In any building there are key foundational structures that ensure the stability and strength of the building.  Without a strong foundation, for example, a building might topple to the ground.  In the study of God, or theology, there are three foundational pillars that are absolutely essential to the integrity of the theological task.  Without these foundational pillars, a person’s theology will undoubtedly tumble to the ground.

Often in the study of Scriptures we come to concepts and doctrines that many in the church believe arise de novo in the New Testament (NT).  One such teaching concerns the office of deacon.  Many read the book of Acts and see that deacons are for the first time appointed in chapter 6 and then of course they see Paul giving the qualifications for deacons in 1 Tim 3.8-13.  The assumption is that the office of deacon never existed prior to Acts chapter 6 and Paul’s explanation of the qualifications for office is unique to the NT.  Yet, as St. Augustine once explained, what is revealed in the NT is hidden in the Old, and what is hidden in the Old Testament (OT) is revealed in the New.  If Augustine’s little aphorism is true, then there is a case to be made that we can find the office of deacon in the OT.  Let us therefore turn to the OT so that we can see where the office of deacon begins, see how that office finds its fulfillment in Christ, and then, of course, see how these things come to bear upon those who hold the office of deacon.

Each year publishers release hundreds of new titles for consumption by the theologically thirsty masses.· Unless one knows the author, trusts the endorsement on the back cover, or perhaps sees the book recommended elsewhere, the reader is often left wondering whether a book is worth the money.· To assist the reader in the process of sifting through the vast sea of ink, we can briefly survey four recent and noteworthy monographs that can be of great benefit for both the pastor and ruling elder alike.· In commending these books, however, the reader should in no way consider such commendation as a whole-sale endorsement of the whole book.· There are always areas where the reader will disagree with the author.· Nevertheless, a discerning reader, a good Berean, will be able to read these monographs and reap great benefits.

Anthony Thiselton’s shorter commentary on 1 Corinthians is not merely a cut-down version of the author’s lengthier 1446 page scholarly tome, but is one that the author specifically wrote for a different audience.  This commentary is primarily aimed at “clergy, pastors, and leaders of church Bible study groups” (p. xiii).  The author does not expound at great length other exegetical views but essentially states his own.  Also, what differentiates this shorter commentary from his longer work is its practical aim, embodied in fifty-two pastoral observation sections that follow the exegesis of each passage.

Ever since the theological doctrine of the covenant of works was codified in the 17th century in the Westminster Confession of Faith (1647) it has come under criticism and outright rejection.  In past years rejection has come not only from the broader evangelical community but also from within the reformed camp itself, most notably from John Murray, Herman Hoeksema, and Daniel Fuller.

Most recently, however, rejection of the covenant of works has come from proponents of the so-called, federal vision.  Among the proponents of the federal vision, two authors have specifically written against the traditional understanding of the covenant of works, Rich Lusk and James Jordan. Jordan, for example, writes that "the confusion over merit and works came into the Protestant tradition as a hangover of Medieval theology."

Despite the fact that Qohelet tells us that there is nothing new under the sun (Eccl. 1.9), in recent years a school of Pauline interpreters have raised their banner declaring they have a new perspective on Paul. What exactly is the nature of this new perspective? One of the earliest proponents of the new perspective, E. P. Sanders, argues that the historic Protestant interpretation of Paul is incorrect. Paul did not face opposition from pharisaical legalism; rather, the Judaism of Paul’s day was a religion of grace, not works.

One need not go very far within the American cultural landscape before being confronted with homosexuality.  Homosexuality is manifest in the media, entertainment, political, and ecclesiastical realms.  All one has to do is open a magazine and to find articles promoting the homosexual lifestyle.  Turn on the television or go to the movies and one is confronted with storylines that feature homosexual characters when such characters are not essential to the plot.  Or, who but the proverbial ostrich with his head in the sand is not aware of the political football of gay marriage.

Throughout the history of the Church Christians have gravitated towards political leaders who have either professed faith in Christ or offered the Church shelter from political oppression, or even outright persecution.  The tendency is only natural.  After all, what Christian finds appealing a political leader who has an antipathy to the Church?  This state of affairs is certainly true with regard to our current president, George W. Bush.  In fact, many see the re-election of our current president as an absolute must for the sake of the forward progress of the interests of the Church in the political arena.  After all, Bush is opposed to abortion and gay marriage, and is in favor of faith-based initiatives, and the death penalty.  Given these positions does this mean Bush is the biblical choice for President?

We must understand what role government is to play according to the teaching of Scripture.  If we understand the place of government, then perhaps we will not expect more of government than we ought. 

We live in a culture in which information is much like gold.  The more information you can possess, organize, and control, the more power you can yield.  The thirst for information certainly fuels the media and entertainment industry.  For example, peruse any given news media website, CNN, ABC, or FOX and you will find gads of information only a click away.  People want to be informed of the latest international and local events.  There is also another category of information that exists on these reputable news outlets—gossip.  One can read stories about celebrities and their love interests or the most intimate details of a person’s life.  It seems as though man has an insatiable desire for gossip, rumors of a personal or intimate nature, which may or may not be true.  Gossip is of course to be expected of the world, the world is as the world does, and the world is sinful.  Yet, sadly, the thirst for gossip also affects the church.