Thursday, March 23, 2017
On the Shortness of Life by Seneca
On the Shortness of Life by Seneca translated by Gareth D. Williams
TEXT
AUDIO
On the Shortness of Life by Seneca translated by John W. Basore
TEXT
AUDIO
On the Shortness of Life by Seneca translated by Aubrey Stewart
TEXT starting on page 288
AUDIO
Monday, March 13, 2017
The Screwtape Letters by C.S. Lewis
See also my blogpost on Lewis' book Mere Christianity. It includes a link to the text, though the links to the audio versions may be dead:
http://misclane.blogspot.com/2013/08/mere-christianity-by-cs-lewis.html
Click on the "Labels" link below for more C.S. Lewis blogs.
Saturday, January 7, 2017
Bart Ehrman's Current Beliefs Regarding Jesus and His Divinity
Jesus as God in the Synoptics by Bart Ehrman
The following are some aspects of Bart Ehrman's CURRENT views (as of the date of this post) regarding the Historical Jesus and claims about Jesus' divinity. Ehrman is a globally known agnostic scholar and New Testament critique. Much of the following list (1-10) are from Robert Bowman's critque of Ehrman's book How Jesus Became God. Bowman discusses his list starting at 24 minutes and 36 seconds.
1.Ehrman believes Jesus was a real historical person. That Jesus was a Galilean Jew who preached things regarding the Kingdom of God.
2. Ehrman doesn't believe everything that the Gospels say. Nevertheless, he believes the canonical New Testament gospels are the earliest, and for all practical purposes, the only valuable sources of detailed information about the historical Jesus. The Gnostic gospels are worthless in regard to discovering anything regarding the historical Jesus.
3. Ehrman believes Jesus thought that he was, or at least would become, the Messiah.
4. Ehrman believes Jesus was crucified at the order of Pontius Pilate and that he actually died on the cross.
5. Ehrman believes some of Jesus' ORIGINAL followers (not decades later) sincerely believed that they saw Jesus alive from the dead.
6. Ehrman believes that the belief that Jesus rose from the dead convinced his disciples almost immediately that he was a divine figure exalted to the right hand of God. It was not a later development. There never was a Christianity that viewed Jesus as just a good teacher.
7. Ehrman believes the belief that Jesus was a divine figure who existed before his human life (who pre-existed) was accepted by at least some Christians even before Paul's earliest Epistles (even though Paul's earliest Epistles all pre-date the Gospels).
8. Ehrman believes that in Phil. 2:6-11 Jesus IS presented as a pre-existent "divine" (in some sense) figure who became a human being.
9. Ehrman now believes, contrary to his past opinion, that Jesus IS called "God" (in some sense) in Rom. 9:5. See chapter 7 of Ehrman's book How Jesus Became God [The relevant passage is quoted here: http://trinitynotes.blogspot.com/2014/05/romans-95-and-christs-deity.html]
10. Ehrman believes that the author of the Gospel of John clearly taught in the Gospel that Jesus existed before creation as someone who was distinct from God the Father, and yet was "God" (in some sense) and was equal to God (the Father). Furthermore, that the author of John didn't originate this view. For example, the prologue derives from pre-Johannine sources.
[ Numbers 1-10 from Bowman]
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
11. Ehrman believes, and has stated numerous times in debate, that John 8:58 does have the author of the Gospel making Jesus claim to be "God".
12.Ehrman believes all authors of the 4 canonical Gospels personally believed that Jesus was "God" (in some sense and in different ways).See this video here (already cued up):
https://youtu.be/CTgig9F782s?t=1960
Or HERE , or HERE
I'm not sure about this, but according to Tony Costa Bart Ehrman sees a general consistency and continuation in Paul's teaching when compared to Jesus' teaching. As opposed to a stark difference or contrast.
https://youtu.be/9G85LwWMRvk?t=7m34s
see also:
William Lane Craig's Video Exposing Bart Ehrman's Shoddy Scholarship Regarding the Criteria of Authenticity HERE: https://youtu.be/70yS6sxi4p4
Why Don't the Synoptics Have Jesus Claiming to be the "I Am"?
