Search results

Wrong. Knowledge does not necessarily progress linearly. The Dead Sea scrolls were discovered in the 20th century. Ditto to Archmedes calculus. The Rosetta Stone in the 19th century. While we lost the formula for Roman cement, far more durable than modern cement, you must concede it could be...

Modern translators know Hebrew and Greek - as well as modern 21st century American - far better than those from half a Millenia ago.

It’s odd double standards you have, AS IF it doesn’t apply EQUALLY to other English translations.

No one should expect more from a translation.

It doesn’t make sense to you because you are putting your doctrine before God’s word. For instance, putting aside this one point, the overwhelming Biblical evidence is against the trinity. Just 3 points of consideration: The trinity is not in the Bible - not the word, not the doctrine. The...

Your insecurity is showing.

If one wants to, one can synthesize any doctrine by this procedure. Hardly proof. Given that his name is NOT Emmanuel (but Jesus), it Scripturally proves the opposite of what you claim. Beyond your idolatrous commitment to your heresy, I don’t know why you don’t get this. Have a nice day.

You do know that Jesus did not speak the king's English, right?

I will never use the KJV - even inclusively.

Putting aside your Ad Homenim, scripture does not differentiate between sin - except lack of forgiveness and blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. Your doctrine proliferations doctrine beyond God's words. What, to use common sense? If I am to believe He's so inept, how am I in the same breath...

That is the accusation. I don't by it. I prefer modern "thought" translations for readability. Literal word translations are too choppy for me to enjoy. Without getting embroiled in doctrinal disputes, an example of the syntax is like this. Jesus was outside in the rain. Jesus then came inside...

Who is God talking to? Not us.

You are projecting. It is you who have failed to prove this claim Guess what. The son of God was not called Emmanuel. You are so desperate to proof your heresy. Sad. This conversation is going nowhere. I’ll let you have the last word.

I already have proved it. You just don’t have ears to hear.

Odd that you suppose God would allow one type of sin and even many types of sin but not this type of sin. :eek: Such is the power of trinitarian idolatry. :mad: In another thread I asked this question and wonder what your answer is, A or B? A. Bring people to Jesus, even if they do not...

Can't it just be error? I am certain there was conspiracy in the 4th century.

This is not in Scripture. Where do trinitarians even get the idea the Isaiah verse applies to the Messiah? HINT: It does not. Also, "God with us" hardly means literally but rather God will light our path, protect us and ensure victory.

It's so funny how don't realize your own hypocrisy; don't hold yourself to standards you hold others to.

Your opinion not a quote from Scripture.

Well, there is the hatefulness others have noticed. Do women ‘spit leaven out once they’ve swallowed it?’ What does that expression even mean? You seem to have pre-determined that there is no way to resolve conflict with, dare I say it? These men? I pray God’s spirit bring you peace.