What are the March Madness "must haves?"

Page 4 of 5 (93 items) < Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next >
This post has 92 Replies | 8 Followers

Posts 241
Puddin’ | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Mar 24 2019 6:44 PM

Umm, I retract the question 🤓!

Seriuosly, every (well, actually I should say “most”) comment has been helpful.  

Thanks much JRB & others for your input 👍.

Posts 638
Michael S. | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Mar 24 2019 6:53 PM

Liam Maguire:
Therefore, we must all proceed with an extreme measure of intellectual humility and charitableness to the views of those who disagree with us

Excellent!

Posts 241
Puddin’ | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Mar 24 2019 8:11 PM

Michael S.:

Liam Maguire:
Therefore, we must all proceed with an extreme measure of intellectual humility and charitableness to the views of those who disagree with us

Excellent!

Agreed!  I noticed this quote also & nodded my head in agreement as I read it.

Posts 26530
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Mar 24 2019 11:23 PM

J. Remington Bowling:
This only applies in the very narrow field of one's expertise. So while Walton is far less likely to make a mistake as it relates to some point of Semitic languages, there is no presumption that he is less likely to make mistakes than, say, Ken Ham when it comes to a syllogism or the reasoning process generally.

Oh the temptation! How could you be so cruel? Syllogisms, as you know, relate only to categorical reasoning - the absence or presence of traits in a collection of entities. This is something that a linguist is especially well trained in -- the presence/absence of traits used to define meaning of words, the presence/absence of traits used to identify historical changes, the present/absence of traits used to identify semantic and grammatical forms ...why, oh why, did you have to word your point in such a tempting manner for refutation? Poor little puppy did need a run ...

Or put far more appropriately for the forums, you have crossed the line into arguing a position rather than sharing resources and information - something you admitted to above:

J. Remington Bowling:

MJ. Smith:
And by page 3 someone has nearly always succeeded in dragging someone else into an argument. There are (church) mice of many colors in the forums.

Seems to be most threads these days. 

Better to listen e.g.

Liam Maguire:
Therefore, we must all proceed with an extreme measure of intellectual humility and charitableness to the views of those who disagree with us

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 3236
Mattillo | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Mar 25 2019 5:43 AM

Gary Osborne:

Doc B:

Puddin’:
Does Walton take the view that meshes evolution w. Genesis?

My answer to your question might be a little easier to grasp than JRB's-

  Yes.

Which makes my answer to purchasing it a firm “No”.

This article seemed timely so I figured I'd post it and everyone can give it whatever worth they see fit but in short, this is why a 6-day creationist might disagree with Walton and his hermeneutic.  https://creation.com/lost-world-walton 

Posts 781
scooter | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Mar 25 2019 5:57 AM

Mattillo:

Gary Osborne:

Doc B:

Puddin’:
Does Walton take the view that meshes evolution w. Genesis?

My answer to your question might be a little easier to grasp than JRB's-

  Yes.

Which makes my answer to purchasing it a firm “No”.

This article seemed timely so I figured I'd post it and everyone can give it whatever worth they see fit but in short, this is why a 6-day creationist might disagree with Walton and his hermeneutic.  https://creation.com/lost-world-walton 

Thank you for posting the article, Mattillo.

Thank you, JRB and Doc B for posting your opinions.  

Posts 884
Kolen Cheung | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Mar 25 2019 6:01 AM

Mattillo:

Gary Osborne:

Doc B:

Puddin’:
Does Walton take the view that meshes evolution w. Genesis?

My answer to your question might be a little easier to grasp than JRB's-

Yes.

Which makes my answer to purchasing it a firm “No”.

This article seemed timely so I figured I'd post it and everyone can give it whatever worth they see fit but in short, this is why a 6-day creationist might disagree with Walton and his hermeneutic. https://creation.com/lost-world-walton

No offense but the quality of this article seems low. It's too defensive and subjective.

Posts 781
scooter | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Mar 25 2019 6:21 AM

Kolen Cheung:

Mattillo:

Gary Osborne:

Doc B:

Puddin’:
Does Walton take the view that meshes evolution w. Genesis?

My answer to your question might be a little easier to grasp than JRB's-

Yes.

Which makes my answer to purchasing it a firm “No”.

This article seemed timely so I figured I'd post it and everyone can give it whatever worth they see fit but in short, this is why a 6-day creationist might disagree with Walton and his hermeneutic. https://creation.com/lost-world-walton

No offense but the quality of this article seems low. It's too defensive and subjective.

I take Walton's books and these reviews and comments as data collection opportunities: I say ''Hmmm,'' then look further.

