Comments on: More than You Wanted to Know about the Virgin Birth http://nathanlewis.org/2007/11/15/more-than-you-wanted-to-know-about-the-virgin-birth/ living the gospel Fri, 18 May 2012 16:12:01 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.7 by: sarah661 http://nathanlewis.org/2007/11/15/more-than-you-wanted-to-know-about-the-virgin-birth/#comment-145613 Sun, 29 Aug 2010 13:14:17 +0000 http://nathanlewis.org/2007/11/15/more-than-you-wanted-to-know-about-the-virgin-birth/#comment-145613 great site！Thanks! great site！Thanks!

]]> by: nathan http://nathanlewis.org/2007/11/15/more-than-you-wanted-to-know-about-the-virgin-birth/#comment-90131 Sun, 21 Sep 2008 03:54:52 +0000 http://nathanlewis.org/2007/11/15/more-than-you-wanted-to-know-about-the-virgin-birth/#comment-90131 Manuel: In our national church, the Presbyterian Church in America and in other confessional churches, we require that our ministers "hold to the system of doctrine contained in our secondary standards." In our case these secondary standards are The Westminster Confession of Faith, the Shorter Catechism and the Larger Catechism and our Book of Church Order. As a confessing General Assembly we are not strict subscriptionists but instead we allow our ministers to register their exceptions to our standards, recorded and held accountable in their presbyteries. In my 20 years as a Minister of the Gospel ordained in the PCA, I have heard quite a few men take exception with what our standards state about making artistic images of Jesus. I have heard and read many more exceptions than I have witnessed first hand on the floor of my presbytery. Of course, the Reformed movement is much larger than our small Presbyterian denominations and the continental Reformed churches are not as insistent that drawings of Jesus are a breaking of the second commandment. Those who have taken exception within our presbyteries are nonetheless members in good standing, viewed to be within the parameters of adherence to the system of doctrine contained in our confessions. This kind of accountability is nearly extinct in the larger evangelical world where not secondary standards are set. I think this answer sufficiently supports my estimation of "a vast number of Reformed...." Manuel, there is no reason for us to be nasty toward those who hold to non-biblical doctrines or to verbally or in print "scorn" these doctrines. Admittedly, this is an apologetic method and one that I would not deny has been effective from time to time in history. Nevertheless, I think that I am well within Christian apologetic practice and charity to choose a method that does not scorn another system's wacky theology. When I was a young man, new to the Reformed doctrines of grace, I used the doctrine of Predestination as a bat to bludgeon some of my dear friends who held to semi-Arminian doctrines. Then I read the Westminster Confession of Faith which informed me that the purpose of the most holy doctrine is the increase of one's assurance of faith. The divines go on to instruct me to treat it with special care towards the comfort of those who hear it. I am to interact with it and present it in all humility. This instruction I took to heart upon my ordination and I have honed the heart, tone, and practice of it ever since. In doing so, I have been cleansed of much hatred, disdain, and scorn for heretics, misinformed, and benighted people and groups. I whole-heartedly encourage and recommend others to do the same. Manuel: In our national church, the Presbyterian Church in America and in other confessional churches, we require that our ministers “hold to the system of doctrine contained in our secondary standards.” In our case these secondary standards are The Westminster Confession of Faith, the Shorter Catechism and the Larger Catechism and our Book of Church Order. As a confessing General Assembly we are not strict subscriptionists but instead we allow our ministers to register their exceptions to our standards, recorded and held accountable in their presbyteries. In my 20 years as a Minister of the Gospel ordained in the PCA, I have heard quite a few men take exception with what our standards state about making artistic images of Jesus. I have heard and read many more exceptions than I have witnessed first hand on the floor of my presbytery. Of course, the Reformed movement is much larger than our small Presbyterian denominations and the continental Reformed churches are not as insistent that drawings of Jesus are a breaking of the second commandment. Those who have taken exception within our presbyteries are nonetheless members in good standing, viewed to be within the parameters of adherence to the system of doctrine contained in our confessions. This kind of accountability is nearly extinct in the larger evangelical world where not secondary standards are set. I think this answer sufficiently supports my estimation of “a vast number of Reformed….”
Manuel, there is no reason for us to be nasty toward those who hold to non-biblical doctrines or to verbally or in print “scorn” these doctrines. Admittedly, this is an apologetic method and one that I would not deny has been effective from time to time in history. Nevertheless, I think that I am well within Christian apologetic practice and charity to choose a method that does not scorn another system’s wacky theology.
When I was a young man, new to the Reformed doctrines of grace, I used the doctrine of Predestination as a bat to bludgeon some of my dear friends who held to semi-Arminian doctrines. Then I read the Westminster Confession of Faith which informed me that the purpose of the most holy doctrine is the increase of one’s assurance of faith. The divines go on to instruct me to treat it with special care towards the comfort of those who hear it. I am to interact with it and present it in all humility. This instruction I took to heart upon my ordination and I have honed the heart, tone, and practice of it ever since. In doing so, I have been cleansed of much hatred, disdain, and scorn for heretics, misinformed, and benighted people and groups. I whole-heartedly encourage and recommend others to do the same.

