On July 8, 2024, Charles Johnson replied to my first two articles on race realism. It seemed good to offer a written response here. I thank Mr. Johnson for his engagement on this important issue, and recognize his effort to answer with clarity, order, and logic, and to make Scripture the final rule in all matters of faith and life. I believe all who write on this topic or any other should desire the same.

Michael Hunter‘ essay, defining and defending the concept of natural communities.

This post is part three of Michael Hunter‘ series, defining and defending the concept of natural communities.

This post is part two of Michael Hunter‘ series, defining and defending the concept of natural communities.

A “special” announcement from our friends at textandtranslation.org : Sick and tired of wokeness? Most Christians are and we are therefore thrilled to announce a truly unprecedented project.

In this series of posts, Michael Hunter, defines and defends the concept of natural communities. Part one differentiates natural and non-natural communities.

To them also, as a body politic, he gave sundry judicial laws, which expired together with the state of that people, not obliging any other now, further than the general equity thereof may require.” (Westminster Confession of Faith, 19.4)

This has been a section of the Westminster Confession which has met with differing interpretations, especially in more recent decades. In particular, it has become central to the question of whether “theonomy” is within the boundaries of the Westminster standards. It also was a point of contention when in 2001 the 68th General Assembly of the OPC declared that “the use of women in military combat is both contrary to nature and inconsistent with the Word of God.”1 A protest to this action objected to this declaration in part because it argued “largely from Old Testament narrative and civil law,” citing 19.4 of the Westminster Confession as a reason why this biblical support was “highly dubious.”2 In my own experience, talking to people and reading books on the Westminster Confession, there is a bit of confusion as to the meaning of this paragraph about the judicial laws.

In a recent article, “What’s So Bad about ‘Worldview’?”, Dr. Brad Littlejohn, president of the Davenant Institute, speaks seriously about some serious issues in Christian thought. He discusses the weakness of the term “worldview” and offers as a replacement the term “wisdom,” which he defines as “the soul’s attunement to the order of reality.”

This is an index and introduction to Mark Jones’ posts on justification, sanctification, good works, merit, and future judgment. These posts address aspects of these doctrines in light of current controversies, past wisdom, and our Reformed confessional standards.

Before we go further in the study of good works, it is important that we define exactly what we are talking about when we are talking about good works. First, let’s be clear what we don’t mean...

This post is the first in a series designed to encourage good works by providing excerpts from Reformed preaching and writing. But, before we get started, I think it is important to ask why this even matters... This post seeks to provide some biblical reasons we as Christians should we make a study of good works.

One of the most frequently asked questions I receive from visitors is, “Why does your church celebrate the Lord’s Supper every Sunday?” There are several reasons for our practice and I organize them under three categories: Biblical/Exegetical, Theological/Practical, and Historical.

Since I serve in a Reformed congregation, visitors sometimes assume that we celebrate the Lord’s Supper 3, 4, 6, or 12 times a year. Some are genuinely puzzled that we would embrace a practice that is at odds with the practice of other local Reformed churches. I remind them that John Calvin advocated the “at least once a week” position. 

Since the Reformation, Protestants have looked with concern at the Mariology of the Roman Catholic Church. When a church makes doctrines concerning Mary essential to salvation there should be quizzical looks. And yet, in the rush to deny the Marian dogmas many Protestants can feel an uncomfortable tingle down their spine when they hear "Greetings Mary, God's favored one." Why is that?

Perhaps I can ask the question more practically. Why do people shudder at the sharing—common during Advent—of the depiction of Eve and Mary embraced while Mary's foot crushes a serpent? Or if I can ask even more directly, have Protestant overreacted to Roman doctrine and dismissed the true Biblical witness concerning the Virgin? Unveiled, why is it that some take issue with Mary crushing the head of the serpent?

Any talk of Christians being “totally depraved” is a mere repetition of Peter’s error: treating the benefits we have already received as if they are of no value.

Q. 22.: How did Christ, being the Son of God, become man? A.: Christ, the Son of God, became man, by taking to himself a true body and a reasonable soul, being conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost, in the womb of the virgin Mary, and born of her, yet without sin.