Search results

The only problem with that is that according to some of the synoptics, John left out "this". Minor? Yes. But his version is still incomplete. If you conflate all the readings, then the conflated reading no longer matches the Biblical account. I find that to be a bit disturbing.

I think the most telling thing here is that in 38 years of education, only 517 graduated. That is a terrible ratio of 13 to 14 a year. No wonder it crashed.

In all 4 accounts, something different is recorded. So much so that if you conflate all the readings together, you arrive at a "saying" that is actually not recorded in the Bible. Mt 27:37 - And over his head they put the charge against him, which read, "This is Jesus, the King of the Jews."...

The fundamentalist Bible college movement is on the way out. And it is unaccredited. So.... why??? :tonofbricks:

Why? :BangHead:

What temple??? Solomon built the temple. You mean the tabernacle? Plus, the Bible never said Jesus went no. 2, but I'm positive he did. Nevertheless, the OP is absurd b/c it was a curse not to be able to approach the throne of God. YHWH's temple presence was the true blessing of Israel that...

Absurd post. That's not liberty but a curse. They were not permitted to approach the presence of God. This was not always practiced strictly, otherwise David would not have been allowed to enter either. Yet he cherished entering the house of God to meet him there. After all, it was his...

Amen and Amen!

What you call Bible prophecy I call literalizing apocalyptic literature... ignorant in my book. That's what I know.

So what? ___

Interesting that these "theological" words were simply common words in Greek. Why does propitiation or justification have to be in the text? B/c they are special? Or is it really that we have a sentimental attachment to them? I love the words myself. But they were common words (salvation...

If Ach started a thread ;) I will admit, it seems very hard to determine what will be allowed and where.

I'm not satisfied. Even exceptions to rules must be taken into account. You made a blanket statement (provided a source at least) and I refuted it. Deal with it. You have got to be the hardest person to teach... no one can teach you anything b/c you never accept that you are wrong, even...

I know people have posted the link, but I want to find it in the actual Baptist Board.

I don't think everything here is correct, but I am surprised at how much we agree. And that from a futurist position, I was surprised as some of your conclusions. You would make a good idealist interpreter of Rev.

I agree w/ you, but the grammar doesn't prove your point. We are arguing for the same thing, but I am just clarifying that the pronoun's case, number, and gender is what it is based on its function in the sentence. Grammatically, the Father is a possible antecedent b/c the 3rd clause (w/ the...

You are completely wrong. There are at least 4 possible antecedents. The grammar will determine the pronoun's case, number, and gender... its function in the sentence. However, it could also, but extremely unlikely, refer to the Father being raised as well. The reason it is not plural or...

Not in linking them to each other. The only reason it takes the masculine singular is because that is the grammatical function of the object in that sentence. But as I said, it is not a grammatical certainty that the pronouns refer to the same person/thing just b/c they agree in gender, case...

As a point of grammar, number 1 doesn't matter and proves nothing. The only time matching case, number, and gender is important is w/ adjectives or participles (verbal adjectives; as you see in the verse w/ "the father who sent"). This is neither but a pronoun. In fact, if John wanted to be...

I would add that the church has grievously erred by syncretizing Christianity w/ patriotism and the civil religion of Americana. The capital city is strewn about with religious symbolism (i.e. google the apotheosis of Washington to see him pictured as Zeus in the rotunda). And Christians have...