Bible Research Tools Discussion Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

The Bible Research Tools Discussion Forum is now online!

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
 1 
 on: September 18, 2018, 07:56:18 AM 
Started by LXXResearcher - Last post by Rev20

On the same subject, this is a great sermon on the age of the earth by Dr. Albert Mohler, Jr., President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary:


Dan,

I noticed that John Stott was mentioned by both Dr's Mortenson and Mohler.

Mohler stated (at the 41:07 mark) that Stott wrote in his Romans commentary an interpretation that every humanist would applaud -- that Adam was an existing hominid, adopted by God.

Mortenson, at about the 17:20 mark of Part II, quoted this equally troubling statement from Stott's book, The Cross of Christ:

"The Bible everywhere views human death not as a natural but as a penal event. It is an alien intrusion into God's good world, and not part of his original intention for humankind. To be sure, the fossil record indicates that predation and death existed in the animal kingdom before the creation of man. But God seems to have intended for his human image-bearers a more noble end..." [John R. W. Stott, "The Cross of Christ." InterVarsity Press, 1986, Chap 3, p.65]

I wonder how many souls Stott turned away from Christ during his "illustrious" career?

Rev



 2 
 on: September 17, 2018, 10:57:14 PM 
Started by LXXResearcher - Last post by Administrator

On the same subject, this is a great sermon on the age of the earth by Dr. Albert Mohler, Jr., President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary:



Dan


 3 
 on: September 16, 2018, 09:44:01 PM 
Started by LXXResearcher - Last post by Jackie

Faith & LXX, I was listening to the BRT playlist of Dr. Terry Mortensen (PhD, History of Geology), when I recalled your conversation about seminaries teaching evolution. The lecture, titled "Millions of Years", provides a history of the transformation of traditional Christian doctrine into conformity with the doctrines of mere men.


Dan,

Thanks for the making us aware of these lectures. I was particularly impressed with Dr. Mortenson's argument in this segment:

"So it's not comparing Scripture with Scripture that determines the meaning of the text; it's geology. My question is, how do they know what responsible geology is? What they're basically saying is the geological majority is what determines what the text means.

But what if we said, ultimately it's the scientific community that determines whether or not Jesus physically rose from the dead? Because, of course, the whole scientific community would say that dead men don't rise. Dead men stay dead! So, we can't believe in the historical resurrection?"


The consensus (the "geological majority" in this case) does not determine what is science, nor is it even relevant, according to Michael Crichton:

"I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you're being had. Let's be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus. There is no such thing as consensus science. If it's consensus, it isn't science. If it's science, it isn't consensus. Period." [Michael Crichton, "Aliens Cause Global Warming." Wall Street Journal, [Updated 2008], 2003]


Jackie

 4 
 on: September 16, 2018, 01:18:20 PM 
Started by LXXResearcher - Last post by LXXResearcher

Faith, it may be worse than you think.


It is worse than I thought!

Thanks, Dan

LXX

 5 
 on: September 16, 2018, 08:07:17 AM 
Started by LXXResearcher - Last post by Administrator

I was listening to the BRT playlist of Dr. Terry Mortensen (PhD, History of Geology), when I recalled your conversation about seminaries teaching evolution. The lecture, titled "Millions of Years", provides a history of the transformation of traditional Christian doctrine into conformity with the doctrines of mere men. The lecture is in two parts.


I just realized the lecture is in three parts.  I listened to the first two over and over again -- pausing to take notes -- and never got around to the next video.  It is mostly a short Q&A (10:22):



This is the entire playlist by Dr. Mortenson:


Dan







 6 
 on: September 16, 2018, 07:57:04 AM 
Started by LXXResearcher - Last post by Brenda

Faith & LXX, I was listening to the BRT playlist of Dr. Terry Mortensen (PhD, History of Geology), when I recalled your conversation about seminaries teaching evolution. The lecture, titled "Millions of Years", provides a history of the transformation of traditional Christian doctrine into conformity with the doctrines of mere men.


Thanks, Dan. It is good to hear from you again.

Brenda

 7 
 on: September 16, 2018, 07:54:14 AM 
Started by LXXResearcher - Last post by FaithIsKey

Faith & LXX, I was listening to the BRT playlist of Dr. Terry Mortensen (PhD, History of Geology), when I recalled your conversation about seminaries teaching evolution. The lecture, titled "Millions of Years", provides a history of the transformation of traditional Christian doctrine into conformity with the doctrines of mere men.


Thanks, Dan. It is good to see that you have finished your projects and are posting again.

Those are hidden gems by Dr. Mortenson for any Christian who hasn't been keeping up. It is far worse than I thought, and I have been trying to keep up. It appears that many (most) of our seminaries have sacrificed the Word of God on the altar of Darwin and "science" (so-called).

