In “Seeking Clarity with Bruxy Cavey” (Sept 10, 2018), Paul Carter asks: “So you believe that the words of the Apostle Paul are authoritative and inspired?” The response comes as follows:
Yes, I see Paul’s writings as authoritative in that normative Protestant sense. Paul might not be perfect – only Jesus is! – but God has inspired Scripture to perfectly communicate what God wants it to say (ibid). Continue reading
In a recent post, Bruxy Cavey comments:
Jesus-following is our identity as disciples of Christ. We are Christ-ians, not Bible-ians (Acts 11:26). This aligns with what Jesus himself said – “follow me” (Matthew 4:19). It seems to me that this should be Christianity 101 and not at all a controversial idea. 
Can this really be Christianity 101? Continue reading
In a recent post on his blog (see here), Bruxy Cavey has affirmed this proposition:
INERRANT: “the Bible is ‘the authoritative written Word of God, inspired by the Holy Spirit, inerrant in all that it teaches’.” 
INERRANT, he remarks, is “a statement I have been happy to align with.” If align means “affirm to be true,” we can happily agree. Continue reading
Consider this 139-character tweet from Bruxy:
“Study the Bible. But follow Jesus. Language matters here because: 1. We are JESUS-followers (Mt 4:19). 2. All authority is HIS (Mt 28:18). 3. History shows that when the Church fails to follow Jesus, it uses the excuse of following the Bible to justify violence.”
This Fall (2018) for the first time, Tyndale Philosophy will be offering a course devoted entirely to the apologetic system of C.S. Lewis. This is one of the required courses for our new BA Philosophy with a Concentration in Christian Apologetics. Topics to be explored include: Lewis’ career as an apologist, the Moral Argument, the famous Trilemma: Lord, Liar, or Lunatic?, as well as Lewis’ views on evil, evolution, pain and suffering, hell, inclusivism, and the Bible.
Here are the course objectives:
In his NDPR review (2018.06.06) of Klaas Kraay‘s Does God Matter? (Routledge, 2018), David Johnson (Yeshiva University) remarks that the chapter Paul Franks and I co-wrote for the volume (see here) is a “nice example of a carefully argued paper in which everything seems to work except the main point.” Well, that doesn’t sound very good. What seems to be the problem? Continue reading
3:16 (a) God so loved the world, that he gave his one and only Son, that (b) whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
On his Dividing Line podcast of March 27, 2018, James White, Director of Alpha and Omega Ministries, suggested that my Calvinist renderings of the underlined expressions in 3:16 engender such “fundamental errors” that there was no need for him to examine (the details of) the actual dilemma I posed in “Calvinism’s Gospel Tautology.” Here I am indebted to my friend Guillaume Bignon and to James Gibson (hereafter, B&G) for having descended into those details (see here). I think they push the discussion forward admirably. Continue reading