PapaLinton says on DC:
cipher
re: Archaeology provides plenty of evidence in support of the events of the OT
Funnily enough, on Dr Reppert's site he has posted an OP on the piece below:http://www.scribd.com/doc/1648... from a book by : F.F. Bruce, “Archaeological Confirmation of the New Testament,” Carl F.H. Henry, ed.,Revelation and the Bible. Contemporary Evangelical Thought. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1958 /London: The Tyndale Press, 1959. pp.319-331.I simply wish they [christians] would take note what F F Bruce, [an arch evangelist] said about archeology [on the second last page]: "Generally speaking, “confirmation” is not the best word to use of the bear- [p.331] ing of archaeology on the New Testament. In fact, in both Testaments it is better to regard archaeology as illustrative than as confirmatory."
re: Archaeology provides plenty of evidence in support of the events of the OT
Funnily enough, on Dr Reppert's site he has posted an OP on the piece below:http://www.scribd.com/doc/1648... from a book by : F.F. Bruce, “Archaeological Confirmation of the New Testament,” Carl F.H. Henry, ed.,Revelation and the Bible. Contemporary Evangelical Thought. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1958 /London: The Tyndale Press, 1959. pp.319-331.I simply wish they [christians] would take note what F F Bruce, [an arch evangelist] said about archeology [on the second last page]: "Generally speaking, “confirmation” is not the best word to use of the bear- [p.331] ing of archaeology on the New Testament. In fact, in both Testaments it is better to regard archaeology as illustrative than as confirmatory."
No comments:
Post a Comment