This post might actually succeed in being shorter than usual, but we’ll say. I debated importing the comment thread from Idolatry: Pharisees (C) into a post of its own, but I’ll just comment on it briefly instead.
Starting with comment 3 a user named Pelgian7 offered insights obliquely related to the actual content of the post. I responded and he responded back and you can track from it from there, but just a quick comment as to why I am even pursuing a discussion.
Looking at the content of the comments, I would be doubtful that I am dealing with a brother in Christ but am rather dealing with a false teacher. I say that in all humility and I think the comments speak for themselves as they are directed at undermining our Lord and Savior.
The reason I am pursuing them is that they are based on clear mis-information. It just so happens I’m in a doctoral seminar at the moment on Ancient Near East literature and so have been reading the primary texts from which data such as Pelagian7’s claims should be drawn. Unfortunately though it is not.
Now, rather than seeking to win an argument, I am rather just seeking to expose the claims as being foundation-less. There is no basis for them in the literature as any reputable Egyptologist would attest. It is tenuous though considering the nature of the original post dealing with calling out heresy and doctrinal infidelity. But in this instance, it seems to be a legitimate apologetic defense of the historicity of Christ and his work, which as we saw a few posts back is the essence of the gospel. For that reason and that alone am I seeking to contend with Pelagian7 and expose his claims as not possessing a knowledge that of Christ, but merely one that puffs up.
We’ll see where the responses go from here, and we will see the Gospel vindicated. The trick is of course, doing so in an appropriate manner in light of the original post and not making an idol out of being right. What an opportunity to put something I’m learning into practice.