Humility and the unity among the body of Christ are main themes in Philippians. Sadly, however, many commentators read that theme into the introduction to the letter (1:1). This then turns the opening into some secret code that the original readers would not have understood. But when it is all boiled down, the opening of Philippians is just like any other opening, and a common sense reading is best.
I am not downplaying the importance of asking questions during Bible study. It is certainly important to ask why every word and phrase is worded the way it is, for every detail was directed by the Holy Spirit. However, it is when exegetes are not satisfied with the most common sense answer, hoping to be “scholarly” and find some deeper innuendo, that I have a problem with these speculations. So it is important to ask in regards to the opening of the letter to the Philippians, “Why does Paul call himself a slave of Christ in this letter?” However, we must be willing to stop where authorial intent stops, which is as easy as, “Because he viewed himself as Christ’s slave.” Continue reading Philippians 1:1 and Authorial Intent: Don’t Read Humility Into Everything
“So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires.” (Romans 9:18)
The doctrine taught in this verse is called Equal Ultimacy. It has to do with double predestination. All Calvinists agree that God unconditionally elects totally depraved sinners and then exercises irresistible grace so that they believe–but what about the rest of humanity? What about those who were not elect before the foundation of the world?
My position is that God exercises the same freedom in His hardening as He does in showing mercy. In the same way that God chooses who goes to heaven and then works faith into them, so also He chooses who goes to hell and then hardens/blinds them. In the same way that election is unconditional, so also is reprobation equally as unconditional. Continue reading Are the Non-Elect Predestined For Hell? A Defense of Equal Ultimacy
Years ago two liberal theologians coined the phrase cosmic child abuse.1 They used this term to express their disgust at the traditional doctrine of Penal Substitution. Those who oppose this motif of the cross see the notion of the Father crushing the Son (Isaiah 53:10) as barbaric. They see Jesus as a victim to the Father’s uncontrollable rage. However, a close look at the facts show that such was not the case. At the cross, a loving heavenly Father crushed an obedient, willing Son. Continue reading A Loving Father Crushes a Willing Son: How Penal Substitution Is Not Child Abuse
- Proverbs 17:15 He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous, both of them alike are an abomination to the LORD.
- Proverbs 24:24 He who says to the wicked, “You are righteous,” peoples will curse him, nations will abhor him.
- Isaiah 5:22-23 Woe to those…Who justify the wicked for a bribe…
- Exodus 23:7 …I will not acquit the guilty.
These Scriptures teach that it is wrong to declare a guilty person, “Not guilty.” Yet in the evangelical gospel we see God doing exactly that! He is a God who “justifies the ungodly” (Rom. 4:5).
How can we explain this dilemma? Is God loving us at the expense of His justice? Continue reading 4 Questions About the Justice of God in the Gospel
Sermons by Joshua Chipchase
Faith Baptist Church, Oxford, OH
July 2 & 9, 2017
Continue reading What God Saves Us From
Sermon by Joshua Chipchase
Preached on June 25, 2017
Continue reading Jesus’ View of Scripture
There is a famous go-to verse in Second Peter for those trying to say that Paul’s letters are confusing and hard to understand. Peter’s words are frequently taken to mean that we cannot properly interpret many of the theological discourses in Paul. His statement has often been used as a cop-out in (losing) debates over a Pauline text. But is this really what Peter meant? Is he really telling his audience that they should throw in the towel and give up on Pauline exegesis? I encourage you to read the entire context in which the verse is found (see passage below), and then we will get into reasons why we can still understand Paul, and why this verse does not teach that we cannot: Continue reading Are Paul’s Letters Hard to Understand? Rethinking 2 Peter 3:16
The Shack, written by William P. Young and adapted to film in 2017 by Lionsgate media, tells the story of a man named Mackenzie who loses his daughter to a brutal murderer. In his grief, he is later summoned to the shack in which his daughter died by the Holy Trinity manifesting themselves as a black woman, a mid-eastern man, and an Asian woman. The film attempts to provide a Christian understanding of how human suffering and evil can exist when an all-powerful beneficent God exists. However, it ultimately fails to provide either a Biblical or comprehensive solution to the problem it addresses.
Continue reading The Shack: A Sub-Christian Explanation for Evil
The doctrine and practice of baptism is one of the cornerstones of Christian ecclesiology. In the Great Commission, Jesus tells his church to make disciples, baptizing them in the name of the Triune God (Matt. 28:19). Jesus could have prescribed any number of things in his final charge to his disciples, but He included baptism. This places baptism high on the Christian’s priority list. Despite its significance, the church at large has not come to an agreement on what precisely baptism is and how precisely we are to perform it.
“What is baptism?”
“What are the key differences between major denominations in their views of baptism?”
“Is there a possibility of denominations coming together in agreement on this doctrine?”
Such questions are at the heart of this study. I wish to navigate between three different positions on baptism (Memorial Sign, Regenerative Sacrament, and Covenantal Sacrament), and show how baptism is both a sign and sacrament. Continue reading Baptism: A Potential Sacrament