Debating the Text of the Word of God
Échec de l'ajout au panier.
Échec de l'ajout à la liste d'envies.
Échec de la suppression de la liste d’envies.
Échec du suivi du balado
Ne plus suivre le balado a échoué
Debating the Text of the Word of God
Acheter pour 9,34 $
Aucun mode de paiement valide enregistré.
Nous sommes désolés. Nous ne pouvons vendre ce titre avec ce mode de paiement
-
Narrateur(s):
-
Douglas Wilson
-
James R. White
-
Auteur(s):
-
Douglas Wilson
-
James R. White
À propos de cet audio
Christians believe that the Bible is the "word of God." But to what text does this refer? Is it the Bible translation I hold in my hands? Is it a textual family behind the King James Version? Is it a modern critical text, with its attempt to recover a single "original"? Or is it something else?
In this lively debate about the world's most influential book, two Christian intellectuals confront this subject head-on. Both participants come from a conservative evangelical tradition, and yet passionately disagree about what version of the New Testament is truly God-breathed. Part theology, part textual-criticism, part ecclesiology, Debating the Text of the Word of God is the most thorough "in-house" debate ever conducted on this subject. You don't want to miss it!
©2017 Simposio LLC (P)2017 Simposio LLCCe que les auditeurs disent de Debating the Text of the Word of God
Moyenne des évaluations de clientsÉvaluations – Cliquez sur les onglets pour changer la source des évaluations.
-
Au global3 out of 5 stars
-
Performance3 out of 5 stars
-
Histoire3 out of 5 stars
- anonHK
- 2020-09-16
Inerrant Word of God or Book of Best Guesses?
The debate starts with Wilson getting strait to the crux: can we trust god when he said he would protect every word and pen stroke? If Nestle Aland is the best source for new bibles, then the answer is no and the church has not had access to a reliable bible ever. So, he argues that Nestle Arland cannot be the best source for Christians because God explicitly promised to protect the word for his people. It is a faith based argument, and it is irrefutable in a Christian milieu.
White argues for Nestle Aland, and so, he cannot counter Wilson’s core argument. This is simply because Nestle Aland is the product of secular scholars cobbling together a ‘best guess’ bible that gets a ‘new and improved’ version every couple of years. The bibles the churches have been using for 1600 years are inferior and filled with mistakes, redactions, and interpolations. White says in the debate, we have to look at the text the way we do any other ancient text. How one maintains faith with the above view, I do not know.
Who you think will have won the debate will depend on whether you have faith and your view of inerrancy. I believe it is the bedrock of Christianity, and dropping biblical authority is the last rung on the ladder to atheism. Wilson won this debate, but White’s side has won the culture.
Should you listen? Probably not. White will push people to atheism, and if you are a believer, there isn't much here to strengthen faith.
Un problème est survenu. Veuillez réessayer dans quelques minutes.
Vous avez donné votre avis sur cette évaluation.
Vous avez donné votre avis sur cette évaluation.