Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Sutcliffes Commentary on the Old & New Testaments - Book of Philippians file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Sutcliffes Commentary on the Old & New Testaments - Book of Philippians book. Happy reading Sutcliffes Commentary on the Old & New Testaments - Book of Philippians Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Sutcliffes Commentary on the Old & New Testaments - Book of Philippians at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Sutcliffes Commentary on the Old & New Testaments - Book of Philippians Pocket Guide.
Bible Study Tools

That the Jesus story is a legend, including the resurrection, is the best explanation by far for the facts that we have. It has become a more fashionable explanation over time, which is itself the making of a legend. Historians have new ideas about things, and the idea that Jesus was a legend became possible after not being a Christian became possible. I expand on why Jesus is a legend here.

Joseph Benson's Commentary of the Old and New Testaments

Over time, new ideas can be discussed and evaluated. What evidence helped to move people in that direction over the years? Or was it the new ideas that did that? Interesting questions, perhaps, but not to me. Can you list some of them? The point about evidence is that there is almost none for the supernatural version of the story.

By contrast, we point to legend to explain myriad interesting tales, from Merlin the wizard to the choking Doberman urban legend. Was it some new physical evidence or some new cultural data or something else? I double my thanks. If the domain is religion, keep in mind that there is no consensus.

Free persons of all faiths from the tyranny of their religion

Which legend explanation? There is no the legend explanation, just like there is no the Big Bang Theory. Based on Julius Caesar? Roman Conspiracy? The apostles invented the legend? The apostles were legend as well? A historical character with a lot of legendary stuff attached? More important — how do you decide? How the individual components came together and where they came from is an interesting question. All the rest is a tangent. For too long, historians have employed this true and false methodology, to the detriment of their profession. It has only been recently that some historical scholars have employed probability theory in their assessments of evidence and have come to the conclusion, more often than not, that the evidence shows that a historical Jesus is less probable than that of a fictional Jesus.

Does that mean a historical Jesus is not possible? Just means that a historical Jesus is not probable. No new evidence has been discovered, but a new approach to assessing the evidence has been employed. Simply said: also with probability theory the motto is garbage in, garbage out. Plus you are guilty of a false dichotomy.

The scientific method. Are you noting that some bits of the gospel story the existence of Jerusalem, for example are historical, so not every word of it is legend? If you were not there then you cannot say it did or did not happen. You can say, I find it very difficult to believe it happened, or it goes against what I understand via my knowledge of nature concerning what is or is not possible. Whether you approve or disapprove is up to you.

I was not there when you were born, so I can maintain that a stork delivered you.

Response to “Top 10 Myths About Jesus’ Resurrection” (2 of 5)

You can say that you find it very difficult to believe your were delivered by a stork, but all you have is imputation. As a human being, I have enough respect for MNb that I would be inclined to ask him to consider a more plausible explanation and point him towards the evidence. Also, I would mention to him that there is no more evidence for his stork theory than there is for my immaterial snowflake fairy theory.

If he preferred to believe in baby-toting storks despite my respectful finger-pointing, it would fine by me. Until he and his crowd started buying up hospitals and controlling maternity wards, interfering with reproductive rights and insisting that we defer to an outrageously inaccurate claim about how little MNb showed up in the world before he grew up to make awesome comments on this site that are peppered with Dutch expressions that amuse and horrify us.

Do you think so little of him that you would just let him utter nonsense and not ask him why he believes in storks? Greg, Given your comment appeared at the bottom of this section, what do you mean by what you wrote above? Please be precise.


  1. The Daily Devotional Series: Psalm, volume 1.
  2. Les pièces (Autofiction) (French Edition).
  3. Book of Revelation.
  4. Wesleyan Heritage Collection CD!
  5. Colouring Outside the Lines.
  6. Trauer Die verwandelte Form von Liebe (German Edition).

The big joke that there is actually some for Storkism. In the district of Hanover there is a correlation of nearly 1 between the amount of brooding storks and the amount of human births. Why all the hate for the Storkist Theory of Birth? We should teach the controversy and like that there. And what I want to do is be so angry with Storks that I refuse to admit they exist. Or is that too controversial? MNb put forth the assertion. I neither need to support it or detract from it. The universe is evidence for the universe.

It is not evidence that your beliefs about the universe are accurate.

Fourth Century and the Beginning of the Vulgate - Oxford Scholarship

It is a worthy answer to your question. The video has Desertphile responding to a creationist, Stone Commander, who asked if the Big Bang Theory is true, why are all planets round. The last 45 seconds are a YouTube classic.

After he had posted several videos and seeing the responses, Stone Commander realized that creationism and its arguments were wrong. The Big Bang does not imply that chaos turned into randomness. The Big Bang was an orderly event. Describing that order is exactly what physics tries to do. If God caused the universe to come into existence from nothing, explain how a cause acting on nothing can have an effect? Apparently your Creator-God has explanatory power or the term objective evidence does not make any sense. The Creator alone, created all that is.

Consistency does not apply to the Creator as Logic does not apply to the Creator. You were the one to originally claim that there is no such thing. You must have a definition to make such an assertion. What did you mean?

So anything goes according to you. Also fine by you? I am not asking whether you could force him to believe it. You are backing away from your previous claims. Beliefs have consequences. Believing prayer works is for finding car keys is one thing but if one believes it is better to pray for a sick child than to go to the doctor, there are tragic consequences for irresponsible beliefs.

If the kid was older and had mental issues, would you not go beyond stopping your kid from jumping?

Philippians Bible Study

You can get the required psychiatric help for your mentally ill child. You can get a young child to jump from a safe height to prove that putting a towel around the neck does not make one capable of flight.