Category Archives: books

As I proceed toward the Mosaic covenant, I thought it would be helpful to re-read Poythress‘ The Shadow of Christ in the Law of Moses. There are so few books that I am familiar with on this subject. I really … Continue reading →

I recently finished the book Abraham, Israel, and the Nations. The timing was perfect as it was a spectacular help in my preparations for my group study on covenants. Upon completion, I came to the realization that the author Paul … Continue reading →

This book is excellent. And I couldn’t have found it at a better time. It is dedicated almost entirely to an analysis between the covenant instituted in Genesis 15 (well, 12 really) and contrasting that with Genesis 17. The question … Continue reading →

More helpful quotes: Thus while Josephus and Philo do not address the relationship between Genesis 15 and 17 specifically, their treatment of the material contained in these two chapters appears to suggest that the two chapters are viewed simply as … Continue reading →

I recently bought this book in hopes that it was a continuation of Crabb’s The Silence of Adam. Sadly, that was not the case. But instead, it was an updated version of the same book. But even so, I thought … Continue reading →

I started Letham’s Union with Christ yesterday in hopes to be able to participate in Matt’s book group in Tucson via video stream this evening. So far I have been nothing but impressed with everything I’ve read of Letham’s. This … Continue reading →

I started reading Robert Audi’s introductory work to epistemology last week. I’ve had this book for quite some time and have wanted to read it for just as long. Audi did a pretty spectacular job with the Cambridge Dictionary of … Continue reading →

  “Different Bayesians commend different versions of the simplicity postulate (see e.g. Swinburne 1979). But whatever notion of simplicity one thinks fits a simplicity postulate best, assigning priors in accordance with it goes beyond the bounds of Bayesian inference construed … Continue reading →

“To answer these questions we seem first to need an answer to the question ‘What is logic?’ My own belief is that there is no fact of the matter about what entitles a theory of reasoning to logical status, and … Continue reading →

Matt and I have had conversations lately where Hume has made an appearance and as such, it prompted me to read a more modern (published in 2000) attempt to deal with the devastation Hume dealt to the justification of the … Continue reading →