My name is Steve Matthews. Welcome to my blog. I appreciate your interest.
I live and work in Cincinnati. In my spare time, I read and write, with special interest in the areas of in Scripturalism (the philosophy developed by Gordon Clark and John Robbins), politics and economics.
Why the name Lux Lucet? Well, I liked the sound of it. At least that’s one reason. But on a more serious note, I chose it because it reflects my prayer for this blog. Lux Lucet is Latin for “The light shines” and is taken from the Vulgate translation of the John 1:5, which reads in English, “And the light shines in the darkness and the darkness did not comprehend it.”
The masthead photo is from a Waldensian church in Palermo, Italy. The Waldensians were Italian Christians who, when it was all but forgotten during the middle ages, preached the gospel of grace and suffered greatly at the hands of the Roman Catholics for their faith. The symbol of a lamp surrounded by seven stars with the words Lux Lucet in Tenebris was a symbol used by the Waldensians and also by other Christian groups during the time of the Reformation.
Hi –
I’m wondering if you’ve read Clark’s Incarnation. If so, what are your thoughts about it?
Yes I have, and I thought Clark was right on target.
For years I’d always been discouraged by Christological discussions, because they were filled with lots of undefined and incomprehensible vebiage. And Clark referred to this sort of thing as fifteen hundred years of chanting nonsense. Clark, on the other hand, carefully defined his terms – especially the key term ‘person’ which he defined as a complex of thoughts or propositions- and and drew the correct conclusion. To quote John Robbins’ summary, “Jesus Christ was and is both God and man, a divine person and a human person.”
Do you think that Clark argued for two persons in the incarnation such that a predicate can be applied to one person but not to the other? If so, how successful do you think was Clark in proving this through Scripture?
Yes and very. The Man Christ Jesus suffered and died, the Logos, the Second Person of the Trinity, did not (pp.67-69).
BTW, what are your thoughts on Clark’s views?
I don’t believe Clark to be successful in proving his view from Scripture. I say this in the sense that his methods seem to change in proving three persons in the Trinity and in proving two persons in the incarnation. The latter seems to be mainly based on silence.
As I understand it, Clark’s problem with the confessional view is the problem of the communication of attributes. I say this because even under Clark’s definition of “person”, a collection of propositions, one can still say that there is one person, or one collection of propositions, in the incarnation. So while some hang on to their dislike for Clark’s definition of person, I put more emphasis on the issue of predication. If there are two persons, how is there any real incarnation? What does incarnation mean under this two-persons view? What unity is there between the Second Person of the Trinity and Jesus the Human that is unlike the unity between the Second Person of the Trinity and a Christian? Are those who hold the confessional view wolves in sheep’s clothing? Or are they saving-ly ignorant?
I appreciate you taking your time in answering some of my questions. Other Clarkians seem to have less patience while trying to spell out their position.
I don’t have Clark’s Trinity or the Incarnation with me, so I’m going to have to work from memory. As I recall, Clark argued that the distinctions in the Trinity were based on the different propositions they thought. This seems to me to be consistent with his arguments for distinguishing the divine person and the human person in the hypostatic union.
I don’t agree that Clark’s arguments for the two person view of the incarnation are based on silence. He sites several examples in Scripture that imply the two person view: Jesus the man grew in wisdom and statue, the Logos doesn’t learn; Jesus the man died on the cross, God cannot die; Jesus the man was limited to a single location, the Second Person of the Trinity fills the heaves and the earth.
As I see it, Clark’s biggest problem with traditional formulations is that they are nonsense, literally. For those who use them rarely attempt to define the key terms in their argument such as ‘person’ ‘nature’ ‘substance.’
I hope that clarifies my views vis-a-vis Clark’s and the incarnation. I’m happy to discuss the matter with you, but I also know that there are others in the Clarkian camp who would do the same.
The same evidence you use to establish two persons within the incarnation is the same evidence to argue that Jesus is God. But under the two-persons view can it be properly said that Jesus is God?
The hypostatic union joins a divine and human person in the incarnation. That’s my best answer Speigel. You can have the last word.
