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!
We should put as much value on the "originals" as God does.
Ransom: That value must be pretty high - look at how many copies He made!
man you really must be confused with all this. so we are supposed to believe that God thinks the originals are so important that He made sure there were thousands of copies of them all throughout the world, but God didn't think they were important enough to make sure they were without error. uh huh. yeah man, you almost have me convinced that i should learn greek.ok so then since they are all different, which of the copies are actually copies of the originals? and which are corrupt?
Ransom: How long have you been involved in "defending" the KJV? And you haven't figured this out yet?
ALL of them are imperfect copies of the originals.
is that your final authority? which dictionary? what edition? what language? look, i really don't care what the definition or meaning behind alma mater is. maybe Gipp is wrong. it makes no difference to the matter of the originals. personally i couldn't care less what alma mater means. i don't know that i have ever used that term in everyday speech. who cares what anyone's stupid alma mater is anyway. not me.Ever heard of the dictionary?
not surprising that this is the only part of that post you chose to comment on.Originally posted by Ransom:
The Harvest said:
man you really must be confused with all this.
Wrong again. Next guess?
so since you disagree with his interpretation of a word you believe he is a liar?If the man can't be trusted to give the true meaning of a word, why should I trust his treatment of more complex subject matter?
why don't you explain what's wrong about it. i think it was a solid conclusion from your own words.Originally posted by Ransom:
The Harvest:
not surprising that this is the only part of that post you chose to comment on.
Then you may consider "wrong again" to be a blanket comment about the whole post.
There is agreement by everyone for this passage concerning the bare text.HankD, as Hebrew is being discussed, and you are apparently familiar with it, I would ask what is the literal reading of Isa. 8:20 in the Bomberg Masoretic text? KJV says "...no light IN them", some others say "... no dawn to them" or some similar. Which is it?
Thanks.
so then you do believe that God is incapable of preserving His words perfectly, right?Originally posted by Ransom:
The Harvest said:
why don't you explain what's wrong about it.
You think you have discovered some sort of inconsistency in my argument. You didn't.
Who does your NASB say killed Goliath?how about this line of reasoning then. since you use a Bible that has a flat out lie in it, that makes you a liar.
Since your premise is a false one, your conclusion is also suspect.
2 Sam 21:19 There was war with the Philistines again at Gob, and Elhanan the son of Jaare-oregim the Bethlehemite killed Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver's beam. NASBWho does your NASB say killed Goliath?
David (1 Sam. 17:50).
i've heard this ridiculous argument before. i don't buy it. "well he's citing the major prophet since malachi wasn't important enough to be mentioned blah blah blah". Mark 1:3 is from Isaiah, not Mark 1:2. so to say that Isaiah said "Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee" is a lie. who's the father of the lie?Since your NASB says that Mark 1:2 is from Isaiah, would you please tell me what chapter and verse from Isaiah it is quoting?
Isaiah 40:3, conflated with Malachi 3:1. Mark cites the major prophet. Just because you misunderstand the format of this citation, does not make it a "lie" in the NASB. (Why should your lack of knowledge be blamed on someone else?)
i've heard this ridiculous argument before. i don't buy it. "well he's citing the major prophet since malachi wasn't important enough to be mentioned blah blah blah". Mark 1:3 is from Isaiah, not Mark 1:2. so to say that Isaiah said "Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee" is a lie. who's the father of the lie? </font>[/QUOTE]If you don't buy this explaination, please post the passage of Jeremiah that Mat 27:9 quotes from in the KJV.Originally posted by The Harvest:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Since your NASB says that Mark 1:2 is from Isaiah, would you please tell me what chapter and verse from Isaiah it is quoting?
Isaiah 40:3, conflated with Malachi 3:1. Mark cites the major prophet. Just because you misunderstand the format of this citation, does not make it a "lie" in the NASB. (Why should your lack of knowledge be blamed on someone else?)