1. Graded two and a half classes. Gave a final. Should have graded a little more, but just couldn't stand it anymore.
2. Television and Pogo badges.
3. Level 37 Night Elf Priest. Fished. Auction stuff.
4. BigFishGame is another time-management thing, so I'll try that. Then I might play more Farm Frenzy.
5. Read more in The Jesus Dynasty. As I've said, the discussion of archaeological sites is really interesting, but some of the speculation is peculiar. He's simply stated that James the Lesser is the Beloved Disciple of John; he's also James the brother of Jesus. I have no problem believing Jesus' brothers were among the disciples (although it is believed by the verse about the prophet receiving no recognition in his own land). I could buy any of those statements if there were some discussion or evidence. Here, the only evidence he's offered so far is a negative argument against John's being the Disciple Whom Jesus Loved. Again, negative arguments haven't worked as definitive proof since Aristotle.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Speculations as to the identity of the beloved disciple seem to know no end -- Thomas, James, John, Nicodemus, Mary Magdalene, James the Lesser (as you note above), Judas (no kidding!) -- as a simple Google search will show. However all of these ideas rely on this-or-that non-Bible source so Ps. 118:8 should be a clear word of caution to those who would promote these ideas.
You seem to say that you are unaware of any "argument against John's being the Disciple Whom Jesus Loved". But realize that if the police find no DNA when they look at the scene of a crime but it is later found when a more thorough search is done it doesn't mean that the evidence didn’t exist when the first group looked. In the same way, the fact that you have failed to search the scriptures to find this proof doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist. It just means that you haven’t found it yet -- because it does exist.
The truth is there is not a single verse in scripture that would justify teaching the idea that John was the one whom "Jesus loved" and yet most simply assume that this man-made tradition cannot be wrong and then interpret scripture to fit this idea. But if one will heed Ps. 118:8 then the NON-BIBLE sources on which this man-made tradition is based will give way to the facts stated in scripture which prove that NO MATTER WHO this anonymous author was he most certainly was not John.
www.TheDiscipleWhomJesusLoved.com has a free Bible-only based study that compares what the Bible says about John with what it says about "the disciple whom Jesus loved" - and the Biblical evidence proves that whoever this person was he was not John because the Bible cannot contradict itself. But one need not read this study because all it takes is reading the fourth gospel from the beginning with the honest question, "Who would I conclude the author was based on just the facts stated in his own gospel?" Those who do so will never come to the conclusion that this "other disciple" was John because NONE of the evidence points toward John.
Post a Comment