-->
@Stephen
Why do you want to know? What do you think it means?
Do you think it is incorrect or that it has no merit?
Who Can Explain This Verse To Me?
Posts
Total:
55
-->
@Stephen
Why do you want to know? What do you think it means?
Do you think it is correct or something else?
-->
@Stephen
Would it matter? Why would it matter?
-->
@Stephen
Why would it matter which parts it applies to?
Are you wanting to add parts or delete parts? Or do think someone else has and wonder whether they have either received curses or been deleted from the book of life?
Do you have a pastoral concern for someone - or perhaps even yourself?
-->
@SkepticalOne
That is a delightfully full assertion. Do you have any support for this from credible experts or is it something you came up with all by yourself?
-->
@Stephen
Careful, it is a trick question.
-->
@Tradesecret
Why do you want to know?
What doyou think it means?
Do you think it is correct orsomething else?
Would it matter?
Why would it matter?
Why would it matter which parts it applies to?
Are you wanting to add parts or delete parts?
Or do think someone else has and wonder whetherthey have either received curses or been deleted from the book of life?
Do you have a pastoral concern for someone - orperhaps even yourself?
Typical. I ask a question and you respond to my ONE SINGLE QUESTION with NINE OF YOUR OWN.
hahahhahahahhahahahhahah my ribs hurt
-->
@Tradesecret
It could be either, but since I don't know to what post you're responding, it is impossible for me to answer which! ;-)
-->
@Tradesecret
What would you consider to be a "credible expert"?Do you have any support for this from credible experts
-->
@Stephen
Someone who has studied and been peer reviewed by his field. Not wikapedia or an armchair theologian.
-->
@Stephen
There is no point in trying to answer a question when it is posed quite vaguely.
Hence, why I asked you the purpose behind wanting to know what it means.
Obviously, you have an agenda, I just want to know what that agenda is before I start answering the question.
Surely, if your question is bone fide, that is not too much to ask?
What do you think it means? And why does it matter?
If you point is simply to prove the bible has contradictions or that Christians don't think about where the NT comes from, then why don't you pose it that way, rather than closing down the discussion by attempting to make people look dumb? One of the principle rules of debate or an argument is that if either side closes down, then the debate has been lost by both sides. You seem to be losing all of your debates.
-->
@SkepticalOne
Added: 09.27.18 01:29AM
--> @Stephen
Yes, of course. The author of Revelation had no clue his book would be lashed to others in a future canon. His warning was meant to protect his writing only.
-->
@Tradesecret
Yes, of course. The author of Revelation had no clue his book would be lashed to others in a future canon. His warning was meant to protect his writing only.That is a delightfully full assertion. Do you have any support for this from credible experts or is it something you came up with all by yourself?
Given that the New Testament canon was not determined until roughly three hundred years after Revelation was written, it's safe to say the writer of revelation had no inkling of a new canon or that his book would be in it.
-->
@SkepticalOne
How can you be so sure? you have not given a reason but an opinion. This is a debate isn't? Possible? Plausible? Probable? I say no on at least two out of three cases.
-->
@Tradesecret
Are you questioning the authorship date of Revelation or when the NT Canon was agreed upon? There are fairly well accepted date ranges for these events and neither are really disputed by serious scholars.
On the other hand, if you think the author of Revelation could see into the future then that 's your opinion in need of validation. You're confused if you think I need to defend against unsubstantiated insinuations of the supernatural.
-->
@Tradesecret
There is no point in trying to answer a question when it is posed quite vaguely.
I asked could someone explain it to me.
SkepticalOne had no problem with my question. He replied right of the bat and not with 9 billion questions of his own before he would actually get around to answering the question
Then why don't you pose it that way, rather than closing down the discussion by attempting to make people look dumb?
It is straightforward request for an explanation. You seem to be struggling with it. Who have I “made look dumb”?
You seem to be losing all of your debates.
That would be in your opinion... again. opinions do not win arguments.
I happen to agree here. I don't believe I need another explanation and you haven't got one either.
here :
SkepticalOne Interpolation and redaction were known to exist to the author of Revelation (whichI recognize one of the verses above is from)and this was his attempt to keephis writing unchanged.
-->
@Tradesecret
What would you consider to be a "credible expert"?
Someone who has studied and been peer reviewed by his field.Not wikipedia or an armchair theologian.
And also just happens to agree with you on biblical issues, no doubt.
Who "peer reviewed " the 4 gospels?
"play a central role in scholarly publishing. Peer review helps validate research, establish a method by which it can be evaluated, and increase networking possibilities within research communities. Despite criticisms, peer review is still the only widely accepted method for research validation".
Not a single mention of faith also being a requirement or playing a "central role" in scholarly validation. So one can take it for granted then that ""because the bible says so" is not going to pass a peer review either is it.
I have told you. I believe there is beyond doubt a true historicity to the gospels and the characters there in. It has to be weeded out is all.
-->
@SkepticalOne
sorry, skepticalone, you made the assertion so it is up to you to put up or back down and apologise.
I never said anything and you know it. So either put up and back up your claim or acknowledge it is only speculation based on no evidence at all.
-->
@Stephen
I asked could someone explain it to me.
SkepticalOne had no problem with my question. He replied right of the bat and not with 9 billion questions of his own before he would actually get around to answering the question
Yes, skepticalone did answer. Obviously, it was not a problem for him or her because he or she is coming from a similar position to yourself. Me on the other hand do see your posing of questions vague, which they are. I notice you did not bother trying to answer them - even in good faith. This leads me to conclude you did not ask in good faith but had an ulterior motive.
