At some point, denying the historicity of the Bible (in general, maybe not every jot and tittle, but certainly the key facts and players) becomes deliberate denial in the face of contrary evidence.
We can spend a lifetime searching for truth and not find anything But when you believe in Jesus you stop searching and life gets so much easier and better I praise him every day Amen
So Bart Erhman accepts the basic tenets of Christianity as not being affected by textual inconsistencies in the New Testament, but rejects God because God allowed scribes to create these textual errors in their rewrites. Therefore, the Bible is not the inerrant Word of God. And this is why he's an Agnostic Atheist? Interesting.
These learned people from our past and present are limited by the time and circumstances in which they lived, plus they / are /were broken and sinful just like we are. I am a Christian because that’s what my grandmother, my mother, my uncle Earl, and family in general taught me from the time I sat on their knees and listened to Bible stories. Then of course went through my rebellious years and returned to the faith. Even still messed up from time to time, but repenting for my poor choices as I felt the shame of my behavior. Now at seventy nine years I go through my day praying without ceasing and thanking God for each day as I face the challenges of each and every day.
This deep dive into Biblical history is too much for my limited brain power.
But what I do know is, I’m a better person when I love God and love my neighbor. It’s about the unseen power of faith. Faith in Jesus Christ and His Holy Spirit.
Scary for me is who will preserve all this written and handed down truth among these modern day "thinkers" who live by their own truth and not THE truth. Two plus two really does equal four.
I once held the door to the seminary Post Office for Professor Emeritus Metzger.
While I didn’t study directly under him, his legacy at the seminary was well established and respected. I learned there, but what I learned only pushed me closer to that damnable Romanism. Tongue-in-cheek, of course. God got bigger, I got smaller, and (perhaps paradoxically) I got closer to Him in the process.
My evangelical (small e) concern is that Evangelical Protestants place too much emphasis on the Bible, ultimately engaging in bibliolatry. From what I can make of John Henry Newman, he thought the same thing, though I have not read that term in him…or anywhere else for that matter.
If we want to convince the world that Christian dogma is true, beauty seems to be the far better approach to this. Hyper modern man does not want to be told what is good (how to act) or what is true (how to believe), because hyper modern man considers those topics subjective.
But all humans are drawn to beauty. It is irresistible—even more irresistible than the Grace reserved only for the Elect.
Perhaps the better evangelical approach is to point people to Christ through beauty (beautiful acts, not just art) rather than trying to convince them of the truth within a text that needs its own defense.
Yes, beauty lifts us up. Bishop Robert Barron's video series Catholicism brings to light the beauty of the Catholic Church. Beauty played a major role in leading me to the Catholic Church.
Yessir. I can’t claim that beauty was a draw to the Catholic Church for myself, but I definitely appreciate it now. The Catholic view of the relationship between Grace and Nature was a huge draw, which is to say I began viewing God’s Sovereignty through a much broader lens.
Funny you mentioned Bishop Barron. I could easily be accused of plagiarizing him in what I wrote above.
Another person I could be accused of plagiarizing was a professor of mine at Berry College. His name was Peter Lawler, and I once accused him of being the most evangelical person on campus. After discussing why I said that, he told me not to take any more of his classes…because he had taught me all I needed to know. It was a very touching compliment, and I am blessed to have had him in my life.
When I first discovered Bishop Barron, he reminded me A LOT of Peter. Needless to say, I enjoy reading his books and listening to his lectures at the Word On Fire Institute.
Roman historian and novelist Adrian Goldsworthy discusses this topic of Jesus regarding contemporary textual evidence compared to other events happening in the time period in a recent YouTube video, though not the Virgin Birth directly. Some of the comments express anger that he discusses this.
There is mountains of more evidence to support Jesus’s and other parts of the Bible’s existence than that of Mayan Aztecs and even the Roman Empire and its many battles.
But because the Bible often delves into the supernatural it is often dismissed.
Same as Troy.
It’s amazing that science and the mainstream historical world is willing to accept some things like who built the pyramids from very scant evidence but something that has been documented and catalogued numerous times somehow is false.
But evidence is not required to receive gods grace. Or Jesus’s forgiveness.
Yet, faithful believers can rest assured. There’s in not a blind faith. It actually happened.
At some point, denying the historicity of the Bible (in general, maybe not every jot and tittle, but certainly the key facts and players) becomes deliberate denial in the face of contrary evidence.
We can spend a lifetime searching for truth and not find anything But when you believe in Jesus you stop searching and life gets so much easier and better I praise him every day Amen
So Bart Erhman accepts the basic tenets of Christianity as not being affected by textual inconsistencies in the New Testament, but rejects God because God allowed scribes to create these textual errors in their rewrites. Therefore, the Bible is not the inerrant Word of God. And this is why he's an Agnostic Atheist? Interesting.
