In this third of three talks, D. A. Carson speaks on subtle ways we abandon the authority of Scripture. To see more, go to our website: ca.thegospelcoalition.org Follow us: @canadatgc ( / canadatgc )
I was able to find the first two sessions, but it might be helpful to post links to all talks in a series in the description of each - one never knows which session a RU-vid visitor might see first. Sending folks to the front page of your website isn't terribly helpful - it's like telling somebody who wants to talk to a Mr. Jones that he lives in Minnesota.
Is Carson aware of a televangelist from my own country Singapore? He's of Chinese-Indian descent but has christened himself Joseph Prince for donkey's years, and is now almost an international 'Christian' phenomenon in charismatic circles. That man preaches half-truths. He has no formal theological training but because he reads a lot and is probably an autodidact, he gives the Christian man on the pew the impression that he has a thorough knowledge of Hebrew and Greek. He commits the etymological fallacy as often as he changes his sartorial sense on the pulpit. Carson ought to critique him.
You are right. What guides Joseph is his fond attraction toward a most profound heretic-Kenneth Hagin. As far as Carson critiquing him? Carson must first begin with his own house and start with Tim Keller. Keller is a Roman Catholic who has infiltrated the visible church. And Carson has not done anything to warn the flock of God.
I have no respect for a man claiming to be a Christian while he has continuously pushed Tim Keller's Romanism agenda. Shame on anyone not calling out Carson for embracing the dead heretic. Keller did not preach the pure gospel, but instead, pushed men and women toward Rome. "The just shall live by faith" and pushing Romanism is contrary to this gospel statement. Rome's gospel is the just shall live by infusion of works and grace.
In case you misunderstood the above comment, you need to watch this video above to understand the frustration. He does not apply these same standards to Keller.
That's technically correct, but mostly wrong. There are no humans or people or wars in the Bible, either, then. Because these are English words and the Bible was written in Greek and Hebrew. But of course there are many Greek and Hebrew words that translate to these words. The same is true for miracles. Hebrew talks of "might works" and Greek has "wonders" "powers" and "signs" all of which translate reasonably well to miracle.
@@loganhurley5590 Since we know where this word comes from, and that it is a latin term, I will stick with what I have said. Miracle is used a lot in our world today, and much of its use is nonBiblical with a magical sense. God's power, work and signs are not magic.
@@loganhurley5590 I guess it boils down to what is a miracle, Biblically, and what is a miracle that the Catholic Church harps on. They are not the same things. Having worked in the medical field for most of my life, there are individuals alive that should not be, and ones that are dead that should not be. Which ones are miracles in your definition? It is over used term which has a multitude of meanings-tell me which one works for you? Dynamis, ergon and semeion, should be translated for what they mean. Is a shooting star a sign, and therefore a miracle?
What kind of a statement is this? The word "sign" is frequently DEFINED as miracle, but it does not take away from its meaning. The word sign IS used often as a warning to the Jews in Deut 13. Sign has been defined as "A mark by which persons or things are distinguished and made known. A mark by which persons or things are distinguished and made known. In Scripture used generally of an address to the senses to attest the existence of supersensible and therefore divine power." The plagues of Egypt were “signs” of God's anger against the Egyptians Exodus 4. The miracles of Jesus were “signs” to attest His unique relationship with God Matthew 12:38 and John 2:,etc While I would agree with you we ought not use the Latin to define a Biblical word if it can be avoided, we are stuck with miracle for what it denotes. There is nothing wrong with saying something is a miraculous event. I dont like term "rapture" and I dont believe in a "rapture" but if it is defined properly to communicate being "caught up" I dont think you should throw the baby out with the bath water. I dont have a problem attacking a Latin term, but dont throw out the Biblical definition.
