Protestantism

» _Boanerges_ - Justin Martyr (A.D. 110-165)

Early Views on Prophecy (Part 3)
Justin Martyr on the Subject of Prophecy

from..... Prophecy in the News

...snippet..

article by: JR Church
http://prophecyinthenews.com/articledeta...
"Let's go back to the second century for a few moments and consider how Justin Martyr (A.D. 110-165), an early Gentile convert and church theologian, viewed some of the prophecies of the Old Testament. To set the scene, the year is about A.D. 135, and the Bar Kochbah revolt against the Roman occupation of Israel has been raging for about three years. Many have fled the Holy Land to escape the violence, and among them is a man named Trypho, now residing in Corinth, Greece. One day, Trypho, in the company of a few friends, was walking near the local gymnasium, and noticed a "distinguished philosopher" coming toward him - or, at least, he thought he was observing a Greek philosopher, because the man was wearing the traditional "white gown" - the attire of the philosopher. Approaching the man in white, Trypho turned and greeted him, desiring to initiate a conversation about philosophy. It turned out that the man in white was Justin, who was also an immigrant from Israel, having been raised in Flavia Neopolis (modern Nablous), a city in Samaria (near Jacob's well in northern Israel).".

-- posted by _Boanerges_

» Brian Tubbs - Manuscript Evidence

Great video...

http://www.leestrobel.com/videoserver/vi...

» Brian Tubbs - JP Moreland

Great article by JP Moreland on evidence for the NT...

http://www.bethinking.org/resource.php?I...

Here's an excerpt...

One of the central claims of Christianity is that Jesus of Nazareth was the incarnate Son of God who died on the cross to atone for the sins of humanity and rose bodily from the dead. Our acceptance of these claims depends on whether or not the New Testament documents are reliable historical sources about Jesus. It is the purpose of this chapter to argue that it is reasonable to accept the substantial historicity of the New Testament. [1]
Detailed works have been written on this topic, but such detail is not possible here. Rather, this chapter will discuss the main features of five arguments bearing on New Testament historicity. Sources for further study will be offered in the notes. I will not discuss the archaeological confirmation of the New Testament or the extra-biblical evidence for the historicity of Jesus. These important facts have been nicely summarized elsewhere. [2]
For our purposes, let us assume that the New Testament is a collection of twenty-seven separate historical sources which, in turn, may have written or oral sources behind them. We will make no assumption which takes the New Testament as a divinely inspired document, although I believe such a position can be defended. [3]

Click on the above link to read the rest of the article. Worth your time!

» Migisi - Very interesting

In response to Very interesting posted by BrianTubbs:

.
I enjoy studying ancient history and early church history.
.
Brian, may I recommend this site, which is loaded with really neat old writings, and references to some I've never heard of, like the apocryphal writing 'The Constitutions of the Apostles'. Just type a topic or church father's name into the search bar.
.
Christian Classics Ethereal Library
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/harnack/origin_...
This page is "Origins of the New Testament", but you can click the 'search' tab and go elsewhere.
.
Instead, I believe, in the face of skepticism toward the Bible, look at it BOOK-by-BOOK.
.
I really enjoy doing that, Bri. See the Suite archived 'Acts' thread which folks here participated in for over two years. 5231 posts (of course, many off topic as usual), beginning Nov. 2, 2004 ending Dec. 8, 2006.
.
http://www.suite101.com/discussion.cfm/m...
.
A fascinating study (IMO) of a book I'd really never closely examined before then. Some great past participants I really miss... Plox, Craig, reddeer.
.
Got dinner cooking. I'll get back to your post later.

-- posted by Migisi

» Brian Tubbs - Good site

In response to Very interesting posted by Migisi:

Yes, I've surfed around the ccel.org site before, but not as much as some of the others. It does have a tremendous amount of info.

What's for dinner?

» paper_turtle - Let's focus on NT

In response to Let's focus on NT posted by BrianTubbs:

I wrote:
The NT was not canonized until the council at Carthage (circa late 4th century CE).
.
My point being: what "bound" early followers of The Way might be different than what you might consider binding now
.
Brian responded
Paper Turtle overstates the lack of consensus for apostolic literature. She cites the Council of Carthage as being where agreement was reached.
.
In actuality, the vast majority of the NT (including the 4 Gospels) was widely accepted as authoritative and binding MUCH earlier than Carthage. There was still disagremeent on books like II Peter, Hebrews, and Revelation. But MOST of the NT was widely accepted by the middle to late 2nd century A.D.

.
Yes BUT the NT as we know it, was not "official" until it was given the *Church's* stamp of approval at Carthage--and therefore was not "officially" binding on all *in the eyes of the church.* Individual congregations still had differing ideas about what was scripture and what wasn't. Doesn't matter what "some" believed; my point still stands: not everyone was bound by the same scripture.
.
Nor does what I said in any way impugn the reliability of scripture.
.
The fact is, a body of human beings decided what was "official" and what was not, and human beings are still making those decisions. Regardless of whether or not one believes they were guided by God, they were by no means perfect. Neither are we.
.
So...it's intellectually unfair and (yes) logically unsound to say that the entire NT was suspect until Carthage.
.
I never said that--or anything which was intended to imply that--and I return to my earlier point:
.
what "bound" early followers of The Way might be different than what you might consider binding now.
.
The same would be true for any Methodist, Congregationalist, Episcopalian, Quaker, or what-have-you. There are doctrinal differences in all churches, and these differences determine how each denomination reads and interprets scripture. We may disagree with a particular interpretation, but we cannot **absolutely** prove any particular viewpoint is utterly and entirely wrong (and hence not authoritative).
.
.
peace and love,
Paper Turtle

-- posted by paper_turtle

» pink101 - The Straw Man

.
I'm at a loss to grasp the value of this discussion thread other than the fact that it is an argument set up in which it appears there is little chance of any possible losers. It's an exercise in futility.
.
That, as I understand it, would be a Straw Man.
.
I see that as what it means to choose one's battles wisely.
.

-- posted by pink101

» Migisi - Good site

In response to Good site posted by BrianTubbs:
.
What's for dinner?
.
It was tuna noodle casserole. The grandkids like it, and it's the only way they'll eat tuna.

-- posted by Migisi

» paper_turtle - Good site

In response to Good site posted by Migisi:

It was tuna noodle casserole. The grandkids like it, and it's the only way they'll eat tuna.

One of my all-time favorites. Next time may I come too?

peace and love,
Paper Turtle

-- posted by paper_turtle

» Migisi - Good site

In response to Good site posted by paper_turtle:

.
One of my all-time favorites. Next time may I come too?
.
You can drop over any time, Paper. We eat a lot of tuna around here. Which tuna brand do you prefer?... Whiskas, Pet Pride, Feline Feast... (wink and tee hee).

-- posted by Migisi