THE BIBLE AND THE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 16 окт 2024
- Is the Bible just "inspiring" or is it the inspired "Word of God"? Another helpful video from ASKABIBLEPROF.COM.
#askabibleprof
#bible
#christian
You can also find us on the web, as well as on Rumble and Facebook at the same name.
If you want to help support the channel, then look for us on Patreon at: / askabibleprof
Doc, this is great! Such a blessing to be attending your NT class at Liberty this summer. I am James Moore. May God continue to bless you and your work.
Great, glad you found it helpful. Thanks for taking the time to view it.
Yeah, liberty is so inclusive
What a Blessing to know that we are always in God's sight. To have this tool of interpretation is a jewel to accompany the study of God's Inspired Word through the Holy Spirit for our instruction, guidance and need of Salvation in Christ Jesus! Amen Thank You Doc for the breakdown!!
Thanks, and glad to you found the video helpful. Blessings.
Oh my!! I got this link from an online course I'm taking and not for one moment did I think it would be soo good! Wow! This is amazing! Thank You Abba for sending this vessel to educate us on this topic!
I'm happy that you are benefiting from the channel. May I ask, what course are you taking and at what school?
Thanks Doc., it brought clarity for understanding the Word of God and how the word was inspired.
Glad you found it helpful, thanks for watching and blessings.
Strong Word Doc. Thanks.
Good to know you found it helpful. Blessings.
Thanks Doc, very informative and truth revealing!! I am excited to learn from you.
Great, and I'm exciting that we can learn together. Blessings.
This was great. Really well done technically and the information was presented in a clear and easy to understand manner. I look forward to more.
Great, good to know that you found in beneficial.
Thanks Doc, clear and concise explanation of inspiration.
Chi; I regret that I am now just finding this comment. Thank you for your kind words, and I hope you find the new content just as beneficial. Blessings.
Buy the book, please. _Invention of the Inspired Text, The: Philological Windows on the Theopneustia of Scripture_ (The Library of New Testament Studies) Paperback - October 20, 2022 by John C. Poirier
Do you ever get tired of appealing to the authority of others? Why don't you provide evidence to support your positions? Why should any read an entire book simply because you recommend it? If the evidence is some much on your side, then why don't you provide some?
@@askabibleprof7099 actually, the question should be is why do you reject that book? But you don't answer questions. You just throw it to the wind and change the topic. You're pitiful I told you that before. I already dealt with the so-called inspired text. You never responded and you never apologized about lying so apparently people are on your butt on responding but you're not responding. You're just calling out names
@@askabibleprof7099 you should read the book because you will learn something. And you still have not dealt with the case that there was no Hebrew Bible when first Timothy or second Timothy or any of the pastoral epistles were written and even if you believe that it was Paul there was no New Testament then and to tell you the truth there was no Old Testament. You're making a full of yourself
*Fool not full
@@gmac6503 I'm not sure that is even a rational statement.
They have no idea who the authors were yet they claim divine inspiration. Apparently god forgot to sign it or have his authors sign it. The Pentateuch was NOT written by Moses. The Gospels are anonymous (which I addressed on one of his other videos yet got no response to my points). Paul wrote 7 and Acts contradicts what Paul actually wrote. But this guy is a PhD!! yeah, ok. Gonna look up where he got this. James White university maybe? no, there were only a couple out of that unaccredited place.
As far as I can tell, I have answered all of your comments and addressed your basic approach to the historical data, which is that it's all worthless. That position is the most extreme biased position one can have. As far as the Pentateuch is concerned, Jesus, Paul, and the early church understood that it was written by Moses (or under his direction to a scribe). That was the view of almost all Jews of the first century BC and AD. That is what the historical data undeniably reveals. My credentials are not the issue (all of which were earned at accredited and respected schools). Your position is that all historical data is worthless and that only modern secular scholarship can provide the "truth." That is the fallacy of appealing to authority. Consequently, your position cannot withstand critical examination of the facts and reasoned opposition to your conclusions.
