There are tons and tons of biographies written on Lincoln from all angles. Here is one of the better, more readable ones for the casual history reader:
David Herbert Donald - Lincoln
http://www.amazon.com/Lincoln-David-Herbert-Donald/dp/068482535X
Haha you're so funny and original and funny.
I'll respond with my favorite Abraham Lincoln quote. You can find it here.
Sorry for being so long in replying. I've been away for a few weeks. Thanks for your patience and for good conversation.
> Is this supposed to be a selling point?
Not necessarily, just talking about the truth of some of Luke's distinctives. We're just trying to get at what's true, right?
> Man created society, economics, and politics.
It's indisputable that man created society, since society is a group of people functioning with each other. Economics also, since economics is the dynamics of our financial interaction as humans. Politics may be different since Romans 13.1-8 conveys that God instituted government for certain benefits that government has over anarchy.
But all of this may be essentially moot since, despite that man created society and economics and inevitably certain aspects of politics, God is able to interact with humans on all of these levels, and that would be part of what Luke is writing about.
> And Luke... was some guy who skimmed the batch and added shit in that didn’t actually exist in the 3 gospels.
Actually Luke adds an aspect as a Gentile intellectual that we don't get with the other Gospel writers (the others being Palestinian Jews). According to Luke 1.1-4, it's inappropriate to accuse Luke of "skimming the batch," since he did allegedly scholarly research to compile his narrative, including many unique elements not in the other Gospels. Because he has elements "that didn't actually exist in the 3 Gospels" is not particularly a detriment. If all the Gospels were identical, we'd ask "What's the point of 4 accounts?" If the Gospels stress different aspects, we say they're different. So we're judged if they're too similar, and judged if they're too different. It's a pretty narrow band of acceptability for the critics to demand. But I think the Gospels actually achieve that razor's edge. They are similar enough, yet different enough, to corroborate information and yet also give us vantage points of interest.
> this is the only place I know of that the afterlife for sinners is described as torment.
You know, I appreciate this conversation. Thanks.
Luke is certainly not the only Gospel writer who mentions the afterlife as a place of torment. Jesus mentions punishment in the afterlife in all of the other 3 Gospels, as well as Revelation:
So I don't agree with you on the basis of this evidence.
> Eternal torment for a finite sin is not just.
Not all Christians, you should know, believe in the traditional concept of hell (eternal punishment for finite sin). There are theories about reconcilationism, semi-restorationism, modified eternalism, and annihilationism, all with some kind of scriptural backing. In other words, hell isn't necessarily eternal for all who enter it. It may only be eternal for those who absolutely, stubbornly, and persistently refuse to be reconciled.
I also don't believe that hell is fire. Hell is not "One Fire Tortures All." Fire is just the image of untold suffering, which is what one will experience when separated from God. We have strong hints that there are different degrees of punishment in hell (totally unlike the different levels of hell as in Dante's Divine Comedy, which is not Scripture).
Why I bother to point this out is because often those who consider hell to be messed up are picturing the same punishment for all, which is most likely not the case, and infinite punishment for finite crimes, which may also not be the case. People will be punished according to the works they have done (2 Corinthians 5.10).
So, with all that has been said, and with all the disagreements, even from Christians, about hell, I can conclude with confidence with this statement: Those who turn away from God will be separated from the life of God. Though we can’t be sure about the form or duration of that separation, this we can be sure of: it will be a horrible experience, and God will be fair about the form and duration of it. If you reject God, you take your chances.
> "He is telling an authoritative and authentic biograph" - Moreso than the men who actually saw his face and embraced him?! Moreso than those who saw him die and be ressuredted?!
Why do you doubt that someone can do research and arrive at reliable information, just as reliable as those who saw his face and embraced him? I read a biography of Abraham Lincoln by Pulitzer Prize winner David Herbert Donald (https://www.amazon.com/Lincoln-David-Herbert-Donald/dp/068482535X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1534185229&sr=1-1&keywords=abraham+lincoln+david+donald), and "At Dawn We Slept" by Gordon Prange (https://www.amazon.com/At-Dawn-We-Slept-Untold/dp/0140157344/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1534185271&sr=1-1&keywords=at+dawn+we+slept). Should I not trust these works because they are researched and not personally witnessed?
> I put this to you: what does Luke ADD to the Bible? Why was his account necessary at all, given that we have three people who walked, mourned, and praised him? Why was Luke necessary?
Luke's Gospel is more uniquely oriented to the Gentile Christian than the other three (though Mark has some similarities in that area). He is showing more than the others that Jesus is for the whole world, not just for the Jews. As I mentioned, Luke speaks more than the other 3 of gender equality, justice, caring for the poor, wealth and poverty, persecution and suffering, and salvation. He writes of Gentile inclusion (though Matthew deals with this as well).
Luke's Christology is functional, not ontological, much more so than the other Gospels. Jesus is understood in terms of what he does and how God's kingdom plays itself out in the real world (economic, political, etc.).
Personally, I appreciate what Luke brings to us: Jesus whose kingdom preaching and actions reach into every part of life. John advises Gentile soldiers about morality. Jesus's message in Nazareth (4.18) is about poverty, prisoners, the sick and the oppressed. Jesus's message is distinctly for everyone, not just Israel (4.25-27). Luke's rendition of the Sermon on the Mount (6.20-49) is so strongly about economic justice, social equality, and community morality. Jesus interacts with a Gentile centurion (7.1-10), praising him for his faith. The book is filled with a unique perspective about the Gospel in culture. I happen to love it.
Abe Lincoln. This biography on Lincoln, called Lincoln by David Herbert Donald was amazing. Abe Lincoln was an incredible man.