Search results

Those subjects are all in the realm of systematic theology. None of those are about biblical theology. Do you know what that discipline actually is? I only ask b/c biblical theology could be the salvation of evangelical theology. The trend is growing, praise the Lord!!!

All I said is that the word should be removed from English translations. I know it was transliterated from the Latin translation. My point is that Isa. 14 is not about Satan, and Satan's name (even if Isa. 14 was about Satan) is not revealed there. That is more KJV error.

"Lucifer" needs to be removed from English vocabulary, and the concept of Lucifer as Satan needs to be forgotten since it was never believed before English translations botching this up.

You've mentioned W&H's theory. I wonder if you could actually enunciate their theory? I think you might find that it is NOT very different to some Byzantine Prioritists view. Only the outcome is different, but the methodology in many respects is the same.

Millard Erickson's and Augustus Strong both have good baptist syst theos. Rolland McCune recently put out a 3 vol syst theo (from Detroit Baptist Seminary). There are others that are baptistic (Geisler and Grudem). Plenty to choose from.

Should we then celebrate Hannukah as it appears Jesus did? (cf. John 10:22ff.)

In every way or practice we emulate Jesus??? What he did, we should strive to do? etc...

What is wrong w/ fully inspired yet w/ errors?

That was my bad... posted while busy at work and meant to say pericapae adultera.

I have a corresponding question (of course), but I am interested to hear your responses first.

Not that such has anything to do with this thread, "inerrancy" needs to be refined and redefined, since the Bible doesn't really address it explicitly but only by inference. Too rigid of a definition is impossible to sustain, especially considering synoptic issues and the movement to ipsissima...

Check it out: http://www.sebts.edu/news-resources/conferences/pericope_adulterae.aspx Wish I could attend.

My situation is unique. I had to do an MDiv equivalency (added 12 credits), then I left the country which prolonged it vastly. I will finish this summer. Thesis subject will be the something along the lines of the function and use of the Pentateuch in the 7 oracles of Rev. 2-3 drawing on the...

Don't know... never went there. I just live in Lyncheburg during the summers and use their library for my ThM research.

You haven't looked at good online programs then. Good schools inside and out of the SBC teach the languages online. I did 3 semesters of Hebrew online, and the platform was great! Just as interactive, and perhaps better b/c the "whiteboard" was right in front of my face.

Why??? B/c the Bible is a history book to you? I'm not trying to gain your approval. I am just trying to get you to think past the simplistic way of thinking about the OT. Like I said, the Bible (and that includes the OT) is primarily a theological book, not history. That doesn't make it...

But I am saying you are asking and answering a question that is moot. Roby aside. It doesn't matter who he married (even if there was even an historical Cain). The Bible is not history but theology. That is not to say it is not historical, only that its purpose is not history. Therefore...

Does seminary make someone a worse preacher???

Me? Silent? NEVER!!! :D B4L, just b/c I value the narrative over the event does not mean I don't care about... whatever that term was you used. I just find that it is not an important issue. If you get sidetracked on this, you will miss the huge point of Gen. 3-11.

This is so easy!!!! HIS WIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!!! My advice: interpret the text not the event. The text doesn't say, so it doesn't matter. To focus on the event is to make Scripture more about history and less about theology.