>Philippians 2:3-4 ~ Don’t be selfish; don’t try to impress others. Be humble, thinking of others as better than yourselves. Don’t look out only for your own interests, but take an interest in others, too.
This past week, as the coronavirus (aka COVID19) pandemic began to sweep around the globe, we noticed a trend emerging in the church. The trend was really a question of whether to close up shop or stay open this weekend (and subsequent weekends).
Several churches (if not all) took to social media, email, text, their websites, and more to announce to their congregations the options they were presenting for gathering this weekend.
Many went virtual, many did a hybrid, and others remained open.
By and large, the response was good, however, I also saw a lot of people taking to those same social media platforms to put other churches on blast for not doing things the way they think they ought to have done them.
For example, I saw some folks actually saying that churches that closed were not being faithful and were forsaking the command to gather. I saw others saying that churches that remained open were being irresponsible and greedy. I saw a whole lot of other comments in between. I go into a little more detail HERE (if you're interested).
Either way, this is not the type of response we need at this time. What we need is what Paul said to the church in Philippi, which was to be humble, think of others better than ourselves, and look out for the interests of others.
Every local church body has a different demographic. Some largely young. Some largely old. Some a wide mix. So decisions are being made with those demographics in mind.
It is not the time to bash other churches you don't agree with...but, instead, to reach out, pray for them, encourage them, and remove our personal preferences from the equation and just know that we are all facing difficult decisions in the weeks and months ahead, and we will need each other more now than perhaps we ever have before.
How do we know it didn't change over the 20 years before Paul wrote it down?
>In the early part of the 20th Century scholars unanimously affirmed that verses 6-7 were part of the pre-Pauline creed. However, now few hold that position.30 Often scholars who support this position “content themselves with magisterial assertions” rather than providing evidence.31 However, there are a few arguments. First, verse 6 does fit with the formula stylistically. The epeita references do not indicate that the creed ends. Rather, it simply indicates a flow between verses 5 and 7. Second, there is at least one non-Pauline word in verse 6, which is epano. Also, there are some words that occur infrequently in Paul’s epistles, such as menein which only once has the exact parallel with the meaning in 1 Corinthians 15.32 Third, even scholars who argue that the creed ends in verse 5 admit that verse 7 contains traditional material. For example, Murphy-O’Connor argues that Paul preserved the reference to hoi apostoloi and Iakobo in order to underline his apostolic authority.33 It has a traditional basis since it exhibits an abnormal linguistic pattern. Murphy-O’Connor argues, “Were v. 7 a Pauline composition, one would expect him to begin with eita after the epeita in v. 6, as he in fact does in vv. 23b-24. If he did not do so, it must be because eita already existed as the link between ‘James’ and ‘the apstles.’ Thus, it seems more probable that Iakobo eita tois apostolois came to Paul as a fixed formula.”34 Fourth, if Paul added the hoti and epeita references it would not seem to create a problem for a verse 7 ending. Fifth, it is obvious that Paul wrote the latter part of verse 6. However, this does not prove that the mention of the 500 is an addition to the text. All it points out is that Paul is inserting comments on the tradition.
https://carm.org/analysis-pre-pauline-creed-1-corinthians-151-11
The 1 Cor 15 creedal formula is a [**pre-Pauline saying
... keep reading on reddit ➡He writes: "thus far he, whose name I shall conceal, (though the exellence of the matter, and present style, will easily discover him) ..
Is there a concessus who actually came up with the content of the epistle?
Greetings to all the officers of the INC and your feeling neglected 😩 families. Please do not go to that special worship service of EVM . These kind of events is more in line with the Pharisees way of imposing “burdensome yokes” that our Lord Jesus Christ is very much opposed too. What you will receive on that day is just the same indoctrination from the INC and NOT the gospel or preaching of our Lord Jesus Christ. It is just another event to stroke EVM’s ego some more. Stay away and do something productive with your own lives and your families . Assuredly I say to you, our Lord Jesus Christ got your back. 🙏(Read the New Testament of the Bible in its entirety . The true gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ is in there)
Note: biggest/most discussed game reveal ever on r/gaming. specifically.
