Tweet
Yes. I know a few in the Geisler camp, maybe even Geisler himself, take the dragon literally.
-
Reading this through Giesler's spectacles .... Whom did they steal if from?1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
.⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Scripture before Tradition:
but that won't prevent others from
taking it upon themselves to deprive you
of the right to call yourself Christian.
⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛ -
Henry Morris, the father of the modern YEC movement, wanted to include a 144-hour creation as an essential component of a fundamentalist belief in inerrancy at the ICBI in Chicago -- but absolutely nobody else agreed.Originally posted by Apologiaphoenix View Post
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --TassmanComment
-
He raised the possibility that perhaps the raising of the saints in Matthew 27 was not intended to be literal.Originally posted by ikaika777 View Post"I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard RavenhillComment
-
-
He suggested it could be apocalyptic in nature, like Revelation. But he didn't commit to that position; he just raised the possibility. It was almost like a side comment.Originally posted by ikaika777 View Post"I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard RavenhillComment
-
-
A friend of mine:
I think in light of points such as these we need to abandon inerrancy. I don't think it does our cause any good if we try to defend such an historically inaccurate view of Pilate and Roman rule."I am telling you that the "nt" is actually historically wrong. There is NO other record of Pilate giving the Jewish people a prisoner to be freed and in fact, he was recalled to Rome for his cruelty. The "nt" seems to have been written by people who didn't even understand religious Judaism very well and certainly not life in Jerusalem under Roman rule."Comment
-
It was irregularities associated with a single campaign in AD36 that caused Pilate to be recalled - the charge of executing men without proper trial being related to that campaign. The small amount of detail available concerning Pilate does not create any conflict with the Biblical record. However, there are a lot of myths people need to avoid being misled by.Originally posted by Encyclopaedia Britannica1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
.⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Scripture before Tradition:
but that won't prevent others from
taking it upon themselves to deprive you
of the right to call yourself Christian.
⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛Comment
-
Then how come he is portrayed as being so careful with the trial of Jesus? He goes from being a careful, fair minded man who only reluctantly gives into the crowd to being someone who doesn't care a wit if someone gets a fair trial? That's just not credible No, the gospel account is obviously an embellishment, which means we need to abandon inerrancy. There are also two other facts scholars have brought up.Originally posted by tabibito View Post
1. The Jewish authorities could indeed execute people themselves at the (we see such an example with the stoning of Stephen later on) and so they wouldn't have needed Pilate. The gospel writers were clearly not knowlegable about First Century Judaism and Roman rule as my friend said.
2. There is not a single reference outside of the Bible to the practice of letting people choose a prisoner to release.
We need to abandon inerrancy and do the work of separating biblical fact from biblical fiction.Comment
-
The Jews had their own laws by which the could enact a death penalty - "it is not lawful for us to put anyone to death" means what it says. Under Jewish law, no one could be put to death ... they couldn't get a verdict of guilty on any capital offence for anyone (on the basis of the kind of evidence presented). That is also attested by the Bible - the witnesses contradicted each other. They wanted him dead, they couldn't lawfully do it themselves, they took him to Rome on a charge of sedition against Rome.1. The Jewish authorities could indeed execute people themselves at the (we see such an example with the stoning of Stephen later on) and so they wouldn't have needed Pilate. The gospel writers were clearly not knowlegable about First Century Judaism and Roman rule as my friend said.
Which doesn't mean that no such practice existed. If there were a complete set of records available, as there should have been by Roman requirements, then it would be possible to make the claim. Until 1969, historians were absolutely certain that no such person as Pilate was in Judea. The records should have attested to his existence, and there were no such records. There are still virtually no records of Pilate available - most of them have vanished.2. There is not a single reference outside of the Bible to the practice of letting people choose a prisoner to release.1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
.⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
Scripture before Tradition:
but that won't prevent others from
taking it upon themselves to deprive you
of the right to call yourself Christian.
⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛Comment
-
Also, it's quite likely Pilate's scenario rose up after the Sejanus conspiracy where Pilate's superior had been executed for treason. Pilate was on thin ice. Originally, he wanted to stay out of it and just pacify the Jews until he got told "If you release this man you are no friend of Caesar." Had word of that got back to Rome, he could have been undergoing the fate of Sejanus. He chose to give in.
Note also that there are accounts of prisoners being released for various reasons. The argument you have, UK, is basically however an argument from silence.Comment
-
I agree; it is an argument from silence. The fact that no records have shown up documenting such a practice is not affirmative evidence that no such practice ever took place in at least one particular locale. Given how many times the gospel writers have been vindicated after earlier skepticism, this doesn't strike me as reason to abandon inerrancy.
(I don't personally hold to a Chicago-style inerrancy but I'm just saying this isn't a reason to reach such a conclusion.)"I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard RavenhillComment
Comment