Resources Responding to Bart Ehrman
My Blog Trinity Notes
Monday, November 7, 2016
Gideons' International Statement About the Bible
THE BIBLE contains the mind of God, the state of man, the way of salvation, the doom of sinners, and the happiness of believers. Its doctrines are holy, its precepts are binding, its histories are true, and its decisions are immutable. Read it to be wise, believe it to be safe, and practice it to be holy. It contains light to direct you, food to support you, and comfort to cheer you.
It is the traveler’s map, the pilgrim’s staff, the pilot’s compass, the soldier’s sword, and the Christian’s charter. Here Paradise is restored, Heaven opened, and the gates of hell disclosed.
CHRIST is its grand subject, our good its design, and the glory of God its end.
It should fill the memory, rule the heart, and guide the feet. Read it slowly, frequently, and prayerfully. It is a mine of wealth, a paradise of glory, and a river of pleasure. It is given you in life, will be opened at the judgment, and be remembered forever. It involves the highest responsibility, will reward the greatest labor, and will condemn all who trifle with its sacred contents.
Saturday, November 5, 2016
The Atonement Studies by William Lane Craig
The Evangelical doctrine of Penal Substitution has always had detractors. Since the beginning of the 21st century the attacks have been more pronounced and sophisticated. The following are some brief lectures by William Lane Craig on the topic of the atonement where he goes through various theories and then defends the Evangelical doctrine of Penal Substitution.
I'm currently adding links to the videos as they are being posted. I'm not sure how many videos in total there will eventually be.
[[UPDATE:
1. There are Lectures on the Atonement by Craig at the bottom of this blogpost.
2. There is also Craig's weekly Sunday School class Defenders where he addresses the doctrine of the Atonement. See THIS LINK or the link at the bottom of this blogpost.
3. For the meantime Craig's book "The Atonement" is freely available in pdf HERE or html HERE. ]]
(https://youtu.be/nSkItzwdi98)
Part 6
(https://youtu.be/e0PT10nNOac)
(https://youtu.be/jZO_yvuDZaQ)
(https://youtu.be/wkU1EEUyFEs)
Part 41
(https://youtu.be/DycmBXELKkU)
Part 42
(https://youtu.be/66PSsesnJJQ)
Part 43
(https://youtu.be/M2PAkZAnzQI)
Part 44
(https://youtu.be/TixeBFal1mg)
Part 45
(https://youtu.be/U-eh3vP0wR4)
Part 46
(https://youtu.be/3sEwey8VGWw)
Part 47
(https://youtu.be/N2d2d7fnFnE)
Part 48
(https://youtu.be/ZufY2VTrpVg)
Part 49
(https://youtu.be/UBi2vkitO80)
Part 50
(https://youtu.be/Oo0aQLicNEY)
(https://youtu.be/-sB9ss6dJ0E)
Part 52
(https://youtu.be/xnL4VizS_DI)
Part 53
(https://youtu.be/2pZo4LSJDiw)
Part 54
(https://youtu.be/W6-y04P58h4)
Part 55
(https://youtu.be/5Pra8fkFVqs)
Part 56
(https://youtu.be/4lrhX50Pg6U)
Part 57
(https://youtu.be/9P4wqelbhbw)
Part 58
(https://youtu.be/BKeg9DKAfaU)
Part 59
(https://youtu.be/F4ZbFN16QGU)
Part 60
(https://youtu.be/cUe8594v-bo)
The Coherence of Penal Substitution | Queen's University
(https://youtu.be/IoC-UTNh_6Q)
Divine Forgiveness & Legal Pardon | Houston Baptist University - October 2017
(https://youtu.be/pmGsrmu2yEo)
Penal Substitutionary Atonement Theories Today |
Craig, Moo, Seifrid, Porter - EPS at AAR/SBL 2017
(https://youtu.be/eHBF29W0NyU)
Q&A: Penal Substitutionary Atonement Theories Today | Craig, Moo, Seifrid, Porter - EPS 2017
https://youtu.be/ccxhK-kyE7c
Does Penal Substitution Satisfy Divine Justice - Toronto 2018
https://youtu.be/pDYNoRQqNVE
Is Penal Substitution Biblical? | Harding University - February 2018
https://youtu.be/yNtZfaDUzIg
Is Penal Substitution Unjust? | Harding University - February 2018
https://youtu.be/G0g1IlCpiHc
https://youtu.be/y3Q3KTpAmzg
WLC on Eleonore Stump’s Critique of Reformation Penal Substitutionary Atonement Theories
(https://youtu.be/1FylkutYePk)
In Defense of Penal Substitution | EPS Plenary Lecture - November 2018
https://youtu.be/QsNqBOAU1_s
Craig also addresses the Doctrine of the Atonement in his Defenders Sunday school class. See part 8 of the Doctrine of Christ at the following link:
William Lane Craig's Introductory Lectures on the Trinity
Refusing to Soften the Atonement
(Reasonable Faith Podcast)
Monday, October 17, 2016
Should We Pray for the Devil?
