this post was submitted on 09 Mar 2025
2 points (60.0% liked)
Reformed Christianity
357 readers
3 users here now
[email protected] exists to be a place where reformed believers, in a broader understanding of the term, can come together, unified by a clear Gospel witness, to exhort one another, spur one another on intellectually in reformed theology, and discuss doctrine.
Rules (draft)
We probably don't need as many rules as on reddit just yet. But some important ones will carry over.
Rule #1 Deal with Each Other in Love
Rule #2 Keep Content Charitable
Rule #3 Keep Content Clean
Rule #5 Maintain the Integrity of the Gospel and Gospel ethics.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You're quipping about making stuff up while supporting a book whose primary evidence for taking it remotely seriously is itself?
The count of occurrences isn't evidence of authenticity or truthfulness.
I don't know what you mean about "authenticity," but between Homer's writings, Plato's writings, and the Bible (OT & NT separately) the NT has:
And the OT and NT together have:
This when compared to the works of Plato & Homer (we don't need to mention Socrates because he doesn't have any written work preserved at all). They are as authentic, and moreso in some areas, as any ancient writing.
As to truthfulness, I've already spoken archaeologically, but referring to the spiritual content, I wouldn't presume to convince you.
This is Reformed Theology. There is a passage in Romans 9 that is very unpopular these days, but we embrace it. It goes like this:
I do want you to know, I hope God has mercy on you. Along with Paul,
By your logic, most historical document's primary evidence for taking it remotely seriously is "itself".