MARSCAST

In this concluding episode on the doctrine of republication, Rev. Andrew Compton, Dr. Marcus Mininger, and Dr. J. Mark Beach speak to the practical implications that holding to this view of the Mosaic Covenant can lead to. 

After introducing the doctrine of republication, Rev. Andrew Compton, Dr. Marcus Mininger, and Dr. J. Mark Beach continue their conversation now as they turn to the biblical data. What does Scripture itself have to say about this? Listen as they turn to passages from both Old and New Testaments to assess this perspective on the Mosaic covenant.

In the study of biblical and systematic theology, students of Scripture learn about the covenant of grace, “wherein [the Lord] freely offers unto sinners life and salvation by Jesus Christ; requiring of them faith in him, that they may be saved, and promising to give unto all those that are ordained unto eternal life his Holy Spirit, to make them willing, and able to believe” (as the WCF says). But students of Scripture also learn about the covenant of works, which preceded the covenant of grace, a covenant made in the Garden of Eden to Adam by God, “wherein life was promised to Adam; and in him to his posterity, upon condition of perfect and personal obedience.” Now, some theologians would speak about the covenant of works being “republished” at Mount Sinai, which is where we get the doctrine of republication. But what exactly does this entail, what do we make of this doctrine of republication? Joining the podcast for the next few weeks to tackle this are Rev. Andrew Compton (who you’ll hear on Zoom), Dr. Marcus Mininger, and Dr. J. Mark Beach. 

Concluding our series on the New Perspective on Paul, Rev. Andrew Compton, Dr. Marcus Mininger, and Dr. Cornelis Venema survey the perspective's use of extra-biblical texts to make their claim and offer their thoughts on further implications that holding to this new perspective can have.  To learn more, consider Dr. Venema's book, The Gospel of Free Acceptance in Christ 

With the New Perspective on Paul framed and described for us by Rev. Compton and Dr. Mininger in our last episode, they, along with Dr. Cornelis Venema, continue in today’s episode to examine the New Perspective a little more closely, giving an analysis and critique of this assessment of Paul.

Last week, we wrapped up a series of episodes on Federal Vision. Embedded in that conversation you may have heard our professors mention another theological controversy, namely, the New Perspective on Paul, a debate that’s been around for some time now. What is it, and how should we assess it? Because it deals with the New Testament, Second Temple Judaism, and doctrinal matters, joining the podcast for this series is Dr. Marcus Mininger, Professor of New Testament Studies, Rev. Andrew Compton, Associate Professor of Old Testament Studies, and President of Mid-America and Professor of Doctrinal Studies, Dr. Cornelis Venema, who will be joining in future episodes. 

Continuing in their review and critique of Federal Vision theology, Dr. J. Mark Beach, along with Drs. Alan Strange and Cornelis Venema, open up the Doctrinal Testimony Regarding Recent Errors, a document written and published by the Faculty of Mid-America back in 2007, where they identify carefully, explain clearly, and evaluate pastorally the errors of this teaching.  You can read the "Doctrinal Testimony Regarding Recent Errors" here: https://bit.ly/regarding-recent-errors

Today marks the first of a couple of episodes where our professors deliberate on a rather controversial topic found in some pockets of the Reformed world: that of Federal Vision theology. What is Federal Vision? Here to help us out are Dr. Alan Strange, Dr. J. Mark Beach, and Dr. Cornelis Venema. 

In this concluding episode of Dr. Alan Strange’s series on church discipline, he discusses the practice and basis of church discipline, using Scripture as our guide.

Continuing in his series church discipline, Dr. Strange moves forward in describing it in the lives of church members, that is, how discipline is both sought for, but also imposed. What does that all mean, exactly? Here’s Dr. Strange to explain.