Why don’t the people who are called prophets tell the Jews this?
“Convert to Protestant Christianity, ‘But I say, Did not Israel know? First Moses saith, I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people, and by a foolish nation I will anger you.’ (Romans 10:19), we’re here to ‘provoke them to jealousy’ (Romans 11:11). We know that ‘these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.’ (Romans 11:31). This is the mercy, hear us; this is the refreshing, join us.”
I asked some ardent modernists the following:
What is the Scriptural basis for arguing that the original source texts are more authoritative than present copies, and what in Scripture-based doctrine indicates any specific divine sanction to Greek or Hebrew MSS?
The answer? Basically, they say, it is because the science of textual criticism says so, that the Scripture doesn’t say anything about textual criticism/transmission and that the science is valid because after all, the Bible fails to address elements of things like evolution, Einstein’s special relativity, etc.
My response to these kind of folks is as follows:
You are, incidentally, confirming that this debate is between an Enlightenment-based philosophy versus a Biblical doctrine interpretation of Scripture. That is, the debate is between reasoning as though the Scripture says nothing on Biblical transmission versus an interpretation of Scripture where many such references are identified.
I can also understand how people can then start from some point out of the Scripture, and arrive at all kinds of views such as evolution, Einsteinian special relativity, etc., which are thoroughly un- and anti-Biblical. I do not want to say it belligerently, but I think your side’s modern bible textual criticism view falls into that category, alongside the unbelief of higher criticism.
The foundational issue is to then question why do I see references to the Reformation, perfection of the KJB, nature of transmission of the Bible, etc., in Scripture, while you do not interpret so. I think it is because of a vastly different hermeneutical presupposition.
Whether used by unionists, anti-muslim groups or anyone else, the Eureka flag is a flag of rebellion.
This flag was used by militant Catholics and Irish rebels in 1854 to revolt against the Victorian Government.
Australians are undergoing a siege of historical revisionism, where on every front, history is being rewritten. Every bad event is elevated to something good, and every good is made bad. This is the agenda of the left, in its fierce, anti-patriotic spirit.