On February 22, 1980, The US stuns the heavily-favored Soviet Union...
Even Canadians -- who live and bleed their leafs! -- will tell you that the 'Miracle on Ice' is one of the great hockey games of all time.
Friday, February 23, 2007
Do you believe in miracles? YES!!!
27 years ago....
On February 22, 1980, The US stuns the heavily-favored Soviet Union...
Even Canadians -- who live and bleed their leafs! -- will tell you that the 'Miracle on Ice' is one of the great hockey games of all time.
On February 22, 1980, The US stuns the heavily-favored Soviet Union...
Even Canadians -- who live and bleed their leafs! -- will tell you that the 'Miracle on Ice' is one of the great hockey games of all time.
More Windows Woes...
This is why friends don't let friends use Windows!
Apparently, the folks in Sweeden didn't get that memo! It's hilarious that this was the IKEA in, of all places....Palo Alto! Hehe...
I notice that there's a whole Flickr ring devoted to public computer errors! Do you notice any common threads there?
Apparently, the folks in Sweeden didn't get that memo! It's hilarious that this was the IKEA in, of all places....Palo Alto! Hehe...
I notice that there's a whole Flickr ring devoted to public computer errors! Do you notice any common threads there?
Christian Cell Phones To Offer Proof-Text Messaging
by Durwood Cumbey, July 2005
The longstanding theological debate between Arminianism and Calvinism heated up last month when Sprint announced a new service in their cell phone technology called Proof-Text Messaging. For a small fee, Sprint cell phone customers will now be able to send short, abbreviated Bible verse references to thwart their theological opponents. Currently the most popular proof-text message sent to Arminians is “JON 6:44, U SEMI-P DOG,” while Calvinists are receiving the classic, “FYI TULIP-HEAD, JON 3:16.”
Betty Johnson, spokesperson for Sprint, says that their new “Friends and Heretics” phone plan is just another way the company is striving to reach the rising Christian market. “Here at Sprint we realize that rebuking others with God’s word shouldn’t suffer in this face-paced society. From now on, preachers with cell phones should anticipate lightning-fast biblical correction from their congregation immediately after every sermon.”
Mike Gavin, a seminary student and staunch Calvinist, is thrilled with the new technology. “Between my class studies and my job at Subway, I have very little time to slam my ‘Free Will’ buds. But now I can just send ‘PREDESTIN8 THIS! EPH 1:11,’ and watch the dust fly.” Adds Gavin, “BTW, if Luther had this technology back in 1524, he would have spammed that Erasmus dude big time. ROTFLOL!”
(HT: The Sacred Sandwich)
[Note bene: Glad to see there are some baptists out there that can poke fun of themselves. This site is almost as funny as Lark News.]
The longstanding theological debate between Arminianism and Calvinism heated up last month when Sprint announced a new service in their cell phone technology called Proof-Text Messaging. For a small fee, Sprint cell phone customers will now be able to send short, abbreviated Bible verse references to thwart their theological opponents. Currently the most popular proof-text message sent to Arminians is “JON 6:44, U SEMI-P DOG,” while Calvinists are receiving the classic, “FYI TULIP-HEAD, JON 3:16.”
Betty Johnson, spokesperson for Sprint, says that their new “Friends and Heretics” phone plan is just another way the company is striving to reach the rising Christian market. “Here at Sprint we realize that rebuking others with God’s word shouldn’t suffer in this face-paced society. From now on, preachers with cell phones should anticipate lightning-fast biblical correction from their congregation immediately after every sermon.”
Mike Gavin, a seminary student and staunch Calvinist, is thrilled with the new technology. “Between my class studies and my job at Subway, I have very little time to slam my ‘Free Will’ buds. But now I can just send ‘PREDESTIN8 THIS! EPH 1:11,’ and watch the dust fly.” Adds Gavin, “BTW, if Luther had this technology back in 1524, he would have spammed that Erasmus dude big time. ROTFLOL!”
(HT: The Sacred Sandwich)
[Note bene: Glad to see there are some baptists out there that can poke fun of themselves. This site is almost as funny as Lark News.]
Thursday, February 22, 2007
CG is getting scary...
