Search results

Couldn't have said it better than myself.

Whew, and over the low-hanging head of the Van man it goes.

Too bad for you Vanny. Your posts have already been recorded. You may want to deny what you said, but your falsehood endures.

As I have said before, to whom do you think His love is directed -- animals or plants? This is your "duh" moment.

Only a lying fool would buy into that. That's because an honest Christian would go to the actual text of the NIV instead of continuing to spread deliberate falsehoods. Christians need to be truthful. That is a basic, elemental principle. Alas, many proclaim to be believers, but their continuous...

The above is a bold-faced lie. Van knows it, but he has no guilt about attributing false things to me. The NIV is not above improvement, I have said several times over the years that I have sent in suggestions for improvements for the NIV. I look forward to a newly revised edition of the NIV in...

Not nearly as many flaws as you have Van. I have never said the things you have said above. Do not speak falsely. It does not serve you well. "...There is always a reason for why translators do what they do. No translation is random, without a reason, and we should be careful at proclaiming...

I have been dealing with your post #36, not #81. Your inanities continue.

You are as dense as a wall. I provided ten passages from the NIV dealing with the role of men, women, families, and elders. You will not be able to find anything within those passages to prove your absolutely false accusations. IF IT'S NOT IN THE TEXT YOUR CHARGES HAVE BEEN LIES ALL ALONG.

You are denying reality. In other words you are delusional Van. You did not provide any basis. All you said repeatedly "Should read." You offered no reason. I explained my self quite clearly in post #85. Saying "should read" is not giving a reason or basis whatsoever.

No, the CSB has 'mercy seat.'

As a matter of fact, no, they are not. It's your responsibility to give reasons, to give an account for. You gave none, zero, nada. You should try using the art of reasoning. It starts with the word '"Because." To laughingly state over and over "Should read" is infantile. I hope that your...

Other translations that have the same thing as the NIV here are : Mounce, NRSV and WEB.

That's not the subject, which I have dealt with a number of times before. The issue is your continual lies about the NIV and your cowardice in not dealing with the ten passages that I listed which blow your reckless falsehoods out of the water.

Correction : You have never, and that means never, quoted any passage from the NIV which supports your lying claims that there are places where 'male headship' is being denied.

If the above is true then it must be found in the text of the NIV. If the above is false then all of the above are just lies. I am going to give references from the N.T. of the NIV. All of them deal with the family, wives, husbands elders --one or more of the above. 1 Cor. 7:1-16 1 Cor...

The baseless basis you advanced was "should read." That's it. Nothing more. That is a big fat nothing burger as they used to say. I've asked around. There is no foundation to merely proclaim "should read" even with your advanced background (chuckle, chuckle) in Bible translation.

Back to the bold-faced lies of Y-1 --the false accuser. I have given you about 200 challenges to back up your sinful charges over the years. You have never produced anything from the text of the NIV . And as I have told you, little one, if a charge cannot be found in the text of the NIV --the...

Why are you arguing? I gave you a point for that one. And I don't give out points willy nilly. :-)

This is in response to Van's post #36 which he keeps regurgitating year after year, as if it has any value. He tries to demean the NIV with largely inane observations. You can look up the verse citations yourself. 1) The NIV is very much like the CSB, ISV, LEB, ESV and NLT here. 2)Van isn't...