Popular Content

Showing most liked content since 03/01/2017 in all areas

  1. 3 likes
    I haven't read it. Those are two reasons not to read it.
  2. 2 likes
  3. 2 likes
    Actually there are still philosophers subscribing to Cartesian dualism in some form (e.g. Keith Ward). Also, I doubt Disciple is still looking for resources on epistemology 5 years down the track...
  4. 2 likes
    You don't even know what this is talking about. This criticism only applies to one specific area of Ehrman's work. The general agreement of professional scholars in a field. No it is nothing like that, because mainstream confessional scholarship agrees with Ehrman on the point under dispute. You missed out these parts of the article. In fact you didn't even quote the footnote properly. Here's what it says.
  5. 2 likes
    [1] Incorrect [2] Sorry, I don't believe it. Or it could be an aberration on the furthermost extremity of the bell curve. It seems like you collect every weird and wonderful story and present it expecting it to have traction. Yes, there might be strange CD and you have found them. I live not far from Cooranbong and my children go to an SDA School. If I thought every madness, deviation from SDA doctrine (I will gratuitously throw in that I know an SDA whom does not believe in a supernatural devil based on his own study) and scandal I am privy to were passable as relevant, I could write a lot more. Can I suggest keeping discussion to Scripture and reasoned thinking does most for your credibility? [3] We are bound by our agreement to a statement of faith. We are free to explore Scripture outside that and even to formulating how we might arrive at those conclusions. Some of that work will be first class and powerful; some not so much. There are different versions of the Trinity - does that automatically invalidate all of them?
  6. 2 likes
    It is God (one person), addressing the angels. However, in the very next verse we are told that God acted alone. That is just gibberish. No not actually 100%. But he does act in ways that God does, because he was appointed as God's representative. The apostles even say this directly, referring to him as a man appointed by God, a man through whom God worked. Unless you view this within its original socio-historical context (instead of fourth century Greek nonsense), you won't make any sense of it. Er, no. A lot of Adelaide is viewed as quaint, old fashioned, and even cultish by other Christadelphians in Australia. And for good reason. We are not talking about scholars who don't believe Jesus was divine, but who don't believe Jesus thought he was divine, and who don't believe his disciples thought he was divine, and who don't believe the apostles thought he was divine, and who instead believe that it was only a century later that Christians started believing Jesus was divine. Look at standard commentaries on Jesus' words "Why do you call me good?", and you will see that most of them understand Jesus was not calling himself God. "While it is possible that Jesus is making a subtle claim to being deity, it is unlikely that he would expect this man to understand such a subtle remark. It is more likely that Jesus is either responding to the implication that inheriting eternal life is based on goodness or that Jesus is responding to the man’s insincere flattery. In either case Jesus is not engaging the question of his own goodness. Eternal life is a gift of God’s goodness and is not based on human goodness: “No one is good.”" Mark C. Black, Luke (College Press NIV Commentary; Joplin, MO: College Press Pub., 1995), Lk 18:18–19. "This rhetorical question directed the ruler to focus on God so the he would be responsive to God [AB, BECNT, Gdt, ICC, MGC, NAC]. Jesus’ statement that only God was good brings out God’s unique holiness and righteousness and if the ruler wanted to follow the ‘good’ One, he must follow God and obey the instructions of the teacher from God [BECNT]. Only God is truly good and the source of goodness when it is found in others, so if the ruler recognized any goodness in Jesus, he must attribute it to the right source [AB]. Jesus’ goodness was the goodness of God working through him [Gdt, ICC, MGC]." Richard C. Blight, An Exegetical Summary of Luke 12–24 (2nd ed.; Dallas, TX: SIL International, 2008), 258–259. "If this was Jesus’ intention, it is certainly a veiled proclamation. In fact, Jesus saw his role as pointing people to God through him, rather than drawing exclusive attention to himself. There are more probable explanations than that it is a subtle rebuke." Darrell L. Bock, Luke: 9:51–24:53 (vol. 2; Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament; Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1996), 1477. "Jesus wants the ruler to focus on God and his will so that he will be genuinely responsive to God (Fitzmyer 1985: 1199; Warfield 1914: 211 [repr. p. 139]). This explanation is the most contextually satisfying, since 18:20 goes on to cite God’s commandments." Darrell L. Bock, Luke: 9:51–24:53 (vol. 2; Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament; Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1996), 1477–1478.
  7. 2 likes
    Leen Ritmeyer was/is involved in excavations which may be the site of Sodom, he wasn't the one that found it though. Those excavations started over a decade ago, and they're still going. That's why most reputable archaeologists only have a few major finds against their name, because it takes time to process everything properly. Ron Wyatt just looked at some geological layers, went "Oooh, that just like ash", found some sulphur balls and declared it the site of Sodom without any excavations or dating or anything; not exactly reliable.