Posts 3678
Francis | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Mar 25 2019 6:46 AM

Paul Caneparo:

I own them but have not read them in detail. I read The Modern Preacher and the Ancient Text way back and had a favourable impression. I took a look at the introduction to the Genesis volume and the first chapter thereafter on creation and it looked like a more intelligent way to relate OT texts to the post-Easter situation than is usually the case. He proposes several criteria to determine how an OT text may be related to Christ and does not hesitate to say it when some do not apply to specific texts. I looked for how he handles Dinah and found that he subsumed her story very very succinctly under the Jacob-Esau story. So there seems to be some very broad swipes as is often the case when Christians preach from longer OT books. 

Posts 3678
Francis | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Mar 25 2019 6:47 AM

Paul Caneparo:

I own them but have not read them in detail. I read The Modern Preacher and the Ancient Text way back and had a favourable impression. I took a look at the introduction to the Genesis volume and the first chapter thereafter on creation and it looked like a more intelligent way to relate OT texts to the post-Easter situation than is usually the case. He proposes several criteria to determine how an OT text may be related to Christ and does not hesitate to say it when some do not apply to specific texts. I looked for how he handles Dinah and found that he subsumed her story very very succinctly under the Jacob-Esau story. So there seems to be some very broad swipes as is often the case when Christians preach from longer OT books. 

Posts 459
J. Remington Bowling | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Mar 25 2019 7:02 AM

MJ. Smith:
Syllogisms, as you know, relate only to categorical reasoning - the absence or presence of traits in a collection of entities. This is something that a linguist is especially well trained in

I've never seen any evidence that being trained in, say, Hebrew or Mandarin, makes one better at logic (syllogistic or otherwise). You might as well argue that English teachers are better logicians. Yes, logic relates to language, but in a very specific way where there isn't much assumption of transference. The fact seems to be that training in English grammar narrowly improves you ability in English grammar, not in your rational faculties generally. In fact, as John Heil points out in First-Order Logic: "The empirical evidence casts doubts on the notion that training in  logic leads to improvement in ordinary reasoning tasks of the sort we encounter outside the classroom. . . . Formal logic, like most other learned disciplines, resists 'transference' across problem domains" (p 4). (For more on this transference problem in education, Paul Kirschner has some interesting work.)

MJ. Smith:
Or put far more appropriately for the forums, you have crossed the line into arguing a position rather than sharing resources and information
 

Well I'm responding to you at this point . . . so. As far as resources and information sharing. . . on other occasions I have pointed to resources which critique Walton. The philosopher Lydia McGrew wrote a few posts critiquing specifically the Lost World of Genesis 1 and The Lost World of Adam and Eve. David T. Tsumura is someone closer to Walton's credentials who has also been critical of him. I didn't mention these things because I assume most people here are capable of finding or being aware of opposing views already.

MJ. Smith:

Better to listen e.g.

Liam Maguire:
Therefore, we must all proceed with an extreme measure of intellectual humility and charitableness to the views of those who disagree with us

Right. Of course we can all agree to have intellectual humility and charitableness. I'm a bit confused how that relates to this specific thread though. If I point out that I disagree with Walton or think that he has some conceptual confusion does that necessarily entail that I lack intellectual humility? That would be odd. Did someone else say something which clearly lacked intellectual humility or charitableness? I don't know, though perhaps dismissing Walton out of hand simply because of his view on the creation v. evolution debate might lean in that direction, but not necessarily.

It just came off as a bit platitudinous. A way to get a few amens, but not really applicable to the conversation unless we assume that disagreeing with Walton is prideful and the like. 

P.S. Anyway, I'll drop this now and let the thread get back on track. I was originally just answering someone's question about what Walton's view was and then Ben came in with that odd "favorite" quote of his. I blame Ben! Stick out tongue

Posts 2061
GaoLu | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Mar 25 2019 9:09 AM

Purportedly, perception is not rooted in reality (our senses being easily deceived) whereas logic is rooted in reason. While truth exists outside our perceptions, we cannot reason logically about things we cannot perceive.  So in the end we can only line up one subjectivity against another (E.G. Walton vs. Ham) and end up back at faith.

I appreciate having resources that broaden both logical reasoning and perceptions of things about which we may be logical. Yet in the end, to appeal to logic as final authority is a wobbly self-deception because we can only apply logic to what we can perceive (rooted in our nasty, deceptive senses)  we end up back at faith in the authority of God.   

I remember the shock I felt one day when I learned that one of my Philosophy prof's (whose name I shall not mention), a brilliant man, steeped in what seemed to me to be perfect logic, existed day to day on Prozac.  I have grace for him, but was startled back to the reality from mistaking logic for God. God is logical.  Logical is not God.  There is a syllogism for that.

