Comments for Theologically Driven http://dbts.edu/blog Detroit Baptist Theological Seminary Thu, 17 May 2012 00:32:32 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 Comment on The Latin Vulgate as Background to the Version Debate by Joshua http://dbts.edu/blog/?p=2800#comment-638 Joshua Thu, 17 May 2012 00:32:32 +0000 http://dbts.edu/blog/?p=2800#comment-638 This is a very long bow to draw between supporters of the received text and the Vulgate. Apples and oranges. I highly recommend anyone who finds the above compelling to read this excellent refutation: http://kentbrandenburg.blogspot.com.au/2012/05/latin-vulgate-and-king-james-version.html?m=1 This is a very long bow to draw between supporters of the received text and the Vulgate. Apples and oranges. I highly recommend anyone who finds the above compelling to read this excellent refutation:

http://kentbrandenburg.blogspot.com.au/2012/05/latin-vulgate-and-king-james-version.html?m=1

]]> Comment on What about the Framework Interpretation? (Part 1) by Bob McCabe http://dbts.edu/blog/?p=2937#comment-637 Bob McCabe Wed, 16 May 2012 20:33:16 +0000 http://dbts.edu/blog/?p=2937#comment-637 They do not address the connection between death and the Fall, yet both views assume that death and suffering came before the Fall. This is incompatible with Genesis 3 and Romans 8. They do not address the connection between death and the Fall, yet both views assume that death and suffering came before the Fall. This is incompatible with Genesis 3 and Romans 8.

]]> Comment on What about the Framework Interpretation? (Part 1) by Steve Drake http://dbts.edu/blog/?p=2937#comment-636 Steve Drake Wed, 16 May 2012 20:24:24 +0000 http://dbts.edu/blog/?p=2937#comment-636 Dr. McCabe, Okay, sorry, more questions. What do you see as the biggest theological question that the Framework view and 'Analogical Day' view fail to take into account? Dr. McCabe,
Okay, sorry, more questions. What do you see as the biggest theological question that the Framework view and ‘Analogical Day’ view fail to take into account?

]]> Comment on Another View of Logos by Michael Hupfer http://dbts.edu/blog/?p=2992#comment-635 Michael Hupfer Wed, 16 May 2012 14:04:13 +0000 http://dbts.edu/blog/?p=2992#comment-635 This article resonated well with me. I've been saying these same things for years. If you want to dump $100s if not $1000s into tons of books you don't want in a format with no guarantee of compatibility in the future, then go for it. The books that are commonly most valued in Logos are the commentaries, and the feature of Logos most commonly valued is the search capabilities. But aren't commentaries the easiest books to search anyway? If I have a question about about Romans 5:12 I can easily find the discussions in my print copies of Moo, Schreiner, Morris, and Murray. If I need more information beyond those works, I need to go to a real library and find other quality works. The outdated public domain stuff on Logos will provide no addition help. Also, I love sitting at my desk and looking up at my books on the shelves. Hard drives can't compete with that. This article resonated well with me. I’ve been saying these same things for years. If you want to dump $100s if not $1000s into tons of books you don’t want in a format with no guarantee of compatibility in the future, then go for it.

The books that are commonly most valued in Logos are the commentaries, and the feature of Logos most commonly valued is the search capabilities. But aren’t commentaries the easiest books to search anyway? If I have a question about about Romans 5:12 I can easily find the discussions in my print copies of Moo, Schreiner, Morris, and Murray. If I need more information beyond those works, I need to go to a real library and find other quality works. The outdated public domain stuff on Logos will provide no addition help.

Also, I love sitting at my desk and looking up at my books on the shelves. Hard drives can’t compete with that.

]]> Comment on What about the Framework Interpretation? (Part 1) by Bob McCabe http://dbts.edu/blog/?p=2937#comment-634 Bob McCabe Tue, 15 May 2012 16:06:50 +0000 http://dbts.edu/blog/?p=2937#comment-634 The analogical days view is a reaction to some of the problems with the day-age view. This reaction is reflected in the late 19th century by Shedd. He reflects some form of this view when he says: "The seven days of the human week are copies of the seven days of the Divine week" (Dogmatic Theology, 1:477). Again, Bavinck (in his book In the Beginning, a translation of his 1895-1901 Gereformeerde Dogmatiek) states that "for all these reasons, 'day,' in the first chapter of the Bible, denotes the time in which God was at work creating.…The creation days are the workdays of God" (pp. 125-26). The current popularity of this approach is because of the work of C. John Collins. He has written a few articles supporting this view. He defends this view is in his book, Genesis 1–4. The analogical days view is a reaction to some of the problems with the day-age view. This reaction is reflected in the late 19th century by Shedd. He reflects some form of this view when he says: “The seven days of the human week are copies of the seven days of the Divine week” (Dogmatic Theology, 1:477). Again, Bavinck (in his book In the Beginning, a translation of his 1895-1901 Gereformeerde Dogmatiek) states that “for all these reasons, ‘day,’ in the first chapter of the Bible, denotes the time in which God was at work creating.…The creation days are the workdays of God” (pp. 125-26).