Here are two photos of Korean actress, Sung Hye Gyo....ur, rather, one photo and one computer-generated (cg) image.
Can you pick out the real one?
or
It really is getting scary what computers can come up with.
And no wonder people like Raymond Kurzweil continue to pack auditoriums discussing things like 'technological singularity'!
Can you pick out the real one?
or
It really is getting scary what computers can come up with.
And no wonder people like Raymond Kurzweil continue to pack auditoriums discussing things like 'technological singularity'!
Dating is much better when...
Quote of the Day (courtesty of Ekklicious):
"[D]ating is much better when you're married!"
I hope so! :)
"[D]ating is much better when you're married!"
I hope so! :)
Monday, February 19, 2007
G.K. Beale on Typology
Greg Beale comments:
“…Many see typology as an arbitrary method which typically involves allegory and therefore it is also viewed as a good example of non-contextual exegesis. But most scholars today agree that typology is not allegory because it is based on the actual historical events of the Old Testament passage being dealt with and because it essentially consists of a real, historical correspondence between the Old Testament and New Testament event. Typological interpretation involves an extended reference to the original meaning of an Old Testament text which develops it but does not contradict it. Put another way, it does not read into the text a different or higher sense, but draws out from it a different or higher application of the same sense."
“...The plausibility of the suggestion that typological interpretation is normative and that we may seek for more Old Testament types than the New Testament actually states for us is pointed to by the observation that this method is not unique to the New Testament writers but pervades the Old Testament. The fact that later Old Testament writers understand earlier Old Testament texts typologically also dilutes the claim that the New Testament writers’ typological method was unique because of their special charismatic stance…the consistent use of such a method by biblical authors throughout hundreds of years of sacred history suggests strongly that it is a viable method for all saints to employ today..."
“…if Jesus and the apostles were impoverished in their exegetical and theological method and only divine inspiration salvaged their conclusions, then the intellectual and apologetic foundation of our faith is seriously eroded. What kind of intellectual or apologetic foundation for our faith is this? M. Silva is likely correct when he states that 'if we refuse to pattern our exegesis after that of the apostles, we are in practice denying the authoritative character of their scriptural interpretation—and to do so is to strike at the very heart of the Christian faith.'"
(from The Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts: Essays on the Use of the Old Testament in the New)
[HT: Breuss Wane]
“…Many see typology as an arbitrary method which typically involves allegory and therefore it is also viewed as a good example of non-contextual exegesis. But most scholars today agree that typology is not allegory because it is based on the actual historical events of the Old Testament passage being dealt with and because it essentially consists of a real, historical correspondence between the Old Testament and New Testament event. Typological interpretation involves an extended reference to the original meaning of an Old Testament text which develops it but does not contradict it. Put another way, it does not read into the text a different or higher sense, but draws out from it a different or higher application of the same sense."
“...The plausibility of the suggestion that typological interpretation is normative and that we may seek for more Old Testament types than the New Testament actually states for us is pointed to by the observation that this method is not unique to the New Testament writers but pervades the Old Testament. The fact that later Old Testament writers understand earlier Old Testament texts typologically also dilutes the claim that the New Testament writers’ typological method was unique because of their special charismatic stance…the consistent use of such a method by biblical authors throughout hundreds of years of sacred history suggests strongly that it is a viable method for all saints to employ today..."
“…if Jesus and the apostles were impoverished in their exegetical and theological method and only divine inspiration salvaged their conclusions, then the intellectual and apologetic foundation of our faith is seriously eroded. What kind of intellectual or apologetic foundation for our faith is this? M. Silva is likely correct when he states that 'if we refuse to pattern our exegesis after that of the apostles, we are in practice denying the authoritative character of their scriptural interpretation—and to do so is to strike at the very heart of the Christian faith.'"
(from The Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts: Essays on the Use of the Old Testament in the New)
[HT: Breuss Wane]
My own impish way...
T. David Gordon quote of the day:
"My own impish way of discerning whether a person really has an understanding of covenant theology is to see whether he can describe it without reference to dispensationalism."
So very true!
"My own impish way of discerning whether a person really has an understanding of covenant theology is to see whether he can describe it without reference to dispensationalism."
So very true!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
