“one can find in the early and medieval church many accounts of justification that speak of justification as a process and particularly emphasize the role of works in the process. The pre-Reformation church did not speak with one voice about justification. Thus, both Roman Catholic and Protestant positions can find precedent in the pre-Reformation church. Here is how the eminent church historian Jaroslav Pelikan summarized it: Every major tenet of the Reformation had considerable support in the catholic tradition. That was eminently true of the central Reformation teaching of justification by faith alone. . . . The Council of Trent selected and elevated to official status the notion of justification by faith plus works, which was only one of the doctrines of justification in the medieval theologians and ancient fathers. When the reformers attacked this notion in the name of the doctrine of justification by faith alone—a doctrine also attested to by some medieval theologians and ancient fathers—Rome reacted by canonizing one trend in preference to all the others. What had previously been permitted also (justification by faith alone), now became forbidden. In condemning the Protestant Reformation, the Council of Trent condemned part of its own catholic tradition. 23”

— What It Means to Be Protestant: The Case for an Always-Reforming Church by Gavin Ortlund

“The idea of a hierarchy of authorities, with the Scripture at the top over other subordinate (but necessary) authorities, was by no means a novel approach in the sixteenth century. To state the point plainly, setting sola Scriptura at odds with the process of canonization confuses the recognition of infallibility with the possession of infallibility. The simple fact is that it is not necessary to be infallible to discern that which is infallible. When Moses heard God at the burning bush, he didn’t need a second voice whispering in his ear that this was indeed God. This is what Protestants intend when they speak of Scripture as self-authenticating. This simply means that the ultimate ground on which we receive the Scripture is inherent in it, rather than external to it. For there is no higher authority the Word of God could rest upon than the Spirit speaking through it. If you think you do have to possess infallibility to discern infallibility, you have a continual regress, because now you need infallibility to receive and interpret the infallible teachings of your church.”

— What It Means to Be Protestant: The Case for an Always-Reforming Church by Gavin Ortlund

Magic Mushrooms origin of Christianity say Dead Sea Scrolls scholar & Joe Rogan

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-ZeRnaAzYY

“Christians in the non-Protestant traditions will often argue that God has promised to watch over his church in ways that distinguish her from Israel. For example, Christ promised that “the gates of hell shall not prevail” against the church in Matthew 16: 18. But this is a promise that the church will never die or fail to accomplish her purpose, not that she will never sin or err. The verb “prevail” can be translated “overpower” or “overcome”; 43 to be “prevailed against” by the “gates of hell” refers essentially to death. 44 If a wrestling coach promised one of his wrestlers that “your opponent will not prevail against you,” this means his wrestler will ultimately win, not that he will avoid making any mistakes during the match. Furthermore, this is a promise to the church as such, not to one particular teaching office or hierarchy within her. Therefore, that Christ will never abandon his church to hell no more substantiates claims of ecclesial infallibility than God’s Old Testament promises to Israel validated the Pharisees’ teachings and claims. God has promised many things to his people, but he has nowhere promised that they will not fall into sin and error. This is why Protestants, in the face of some frankly brutal historical realities, consider majority depth to be a frequently superficial criterion.”

— What It Means to Be Protestant: The Case for an Always-Reforming Church by Gavin Ortlund

#Reformed Presuppositional #Apologetics’ Links from Late November 2024
#Christianity #God #Theology https://veritasdomain.wordpress.com/2024/12/02/late-november-2024-presuppositional-apologetics-links/

"Therefore, the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel." - Isaiah 7:14

This Christmas, let us celebrate the fulfillment of the ancient prophecy spoken through Isaiah, a promise that pointed unmistakably to the coming of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the world. The birth of Immanuel, "God with us," is not just a story but the cornerstone of our faith, affirming the reliability of God's Word and His divine plan for humanity.

As foretold in Isaiah 9:6, Jesus is the Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, and Prince of Peace. His arrival is a reminder that God keeps His promises, offering salvation and reconciliation to all who believe.

