EPT[Christian topic] Greg Laurie - Page 9
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Slayer91
Ireland23335 Posts
| ||
|
TheOvermind77
United States923 Posts
On April 18 2007 15:06 Slayer91 wrote: God gave you a brain, use it. Never ever take the bible word for word, especially since it was translated originally. There is a reason the catholic church basically tells people whats ok and whats not, left to their own devices people come up with conclusions and start judging people etc.. Simple but brilliant. | ||
|
0z
Luxembourg877 Posts
On April 18 2007 15:06 Slayer91 wrote: God gave you a brain, use it. Never ever take the bible word for word, especially since it was translated originally. There is a reason the catholic church basically tells people whats ok and whats not, left to their own devices people come up with conclusions and start judging people etc.. So catholics believe in god, because the catholic church told them there is one? | ||
|
TheOvermind77
United States923 Posts
On April 18 2007 15:09 0z wrote: So catholics believe in god, because the catholic church told them there is one? Um no? | ||
|
0z
Luxembourg877 Posts
Why then? | ||
|
TheOvermind77
United States923 Posts
Because more people than just Catholics believe in God and trust me, if you know any Protestants, they will tell you that the last thing you will want to do is listen to the Vatican. | ||
|
Annor[BbG]
United States55 Posts
[QUOTE]On April 18 2007 14:27 Annor[BbG] wrote: [QUOTE]On April 18 2007 14:07 TheOvermind77 wrote: [QUOTE]On April 18 2007 13:48 Annor[BbG] wrote: So when Jesus said that the Old Testament was accurate, he was actually lying?[/QUOTE] Also, it is important that we realize that the Bible has been altered in an incredible amount of ways since it was written. Chapters have been removed, books have been removed, books have been added, passages have been re-translated, etc...there are so many factors to consider. I still believe in its overall purpose and I believe in God, but I admit there are some things in there that are definitely not the words that God has spoken.../QUOTE] Please inform me of which chapters were removed, which books were added after the Council, and which books were removed after the Council. The Bible has been translated, but not re-translated. I also don't understand how you can believe that God is a limited being without superior powers. If God wanted a book written exactly the way he wanted it written are you saying that is beyond the scope of God's powers? If so, some God that is.[/QUOTE] [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_English_Bible_translations]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_English_Bible_translations[/url] Go there and see for yourself the ridiculous amount of translations and versions. It is amazing!!! I don't think God is limited. God made humans with free will, allowing us to sin or not sin, to believe or not. If he revealed himself fully in an entirely indisputable manner, where would this free will go? Just my thoughts.[/QUOTE] I'm aware of how many translations there are. I just wasn't aware of this mass add/remove of chapters and books which you proclaim to be true, but seemingly ignored when I called you out on it. | ||
|
Never Post
United Kingdom503 Posts
On April 18 2007 15:03 TheOvermind77 wrote: What caused the Big Bang? What created that event? What created the event that cause THAT event? I can ask that into oblivion. The answer is either God or something else. Since no one knows right now and no one can scientifically prove otherwise, I'll go with God. So you're saying god is merely a filler explanation for the unknown. I really don't see how you can call yourself a 'believer'. It's more like you want an answer even if it is probably not true because it's the best thing you have at the moment. Following this logic, the unknown is god, as we learn more and more, god becomes less and less. In the end, nothing. Religion does limit the thinking of some people, however. The hardcore right-winged uber-conservative Christians that have very closed minds and go on those rallies with signs that say "God hates fags" are severly limited in their mental capacity. That is where I think people take religion too far...when they start perverting it or something of the like. Those people piss me off. Plus going to White Castle, as I said before, is clearly the best answer. By the way if I seem hostile I don't really mean to be, it's just around here there are very few Christians willing to debate about their faith, afraid you might say something that makes them doubt it. | ||
|
0z
Luxembourg877 Posts
