For those with a Logos account, this commentary from the excellent NIVAC series is free for the month of August. Blessings.
Free Bible Commentary for NIV Application - Letters of John (Was US$26.99) @ Logos
1360
Related Stores
closed Comments
- 1
- 2
Ebook.
Got one, thank you!
Feel free to read it and find out :)
At the very least, you're getting free commentary from highly educated scholars on an ancient near east letter which has been well preserved for centuries.
Do you wear a fedora?
Thats cool, thanks
The word "Lego" jumped out to me from the title. Second glance has left me immeasurably disappointed.
What’s the neg for?
It appears you may have committed sacrilege. Watch out for incoming lightning bolts and negs.
Don't worry you are not alone. Had to double take if it's really Lego. Lol.
So I've just watched a short clip of the author Gary M. Burge. While he's legitimately credentialed this book remains of limited value as serious scholarship but does provide a good example of contemporary Johannine apologia.
I'm not Christian but I do like reading exegetics as long as they have legitimate historical value. I'm implying from your comment that this one belongs firmly in the dogmatic camp and I should give it a miss, or have I misinterpreted you?
The NIVAC authors generally come from more conservative schools of Biblical interpretation—but they're serious scholars and, generally will at least briefly engage with the key critical arguments (but, it's not really that kind of series).
It never ceases to amaze me of the things relatively sophisticated people believe and become immersed in.
Flat earth…. fake moon landings…. ufos…. parting watercourses by mental willpower… reincarnation… religion in general.
Humans eons ago worshipped all sorts of strange things… sun, moon, bulls and many other animals, fire, gold… and on and on.
Many contemporaries believe they were naive…. unsophisticated… not understanding their world, so grasping at straws. Some believe simply charlatans creating or joining followings for personal power or profit.
In our stage of evolution (did I say evolution? oops…there's another one!) religions and cults continue to be invented and followed by modern day man
And in all of this, the majority of religious people are convinced that "theirs" is the only true god, and all others are imposters and fake. There's some irony in that to the rest of us!
I'm not banging on about any truth!
I simply highlighted the logical inconsistency of hordes of people who all believe that their (various) one god is the only god, and the true god.Perhaps you can educate with your wisdom a bit… who is your particular god, and why that god is the only true god, and why all others are impostors?
Who is your god…. if you have time as an ozbargainer to share?
@DashCam AKA Rolts: I just looked at that… stephen fry is a wise man!
maniac and monstrous are two interesting words in the context!
If someone finds the Kalam cosmological argument convincing, it could significantly narrow down their possible worldviews, leaving only a few religions that might be considered true. By studying these remaining religions and examining their arguments, historical context, and compatibility with other worldviews, one can better assess their accuracy.
It's essential to remember that some religions may be exclusive, meaning they may not be compatible with other belief systems.
The problem of religious pluralism may not be a concern for someone who believes in the Kalam cosmological argument, as it effectively narrows down the range of possible worldviews. Since many worldviews would not be compatible with the Kalam cosmological argument, it helps in clarifying the options and may lead one to explore only those religions or belief systems that align with the argument's principles.
@gto21: If someone finds the Kalam cosmological argument convincing, then they have fallen for flawed reasoning.
Wow @Wolfy, triggered much?
@Rooster provides a reasonable critique at a conceptual level and you launch into a full ICBM ad hominen attack in response!
Your juvenile sarcasm only further emphasises @Rooster's points.
@Wolfenstein98k: So you have zero skin in the game, yet you elected to be offended anyway. Gotcha, hope that works out for ya.
I completely disagree with you regarding the relevance of climate change…. to a degree about social justice… and am scratching my head about basic human nature/ racism.
I completely agree with you regarding the various forms of nationalism abounding in numerous countries…. manifested in various ways including:
playing the national anthem, standing for the national anthem,
the "god bless (insert country here),
the bizzare flying of flags on domestic premises (highlighted in the usa, often on dirt poor premises where the "lucky country" hasn't come true)
etc etcI think such things are worse than simply stupid or moronic… arguably this was the cause of WW1, which in turn was the cause of WW2. Fervent blind nationalism is the ultimate version of not just "keeping up with the joneses" but killing citizens trying to establish rival status.