Just thought it would be interesting to share. This is VERY important for VR because Medal of Honor didn't even have more than 8 comments.
A gameplay reveal is sure to make another big splash.
Robert Price argues.. " all that can be taken from the epistles, Price argues, is that a Jesus Christ, son of God, lived in a heavenly realm, there died as a sacrifice for human sin, was raised by God, and enthroned in heaven.[22] "
I went through all refs to Jesus in the epistles, and I can't find anything that Paul writes that seems that connected to the Gospels story of Jesus, other than one mention of him being crucified and raised, but that doesn't mention it happening in the "real world".
How does the Church treat the epistles of St. Ignatius that are of spurious origin? Are they rejected outright, or are parts of them accepted? How does one parse through which is which?
From the website FAQ:
IS THERE ANY SORT OF COMPETITION WITH OTHER PROJECTS OF SIMILAR NATURE?
No, not at all. We support, and are on good terms with, other projects based on Epistle 3. What we are doing is not about proving anything to anyone, what we are doing is having fun together as a group of fans who want to achieve the same goal. We are aware of other similar projects and support them equally.
Does anyone else know which projects these are? I'm only aware of Project Borealis and Project-AC.
The first time I played Half-Life games was in 2006 when my dad bought me a Half-Life 2 on steam with Episode 1. After finishing Episode 2 on 7.01.2019 my mood was bad since then and Epistle 3 kinda helped me out with it. And realizantion that there are 2 teams working on another part of Gordons Adventure makes me smile. Thanks guys.
It's my understanding that the Pastoral Epistles are generally attributed to a Pauline school of authorship, following a general consensus that the ecclesial structure presupposed in these letters arose after Paul's lifetime. I'm wondering if someone can point me to the strongest arguments for both this position and a Pauline authorship position. For example, what external evidence corroborates the claim that ecclesial hierarchy (in the form of bishops, etc.) did not exist before around AD 60 (assuming Paul's death occurred around that time)?
If only a terminus ante quem can be established for this level of church structure, has any other external evidence for authorship and dating been adduced? I'm familiar with arguments from internal evidence (e.g. writing styles, etc.), but I would greatly appreciate any discussion or recommendations of articles on the subject of external evidence on this point. Thank you for your time!
Now I know this probably isn't my place to speak, considering the talented writers that this project already has, but there's one thing that would be criminal to leave out of Project Borealis and something I wanted to speak about myself.
The explanation and expansion upon the Shu'ulathoi (Unsynthesized Advisors, the origin species)
Let me give a little background here: throughout the Episodic saga of Half-Life 2, (as well as HL2 itself's very end) it has been building and building upon the existence of the Combine Advisors, as throughout each continuation of the HL2 storyline, their presence has grown greatly to the point of where we left off in Episode 2, to where they were directly attacking the main characters, even killing Eli at the game's end.
The logical next step and what was pretty clearly hinted at was that the Advisors were going to be likely a direct encounter in the final installment of HL2's arc, Episode 3.
This was already well agreed upon but what I'm really here to mention is that the Advisors are much more than just a high ranking Synth in the Combine's force. This is where BreenGrub comes into the picture.
Throughout Epistle 3, we didn't really get much insight on what was going on with the Advisors, I take this to believe that this wasn't due to their lack of significance, but due to it already being addressed cryptically, though thoroughly on the [BreenGrub] (https://twitter.com/breengrub) twitter account. This was written by Marc himself so I think its logical to consider it official to HL's story especially if this game is using Epistle 3 as its footwork. BreenGrub goes into lengths about the tale of what the Shu'ulathoi were before the Combine's intervention and takeover of the majority of their species. While this stuff is already well known to deep Half-Life fans, I imagine the only reason this was spoken about here as it was, was because Episode 3 itself was never turned into an official game, but in the same vein of Epistle 3, it must be included through some fashion in Project Borealis itself.