On April 18 2007 15:12 TheOvermind77 wrote: Because more people than just Catholics believe in God and trust me, if you know any Protestants, they will tell you that the last thing you will want to do is listen to the Vatican. Well the protestants have their respective churches to tell them On April 18 2007 15:06 Slayer91 wrote: .whats ok and whats not So the question transorms naturally to: So people belonging to some church believe in god, because the church they belong to told them there is one? | ||
|
0z
Luxembourg877 Posts
[QUOTE]On April 18 2007 14:38 TheOvermind77 wrote: [QUOTE]On April 18 2007 14:27 Annor[BbG] wrote: [QUOTE]On April 18 2007 14:07 TheOvermind77 wrote: [QUOTE]On April 18 2007 13:48 Annor[BbG] wrote: So when Jesus said that the Old Testament was accurate, he was actually lying?[/QUOTE] Also, it is important that we realize that the Bible has been altered in an incredible amount of ways since it was written. Chapters have been removed, books have been removed, books have been added, passages have been re-translated, etc...there are so many factors to consider. I still believe in its overall purpose and I believe in God, but I admit there are some things in there that are definitely not the words that God has spoken.../QUOTE] Please inform me of which chapters were removed, which books were added after the Council, and which books were removed after the Council. The Bible has been translated, but not re-translated. I also don't understand how you can believe that God is a limited being without superior powers. If God wanted a book written exactly the way he wanted it written are you saying that is beyond the scope of God's powers? If so, some God that is.[/QUOTE] [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_English_Bible_translations]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_English_Bible_translations[/url] Go there and see for yourself the ridiculous amount of translations and versions. It is amazing!!! I don't think God is limited. God made humans with free will, allowing us to sin or not sin, to believe or not. If he revealed himself fully in an entirely indisputable manner, where would this free will go? Just my thoughts.[/QUOTE] I'm aware of how many translations there are. I just wasn't aware of this mass add/remove of chapters and books which you proclaim to be true, but seemingly ignored when I called you out on it.[/QUOTE] [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_apocrypha]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_apocrypha[/url] !! | ||
|
Annor[BbG]
United States55 Posts
On April 18 2007 14:52 Never Post wrote: Actually that's not the only counter-argument, but it's the lazy atheists' approach. I don't really want to explain other reasons because I don't see how this one isn't an equal and sufficient reply. I wasn't talking about what the Bible says about god, I think that's obvious. What are you talking about? I was just making an example of false mass-beliefs, not necessarily religion-related. But if you do want a religious one, how about when the Church convicted those who believed the Earth was not at the centre of the universe? That doesn't really make sense. What I meant is if I attempt to disprove 'a god', you'll just turn around and say that's not 'your god'. I'm aware its not the only argument, but I have just as many counter reasons as you have reasons, just as you have the same. No one can 'logically' debate you, because you assume your logic is at a higher standard than everyone else's. There is always the problem that its hard to have a logical debate when you, "don't really want to explain other reasons." Here I'll start you the debate off with this; There are two parts of the Bible, there are the parts that have been proven true and the parts that are yet to be proven. There are no unproved parts in the Bible. That's a factual statement, which is a lot more than the evolutionary theory has to say about itself. | ||
|
TheOvermind77
United States923 Posts
[QUOTE]On April 18 2007 14:38 TheOvermind77 wrote: [QUOTE]On April 18 2007 14:27 Annor[BbG] wrote: [QUOTE]On April 18 2007 14:07 TheOvermind77 wrote: [QUOTE]On April 18 2007 13:48 Annor[BbG] wrote: So when Jesus said that the Old Testament was accurate, he was actually lying?[/QUOTE] Also, it is important that we realize that the Bible has been altered in an incredible amount of ways since it was written. Chapters have been removed, books have been removed, books have been added, passages have been re-translated, etc...there are so many factors to consider. I still believe in its overall purpose and I believe in God, but I admit there are some things in there that are definitely not the words that God has spoken.../QUOTE] Please inform me of which chapters were removed, which books were added after the Council, and which books were removed after the Council. The Bible has been translated, but not re-translated. I also don't understand how you can believe that God is a limited being without superior powers. If God wanted a book written exactly the way he wanted it written are you saying that is beyond the scope of God's powers? If so, some God that is.