  8. 2 likes
    This is what happens when you necro threads from 7 years ago
  9. 2 likes
  10. 2 likes
    "Go up" to Adelaide. LOL. Whatever you've picked up, Adelaide is not CD HQ. Plus this reply is drifting from the point. Maybe I'm lazy. Maybe I put value on my free time and that doesn't involve flying to Adelaide to correct "conservative" CD. But my point was that whatever anecdotal conversation you might relay does not hold water. Best to stick with Scripture and reason, not gotcha conversations with nameless people.
  11. 2 likes
    I am a little bit of the view that when "quantum" is waved at any difficult apologetic topic (for example) that a warning light is going off.
  12. 2 likes
    It is the favored reading among some scholars. But this reading is more difficult because Jesus is nowhere called "begotten god", and this verse would actually differentiate Jesus from God, making two gods.
  13. 2 likes
    I don't know why you think they refer to the second coming, and Ezekiel 32:7-8 can't be a type of something which already happened. Regardless, the point in every single passage is the same; the destruction of the empire or nation is depicted in cosmological terms, as the heavens being disrupted and the heavenly bodies being torn down. That's the issue here. That is patently untrue, since the Bible uses certain symbols which were common to other nations of the day, such as the heavenly bodies being used to depict the ruling powers (or even the gods). The seven headed serpent/dragon, for example, is taken directly from pagan mythology. That's precisely why it is used in the Bible. No it is not just a single event. Moses says that every time Israel sins, they will be handed over to an enemy nation. They will go into captivity and not return until they repent. This happened more than once. It happened many times during the time of the Judges, for a start.
  14. 2 likes
    You are right SDA. I've looked into the 'Mens Sheds' and there are two in my locality. One is being built, and the other, I have sent out two emails and not gotten a reply and I've driven down the road and can't find them. I've not given up on them though and hopefully I'll find them soon.
  15. 2 likes
    Hello everyone I want to post something that is positive for once because I only seem to come here when I am feeling down and anxious. I apologise if this is in the wrong thread. I am currently building (well, not on my own, I wouldn't have a clue) a shed in my back garden so I can learn woodwork. We haven't done any work since October last year though, because of the weather. I didn't know but apparently, you cannot lay bricks if the temperature is at 5 degrees or less because the frost/cold makes the cement brittle. We are also at the point where we need to start thinking about the roof and for that we need a good few days of nice dry weather. I want to learn a trade (carpentry/woodworking/joinery) and use my skills to make useful items for my family and for other people. That's the long-term goal but the short term goal is to do something to take my mind off things because I worry so much. I can't go to a college to learn because of my mental health so I am watching lots of videos on Youtube and I'm reading books. I'll basically be learning on my own as I go along so I have to remind myself not to be critical of myself and to just enjoy it. If you ever decide to take up woodworking, I strongly suggest you check out Mr Paul Sellers. He is a real craftsman who has years of experience in woodworking. He's practiced the craft longer than I have been alive, and I'm 49 in July. I find woodworking a very relaxing therapeutical exercise. I've been buying tools here and there, all hand tools because that's where I find enjoyment. I don't want to use power tools because whilst they are quicker, they can be loud and make a lot of sawdust. I want to craft things by hand. I would like to make something for the homeless, and in particular a fold away bed. They would be similar to the fold away sun loungers you see in gardens on hot days. I've got an idea of how that might work but it'll be something they can fold away and tuck under their arm and carry around for when the night comes. At least they won't be on the cold floor. I also think it is great that Joseph was a carpenter and (I think) Jesus was too. Anyway, thank you all for helping me when I am anxious and feeling low. It's greatly appreciated. My God bless you all. Love always.
  16. 1 like
    Ok, please do when convenient. What does "nature" mean in your citation?
  17. 1 like
    Not science in any sense. Not science, not scientifish, just plain old pseudoscience. Real science gathers evidence, draws a hypothesis and then tests it. If it passes the tests, then it gets promoted to scientific theory. What you're doing is completely backwards.
  18. 1 like
    The earliest Christians were Jews and they claimed Jesus as the Messiah. The Jewish Messiah was neither God nor a supernatural, pre-existent being. He was a man "anointed" to be God's messenger. A starting point for evidence would be the Psalms of Solomon or any book covering the Jewish belief system in the first century BCE and CE.
  19. 1 like
    SDA, what evidence is there that these are dinosaurs? What did the Egyptians call them? If dinosaurs existed at the same time as humans, where are all the fossil remains and all the depictions in artwork and all the descriptions in texts? This is just ludicrous.