The current popularity of this approach is because of the work of C. John Collins. He has written a few articles supporting this view. He defends this view is in his book, Genesis 1–4.

]]> Comment on What about the Framework Interpretation? (Part 1) by Steve Drake http://dbts.edu/blog/?p=2937#comment-633 Steve Drake Tue, 15 May 2012 15:11:38 +0000 http://dbts.edu/blog/?p=2937#comment-633 Dr. McCabe, Thanks. One last question. You mention Kline as the popularizer of the Framework View, and in your technical journal paper mention Noordzij and his earlier work, something that Kline may have used and referenced perhaps, but in who do we find the origins of the 'analogical day' view and when? Dr. McCabe,
Thanks. One last question. You mention Kline as the popularizer of the Framework View, and in your technical journal paper mention Noordzij and his earlier work, something that Kline may have used and referenced perhaps, but in who do we find the origins of the ‘analogical day’ view and when?

]]> Comment on What about the Framework Interpretation? (Part 1) by Bob McCabe http://dbts.edu/blog/?p=2937#comment-632 Bob McCabe Tue, 15 May 2012 14:22:14 +0000 http://dbts.edu/blog/?p=2937#comment-632 Like the framework, the analogical day view maintains that the days are analogous to earthly days. One of the key differences is that the analogical day view maintains that that the "days" of the creation week are broadly consecutive. The framework does not take the creation days to be broadly consecutive. It seems like the analogical day view is roughly a combination of the day age view and the framework. Advocates of both views provide some exegetical support. However, in my understanding, the tradition view of the creation week has the most consistent exegetical support and is consistent with the Scripture's overall message about creation. Like the framework, the analogical day view maintains that the days are analogous to earthly days. One of the key differences is that the analogical day view maintains that that the “days” of the creation week are broadly consecutive. The framework does not take the creation days to be broadly consecutive. It seems like the analogical day view is roughly a combination of the day age view and the framework.

Advocates of both views provide some exegetical support. However, in my understanding, the tradition view of the creation week has the most consistent exegetical support and is consistent with the Scripture’s overall message about creation.

]]> Comment on Interview with a Transitioning Pastor by Evan Collier http://dbts.edu/blog/?p=2905#comment-631 Evan Collier Tue, 15 May 2012 13:56:26 +0000 http://dbts.edu/blog/?p=2905#comment-631 Hey, Dan. Once the dust from the move settles, perhaps we can have you down to our part of Boston. Evan Hey, Dan. Once the dust from the move settles, perhaps we can have you down to our part of Boston. Evan

]]> Comment on What about the Framework Interpretation? (Part 1) by Steve Drake http://dbts.edu/blog/?p=2937#comment-630 Steve Drake Tue, 15 May 2012 13:56:10 +0000 http://dbts.edu/blog/?p=2937#comment-630 How does the 'analogical day' view differ from the framework view in your estimation? Does this have better exegetical support than the framework view? How does the ‘analogical day’ view differ from the framework view in your estimation? Does this have better exegetical support than the framework view?

]]> Comment on Another View of Logos by Mark Snoeberger http://dbts.edu/blog/?p=2992#comment-629 Mark Snoeberger Tue, 15 May 2012 12:54:50 +0000 http://dbts.edu/blog/?p=2992#comment-629 Some very fine comments. I just read a research paper by an otherwise good student who apparently was limited to the use of materials available from an electronic library. I was graced with quotations from the Pulpit Commentary, Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown, and other badly outdated, multi-volume sets that dearly need to be retired from common usage, but survive because they represent public-domain materials with a high volume count that add to the "wow" selling factor of electronic libraries. There are advantages to electronic research--physical size, storage and transportation costs, keyword searching (though that's a bit overrated), etc. But the initial cost of quality resources really isn't one of them. Sure, I've got my obligatory Logos collection with thousands of resources each costing less than a dollar!! But I'll never use 95% of them, so the cost of the worthy titles just increased twentyfold. Some very fine comments. I just read a research paper by an otherwise good student who apparently was limited to the use of materials available from an electronic library. I was graced with quotations from the Pulpit Commentary, Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown, and other badly outdated, multi-volume sets that dearly need to be retired from common usage, but survive because they represent public-domain materials with a high volume count that add to the “wow” selling factor of electronic libraries.

There are advantages to electronic research–physical size, storage and transportation costs, keyword searching (though that’s a bit overrated), etc. But the initial cost of quality resources really isn’t one of them. Sure, I’ve got my obligatory Logos collection with thousands of resources each costing less than a dollar!! But I’ll never use 95% of them, so the cost of the worthy titles just increased twentyfold.

]]>