<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
xmlns:rawvoice="http://www.rawvoice.com/rawvoiceRssModule/"
>

<channel>
	<title>Reign of Christ Ministries &#187; Reviews</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thereignofchrist.com/category/writ/reviews/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thereignofchrist.com</link>
	<description>Bringing Healing thru Knowledge of the Gospel of Jesus Christ</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 21:06:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
<!-- podcast_generator="Blubrry PowerPress/4.0" -->
	<itunes:summary>...various topics such as presuppositional apologetics, Christian worldview, philosophy, christianity and science, epistemology, eschatology, history, reformed theology, hermeneutics, and preterism, as well as exegetical series from various places in the Bible.</itunes:summary>
	<itunes:author>Reign of Christ Ministries</itunes:author>
	<itunes:explicit>clean</itunes:explicit>
	<itunes:image href="http://thereignofchrist.com/wp-content/plugins/powerpress/itunes_default.jpg" />
	<itunes:owner>
		<itunes:name>Reign of Christ Ministries</itunes:name>
		<itunes:email>thercm@gmail.com</itunes:email>
	</itunes:owner>
	<managingEditor>thercm@gmail.com (Reign of Christ Ministries)</managingEditor>
	<copyright>Reign of Christ Ministries &#xA9; 2011</copyright>
	<itunes:subtitle>Bringing Healing thru Knowledge of the Gospel of Jesus Christ</itunes:subtitle>
	<itunes:keywords>preterism, eschatology, theology, apologetics, epistemology, philosophy, scripturalism, presuppositionalism, gordon clark</itunes:keywords>
	
	<itunes:category text="Religion &amp; Spirituality">
		<itunes:category text="Christianity" />
	</itunes:category>
	<itunes:category text="Society &amp; Culture">
		<itunes:category text="Philosophy" />
	</itunes:category>
	<itunes:category text="Education" />
		<item>
		<title>A Monumental Review</title>
		<link>http://thereignofchrist.com/a-monumental-review/</link>
		<comments>http://thereignofchrist.com/a-monumental-review/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Apr 2012 21:23:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jason Bradfield</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Eschatology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[History]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Movies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Unique]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Videos]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kirk Cameron]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Monumental Movie]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pilgrims]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Puritans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[review]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thereignofchrist.com/?p=8123</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A quick review of Kirk Cameron&#8217;s movie, Monumental. And no, i don&#8217;t burn any books. I don&#8217;t have anymore hyperpret books to burn. ( :]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thereignofchrist.com/a-monumental-review/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Hunger Games Movie Review</title>
		<link>http://thereignofchrist.com/the-hunger-games-movie-review/</link>
		<comments>http://thereignofchrist.com/the-hunger-games-movie-review/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Mar 2012 14:08:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Samuel Frost</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Movies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[capitalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hunger Games]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[movies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[socialism]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thereignofchrist.com/?p=8032</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I took the boy last night to the opening of The Hunger Games, directed by Gary Ross (Pleasantville, BIG, Seabiscuit) and based on the novel by Suzanne Collins.  The theatre was packed with fathers and teenagers.  It was a scene. I went into the movie with very little information.  My sons, a twin Siskel and Ebert machine, knew a little more.  I was thinking The Running Man (Stephen King); a televised kill-as-many-as-you-can context in a Socialist controlled, post-apocalyptic world.  What I got was The Hunger Games;  a televised kill-as-many-as-you-can context in a Socialist controlled, post-apocalyptic world.  Sans Arnold Schwarzenegger and Richard &#8220;survey says&#8221; Dawson. Instead of Dawson we get Seneca (Wes Bentley).  Yes, the Roman name &#8211; think Rome.  Donald Sutherland plays the President, although that&#8217;s President as in the Russian &#8220;President&#8221; or &#8220;President Chavez.&#8221;  You get the idea.  The people are sheep.  The Pigs are the rulers, and the gaurds are the dogs, just like the good Pink Floyd album, Animals (which, ironically, is against Capitalism). Basically, the story is about some &#8220;war&#8221; that happened in the States a long time ago.  It was a rebellion of sorts that was eventually put down by the government.  These rebel &#8220;districts&#8221;  (12 of them) produce the goods for the Messianic State (and so the prolateriat are needed).  But, their existence is squabble and barbed wire.  Each year, in order to &#8220;appease&#8221; the Messianic State, they have to offer a teenage boy and girl to the Hunger Games &#8211; a televised fight ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thereignofchrist.com/the-hunger-games-movie-review/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Review of Off Target by John Noe</title>