I applaud the concept of living to a set of principles (if those principles are beneficial to humanity, rather than the rules of say the mafia)…. but worshipping some far distant in history entity (or current day cult god or pope or rock star) just seems a bit like madness to me.
As I was growing up, the catholic church seemed to be a great example of what I have come to despise… an organisation with a mantra of do what I say, not what I do …. with hypnotic ramblings in a language the listeners did not understand (latin)… with dire threats to the current and perpetual well being of its subjects, if they didn't do what they were told. A great example of a fear driven cult. What was the prime hook? ahhh…original sin! You are forked forever, not because of what you have done, but because of what you have not done. It was priceless, if it wasn't so tragic. Not only did they afflict their own culture, they had the need to extort money from their subjects, and their children, "for the missionaries" so they could spread the disease.
Anyway, all the best, and nice chatting!
Rooster You conveniently didnt address the welcome to country ceremonies spiff spoke of
@bargain huntress: I'm glad my response was convenient to you…. I thought I'd addressed the essence of spiff's post.
I stated my thoughts on nationalism and flags anthems… are you meaning something different?
I don't know what you mean "the welcome to country before every meeting or event"…. are you talking about an immigration/ naturalisation process? It sounds reasonable to have a welcome to the country greeting to people entering the country… but if that (whatever it is) occurs at every meeting some people goes to, it sounds over the top and moronic.
If it's something like school kids being required to salute the flag and give an oath of allegiance every day (or even once) that sounds like bollocks to me. If it's school kids reciting "gawd bluss umuricka" (or any other nation's version) at the start of every schoolday, I believe it is bizzare
indoctrination.Please let me know if I'm missing something…..
I stated my thoughts on nationalism and flags anthems… are you meaning something different?
@rooster7777: 🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄
https://www.indigenous.gov.au/contact-us/welcome_acknowledge…
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welcome_to_Country
https://youtu.be/4byEHkYPsP8
https://youtu.be/LxNbasdRA2w
https://youtu.be/B7vng_eRVK0
https://youtu.be/uLa7qojvkSc
https://youtu.be/NDfttXIEEhI
https://youtu.be/aDH4__qL0Nc
https://youtu.be/sa5ZDKBFsyc
https://youtu.be/ZNYjKxKMpV4
https://youtu.be/nuTWPeNWmtY
https://youtu.be/fiov2P_1GzE
https://youtu.be/7lHKI6mNI8A
https://youtu.be/nqdpHrcMkDk
https://youtu.be/dQw4w9WgXcQ
https://youtu.be/m88HLu9pfgkIf it's something like school kids being required to salute the flag and give an oath of allegiance every day (or even once) that sounds like bollocks to me. If it's school kids reciting "gawd bluss umuricka" (or any other nation's version) at the start of every schoolday, I believe it is bizzare
indoctrination.https://youtu.be/TV1fnPWE62E
https://youtu.be/HaK4aZy9n3E
https://youtu.be/LxNbasdRA2w
https://youtu.be/2Ys7e2BhHAA
https://youtu.be/0q6yphdZhUA
https://youtu.be/zwB19PARVRc
https://youtu.be/WncAdLJIyzo
https://youtu.be/-0id9JGfpgo@bargain huntress: "It is intended to highlight the cultural significance of the surrounding area to the descendants of a particular Aboriginal clan or language group who were recognised as the original human inhabitants of the area. "
@Duck Mode: For example they need to learn to count so when they grow up they can cope with money. How does doing welcome to countries help them?
"It is intended to highlight the cultural significance of the surrounding area to the descendants of a particular Aboriginal clan or language group who were recognised as the original human inhabitants of the area. "
How is forcing children to do a welcome to country any different to forcing them to pray or pledge allegance to a flag or sing a national anthem? That is @Spiff and my point.
@bargain huntress: Acknowledging indigenous people and their history is not the same as patriotism or nationalism?
@bargain huntress: Is it really that hard to just skim through the wikipedia link you yourself posted and go from there?
@Duck Mode: Is it really that hard for you to explain?
I havent just skimmed it, ive read it in its entirety, and it proves my point not yours.
Youre refusing to admit that you cant explain the difference because there is no difference.
