Results 1 - 16 of 16
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Correcting the translation | Col 2:16 | djconklin | 26009 | ||
Ed, I don't "dance" period! I refuse to be the "instant expert" type who spouts off. All I can tell you is what I found. My personal life is betrween me and God just as yours is between you and Him. He gave us a brain to use and I'll use mine the best I can. If you don't like it and have to attack me then that says more about you than me. |
||||||
2 | Correcting the translation | Col 2:16 | EdB | 26065 | ||
DjConklin I apologize for my poor choice of words in the use of “dance”. I assumed that after your monomaniacal defense of “your” interpretation of Col. 2:16 you had some application/agenda to go with it. If I’m mistaken, I then have misjudged you and what you were doing and if that be the case I’m very sorry. That said let me also say if you went to all the trouble you have seemed to with Col 2:16 and you don’t have a point then I’m flabbergasted. All that effort for what? EdB |
||||||
3 | Correcting the translation | Col 2:16 | djconklin | 27882 | ||
My apologies Ed, for not responding sooner. My computer completely died and so I'm re-installing my software, and of course, when it died it took all the links with it and I have been working 10-12 hour days 6 days a week at work. --- "I assumed that after your monomaniacal defense of “your” interpretation of Col. 2:16 you had some application/agenda to go with it." 1) ROFL! The last time I was described as "monomanical" was when I defended the traditional dating of Daniel! The Bible critic just could not face the facts and deal with them as they were so he had to engage in an ad homenium attack. He did it again when I showed that the Heb. word "'almah" in Isa. 7:14 meant virgin--of course, then I could point out that "mono" means one and I had just dealt with two so in reality I was a bimanic!!! With the work on my web page I'm up around 7--septmaniac? 2) It is unfortunate that you dealt with with people in past who had a agenda and so you assumed that I had one as well. Well, I hate to disappoint you but I don't--unless you count digging for the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth an agenda. --- "All that effort for what? " See #2 above, last part. BTW, I now have almost 190 sources for my study. --- "If I’m mistaken, I then have misjudged you and what you were doing and if that be the case I’m very sorry." As I have noted before you are a bigger man than some give you credit for. It is really a pleasure to deal with someone who is polite for a change (Bible critics typically resort to swearing and personal when they are losing). |
||||||
4 | Correcting the translation | Col 2:16 | EdB | 27952 | ||
I didn't know I was losing! I thought since you didn't have a point or at lest failed to make one your willing to stand on this was just an exercise in futility. It is with great pride you point others to your web site. Your right it is a great display of much effort and a lot of work, but look at the content. There is nothing! You are defending positions that no one seriously questions. The points you make for the most part are commonly accepted facts. Oh sure there are a few that say Daniel was written post historic rather than pre but no one takes them seriously. So why should we take someone that defends against these jokers seriously? On the one point that people do care, should we worship on the Sabbath or Sunday, you say many things but do not state your belief. You make statements that contradict the norm and when people ask you what you mean or what you believe you say that is not important. Are you looking to start a fight? Are you looking to show how much you know? What is your intent? I can see no reason to take what you say seriously since you refuse to state what it is you believe. Forgive my bluntness but until you have something your ready to commit too we really don't have anything to say to each other. My best to you this holiday season and think over what I have said. EdB |
||||||
5 | Correcting the translation | Col 2:16 | djconklin | 28268 | ||
Ed, I didn't say that you were losing at anything; please re-read what I wrote without prejudice. --- "... there are a few that say Daniel was written post historic rather than pre but no one takes them seriously." Actually, it is the norm of most scholars that Daniel was written late. And if you defended traditional Christian beliefs against the attacks of the Bible critics you would know how vocal and vociferous they can be. --- "So why should we take someone that defends against these jokers seriously?" Because if you do not defend tradititional Christian beliefs against the attacks of the critics then some souls will be lost because they will think that the critics are making valid and reasonable points. Jesus died to save sinners--so you should not call anyone any name at any time (Matt. 5:22) or if you do then you should stop calling youself a Christian, eh? --- "On the one point that people do care, should we worship on the Sabbath or Sunday, you say many things but do not state your belief." Why should you care what I believe? Am I the Pope or something? What does the Bible say? What did God say to do? |
