This is part three of a response to a post by Jeremy Myers. In that post, Myers summarizes the view of Ron Goetz, which proposes that Luke 17:34–35 is about saved non-celibate homosexuals. While I believe that there are saved non-celibate homosexuals, I disagree with the process of forcing a gay reading into this text (especially by using Document Q and Pagan mythology).[Read More]
independence
Response to “Luke’s Gay Apocalypse” Part II: Context
This is part two of a response to a post by Jeremy Myers. In that post, Myers summarizes the view of Ron Goetz, which proposes that Luke 17:34–35 is about saved non-celibate homosexuals. While I believe that there are saved non-celibate homosexuals, I disagree with the process of forcing a gay reading into this text (especially by using Document Q and Pagan mythology).[Read More]
Justification, Sanctification, Glorification, and Pinocchio
Paul has been invited to contribute a chapter to an upcoming book entitled, Moral Theology and the World of Walt Disney. His submission is on anthropological, hamartiological, and soteriological implications of Pinocchio. Here is an excerpt from the soteriology portion of his draft.
Disney’s Pinocchio brings about a salvation essentially in the one grand event of his death and resurrection after rescuing Geppetto. After proving his maturity, Pinocchio is rescued from his donkey-puppet body into the new body of a real boy. However, the Bible presents salvation in an entirely different manner which actually consists of three phases. These three phases are salvation from the penalty of sin (often called, “justification”), salvation from the power of sin (often called, “sanctification”), and salvation from the presence of sin (often called, “glorification”).
[Read More]
Daniel’s Seventy Weeks Prophecy
Among the evidence that the Bible is infallible is the startling accuracy of the prophecy revealed to Daniel, which he records in Daniel 9:24–27. This prophecy, known as Daniel’s Seventy Weeks, was revealed during the Babylonian exile “in the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus” (Dan. 9:1). At the beginning of the chapter, “Daniel deals with multiple interwoven texts and how exactly they all fit together. He wonders how the seventy-year prophecy relates to God’s larger plan concerning the complete reinstatement of Israel.”1 Daniel knew that the exile would last 70 years (Dan. 9:2) as Jeremiah had written (Jer. 25:1–14).
Jeremiah repeats the language of Deuteronomy and Kings in discussing the need for repentance, seeking God with all one’s heart, in addition to describing the complete restoration from exile (Jer. 29:10, 13; cf. Deut. 30:1–4; 1 Kings 8:48–50)… The intertextuality of Jeremiah with Kings and Deuteronomy clarifies what Daniel is wondering in Daniel 9. First Kings 8:30 and Deuteronomy 30:1–6 focus upon the ultimate end of exile. By contrast Jeremiah 29 predicts a return from Babylon after seventy years but does not directly associate the seventy years (Jer. 29:10) and how it will ultimately be restored per Deuteronomy and Kings (Jer. 29:12). The Lord does not, however, guarantee in Jeremiah that they will be ultimately restored when they return to the land after seventy years.2
Daniel confessed that he and Israel had sinned (Dan. 9:3–19) and God responded by sending Gabriel to deliver a message that fills in some gaps of what will happen after the return from exile and when it will happen:[Read More]
Three Conferences That We Recommend
We had to come to America for paperwork and since being here, we’ve had opportunities to visit some excellent Bible conferences. As missionaries, we are able to travel more freely throughout an American year than most pastors are, so I have narrowed down a list of three conferences that I recommend attending (though we personally go to more than these when we are Stateside).[Read More]
The Good Place: A Mythology for Moralistic Therapeutic Deism
Some Christians try to avoid television shows that promote ideas that are in conflict with Christianity, but I prefer to watch with a theologically critical eye. I guess I like to take on challenges like that, but if you are more inclined to avoid conflicts, that’s fine as well. One popular show these days is called The Good Place, which is in its fourth and final season (I’ll avoid any major spoilers for those who haven’t been watching). The Good Place blatantly rejects Christianity, but I enjoy it, first of all because the comedy is golden, but also because if you watch it critically, you can pick up on what Hollywood thinks about some big questions in life. I wouldn’t be surprised if many have fallen for some false teachings while watching, but if Christians are equipped to watch critically, I think they might be able to understand better why this show is contrary to the Bible and which untruths specifically are being promoted.
I have concluded that The Good Place is a mythology for moralistic therapeutic deism. That’s a mouthful, so first I would like to describe what the show is about, then I will define the terms “mythology” and “moralistic therapeutic deism” to show why The Good Place meets this description.[Read More]