@bargain huntress: Because people don't always have the time or energy to spoon feed you?
Welcome to Country:
Intended to acknowledge and respect indigenous peoples considering the brutal colonial historyNationalism:
- Devotion, especially excessive or undiscriminating devotion, to the interests or culture of a particular nation-state.
- The belief that nations will benefit from acting independently rather than collectively, emphasizing national rather than international goals.
- The belief that a particular cultural or ethnic group constitutes a distinct people deserving of political self-determination.
This first point you already saw i copied and pasted from wikipedia. Defininition of nationalism from a simple search. I don't know how it can get any simpler than that.
@Duck Mode: facepalm
This description of nationalism you posted is a literal description of welcome to country ceremonies.
Nationalism:
Devotion, especially excessive or undiscriminating devotion, to the interests or culture of a particular nation-state.
The belief that nations will benefit from acting independently rather than collectively, emphasizing national rather than international goals.
The belief that a particular cultural or ethnic group constitutes a distinct people deserving of political self determinationHave you ever actually listened to one?!
"We acknowledge the people of the [insert name] NATION"
"The people of the [insert name] NATION welcome you to OUR COUNTRY."What a selfown. You really need to work on your critical thinking skills.
Also more toddlers being indoctrinated: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12434613/Pre-school…
@bargain huntress: Look, you need your own critical thinking skills improved if you keep thinking it's fair to compare highlighting colonised peoples history and place in society is the same as flag waving American style patriotism/nationalism.
The daily mail example is certainly pretty cringe, but it's the daily mail so there could be more to the story for all we know.
I stand for all national anthems, not just my own. I also don't clap after any national anthem, as the social convention is that you don't.
I don't judge people who choose not to stand. I save my white hot rage for those damn clappers.
You could just as easily argue that many of today's sufferings are caused by religion. Social justice and racism has been shaped by religion. You can't doubt that. Both negatives and positives of religion exists. To say "I'd rather worship xyz", implies that you are either a religious person or you are inherently evil because you don't follow some god is silly. To be religious doesn't automatically make you a moral person.
The welcome to country aspects has always been about acknowledging a history of a place, and respecting a homeland. It is no different to respecting your family home when you live there. That's vastly different to worshiping an imaginary sky fairy.
You sum up the illogical hypocrisy christianity perfectly.
You do what most of them do. Dress up every personal agenda , none of which impact on you, and hide behind the imagery of the religion.
The "pseudo christian" MO is much like putting Rolls Royce badges on a Barina, and then waving like a Royal ,broken down on the side of the road, bonnet up.Wondering why the world is all out of good Samaritans.There is a pattern of christian recently claiming climate change is crap. Mostly from the safety of a cosy place distant from the drowning penguins and razing northern hemisphere.
I'm tipping you vote accordingly.
It's so weird how Christians think that repeating their Christian mantras will persuade people who think that religion is generally silly. My dad does this and it just makes me question whether everything is ok up there.
A bit of "earth to major tom…is there anybody out there".
I mean, we all tend to accept our early school training memory repetition training of the times tables, and accept that 2x2=4… and there's nothing deceptive or harmful about that… but religious mantra or "teachings"… agreed!
Seems to be the same in any cult, when members are indoctrinated effectively.
Meant to say…
See John 17 v1-3
Wouldn't that be "john" telling you that. You know…rules of hearsay and such.
If we find some medieval document by church hierarchy slamming copernicus, and declaring the world is flat….does that make the world flat?
Atheist & agnostic scholars use the Bible as a historical document, alongside non-biblical evidence, to support events like Jesus' existence and the crucifixion. Some liberal critical scholars deny Jesus' existence, but their views aren't widely accepted among other atheist & agnostic scholars and historians.
Do you think the universe was created by a bang initiated by nothing, in a void of nothing, that started to become spontaneously organised by nothing and now we have this sophisticated world by pure chance?
There are explanations for that nothing, why do we have to get religious based on the Big Bang?
If that’s so you’re pulling people towards belief over this, therefore u giving another example how religious leaders get sheep’s to join religion and brainwash themIs you argument that the 'nothing' was actually something? Seems like you haven't thought of the obvious implications of that and you're calling others brainwashed. Ironic.
Where did I invoke religion?
