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges. Edited by J. J. S. Perowne. Taken from the TheWord Bible...

A Short Review of Beckwith's & Stott's This Is The Day

Simon Wartanian | 1,492 views | 626 words | 0:03:08 hours | 08 January 2017 23:25

Sunday The Lord's Day Christian Sabbath Fourth Commandment Church History Historical Theology Book Review Roger Beckwith Wilfrid Stott

This is the Day

The Biblical Doctrine of the Christian Sunday in Its Jewish and Early Church Setting

by Roger T. Beckwith and Wilfrid Stott

A well researched book by two readable authors. Makes a convincing and honest case from both the Holy Scriptures as well as the first four centuries from Christian history.

The biblical case is short and to the point. I love the fact there is always reference back to what he has said or established on earlier pages. Roger Beckwith goes on to demonstrate that the Sabbath was a creation ordinance and as such it is not connected with the Fall. Then he goes on to survey the passages speaking about the Sabbath. Very interesting was chapter 4 where he showed continuities between the Jewish Sabbath and the Lord's Day (the Christian Sabbath). He makes the case that the Lord's Day is the day of the Lord Christ, the day on which He rose and which we keep to celebrate His resurrection. The first part was very well written and argued, although I would have liked it to be longer and more extensive, but oh well!

The second part has 9 chapters devoted to a historical study about the Sabbath and the Lord's Day. It is very interesting to many how many early references there are to the Christian observance of the Lord's Day as the day of worship. The New Testament has a handful of passages speaking about the Lord's Day (first day of the week), but apparently, in the mind of the early Christians, these passages were a firm foundation to show them that Sunday was the day of worship, the kyriake hemera! Dr. Stott makes a good survey of various pre-400 AD writings in these chapters. There are things which the Fathers believed that I don't agree with, neither do Beckwith nor Stott. But they are honest to lay out their views honestly and clearly. For example, although the observance of the Lord's Day is directly connected to the Fourth Commandment in the mind of the Christian Sabbatarian, the early Fathers, according to Stott, do not make a direct connection with it. As Christian Sabbatarians we believe that the Sabbath was instituted in the Garden and given to Adam to keep, but the Fathers did not agree or say that Adam had to keep a Sabbath, but some of them connected it with the existence of sin (i.e. trouble, sin in our lives and the need for rest). Stott lays these views out honestly and makes some observations on them. It is still amazing to me how much Christians wrote and said about the Lord's Day, although there were but a handful of passages on it in the New Testament. It goes to show that what is insignificant in our modern eyes, was more than enough for the early church. It was enough that the Lord Christ rose on the Lord's Day, for the Lord's Day to be considered the day of rest and worship--a holy day.

His chapter on Eusebius of Caesarea (8) is very interesting. He tries to demonstrate that Eusebius tried to systematize and summarize the doctrines about the Lord's Day and the Sabbath which the Fathers taught. He was the systemizer of the Christian Sunday. He speaks of the Lord transferring the feast of the Sabbath to the first day and so on. Clearly connecting the Lord's Day with the Sabbath.

Overall, a very good and well argued book. I will certainly go back to it and check some stuff again!

Seeing that this book was published in 1978 it would be hard to come by, but fear not! An online (scanned) version is available here.