Results 1 - 5 of 5
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | God can use woman in the ministry? | Gal 3:28 | reformedreader | 3460 | ||
Elijah, You have twice not answered my question about the source of the alleged changes you claim to have been made in the Bible. So, I will suppose you do not have an answer and the accusation is false. Do you understand the seriousness of such an accusation? Also, I never said anything at all about God not using women in ministry and you should discover much more about Aimee Semple McPherson before you associate the name Christian with her. Sam Hughey |
||||||
2 | God can use woman in the ministry? | Gal 3:28 | Hank | 3613 | ||
I've been following this line of dialogue with some interest. I offer two brief observations. When one translation differs materially from all other accepted translations, should not the one rather than the many be suspect? And, as a caveat to us all, should not we make every effort to make doubly sure our facts are indeed facts before we publish them for all the world to see? It is all too easy and perhaps tempting to air opinion or heavily skewed sectarian bias as irrefutable fact. Hank | ||||||
3 | God can use woman in the ministry? | Gal 3:28 | reformedreader | 3617 | ||
Hank, It would greatly depend upon what the difference actually is and, like you said, opinion or heavily skewed sectarian bias might cause one to see a particular translation as suspect when it really isn't. Sam Hughey |
||||||
4 | God can use woman in the ministry? | Gal 3:28 | Hank | 3620 | ||
Sam, I appreciate your comment. Let me attempt to make my point clearer by recasting the sentence. Given the situation in which one translation stands in opposition to all the others on some crucial issue, wouldn't you agree that that particular translation might well be suspect? My point is that it seems to me highly unlikely that all the other scholars of all the other translations would have erred so miserably. Doesn't that make sense to you? If all history books but one say that George Washington was the first U.S. President, and the one refuted them by saying Abraham Lincoln was, what are we to beleve? Hank | ||||||
5 | God can use woman in the ministry? | Gal 3:28 | reformedreader | 3625 | ||
Thanks Hank, I will agree that the lone translation, standing in stark contradiction to a widely trusted and accepted orthodox translation by reputable and unquestionable translators would be considered suspect of error. I would also say that vague and ambiguous dialogue concerning non-specific error can be equally suspect. So, could you be a little more specific as to what you are talking about? By the way, George Washington was not the first President the US had. He was the first President of the US under the Constitution. There were several other Presidents over the colonies which would become the US and were considered the US by many even prior to the Constitution. Is this the type of "suspect" error to which you were referring? Sam Hughey |
||||||