I rather not have the last word being that I’m trying to understand what your position is. But I’m unsure as to what you mean by hypostatic union being that it means something else under the confessional view. Perhaps someone else can fill me in.
Steve,
It’s nice to be introduced to your blog. Thanks for your helpful follow-up post on Knox Theological Seminary. I will feature it on my blog tomorrow.
I’m now following your blog.
Blessings to you, Wes
Thanks, Wes. It’s good to hear from you. I’m glad you like the article and I appreciate your support.
In Christ, Steve
Hi Steve, I just noticed that you’ve added me to your blogroll. Thank you!
You’re welcome.
Good to meet yet another scripturalist on the web but I must say that I strongly urge you to rethink the two person view of Christ. I think the view is a heresy and I think I have earned the right to say that since I believed it for over a year, wrote quite a bit on the issue, was persoanlly attacked on numerous occasions and came under the discipline of my presbytery over this. My writings on the issue are here:
https://sites.google.com/a/thekingsparlor.com/the-kings-parlor/christology/my-resolution-concerning-the-hypostatic-union-by-drake-shelton
I would be interested in your thoughts, at least different ones that haven’t already been dealt with.
Drake
I’ll check it out, Drake.
This is not a comment per se. Just thought I woul link this to you.
http://olivianus.thekingsparlor.com/triadology/the-monarchy-of-the-father-by-drake-shelton
I think I figured out exactly the error of Van Til’s view of the trinity which turns out to be a problem for western scholasticism in general. Feel free to delete this comment.
Huge issue please read:
http://eternalpropositions.wordpress.com/2011/04/22/my-response-to-wes-white-on-merit-and-created-grace/
Steve,
It’s good to meet someone with the same admiration for Gordon Clark and John Robbins that I have. I’ve studied their works for the past 14 years or so. I led a men’s study for our church recently and we went through Clark’s CVMT, so I’m enjoying your comments since the book is so fresh in my mind.
Great blog! Check out mine: http://tbftgoggi.wordpress.com/
It’s a growing collection of quotes from Reformed sources that I’ve been reading.
God bless!
Jim Snyder
Thanks, Jim. It’s always good to hear from a fellow Scripturalist. I think that’s great that you led a discussion of CVMT at your church. Not many people get a chance to read Clark’s books in a church setting, and I think it is important for those of us who support the work of Clark and Robbins to take the initiative to get their material out in front of people.
I’ll definitely be swinging by your blog.
Hi Steve!
Yes, I agree. We’ve gone through other books as well; What is Saving Faith, Predestinaiton, the Justification controversy books and Not What My Hands have done. Hopefully this Fall we will get into Clark’s CHristian Philosophy. Right now we are using Crampton’s Scripture Alone book. Our congregation has been very acceptive of these books.
God bless you labors!
Jim
Mr Matthews, I pray everything is ok with you, You have not posted in quite some time. I was enjoying you reviews of “A Christian View of Men and Things”.
Not trying to pry – just a note to say I miss you comments.
Bruce Jeffers
Thanks for you prayers, Bruce. I’m ok, but I’ve found that my schedule is making it harder to write than I had thought. Full-time work and part-time school have made it hard to do the kind of work on Clark that I would like.
Steve,
Just in case you might be in the Los Angeles area: https://www.facebook.com/branchofhopeopc/posts/957229227630958
My friend Cal Beisner will give his able explanation of GHC:
“Understanding Gordon H. Clark” – E. Calvin Beisner, PhD (The Cornwall Alliance)
Blessings
I won’t be in LA anytime soon, but thanks for the invite.
Good day. I was led to your work via the Trinity Review. Great work brother. Question: what are your thoughts on Thomas Sowell? I have a copy of his Basic Economics. I do not know whether he is a Christian or if he takes a Biblical approach at all. Is it worth reading or should I not waste my time?
Thanks,
Nick
Greetings. I found your site through Trinity Foundation. I live up the road in Columbus, Ohio. I would like to email you with some questions. Is that possible?
