A professor of mine recently offered a quote on the reality of whether belief leads to practice or practice leads to belief. This is the ever-debated discussion around orthodoxy and orthopraxy.
The quote comes from Miroslav Volf, in his co-authored book, Practicing Theology: Beliefs and Practices in Christian Life. I confess that I greatly appreciate Volf’s thoughts, including this reflection on orthodoxy and orthopraxy.
Continue reading →
When we hear the word Immanuel, we might be quick to think of two words – Jesus and Christmas. It is at Christmas time, this time of year, that we celebrate Immanuel, that is, “God with us,” seen in the incarnation of the Son of God. We turn to both Isaiah 7 and Matthew 1 and find a most well-known passage in Scripture:
Behold, the virgin shall be with child and shall bear a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel.
Continue reading →
I continue to plod my way through Kenton Sparks’, God’s Word in Human Words: An Evangelical Appropriation of Critical Biblical Scholarship. Though, by no means do I agree with every statement and nuance put forth by Sparks, I am very much appreciating his overall approach in thoughtfully helping Christians consider the way God has communicated his inspired, God-breathed revelation and truth in Scripture through its actual human authors.
If it weren’t for it’s 400-page length, I would probably recommend the book to many people. But I could start by introducing Pete Enn’s book, Inspiration and Incarnation.
One important word of discussion in understanding how God ‘breathed out’ Scripture as he utilised the human writers is the word accommodation. This word is all about how God decide to adapt himself, come down to the writer’s level in communicating his revelatory truth.
You see, Scripture is a team project. Both from God and from humanity. One really cannot deny such. And I don’t see Christians ever denying such. Continue reading →