||||||
6 | Correcting the translation | Col 2:16 | EdB | 28331 | ||
You are truely a man of many words with absolutely nothing to say. It has been..... Let's just say it's been, and leave it at that. EdB |
||||||
7 | Correcting the translation | Col 2:16 | djconklin | 28335 | ||
It's the other way around. Try reading very carefully and learn. | ||||||
8 | Correcting the translation | Col 2:16 | EdB | 28343 | ||
Let us see, I have learned from you: You have a web site! You rather proud of your education. You are rather impressed with you scholarship. The leading and foremost Bible translators are either wrong, mistaken, mislead or conspiring to create a deception as to the day of worship. Most if not all commentators either do a half baked job or simply use what was previously written on the subject. Most Bible scholars of today are either wrong, mistaken, mislead or conspiring to create a deception about which day we as Christians should worship. Most Christian denominations are wrong, mistaken, mislead or conspiring to create a deception on what day to worship. Most “scholars” question the veracity of date the Bible implies as to when Daniel was written. However my own experience shows most genuine theologians now agree Daniel was written at the time of Daniel’s experiences. Most theologians do not understand Greek as well as you. Most theologians must stand in the shadow of the your 195 references. Most theologians must stand in the shadow of you two years of your studying the meaning of Col. 2:16. That you can not or will not verbalize what it is you believe. Nor will you reveal your religious affiliation. You have a Web site. Let me say, I stand in awe of all that I have learned from you. EdB |
||||||
9 | Correcting the translation | Col 2:16 | djconklin | 28345 | ||
Well Ed, let's see how well you analyze things: "I have learned from you: You have a web site!" Yeah, one right! "You rather proud of your education." I have never said such a thing; see Hosea 4:6. "You are rather impressed with you scholarship." Nope, two wrong! "The leading and foremost Bible translators are either wrong, mistaken, mislead or conspiring to create a deception as to the day of worship." Never said such a thing; three wrong. "Most if not all commentators either do a half baked job or simply use what was previously written on the subject." The amateur commentators do it in part. Note the number of lexical sources I use that contradict some of the commentators I do cite. Where the writers of the lexicons wrong? Am I wrong in noting what they say? Am I wrong in simply pointing out that some commentators are wrong? "Most Bible scholars of today are either wrong, mistaken, mislead or conspiring to create a deception about which day we as Christians should worship." Never said that either, four wrong. Try reading the full study; perhaps you are trying to read too much into the litle posts here. "Most Christian denominations are wrong, mistaken, mislead or conspiring to create a deception on what day to worship." Since we never even talked about various denominations this is really a totally mis-read. "Most “scholars” question the veracity of date the Bible implies as to when Daniel was written." See the study on the date of the book of Daniel; there are very many well-known scholars who say that the book was written in about 164 B.C.. "However my own experience shows most genuine theologians now agree Daniel was written at the time of Daniel’s experiences." "genuine"? How do you determine who is and who isn't? "Most theologians do not understand Greek as well as you." Never said that--five wrong. "Most theologians must stand in the shadow of the your 195 references." Nope, never said that either--six wrong. "Most theologians must stand in the shadow of you two years of your studying the meaning of Col. 2:16." Nope, never said that either--seven wrong. "That you can not or will not verbalize what it is you believe." I did, repeatedly: Col. 2:16-17 isn't talking about the seventh-day Sabbath. Anything about that is irrelevant as in I do not believe in child baptism, I do believe in the Trinty--now are you happy? "Nor will you reveal your religious affiliation." Who cares? How about: Reformed Druid? "You have a Web site." Repeat from above. Now, since we now know that you read way too much into stuff why don't you actually try reading the full study? |
||||||