These learned people from our past and present are limited by the time and circumstances in which they lived, plus they / are /were broken and sinful just like we are. I am a Christian because that’s what my grandmother, my mother, my uncle Earl, and family in general taught me from the time I sat on their knees and listened to Bible stories. Then of course went through my rebellious years and returned to the faith. Even still messed up from time to time, but repenting for my poor choices as I felt the shame of my behavior. Now at seventy nine years I go through my day praying without ceasing and thanking God for each day as I face the challenges of each and every day.
Excellent apologetics, Erick. Also, read "I Don't Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist" by Frank Turek and Norm Geisler.
This deep dive into Biblical history is too much for my limited brain power.
But what I do know is, I’m a better person when I love God and love my neighbor. It’s about the unseen power of faith. Faith in Jesus Christ and His Holy Spirit.
It's all about Faith.You either believe it or not. Do you believe George Washington was the First President? You learned it in school.
Salvation requires both Repentance and acceptance -that Jesus did Die for the remission of our sins.
It's all based on Faith!
Amen, well said.
Scary for me is who will preserve all this written and handed down truth among these modern day "thinkers" who live by their own truth and not THE truth. Two plus two really does equal four.
Of course it happened. It all happened. I’m more confident in this than I am the tales woven by modern day scribes.
Eye witnesses were willing to die, rather than say Jesus did not rise from the dead.
I once held the door to the seminary Post Office for Professor Emeritus Metzger.
While I didn’t study directly under him, his legacy at the seminary was well established and respected. I learned there, but what I learned only pushed me closer to that damnable Romanism. Tongue-in-cheek, of course. God got bigger, I got smaller, and (perhaps paradoxically) I got closer to Him in the process.
My evangelical (small e) concern is that Evangelical Protestants place too much emphasis on the Bible, ultimately engaging in bibliolatry. From what I can make of John Henry Newman, he thought the same thing, though I have not read that term in him…or anywhere else for that matter.
If we want to convince the world that Christian dogma is true, beauty seems to be the far better approach to this. Hyper modern man does not want to be told what is good (how to act) or what is true (how to believe), because hyper modern man considers those topics subjective.
But all humans are drawn to beauty. It is irresistible—even more irresistible than the Grace reserved only for the Elect.
Perhaps the better evangelical approach is to point people to Christ through beauty (beautiful acts, not just art) rather than trying to convince them of the truth within a text that needs its own defense.
My bone with big-E Evangelicalism is that the evangelical/fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible becomes its own magisterium quite fast.
One can be sola scriptura and still leave room for differing interpretation. Indeed, it sometimes is a must.
Yes, beauty lifts us up. Bishop Robert Barron's video series Catholicism brings to light the beauty of the Catholic Church. Beauty played a major role in leading me to the Catholic Church.
Yessir. I can’t claim that beauty was a draw to the Catholic Church for myself, but I definitely appreciate it now. The Catholic view of the relationship between Grace and Nature was a huge draw, which is to say I began viewing God’s Sovereignty through a much broader lens.
Funny you mentioned Bishop Barron. I could easily be accused of plagiarizing him in what I wrote above.
Another person I could be accused of plagiarizing was a professor of mine at Berry College. His name was Peter Lawler, and I once accused him of being the most evangelical person on campus. After discussing why I said that, he told me not to take any more of his classes…because he had taught me all I needed to know. It was a very touching compliment, and I am blessed to have had him in my life.
When I first discovered Bishop Barron, he reminded me A LOT of Peter. Needless to say, I enjoy reading his books and listening to his lectures at the Word On Fire Institute.
Wow, what an honor it must have been to learn at the feet of the great Peter Lawler!
Such an interesting and well written response.
https://youtu.be/_IJcrZeYCD0?si=9_P5nE851T8rp-UC
Roman historian and novelist Adrian Goldsworthy discusses this topic of Jesus regarding contemporary textual evidence compared to other events happening in the time period in a recent YouTube video, though not the Virgin Birth directly. Some of the comments express anger that he discusses this.
There is mountains of more evidence to support Jesus’s and other parts of the Bible’s existence than that of Mayan Aztecs and even the Roman Empire and its many battles.
But because the Bible often delves into the supernatural it is often dismissed.
Same as Troy.
It’s amazing that science and the mainstream historical world is willing to accept some things like who built the pyramids from very scant evidence but something that has been documented and catalogued numerous times somehow is false.
But evidence is not required to receive gods grace. Or Jesus’s forgiveness.
Yet, faithful believers can rest assured. There’s in not a blind faith. It actually happened.
Amen!
AMEN