Search results

As I said, I do not believe myself to be WONG. For every Wallace, there are two or three other PhD's that would claim that the rule holds for John 1:1. Would you like me to list a few or do you just want to take my word for it? Pretty much every Greek textbook I have read has a blurb about...

Interesting direction this conversation is going.... In any event, I think most agree that the Syriac version of the scriptures were translated from Koine Greek. Thus, the original was Koine. Wikipedia states, It seems to me that most agree that while Syriac versions of the Bible were...

I'll have to agree with Old Jack on the issue of the manuscripts. I have been studying the Scriptures for decades both personally and formally. I have never read or heard of any scholar arguing that John, Paul or Peter originally penned their letters in anything but Koine. I am sure there are...

Noddimus, I cannot be held liable if your arguments are convoluted, improperly intertwined or nonsensical. Clearly the argument about the reliablitity of Colwell's Rule is entirely distinct as to whether or not that rule applies to John 1:1. I was making clear statements about the reliability...

Um, no. The books of the NT were not written in Hebrew. This is completely and totally false. You are basing your views on a faulty premise. Really? You are going to base your argument against me around a type-o? If I felt like I had to "ignore" stuff in the Bible to hold a theological...

No, no dear friend. I laid out the conversation as it unfolded. I declared Colwell's Rule to be irrefutable. You posted an objection to this based on Origen and then, quoting my statement that Colwell's Rule was irrefutable, you said, Now, 1 +1 = 2. And my comment that Colwell's Rule is...

Well, nodhead keeps trying to plow his heifer, but it is of no use. I dont play da foo. When I discuss Colwell's Rule and claim it to be "irrefutable" and your response is essentially that such a statement is an attempt to "refute" Wallace, it sure seems like you are claiming Wallace does not...

This site is a Christian site (not a generic "religious site") for discussions and debate. If people are abusive and refuse to abide by the rules they agreed to when they created their account, then the problem is on their end. The rules exist to make this a happy and healthy place for...

First, let's deal with the quote you clearly do not understand... As I mentioned to you before, Colwell's Rule does not demand definiteness, but only allows for definiteness under the type of construction we see in John 1:1. This is contrary to many JW's who want to argue that the lack of the...

Thanks Floyd. I'd be happy to share some titles from my perspective as well if you are interested in reading a different view on this matter. I agree this is not a matter of salvation, nor something to be overly concerned about. Thanks for your kind words.

nothead, Colwell's rule is pretty irrefutable. The fact is that we have many variants that are written both ways. There are some variants that have the definite predicate nominative preceding the copulative and some with it following the copulative. When it follows the copulative, it has the...

Jack, I tried explaining Colwell's Rule in detail with this lot. Might as well spend your time picking burrs off a donkey's rear. Ha!

Well, fortunately for us Trinitarians, it doesn't matter one way or another which variant you go with. Clearly, monogenes Theos (which is most likely) devastates your views, but monogenes hueos does not impact ours as there is a wealth of texts that testify to Christ's divinity. Unfortunately...

Vale, I appreciate your point, but am not sure I agree. I am not accusing you of Mariolatry. However, Paul seemed to indicate that people could wrongly exalt servants of Christ in divisive and harmful ways. He seems quite distressed about this fact in 1 Corinthians 3. Again, my point here...

nothead, You are so self-contradictory its almost humorous. First, your very incorrect in your view on textual criticism. It is one thing to have someone quote a verse with a particular wording and another to find an actual NT book or series of books (on multiple occasions) that has it...

Floyd, It appears you are taking my comments and tone the wrong way. I am not angry and I am not trying to belittle you. I am asking questions that, for the most part, you do not answer and then get upset that I am making assumptions about your beliefs. I do not know why my comments tend to...

nothead, I see you are still diligent on your Google web surfin' studies. Nothin like being convinced of a position and then randomly searching the web until you find "Jack the Bear" that validates what you already have determined to believe regardless of what Scripture and scholars teach. I...

nothead, There are two primary variants for this verse but four total. The first and one most accepted by NA27 is monogenes Theos (one and only God) as it is found in the earliest texts such as P66 (about 200 AD) and P75 and some 4th and 5th century documents. It is also quoted by pretty...

nothead, I see you are still at your nutty ways. There are thousands of textual variants and I assure you they are not all related to the deity of Jesus. However, with some that do point to the deity of Jesus, sometimes the more reliable texts are those that affirm Christ's deity. However, I...

SL, I understand. I think we are probably saying the same thing in different ways. I think both of us are claiming that we should love the Word of God with all that we are, but we should make sure that we don't lose sight of why we study the Word. I just don't know that missing the purpose...