Right Divider
Body part
I'm going to just go ahead and believe the Bible.There is no other way to validate or present my point of view. Just say anything with no grounds to support
I'm going to just go ahead and believe the Bible.There is no other way to validate or present my point of view. Just say anything with no grounds to support
Nor this: is dealing with scriptures. Show 'how' it was 1) A Trinitarian slant instead of the VERY plain reading of scripture. Show how it is not. 2) SEE if the Apostle Paul did NOT say word for word, that 'we should not tempt Christ' as they did in Israel. I really don't believe you have a prayer of contention. How could it possibly be rendered otherwise? :idunno:
To me, it looks like YOU are doing the gymnastics. Why would you do that? Why would you NEED to do that? :think: Please engage and show. -Lon
:doh: YOU are better than this. READ it, 1Mind!Paul is telling them not to test Christ the way the father's tempted God.
Easy peasy, bud.
:doh: YOU are better than this. READ it, 1Mind!
1Co 10:9 Nor let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted Him and were destroyed by serpents. Numbers 21:5
How well did you do in English class? Good enough, right? You KNOW what this is saying! :mmph: You KNOW!
There is no difference in Christ and the spirit of GOD.
You can look this up: 1Corinthians 10:9 μηδὲ ἐκπειράζωμεν τὸν Χριστόν, καθώς καὶ τινες αὐτῶν ἐπείρασαν καὶ ὑπὸ τῶν ὄφεων ἀπώλοντο.I don't hold with the nkjv.
In the KJV there is no him after tempted.
You can look this up: 1Corinthians 10:9 μηδὲ ἐκπειράζωμεν τὸν Χριστόν, καθώς καὶ τινες αὐτῶν ἐπείρασαν καὶ ὑπὸ τῶν ὄφεων ἀπώλοντο.
αὐτῶν isn't 'necessary' if you understand they tested 'him' (Christ- Χριστόν). See the ending v on both? Means 'He.' I don't mind doubt, 1M1S. I do mind if we (you or I) stick to an idea that scripture doesn't support. Scripture supports this. It is this clear (thank you for addressing the text). -Lon
In the KJV there is no him after tempted.
Doesn't Scripture say that He is equal with God the Father?
Philippians 2:5-7 King James Version (KJV)
5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
And I will continue to believe in "a" creator.I'm going to just go ahead and believe the Bible.
So man has change text written in the Bible. I believe there is a verse in Revelations about tampering with the Bible.C-o-n-j-e-c-t-u-r-e Metzger is a smart man but he is not always a 'right' man. On this, he is taking a particular line of thought: That the bible was translated linearly. It was not, it was copied and circulated more like a web in all directions. Conjecture is, what it is, but it is NEVER gospel (truth unquestioned).
More Jewish than KJV (English). Even G-d is not written by them. In the front of your KJV, 'how' they translated Hebrew names into English, are 1) consistent and 2) given.
Revelation 22:18-19 New Living Translation (NLT)So man has change text written in the Bible. I believe there is a verse in Revelations about tampering with the Bible.
Sent from my SM-J727P using Tapatalk
Sure you do. One that you've created in your own mind.And I will continue to believe in "a" creator.
Well, what about this in the KJV?
1 Corinthians 10:3-5KJV 3 And did all eat the same spiritual meat; 4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ. 5 But with many of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness.
You, nor I, nor Metzger knows that. It is a 'guess.' I do NOTHING off of a guess. It is entertaining rumors and gossip.So man has change text written in the Bible.
And about conjecture, guesses, and gossip as well. I think Metzger 'thinks' this, but he also doesn't believe scriptures are inerrant either.I believe there is a verse in Revelations about tampering with the Bible.
Which would be why striking twice would be a problem, no?That question rates right up there with, why did Moses strike that Rock twice? :think:
That question rates right up there with, why did Moses strike that Rock twice? :think:
Which would be why striking twice would be a problem, no?
Yes, but why do you think Christ was called that ROCK?