This short addendum is offered merely to demonstrate how blind and ignorant the IBR Group is. After questioning whether or not Jesus might have committed sins, the paragraph concludes with these words --
|
"There is, in fact, no historical evidence of a particular sin for which Jesus needed to repent. The texts are silent." The IBR Jesus Group, Jesus' Baptism: Its Historicity and Implications |
In fact, as anyone who has read the New Testament with open eyes knows, the texts are NOT silent. The texts, in fact, literally SCREAM with the SINLESSNESS of Jesus Christ...
|
"And he that sent me is with me: the
Father hath not left me alone; FOR I DO ALWAYS THOSE THINGS THAT PLEASE
HIM." John 8:29
"Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not
known me, Philip? HE THAT HATH SEEN ME HATH SEEN
THE FATHER: and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?"
John 14:9 |
Of course, reams of Scriptures could be offered testifying to the DEITY and SINLESSNESS of Jesus Christ. Only a blind man could read the New Testament and conclude that "the texts are silent" with regard to the SINLESSNESS of Jesus Christ. As well, only an unregenerate blind man could posit that Jesus was a disciple of John. In fact, such an assertion is just as blasphemous -- and as ignorant -- as is even raising the question of whether or not Jesus might have committed sins.
As a brief exercise in contrast, ask a member of the IBR group if his wife might possibly have been a whore, and see how he likes it. Even raising the question, of course, would enrage any normal married man. And yet, to the truly regenerate, even raising the question that Jesus might have committed sins is INFINITELY more blasphemous than accusing all the wives of all the men in ten thousands worlds of being whores.
Only the unregenerate would raise such a question about Jesus Christ, and only the unregenerate would associate or fellowship or condone or promote a paper such as I am exposing. Only the unregenerate would continue to reference these men or have ANYTHING at all to do with them, or to quote them in support of their positions.
In short, the
ONLY thing the TRULY REGENERATE man would do with regard to such men
is CONDEMN them. There are no exceptions, for the TRULY REGENERATE
man is so jealous for Jesus Christ that accusing a man's wife of being a whore
pales to utter insignificance compared to raising the question that Jesus Christ
might have committed sins.
In closing, the Holy Spirit testifies that the IBR is composed not only of
manifestly unregenerate men, but men who are complete ignoramuses with regard to
the issue of evidence, men who are utterly ignorant of what actually constitutes
evidence, much less how to interpret it.
This is just ONE example of not
only the blasphemy contained in the IBR article, but also of the shoddy
"scholarship" that manages to present a whole slew of errors of fact, just like the one
here demonstrated.