]]> by: manuel http://nathanlewis.org/2007/11/15/more-than-you-wanted-to-know-about-the-virgin-birth/#comment-90056 Sat, 20 Sep 2008 05:47:59 +0000 http://nathanlewis.org/2007/11/15/more-than-you-wanted-to-know-about-the-virgin-birth/#comment-90056 Would you care to share who these other Reformed Christians are that would agree with you that making images of Jesus Christ in an artistic manner is acceptable? I wasn't aware that there are "a vast number of Reformed Christians" that hold to this position. Sounds like this is a majority view if there are a vast number. Is there what one might consider "the" Reformed position on this matter? Also, I incorrectly said "lowly" but nonetheless meant what you said when you wrote "false, non biblical." Although if you believe that some Roman Catholic doctrines are false and non biblical, I'm not sure why you wouldn't scorn them, maybe even disparage them. Same goes for Pentecostal doctrines, which I would assume have to do with tongues, miracles, and spiritual gifts. Why wouldn't you scorn them if they are false and non biblical? Would you care to share who these other Reformed Christians are that would agree with you that making images of Jesus Christ in an artistic manner is acceptable? I wasn’t aware that there are “a vast number of Reformed Christians” that hold to this position. Sounds like this is a majority view if there are a vast number. Is there what one might consider “the” Reformed position on this matter?

Also, I incorrectly said “lowly” but nonetheless meant what you said when you wrote “false, non biblical.” Although if you believe that some Roman Catholic doctrines are false and non biblical, I’m not sure why you wouldn’t scorn them, maybe even disparage them. Same goes for Pentecostal doctrines, which I would assume have to do with tongues, miracles, and spiritual gifts. Why wouldn’t you scorn them if they are false and non biblical?

]]> by: nathan http://nathanlewis.org/2007/11/15/more-than-you-wanted-to-know-about-the-virgin-birth/#comment-89168 Sat, 13 Sep 2008 01:01:58 +0000 http://nathanlewis.org/2007/11/15/more-than-you-wanted-to-know-about-the-virgin-birth/#comment-89168 thanks for reading my blog and commenting, Manuel. Did you read my sermons on the Virgin Birth? I quote as many Roman Catholic scholars and authors as I do Reformed and in most cases, I quote them agreeing with them. After all, we all agree in the Virgin Birth. I am convinced that the 2nd Commandment prohibits idolatry, specifically the idolizing of immaterial objects that represent a deity of any kind, even the one true God. I do not believe that we should thus refrain from making images of the one true God. As you may know, some Reformed publishers will not include in children's story books images of the visage of Christ, but they will show his figure from behind! I am not part of this view and practice. It is believable to me and to a vast number of Reformed Christians, that one can make or enjoy an artistic rendering of God and stop short of worship. The Puritan argument, of course, is that if the art is fine and good, then the image would be so much like the true God himself, that we would be unable to do anything less than worship. I don't buy it and many Reformed Christians would agree with me. BTW, I do not consider any Roman Catholic doctrine to be lowly. I consider some Roman Catholic doctrines to be false, non biblical, or puzzling, but I do not disparage the doctrines or scorn them. The same is true for my responses to Reformed and other Protestant doctrines. I have as much difficulty with some Pentecostal doctrines and mainline Protestant doctrines as I do with the Roman Catholic dogma. thanks for reading my blog and commenting, Manuel. Did you read my sermons on the Virgin Birth? I quote as many Roman Catholic scholars and authors as I do Reformed and in most cases, I quote them agreeing with them. After all, we all agree in the Virgin Birth. I am convinced that the 2nd Commandment prohibits idolatry, specifically the idolizing of immaterial objects that represent a deity of any kind, even the one true God. I do not believe that we should thus refrain from making images of the one true God. As you may know, some Reformed publishers will not include in children’s story books images of the visage of Christ, but they will show his figure from behind! I am not part of this view and practice. It is believable to me and to a vast number of Reformed Christians, that one can make or enjoy an artistic rendering of God and stop short of worship. The Puritan argument, of course, is that if the art is fine and good, then the image would be so much like the true God himself, that we would be unable to do anything less than worship. I don’t buy it and many Reformed Christians would agree with me.
BTW, I do not consider any Roman Catholic doctrine to be lowly. I consider some Roman Catholic doctrines to be false, non biblical, or puzzling, but I do not disparage the doctrines or scorn them. The same is true for my responses to Reformed and other Protestant doctrines. I have as much difficulty with some Pentecostal doctrines and mainline Protestant doctrines as I do with the Roman Catholic dogma.

]]> by: Manuel http://nathanlewis.org/2007/11/15/more-than-you-wanted-to-know-about-the-virgin-birth/#comment-89127 Fri, 12 Sep 2008 18:19:38 +0000 http://nathanlewis.org/2007/11/15/more-than-you-wanted-to-know-about-the-virgin-birth/#comment-89127 What is your opinion of the 2nd Commandment? Seems odd for someone who seems to hold Machen's thoughts so highly while at the same time regards the Roman Catholic doctrines so lowly, continually paste pictures of the Lord Jesus Christ over and over again. Why is that? What is your opinion of the 2nd Commandment? Seems odd for someone who seems to hold Machen’s thoughts so highly while at the same time regards the Roman Catholic doctrines so lowly, continually paste pictures of the Lord Jesus Christ over and over again. Why is that?

]]>