Yes.
Do you think a higher power created all this including aids and pancreatic cancer (not by pure chance)?
Do you not understand the concept of nothing? Nothing acting on nothing doesn't produce something. Pure chance acting on nothing doesn't produce anything either. Do you want to have a go of explaining how it does produce something to prove that you're not just an ideologue?
You question how a big bang theory could be true…..but somehow strangely accept that god created everything from nothing…. and god came from where?
Sorry…your god came from where?
Everything that begins to exist has a cause. The universe had a beginning, and therefore, it must have a cause.
Since everything is bound by time, space, and matter. Therefore the "First Cause" or "Uncaused Cause" is timeless, spaceless, and immaterial.
Asking Where one’s God came from assumes that being was created in the first place.
One of the central claims of the monotheists is that God is eternal and ‘uncreated’.
To ask where it came from would be begging the question.
I didn't invoke god or religion and you avoided my question.
Explain how nothing acting on nothing can produce something.
Do you believe your god was created from nothing? If so then how is that any different? If not then how is it the all powerful one and only god?
Why are you invoking god and not answering my question?
@Ghos7: Because your question was very basic and didn't show that you fully understand your side of the argument.
I believe the scientific evidence so far which is that the current universe expanded from a singularity. We can't know what was before the singularity because either there was nothing before it, or all information was lost in it. I won't claim to know how the singularity got there except to say that in our current universe there is no such thing as nothing, even a complete vacuum with no particles in it is capable of producing matter - matter and antimatter particles are constantly being created and annihilated (this is how Hawking radiation occurs). I'm just pointing out that ascribing the universe to a creator doesn't explain the origin of everything because it doesn't explain the origin of the creator.
@macrocephalic: One of your hypotheses is that something spontaneously existed where "there was nothing before it".
It seems like you're the one who doesn't fully understand your side of the argument.
If you're stumbling over understanding the concept of nothing, what makes you so sure there is no such thing as uncreated?
bronze age metaphysics wont fill the gap cosmology leaves. its walking in the wrong direction.
Well, yes. It's the most logical explanation offered.
Apparently you don't have even the most cursory knowledge of science or logic.
The universe, the galaxies within it and everything they contain are far from ‘organised’ it’s complete and utter chaos. Constant change over huge time scales that will continue for trillions of years into the future.
And modern science now has theories about the ‘time’ to before the Big Bang.
Highly recommend you watch ‘The Universe’ TV Series from the BBC with Professor Brian Cox. It’s a good place to start to wrap your head around where the latest scientific evidence and theories are at, and if it interests you will get you on a path to learning more.
"The universe and everything it contains is far from organised."
"Watch this documentary from a highly educated professor filmed on digital cameras and available to a massive percentage of the population on earth to watch on a device they carry in their pocket."
LOL
@Ghos7: I’m confused how these two are related?
Having atoms come together in chemistry to form life intelligent enough to create devices where they can learn something from them has nothing to do with the universe being ‘organised’
The universe is not some organised, purposely designed thing.
Watch the documentary and you will see.
smart person coming thru
lol @ u
Anything that requires ‘faith’ because there’s no evidence needs to be avoided. Trust me bro.
Christian faith doesn't mean trusting something that has no evidence. It means trusting in Jesus because of the evidence.
@rooster7777 According to the Bible, you are a unique individual who is loved by God, created in his image and who has immense value and deserving of dignity as a result.
It seems from your comment that you subscribe to a different world view. Who does yours say that you are?Errr… I don't have a bible (any of the myriad of competing versions) or a god, so ergo I don't have a god telling me what I am. Why on earth (not heaven!!) would you think I have a god?
Do you need someone else to write something, for you to form a mental picture of who you are?
I mean… I need a doc if I need him to write a prescription…. but I don't need a psychologist or a theologian to write my self image for me.
The US authorities confirms UFOs' existence, and I'm skeptical about chemical evolution.
The Bible has had a massive impact on our way of life today, and reading something like this with a detached air - reading the 'meta' messages - would probably be interesting. Maybe think of it as a piece of evidence that could be used to explain these behaviours that amaze you, digesting it to so you can come up with countermeasures to their spread…..
