That article seems to be nothing more than the flip side of the twi coin. VPW et al tried to make everything in the Bible fit together perfectly, by way of an intellectual exercise. This writer tries to show that nothing in the Bible fits together, again by way of an intellectual exercise. Same chit, different day.
5,000 word studies and "literals according to usage" won't prove anything in the Bible true, nor will dismissing the whole thing as inspired and authored by man disprove it.
You can't intellectualize the spiritual, one way or the other. God knows we tried, didn't we?
That article seems to be nothing more than the flip side of the twi coin. VPW et al tried to make everything in the Bible fit together perfectly, by way of an intellectual exercise. This writer tries to show that nothing in the Bible fits together, again by way of an intellectual exercise. Same chit, different day.
5,000 word studies and "literals according to usage" won't prove anything in the Bible true, nor will dismissing the whole thing as inspired and authored by man disprove it.
You can't intellectualize the spiritual, one way or the other. God knows we tried, didn't we?
Bible debunkers have some pretty intelligent debunkers themselves .....and on it goes. . . you can have both intelligence and faith. It is pretty interesting to listen to bible debunkers questions and then hear those questions answered by some brilliant Christian apologists....to have their methods and approach addressed. I think if one is honestly asking these questions......that is the place to go. To the people answering the questions.
If it is just an agenda.....it isn't any different from what they think they are trying to debunk.
It gets pretty real! I am satisfied with the answers. :)
Bible debunkers have some pretty intelligent debunkers themselves .....and on it goes. . . you can have both intelligence and faith. It is pretty interesting to listen to bible debunkers questions and then hear those questions answered by some brilliant Christian apologists....to have their methods and approach addressed. I think if one is honestly asking these questions......that is the place to go. To the people answering the questions.
If it is just an agenda.....it isn't any different from what they think they are trying to debunk.
It gets pretty real! I am satisfied with the answers. :)
I would recommend C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity. He was very intelligent (taught at Cambridge in England) and addresses many of the common issues with Christianity. Even if someone is not a Christian, I believe they will find this a very interesting read. Not a "Pie in the Sky", "bless you, bless you" type of book, and it won't insult your intelligence.
To clarify, I don't mean to imply thinking is a bad thing. My point was that you can't know spiritual things merely by intellectual means. I don't even think word studies are a bad thing. It's about balance, and about differentiating between what can be known spiritually and what can be known intellectually.
I would recommend C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity. He was very intelligent (taught at Cambridge in England) and addresses many of the common issues with Christianity. Even if someone is not a Christian, I believe they will find this a very interesting read. Not a "Pie in the Sky", "bless you, bless you" type of book, and it won't insult your intelligence.
I have read that several times...I had to read it several times to actually get through it once. :) I love CS Lewis. He taught at Oxford too and if you ever get there you can take a tour of his haunts. Bodleian Library, a very cool place, has a wonderful collection of his papers.
William Lane Craig, Dan Wallace, and a host of others deal with the current crop of bible debunkers. Wayne Grudem has a great series of books if you are ever interested.
We went to see Ravi Zacharias not that long ago..... excellent speaker. Fascinating the way he deals with peoples questions.
For me, the questions have been asked and answered to my satisfaction.
Speaking of academics, which one of them decided we need to stop using BC and AD as year designators? Why the sudden move to start using BCE (before current era) and CE (current era) to replace BC and AD? I see it more and more in academic writings, and it bugs me. Seems to me before an effort is made to overthrow centuries of western tradition and practice, there should first be discussions and debates. But this BCE and CE stuff just started happening, all of a sudden, out of the blue.
Speaking of academics, which one of them decided we need to stop using BC and AD as year designators? Why the sudden move to start using BCE (before current era) and CE (current era) to replace BC and AD? I see it more and more in academic writings, and it bugs me. Seems to me before an effort is made to overthrow centuries of western tradition and practice, there should first be discussions and debates. But this BCE and CE stuff just started happening, all of a sudden, out of the blue.
I have no idea but I know what you're saying. Now everything has to be politically correct and BC means "before Christ" and AD is "anno domini", Latin for "Year of the Lord". I mean, who are we to force everybody to reckon time according to Christ's presence on earth? Why don't we do that with Buddha, or Mohammad, or when the world began? (I'm just articulating the argument, I don't really believe that.)
"BC and AD do have a religious significance because they state that Yeshua of Nazareth is both God and Messiah: AD means "Year of the Lord." BC means "Before Christ" or "Before the Messiah." This religious component makes CE and BCE more attractive to many people -- particularly secularists, non-Christians and liberal Christians. CE and BCE are notations that are not based on religion or myth. They can be embraced by all."
