A Proposed Interpretation of Hebrews 9:15-22

Why does the author of the Letter to the Hebrews, in the midst of his rigorous argument regarding the New and Old Covenants (diatheke), introduce the rough analogy of a will (diatheke) or does he? The common interpretation understands Hebrews 9:15-22 as an analogy made between a biblical covenant and a will; I briefly contend here that better sense is made of the text if we read diatheke as a covenant between God and man—not a will.

The Irrationalism of Rational Thought

Can someone who rejects God as He has revealed Himself in Scripture be consistently rational? Cornelius Van Til, a 20th century Christian apologist and theologian, frequently demonstrated the inherent irrationalism of all non-Biblical worldviews. One of his students, John Frame, has applied this insight to many of the major philosophical thinkers and movements of western … Continue reading The Irrationalism of Rational Thought