Archive | October, 2008

Piper on the Election

Good stuff. John Piper shares his heart on womanhood, race, abortion, the prophetic perspective, the sovereignty of God, and the gospel as they relate to the election.

http://www.youtube.com/v/YGjGbZNyIBY

HT: JT

Comments { 1 }

Get CrossOver from CodeWeavers Free—One Day Only!

CrossOver Mac is one of the several ways to run Windows applications on a Mac. The advantage that it has over Parallels Desktop, VMware Fusion, or Boot Camp is that it doesn’t require a copy of Windows. The downside is that not all applications will work.

CrossOver Linux is a customized, commercial version of Wine, the popular software that allows you to run many Windows applications on Linux (e.g., Ubuntu, et al.).

On October 28, 2008, the folks at CodeWeavers are making either of these products—in its downloadable, professional version—free of charge for one day only (though I successfully downloaded it tonight at at 8:00 PM PST).

Here’s what they say,

We are giving away all of our software for free on Tuesday, October 28th, 2008. This is a fully working, fully supported copy of either CrossOver Mac Professional, or CrossOver Linux Professional. No hooks, tricks, timebombs, or gimmicks: it’s the real deal.

Continue Reading →

Comments { 0 }

Does the McCall–Yandell Argument Work? Feinberg Says No

I commented briefly in the second half of this post on why I think that the McCall–Yandell argument fails. (To get up to speed on what that argument is, see my two previous posts here and here.) A couple of days ago I stumbled across a quote in John Feinberg’s No One Like Him that demonstrates nicely why that argument doesn’t succeed.

In the last section of his chapter on the Trinity, “Logic and the Doctrine of the Trinity,” Feinberg is responding to criticisms that challenge the logical coherency of the doctrine.

Timothy Bartel raises an objection that parallels the McCall–Yandell argument very closely, the only difference being which properties are in view. McCall and Yandell attacked the notions of authority and submission, but if their argument is applied consistently, it would have to encompass any properties that the three don’t share in common.

Continue Reading →

Comments { 5 }

New Edition of the ESV with the Apocrypha

ESV with ApocryphaA friend of mine pointed out to me that Oxford University Press is publishing an new edition of the ESV which includes the Apocrypha. The expected release date is December 31, 2008.

Here’s a selection from the publisher’s description:

This Bible [the ESV] has been growing in popularity among students in biblical studies, mainline Christian scholars and clergy, and Evangelical Christians of all denominations.

Along with that growth comes the need for the books of the Apocrypha to be included in ESV Bibles, both for denominations that use those books in liturgical readings and for students who need them for historical purposes. More Evangelicals are also beginning to be interested in the Apocrypha, even though they don’t consider it God’s Word. The English Standard Version Bible with the Apocrypha, for which the Apocrypha has been commissioned by Oxford University Press, employs the same methods and guidelines used by the original translators of the ESV, to produce for the first time an ESV Apocrypha. This will be the only ESV with Apocrypha available anywhere, and it includes all of the books and parts of books in the Protestant Apocrypha, the Catholic Old Testament, and the Old Testament as used in Orthodox Christian churches. It will have a lovely pre-printed case binding, and will include a full-color map section, a table of weights and measures used in the Bible, and many other attractive features.

Continue Reading →

Comments { 7 }

Does Eternal Subordination Entail a Denial of Homoousion?

Shield of the TrinityIn tonight’s debate, McCall and Yandell tried to make the case that the eternal subordination of the Son to the Father entails a denial of homoousion.

The Argument

Here’s their argument:

  1. If the Son is eternally subordinate to the Father in all possible worlds, then the Son is necessarily subordinate to the Father.
  2. If the Son is necessarily subordinate to the Father, then the Son is essentially subordinate to the Father.
  3. Thus, the Son, as essentially subordinate to the Father, is of a different essence or nature than the Father, which entails a denial of homoousion.

Continue Reading →

Comments { 14 }

My Question for Dr. Yandell

My good friend Andy Naselli is sitting on the front row watching and live blogging the debate. He asked me if I wanted to ask a question, so I sent this:

If the Son is necessarily the Son and the Father is necessarily not the Son, then the Son is essentially the Son and the Father is essentially not the Son. Thus the Son is essentially different from the Father. Must you not deny homoousion on the basis of your own premises?

This parallels the central argument that Drs. Yandell and McCall were making—and shows its weakness:

If the Son is necessarily subordinate to the Father, then the Son is essentially subordinate to the Father. Thus, the Son is essentially different from the Father, which entails a denial of homoousion.

Continue Reading →

Comments { 10 }

Trinity Debate—Live

I mentioned the debate between Ware–Grudem and McCall–Yandell a while back. The subject of the debate is “Do relations of authority and submission exist eternally among the Persons of the Godhead?” I’m currently watching the debate live right now. You can tune in as well.

I don’t know if I’ll liveblog. We’ll see. But I probably will write a post later analyzing the debate.

Comments { 4 }