Posts 440
Liam & Abi Maguire | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Mar 25 2019 9:32 AM

J. Remington Bowling:

Right. Of course we can all agree to have intellectual humility and charitableness. I'm a bit confused how that relates to this specific thread though. If I point out that I disagree with Walton or think that he has some conceptual confusion does that necessarily entail that I lack intellectual humility? That would be odd. Did someone else say something which clearly lacked intellectual humility or charitableness? I don't know, though perhaps dismissing Walton out of hand simply because of his view on the creation v. evolution debate might lean in that direction, but not necessarily.

It just came off as a bit platitudinous. A way to get a few amens, but not really applicable to the conversation unless we assume that disagreeing with Walton is prideful and the like. 

As my dear ol' mum used to say, JRB, it's not just what you said, but how you said it (Or in this case, typed it). The tone of your comments came across dismissive of the author in question and the responses of posters who disagreed with you. 

You're clearly very bright and articulate (more so on both counts than I, I'd wager)., it just seems that sometimes you use them more like a stun-stick than the lantern. Both create light, but only one benefit more than the wielder. 

That said, if my comments came across platitudinous, than I apologise, that was not my intention. 

Check out my blog 'For Fathers'

Posts 1564
John Kight | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Mar 25 2019 9:40 AM

For some reason, I keep clicking on this thread assuming that resource recommendations are being provided from the current sale...only to be disappointed again and again. Beer

For book reviews and more visit sojotheo.com 

Posts 459
J. Remington Bowling | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Mar 25 2019 9:50 AM

John Kight:
For some reason, I keep clicking on this thread assuming that resource recommendations are being provided from the current sale...only to be disappointed again and again. Beer

Apologies on that. To that end:

I noticed that the March Madness sale is no longer showing on the logos.com homepage (it's now Tim Keller and general March sales), but if you go to the resources that were in the March Madness brackets you can still get the deals. 

Here is the link to the March Madness sale page: https://www.logos.com/march-matchups?utm_source=brackets.logos.com&utm_medium=link&utm_content=getdeals&utm_campaign=promo-lmm2019

Posts 2201
Forum MVP
John Fidel | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Mar 25 2019 9:55 AM

John Kight:

For some reason, I keep clicking on this thread assuming that resource recommendations are being provided from the current sale...only to be disappointed again and again. Beer

Here is what I bought. Not sure any are must haves, but you can decide. I have found them interesting and helpful:

All 3 Lexham Discourse Commentaries. If you have Faithlife Connect and buy through Lexhampress.com you should qualify for and additional 25% discount on at least one of them. Not sure if it applies to one or all, so purchase all of the Lexham at one time to see.

EEC Exodus. Ditto on the 25% discount.

Hebrews Through Hebrew Eyes

Reformed Expository Commentary Galatians - highly rated at Bestcommentaries.com

OTL Exodus - also highly rated.

I actually did not think I would purchase anything until they broke up the bundles. Glad they did.

Hope this helps.

Posts 1366
Ben | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Mar 25 2019 10:04 AM

I figured it was relevant to post a passage from the resource inquired about, which directly responded to the dismissive question about its position. You took it from there.

"The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected."- G.K. Chesterton

Posts 3236
Mattillo | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Mar 25 2019 10:07 AM

Unfortunately the Galaxy Journal Bundle destroyed my wallet this month so I only elected to get two titles.

1) https://www.logos.com/product/49491/on-the-reliability-of-the-old-testament 

- I've seen this book quoted a lot and I enjoy apologetics. Its been on my wishlist for quite some time.

2) https://www.logos.com/product/166094/apollos-old-testament-commentary-hosea 

- I really like the Apollos series thus far.  They are newer and have some great, fresh info that I haven't seen in others.  When I was doing a study on Exodus, I found the EEC Exodus and AOTC Exodus to be wonderful additions to the NAC Exodus I was using.

Otherwise, as others have suggested if you don't have them New International Commentaries, New American Commentaries, NIVAC, Reformed Expository Commentary etc are all nice to have IMO.

Posts 3236
Mattillo | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Mar 25 2019 10:11 AM

Another gem that I'm enjoying reading right now is Davis' commentary on Joshua.  https://www.logos.com/product/18455/joshua-no-falling-words 

They are short, to the point, and have some great preaching points.  He has several in that series though I don't know which ones are on sale.  Highly recommended as well.

https://www.logos.com/products/search?Author=2886%7cDale+Ralph+Davis 

Posts 1497
Josh | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, Mar 25 2019 1:03 PM

Any resource that can start a debate is worth owning. Smile

It is important to understand other positions from those who actually believe in them. I would never think about learning about young earth creationism from Hugh Ross, for example. Likewise, if you want to be able to understand John Walton's position, you have to read his books. Why would you expect a biased source to provide the best (and most convincing) argument?

Page 4 of 5 (93 items) < Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next > | RSS