But even if you should suffer for the sake of righteousness, you are blessed. And do not fear their intimidation, and do not be troubled, but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you yet with gentleness and reverence; and keep a good conscience so that in the thing in which you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ will be put to shame. 1 Peter 3: 14-16
Dale TuggyOf course, one may be a prophet, a messenger, and in a sense "be" the message.
Here's a followup to my previous post:
Anti-Trinitarian apostate Dale Tuggy attempted to respond to this post:
Dale Tuggy:The only problem with this argument is that it doesn't actually imply or even suggest the deity of Jesus.
Except that it does.
Of course, he *is* a prophet.
In my experience, Clarkians like to describe Scripturalism as an axiomatic system. For instance:
(A) There is an axiom, called “The Axiom of Revelation,” from which, by itself, there can be validly deduced an important set of theorems.
(B) These theorems belong to a number of fields, such as theology, history, logic, ethics, politics,
There are different ways of broaching the deity of Christ, but here's a simple, neglected tack: what's the difference between the Son of God and a prophet of God? Here's one crucial difference:
i) Prophet: believe me
ii) Jesus: believe in me
We should believe a prophet of God because he speaks for God. We should believe his message.
But we don't
Elizabeth Warren is often treated as the ideological leader of the Democrat Party. A few days ago she made a speech on the Senate floor attacking "rightwing" efforts to defund Planned Parenthood. A few quick comments:
She asked Republicans if they knew what year it is. Did they wake up in 1950 or 1890s?
It's unclear what's special about those dates.
My dialogue with Ryan appears to be winding down. Much of this involves an intramural debate between Scripturalists. I'll bypass most of that and zero in on two paragraphs:
I’m not sure if Steve is saying we can’t extract Christian theology from Scripture or if he is implying that the “data base” of indubitable, indisputable
I'm somewhat hesitant to comment on this post:
It's a sensitive, personal issue. However, Beckwith put it out there for public consumption. And it contains an implicit Catholic apologetic (i.e. a Catholic miracle confirms Roman Catholic theology). Moreover, I've waited three months.
What surprised me somewhat was the wiggle-room that some of the evangelical contributors were willing to grant to Mormonism, regarding the question of whether Mormon beliefs are acceptable or
I've going to focus on one aspect of Nate Shannon's recent article "The epistemology of divine conceptualism," Int J Philos Relig (2015) 78:123–130.
As no doubt the reader will have noticed, I harbor an openness to the possibility that the laws of logic as we know them do not exist necessarily, in the strong sense in which this is usually
I'm going to comment on Ryan's latest post:
To set the stage, by using the Cartesian demon I'm playing devil's advocate. For the sake of argument, I'm assuming a far more skeptical viewpoint than I myself endorse. But I'm doing that because I'm responding to
Statewide Amendment 1: Called “The American and Alabama Laws for Alabama Courts
Famously progressive and permissive Holland has tried multiculturalism and decided that it just doesn’t work. In a historic reversal, the Dutch are abandoning government policies in support of multiculturalism and demanding intregration and acceptance of
I first saw The Garden of the Finzi Continis when I was about 12. It made an indelible impression on my youthful mind. C. S. Lewis discussed the value of rereading good books, and Leland Ryken has discussed the inexhaustibility of good literature. As you age, you change. When you reread a good book, it has newer significance, not because the book
The 2015 General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in America will be most remembered for how we responded to a personal resolution asking that the PCA acknowledge and repent of past sins during the Civil Rights era.
One of the first major speeches made was by a Hispanic member of the Committee who wondered why we were only addressing
I'm going to begin by quoting some representative statements:
They argued that the time for confession of sin that is acknowledged to have occurred is always now, and that if we admit that we have sinned, we should not delay but confess our sins now. Psalm 32 was appealed to, on which the Very Reverend Dr. Bryan Chapell preached the opening night
I recently left some comments at the Calvinist International:
It appears that conversation has died down, so I'm going to repost my comments.
Vincent Torley asked some questions, which I answered. Torley is a Catholic Intelligent Design
Sean Michael LucasYesterday at 8:18pm · Twitter ·I have to admit: not sure how a white person can read any history of race in America & not think there's a lot to repent of & apologize for.
Predictably, this statement provoked a strong response, both pro and con. Commenters who defended the tweet appealed to the principle of
Many people who oppose capital punishment are the same people who support assisted suicide. A stock objection to capital punishment is the risk of executing the innocent. If you're wrong, they don't get a second chance.
But when it comes to assisted suicide, you know that you're killing the innocent. They weren't even convicted of a serious
The principle concern I have has to do with the incomprehensibility of God.
NT scholars typically think "Jesus traditions" were initially transmitted orally. More liberal scholars think this was creative oral tradition; more conservative scholars think this was oral history, based on retentive living memory. Oral cultures foster a retentive memory.
Occasionally, you have a maverick scholar like Alan Millard who thinks
Ryan Hedrich has written a post that's in part a taxonomy of Scripturalist positions, as well as interacting with my analysis:
Before engaging his post, I'll begin with some definitions:
Traditionally, knowledge was defined as true belief. However, that's
All views presented are those of the respective author. Inclusion in the Apologetic Report should not be taken as an endorsement. However, we do review both authors and posts to make sure the views/opinions presented are edifying to believers, instructive to those being called, and most importantly, glorifying to God. Apologetic Report reserves the right to remove posts that do not, in our view, meet this criteria. All content used is in accordance with Section 107 of the Copyright Act.
May the information here, bless you in your sanctification and bring glory to God and Him alone.