1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Search Results for Query: "Matthew 10:10"

  1. The following words were not included in your search because they are too short, too long, or too common: 10, 10
Search Again
Page 1 of 2
  1. Alex2165
    Post

    RESPONSIBILITY AND CONSEQUENCE OF TEACHING.

    RESPONSIBILITY AND CONSEQUENCE OF TEACHING. Acts 20.25-27 26. "I am innocent of the blood of all men." This means that all of Paul's ministry...
    Post by: Alex2165, May 18, 2024 in forum: Other Christian Denominations
  2. Alex2165
    Post

    WORK AND SUPPORT

    WORK AND SUPPORT Acts 18.3 Paul was not only deeply religious man, Pharisee by education and a Christian by faith in Christ, but he was also a...
    Post by: Alex2165, May 3, 2024 in forum: Other Christian Denominations
  3. 37818
    Post

    Biblical errancy?

    The WEB follows the TR in Matthew 10:10 and not the MT!
    Post by: 37818, Mar 25, 2023 in forum: Baptist Theology & Bible Study
  4. 37818
    Post

    Biblical errancy?

    Only Mark 6:8 does. If either Matthew 10:10 or Luke 9:3 are read staff in the singular a contradiction is made against the instruction as reported...
    Post by: 37818, Mar 25, 2023 in forum: Baptist Theology & Bible Study
  5. Van
    Post

    Biblical errancy?

    LOL, now the TR says in Mark 6:8, take a staff, and in Luke 9:3 do not take staffs, and in Matthew 10:10 do not take a staff. And that the WEB...
    Post by: Van, Mar 25, 2023 in forum: Baptist Theology & Bible Study
  6. Van
    Post

    Biblical errancy?

    The MT in Matthew 10:10 and Luke 9:3 do not specify any staff is allowed.
    Post by: Van, Mar 25, 2023 in forum: Baptist Theology & Bible Study
  7. 37818
    Post

    Biblical errancy?

    @Van We have an ongoing disagreement over Mark 6:8, Matthew 10:10 and Luke,9:3
    Post by: 37818, Mar 24, 2023 in forum: Baptist Theology & Bible Study
  8. 37818
    Post

    Biblical errancy?

    The CT in Matthew 10;10 and Luke 9:3 do not specify "extra" staff. Nor the TR in Matthew 10:10.
    Post by: 37818, Mar 24, 2023 in forum: Baptist Theology & Bible Study
  9. 37818
    Post

    Biblical errancy?

    Again, no.
    Post by: 37818, Mar 24, 2023 in forum: Baptist Theology & Bible Study
  10. 37818
    Post

    Biblical errancy?

    No. Also the KJV does not follow TR in Matthew 10:10. The TR being singlular and the KJV plural.
    Post by: 37818, Mar 24, 2023 in forum: Baptist Theology & Bible Study
  11. Van
    Post

    Biblical errancy?

    The TR contradiction as presented in the KJV. Mark 6:8 take a staff (S), Luke 9:3 do not take staffs, Matthew 10:10 do not take staffs. The CT...
    Post by: Van, Mar 24, 2023 in forum: Baptist Theology & Bible Study
  12. 37818
    Post

    Biblical errancy?

    The CT contradiction to allow a staff, Mark 6:8 and not to allow a staff Matthew 10:10, Luke 9:3.
    Post by: 37818, Mar 24, 2023 in forum: Baptist Theology & Bible Study
  13. 37818
    Post

    Biblical errancy?

    You fail to hear the contradiction of the CT translation.
    Post by: 37818, Mar 23, 2023 in forum: Baptist Theology & Bible Study
  14. Van
    Post

    Biblical errancy?

    Yes, the Modern Literal Version (MLV) and the English Majority Text Version (EMTV) both has staff in the plural at Matthew 10:10. And both have...
    Post by: Van, Mar 23, 2023 in forum: Baptist Theology & Bible Study
  15. Van
    Post

    Biblical errancy?

    Still no answer. I am done.
    Post by: Van, Mar 23, 2023 in forum: Baptist Theology & Bible Study
  16. 37818
    Post

    Biblical errancy?

    The WEB did not follow the MT reading in Matthew 10:10.
    Post by: 37818, Mar 23, 2023 in forum: Baptist Theology & Bible Study
  17. 37818
    Post

    Biblical errancy?

    The MT is plural at 95% Greek mss for Matthew 10:10. The WEB is based on the ASV, a CT translation. The 1611 KJV is, best I can tell, the...
    Post by: 37818, Mar 23, 2023 in forum: Baptist Theology & Bible Study
  18. 37818
    Post

    Biblical errancy?

    My electronic TR is singular. But has in parentheses Scrivener [1894] TR as plural. The KJV follows what became Scrivener's. There is not one...
    Post by: 37818, Mar 22, 2023 in forum: Baptist Theology & Bible Study
  19. Van
    Post

    Biblical errancy?

    The KJV (the one that pops up when you click on the blue Matthew 10:10, which is the TR is plural.
    Post by: Van, Mar 22, 2023 in forum: Baptist Theology & Bible Study
  20. 37818
    Post

    Biblical errancy?

    The MT has the plural. The TR and CT has the singular, Re: Matthew 10:10.
    Post by: 37818, Mar 21, 2023 in forum: Baptist Theology & Bible Study
Showing results 1 to 20 of 31 Next >
Search Again
Page 1 of 2