“For if it has occurred to any preacher to weave into his sermons any part of other men’s works, he is exposed to greater disgrace than those who steal money. Nay, often where he has not even borrowed anything from any one, but is only suspected, he has suffered the fate of a thief. … the public are accustomed to listen not for profit, but for pleasure, sitting like critics of tragedies, and of musical entertainments.”—Chrysostom
I understand the background of this post and there is a place for institutions (like academia) to have their own standards, but in the church we need to be more concerned about edification than erecting hand-washing regulations that would condemn the authors of the synoptics.
@posttenebrasluz@LewisHHenley@gracerealist Okay, I totally agree with the South position, but as it was part of America and ethnos means Nation, wouldn't it fall under american?
ATTENTION CALVINISTS:
Is Wesley Huff guilty of plagiarism?
Or did God make him do it by decreeing Huff’s action at the beginning of the world?
Or—the compatibilist position—are the two of them in it together, with God devising the fraudulent scheme and Huff carrying it out?
@ShawnWGillogly@dgh5391 The evidence is what is cross examined. If you're throwing it out because of the source, then you're committing the genetic fallacy. That would be irrational and the scripture does not encourage irrationality.
@ShawnWGillogly@dgh5391 I don't think anyone is speaking of assuming guilt but rather expressing that they have evaluated the evidence assessing that it is damning.
For those who use James 2 to argue for a final/future justification by works, note that the justification in view has NOTHING TO DO with something future.
@lsanger I’m on a team that’s working on hosting a concert in the Columbus, OH area sometime around July to encourage people to drop copyright on Bible translations, worship music, and other biblical resources. It would be amazing if you would be willing to share a few words there.
Obama’s 2010 midterms saw Democrats lose a net 63 House seats (largest postwar shift) and 6 Senate seats while retaining the Senate. Trump’s 2026 results show Republicans losing about 25 House seats and 7 Senate seats, flipping both chambers. Absolute House losses were larger under Obama; Trump’s party lost full control of Congress.
@TomBuck you realize that this is pretty much the exact position of every single elected official in the first few years of our country, from the POTUS, to the House, to the Senate? This is the view codified into law in the 1790 Naturalization Act. And again in 1795 when things were tightened up even further.
“Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That any alien, being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof..."
There is zero dissension to this in the records… Not even amongst the clergy in government. Not in the papers or churches across the United States. This was THE view.
Would you be wiling to say that literally all the Founding Fathers and early American politicians and pretty much every citizen and even clergy were all white supremacists and Nazis?