Worshipping (giving thanks) to the Sun makes the most sense to me.
It truely sustains all life on Earth.
Nothing strange about that at all.
At $0 it's impossible to calculate a nonsense to dollars ratio.
Infinity is a bit of a hard concept to grasp…. in quantity, time, etc
So yes, the inverse of infinity also creates a difficult calculation!
Do you have some good evidence to prove that even one single verse is nonsense? What is your BEST evidence? I am genuinely interested to know of any convincing evidence, as opposed to a bald assertion of "nonsense".
It's nonsense that the Noah character was able to gather two of every creature (including, for example, a freshwater fish species that lives in a single river in Argentina, and a beetle that eats one type of plant in Zimbabwe) and house them all, with all required food and habitat, for what was it, 40 days? While 99.99% of everything was randomly murdered by god because he was displeased with some people, yet there's no trace of the piles and piles of drowned bodies from an event that apparently happened so recently that one human could build a wooden megaboat to hold the whole world.
These stories are the work of humans, humans who lacked the perspective to write a more plausible story.
That's it? Is that your BEST evidence - some reasoning about the Ark, when it was the same volume as 522 railroad cars which can hold 240 sheep each, and he needed only two of each 'kind'?
Remember also that Jesus himself endorsed and authenticates the global catastrophe of Noah's flood, with his own resurrection surely demonstrating the truth of what he spoke. Jesus showed the flood is a picture of our world today, with the masses blindly rejecting their own creator God and preferring to have faith in bronze and plastic idols like Lucy in the Smithsonian, instead of choosing to be saved with Noah and the few.
Grateful for your reply, but is there any evidence which is more convincing? Anything at all?
@inherentchoice: I understand that ancient people in the middle east had an opinion that "all animals" were sheep, goats, and ducks, but you know better. Being able to physically stack livestock isn't the point. Did the ark have industrial refrigeration for the Andean species that die if the temperature rises above 10°? After the waters receded, how did Noah return Tasmanian species to Tasmania? The story kinda just indicates that the boat ran aground and he said "ok everyone off here thanks" didn't it? Is that any good for a freshwater fish from Thailand?
@gto21: Most of the earth's water is salt water, so setting aside the obvious question of "where did a 9km deep body of floodwater come from / drain to?", a global flood would be salt water. But there are many thousands of aquatic species that can only live in fresh water, they'd have been wiped out unless Noah had gone to each of the local habitats they're found in, caught them, and transported them back to the Middle East at the correct temperature and with the correct food. If one of them died a few days later during transport, he'd have to go back to that waterhole in Honduras and try again. And if he got a guess wrong about what nutrition a particular type of crab needs, he'd have to (walk?) back to Sri Lanka, get new crabs, and try a different diet. And that's before we get to what type of mega fresh water, heat-controlled aquarium setup would be needed on the boat.
Christians justifying this fantasy with "well it happened because I also think Jesus rose from the dead, so there!" is a real house of cards.
@park: You have asserted "nonsense" and claim to know better. And so please do tell if this is your best evidence to support your point.
The claim of the Bible is that Jesus is the promised Messiah and only begotten son of God, who bought us redemption from eternal hellfire at the price of his execution as our passover sacrificial lamb. This written record of 66 books by 40 different authors gives us staggering prophecies which have already been fulfilled over millennia and which contine to be demonstrated even today on our evening news.
And do you now wish to refute this with a mere statement that you "understand" there was an ancient opinion about animals?
The Andean species which may be limited to cold are merely an example of natural selection being a reduction and removal of information in the genome, as opposed to an increase. These current species demonstrate the amount of genetic variation that was possible from the ancestor of their 'kind' aboard the Ark. In any case there's plenty of huskies in tropical climates and even polar bears at Sea World last I checked.
So… do have no better evidence? Nothing at all convincing to support your bald assertions of "nonsense"?
Where did he put the dinosaurs?
How does logos compare with Accordance?
I don't think there's a ton of difference for most people. This is just an ebook that you can get with the free version of logos. Maybe if you were searching for stuff in Greek or Hebrew and looking for particular verb tenses then I think Accordance may be ahead slightly, but at that level you would probably be reading a bunch of software reviews.
- 1
- 2
Is this printed or eBook?