Search results

More questing I see. Which one is this??? 4th? 5th? Time to move on, critics!

You should post a link to the book (like amazon) as well as author details. That would be better than only a link to a review about the book. Just a thought.

I disagree with this. I would qualify and say "only by scholars." Balance.

Great question!!! I am torn on this. On one hand, I would love to see a 60 credit MDiv w/ prompt to a specialized ThM or something. But I also realize that ministry requires a large many fields to cover: languages/linguistics, Bib studies, theology, history, and then actual ministry stuff...

I love how the poll assumes that rapture theology is correct. "Farewell to the Rapture"

I'm not surprised the literary independence view is the most popular here. Fundamentalist have a problem w/ literary dependence when concerning the gospel accounts. But I think it is very unrealistic. I might go so far as to say that it is so probable that the synoptics were dependent on one...

I lean more and more to Markan priority, although I have had huge influence from the Matthew priority perspective. What about you?

[british accent]THROW 'IM INTO THE POND!!!![/british accent]

John is not chronological in the sense you mean. He has time markers, but that doesn't require that every story or event is sequential to one another. And it is easy to prove that the gospels are not all chronological in nature... the order for some of the same events and miracles happen in...

An added caveat... I think harmonization amongst the gospel accounts is counter to what the genre of "gospel" is all about. They were intended to be read vertically not horizontally. I want to understand Luke on his own terms, not what Matthew may have meant and bring that over to Luke. I...

I stated a thread a while back about this (here) My answer was this: John mentions a judgment early in his gospel, although that is not necessarily chronological but theological placement (perhaps). The easiest explanation I can come up with is that the Jesus tradition passed on a temple...

No Jn 3:16-17 is not enough b/c that text presuppose much knowledge (i.e. does "believe in Jesus" simply mean believing in a person named Jesus??? NO! It is assuming the entirety of the gospel; but w/out that knowledge, then you cannot do what Jn 3:16 is asking thus it is not enough). Take...

What do we learn in James 2:14ff.? Faith w/out works is dead. So to say that "belief in Jesus's [sic] promise for eternal life to be saved" seems merely to acknowledge a theological truth (one not state well I might add). I think faith has to be more than mental assent or acknowledgment of a...

Really... the start of the end times? I guess the NT was mistaken when it said that the "end" has already come w/ Jesus (1 Cor. 7:29; Heb. 10:25; 1 Pet. 4:7; 1 Jn 2:18).

This is my problem with most of dispensational futurism... it is newspaper exegesis. Instead of saying this is that w/in Scripture (cf. Acts 2 and the use of pesher w/ Peter quoting Joel 2), you look at the news reporters and say that is this right here in the Bible. That is loaded w/ error, IMO.

I went to Bible college and semi-regret it. I got my Greek in undergrad, but I would have preferred to go to a regular college and then on to seminary. Instead, I did a B.A., M.A., and now ThM (finish this summer!!!) route. I would prefer to go the B.A. at a regular Uni, and then MDiv ThM...

That's my school!!!!!!!!!!

I only know 2 personally. One is a teacher w/ me here in Honduras. The other was a classmate at SEBTS (NT Text Criticism w/ Dr. Robinson). He just recently finished his PhD at SEBTS. He is the son of John of Japan. So depending on your definition of success... I'd say yes. But numbers...

I can live with that explanation.

Then you haven't read carefully. John leaves out the word "this". Instead of saying "this is Jesus..." he just has "Jesus..."