  20. 1 like
    That would be the point. I looked at the Scholia on Wasps. I don't see any entry at all for line 1030.
  21. 1 like
    Even if the imagination is based on something, it could be loosely based on a depiction or description provided by someone else. Any likeness to a dinosaur is much more likely to be coincidental. That dude uses an Egyptian depiction of what he claims are dinosaurs (because of the long necks), but when you look at the feet/head/tail, you quickly realise it's just a cat with a really long neck (and not a real animal).
  22. 1 like
    You will need to ask someone who holds that view. I don't.
  23. 1 like
    Irrelevant. It is not the same mass of water in three different forms. The bottom line, which you keep avoiding, is that the apostles never described God and Christ as you do. Ever.
  24. 1 like
    Sorry, I don't understand your point - I never suggested it was otherwise. I was quoting from a book written by a Trinitarian scholar. But I do like the cut of his jib. My understanding is that Ellen White would have like it as well.
  25. 1 like
    C&AS 11_chronology of kings.pdf
  26. 1 like
    Hi all, (I have posted this on BTDF but then wondered if this was better for BEREA?) I'm currently examining some of the chronological difficulties/variances in Kings and Chronicles - specifically: - Asa's 35th year - which can't be his 35th year (2 Chron 15) - Ahaziah's age at accession (2 Kings 8:26 [22] and 2 Chron 22:2 [42]) - Jehoiachin's age at accession (2 Kings 24:8 [18] and 2 Chron 36:9 [8]) Particularly on the last two I am trying to analyse whether a geniune variance occurs. After looking at the variance within the plethora of English translations I decided I needed to go further back. As a result, I am trying to get hold of old OT manuscripts to highlight whether there is a transmission issue or whether the record has been written different on purpose. Here's where I'm a tad unstuck and am hoping for help? I've looked at the following manuscripts and wondered if there was any major ones I had missed: - Codex Leningrad (from BHS) - Aleppo Codex - LXX (both Brentons and NETS) - Latin Vulgate - Syriac Peshitta I can't seem to find Chronicles in the DSS so far - does anyone know the best route to go down? My initial conclusion is that a geniune discrepancy seems to be there which has then been edited in later manuscipts (i.e. other than the Hebrew) to conform to Kings. I have some tentative conclusions about what's going on - which I found pretty exciting - but just wanted to ensure I'd done my research! Some of this may ultimately appear in eJBI if I decide it's good enough. I appreciate to some this may look quite academic, but I need to know whether a variance exists or not! Jon
  27. 1 like
    That's probably because you are commenting on threads from six years ago.
  28. 1 like
    @KenGilmore be interested in your input in this one
  29. 1 like
    I do. I say specifically "A duration of at least ten years seems indicated here, as it is historically credible and likely, and thus fits the context well". No, I am saying that the time times, and half a time, and forty and two months, and 1,260 days, are three time periods which all start at a different time. You can't apply any methods of interpretation until you have determined the genre. Scripture uses symbols exactly the same way secular literature uses symbols; it uses metaphor, simile, synecdoche, and other standard literary devices. The seven hills. The angel says that the horns represent seven hills. That shows me that Revelation typically presents information in the form of symbols, and should not be interpreted literally; the symbols need to be interpreted as symbols. See attached. _Revelation overview timeline.pdf
  30. 1 like
    Where does the Bible say this? Hebrews says they're angels. So as I said, you can bear the name Yahweh without being Yahweh. This angel was given the name of Yahweh; "My name is in him". Evidence please. Well I'm sorry that's plain wrong. The text says "Yahweh", not "Jesus".
  31. 1 like
    Jeff Berry is always fun to chat with.
  32. 1 like
    That's because the sea beast PDF is addressing the beast of the sea, and the verses you're talking about describe the beast of the earth. Those verses are addressed in the beast of the earth PDF. No. I haven't heard anyone say it means "burning at the stake". Yes, false signs. Pretend miracles. The early apostate church was full of them. The socio-historical context. The text uses a phrase which is used specifically when referring to gematria. See page 4 of this PDF. JBurke_The Value of Socio-historical Background to Exegesis.pdf
  33. 1 like
    Am I correct in thinking you believe the devil to be an actual entity SDA? I think I am right in saying, Christadelphians believe the devil is not a real entity, but a personification of a human being's propensity to sin.
  34. 1 like
    Thank you for the reply SDA I guess if nobody can find where it says the resurrected body of the unrighteous can be tormented forever due to its changed state, then it is inferred. I remain slightly unconvinced, however, because they could say 'if a resurrected righteous body is immortal then so is a resurrected unrighteous body'. That said, Paul does mention eternal destruction and Revelation tells us it is the second death.