I saw the following meme on Facebook
The following was my response (with possible future typo corrections and additions):
1. It must be remembered that Satan sinned against greater light (i.e. knowledge) than all human beings, and probably than all other angels. He was probably one of the chief angels of God (if not THE chief; cf. Isa. 14 & Ezek. 28). He's the most guilty of all both in terms of greater light and in terms of being the greatest instigator of sin in others via temptation and lies down through the centuries. Satan probably led the angels in their falling away just as he instigated the Fall of Adam and Eve. Satan might also be the most gifted, powerful and intelligent of all creatures ever created (with the likely exception of resurrected and glorified human beings). So, Satan also sinned with greater accountability because of his superior intellect and powers.
2. It must also be remembered that grace (i.e. unmerited favor) and mercy are, by definition, not obligated. God didn't have to provide salvation for fallen creatures (whether human or angels). God would be righteous and just in never having provided salvation for either humans or angels.
3. Historic Christianity affirms God's exhaustive foreknowledge of the Future (whether Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Arminian, Lutheran, Molinist, Calvinist etc.). The Bible predicts and prophesies that the devil will not repent and has been destined for ultimate and final judgment (cf. Matt. 25:41; Rev. 20:10; Gen. 3:14-15; Rom. 16:20). To pray for the devil's salvation would contradict God's revelation of the future and is therefore sinful because you're denying God's foreknowledge (and if a high view of predestination is true, like in Calvinism, then also denying God's foreordination).
4. For Protestants Christ died to redeem human beings. In the context of redemption and atonement the author of Hebrews states in Heb. 2:16, " For surely it is ***NOT ANGELS*** that he helps, but he helps the offspring of Abraham." There's no indication of Christ dying for angels. Yes, there's a sense in which Christ's redemption has a universal effect on all creation and so in that sense Christ redeemed it by His death on the cross. But in terms of penal substitution, Jesus only died for human beings. Additionally, Calvinists generally believe Jesus only died for the elect. I'm a Calvinist and I lean toward the Calvinistic doctrine of Limited Atonement, but I'm not dogmatic on it. I still think it could be false.
5. For Protestants, we interpret the Bible to teach that sinners (whether human or angelic) by nature cannot freely come to God in repentance and faith. That's because sinners are in bondage to sin (contrary to Pelagianism). It takes God's initiating/enabling grace to touch a person for them to be delivered from bondage to sin and to be able to now freely come to God (contrary to Semi-Pelagianism which says that sometimes man can self-initiate an application of grace). Catholics and Arminians are among those who believe this. If Calvinism is true, then God's grace is not merely initiating and enabling, but it's also sufficient and efficacious. Either way, God's grace is revealed in Christ's atonement, and that atonement also graciously makes possible the redemption of sinners. But as has been noted in #4 Christ died for humans and (in all probability) not for fallen angels.
