Search results

I'm away from all my sources at the moment. And I do think that the usual meaning is "defense". But even in cases as you mentioned above, the defense for Paul was his conversion experience. I'm moving in the direction that the early Christian "apologetic" was the gospel and not what we make...

This is where we part ways again. I hold to an impsissima vox, especially of the Sermon on the Mount. It is clearly theologically arranged in a text that is also theologically arranged. For example, 5-7 being Jesus' teaching and gospel and 8-9 being his healing, bookended in Matt. 4:23 to...

I'd agree with that understanding of the "apologia" clause being adverbial (though it is still a clause lacking a verb). I think a case could even be made that the Petrine style (at least in 1 Peter) is to begin w/ a command and follow it w/ participles (I would argue imperatival) or possibly...

It is not about refuting faith but making your faith seem illogical and lacking credibility. I would argue that you have nothing objective that points to the KJV over against, say, the NKJV. You have just decided based on subjective reasons (perhaps it is what you grew up with so it is what...

Question related to this: do you believe that the sermon as it exists in Matt. 5-7 is the verbatim sermon/teaching of Jesus? Is Matthew retelling an actual event or is he is narrativally giving us the sum total of Jesus' most essential teachings?

Thought I would try a thread to actually have a thread on a Bible study since that is what this portion of the BB is about. How many apologists do you know that will speak on this verse to either justify their "ministry" (not a huge fan btw) or to encourage others to be mini-apologists too? I...

That is way too simplistic to be valid. And if you are arguing from that line of reason, then why do you pick the KJV over the NKJV which has the same textual source as the KJ?

Bada-bing... I too have left IFBdom, into SBC and evangelicalism, and now moving into a plural eldership position where the elders lead the church.

There's fundamentalism for you... if it wasn't good then it was "wrong".

The telling of what they saw and heard is the tradition. And actually, the term is still in common usage when referring to the Jesus tradition or pre-gospel Jesus stories and etc. Here's an example: The Jesus Legend, A Case for the Historical Reliability of the Synoptic Jesus Tradition...

I'm saying they are drawing from the same tradition. If I went w/ the progressive publication of Matthew theory, then the scraps that Luke had which were Mathaen but not the actual gospel of Matthew would account for the similarities yes shorter versions plus whatever Luke brings to the table.

Thinking more of something like 1 Cor. 15:3 and the thing which he recieved implying a gospel/Jesus tradition. But yes, the "tradition" is what I'm referring to when it was something "received". Another example of Paul having access to a Jesus tradition is 1 Cor. 7:10 and 12.

I think it is more complex than that. A certain "tradition" was going around that was the measure of orthodoxy. Paul mentions it a few times. Could it be that this tradition was developed by the apostles? Nevertheless, the verbal parallels are uncanny possibly suggesting a textual allusion...

You don't think Luke was leaning on Matthew for his "stuff" on the sermon on the plain? There is where we would disagree.

Though the question was not posed to me, I will throw out an answer. There is a very small view that sees the synoptics as independent works. Some with an extremely overly simplistic view of inspiration would just chop it up to the Spirit guiding these men to write their accounts so...

rip that is the sound i heard when that text was removed from its context

As a caveat, I think it is quite likely that James and 1 Peter do allude to Matthew (especially the Sermon on the Mount). Example: compare Matthew 5:11-16 with 1 Peter 2:12. I think Peter understood 5:11-16 as a thematic unit connected together (more to it than that but just a brief example)...

I'm trying to even think of a place in Beale's written work where he would address something like that. And are you thinking for a dissertation idea to answer a question (that has hardly ever been asked) "Why do the gospel accounts only quote or allude from the OT rather than other...

Interesting that you mention Luke not quoting Paul when in fact Paul quotes Luke in 1 Tim. 5:18. What would that mean, especially if Luke was the 3rd synoptic written? Probably that Paul had access to all 3 synoptics at this point. But as stated, the synoptics never quote Paul. Is there...

I've admitted that much. But I also said it is possible albeit not probable. Your next statement shows the possibility and how Q scholarship has evolved to a more likely position. Likely, this is what most of the evangelicals believe who adhere to some form of Q. Even I hold to a Jesus...