That's a very helpful point. I would just add that the discussion by talking about 'acting on the inclination to sin' includes both the actual acts of sin as committed and the unseen acts of sin which our mind engages in, but nobody but God and us see (WCF 6.4-6; WLC Q. 25; WSC Q. 18). That point is not clear in the interview, but is clear in the report. Also, because of the context of the interview it is assumed by the three men in the interview, but I know that this issue is a point of difference between, at the very least, Rome and Protestants so I thought I would make it clear. I will go into this particular difference latter on when address Romans 5:12.The attraction has to be placed within the context of our fallen nature, and fallen nature is sinful. … Temptation is a crossroads, our sinful nature is in conflict with our redeemed nature and the question at that point is ‘where am I going to go?’, ‘where am I going move?’, ‘am I going to resist that temptation, or am I going to give into it?’ and giving into it is the specific action of sinning. Resisting it is the specific action of redemption.
The second quote is from Ken Smith about two different ways of understanding Scripture:
There are two popular views of the Bible. One is ‘you’ve got to learn the language, and hone your skills’ to find out what in that book is the Word of God. The other approach says ‘learn your language, hone your skills because this is the Word of God. Now what does it mean?
This quote explains the difference between Neo-Evangelicals and historical Evangelicals wonderfully! The report is available at Crown & Covenant for $6.00 and really a good read.
No comments:
Post a Comment