Then why don't you pose it that way, rather than closing down the discussion by attempting to make people look dumb?
It is straightforward request for an explanation. You seem to be struggling with it. Who have I “made look dumb”?
I think your intention was to close down everyone's argument who was opposed to you. You already had your understanding or interpretation and just wanted others to put up something so you could throw it down. Hence, why I asked you what your position was and possibly why you chose not to answer in good faith but resorted rather to attack.
You seem to be losing all of your debates.
That would be in your opinion... again. opinions do not win arguments.
Yes, it is my opinion. and others as well. It may not be your opinion but I am not sure you have yet succeeded in winning any arguments - because you turn people of with your aggressive attitude. You close down people's views rather than engage in meaningful dialogue unless of course it is someone who agrees with you.
I happen to agree here. I don't believe I need another explanation and you haven't got one either.
I am simply asking you to explain what you are trying to achieve by asking such questions and once you have done so, I am only asking that tell us how you came to that conclusion. I don't think that is asking too much. you are clearly much more clever than everyone else on this site and we need to think about the wisdom that you are putting forward.
SkepticalOne Interpolation and redaction were known to exist to the author of Revelation (whichI recognize one of the verses above is from)and this was his attempt to keephis writing unchanged.
-->
@Tradesecret
Me on the other hand do see your posing of questions vague,
Well, such is the nature of the internet. I can’t help in how you interpret and or translated text. I have witnessed your diabolical attempts at interpretations with words such as “touch” to you somehow translates as “light”: Incredible.
I think your intention was to close down everyone's argument who was opposed to you.
Again, that is how you have read it. I don’t mind but it was a GENUINE simple request for C-L-A-R-I-T-Y.
You already had your understanding or interpretation and just wanted others to put up something so you could throw it down.
Opinion and again,that is how you have read it. And you once again are wrong. I simply couldn’t make my mind up if or not these dire warnings were concerning the whole of the bible or just Revelation. I have had reasonable responses and yes, I have gone with the one that makes more sense -TO ME.
Yes, it is my opinion.and others as well.
And you and “others”are welcome to them. That is your right and I welcome them, it doesn’t mean I Am forced or obligated to accept them.
You close down people's views.
How have I done that!? How could I possibly stop someone putting their views on an internet open forum!? I am happy with the responses and this conversation or “argument” as you have put it, hasn’t closed down either, It has been continued.
I happen to agree here. I don't believe I need another explanation and you haven't got one either.
So what the hell is your problem? I said I got my answer, I made it clear then you accuse me of “closing down” other people’s views. It hasn’t stopped you continuing your “views” hasit? Here you are discussing me instead of the op. But please, you fire away if it makes you happy.
I am simply asking you to explain what you are trying to achieve by asking such questions
Explained earlier to you twice now, I believe.
I am only asking that tell us how you came to that conclusion.
It is the only one that makes sense. i.e. “this book” and not “books” plural, and of course the response from SkepticalOne
I don't think that is asking too much. you are clearly much more clever than everyone else on this site and we need to think about the wisdom that you are putting forward.
Flattery will get you everywhere ... but not in my case.
-->
@Tradesecret
My claims are substantiated. Thank you.
-->
@Stephen
to your 1st post.
it means anyone adding to their knowledge will also have their plagues "aswell".
-->
@Stephen
as to this post.
if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. Revelation 22:18-19. KJV.
first you need to understand a few things in this verse. 1 they are saying the book revelations is a prophesy. 2. their god will not become their knowing of their god's book of life. 3. the holy city, means their city/gathering you are not part of. because 'the things written' in the 'this book/bible'.
understanding these meanings i listed. the text means anyone who removes their text has to be one of them. and any person unlike them will be known as being unlike them.
example. the manuscripts have the hebrew letters for our LORD and CREATOR is YHVH. yet the 1611 translators removed HIS NAME and added two titles.
yet their kind did except their editing.
thus they took away words from the bible and those still editing the bible are allowed to continue doing so because they are excepted in their 'holy city'.
-->
@eash
example. the manuscripts have the hebrew letters for our LORD and CREATOR is YHVH. yet the 1611 translators removed HIS NAME and added two titles.yet their kind did except their editing.thus they took away words from the bible and those still editing the bible are allowed to continue doing so because they are excepted in their 'holy city'.
Extremely interesting eash.
Tell me, what else did they take away and add?
And what were the titles added?
-->
@Stephen
the king of egypts name was removed 22 times and the greek word pharaoh was added. Moses and Aaron would have known his name.
the word mountain was added over 300 times because the 300 times i am speaking about says there is a mountain/s in Israel. yet Moses went up a mount east of the jordan river to look at the Promised Land. the hill country.
sin is used wrong because only the 12 COMMANDMENTS needed a "sin" offering.
YHVH CALLS HIS TENT, A TENT for MEETING With HIM. HIS HOUSE too. yet we find the words tabernacle or temple. and people today say the temple mount.
the word man is DEFINED BY YHVH as I MADE man, male and female. yet the word man is used many times as to mean a male.
these are the big ones. i found a lot of times they word switch the names around. the biggest switching they did were thenames of the 12 tribes. to correct the brothers birth order comes from the maps we have today of the tribes. combine that knowledge as to how they camped around HIS TENT. then one can correct the names.