This is where the writers come in where I am not near skilled enough to, incorporating it into the game itself without feeling forced, my only guesses as to how would be through a Vortigaunt's speech or through Dr. Breen himself, in his new 'Shu'ulathoi'd' state.
The story of the Shu'ulathoi is one of the most interesting pieces to the Half-Life puzzle and this post is a call to the developers, to not forget about the importance
... keep reading on reddit ➡For my own spiritual discipline/practice, I am going to take at least one verse of the Epistle of James and work my way through the entire document.
My goal is to strengthen my new understanding of the Bible as Neville has taught me, one verse or cluster of verses a day.
I will be using the New English Translation (NET) Bible, though I may lean on other versions and the Greek, at times.
Personal experiences and discussion are heartily welcomed and encouraged.
I'm looking to pick up a light weight, no frills EDC knife and the Kershaw Epistle caught my eye. Is it a good knife? I was recommended Kershaw on a different subbreddit and I want to make sure it's not a waste of my money, even if the price is reasonable. I'm also not trying to drop $150 on an EDC knife atm.
https://www.christiantruththroughapologetics.com/talk-apologetics-blog/authorship-of-1-2-peter
///Objection #1: Peter used Jude as a source, but Peter would have died before Jude would have been written.
Reply: It’s easier plausible that Jude could have used 2 Peter as a source if this document is earlier. This objection becomes circular if they do not bring in evidence that 2 Peter used Jude as a main source.///
That is a point that is rarely admitted. Texts relying on other texts sometimes becomes a game of assumptions. Hard to prove positively or negatively, but presuppositions still abound :/
My other thought is one of confusion.
///Objection #5: Church fathers do not quote 2 Peter and its canonicity was under attack in the fourth century.///
And yet in an earlier part of the article it states: ///This is where the controversy comes on with 2 Peter since it’s clear he had help from Silvanus in 1 Peter. Skeptics will point this out to be evidence against Peter as the author of second Peter. To the contrary, *Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Clement of Alexandria* accept Peter as the author.///
So...did the church fathers accept 2nd Peter as being authored by peter or not? How can church fathers not quote 2nd peter (objection #5) and yet it is claimed that 3 of the church fathers accept peter as the author of 2nd peter as stated in the earlier authorship section??
Is there more evidence for or against Philippians 2:6-11 being a hymn, or being Paul's own writing?
So far, I know that the arguments for include: hapax legomena and poetic quality; it has also been a scholarly consensus of the last 100 years, but I'm skeptical that may be because of the more recent enthusiasm for older texts and form criticism.
Yet, when I look in the Greek, it's either that Paul is an EXPERT in braiding this hymn with his exhortation towards humility, or he wrote it. I say this due to the words he uses, and the thematic coherence and consistency from 2:1-18. In terms of vocabulary, oft-repeated words include: glory (doxias, 2:3, 11), consider (hageomai 2:3, 6), humility (tapeinopherosune, 2:3, 8), and the prefix keno- referring to vain glory (kenodoxian, 2:3), self emptying, (kenosis, 2:7), and vanity of Paul's running/toil (2:16).
What are other's thoughts? I'm just beginning to read koine Greek, so I am no expert. Just questioning assumptions, because I think some tend to regard 2:5-11 as more important or more sacred than the rest of the chapter, given that they think the earlier church composed a theological hymn.
Hey everyone, just got a couple of probably silly questions about the Epistle. Firstly, is it appropriate for any member of the laity to own a copy at home for any reason? I am an altar server and have been blessed to wear orarion but even then I am still just part of the laity by definition. Secondly, would there happen to be any church slavonic with English translation copies out there (ie with slavonic on one page with the next english)? I'm learning slavonic at the moment and I have been reading the Epistle in english occasionally at liturgues recently. I also do realise it would be quite thick but not worrying about that too much haha Any help/answers at all would be appreciated!
From what I can tell, most scholars hold to common authorship of 2 John and 3 John and are divided on whether the author of the first epistle is the same author or someone else. What are the arguments for and against these respective positions?
Also, if you have any light to shed on the dating of the epistles, whether before or after the Gospel of John, that would be great too.
