submitted by frequent contributor Chris J.Wow...God really has nothing useful to say, does He?
------------------------------------------------
submitted by frequent contributor Chandler CarrikerReferencing a Bible verse about believing isn't really going to convince someone who doesn't believe yet.
That would be like someone showing me some kid's letter to Santa Claus to prove that he exists.
If someone believes (like I do), then it's by faith. Don't threaten people with Bible verses they already don't believe.
------------------------------------------------------
"No matter how hard we try, there is still Christ in Christmas."
submitted by new contributor Denise R.
Well now...that's an interesting tactic for a church to take.
-------------------------------------------------------
I'm once again a finalist in the Mattress Police caption contest. And I'm getting pantsed. Go vote!!
-------------------------------------------------------
This is a sign from humor-blogs.com
Keep 'em coming.
The crummiest thing in this post is...someone has a church sign that is electronic.
ReplyDeleteNow, new "insights" every other minute.
I'm very, very scared.
You're not getting smoked as badly as I am...
ReplyDelete;p
Argh, nothing is worse than those electronic church signs... so tacky.
ReplyDeleteJoel, I understand what you're saying about not using Scripture for evidence to people who don't believe the Bible, but doesn't Jesus' warning in that verse stand true, whether it convinces anyone or not? (Of course, there's also the issue of that verse's canonicity, which is why I'm less likely to use it.)
ReplyDeleteAllen:
ReplyDeleteI agree the warning applies. I just don't think that, standing alone, it's going to change anyone's thoughts.
I recently stumbled onto this site and love it.
ReplyDeleteJust wanted to comment on the post regarding the canonicity of Mark 16:16.
Without getting overly technical, the evidence for the canonicity of Mark 16:9ff is overwhelming.
Basically, only two early MSS (Aleph and B) don't include these verses (yet they leave a space where these verses would have gone, indicating that the copyist felt they belonged there). All other equally early and reliable MSS include these verses.
Clinching the argument for including these verses is the fact that the ancient Church chose verses from Mark 16:9ff for the Gospel readings for Easter and Ascension. Why would they choose questionable texts?
I believe the NIV editors made a huge error by inserting the note between Mark 16:8 and 9 which states that "most reliable early manuscripts...don't have Mark 16:9-20." At best, it's an exaggeration. At worst, it's deceptive. Please don't hesitate to make use of Mark 16:16.
(By the way, I'm not a KJV-only person. In fact, I use the NIV almost exclusively in worship, Bible classes, and personal reading).
Now back to your regularly-scheduled crumminess.
Hmm ... my sources (Harper-Collins Study Bible, The Complete Gospels) indicate that, whereas the earliest mss. do include Mark 16:9ff (one of three variants), all of these date from the second century CE or later, whereas the "earliest Patristic evidence (Clement of Rome, Origen, Eusebius, and Jerome) gives no evidence of any text beyond 16:8". A Gospel without a commissioning scene (as in Mt, Lk, Jn) would look bad, so later writers supplied one, according to this view.
ReplyDeleteI suppose the point is not whether verse X is authentic, but whether it helps people live a "godly" life. Dig too deeply into the truth of who said what, and all creeds will vanish. I doubt that such an event would do humankind any favors. You think things are bad with active religions in the field ...?
Forgive me, I beg, Joel.
I don't want to get into a pissing war over this one, amoeba, especially since it's clear you and I are coming from very different perspectives regarding the inspiration of Scripture (cf. your comment "dig too deep...").
ReplyDeleteNevertheless, my sources (including the UBS Greek text) include such early fathers as Irenaeus and Tertullian as citing Mark 16:9ff.
Regardless of which fathers cited these verses, however, the preponderance of textual evidence supports their inclusion. Hey, that would make for an interesting church sign, huh?
I've heard that a little club soda will get Christ out of Christmas.
ReplyDeleteMan, God should really consider using the electric sign. More people might mistake it for a hotel/casino and actually read it! I'd like to think that God could afford a sign without that hiddeous yellow background.
ReplyDeleteIn their defense, it's white background.
ReplyDeleteMy phone has a bad white balance.