Search results

so you believe yourself to be Elijah, and pinseeker a prophet of Baal in this comparison? Just seems like you’re going to “eye for an eye”.

I never said I was “holier than thou”, that’s quite the stretch.

I hope that if ever lose my temper and partake in childish mockery. Someone calls me out on it.

OT principal of an eye for eye?

It’s a public forum, if you don’t like me calling you out on your rude behavior, ie name calling, report me

You believe childish mockery is the same as Jesus, the lamb of God, calling the Pharisees sons of devils and Herod a fox?

Seems like you are trying to justify why you can be rude back - ie name calling. It’s not a fruit of the spirit.

It’s a historical fact, whether you personally find it ludicrous or not. I said IF

Turn the other cheek, brother. No sense in getting too worked up.

Similarities are not sole reason for inclusion. Its inclusion was heavily debated, even more so than revelation. Its inclusion was disputed up until the fourth century. so it’s not ludicrous in that sense. As to the olivet discourse Contextually, it answers 2 questions - the destruction of...

Textual negotiation with the olivet discourse: LINGUISTICALLY Dictionaries, concordances, lexicons, commentaries, and the majority of English Bible translations overwhelmingly translate genea to mean the English equivalent generation - group of people living at the same time within Matthew...

sure....we will just have to agree to disagree. I never said strong's dictionary does not meet the basic definition of a dictionary. My point was that it doesn't meet the scholarly sense of a true lexicon because it provides only glosses - 1 or 2 word english equivalents, and not an exhaustive...

I disagree with the way you used the analogy. Birth pains do not signal that the birth is far off. That’s not a thing. The beginning of Birth pains signal the birth is in process of happening or closer to happening. Grammatically or linguistically why should “the end is not yet” be...

No, strongs is not a dictionary in that sense, and should not be used as such. The “definitions” provided by strongs concordance are “glosses”, and in the example you provided for g3778, it’s just a list of words, as to how it’s found translated into English without contextual usage. “This...

You seem to be arguing “not yet” means “not near”. That’s not true grammatically. You haven’t addressed this. The olivet discourses are harmonious, but not identical. “All these things” is context dependent, not “harmonizing dependent”. The gospel authors are making different points about the...

After further reviewing several lexicons and usages, I can concede, that grammatically, "this" is ambiguous enough to point spatially near to Jesus contemporary audience OR contextually near to those living through Matthew 24:4-33 Sure, then please show grammatically and/or contextually (not...

You are missing my point. I said redundant because of the way it was explained. Its redundant to say "the generation that sees all these things will not pass away until all these things occur". After further reviewing several lexicons and usages, I can concede, that grammatically, "this" is...

Not necessarily. Birth pains indicate the end is not now, not that it is not near. In other words. The beginning of birth pains (war, famine, pestilane, etc...) do not indicate the end has been realized. There is no requirement that the beginning of birth pains means that end is not near. You...

Right, you provided the "definition" from Strong's Exhaustive concordance. Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance isn't a lexicon in the traditional sense. The so-called “definitions” it provides are more accurately glosses—brief English equivalents that reflect how the King James Version (KJV)...

My point was that reading “this generation” to mean “the generation that sees all these things will not pass away until all these occur” is redundant. It would be redundant to read Matthew 23 - the generation on whom all this righteous blood shed falls will not pass away until all the...