Theologian

Rom 11:31 can clarify when the gathering of Israel that Paul speaks of in Rom 11:26.

Rom 11:31 says, “so they too have now been disobedient in order that by the mercy shown to you they also may now receive mercy.”

What’s interesting here is the last “now” in the verse. It seems to be saying that Israel will be gathered in at the same time as the Gentiles. This also goes along with the mechanism that Paul tells us will bring the Jews in - jealousy of the Gentiles (Rom 11:11) .

(the last “now” is found in Aleph, B, D, and other witnesses)

It also makes sense in light of Rom 11:12, “Now if their trespass means riches for the world, and if their failure means riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their full inclusion mean!”

Since Israel is seen here as blessing the Gentiles in their “full inclusion” we should not think that the full inclusion will happen after the Gentiles are gone as some do.

The Kingdom of God has two aspects, the Kingdom that exists now and the Kingdom that will come at the second coming of Christ. It is also my understanding that the “Kingdom of God” and the “Kingdom of Heaven” are one and the same thing.

The NT Scriptures speak plainly about a present Kingdom as well as a future Kingdom.

Some theologians have distinguished between the two aspects of the kingdom as being grace and power. The present kingdom they say is a kingdom of grace, the final kingdom is one of power.

I don’t like distinguishing the kingdoms in that manner. It implies that the present kingdom is powerless and that the final kingdom is void of grace.

The difference rather should be that of purely spiritual nature - something that happens in the heart of each beleiver and in the Church at large - and the final kingdom being a complete and visible reign of our great king and saviour Jesus Christ.

Spiritual nature of the present kingdom:

I tell you this, brothers: flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. (1Co 15:50, ESV)

Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But my kingdom is not from the world.” (Joh 18:36, ESV)
The kingdom does have power:

For the kingdom of God does not consist in talk but in power. (1Co 4:20, ESV)

because our gospel came to you not only in word, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction. You know what kind of men we proved to be among you for your sake. (1Th 1:5, ESV)

I was thinking about the practice of paedobaptism and communion as practiced in reformed Presbyterian churches. A major distinction in this camp is Covenant Theology which sees one covenant (that of grace) in both the OT and NT.

One of the reasons they practice paedobaptism is because it is a NT version of circumcision (Col 2:11-12).

Then i got to thinking that Communion is a NT version of Passover as is obvious from the Passover meal in which Christ initiated it. Wasn’t OT Passover shared with the children?

At first i felt that there was hypocrisy in this line of thinking - paedobaptism and anti-paedocommunion. But then i realized that it is the NT itself that changes the ordinance of Commuion by telling us not to take it in an unworthy manner, and that we must examine ourselves (1 Cor 11:27-28).

Baptism is a passive sacrament, it is administered to somebody. Communion is an active sacrament, we are to take it, eat/drink it, examine ourselves.

So after considering the NT admonishment of how we are to actively participate in communion, i am fully behind paedo-baptism and non-paedo-communion.

The Book: A Student’s Guide to Textual Criticism of the Bible
The Author: Paul D. Wegner

It is a very good book. On a scale of 1-5 i would give it a 4. I liked it better than Metzger’s book “Text of the New Testament.”

It was chock full of actual manuscript examples and variants. It discussed how to use the textual apparatus in the NA and UBS.  It also had application parts where you could practice choosing the best text for a particular passage.

The cool thing about this book is that it contained both OT and NT criticism in one volume. The downside to this approach is that some of the material was repetitive.

The book definitely takes the side of promoting the Critical Text above and against the Received and Byzantine/Majority Text. I think it is a good idea to get a balanced approach, so i would suggest reading some pro-Received Text and pro-Majority Text materials as well.

Here are some great links for completely free online theological education resources -

Covenant Theological Seminary classes from their master’s program…
http://www.covenantseminary.edu/worldwide/default.asp

Learn New Testament Greek…

http://www.ntgreek.net/index.htm

Learn Biblical Hebrew…

http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/7_home.html

Genevan Institute for Reformed Studies…

http://www.girs.com/

Their syllabus has a great series of lessons…

http://www.girs.com/library/theology/syllabus/index.html

Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary “Dimensions of the Faith” certificate…

http://www.gordonconwell.edu/ockenga/dimensions/about_certif icate.php

Biblical Training (this is the one with audio files from lectures - endorsed by J.I. Packer)…

http://www.biblicaltraining.org/index.php

You have to register to take the classes, but it’s free.

There are also some great copyright-free resources that are available online…

Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion…
http://www.reformed.org/books/institutes/

Louis Berkhof’s Summary of Christian Doctrine…
http://www.mbrem.com/shorttakes/berk.htm

Charles Hodge Systematic Theology…
http://www.dabar.org/Theology/Hodge/Tableo…/Content_P1.htm

R.L. Dabney Systematic Theology…
http://www.pbministries.org/R.%20L.%20Dabn…ic_theology.htm

James Boyce Abstract of Systematic Theology…
http://www.founders.org/library/boyce1/toc.html

The teaching of the purity of scripture seems to have changed over the years.

The Westminster Confessions hold that only the Hebrew and Greek were “immediately inspired”, which could be taken as a reference to the autographs. They go on to say that the word of God has been “kept pure in all ages”.

The confession is clear about the Greek NT being pure in all ages, yet scholarship throughout the ages is moving further and further from this position. Scholars either re-define purity as something that is “almost” pure, or reject the idea of purity throughout the ages all together and suggest that they are trying to get back to the purity of the originals (as if the text must be reclaimed, and has not been kept pure in all ages).

Modern thought on purity can be seen in The Chicago Statement on biblical Inerrancy. This statement claims that inerrancy applies only to the original manuscripts (autographs), not to the copies (apographs).

Scholars of the past had different ideas, as they seemed to hold the apographs in a higher esteem…

John Owen said,”the purity of the present original copies of the Scripture, or rather copies (apographa) in the original languages, which the Church of God doth now and hath for many ages enjoyed as her treasure.”

Francis Turretin wrote in his Systematic Theology, “By original texts, we do not mean the autographs written by the hand of Moses, of the prophets and of the apostles, which certainly do not now exist. We mean their apographs which are so called because they set forth to us the word of God in the very words of those who wrote under the immediate inspiration of the Holy Spirit.”