Faith








 8 
 on: September 15, 2018, 09:29:04 PM 
Started by LXXResearcher - Last post by Administrator

LXX, thank you. Did you know there are seminaries that teach evolution?



Faith, it may be worse than you think.


Faith & LXX, I was listening to the BRT playlist of Dr. Terry Mortensen (PhD, History of Geology), when I recalled your conversation about seminaries teaching evolution. The lecture, titled "Millions of Years", provides a history of the transformation of traditional Christian doctrine into conformity with the doctrines of mere men. The lecture is in two parts. Check it out:





Dan

 9 
 on: July 20, 2018, 01:08:11 AM 
Started by Administrator - Last post by Administrator
On the Keeping of Easter
From the Letter of the Emperor to all those not present at the Council.
(Found in Eusebius, Vita Const., Lib. iii., 18–20.)

When the question relative to the sacred festival of Easter arose, it was universally thought that it would be convenient that all should keep the feast on one day; for what could be more beautiful and more desirable, than to see this festival, through which we receive the hope of immortality, celebrated by all with one accord, and in the same manner? It was declared to be particularly unworthy for this, the holiest of all festivals, to follow the custom [the calculation] of the Jews, who had soiled their hands with the most fearful of crimes, and whose minds were blinded. In rejecting their custom, we may transmit to our descendants the legitimate mode of celebrating Easter, which we have observed from the time of the Saviour's Passion to the present day [according to the day of the week]. We ought not, therefore, to have anything in common with the Jews, for the Saviour has shown us another way; our worship follows a more legitimate and more convenient course (the order of the days of the week); and consequently, in unanimously adopting this mode, we desire, dearest brethren, to separate ourselves from the detestable company of the Jews, for it is truly shameful for us to hear them boast that without their direction we could not keep this feast. How can they be in the right, they who, after the death of the Saviour, have no longer been led by reason but by wild violence, as their delusion may urge them? They do not possess the truth in this Easter question; for, in their blindness and repugnance to all improvements, they frequently celebrate two passovers in the same year. We could not imitate those who are openly in error. How, then, could we follow these Jews, who are most certainly blinded by error? for to celebrate the passover twice in one year is totally inadmissible. But even if this were not so, it would still be your duty not to tarnish your soul by communications with such wicked people [the Jews]. Besides, consider well, that in such an important matter, and on a subject of such great solemnity, there ought not to be any division. Our Saviour has left us only one festal day of our redemption, that is to say, of his holy passion, and he desired [to establish] only one Catholic Church. Think, then, how unseemly it is, that on the same day some should be fasting whilst others are seated at a banquet; and that after Easter, some should be rejoicing at feasts, whilst others are still observing a strict fast. For this reason, a Divine Providence wills that this custom should be rectified and regulated in a uniform way; and everyone, I hope, will agree upon this point. As, on the one hand, it is our duty not to have anything in common with the murderers of our Lord; and as, on the other, the custom now followed by the Churches of the West, of the South, and of the North, and by some of those of the East, is the most acceptable, it has appeared good to all; and I have been guarantee for your consent, that you would accept it with joy, as it is followed at Rome, in Africa, in all Italy, Egypt, Spain, Gaul, Britain, Libya, in all Achaia, and in the dioceses of Asia, of Pontus, and Cilicia. You should consider not only that the number of churches in these provinces make a majority, but also that it is right to demand what our reason approves, and that we should have nothing in common with the Jews. To sum up in few words: By the unanimous judgment of all, it has been decided that the most holy festival of Easter should be everywhere celebrated on one and the same day, and it is not seemly that in so holy a thing there should be any division. As this is the state of the case, accept joyfully the divine favour, and this truly divine command; for all which takes place in assemblies of the bishops ought to be regarded as proceeding from the will of God. Make known to your brethren what has been decreed, keep this most holy day according to the prescribed mode; we can thus celebrate this holy Easter day at the same time, if it is granted me, as I desire, to unite myself with you; we can rejoice together, seeing that the divine power has made use of our instrumentality for destroying the evil designs of the devil, and thus causing faith, peace, and unity to flourish amongst us. May God graciously protect you, my beloved brethren.

[Source: Philip Schaff, Constantine Letter On the Keeping of Easter, "Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers Ser 2 Vol 14." Charles Scribner's Sons, 1916, p.54]

Dan

 10 
 on: June 22, 2018, 01:59:52 PM 
Started by Administrator - Last post by Administrator

That would make Joshua about 38 when he fought the Amaleks, and not much younger when they departed Egypt.  Therefore, at best Joshua had 73 years remaining, when you need at least 80.

But that is a really good theory, so maybe we are overlooking something else


That should be worth a few extra years.


Thanks, fellows.  I will rewrite it before I post it to the BRT website.

Dan

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10