John

No video

John

Рет қаралды 2,103

Reformed Bibliology

Күн бұрын

#textusreceptus
#1689Confession

Пікірлер: 32

@garystorm6368 5 ай бұрын

Excellent! 5 Stars Blessings

@Morethangood. Жыл бұрын

Why did this channel stop :/

@leevww Жыл бұрын

Good study..thanks..much to take in

@KennethSummers Жыл бұрын

Excellent informative video! It is not up to man to decide what should and should be included in the word! God bless you!

@truebaptistfilms 4 жыл бұрын

Great video! Keep ‘em coming!

@jamessheffield4173 4 жыл бұрын

Good info. thanks.

@samuelbonura7439 4 жыл бұрын

Great job!

@thederpyunicorn306 3 жыл бұрын

John Piper wrote an article saying to vote for Biden. Let's just say I've removed John Piper from my list of Christian online sources.

@emmanuelmakoba6085 9 ай бұрын

You're misrepresenting him I think. He wrote an article on why we should rethink voting for Trump

@josemartinez4380 5 ай бұрын

kzfaq.info/get/bejne/qJumeKWn1qiYmaM.htmlsi=xk6a19bI6UxIIkcN

@makarov138 2 жыл бұрын

I believe that it is. But that it is in the wrong place. It should by inserted between verses 7:36 & 37. There it will not interrupt the flow of scripture from :37 and forward. Then when reading 7:37 through :52, then jump to 8:12, the flow is not interrupted.

@fg92304 3 жыл бұрын

What is the chapter of the didascalia in which the PA is mentioned ?

@georgewilson3110 Жыл бұрын

please leave sources, we need this, leave spellings and sources. it's unacceptable that people do not do this. if you know where to find this information please be professional and leave a page for us for references in the desc.

@jamessheffield4173 Жыл бұрын

Are the gospels legends? Another point is that on that view you would have to regard the accounts of the Man as being legends. Now, as a literary historian, I am perfectly convinced that whatever else the Gospels are they are not legends. I have read a great deal of legend and I am quite clear that they are not the same sort of thing. They are not artistic enough to be legends. From an imaginative point of view they are clumsy, they don’t work up to things properly. Most of the life of Jesus is totally unknown to us, as is the life of anyone else who lived at that time, and no people building up a legend would allow that to be so. Apart from bits of the Platonic dialogues, there are no conversations that I know of in ancient literature like the Fourth Gospel. There is nothing, even in modern literature, until about a hundred years ago when the realistic novel came into existence. In the story of the woman taken in adultery we are told Christ bent down and scribbled in the dust with His finger. Nothing comes of this. No one has ever based any doctrine on it. And the art of inventing little irrelevant details to make an imaginary scene more convincing is a purely modern art. Surely the only explanation of this passage is that the thing really happened? The author put it in simply because he had seen it. C.S. Lewis, "What Are We to Make of Jesus Christ?" (1950)

@johnkight7676 4 жыл бұрын

I may have missed it and I know you mentioned the floating tradition argument several time as it relates to John, but I didn’t hear you interact with the PA showing up in other gospel accounts (eg. after Luke 21:38). Any thoughts on that aspect of the floating tradition argument?

@theyoungtextlessandreforme7113 4 жыл бұрын

It doesn't float until a few 9th century and only in a few mss. All of the PA scholars affirm it's original location at 7:53-8:11

@theyoungtextlessandreforme7113 4 жыл бұрын

It's such a dishonest argument it kind of makes me sick

@johnkight7676 4 жыл бұрын

Taylor DeSoto I’m not sure we should expect it to be broadly attested. The fact that it’s still trying to find a home in the 9th century is interesting, though not conclusive. That aside, I don’t think it’s fair to assert that “all of the PA scholars affirm its origin location at 7:53-8:11.” That’s oversimplistic and untrue. There is plenty of conversation about the internal evidence of the PA to the Gospel of John, more specifically It place at 7:53-8:11 and the contextual indicators that seem to demonstrate a later insertion into John’s narrative.

@theyoungtextlessandreforme7113 4 жыл бұрын

@@johnkight7676 It wasn't "still trying to find a home." It well had a home and some manuscripts misplace it. The scholars all reject its originality, but affirm that it came into the mss at G John.

@theyoungtextlessandreforme7113 4 жыл бұрын

@@johnkight7676 “Ambrose is particularly significant for the present discussion because he is the first Christian writer to remark upon Jesus’ acts of writing in PA, the main subject of this thesis. In a letter dated between 385-387 CE, he claims that PA is located in GJohn, and also remarks that the story is, by his time, quite familiar in Christian communities. In Epistle 68 (26), he writes, ‘Numerous times the question [regarding bishops’ involvement in secular courts, specifically concerning capital punishment] has been raised, and well known, too, is the acquittal of the woman who in the Gospel according to John was brought to Christ, accused of adultery.’33 It is clear, then, that Ambrose knows PA in GJohn,34 and further evidence makes it probable that Ambrose read PA at John 7.53-8.11.” Keith, Chris. Jesus Began to Write: Literacy, the Pericope Adulterae, and the Gospel of John. PhD. University of Edinburgh. 2008. P. 119.

@zombiewriter7530 3 жыл бұрын

"The evidence against its authenticity is overwhelming: The earliest manuscripts with substantial portions of John’s Gospel (P66 and P75) lack these verses. They skip from John 7:52 to 8:12. The oldest large codices of the Bible also lack these verses: codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, both from the fourth century, are normally considered to be the most important biblical manuscripts of the NT extant today. ". This is from a christian website. If it's not in the earliest manuscripts how can you judge it to be true? Because it became tradition? It sounds something like Jesus would say? John 7:53 to 8:11 is an interpolation plain and simple.

@Chudsmash777 2 жыл бұрын

I agree, this is a clear example of people adding to scripture and then reject the original because it’s what their ears itches to hear.

@honingpot4577 Жыл бұрын

Its called cognitive dissonance. They will reject that its cognitive dissnonance but its that, 100%. Their faith crumbles when the fact that the bible is not 100% correct is presented to them.