		<link>http://thereignofchrist.com/review-of-off-target-by-john-noe/</link>
		<comments>http://thereignofchrist.com/review-of-off-target-by-john-noe/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Mar 2012 17:24:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Samuel Frost</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reviews]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thereignofchrist.com/?p=8002</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[John Noe has created one of the largest marketing campaigns for a Full Preterist (FP) that I have seen to date.  His last book, Hell Yes?  Hell No!, published by his own arm, East2West Press, equally garnered some press.  No, it won&#8217;t be on the NY Times Bestsellers list, but maybe on the FP one, anyhow.  Noe is clearly trying to break out of the market by limiting his books to AD 70 (a trap that is damn near killing the movement as a whole).  For that, my hat is off to Noe.  He is at least attempting to tackle other issues in the Christian encyclopedia rather than just the same old FP pabulum of Nero, &#8220;this generation&#8221;, and &#8220;some standing here.&#8221;  What are the ramifications of the AD 70 doctrine in other areas of systematic theology?  Noe takes a stab. First, I have known Noe for many years, and we have spoken at many conferences together.  I even occassionally run into him at the Evangelical Theological Society conferences.  We had differences when I was a FP, and you can bet your bottom dollar we have them even more, now.  Noe was teaching his &#8220;many comings theory&#8221; (as we called it) along with the idea that the charismatic &#8220;gifts&#8221; were still for today.  This is almost anathema in the FP circles I ran with in those days.  And, Noe felt the brunt of this, claiming that he was not a FP.  Lot&#8217;s of FP are doing that these days.  Duncan McKenzie ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thereignofchrist.com/review-of-off-target-by-john-noe/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Temple and the Church&#8217;s Mission</title>
		<link>http://thereignofchrist.com/the-temple-and-the-churchs-mission/</link>
		<comments>http://thereignofchrist.com/the-temple-and-the-churchs-mission/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Nov 2011 03:23:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jason Bradfield</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Creation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eschatology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Missions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[beale. temple]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consummation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[creation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[eschatology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thereignofchrist.com/?p=7520</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Back in my hyperpreterist days, a friend gifted me with G.K. Beale&#8217;s book The Temple and the Church&#8217;s Mission. I thought it was a great read. Strangely however, the overarching purpose of creation that is explained in the book never settled in my mind. As i did with so many orthodox writings back then, i read, enjoyed, and even tried to implement some of the doctrine into my hyperpreterist framework; not understanding that if these doctrines were in fact true, hyperpreterism was completely demolished. I reread Beale&#8217;s book shortly after renouncing hyperpreterism and, well, now i get it. While i do not agree with every conclusion Beale reaches, i do agree with that overarching purpose. In June, i took a trip down to Punta Gorda, Belize and did a two hour summary of the first half of the book at the Belize Training Center. When i returned, a few buddies of mine asked me to elaborate a little on the summary. The following is a post i wrote for them. While it is certainly not a full review of the book, i thought i would repost it here to perhaps whet your appetite. Ironically, this book has made its rounds in hyperpreterist circles and has been praised; but they &#8211; like i once did &#8211; are missing the huge elephant in the room. Although Beale does not claim to be a postmillennialist, what he argues in that book is what postmills like Chilton and Gentry have been saying for a long ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thereignofchrist.com/the-temple-and-the-churchs-mission/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bible Matrix II: The Covenant Key</title>
		<link>http://thereignofchrist.com/bible-matrix-ii-the-covenant-key/</link>
