Search results

This is a thread of textual criticism. Textual critics (i.e. geeks like me) know that the variant is really not going to cause a controversy of meaning. But this is a significant variant nonetheless, and it does have literary and theological consequences that are important. And hopefully you...

I just read this article by Mounce He pointed out that the NA28 has put in "Jesus" instead of NA27's "Lord" reading. Mention was made to Metzger's commentary as to why "Jesus" was not used despite the decent external support. So... where do you stand on the issue. Which reading is...

Oh come one and watch the video... he says exactly that. Even a kjvO could get a kick out of it if you would loosen up a bit.

The problem w/ SBTS (and likely SEBTS) is that the modular PhD concentrations are not the biblical studies/NT/OT/theolgy that most are interested in. I'm pretty sure that SEBTS has PhD modules, but again it is for leadership degrees and such. Not the biblical/theological studies that modulars...

I think the trend is that even ATS schools can offer online degrees now. Not all are choosing to do so. For instance, I still have to do my ThM in residency at SEBTS (which is hard when I am so close to finished and out of the country).

One might even say over-simplified. I still don't see how you can justify your question as an either/or. As it stands, most see it as a both/and, probably many who have given you answers. Some have commented that one leads to the other, so they chose one, but they communicated that both imply...

I completely agree and like the way you said that. It was a proper use of contextualization. The message and facts stayed the same. Only the medium was updated. I thought it was excellent.

I am adamantly opposed to contextualizing the gospel so people can fit it into their notions and etc. Example, if people don't know what a sheep is, don't change the animal to help them understand. Teach them what a sheep is... So here is a Christmas video that contextualizes the story of...

I don't want you being rude to him either. JB is a friend of mine, though we disagree on the DoG.

Wow... kinda harsh there, brother

I tried to send him a message. If he doesn't get a laugh out of it, then I'll take it down. didn't take that long to make.

read the comments on youtube... clearly it was edited. meant to be a joke. I wonder if I can get a conspiracy going and rile up the KJVO's.

Well that might help :D

Did you hear the news??? He just posted this on his youtube channel: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pK45meK4Upc&feature=youtu.be

Says you. But many of us disagree w/ your initial premise thus believe your question to be flawed.

So you thought you would load the question to get the answer you want??? That's real honest.

I think all labels are wrong and from the devil. I would never do such a thing to myself or others!!!!

How is there not a both/and? Why is that option removed as a possibility? How can you say that culpability rest on only 1 option?

which is under Luke's 35% or so

I mean what I said, Luke-Acts is the majority of the NT (like 30%). It was meant to be jovial since it had nothing to do with this thread. But it is still true. Luke (assuming Lukan authorship for Luke-Acts) makes up the majority of the NT. And if Luke also had a hand in Hebrews (as either...