[/QUOTE] [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_English_Bible_translations]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_English_Bible_translations[/url] Go there and see for yourself the ridiculous amount of translations and versions. It is amazing!!! I don't think God is limited. God made humans with free will, allowing us to sin or not sin, to believe or not. If he revealed himself fully in an entirely indisputable manner, where would this free will go? Just my thoughts.[/QUOTE] I'm aware of how many translations there are. I just wasn't aware of this mass add/remove of chapters and books which you proclaim to be true, but seemingly ignored when I called you out on it.[/QUOTE] I was mostly too lazy to point them out. Apocrypha is the name of a group of books which have been removed from the Bible. This name applies to a group of books, mainly written during the intertestamental period. Go to [url=http://www.ch-of-christ.beaverton.or.us/LOSTBOOK1.htm]this[/url] site to find out more. Here are some of the books: I ESDRAS: (about 150 B.C.)-draws considerably from Chronciles, Ezra, and Nehemiah, tells of the restoration of the Jews to Palestine after the Babylonian exile. Adds much legendary material. 2 ESDRAS: (100 A.D.), contains seven visions. TOBIT: (2nd cent. B.C.)-emphasizes the Law, clean foods, ceremonial washings, charity, fasting, prayer, states that almsgiving atones for sin. It is claimed that Tobit was alive when the Assyrians conquered Israel (722 B.C.) as well as when Jeroboam revolted against Judah (931 B.C. -time span=209 years), yet his total life-span was only 158 years (14:11; cf. 1:3-5). JUDITH: (middle 2nd cent. B.C.) Contains subbiblical teachings. Judith was assisted by God in a deed of falsehood (9:10,13); and historical error-Judith speaks of Nebuchadnezzar as reigning in Nineveh instead of Babylon (1:1) "William H. Green concisely summarizes this evidence, as he writes, 'The books of Tobit and Judith abound in geographical, chronological, and historical mistakes, so as not only to vitiate the truth of the narratives which they contain, but to make it doubtful whether they even rest upon a basis of fact." (Geisler/Nix). ADDITIONS TO ESTHER: (about 100 B.C.) The additions have long prayers attributed to Moredecai and Esther, with a couple of letters supposedly written by Artaxerxes. THE WISDOM OF SOLOMON: (about A.D. 40) ECCLESIASTICUS: Or, The Wisdom of Sirach (about 180 B.C.) Somewhat like Proverbs and contains practical advice. Yet it and the "Wisdom of Solomon" both teach a morality based on experience. BARUCH: (about A.D. 100) Claims to be written by the scribe who served Jeremiah. BEL AND THE DRAGON: A chapter which is added to the book of Daniel. SONG OF THE THREE HEBREW CHILDREN: Follows Daniel 3:23, borrows heavily from Psalm 148. THE PRAYER OF MANASSEH: Claims to be the prayer of the wicked king Manasseh. FIRST MACCABEES: (1st cent. B.C.) Records the exploits of the three Maccabean brothers. SECOND MACCABEES: Which is not a sequel, but a parallel account, treating only the victories of Judas Maccabeus. Teaches prayers for the dead. (12:45-46), which contradicts the Scriptures (Heb. 9:27; Luke 16:25-26). | ||
|
Annor[BbG]
United States55 Posts
On April 18 2007 15:16 Never Post wrote: So you're saying god is merely a filler explanation for the unknown. I really don't see how you can call yourself a 'believer'. It's more like you want an answer even if it is probably not true because it's the best thing you have at the moment. Following this logic, the unknown is god, as we learn more and more, god becomes less and less. In the end, nothing. By the way if I seem hostile I don't really mean to be, it's just around here there are very few Christians willing to debate about their faith, afraid you might say something that makes them doubt it. How does knowing more about something make it become less and less? You keep using words to make your logic seem superior over his. Your logic has a fatal flaw, God does not equal ALL unknown. If you have 2x+3=y and someone tells you that x=2, both sides = 7 not zero. The unknowns are the same as they were before you started. | ||
|
Never Post
United Kingdom503 Posts
On April 18 2007 15:19 Annor[BbG] wrote: There are two parts of the Bible, there are the parts that have been proven true and the parts that are yet to be proven. There are no unproved parts in the Bible. That's a factual statement, which is a lot more than the evolutionary theory has to say about itself. Do you even know what evolution is? No one has yet managed to 'disprove' evolution and what exists is backed by substantial evidence; if you call creationism 'disproving' I will literally just laugh at you. There are many parts of the Bible that have been proven to be false too, unless you believe evolution/geology/mathematics/etc. is not enough 'proof'. If so, you must have incredible difficulty believing in anything backed by evidence (but no trouble believing in what lacks evidence). | ||
