Category: Evangelical Calvinist

Theology ultimately should be a very concrete thing, at least for the Protestant Christian. We are people of the Word of God; we are people who have been radically brought into the life of God by a deep sense of the theology of God’s Word as that has confronted us in the face of a man from Nazareth. It is this Word-grounded reality upon which we, then, as Christians think a God-world / world-God relation; that is, through the analogy of the hypostatic union, of the Theanthropos Godman, Jesus Christ. And it is as we have come to know this…

Barth’s theology is often tagged as postmetaphysical in line with something like Kant’s, and more to the point, post-Kantian mediating theologians like Albrecht Ritschl, Wilhelm Hermann et al. But this is overwrought in the sense that Barth might be a trained modern theologian, nevertheless he is conditioned more by his reliance on the antique tradition found in the patristic past, and into the modern post reformed orthodox development of Protestant theology in Western Europe. Because of his influences we get a smattering, as Bruce McCormack might say, of a Barth who is both Orthodox and Modern. In this post we…

For Barth dogmatic theology is eschatological, dynamic, personal, and scandalously particular to the person and work of God in Jesus Christ. That is why the work of dogmatics is semper reformanda per the ground and grammar of God’s triune life in Jesus Christ. The work of dogmatic theology is a Petrine ‘growing in the grace and knowledge of Jesus Christ’ in ‘whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.’ This implies that dogmatic theology should never be stifled by static reception or repristination. As Christians, theologians, we aren’t engaged in an impersonal arid work of dialectical analysis, per…

Staying on theme from the previous post, let’s continue to focus on the theologia crucis; except this time it won’t be Luther’s, but John Calvin’s. Karl Barth in his Church Dogmatics III/1 refers us to the foreword Calvin wrote for his Commentary on the Book of Genesis (1554). Herein Calvin offers something that sounds intimately close to Luther’s thinking on a theology of the cross. So Calvin: indeed it is vain for any to philosophize in the manner of the world, unless they have first been humbled by the preaching of the gospel, and have instructed the whole compass of…

Since this “dissertation” and PhD by Publication isn’t going to see the light of day now, I thought I would share the introduction chapter that I presented for said dissertation. Part of it includes my contribution to the introduction to our second volume Evangelical Calvinism book that I co-wrote with Myk Habets. The part I appropriate for that, in this current iteration (as introduction to my “dissertation”), is, of course, the part I wrote. And then, much of that has been augmented by further writing, as you will see. But I think it underscores some needed orientation, particularly as “Reformed…

In theological circles these days there is a push to recover the so-called Great Tradition, of the type of thinking, in regard to the Trad, or also, the so-called Consensus Patrum, that we get in Vincent of Lérins. That is, a type of generalization a flattening out of a perceived consensus of the faithful that has some type of agreed upon core of the core of orthodoxy that ostensibly the majority of Christian theologians, “orthodox” ones, have affirmed and submitted to as regulative for their own respective theological offerings. Contemporaneously, we have movements by Reformed theologians, particularly Baptist ones currently,…

Knowledge of God is the key, that is to the ‘secret of creation.’ If “Jesus Christ is indeed the real ground of creation,”[1] then in order to know what in fact creation is for, we must first know its Creator. But as Karl Barth underscores, in a rather Athanasian key, if Jesus is the ground of creation, and if Jesus is indeed the ‘Son of the Father,’ then to know the inner-ground, the secret of creation is first to know Jesus, to know the Son. As such, prior to knowing what and who creation is for, as the case may…

Update on my doctoral statuses. I have backed out of the PhD I was attempting to do with Concordia Academic Theology Consortium, Intl., and Martin Luther School of Bible and Theology. I have also “unaccepted” the honorary ThD presented to me by the same institution back in January of this year. After further research into the degrees offered, and some other circumstances, I have decided that this is the best alternative. That said, the church denomination associated with this educational institution, the General Lutheran Church, is legitimate. And its Dean has nothing but good and pure intentions. The gesture made…

God is my Father.[1] Jesus said to Mary post-resurrection, “I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.” God is our Father. Athanasius writes: “Therefore it is more pious and more accurate to signify God from the Son and call Him Father, than to name Him from His works only and call Him Unoriginate.”[2] This is the Christian way for knowing, for thinking God; this is the way those who have the Spirit can call Jesus, Lord; that is, as recognizing their Shepherd, knowing His voice as Son of the Father. As Athanasius rightly noted we…

Matthias Grebe continues in his trek of offering a critique of Barth through Barth in regard to the loci of election and atonement. In his task he offers up a description, here in summary form, of various atonement theories propounded by the church fathers. He points out, rightly, that the fathers, in the main, (barring Augustine) would have rejected the penal substitutionary atonement (PSA) theory, and instead operated with a Christus Victor model, generally. He argues that the ’victim theory’ (his language for PSA) would not have been countenanced by them, and that instead something like Thomas F. Torrance’s theory…