May this season be an opportunity to reflect on the profound truth of the Gospel that God, in His love, stepped into history to redeem us. Let the light of Christ shine brightly in your heart and give you confidence in the hope we proclaim.

Wishing you all a blessed Christmas filled with the joy of His presence and the peace that only He can give.

Not Three Gods by Gregory of Nyssa

https://www.monergism.com/not-three-gods-gregory-nyssa

Amazing #Bible #prophecy! “#Christmas” Expectations in Obadiah
#Apologetics #Christianity #Jesus #Christ https://veritasdomain.wordpress.com/2024/12/18/christmas-expectations-in-obadiah/

Key Advent Texts from Isaiah 8 & 9 and "Emmanuel"

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DyQ5PB6E7Os

Top Ten Discoveries in Biblical Archaeology in 2024


https://biblearchaeologyreport.com/2024/12/27/top-ten-discoveries-in-biblical-archaeology-in-2024/

Baptism in the Early Church: A Baptist Response

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3msUZ-Ijyw

Pagan Origins of Yahweh DEBUNKED!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBGUtnUf584

Joe Rogan Hosts Biblical Scholar Wes Huff After Billy Carson Debate @WesHuff

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCJCHZ1HExo

Bible Contradiction? Resolved: Who was Zelophahad’s father?

https://veritasdomain.wordpress.com/2024/12/05/bible-contradiction-who-was-zelophahads-father/

How Do We KNOW the New Testament Canon?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=06ItjoHCp28

God bless and have a blessed new year 2025

Hebrews 7:3  He is without father or mother or genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but resembling the Son of God he continues a priest forever.


The words do not mean that he literally had no father or mother. In the LXX of Esth 2:7, Esther is described as having no father or mother. Scripture’s silence concerning Melchizedek’s origin “is stressed by the writer to amplify the concept of the uniqueness of his priesthood, and not as proof of that uniqueness.”

the author is not attempting to “establish a factual point but to exhibit the radical difference that existed between the priesthood of Melchizedek and the more familiar Levitical line of priests.” The silence of Scripture regarding Melchizedek’s parentage and genealogy is now extended by the author with a phrase that evokes the notion of eternity; an eternity that is only typified in Melchizedek but is realized in Christ. The use of the perfect passive participle in v. 3 could be literally translated “having been made to resemble [by God],” an example of the so-called “divine passive” where the author’s construction indicates God’s appointment of Melchizedek as a type of Jesus that subordinates Melchizedek to Christ. It is this phrase, “like the Son of God,” that the author uses to indicate two important truths: the greatness of Melchizedek; yet he only resembles someone greater. Several times the author refers to Jesus as “Son” but only three times is Jesus designated as “Son of God” (6:6; 7:3; 10:29). Mason correctly pointed out that the use of the phrase “is far from random in these passages, however, as in each case use of this term heightens the rhetoric of the author or subtly expresses Jesus’ superiority over an inferior entity.”

The final phrase of v. 3, “he remains a priest forever,” is the author’s paraphrase of Ps 110:4. The phrase is dependent upon the preceding participial clause and functions to relate the eternal priesthood of Melchizedek, typologically presented, to his resemblance to Jesus, the Son of God. The Greek phrase eis to diēnekes occurs four times in Hebrews (7:3; 10:1,12,14) and nowhere else in the New Testament. It denotes that which continues uninterruptedly or perpetually. The phrase is not to be interpreted literally, but typologically. The relationship between Melchizedek and Jesus is best described in terms of typology.

By grounding Christ’s priesthood in the biblical source of Ps 110:4 and connecting it with the historical source of Gen 14:17–20, the author establishes the eternality of Christ’s priesthood. In the remainder of Hebrews 7, the author will demonstrate the implications of this fact with respect to the Levitical priesthood, and lay the groundwork for the next step in the theological argument to be taken in Hebrews 8. Mathews rightly reminds us, “Typologically, it is not necessary for Jesus and Melchizedek to share in all traits; thus the ancient interpretation that Melchizedek was the pre-incarnate Christ is not required.”