|
Annor[BbG]
United States55 Posts
[QUOTE]On April 18 2007 15:15 Annor[BbG] wrote: [QUOTE]On April 18 2007 14:38 TheOvermind77 wrote: [QUOTE]On April 18 2007 14:27 Annor[BbG] wrote: [QUOTE]On April 18 2007 14:07 TheOvermind77 wrote: [QUOTE]On April 18 2007 13:48 Annor[BbG] wrote: So when Jesus said that the Old Testament was accurate, he was actually lying?[/QUOTE] Also, it is important that we realize that the Bible has been altered in an incredible amount of ways since it was written. Chapters have been removed, books have been removed, books have been added, passages have been re-translated, etc...there are so many factors to consider. I still believe in its overall purpose and I believe in God, but I admit there are some things in there that are definitely not the words that God has spoken.../QUOTE] Please inform me of which chapters were removed, which books were added after the Council, and which books were removed after the Council. The Bible has been translated, but not re-translated. I also don't understand how you can believe that God is a limited being without superior powers. If God wanted a book written exactly the way he wanted it written are you saying that is beyond the scope of God's powers? If so, some God that is.[/QUOTE] [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_English_Bible_translations]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_English_Bible_translations[/url] Go there and see for yourself the ridiculous amount of translations and versions. It is amazing!!! I don't think God is limited. God made humans with free will, allowing us to sin or not sin, to believe or not. If he revealed himself fully in an entirely indisputable manner, where would this free will go? Just my thoughts.[/QUOTE] I'm aware of how many translations there are. I just wasn't aware of this mass add/remove of chapters and books which you proclaim to be true, but seemingly ignored when I called you out on it.[/QUOTE] I was mostly too lazy to point them out. Apocrypha is the name of a group of books which have been removed from the Bible. This name applies to a group of books, mainly written during the intertestamental period. Go to [url=http://www.ch-of-christ.beaverton.or.us/LOSTBOOK1.htm]this[/url] site to find out more. Here are some of the books: I ESDRAS: (about 150 B.C.)-draws considerably from Chronciles, Ezra, and Nehemiah, tells of the restoration of the Jews to Palestine after the Babylonian exile. Adds much legendary material. 2 ESDRAS: (100 A.D.), contains seven visions. TOBIT: (2nd cent. B.C.)-emphasizes the Law, clean foods, ceremonial washings, charity, fasting, prayer, states that almsgiving atones for sin. It is claimed that Tobit was alive when the Assyrians conquered Israel (722 B.C.) as well as when Jeroboam revolted against Judah (931 B.C. -time span=209 years), yet his total life-span was only 158 years (14:11; cf. 1:3-5). JUDITH: (middle 2nd cent. B.C.) Contains subbiblical teachings. Judith was assisted by God in a deed of falsehood (9:10,13); and historical error-Judith speaks of Nebuchadnezzar as reigning in Nineveh instead of Babylon (1:1) "William H. Green concisely summarizes this evidence, as he writes, 'The books of Tobit and Judith abound in geographical, chronological, and historical mistakes, so as not only to vitiate the truth of the narratives which they contain, but to make it doubtful whether they even rest upon a basis of fact." (Geisler/Nix). ADDITIONS TO ESTHER: (about 100 B.C.) The additions have long prayers attributed to Moredecai and Esther, with a couple of letters supposedly written by Artaxerxes. THE WISDOM OF SOLOMON: (about A.D. 40) ECCLESIASTICUS: Or, The Wisdom of Sirach (about 180 B.C.) Somewhat like Proverbs and contains practical advice. Yet it and the "Wisdom of Solomon" both teach a morality based on experience. BARUCH: (about A.D. 100) Claims to be written by the scribe who served Jeremiah. BEL AND THE DRAGON: A chapter which is added to the book of Daniel. SONG OF THE THREE HEBREW CHILDREN: Follows Daniel 3:23, borrows heavily from Psalm 148. THE PRAYER OF MANASSEH: Claims to be the prayer of the wicked king Manasseh. FIRST MACCABEES: (1st cent. B.C.) Records the exploits of the three Maccabean brothers. SECOND MACCABEES: Which is not a sequel, but a parallel account, treating only the victories of Judas Maccabeus. Teaches prayers for the dead. (12:45-46), which contradicts the Scriptures (Heb. 9:27; Luke 16:25-26).[/QUOTE] Oh I thought when you said add/removed you meant after the Council of Nicea. That has no relevance to anything that has been changed recently. There were many books written at that time they didn't add or remove any of them from the Bible. | ||
