Category Archives: Doctrine

From Heiser to Heidelberg: How Zacharias Ursinus Answers the Heiser Question on Romans 5.12

Posted by npulpit on

Episode 471: Via a Twitter/X interaction I ran across Dr. Michael Heiser’s series of blog articles on Romans 5.12. The question Heiser believes those who affirm Original Sin cannot answer is “How is Jesus, being a Son of Adam, exempted from Original Sin?” This question is not new. Dr. Zacharias Ursinus nearly 500 years ago provided an explanation in his “Commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism” under his exposition of Question 35. Tune in as I interact with both Heiser & Ursinus.

Some Brief Thoughts on “Sin Nature” by Heiser

Back to Romans 5.12 where Heiser fleshes out his question further

Commentary on Heidelberg Catechism by Ursinus (PDF)

Total Depravity: Rex Turner, Louis Berkhof, Michael Heiser

Posted by npulpit on

Episode 470: Start of the show with a review of part of Dr. Rex Turner, Sr.’s, Biblical Theology. His definition of Total Depravity is mere tautology. Thus, we look at Berkhof’s Systematic Theology for a more robust appreciation of the doctrine. Finally, land with Dr. Michael Heiser’s comments on Romans 5.12, which is part of the debate, but is not the whole debate.

Michael Heiser on Romans 5.12

Christ’s Proclamation to the Spirits, pt. 2

Posted by npulpit on

Episode 468: Once more we turn out attention to the enigmatic text 1 Peter 3.18b-19 with an eye toward 4.6. I challenge the traditional view, offering a more consistent and coherent understanding of this tough text. Christ is risen, Christ is Lord, the angelic powers are subjected to Him, and this is good news for the church!

Christ’s Proclamation to the Spirits, pt. 1

Posted by npulpit on

Episode 467: 1 Peter 3.18b-19 can be an enigmatic mystery. The traditional view sees Jesus going to the hadean realm and preaching the gospel to dead people for a posthumous opportunity at salvation. In this episode, I cut through the fog, approaching the text linguistically and exegetically for something a bit more coherent and consistent.

Walter Scott on Election, pt.1

Posted by npulpit on

Episode 465: As mentioned in the previous episode, development must have taken place with Alexander Campbell concerning the doctrine of election. Perusing the archives of the Millennial Harbinger, I found four (4) articles on the subject of election. However, they were not written by Campbell, but by Walter Scott, his right hand man. Nevertheless, Campbell & Scott were sympatico and Scott elucidated the doctrine of election as understood by the Restoration Movement in the late-1820s. After a brief recap of Campbell’s 1817 “Views” essay, I begin working through Scott’s essays on election.

Alexander Campbell on Election & Reprobation

Posted by npulpit on

Episode 464: In 1817 Alexander Campbell wrote a circular letter for the churches within the Red Stone Baptist Association. Surprisingly, it contains a high view of divine sovereignty in election and reprobation. Also, there is a denial of Arminianism, as well as an implied agreement with John Calvin. Tune in as I read from this letter and get a sense of Campbell’s view on these biblical doctrines.

Read Campbell’s Letter Here

Free-Will According to Calvinism

Posted by npulpit on

Episode 462: I review Tracy Dugger’s article for Seeking the Old Paths, “Free-Will According to Calvinism.” I was hopeful for a definition (finally) of “free-will” within the framework of churches of Christ. Unfortunately, this article disappoints in several ways. Tune in as I work through the assumptions and shortcomings of this article while also providing an (Edwardsian) accounting of the will.

“He Glorified” in Romans 8.30

Posted by npulpit on

Episode 457: Yet another interpretation presents itself concerning the Golden Chain of Redemption in Romans 8.29-30, this one focusing on “He also glorified” at the end of verse 30. This particular take argues that since the aorist (past) tense is used, glorification is a already accomplished with a strong connection to baptism. In this episode, I take this view to task exegetically, contextually, and theologically to show that Paul’s use of the aorist does not negate his eschatological considerations.

Moses E. Lard on Romans 8.28-30

Posted by npulpit on

Episode 449: The quest for resources within the Restoration Movement which do justice to Romans 8.28-30 continues! This time I grab Moses E. Lard’s Commentary on Romans off the book shelf and take a look inside to see what he says. I interact with his exposition linguistically, lexically, theologically, and anthropologically. Tune in & nerd out with me.