My Problems With MV's

OK, folks, move along...Kum-ba-ya sing-a-long is over...

 

Amen! And God bless Baptist4life. And God bless Salamander, and the rest of the regular gang (in no particular order) rbell, Jerome, C4K, mcdirector, AntennaFarmer, robycop, marcia, Askjo, EdSutton, Ed Edwards, Dr. Bob, gb93433, Deacon, Pastor Larry, TomVols, Jim1999, sag38, TCGreek, Rippon, JohnofJapan, annsi, because of grace, stilllearning, jonathan.borland, HankD, tinytim, Logos1560, Amy.G, thomas15, Trotter, Keith M, GoldDragon (I'm sure I've left some out, sorry). (Ziggy, I know you're out there)

Really, I was thinking of you all last week and how thankful I am for the folks on the BB. I can hardly wait to meet you in person (in this life or in Heaven). Love you all. Special blessing to those on the mission field (but that's everybody).

 

Thanks, Franklin.

 

My thanks to you, TCGreek. I especially enjoy your insights into the Greek language. Everyone here adds something special. I like to hear the ladies perspective. Deacon is especially great in matters of the Psalms. And what would be this debate forum without those with different opinions? Frankly, I'd like to see more posts from some of these folks. I always like hearing from those outside the US, too. I respect Rippon's comparisons; and JohnofJapan on translation methodology. And then there's EdSutton's humor!

 

Yeah, thanks franklin!. .. I can't wait to meet many of you also...

Gee.. I go off to read my new TNIV Bible I got today thanks to TCGreek, and Zondervan.. and I come back and everyone is getting along in the VERSIONS forum...

TC, was there something in that TNIV that zoomed me into the twilight zone?

 

I love you, you love me, we're a happy family with a great big hug and a kiss from ..... uh... nope, ain't goin there!:tongue3: :laugh:

 

I hope you enjoy the TNIV.You're welcome to join our ever-expanding TNIVP club.It's not exclusive;but we charge dues.I just happen to be the treasurer.

 

OK, I stopped by Zondervan's on the way home from school and got one of the 8 TNIVs they had. It was one of the 2 study Bibles.

They had dozens of many others btw including the ESV.

I did not get a chance to start reading it though. *sobbing in my hankie*

 

Way to go Bitsy!We'll expect a review from you in the new year.

 

Ew! Leave me alone! I call Prop 8!

 

Hey! No fair!!

EdSutton may be from a bit far out, at times, but is from and still lives only about 2 1/2 hrs or so away from you, about 45 min. south of Lexington.

And my bride is from only an hour or so from you, between Bethel and Mt. Orab, OH, as well.

But I said, "No fair!" for two reasons.

No. 1, I think that at least sometimes, there is a bit of substance to some of my posts, anyway.

And No. 2, I had a point I was going to make about something previously posted in this thread here, but the whole lot of you have done and messed up the mood with the whole :1_grouphug: thingie, and I don't want to mess up the spirit.

Ed

 

Of course there is, Ed. I didn't mean that there wasn't.

 

Oh, I know what you meant.

But I just couldn't resist the opportunity to sneak in a cheap laugh.

Hey, I can get ten of the 'cheapies' for the price of one 'goodie'. :thumbs: :laugh: :laugh:

Ed

 

Yes, the way to go!

You'll enjoy it.

 

Yes you did.

Come on Franklin, there's way too much niceness going on here. :laugh:


(Tryin' to stir up some trouble. Is it workin'?) :saint:

 

Well, you forget one difference: Written comment VS oral comment.

 

You are confused between written comment and oral comment. Luke 2:48 is Mary's ORAL answer to Jesus.

 

All of the gospels were passed down by oral tradition and recorded in writing many years later. The second part of that verse is called direct discourse.

 

By your implication (that Mary's statement does not need to be accurate because it is "oral") we would be left with only two choices: that either Mary was mistaken, or she was lying. It impossible to believe that Mary herself could be confused about Joseph's role, so she wasn't factually ignorant; and it is doubtful she would lie since she knew that Jesus would not be deceived (it is ineffectual to misrepresent the truth to someone who is knowledgeable of the facts). While the Bible does record some 'true lies' (I think of Samson), this is NOT one of them. Clearly, Mary is neither in error nor bearing false witness here.

So, unless you you are suggesting that Mary was insane, we can logically conclude your distinction is meaningless; Mary's statement represents her genuine position on the matter.

You seem to be attempting to insert significance where it does not exist. If you insist on being hyper-literal about relationship terms then the KJV has illogically implied that Jesus was the "son of" multiple fathers (David & Abraham included).