|
TheOvermind77
United States923 Posts
On April 18 2007 15:16 Never Post wrote: So you're saying god is merely a filler explanation for the unknown. I really don't see how you can call yourself a 'believer'. It's more like you want an answer even if it is probably not true because it's the best thing you have at the moment. Following this logic, the unknown is god, as we learn more and more, god becomes less and less. In the end, nothing. By the way if I seem hostile I don't really mean to be, it's just around here there are very few Christians willing to debate about their faith, afraid you might say something that makes them doubt it. I'm not saying he is a filler...I mean, if I take the opposite perspective, then God created the world, and as we grow to understand the world and its origins, we grow closer to understanding the works of God and how he put everything in motion. Then God is the endpoint in this case...and because we humans have limitations to things that we can observe and explain (I think it is the general consensus of all scientists, atheist and christian, that we will never be able to explain everything because of how short our lives are and how we are simply a speck in the grain of the celestial sands) then the only way we can truly understand everything is when we are in Heaven and truly can know God and his works. You see, it can be taken from both perspectives, both of which are believable by any person and both of which are refutible (only in concept, but never in fact). This argument will just go in a circle until old age and arthritis prevent us from typing responses. | ||
|
bine
United States2352 Posts
On April 18 2007 13:22 XelNaga wrote: That's also what you would be calling taking out of context. That was hygiene law for the Hebrews when they were in the desert. There was a lot of sickness and disease concern at the time, and so there you go, this is a solution for it. When you say you're taking the bible literally, there is also the assumption that you know the context of the bible and do we need to apply Hebrew religious laws to our society today? No, because 1) We aren't Hebrew and 2) It's out of context. No, just inaccurate. You think that the carbon in dinosaur bones somehow tricked scientists into thinking it's millions of years old? | ||
|
Annor[BbG]
United States55 Posts
On April 18 2007 15:26 Never Post wrote: Do you even know what evolution is? No one has yet managed to 'disprove' evolution and what exists is backed by substantial evidence; if you call creationism 'disproving' I will literally just laugh at you. There are many parts of the Bible that have been proven to be false too, unless you believe evolution/geology/mathematics/etc. is not enough 'proof'. If so, you must have incredible difficulty believing in anything backed by evidence (but no trouble believing in what lacks evidence). Many people have managed to disprove parts of the Evolutionary Theory. They have edited parts, added parts, removed parts, have they disproved Evolution as a whole? No. That's not what I said in the first place. I was talking about the Bible, which is the Christian book, and therefore implied I was talking about the Evolutionary documents, which have been changed. Oh? The Bible was proven false? Enlighten us, oh wise one. You know something that no one else does. | ||
|
TheOvermind77
United States923 Posts
[QUOTE]On April 18 2007 15:20 TheOvermind77 wrote: [QUOTE]On April 18 2007 15:15 Annor[BbG] wrote: [QUOTE]On April 18 2007 14:38 TheOvermind77 wrote: [QUOTE]On April 18 2007 14:27 Annor[BbG] wrote: [QUOTE]On April 18 2007 14:07 TheOvermind77 wrote: [QUOTE]On April 18 2007 13:48 Annor[BbG] wrote: So when Jesus said that the Old Testament was accurate, he was actually lying?[/QUOTE] Also, it is important that we realize that the Bible has been altered in an incredible amount of ways since it was written. Chapters have been removed, books have been removed, books have been added, passages have been re-translated, etc...there are so many factors to consider. I still believe in its overall purpose and I believe in God, but I admit there are some things in there that are definitely not the words that God has spoken.../QUOTE] Please inform me of which chapters were removed, which books were added after the Council, and which books were removed after the Council. The Bible has been translated, but not re-translated. I also don't understand how you can believe that God is a limited being without superior powers. If God wanted a book written exactly the way he wanted it written are you saying that is beyond the scope of God's powers? If so, some God that is.