Hi Jeff. I’ll email you privately. Steve
Hi Steve,
I’d like to ask about the article on The Fed, Fiat Currency, and Feckless Keynesian Economics on the Trinity Foundation website. Do you have specific thoughts on what people should invest their money in, if it’s all going to crash in the (near) future?
i.e How can one protect savings? Is it right to protect savings?
Thx,
John
Hi John,
Thanks for the great questions. Since it deals with ethics, I start with your last question first, “Is it right to protect savings?”
The short answer is, yes.
For a longer answer, consider Proverbs 22:3, “A prudent [man] foresees evil and hides himself, But the simple pass on and are punished.” The Bible expects believers to be able to use discernment and to apply their knowledge of God’s Word to the different situations they encounter in life. This is what the Scripture mean by wisdom: it is the correct application of God’s Word.
There are many examples in Scripture of men who did just that, believe the Word of God and applied it correctly in their lives. Noah is an obvious example. He was faced with the end of the world as he knew it, and was saved by believing what God told him and acting in response to his belief. Joseph did the same with his preparation in Egypt. Hezekiah prepared Jerusalem for the Assyrian siege by stopping the wells around the city. Jesus told people to flee Jerusalem with they saw it surrounded by armies.
When we come to understand what the Bible teaches about economics and politics – everywhere it advocates private property, honest money, and limited government – and we see a world that is rushing 180 degrees away from those things, it’s not hard to see that there’s going to be a problem.
I would argue that, not only is it right for Christians to make preparations to protect their savings against the monetary debasement that’s all around us and very likely to get much worse, they actually have an obligation to do so.
As far as concrete steps, there are several things Christians can do. First, they can pay down and eliminate their debt. Debt can be a monster even in the best of times – The rich rules over the poor, And the borrower [is] servant to the lender (Proverbs 22:7) – and in a financial crisis it can be a stone cold killer.
Second, have some physical cash on hand. Many people equate having a bank account with having cash. But bank accounts are just electronic digits. And with our fractional reserve banking system, banks do no have anywhere near the physical cash available if everyone were to demand his funds from his checking account all at once. Think about the bank lines from the old pictures of the Depression, or even more recently in Greece or Cyprus. Having some of your savings in physical cash outside the banking system is a great way to begin to hedge against a financial crisis.
Third, if you have the means, consider buying physical gold and silver. And just like with the physical cash, you want to store it outside the banking system. Don’t buy silver or gold coins and then put them in a bank safe deposit box. Your funds are still in the banking system in that case. Keep the coins in a safe place where you can get to them. This is called eliminating counterparty risk, the risk that the other guy will be unable or unwilling to keep his financial obligations to you.
If you buy gold or silver, I recommend purchasing bullion coins. Bullions coins are coins that are valued for their metal content rather than having any collector’s value. Examples of bullion coins are US gold and silver Eagles, Canadian gold and silver Maple Leafs, gold Kruggerands, etc.
Also, avoid buying ETFs such as GLD, SLV, or other forms of “paper gold” or “paper silver”. You want to buy the actual, physical precious metals and store them somewhere where you can touch them. For most of us, that means keeping them at home.
I hope this was helpful to you. Let me know if you have any other questions,
Best regards,
Steve
Very helpful. Thankyou so much.
John
Steve, any thoughts on finding a publisher for my new book, Christianity for the 21st Century and Beyond! thank, Dave
Hi Dave. Good question. I’m probably not the best one to ask, but there are options for self publishing. Lulu Press http://www.lulu.com/home is one such service. Amazon offers a similar service https://www.amazon.com/gp/seller-account/mm-summary-page.html?topic=200260520
I’ve thought about publishing something myself through one of these outlets, perhaps an annual compilation of blog articles. I just haven’t gotten around to doing anything yet, so I can’t relate any personal experience.
[…] Steve Matthews provides us with a series of articles and podcasts dealing with the current immigration controversy through the lense of Scripture. Steve is a Presbyterian and a scripturalist (following the theology and philosophy of Gordon H. Clark). In his 12th post in the series, Immigration, Citizenship, and the Bible, he provides an excellent summary of Thomistic economic theory and specifically addresses the Romish doctrine of the “universal destination of goods”. […]