		<comments>http://thereignofchrist.com/bible-matrix-ii-the-covenant-key/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Oct 2011 02:09:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Samuel Frost</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Covenant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Creation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hermeneutics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bible Matrix]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[covenant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mike Bull]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[review]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thereignofchrist.com/?p=7226</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Mike Bull has recently sent me his new book, The Bible Matrix II: The Covenant Key (Westbow Press, 2011). Like his Bible Matrix, this one is full of &#8220;patterns&#8221;. Did you ever think that Esther, probably one of the most neglected books in the Bible, was covenantal in structure and outline? That it speaks directly to us? Get ahold of Bull&#8217;s &#8220;key&#8221; and you will. Bull takes the most basic and fundamental structure from one Ray Sutton. You may have heard me from time to time mention Sutton, Jordan, Chilton, Gentry, DeMar and Grant &#8211; the Tyler, Texas gang funded by Gary North back in the late eighties and early ninties. I cut my teeth on these men. Sutton is currently Bishop of the Church of Holy Communion in the Reformed Episcopal Church (REC). As an aside, my family has recently joined an Anglican Province of America (APA) body which has established &#8220;intercommunion&#8221; with REC. Our Bishop knows Sutton. Weird how God brings things around like that. Sutton is no longer a &#8220;theonomist&#8221; in the strict sense of the word. Nonetheless, his &#8220;covenant outline&#8221; has survived. If you don&#8217;t remember it, it is: 1. Transcendence 2. Hierarchy 3. Ethics 4. Sanctions 5. Inheritance Or, to put it into everyday speak: 1. Who&#8217;s in charge here? 2. To Whom do I report? 3. What are my orders? 4. What do I get if I obey or disobey? 5. Does this outfit have a future? Now, this structure, if you will, further ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thereignofchrist.com/bible-matrix-ii-the-covenant-key/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Dumbest Book Ever?</title>
		<link>http://thereignofchrist.com/dumbest-book-ever/</link>
		<comments>http://thereignofchrist.com/dumbest-book-ever/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Sep 2011 21:41:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Samuel Frost</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Frank Viola]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pagan Christianity]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thereignofchrist.com/?p=6039</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I have finished re-reading Frank Viola&#8217;s book, Pagan Christianity, and I must say, &#8220;whew&#8230;glad that mindless waste of time is over!&#8221;  Viola&#8217;s sources for his &#8220;anti-church&#8221; view are mostly liberals.  Take Will Durant, for example.  Durant was an adamant anti-Christian, and agnostic.  Yet, this is one of Viola&#8217;s sources. What is NOT quoted in the study of the origins of Church order and liturgy (Liturgics), are scholars like Gregory Dix, Alexander Schmemann, Cullman, Duchesne, Dugmore and Freeman (and others).  For example, in Schmemann (Introduction to Liturgical Theology &#8211; St. Vladmir&#8217;s Seminary Press, 1986), we read, &#8220;No matter what disagreement may exist between historians of the Christian cult, they all agree on the acceptance of the genetical link between this cult and the liturgical tradition of Judaism as it existed in that period.  The study and evaluation of this link has been hindered for a long time by a myth which has been central in liberal theology, the myth of the rebirth of the Church under the influence of the Hellenistic world.  According to this myth, the organized catholic Church, as we see from the middle of the second century on, with her doctrine, worship and discipline, was separated from her Hebrew beginnings, and was the fruit of the Hellenistic metamorphosis which the original teaching of Christ underwent, it is said, some time prior to the Church&#8217;s emergence as an organized structure&#8221; (53,54). And, again, in academic study, &#8220;&#8230;we may assume that this Hellenistic myth in its pure form has finally ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thereignofchrist.com/dumbest-book-ever/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Movie Review: Rise of the Planet of the Apes</title>
		<link>http://thereignofchrist.com/movie-review-rise-of-the-planet-of-the-apes/</link>
		<comments>http://thereignofchrist.com/movie-review-rise-of-the-planet-of-the-apes/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Aug 2011 04:12:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Samuel Frost</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Movies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[apes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[movie]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[planet]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thereignofchrist.com/?p=5804</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I am a huge fan of the Apes movies.  As a kid growing up in the seventies, I got to see two of them in the theaters.  Of course, the first one was 1968 and the huge hit, The Planet of the Apes with Chuck Heston and Rod McDowell.  Classic.  One of my favorites. Tim Burton revamped the theme in his remake of the &#8217;68 classic, but it bombed and was panned by critics.  