FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.

Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Reload this Page aa5874 broken recording split from Augustus and Jesus
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM
Search

 
Page 7 of 11 « First 56 7 89 Last »
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-11-2008, 07:28 AM   #61
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amaleq13 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
And, if not, your entire post has been nothing but misleading and erroneous.
That makes no sense.

You should have written "And, if so..."

So, despite your protests, we are still left with no scholars supporting your reading and no reason to think you have it right while everyone else has it wrong.

IOW, nothing to suggest I have been wrong about you at all.

How do you know you understand the translation perfectly?
You make no sense.

You make assertions and then ask questions afterwards.
aa5874 is offline  
Old 05-11-2008, 08:57 AM   #62
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Eagle River, Alaska
Posts: 7,816
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post

You make no sense.

You make assertions and then ask questions afterwards.
:rolling:

How do you know you understand the translation perfectly?
Amaleq13 is offline  
Old 05-11-2008, 12:48 PM   #63
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post

You make no sense.

You make assertions and then ask questions afterwards.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amaleq 13 View Post
How do you know you understand the translation perfectly?


Maybe I KNOW a translator.

:rolling:

Just read my post and you will find out what I KNOW.

:rolling:
aa5874 is offline  
Old 05-11-2008, 06:08 PM   #64
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Eagle River, Alaska
Posts: 7,816
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
Maybe I KNOW a translator.
Maybe but your reluctance to provide any names or support for your apparently unique reading suggests otherwise.

Quote:
Just read my post and you will find out what I KNOW.
That's what I thought. Just playing games to distract from your lack of knowledge. No wonder you got so upset when I called your bluff. :wave:
Amaleq13 is offline  
Old 05-11-2008, 06:56 PM   #65
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
Maybe I KNOW a translator.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amaleq13 View Post
Maybe but your reluctance to provide any names or support for your apparently unique reading suggests otherwise.
Just keep on reading.

Quote:
Just read my post and you will find out what I KNOW.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amaleq13 View Post
That's what I thought. Just playing games to distract from your lack of knowledge. No wonder you got so upset when I called your bluff. :wave:
Just keep on reading.

And I don't get upset, I'm having fun. You are so predictable.
aa5874 is offline  
Old 05-12-2008, 05:33 AM   #66
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Midwest
Posts: 4,787
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
You think it is foolish to use the KJV?
Are you even using the KJV? My KJV has in, not into.

Ben.
Ben C Smith is offline  
Old 05-12-2008, 07:09 AM   #67
2-J
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 179
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben C Smith View Post
My KJV has in, not into.
So does mine...
2-J is offline  
Old 05-12-2008, 07:31 AM   #68
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Midwest
Posts: 4,787
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
And I don't get upset, I'm having fun. You are so predictable.
I agree! Doug is predictable. Predictably fair, predictably reasonable, predictably keen. And he predictably calls nonsense what it is.

Ben.
Ben C Smith is offline  
Old 05-12-2008, 10:25 AM   #69
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben C Smith View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
You think it is foolish to use the KJV?
Are you even using the KJV? My KJV has in, not into.

Ben.
You are correct.

Luke 1.41 definitely has "in" and not "into".

And I have found a passage that appear to CONFIRM that the author did refer to the baby of Elizabeth and NOT of Mary.

These are words of Elizabeth, according to the author of Luke:

Luke 1.44,
Quote:
"For lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears, the babe leaped in MY WOMB for joy.
aa5874 is offline  
Old 05-12-2008, 02:56 PM   #70
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 3,058
Default
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben C Smith View Post

Are you even using the KJV? My KJV has in, not into.

Ben.
You are correct.

Luke 1.41 definitely has "in" and not "into".

And I have found a passage that appear to CONFIRM that the author did refer to the baby of Elizabeth and NOT of Mary.

These are words of Elizabeth, according to the author of Luke:

Luke 1.44,
Quote:
"For lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears, the babe leaped in MY WOMB for joy.
So what becomes both of your earlier claim made here that Lk. 1:41 the text spoke of a baby leaping into Mary's womb was a "perfect understanding" of this text and your claim made here that you know what you are talking about when you make claims about what (translations of) biblical texts do and do not say?

Jeffrey
Jeffrey Gibson is offline  
 
Page 7 of 11 « First 56 7 89 Last »

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:09 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.