  35. 1 like
    Sorry SDA, I should have added this (only just caught it) because it is the reason as to the why of it all. The reason the person believes the unrighteous resurrected body suffers eternal torment because it is different to the earthly body is because: The Old Testament verses on death which speak of the dead knowing nothing, and having no thought etc, they describe the first death. But this has no claim on us due to Christ's resurrection. So it is the resurrected bodies of the unrighteous that will end up in the lake of fire suffering torment.
  36. 1 like
    Don't forget these parts of the article. "Lunar eclipses were the first major celestial events that astrologers learned how to predict based on local historical observation records." "By AD 206 Chinese astrologers could predict solar eclipses by analyzing the Moon's motion." Sent from my Neville 5000 using Tapatalk.
  37. 1 like
    I picked up a copy Archaeological Diggings (Vol 20 No 3) because it had some interesting looking articles in it: - The archaeology of Khirbet Qeiyafa. Another battle over David and Golitath - The dead sea scrolls: life in ancient times - The roles of women in ancient Egypt - Can we still believe the Bible? A brief glance through and it looks fairly good. Just wondering if anyone knows much about this periodical, and if you have an favourable or unfavourable remarks about it. Website here
  38. 1 like
    Yes there are references in the New Testament, explained in the PDF. Sent from my Neville 5000 using Tapatalk.
  39. 1 like
    I am going to start woodworking as soon as my workshop is built. Hopefully that will take my mind of things and get me to be more productive.
  40. 1 like
    Where do you get that idea from?
  41. 1 like
    The Aramaic section of Daniel overall seems to have more relevance to Gentiles, I agree. Chapter 8 onwards is more Israel-centric. I guess in light of that then it's fair to say there's probably just 2 legs because men tend to just have 2 legs (i.e. just part of the symbol's colour not a core part of the message).
  42. 1 like
    With that image that you linked to, upon what is the map basing those borders? I've never seen a map like that before.
  43. 1 like
    A reference to Patterns of Evidence, a documentary film on the historicity of the Exodus popped up in my Facebook feed today. From its website comes this explanatory blurb: Those involved include: Charles Aling Manfred Bietak John Bimson Mansour Boraik Israel Finkelstein Norma Franklin Rabbi Manis Friedman Rabbi David Hartman James K Hoffmeier Michael Medved Benjamin Netanyahu Shimon Peres Maarten Raven David Rohl Kent Weeks Rabbi David Wolpe Bryant Wood Any list that includes Bryant Wood, David Rohl, Israel Finkelstein and James Hoffmeier is covering a reasonable spectrum of ideas. There's also an upcoming book, due to come out later this year. The trailer is below - other clips can be found here. Honestly, I don't know what this is going to be like, but at the very least, it should serve to awaken interest in the subject.
  44. 1 like
    A good spectrum of views; Bimson and Wood (conservative fringe), Rohl (radical fringe), Finkelstein (strong skepticism), Bietak (moderate skepticism), Hoffmeier (strong support). We should plan an edition of D&C to comment on this.
  45. 1 like
    Why would it not be correct for the Holy Spirit to move you to quote a particular passage?
  46. 1 like
    Thanks Ken. Conservatism notwithstanding, the SDAs have produced some excellent scholarship over the past 100 years. I wish our community had taken the same direction they did with higher education.
  47. 1 like
    It seems it has SDA affiliations, though the article sources seem to be pretty good (DRs, PHDs), and the interest in ME archaeology seems to be the genuine driver. Caution advised, but the material addresses real finds and digs.
  48. 1 like
    An Adelaide Christadelphian sister who reads Alain de Botton? Greb, I do believe you have just made history.
  49. 1 like
    Ever wondered just how many people have been harmed - or even killed - by pseudoscience? Wonder no more. What's the harm? covers every conceivable pseudoscience from homeopathy to evolution denialism, and details just how harmful these anti-science positions really are: Feel free to share the link love around.
  50. 1 like
    Here are some relevant papers updating Thiele's model, and discussing related chronologies. Did_Thiele_Overlook_Hezekiah.pdf The_Chronology_Of_2_Kings_15.pdf The_Relationship_of_the_Reign_of_Ahaz_to_the_Accession_of_Hezekiah.pdf Inductive_And_Deductive_Methods_As_Applied_To_OT_Chronology.pdf Tables_of_Reign_Lengths_From_The.pdf The_Interphased_Chronology_of_Jotham.pdf A_Translation_Guide_to_the_Chronological_Data_in_Kings_and_Chronicles.pdf