I panned it as well.  I didn&#8217;t really like anything about that movie at all, except for Danny Elfman&#8217;s score. Then, this summer, a new film comes out with all the sophisticated CGI effects (Avatar, etc).  The chimps are real looking.  Of course, no one faults the super make up effects of Chambers in 1968 &#8211; for which he won an academy award.  The &#8217;68 version chimps were punctuated with great characters and great acting &#8211; that&#8217;s what made them believable even though they looked nothing like real chimps.  Burton&#8217;s film used make-up that tried to more resemble real apes.  Better make up, worse acting. This one drops the actors altogether.  The gorillas, chimps, orangutans all fairly look real &#8211; and they act real &#8211; well, of course, as real as this story can allow.  Apes will never run the planet, folks.  They can&#8217;t.  They are apes.  They are not made in God&#8217;s image. However, suspending theology and the real world, this movie packs a punch.  I took the twins to see it, and they loved ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thereignofchrist.com/movie-review-rise-of-the-planet-of-the-apes/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>17</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Creation and Change: Genesis 1.1-2.4 in Light of Changing Scientific Paradigms</title>
		<link>http://thereignofchrist.com/creation-and-change-genesis-1-1-2-4-in-light-of-changing-scientific-paradigms/</link>
		<comments>http://thereignofchrist.com/creation-and-change-genesis-1-1-2-4-in-light-of-changing-scientific-paradigms/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Sep 2010 20:53:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Samuel Frost</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[book]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[creation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[earth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[genesis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jordan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[science]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thereignofchrist.com/?p=3938</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Douglas F. Kelly, Professor of Systematic Theology at Reformed Theological Seminary (North Carolina), has written a masterful defense of a literal interpretation of Genesis (titled in the heading, Mentor Press, 2002). I rank it up there with James B. Jordan&#8217;s work on the six days of creation. The main thrust of the book is that, although Genesis is not a &#8220;textbook on science&#8221; (blah, blah, blah), it nonetheless is to be used as a basis upon which science can do what it does. He does not argue, as do creation scientists, from an empirical demonstration in order to &#8220;prove&#8221; a young earth. Rather, starting with the assumption of the straightforward text of Genesis, he shows that a young earth hypothesis is &#8220;viable&#8221; (possible), which is all that is needed, since, as he amply demonstrates from scores of quotes, this is how Naturalism develops: no God, no creation, therefore, Nature. This is &#8220;hypothesis&#8221; pure and simple, and the results are what we see in so called &#8220;science&#8221; today, whose &#8220;facts&#8221; are so pounded through the media (propaganda eucharistically served to the mind-numb public), that to even question it is scientific heresy. Kelly starts where Feyerabend, Kuhn and Polanyi do: presuppositions. Science cannot establish presuppositions (obviously! since they are unprovable axioms to begin with). The problem (often ignored by our Covenant Creationist friends) is epistemology &#8211; not &#8220;evidence&#8221;. &#8220;Facts&#8221; are interpreted, not &#8220;given&#8221; (or as Kant would say, Ding an Sach). This book is absolutely loaded with resources and footnotes. Enough to ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thereignofchrist.com/creation-and-change-genesis-1-1-2-4-in-light-of-changing-scientific-paradigms/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Review of Mike Bull&#8217;s, Bible Matrix</title>
		<link>http://thereignofchrist.com/review-of-mike-bulls-bible-matrix/</link>
		<comments>http://thereignofchrist.com/review-of-mike-bulls-bible-matrix/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jul 2010 14:15:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Samuel Frost</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bible Matrix]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[book]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DNA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dominion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[world]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thereignofchrist.com/?p=3649</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Mike Bull recently sent me a copy of his book, Bible Matrix: An Introduction to the DNA of Scriptures, 2010, Westbow Press. Peter Leithart, who I began reading when studying the book of Samuel, writes the introduction. Leithart, as many of you may know, is a close student of the works of James B. Jordan, who is perhaps more closer to our view than most, but nonetheless stays within the &#8220;orthodox&#8221; limits. I like patterns. I believe the Bible is built on patterns (tupos, or &#8220;types&#8221;), and that&#8217;s exactly what this book is about. &#8220;Genesis 1 is the Bible Matrix. As it matures throughout the Scriptures, the identification of this pattern unlocks the book of Moses, Israel&#8217;s history, the structure of Jesus&#8217; ministry and the book of Revelation&#8230;It also has staggering implications concerning the identity, purpose and future of Christianity&#8230;&#8221; (15). Amen. God has taught us in the historical unfolding of the Bible (its stories) how He acts, why He acts, when He acts and how we are supposed to act as a result. For me, as a Preterist, God doesn&#8217;t &#8220;cease&#8221; acting this way in A.D. 70. Now, of course, Bull is an &#8220;orthodox preterist&#8221;. But, this should not deter one from buying the book. It has much to offer in the way it is laid out, and the structuring of the biblical feasts, types, patterns consistently run throughout the book. The contents takes their cue from Bible history, climaxing in the Church. The feasts, furniture of the temple, ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thereignofchrist.com/review-of-mike-bulls-bible-matrix/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Re: The Test of Truth</title>
		<link>http://thereignofchrist.com/re-the-test-of-truth/</link>
		<comments>http://thereignofchrist.com/re-the-test-of-truth/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 02:21:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jason Bradfield</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Logic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[beyond creation science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[contradiction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[covenant creation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[death]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[empiricism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jeff vaughn]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[test]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[testimony]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tim martin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[truth]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thereignofchrist.com/?p=2583</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ironically, a book that emphasizes context and attempts to localize what has been often understood as global, now rips these verses from their immediate context and attempts to globalize, so to speak, what is in actuality limited.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thereignofchrist.com/re-the-test-of-truth/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>12</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Review of “Logic” by Gordon Clark</title>
		<link>http://thereignofchrist.com/review-of-logic-by-gordon-clark/</link>
		<comments>http://thereignofchrist.com/review-of-logic-by-gordon-clark/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Aug 2006 18:43:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Samuel Frost</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Logic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[book]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gordon clark]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[man]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thereignofchrist.com/2006/08/review-of-logic-by-gordon-clark/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Book Review of Gordon H. Clark&#8217;s Logic (The Trinity Foundation, 1998) 140 pages.   In the “Introduction” to this book, John Robbins asks the most pertinent question, “Why Study Logic?” Logic, which is defined as “the science of necessary inference,”  is often belittled as unnecessary. After all, we are told, “life is deeper than logic; life is green, but logic is gray and lifeless.” Why then should we spend our time studying logic? Could we not better involve ourselves in something “more spiritual?”   In his Logic, [1] Gordon Clark, who taught the subject for years at the college and seminary level, instructs his readers about “the science of necessary inference.” Logic is a text book, and it is classic. In it Dr. Clark defines and deals with Informal Fallacies, Syllogisms, Sorites and other forms of Argument, Truth Tables, etc. All of the chapters are, in typical Clarkian fashion, systematic, and extremely well presented. But the most important thing the author does in the book under review is answer the question “Why Study Logic?”   In the “Postscript,” and elsewhere,[2] Dr. Clark presents a biblical view of logic. First, the Bible teaches that the Triune God is a God of knowledge, who is also the source and determiner of all truth. That which is true is true because God thinks it so. And since that which is not rational cannot be true (1 Timothy 6:20), it follows that God is rational, and the laws of logic are the way ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thereignofchrist.com/review-of-logic-by-gordon-clark/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Chapter Summary of Three Types of Religious Philosophy by Gordon Clark</title>
		<link>http://thereignofchrist.com/chapter-summary-of-three-types-of-religious-philosophy-by-gordon-clark/</link>