[/QUOTE] [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_English_Bible_translations]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_English_Bible_translations[/url] Go there and see for yourself the ridiculous amount of translations and versions. It is amazing!!! I don't think God is limited. God made humans with free will, allowing us to sin or not sin, to believe or not. If he revealed himself fully in an entirely indisputable manner, where would this free will go? Just my thoughts.[/QUOTE] I'm aware of how many translations there are. I just wasn't aware of this mass add/remove of chapters and books which you proclaim to be true, but seemingly ignored when I called you out on it.[/QUOTE] I was mostly too lazy to point them out. Apocrypha is the name of a group of books which have been removed from the Bible. This name applies to a group of books, mainly written during the intertestamental period. Go to [url=http://www.ch-of-christ.beaverton.or.us/LOSTBOOK1.htm]this[/url] site to find out more. Here are some of the books: I ESDRAS: (about 150 B.C.)-draws considerably from Chronciles, Ezra, and Nehemiah, tells of the restoration of the Jews to Palestine after the Babylonian exile. Adds much legendary material. 2 ESDRAS: (100 A.D.), contains seven visions. TOBIT: (2nd cent. B.C.)-emphasizes the Law, clean foods, ceremonial washings, charity, fasting, prayer, states that almsgiving atones for sin. It is claimed that Tobit was alive when the Assyrians conquered Israel (722 B.C.) as well as when Jeroboam revolted against Judah (931 B.C. -time span=209 years), yet his total life-span was only 158 years (14:11; cf. 1:3-5). JUDITH: (middle 2nd cent. B.C.) Contains subbiblical teachings. Judith was assisted by God in a deed of falsehood (9:10,13); and historical error-Judith speaks of Nebuchadnezzar as reigning in Nineveh instead of Babylon (1:1) "William H. Green concisely summarizes this evidence, as he writes, 'The books of Tobit and Judith abound in geographical, chronological, and historical mistakes, so as not only to vitiate the truth of the narratives which they contain, but to make it doubtful whether they even rest upon a basis of fact." (Geisler/Nix). ADDITIONS TO ESTHER: (about 100 B.C.) The additions have long prayers attributed to Moredecai and Esther, with a couple of letters supposedly written by Artaxerxes. THE WISDOM OF SOLOMON: (about A.D. 40) ECCLESIASTICUS: Or, The Wisdom of Sirach (about 180 B.C.) Somewhat like Proverbs and contains practical advice. Yet it and the "Wisdom of Solomon" both teach a morality based on experience. BARUCH: (about A.D. 100) Claims to be written by the scribe who served Jeremiah. BEL AND THE DRAGON: A chapter which is added to the book of Daniel. SONG OF THE THREE HEBREW CHILDREN: Follows Daniel 3:23, borrows heavily from Psalm 148. THE PRAYER OF MANASSEH: Claims to be the prayer of the wicked king Manasseh. FIRST MACCABEES: (1st cent. B.C.) Records the exploits of the three Maccabean brothers. SECOND MACCABEES: Which is not a sequel, but a parallel account, treating only the victories of Judas Maccabeus. Teaches prayers for the dead. (12:45-46), which contradicts the Scriptures (Heb. 9:27; Luke 16:25-26).[/QUOTE] Oh I thought when you said add/removed you meant after the Council of Nicea. That has no relevance to anything that has been changed recently. There were many books written at that time they didn't add or remove any of them from the Bible.[/QUOTE] I should have been more clear. It should be noted, however, that certain quotes in the Bible vary GREATLY from version to version. For example, if you happen to be interested in Paul's antinomianistic views, check out the following from wikipedia: Colossians 2:13-14 is sometimes presented as proof of Paul's antinomistic views, for example the New International Version translates: "...He forgave us all our sins, having canceled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross."; however the New Revised Standard Version translates this same verse as: "...he forgave us all our trespasses, erasing the record that stood against us with its legal demands. He set this aside, nailing it to the cross."; which makes it sound as though it is a record of trespasses, rather than the Law itself, that was "nailed to the cross." The interpretation hinges on the word χειρόγραφον, see also Strong's G5498, literally "something written by hand", variously translated as "written code" or "record". (Notice that even the NRSV speaks of "the record ... with its legal demands", which may indicate a law code rather than a charge sheet.) Interesting, eh? | ||
|
xM(Z
Romania5269 Posts
if someone were to come to you and said : "i am your God" would you believe him? | ||
| ||
Tool of the devil 