@@askabibleprof7099 well, as far as you can tell, doesn't mean anything because you haven't really responded to any of my points and then again, you tell me that I deny certain things and that is not the case and I guess you make up these things because you're telling me what I believe and it's not even close. and your credentials are the issue because you're an apologist. You haven't studied the critical scholars. Yes you've gone through an accredited university because I checked. James White didn't so you went to an accredited university but it's an apologetic strategic move. Do you even know any critical scholars? and again, why don't you buy any of the books that I recommended and if you think that Moses wrote the Pentateuch it just proves my case and you're the one going back in history to try to prove what you believe now is true. So you're the one appealing to history in the past, but that doesn't mean anything. Now that's a fallacy. What I've written is not a fallacious argument. I wish you would just learn to have normal conversations with people and quit assuming what I'm thinking because you don't have any idea what I'm thinking. Read some scholarly books and get back to me. Besides fundamental evangelical apologists, nobody believes that Moses wrote the Pentateuch. I mean I reread EJ, Young, and OT Allis's books that I bought and I cringe at believing what I used to believe. I laugh at my notes that I wrote in the book. I sounded like you. Ugh! Does your huge library there have any critical scholars' books? And quit telling me that you've responded to my points because you haven't really responded to any of them. And you won't buy a $50 book by Mark Goodacre or watch any of the discussions that he had with other critical scholars with whom they disagree. You're a Putz. You don't want to read those books because it would make you think and you can't refute them. Joel Baden on the documentary hypothesis or any good commentary on genesis from Tabor, M Smith, John Day, Drazin, David Carr, Hendel, Konrad Schmid, John Collins... I could go on and on... God forbid you read Francesca Stavrakopoulou's _God: An Anatomy_ book. You wouldn't be able to handle that! For the n-th time, quit telling me what I believe and quit erecting strawmen so you attack a false position so you can look good.
This 'professor' writes: Your position is that all historical data is worthless and that only modern secular scholarship can provide the "truth." That is the fallacy of appealing to authority. Consequently, your position cannot withstand critical examination of the facts and reasoned opposition to your conclusions.
Me: to which I conclude after he writes that that there is no point in trying to have a rational conversation with this self- proclaimed professor, who doesn't know the difference between True scholarship and apologetics. I mean, seriously? I say that to him and he rewords it and he uses it as a "response" to me and he really thinks that this is the way dialogue goes. It's actually hard to believe that someone is really like this.
@@gmac6503 The fact is that you actually declared that much of the the relevant historical data concerning the origins of the Gospels are "lost" and thus not relevant to the issues that we having been discussing (e.g., Papias). But some how you assert that Mark wrote the first Gospel. What is the evidence that supports your position? Is it not the historical data that you claim is "lost"?! It's not rational to claim that all historical data supports your positions, but is some how worthless with respect to those that disagree with you.
@@askabibleprof7099 1) Never said "that much of the relevant historical data concerning the origins of the Gospels are "lost" - so Strike 1 to you. He never reads anything by scholars nor comments on his channel. He 'inserts' what he wants to and then refutes it.
2) The evidence that Mark is first is in any scholarly book or commentary and is the major consensus among the SCHOLARS, which you do not read. Damn, is it so hard for you to even force yourself to watch a video or two by Tabor, Allison, Ehrman, A Y Collins, Hurtado and dozens of others? You deny Markan priority! Read CURRENT scholarship!
3) Again, I never said "historical data is lost" so stop whatever you are consuming.
I already told you why Markan priority is my view. I never brought up Papias except to say what he said about Mark and that HIS books are lost in history so when he is quoted there is no evidence. Younever deal with the examples and you keep switching to another topic.
Papias-early 2nd century(AD 95-110) but books lost to history.
Excerpts in Irenaeus and Eusebius (early 4th century)
Papias of Hieropolis claimed Matthew originally written in Hebrew (which RFW says may be so) but problematic to say he names authors of MM 120-130 CE (as we know the gospels). Also says Mark was interpreter of Peter.
Papias: mark got info from peter, was NOT an eyewitness to jesus, not written 'in order'
matthew has 90% of mark; 77% of precise wording
luke has 52% of mark; 61% wording
Those are SOME of the reasons. I think this is the third time I mentioned this but you just apparently haven't noticed
Plus I wrote Nowhere in Mark is his name mentioned! 11,000 words.
None of the gospels' authors are known - and I gave the reasons why
You never address anything that I say except to go on a tangent and respond to points that were never made.
Heck, on one post I made I even numbered them for you but I got crickets
Heck, you believe Jonah was really swallowed by a big fish and that Moses wrote the Pentateuch. I am sorry you are so inept at reading modern scholars and are stuck in the 16th century but that is not my problem.
Heck, the DSS would straighten you out a bit if you read them but you won't read anyone scholarly on them either. And I'm not talking about christian apologists on the DSS. Again, they have been refuted on Isaiah and other issues.
You go by a title prof and a prof that does not read the scholarship or peer-reviewed scholarly journals is not a prof!
There is a reason why the scholars do not deal with apologists and that is because they are irrelevant and have nothing to say. They don't deal with the scholarship and the scholars already know what the apologist is gonna say because it is the same old nonsense that has already been said thousands of times.
Dang it, buy some scholarly books and commentaries and read them! And don't say you have. You haven't!
I've already read the books you have - and more! The one you wrote is ummm, never mind.
I've supported my positions and you never once responded. You're not fooling anybody. You act like a child who thinks nobody sees or knows what they wrote. I've had people tell me the same and I even had a couple people buy that book because they want to learn.but apparently anybody who disagrees with you is a liar
I've never referred to anyone as a "liar." Unjustifiably bias, yes, but a liar, no.