Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I understand that what Dr. K. Scott Oliphint teaches about the covenantal properties of God are thought by some to be disturbing. What exactly is the heart of the issue?
Oliphint is using the more precise term "property" instead of "attribute." In philosophy, a property is something that can be said of something. He writes,
Thus, his condescension means that he is adding properties and characteristics, not to his essential being . . . but surely to himself. (God With Us, 110)
The Logos takes upon himself the property of "being incarnate," yet this can't apply to the essence since it doesn't apply to the Father or Spirit.
When I read the Bible saying that God is angry; I think God is just, and His sense of justice is offended by specific actions of men. Is Oliphint saying, that when God is said to be angry, His anger a property He is taking upon Himself? And then further identifying this property, as a covenantal property?...Saying God's anger is a covenantal property is weird. It's not clear how anger is uniquely covenantal. When analytic theologians speak of contingent properties, they usually mean the property to create the world, become incarnate, etc. Things that aren't essential. They usually never mean "God has anger."
Is Oliphint saying, that when God is said to be angry, is His anger a property He is taking upon Himself? And then further identifying this property, as a covenantal property?
The world (and the church) is falling apart....but let's jump on Dr. Oliphant!
Is this fair brother? In essence, you're assuming that the charges are either concerned with unimportant matters or driven by petty motivations. Either of those assumptions could of course be right, but to my knowledge, the content of the charges has not been made available to us.
I think it is perfectly fair.
Some of the same folks pushing for strict views of impassibility among the Reformed Baptists, for instance, are also the same ones ignoring a child abuse case and even praying for the perpetrator.
We've lost perspective and priority. It's like we are worrried about the paint scheme on the Titanic as it approaches the iceberg.
There are bigger fish to fry.
There is no bigger fish to fry than having and teaching the wrong view of who God is. So far as the "Reformed Baptists" James Dolezal's book on impassibility should be a good read to see where some are departing from orthodoxy. https://tabletalkmagazine.com/posts/2017/11/book-review-all-that-is-in-god-by-james-dolezal/
There is no bigger fish to fry than having and teaching the wrong view of who God is. So far as the "Reformed Baptists" James Dolezal's book on impassibility should be a good read to see where some are departing from orthodoxy. https://tabletalkmagazine.com/posts/2017/11/book-review-all-that-is-in-god-by-james-dolezal/
Between the charges being brought against him and the rigorous 34 pages of criticism Richard A. Muller brought to his book Thomas Aquinas (2017) in the latest issue of Calvin Theological Journal, Dr. Oliphint is not having a good year.
The world (and the church) is falling apart....but let's jump on Dr. Oliphant!
Between the charges being brought against him and the rigorous 34 pages of criticism Richard A. Muller brought to his book Thomas Aquinas (2017) in the latest issue of Calvin Theological Journal, Dr. Oliphint is not having a good year.