Paul commences his second letter to the church at Thessalonica with an encouragement for those experiencing affliction. Paul tells his readers that it is just for God to repay in kind those who afflict them.[1] He tells the Thessalonians that God will “repay with affliction” those who afflict his reader (2 Thess 1:3-9). The term, ‘repay’ (ἀνταποδοῦναι), means ‘to give back’ or ‘return’ what is due.[2] In this case, those who afflict God’s people will be repaid with affliction from God. Paul goes on to tell his reader that such a repayment is retributive: God will deal out “retribution to those who do not know God and to those who…
-
-
Atonement: Punishment and Blood
“Whoever sheds man’s blood, by man his blood shall be shed, for in the image of God He made man” (Genesis 9:6) Genesis 9:6 is a standard text used to support the principle of lex talionis (a life for a life). In this case, those who murder shall be killed. Although there is some debate over whether the text indicates that the one who kills is man or God, the principle is clear: those who commit murder deserve death. As Bruce Waltke points out, such a payment is a demand of God: “This is an obligation, not an option… Blood shed through homicide must be dealt with.”[1] Waltke argues that the…
-
Lewis on Justice and Punishment
In “The Humanitarian Theory of Punishment” C.S. Lewis argues that if one accepts that punishment is justified, then one must have some moral reason for it. However, there appear to be only three options: retribution, deterrence, and rehabilitation. Lewis argues that neither deterrent nor rehabilitation count as reasons for punishment. Therefore, if we accept punishment as justified, we must accept retribution to be the reason. When we consider punishment in terms of deterrence or rehabilitation we don’t consider it in terms of whether it is just. Rather, we only consider it terms of whether it succeeds in deterring or rehabilitating. Whereas the concept of desert is conceptually linked to the…
-
AiG vs. BioLogos pt.2: Dr Jeanson (AiG)
There is a clock in DNA. Does it show how old the species is or not? We have less than 5% of DNA’s function. This is small fruit and does not conclusively tell us that ancestry is common or not. So, what do the number of DNA differences show? DNA resides in the nucleus and mitochondrial DNA resides in a separate part of the cell. The mitochondria is passed on through the maternal line (the sperm unites only with the nucleus). DNA has its own language comprising of four letters, ATCG. We can compare two DNA strands. When there is similarity and difference we can see it. DNA strands might…
-
AiG vs. BioLogos pt2: Dr Venema (BioLogos)
Dennis Venema I am sitting waiting for part 2. Some comments on what I’ve heard so far: So far the talks have not focused on Adam. Instead, we have heard arguments for the thesis that the similarities of traits across species do not show common ancestry and that they do. Neither argument is conclusive since both arguments conclude from that the data does not disconfirm the respective theories. Conclusions are thin. Design was a feature of Dr Jeanson’s talk – all the data is compatible with design. But this is true even if evolution is true. The data would not be radically different given either evolution or young earth. This…
-
AiG vs. BioLogos: Dr Venema (BioLogos)
Dr Venema from BioLogos is professor of Biology at Trinity Western University in BC, Canada. Dr Venema is a theistic evolutionist (or evolutionary creationist, as he calls it). Here are my notes: Three assumptions: If every square inch of creation is under the Lordship of Christ, then science is an act of worship. If God is the author of both books–the Bible and nature–then there cannot be a contradiction. If there is apparent conflict between our study of the Bible and nature, it is only apparent. A theory is an explanatory framework that has survived testing and makes accurate predictions. Evolution is this kind of theory. It makes accurate predictions,…
-
AiG vs. BioLogos: Dr Jeanson (AiG)
[DISCLAIMER: I’m ‘live-blogging’ so there will be errors, maybe many] I’m at the Evolution, Genetics, and the Historical Adam Conference at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. The question for the conference is: Did Adam exist? The debate has achieved critical mass and now has its own Four Views book, an accomplishment reserved for only the most debated of topics. The speakers today represent two sides of the debate – Dr Nathaniel Jeanson argues that the Genesis account should be taken literally – six days, less than 10,000 years ago, and a guy, formed from the dust and the breath of God, called Adam, the first man. Dr Venema argues that Adam……
-
God-of-the-Gaps: No Such Thing
Mathematician, Pierre-Simon LaPlace was once asked by the emperor of France where God was to feature in LaPlace’s mathematical system. LaPlace replied, “I have no need of that hypothesis.” The idea behind the quip is that if you can find a good explanations for something without God, then you don’t need him. And if you don’t need him, then this is good reason to suppose that he’s not there. The kind of God supposed in such thought is the “God-of-the-gaps” kind of God, a God who is necessary only in so far that he explains some feature of the world – existence, the movement of the planets, the habits of…