That would be Joel Marcus, sir.

The learning is not disputed. It's the claim to certainty in one's interpretation I find untenable. Either these leaders haven't thought this issue through or are too uncomfortable to. The basic division is between those trying to conserve tradition vs those trying to get at the truth. Philosophers and Prophets have often been the enemy of established religion.

Please don't be offended by this because this speaking about I UT my experience as an Independent Fundamental Baptist having two years in a IFB Bible College.i would put this at first their lack of accreditation. I say it this way because it is more concise this way(to me anyways) Anti-intellectualism is not a gift of The Holy Spirit. A lot of what I saw in IFB churches and colleges does a disservice to students and members...saw it more after Bible College. About four or five times we had bounced Ruckmanites out of our church. This being a KJVO belief going outside the scriptures with some bad reasoning. They teach if the person that lead you to the Lord using KJV, they are not really saved because it was done with corrupt seed. A friend d of mine wanted to be a missionary and invited me and another brother in a way to be in his corner. After that there were two deacons, our pastor, and a rep from the missions agency. One deacon brought this up asking if the brother and wife was saved through a KJV. I immediately pounced. I asked the deacon if he knew it was a heresy? Besides that I asked if he was aware that KJV Onlyism cannot be found in our church doctrinal statement but in the Church Covenant that stated when working in a ministry, it was required to use the KJV to have unity a d lesso confusion by putting us all on the same page in the same version which has nothing to do with anything claimed to be KJV all the time. I have proble.s with most who defines "for" in Acts 2:38 could mean "because.". I never liked that explanation and one day decided to flesh this ideal out.All through Logos I searched and found only one explanation that made sense which was the context of Acts one. Author stated that chapter and verse di is ions are not a part of scri p tunes and not added until the 14th and 15th century. Author showed it was another rendition of the Great commission. That is the understanding we should bring to Acts Some times there are no easy answers and we have to dig into the bible asking God to teach us the truth. In ano t he r example...from conservatives, never given a deeper understanding until I read one very liberal book who showed the ideals of, "Son of Man" and "Son of God is speaking of Christ's Incarnation being fully human and div I need at the same time. You have to did and study to sometimes understand the truth. What is often n neglected is not asking g God to teach the truth. Thanks for letting me share.

You make many good points David. I’ve wondered the same things. There are clues, and they all relate back to the Bible. When men rationalize or justify their theology/doctrine is when they get into trouble (and there’s lots of trouble in the “church” today)! Mark 7:8-9 When tradition (often regurgitation of an errant teaching) goes against God’s commandments, it becomes sin, yet Christianity today is rife with tradition. 1 John 3:4 For me, the Bible is always the best interpreter of itself, and one must go back to the original languages to be safe. Come out of her My people. Return to The Way of YHVH!

I did but it still sits