/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

Not even those church fathers (like St. Justin) who quoted it that way used it in an "adoptionist" sense. It sounds like you're listening to too much Bart Ehrman, who only interprets this passage his own way, and then hides the fact from you that not everyone read it the way he does.

It looks to be originally mentioned in Psalms 2:7.

Also mentioned in Acts 13:33, Hebrews 1:5, and Hebrews 5:5.

How does Codex D render Luke 1:35?

>>808359

The same though not sure if that was a rhetorical question.

On a sidenote, I would like to point out that Ehrman, before he was an atheist, was a fundy who graduated from Moody Bible Institute of all places. These people literally require you to be dispensationalist in their statement of faith. Protestants are already individualistic and anti-tradition to begin with, but the dispensational wing of Evangelicals are about as iconoclastic as it gets. They see everything about the historical church as part of some conspiracy. And especially Catholic and Orthodox tradition. To them, those two are all part of some NWO scheme to hide Christ and lead the world astray. Only the endtimes obsessed evangelicals and their Zionist buddies can save the world and uncover the truth.

THIS is the world Ehrman came from. People make a big deal about how he's an atheist now and how he's on some noble mission to uncover what the Church has "hidden". But to me, that's what he was already doing before all of this. His whole religion was founded on viewing the Church in bad faith. He didn't drop his religion. It just goes by another name now.

And he isn't alone. Some don't make the jump to full on atheism (at least not publicly), but a lot of the skeptical mainliners will have some conservative Evangelical seminary like Moody in their resume. You'd be surprised how many you find with a similar red flag. Most of them are boomers who started off in ultra rednecky evangelicalism as youths, and became rebellious in their old age. But the thing is: They always were rebellious.

>>808379

Hey I've made so-called "iconoclastic" statements on here (really just pointing out the out of control idolatry but hey you know) and I completely denounce dispensationalist system and ideas. Scripture says no such thing, there is no such doctrine, as it was merely devised by Darby and Scofield. And I agree with some of the things you've pointed out, but it has nothing to do with being anti-Catholic or whatever. That would just be confirmation bias kicking in. Because they are also usually pretty anti-mormon and anti-other strange beliefs. The thing with them is though, that they are in with the synagogue. Whether they realize it or not, they are subverted on some level to be teaching such things.

Here is the scripture I would start out with them. To point out that the synagogue of Satan is totally without God and utterly, in fact those very people are people who curse Jacob and Israel as a matter of fact, at the same time as definitively not being part of it since they reject Christ.

1 John 2:23

Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: but he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.

2 John v. 9-11

He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:

For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.