Bill Hamblin Posted May 2, 2009 Posted May 2, 2009 Okay, so what do we have that is correctly understood?Apparently nothing. If you ask this question you haven't understood my point.
e=mc2 Posted May 2, 2009 Posted May 2, 2009 And thisWas answered here perfectly:There can be no better answer. Dang. We have to do something about this Hamblin guy. He keeps getting it right, and I feel like I end up kissing up to the guy every time. Grrrrr. *********NO ONE*************** kisses Hamblin...... up or down, NO ONE..........................
Bill Hamblin Posted May 2, 2009 Posted May 2, 2009 *********NO ONE*************** kisses Hamblin...... up or down, NO ONE..........................My granddaughters do!
Hoops22 Posted May 2, 2009 Posted May 2, 2009 Apparently nothing. If you ask this question you haven't understood my point.How about just a straight answer. I get your point - and it fails. So just tell me.My suspicion is that you can not, which is my point. Since you can not rely on the bible due to its horrendous mistranslations, then you have no logical reason to consider it scripture.Hoops,Please start your own thread, since you are diligently ignoring the purpose of this one.Sincerely,SargonOkay. Didn't mean to.
mfbukowski Posted May 2, 2009 Posted May 2, 2009 My granddaughters do!They have too or they'll lose out on all that inheritance money you get as commission for pushing Shirts' website.
mfbukowski Posted May 2, 2009 Posted May 2, 2009 Since you can not rely on the bible due to its horrendous mistranslations, then you have no logical reason to consider it scripture.You know, seriously, I am trying to be charitable here, but I don't know where you get this stuff. Who said it was "horrendously mistranslated?" Just relax a little ok? Too much coffee maybe?
johndoe Posted May 2, 2009 Posted May 2, 2009 How about just a straight answer. I get your point - and it fails. So just tell me.My suspicion is that you can not, which is my point. Since you can not rely on the bible due to its horrendous mistranslations, then you have no logical reason to consider it scripture.Since you consistently ignore the more difficult questions that have been raised in your direction, it is hard not to have the impression that you are simply in over your head in this particular discussion.
Bill Hamblin Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 How about just a straight answer. I get your point - and it fails. So just tell me.My suspicion is that you can not, which is my point. Since you can not rely on the bible due to its horrendous mistranslations, then you have no logical reason to consider it scripture.You need to check your nuance meter, Hoops; it's apparently broken. The possibilities are not 100% inerrant or "horrendous mistranslation." There are some options in between.The fact that there have been dozens if not hundreds of different interpretations of the meaning of the Bible throughout history is ample proof that the text, in and of itself, is not inerrant.At any rate, when I seriously study the Bible I read it in Greek and Hebrew.
Sargon Posted May 3, 2009 Author Posted May 3, 2009 I would think a prophet would be able to tell us such. Are you saying that God is allowing the vast majority of professed christians to rely on something so unreliable when He has a prophet that can set the record straight?I would think that an inerrant Bible would limit the ability for so many equally intelligent individuals to interpret it in so many contradictory ways. Does this mean that God is allowing the vast majority of professed Christians to rely on something so unreliable, when he could simply send a new prophet to clarify the truth?
Hoops22 Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 Please answer my question.I would think that an inerrant Bible would limit the ability for so many equally intelligent individuals to interpret it in so many contradictory ways. I do not accept your premise that The Bible is "interpreted in so many contradictory ways." Are there differences, sure, some. But not as many as your question impliesDoes this mean that God is allowing the vast majority of professed Christians to rely on something so unreliable, when he could simply send a new prophet to clarify the truth?Yes, why does He not?
Hoops22 Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 You need to check your nuance meter, Hoops; it's apparently broken. The possibilities are not 100% inerrant or "horrendous mistranslation." There are some options in between.That's fine. As I've asked earlier, how do the mechanics of this approach play out?Since you consistently ignore the more difficult questions that have been raised in your direction,For the time being, I am ignoring the questions raised to me as answers to my original question.it is hard not to have the impression that you are simply in over your head in this particular discussion.I'm sure.
LifeOnaPlate Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 That's fine. As I've asked earlier, how do the mechanics of this approach play out?For me it has a lot to do with the way I live and the way I understand life. The two great commandments ask that I love God and love my neighbor. Even if I may have misunderstanding about, or wrong metaphysical beliefs about God, there is little ontological confusion over who my neighbor is. That's been laid out pretty well. So in that regard I do my best, though this requires constant repentance as well. In attempting to fulfill the second commandment I feel the fruits of the Spirit and I feel the reality of Christ in my life. What I am trying to say is that I understand the parts of the Bible best that I can actually live in my life right now.
johndoe Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 That's fine. As I've asked earlier, how do the mechanics of this approach play out?For the time being, I am ignoring the questions raised to me as answers to my original question.I'm sure.I give up. If you had something interesting to say, surely you would have said it by now. Good luck with the discussion, if it continues any further.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.