There isn’t a single place upon the timeline of history to which we might point in an attempt make an historical demonstration of natural theology’s demise.
There has been much speculation as to the identity and timing of God’s kingdom. Contemporary speculation on the kingdom of God tends to domesticate and separate the kingdom from Christ and His work, and it fails to account for present-kingdom language used throughout the New Testament.
Like the word “Trinity,” the word “simplicity” eludes those making the demand for an express, biblical reference. So, how do we know if it’s biblical?
As the all-too-familiar trinity debate rages on, one vital piece of the “discourse puzzle” is still missing—hermeneutics.
Appeals to natural revelation, and thus the assumption of a natural theology, are rife throughout the didactic work of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Part of our current ailment is the inability for Christians to relate subjects of theology to one another in terms of their respective, causal relationships.
It is never a good day to disagree with Dr. Sam Waldron. In spite of our disagreements, I have leagues-worth of respect for this man…
Thomas’ five ways are well known. But fewer know that another Thomas had even more.
Sola Scriptura must be defined correctly, not only to avoid subjecting Scripture to the dictates of men, but also that we might retain the requisite tools (assumptions) and categories needed in order to make sense of the Scriptures in the first place.
Hospitals aren’t the only ones fulfilling their own doom-and-gloom prophecy. Modern theological conservatives are doing the very same thing.
If there is potential in God, there is potential in God’s judgment. If there is potential in God’s judgment, satisfaction is not necessary…
But the temptation to “fix” this tension by making the divine essence the transcendent “part” in God, and the Trinity the immanent and complex “part” in God is misguided since it wouldn’t fix any problem at all.
“I am persuaded that one reason why our working-men so universally keep clear of ministers is because they abhor their artificial and unmanly ways.”
By the time I reached the end of this book, I simply didn’t see any God left. All that remained was creature. Such is the end of theistic personalism and/or process theism.
“But who is to say both non-motion and motion couldn’t exist in the Trinity?”
From obviously selective quotation, not only of Thomas, but also of John Calvin, John Owen, and others, to blatant denial of Christian orthodoxy, this book doesn’t so much represent a nuance within the orthodoxy of Reformedom, but a departure from the first principles of Christianity altogether.
Owen, thus, represents a full-fledged Reformed orthodoxy on this matter. There are others, such as Johann Heinrich Alsted, Stephen Charnock, Herman Witsius, and Petrus Van Mastricht. Yet, any differences between them would be mostly accidental and not relevant to the overall point of the present essay.
Turretin… no doubt understood natural theology in relationship to the covenant of works and the covenant of grace.
Franciscus Junius construes the state of man in a twofold manner when he writes that there are “two states of men, namely, the state of integrity when he was created by God and the state of corruption arising from man’s fall by his own choice.”
“In attestation of his wondrous wisdom, both the heavens and the earth present us with innumerable proofs…” ~ John Calvin
Henry Bullinger, an English contemporary of John Calvin and influencer of the English Reformation, connects the significance of natural theology to God’s revelation in Scripture.
The productivity of debate centered around the aforementioned issues depends on definitions. There are three main terms in question throughout this essay: natural theology, covenant of works, and covenant of grace.
There are massive implications for asserting an immediate knowledge of the divine, rather than a derivative knowledge through one medium or another.
“But that’s natural revelation, not natural theology.”
In order to prove natural theology false, one would need to use natural theology.
This will not be a terribly long post. I have sermon preparation to do. Nevertheless, as I parsed the river of thought running through my mind, it occurred to me that I probably need to throw out into the public a response I’ve been making in my head to a mainstream argument coming from the immuno-vangelistic propaganda.
Why don’t Americans, especially discerning Christians, apply the principle of motive to their government?
What does God think about this hot-button issue?
Anachronistically, not statistically, I have gathered there to be two rather different responses to the current flow of information which comes by way of mainstream news media.
The method of theology matters, because it will ultimately determine whether or not a person has a true or a false theology.