Free E-book: #Faith and #Science by Steve Hays
#Christianity #Apologetics https://veritasdomain.wordpress.com/2024/10/23/free-e-book-faith-and-science-by-steve-hays/

Beware of ISLAMIC CHERRY PICKING #Islam #Dawah #apologetics #presup #bible

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PB9kW-6T800

BibleProject Resource Hub

Biblical scholarship is an ongoing conversation! Here are some books we've encountered as we explore the unified story that leads to Jesus.

https://www.librarycat.org/lib/BibleProject

What a great promise! And what a great fulfillment of that promise was experienced by the early Christians and continues to be a mark of genuine Christians today (cf. 1 John 3:2, 13).

Spirit of Truth (14:17; 15:26; 16:13)

The Dead Sea Scrolls provide our strongest base of evidence for an early contrasting of two spécifie spirits, the spirit of truth and the spirit of error. One could speak of spirits of truth and of evil in 1QS 3.18–19, but the context indicates that one of each is intended (4.21–23). Charlesworth has shown parallels with the Fourth Gospel's language on the Spirit of truth.
Betz thought that John identified the Spirit of God with Michael, the angelic spirit of truth; Johnston, conversely, thinks that the identification is pre-Johannine and that John combats this view as a heresy. While Johnston may be right to challenge Betz's view that John made the identification, he offers little direct evidence to support his own position. The use in the Scrolls is probably fluid enough that one could identify the spirit of truth either with an angelic power or with the holy Spirit of God; a Philonist might have seen little difference between the two. But John could easily enough have taken one identification available to him without knowing of, or necessarily polemicizing against, the other.

John may have adopted a variety of possible nuances available to him in the term. That Michael may appear as a heavenly advocate representing Christ (not the Spirit) in Rev 12 does not indicate that the Johannine community would have identified Michael and the Spirit of truth. But the fluid imagery in which the seven spirits could be identified with the Spirit of God (cf. Rev 1:4–5) or the seven archangels (compare 5 with Zech 3:9; 4:10, in light of Zech 1:10; 6:7) or the guardian angels of the churches (1:20) may warn us against excluding or including possible nuances every time the term appears; the Johannine community may have tolerated a degree of pneumatological ambiguity unthinkable to most theologically nuanced post-Nicene Christians.

By identifying what could have been the angelic spirit of truth, or the divine Spirit of truth (or both), with the Holy Spirit (14:26) and writing of him indwelling the disciples and fulfilling the functions of the Spirit of prophecy, the writer of the Fourth Gospel clearly points more in the direction of the divine Spirit than toward the angelic idea. Paralleling the Spirit with Jesus, whom the Gospel also presents as divine and distinct from the Father, further tends toward this position. The spirits of truth and error that correspond to true and false prophets in 1 John 4:1–6 can be understood in one of two ways: as angelic messengers who bring revelations8719 or as specific manifestations of the basic opposing forces: the Spirit of truth (the Spirit of God, v. 2) and the spirit of deception (the spirit of the antichrist, v. 3). Given the Epistlés dualism, emphasis on the divine indwelling, and lack of emphasis on angelology or demonology, we may suppose that the latter is more likely.

The title «Spirit of truth» is undoubtedly particularly relevant to the Farewell Discourses because of the earlier identification of Jesus as the truth (14:6). This again binds the Spirit to Jesus.

Commentary on the gospel of By Craig Keener