Recommended Posts
Linda Z
That article seems to be nothing more than the flip side of the twi coin. VPW et al tried to make everything in the Bible fit together perfectly, by way of an intellectual exercise. This writer tries to show that nothing in the Bible fits together, again by way of an intellectual exercise. Same chit, different day.
5,000 word studies and "literals according to usage" won't prove anything in the Bible true, nor will dismissing the whole thing as inspired and authored by man disprove it.
You can't intellectualize the spiritual, one way or the other. God knows we tried, didn't we?
That's about as real as I can get.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
That is pretty real.
_________________________________________________________________________
Bible debunkers and bible defenders kindred spirits? Maybe...because both can certainly push their POV as the correct one.
Either way....the bible has long outlived its pallbearers. I don't suspect the author of this article is going to fare much better.
Edited by geisha779Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
faith and intellect
i choose faith
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
Why not both?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
1. Love God.
2. Love your fellow man.
That's about it really.
The Bible is a book about what goes on, on the inside, not the external actions.
Maybe the Bible should be read once in a while as a book about how people loved their fellow human beings.
And how some others didn't love their fellow human beings.
Both, in about as many different ways as there are and have been human beings. So of course there will be myriad "contradictions." Welcome to "Life".
We mostly have far too small a picture of (mindset about) God.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
The thing is, Bibliolaters (of which TWI is only one group) idolize the words themselves.
But words alone are not enough, not anything at all really.
The words encapsulate ideas. Attitudes. Imaginations. Hopes. Despairs. Fears. The "heart" of it all.
Those, the ideas, are what we need to get to.
If you stop at studying the words, you see only the whited sepulchre.
You don't see either the rot behind - or the angel in the tomb.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
Exactly.
Bible debunkers have some pretty intelligent debunkers themselves .....and on it goes. . . you can have both intelligence and faith. It is pretty interesting to listen to bible debunkers questions and then hear those questions answered by some brilliant Christian apologists....to have their methods and approach addressed. I think if one is honestly asking these questions......that is the place to go. To the people answering the questions.
If it is just an agenda.....it isn't any different from what they think they are trying to debunk.
It gets pretty real! I am satisfied with the answers. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
I would recommend C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity. He was very intelligent (taught at Cambridge in England) and addresses many of the common issues with Christianity. Even if someone is not a Christian, I believe they will find this a very interesting read. Not a "Pie in the Sky", "bless you, bless you" type of book, and it won't insult your intelligence.
Edited by Broken ArrowLink to comment
Share on other sites
Linda Z
To clarify, I don't mean to imply thinking is a bad thing. My point was that you can't know spiritual things merely by intellectual means. I don't even think word studies are a bad thing. It's about balance, and about differentiating between what can be known spiritually and what can be known intellectually.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
I have read that several times...I had to read it several times to actually get through it once. :) I love CS Lewis. He taught at Oxford too and if you ever get there you can take a tour of his haunts. Bodleian Library, a very cool place, has a wonderful collection of his papers.
William Lane Craig, Dan Wallace, and a host of others deal with the current crop of bible debunkers. Wayne Grudem has a great series of books if you are ever interested.
We went to see Ravi Zacharias not that long ago..... excellent speaker. Fascinating the way he deals with peoples questions.
For me, the questions have been asked and answered to my satisfaction.
Edited by geisha779Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
yes both is very good
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OperaBuff
Speaking of academics, which one of them decided we need to stop using BC and AD as year designators? Why the sudden move to start using BCE (before current era) and CE (current era) to replace BC and AD? I see it more and more in academic writings, and it bugs me. Seems to me before an effort is made to overthrow centuries of western tradition and practice, there should first be discussions and debates. But this BCE and CE stuff just started happening, all of a sudden, out of the blue.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
I have no idea but I know what you're saying. Now everything has to be politically correct and BC means "before Christ" and AD is "anno domini", Latin for "Year of the Lord". I mean, who are we to force everybody to reckon time according to Christ's presence on earth? Why don't we do that with Buddha, or Mohammad, or when the world began? (I'm just articulating the argument, I don't really believe that.)
Edited by Broken ArrowLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
"BC and AD do have a religious significance because they state that Yeshua of Nazareth is both God and Messiah: AD means "Year of the Lord." BC means "Before Christ" or "Before the Messiah." This religious component makes CE and BCE more attractive to many people -- particularly secularists, non-Christians and liberal Christians. CE and BCE are notations that are not based on religion or myth. They can be embraced by all."
SOURCE
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.