That's racist!

#16,878
#16,878
Orangeslice13 said:
You know the girl about to be stoned is a addition to the Bible and doesn’t exist in any of the earlier copies.
Click to expand...

Complete nonsense, the Gospels aren’t mirror images of each other and were never meant to be, what would be the point. They each mention Christ’s genealogy from a different perspective or not at all. They describe the resurrection differently and what Jesus did afterwards. The four gospels don’t all mention the same miracles. They were written by four different men with four different backgrounds to different audiences
 
#16,880
#16,880
landscapingvol said:
Complete nonsense, the Gospels aren’t mirror images of each other and were never meant to be, what would be the point. They each mention Christ’s genealogy from a different perspective or not at all. They describe the resurrection differently and what Jesus did afterwards. The four gospels don’t all mention the same miracles. They were written by four different men with four different backgrounds to different audiences
Click to expand...

you open with “complete nonsense” then rambled about something nobody said or even inferred.
Everything you said after “complete nonsense” doesn’t change the fact that the 2 stories I referred to only appear in later copies. In fact they don’t appear until the 5th century.
But don’t take my word for it.

@DinkinFlicka im about to copy and paste.
Hope that’s ok in this case.
  • Don Carson, who teaches at Trinity, and is in my view one of the best New Testament scholars in the world, writes, “Despite the best efforts . . . to prove that this narrative was originally part of John’s Gospel, the evidence is against [them], and modern English versions are right to rule it off from the rest of the text (NIV) or to relegate it to a footnote (RSV).” (The Gospel According to John, 333)
  • Bruce Metzger, one of the world’s great authorities on the text of the New Testament until his death in 2002: “The evidence for the non-Johannine origin of the pericope of the adulteress is overwhelming.” (A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 219)
  • Leon Morris: “The textual evidence makes it impossible to hold that this section is an authentic part of the Gospel.” (The Gospel According to John, 882)
  • Andreas Köstenberger: “This represents overwhelming evidence that the section is non-Johannine.” (John, 246)
  • And Herman Ridderbos: The evidences “point to an unstable tradition that was not originally part of an ecclesiastically accepted text.” (The Gospel of John, 286)
 
#16,883
#16,883
Orangeslice13 said:
you open with “complete nonsense” then rambled about something nobody said or even inferred.
Everything you said after “complete nonsense” doesn’t change the fact that the 2 stories I referred to only appear in later copies. In fact they don’t appear until the 5th century.
But don’t take my word for it.

@DinkinFlicka im about to copy and paste.
Hope that’s ok in this case.
  • Don Carson, who teaches at Trinity, and is in my view one of the best New Testament scholars in the world, writes, “Despite the best efforts . . . to prove that this narrative was originally part of John’s Gospel, the evidence is against [them], and modern English versions are right to rule it off from the rest of the text (NIV) or to relegate it to a footnote (RSV).” (The Gospel According to John, 333)
  • Bruce Metzger, one of the world’s great authorities on the text of the New Testament until his death in 2002: “The evidence for the non-Johannine origin of the pericope of the adulteress is overwhelming.” (A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 219)
  • Leon Morris: “The textual evidence makes it impossible to hold that this section is an authentic part of the Gospel.” (The Gospel According to John, 882)
  • Andreas Köstenberger: “This represents overwhelming evidence that the section is non-Johannine.” (John, 246)
  • And Herman Ridderbos: The evidences “point to an unstable tradition that was not originally part of an ecclesiastically accepted text.” (The Gospel of John, 286)
Click to expand...

You can find a biblical scholar who will debate the authenticity of every book in the Bible to a certain degree however IF you believe in the authenticity of the Bible as God’s word then you must assume that everything God intended to be included is included. The New Testament as we know it wasn’t canonized until the end of the forth, beginning of the fifth century
 
#16,884
#16,884
landscapingvol said:
You can find a biblical scholar who will debate the authenticity of every book in the Bible to a certain degree however IF you believe in the authenticity of the Bible as God’s word then you must assume that everything God intended to be included is included. The New Testament as we know it wasn’t canonized until the end of the forth, beginning of the fifth century
Click to expand...
And yet the content of those canonized books are inconsistent at best. If you find the version you agree with the most I’m sure that’s every bit as good as truth. And while you’re at it just ignore the guy who said….”ask and you will receive, seek and you will find…” I’m sure you know the rest. Maybe you don’t. I guess it depends on which version you choose to believe.
I’m sure you’re also aware that messiah quotes books that didn’t make in into your little approved list.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zeppelin128
#16,892
#16,892
  • Like
Reactions: StarRaider and Rickyvol77
#16,895
#16,895
AshG said:
No different than the individuals here who label things they don't like as liberal this or liberal that. Just as insipid.
Click to expand...

I understand your point in terms of subjective topics but not math. Math is math and usually not up for interpretation. There are many people that hate math, but that doesn't make it: racist, liberal, or conservative.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RavinDave, C-south, Orangeslice13 and 3 others
#16,896
#16,896
Boca Vol said:
I understand your point in terms of subjective topics but not math. Math is math and usually not up for interpretation. There are many people that hate math, but that doesn't make it: racist, liberal, or conservative.
Click to expand...

I agree. I'm just focusing on the "I don't like it, so I'm going to attach a word to it that I don't like either." crew.

As for the tweet, I can't wrap my head around it. Math and science are math and science. An apple falls from a tree and moves in the direction of the Earth's core no matter where on earth it happens.
 
#16,897
#16,897
Orangeslice13 said:
So he allegedly said something rassist. That’s an important detail left out of the title.

“Four witnesses corroborated accounts of the incident, though one witness admitted they did not hear what was being said.”
Click to expand...
I heard the two were in the same unit together in the military and what was actually said referenced that. He was his former drill sergeant
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top