10 | Correcting the translation | Col 2:16 | EdB | 28348 | ||
Gee whiz 7 wrong! You mean after all that you have said I only got the fact you have a web site right! Who is kidding who? You said or inferred every point I made, but that is not important. What is important is what is your agenda and that you refuse to reveal. EdB |
||||||
11 | Correcting the translation | Col 2:16 | djconklin | 28360 | ||
Ah, so now I'm a liar? You claim I inferred it; in fact, it was you who inferred it falsely from what I did in fact say. I don't have an agenda; what's yours? |
||||||
12 | Correcting the translation | Col 2:16 | EdB | 28364 | ||
Excuse me! I never called you liar! However you did say, implied or inferred the things I listed. Reread what you have said. I will concede you did in say it such a way that it was nearly impossible to nail down what you were saying, but the intent, purpose, came shining through. EdB |
||||||
13 | Correcting the translation | Col 2:16 | djconklin | 28370 | ||
Since you say that I did say what I in fact did not say means that you are calling me a liar. I will cease discussing this with you and turn the matter over to the webmaster. If you wish to read "intent" or "purpose" into what someone ewlse says that's between you and God. But the last thing yoiu should be doing is claiming that it was in fact my intent or purpose. My sole purpose was to study this verse to find out what it said. I only contributed one little element into the whole; the rest I found by reading what pro's in the field have said. |
||||||
14 | Correcting the translation | Col 2:16 | EdB | 28373 | ||
So be it! Again I state I did not call you a liar! I simply took what you said and based on accepted practices of reading and comprehension restated them. If you did not say them then I and I feel safe in saying most of the forum have no idea what it is you did say. And yes I think we should cease discussing this! EdB |
||||||
15 | Correcting the translation | Col 2:16 | djconklin | 28381 | ||
"I simply took what you said and based on accepted practices of reading and comprehension restated them." For that I blame the liberal educational system; I didn't really learn how to read carefully and thoughtfully till I was in grad school. "If you did not say them then I and I feel safe in saying most of the forum have no idea what it is you did say." Isn't it amazing how quickly some will judge their experience to be the same as others? Others have emailed me to tell me they understood what I was saying quite well. When I preach even those who haven't finished high school understood me quite well. When I run my papers through a grammar checker I have to take the Bible verses out because it drags the grade level down to the 4th-6th grade; without them it is at the 9th grade level. So, I find it really difficult to understand how any thoughtful praying Christian couldn't understand my study--unless, of course, they never bothered to read it in the first place. I had one gent who has a D.Min. who was working on a Th.d. on the book of Colossians email me who stated that I was the first he had seen to have correctly understood the verse. We also had a pleasant hour or so on the phone conversing about it and he gave me a few more ideas to plug into my study! |
||||||
16 | Correcting the translation | Col 2:16 | EdB | 28386 | ||
Now see here I go misunderstanding you, it seems like you just personally attacked me. "For that I blame the liberal educational system; I didn't really learn how to read carefully and thoughtfully till I was in grad school." What makes you think I was educated by the liberal education system and that I don't have a grad school education? “Isn't it amazing how quickly some will judge their experience to be the same as others?” My friend you are the source of much off forum... Let me say just say I'm not alone. “So, I find it really difficult to understand how any thoughtful praying Christian couldn't understand my study--unless, of course, they never bothered to read it in the first place.” First of all we weren't talking about your study but rather what you have said on this forum. Also with my humble understanding I think you said I had the comprehension level less than a 4 to 6 th grad level. I had one gent who has a D.Min. who was working on a Th.d. on the book of Colossians I have a very close relationship with a person that has a Th.d and they think you totally mishandled scripture. By the way if your not proud of your education why have you repeatedly touted,(I think 3 times you have stated you were a grad school graduate)? In fact I think you tried to put down Kalos with it. And if your not proud of your scholarship why have you told me about the guy with a D Min at least twice? Forgive me for saying this, but me thinks your proud! EdB |
||||||