N.T. Wright is certainly not the only view or last view. I suppose slapped might sound good to a person disagreeing with Wright. However Wright not only studies he thinks which occasionally receives objections from various angles. It is possible he makes mistakes but he does not just repeat testimony.
Nonsense beliefs this second coming. However, he appeared to me as a blackjack dealer, in or out of inebriation I cannot tell, and he said unto me, "split not thou when thou hast been dealt double 5's or even 6's thus say the Lord of Hosts." And I said Lord, I shall double down on two 5's by and by but double 6's? And the Lord said in the whirlwind, "wherein hast thou doubted thy Lord, where wast thou when the rains came and the beggar asked humbly for a fish?" And at that moment I knew to hit on the double 6's as the 9 cometh and I was satisfied thereafter.
Myth is misused by the powerful to subjugate the masses all too often.
I guess when you run out of years to check off, then you will know for certain he isn’t coming back. I suppose that’d be at the point that time stops.
"Your eyes saw my unformed substance; in your book were written, every one of them, the days that were formed for me, when as yet there was none of them." Psalm 139:16 ESV
I guess when you run out of years to check off, then you will know for certain he isn’t coming back. I suppose that’d be at the point that time stops.
People have been checking these boxes off every century for the last 2,000 years. I have simply joined them in a box checking party! It wouldn't surprise me to learn there will be people checking boxes 2,000 years from now and he still will not have returned from the dead. Does that compute?
I suppose this is Shulem making a prophecy, which may very well pan out.
"Your eyes saw my unformed substance; in your book were written, every one of them, the days that were formed for me, when as yet there was none of them." Psalm 139:16 ESV
He's a Christian apologist who has been slapped silly by many. Why should I go with him and his ideas?
Because he is a widely recognized and one of the world's leading, most rigorously peer reviewed New Testament historians?
Philo, you're a scholar and a gentleman. Would you be will to give us the names of some other New Testament scholars that agree with Wright in regard to his views concerning 1st century Jewish apocalypticism?
There were some, you know.
They each believed that the text of the New Testament was pointing to the 1st century generation, and they were fulfilled precisely on schedule in 70 AD with the Roman destruction of the Jerusalem Temple.
Do you give these guys any credence?
Regards,
MG
Oh he is well known, and well favored by many, but consensus scholarship is not the means to gain truth. So if one gets say 100 others who agree with Wright, does that make him right (or Wright?) GRIN. I find it interesting that Wright is the gent you pick. I personally have found Dale C. Allision Jr. to be quite good as well.