Search results

For a book published in 2021 it may be a little soon to go with "gold" here, but the NRSV certainly was highly prized by academics. (It's what my wife used at Harvard Divinity School years ago.)

John was originally written in all capitals. "Originally the Bible was written in all capital letters without punctuation, accent marks, or spaces between the words. John 1:1 began, ΕΝΑΡΧΗΗΝΟΛΟΓΟΣ. Capital letters, or “majuscules,” were used until the sixth century A.D. (“Uncials” are a form of...

Not every English (or French, or German, etc.) translation is an inspired one.

My point was that referring to the pre-resurrection Jesus as "Christ" has scriptural support.

Are you looking for accuracy in translation of the original words or accuracy in translation of the original meaning? Some people prefer the latter. My personal preference is for the former. In my view, translations that attempt to bring the original words into modern cultural context are...

To call Him "Christ" (anointed one) only after His resurrection is fine if you wish. But that wasn't Peter's view in Acts 10:36-40: "You know the message God sent to the people of Israel, announcing the good news of peace through Jesus Christ, who is Lord of all. You know what has happened...

Right. The Brittanica passage suggests that he was actually FIRST guessing himself while in prison, and that his words to Christ at the Jordan were made up by Matthew. I have some sympathy for that view.

If it's neither here nor there, then where is it? :)

I am indeed a Trinitarian, although my reasons are different than many advanced by others. It's a banned subject on this site. You'll notice my comment "if Matt. 3:13-15 is accurate." There's a lot to be said on that subject. Here is a start from Brittanica: "The author apparently found it...

Perhaps. But neither Jesus' baptism nor Timothy's circumcision can fairly be called a "bluff," although both events were ineffective to accomplish what a baptism or a bris is thought by their respective adherents to accomplish. Jesus was not in need of repentance, Timothy was not in need of...

Well, close; let's just say it was for appearances sake. Ditto for Jesus being baptized, if Matt. 3:13-15 is accurate.

Paul had Timothy circumcised (Acts 16:3). What do you suppose was the purpose of that?

Fair question. But when you said "my mother and my father" were you addressing a single person, as it appears Thomas was?

Of all your points, this is one you need to let go of right away. The "through" whom all things were made in Col. 1:16 is obviously not a reference just to the church, but to everything under the sun. I'm happy to dive into the Greek with you if you wish, and we can also discuss Aristotle's...

Can you guys tone down the vitriol? Turn the dial counterclockwise, please. Comparing the sinfulness of both groups had limited usefulness in proving anything relevant. Attacking each other has none. I want to follow your discussion, not your war.

"The origin of the word Jehovah can be traced to the late Middle Ages (around the year 1500), when Jewish scribes began inserting the vowels from the Hebrew word adonai (“my Lord”) into the name YHWH. The insertion resulted in the hybrid term YaHoWaH. Scribes wanted this new word to remind...

The three-legged stool reminds me of Richard Hooker, who is reputed (incorrectly, I think) to have described Scripture, Tradition, and Reason as the legs of a stool. Anglicans and Episcopalians refer to the analogy regularly.

Because it was unnecessary to my point, which was simply that the RCC rejects Maria's writings. You never said you didn't "know for certain." You called me "supposedly" a lawyer. Big difference! I wrote that I have been a trial lawyer for 40+ years. I grant that you have no personal...

In and of itself, it doesn't. No one is suggesting God needed to. Only that He could have. It would be consistent with his mission as described in 2 Cor. 5:21. After all, contact with sinful human flesh didn't faze Him one bit for 30+ years walking the earth, so why must we assume that would...

Not if the Genesis creation story is a metaphor.