		<comments>http://thereignofchrist.com/chapter-summary-of-three-types-of-religious-philosophy-by-gordon-clark/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 May 2006 03:00:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Samuel Frost</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[book]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gordon clark]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[knowledge]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[man]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[show]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[truth]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thereignofchrist.com/2006/05/chapter-summary-of-three-types-of-religious-philosophy-by-gordon-clark/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This book, published originally in 1973, offers again the scope of Clark’s epistemological theory against rationalism, empiricism, and irrationalism. Dogmatism is Clark’s theory. By the use of reduction, Clark asserts that dogmatic principles are the hallmark of every system, rational or empirical. “Thus a presuppositionaless description is impossible” for anyone who attempts to build a Weltanshauung (118). This must be kept in mind as we begin to critique Clark’s work. This book, published originally in 1973, offers again the scope of Clark’s epistemological theory against rationalism, empiricism, and irrationalism. Dogmatism is Clark’s theory. By the use of reduction, Clark asserts that dogmatic principles are the hallmark of every system, rational or empirical. “Thus a presuppositionaless description is impossible” for anyone who attempts to build a Weltanshauung (118). This must be kept in mind as we begin to critique Clark’s work.   Concluding the Introduction Clark is very clear as to how each system is to be evaluated. It is, perhaps, this clarity that is so troublesome for many to grasp his thinking. It is not filled with the cumbersome academic technical terms found in many philosophies. It is worthy to quote the final paragraph at length. “To evaluate an argument, one must examine every step made to see whether the whole is logical or whether it contains an invalid syllogism somewhere. One fallacious link would break the chain and render the whole a failure” (25). Obviously, the methodological choice is Aristotelian logic, namely the law of contradiction. “Philosophies must be ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thereignofchrist.com/chapter-summary-of-three-types-of-religious-philosophy-by-gordon-clark/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Analysis of Gordon Clark’s Faith and Saving Faith</title>
		<link>http://thereignofchrist.com/analysis-of-gordon-clark%e2%80%99s-faith-and-saving-faith/</link>
		<comments>http://thereignofchrist.com/analysis-of-gordon-clark%e2%80%99s-faith-and-saving-faith/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 May 2006 02:02:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Samuel Frost</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Books]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[book]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[faith]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gordon clark]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[knowledge]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[man]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nature]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thereignofchrist.com/2006/05/analysis-of-gordon-clark%e2%80%99s-faith-and-saving-faith/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;Without faith it is impossible to please God” the writer of Hebrews tells us. So, there should not be any real difficulty with explaining what faith is. Faith, as a word, occurs hundreds of times in the Scripture. Gordon Clark, however, dispels any notion in his book, Faith and Saving Faith, that faith is easy to define. But define it we must, ‘or else we do not know what we are talking about’ (95). In other words, we cannot talk about something we have, but do not understand. This is not to say that we have an immediate, full understanding of faith, but that at whatever point we receive it, it will be in the form of a proposition.   Clark begins with a few secular writers who have ventured into the area of pinpointing a definition of faith, or belief. Blanshard identifies belief with intellection. Intelligence is supposed, and precedes sensation. Indeed, cognition is always present with any sense-data. There is no knowledge which derives itself ‘minus all intellectual interpretation’ (6). With this talk about sensation and intellection in matters related to a definition of biblical faith, one must conclude that it ‘presupposes a view of human nature’ (7). How do we think as human beings?   There are, then, matters that are connected to thought that must be distinguished first. Linguistically, words, or sentences, can be seen as a reproduction of thoughts on a page. Or, at least these words can cause a thought to come into memory. ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://thereignofchrist.com/analysis-of-gordon-clark%e2%80%99s-faith-and-saving-faith/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
<!-- This Quick Cache file was built for (  thereignofchrist.com/category/writ/reviews/feed/ ) in 0.52606 seconds, on May 22nd, 2012 at 4:55 am UTC. -->
<!-- This Quick Cache file will automatically expire ( and be re-built automatically ) on May 22nd, 2012 at 5:55 am UTC -->
