21 Apr 13
Originally posted by johnnylongwoodyBut this is not a teaching which is advocating confusion and division, is it. You can say that the interpretation of the verse may be confusing and those who interpret it are divided as to its meaning but its not evidence of the Bible itself promoting a teaching which advocates that persons should be confused nor divided, is it, because no such teaching exists, in fact, as i have demonstrated, what the Bible really teaches is oneness and unity of thought.
Ok, here is just one example.
When Jesus was crucified and he was speaking to the two
people crucified with him. He said to one of them,
Truly I tell you today you will be with me in paradise.
Experts disagree with the way and the context in which Jesus said those words.
Some say he meant......TODAY you will be with me in paradise.
...[text shortened]... that is a very simple example of how men have argued
for centuries over a small piece of text.
21 Apr 13
Originally posted by robbie carrobieFor all you have said there, you did not answer the question.
But this is not a teaching which is advocating confusion and division, is it. You can say that the interpretation of the verse may be confusing and those who interpret it are divided as to its meaning but its not evidence of the Bible itself promoting a teaching which advocates that persons should be confused nor divided, is it, because no such teac ...[text shortened]... in fact, as i have demonstrated, what the Bible really teaches is oneness and unity of thought.
What do you suppose Jesus meant when he said those words?
Did he mean you will be with me TODAY in paradise?
Or did he mean I am telling you today................you will ( at some later stage )
be with me in paradise?
Scholars have argued over that particular point for ages.
Which one is correct according to you?
Answer the question please.
You asked for an example, I gave you one.
Now answer it please, thank you.
21 Apr 13
Originally posted by johnnylongwoodyNo you have provided a Biblical teaching which speaks about a paradise, you have
For all you have said there, you did not answer the question.
What do you suppose Jesus meant when he said those words?
Did he mean you will be with me TODAY in paradise?
Or did he mean I am telling you today................you will ( at some later stage )
be with me in paradise?
Scholars have argued over that particular point for ages ...[text shortened]... stion please.
You asked for an example, I gave you one.
Now answer it please, thank you.
not provided a Biblical teaching which advocates confusion and division. Again here
was the original assertion, 'the Bible teaches confusion and division', you have
produced no such teaching, nor can you, for it does not exist.
As to answering the question, it is a rather mundane affair, clearly it cannot have
meant that Christ and the thief went to paradise on that day, why not? because
Jesus was dead and did not ascend to heaven until some forty days later. The whole
controversy rests upon the introduction of punctuation, not found in original
manuscripts.
German Bible translator L. Reinhardt says: “The punctuation presently used [by
most translators] in this verse is undoubtedly false and contradictory to the entire
way of thinking of Christ and the evildoer. . . . [Christ] certainly did not understand
paradise to be a subdivision of the realm of the dead, but rather the restoration of a
paradise on earth.”
The matter is rather clear, Christ is referring to some point in the future, when the
thief will be resurrected to the the restoration of the earthly paradise that I outlined
in my opening statement. There is no confusion whatsoever, this is in harmony with
other Biblical teaching, in harmony with Gods original purpose, in harmony with the
original language and manuscripts and is not evidence that the Bible advocates
confusion and division, which you have still yet to produce.
21 Apr 13
Originally posted by robbie carrobiePresumably "most translators" would disagree with the translator you have chosen to cite, right?
German Bible translator L. Reinhardt says: “The punctuation presently used [by most translators] in this verse is undoubtedly false and contradictory to the entire way of thinking of Christ and the evildoer...
21 Apr 13
3 edits
Originally posted by FMFI have no idea whether they would agree or disagree not having the ability of
Presumably "most translators" would disagree with the translator you have chosen to cite, right?
telepathy. The fact of the matter remains that citing differences among translators is
not evidence that the Bible itself advocates division and confusion as i have repeatedly
pointed out. Perhaps you would like to cite a chapter and verse where it does
advocate division and confusion, who knows, you may be able to differentiate between
the exegesis of those who read the Bible and what the Bible actually advocates itself,
for these other posters seemingly are having not a little trouble in doing so.
21 Apr 13
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThe one translator you cited said “The punctuation presently used [by most translators] in this verse is undoubtedly false [etc.]" You would need "telepathy" to figure out whether the "most translators" he mentioned would agree or disagree with him?
I have no idea whether they would agree or disagree not having the ability of telepathy.
21 Apr 13
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFCan you explain how i would know what other people thought, other than telepathy? I have no reference, you cited 'other translators' and scanning the horizon with my mind ray, i found no one, sadly who fitted that description.
The one translator you cited said “The punctuation presently used [by most translators] in this verse is undoubtedly false [etc.]" You would need "telepathy" to figure out whether the "most translators" he mentioned would agree or disagree with him?
21 Apr 13
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI have provided you with an example where there is confusion.
No you have provided a Biblical teaching which speaks about a paradise, you have
not provided a Biblical teaching which advocates confusion and division. Again here
was the original assertion, 'the Bible teaches confusion and division', you have
produced no such teaching, nor can you, for it does not exist.
As to answering the question, it ...[text shortened]... idence that the Bible advocates
confusion and division, which you have still yet to produce.
Bible scholars have argued this passage for ages without agreement.
I have asked you for your opinion on it and you have completely
dodged the question. You have not answered it.
Why won't you answer the question?
Did Jesus mean ........TODAY you will be with me in paradise?
Or did he mean, I tell you today, that ( at some later stage )
you will be with me in paradise?
It is a simple Question I ask of you.
Once again I ask you for an answer and if you are not
prepared to answer then don't bother to post anymore.
You are required by your organization to answer these
types of questions, but yet you avoid them.
If you knocked on someone's door and in the conversation they asked
you the question I have asked which is your answer?
21 Apr 13
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThe one translator you cited called the work of "most translators" false in this matter. You don't need "telepathy", robbie, to realize that those "most translators" wouldn't agree with the one translator you cited.
can you explain how i would know what other people thought, other than telepathy?
21 Apr 13
Originally posted by johnnylongwoodyI see no confusion the matter is perfectly clear in my mind. I not only answered it, I
I have provided you with an example where there is confusion.
Bible scholars have argued this passage for ages without agreeDid Jesus mean ........ment.
I have asked you for your opinion on it and you have completely
dodged the question. You have not answered it.
Why won't you answer the question?
TODAY you will be with me in paradise?
O ...[text shortened]... door and in the conversation they asked
you the question I have asked which is your answer?
told you why.
Here is the text again, if you use spectacles then i suggest you put them on,
Johnny,
Did Jesus mean today,
THE ANSWER - FROM MY TEXT,
clearly it cannot have meant that Christ and the thief went to paradise on that
day, why not? because Jesus was dead and did not ascend to heaven until some
forty days later.
this is the second time I have answered it Johnny, now either put your spectacles on
or learn to understand what is written. I understand that you are half French and
English may not be your first language but its no excuse for poor reading
comprehension.
Again you are attempting to cite the differences in exegesis among those who read
the Bible, you have still failed to produce a single chapter or verse where the BIBLE
ITSELF (note that term Johnny, the BIBLE itself, not those who read and study it,
they are different entities) advocates confusion and division. You have FAILED
johnny! Epically!
21 Apr 13
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFthen if you knew from the statement then why are you asking me what they thought? does the statement not make it clear that most translators disagree? Is this more pettiness from you FMF? How banal.
The one translator you cited called the work of "most translators" false in this matter. You don't need "telepathy", robbie, to realize that those "most translators" wouldn't agree with the one translator you cited.