Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Originally Posted by Eusebius In the second place, he doesn't even understand the role of an adjective in Greek as I found out about a year or so ago in dealing with him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel O. McClellan
Beg pardon?
You don't remember me asking you to translate the Greek of Matthew 25:46? and you translated the adjective aionios as "eternal"?
No, I can't prove I went to Oxford at all. See here anyway. And my third degree? Also, knowing where I went to school tells you next to nothing about my education. You don't know jack about my professors or what they taught or promoted.
Too bad you didn't take a couple classes on humility. Knowledge without love is nothing. So you went to Wolfson College which was founded in 1965. Good for you.
Quote:
I'm not making anything up. I've demonstrated everything I've asserted.
Too bad you didn't take a couple classes on humility. Knowledge without love is nothing. So you went to Wolfson College which was founded in 1965. Good for you.
Wolfson College is one of almost forty different colleges at Oxford University to which all students are assigned. I lived at the Oxford Centre for Hebrew and Jewish Studies and took classes from professors associated with a variety of different colleges. You obviously don't know anything about Oxford University, so don't pretend to poo-poo it because you're frustrated with me.
You don't remember me asking you to translate the Greek of Matthew 25:46? and you translated the adjective aionios as "eternal"?
That's because that's what it means. You went off on a deranged rant about the absolutely laughable Concordant Version, if I remember correctly, and appealed to a bunch of pseudo-academic nonsense in an attempt to support an argument you don't even understand. If I recall, I gave you the opportunity to show me you knew Greek with any facility whatsoever and you refused. Let's try again. Translate this sentence from a first year Greek grammar and parse all the verbal elements:
εἰσέλθετε εἰς ἀγορὰν δῶρα παρά γε τῶν ἀδικούντων ληφόμενοι
That's because that's what it means. You went off on a deranged rant about the absolutely laughable Concordant Version, if I remember correctly, and appealed to a bunch of pseudo-academic nonsense in an attempt to support an argument you don't even understand.
I do not know Greek and cannot say for sure what aionios means. But if the 'eternal' punishment in Matthew 25:46 is not eternal then neither is the 'eternal' life in the very same sentence. One wonders which ends first. Maybe there is only so much room in heaven and the righteous 'sheep' have to be euthanized to make room for the unrighteous 'goats'. Or maybe the sheep go first so the Lord can have some peace and quiet before bringing in those raucous goats. Or could there be an overlap where the righteous, who know their days are numbered, suddenly have to put up with the unrighteous, who presumably do get to hang around forever (?) No wonder there will be a war in heaven!
Or could it be that one fine day the Lord gets tired of the whole business and just snuffs everybody's candle...
Again I do not know Greek (and have forgotten most of the Latin I once knew) but when translating a word one way leads to such a wacky set of theological options, it seems to me that it is time to open Occam's shaving kit. Ainios really means eternal.
That does not logically follow that if one is anonymous that they therefore cannot be trusted or cannot be correct. Many people in life remain anonymous or give themselves a fake name so as to protect their privacy.
I didn't know I called the writer "an expert witness."
I wouldn't trust Daniel with a 100 foot pole. In the first place, he can't control his emotions. In the second place, he doesn't even understand the role of an adjective in Greek as I found out about a year or so ago in dealing with him.
I thought the writer of the article did a much better job at explaining the two genealogies than alt thinker did. But, hey, I'm biased :-)
I may not agree with Daniel on a spiritual basis, but that is greatly different from disagreeing with him concerning his understanding of Greek and Hebrew. Are you claiming YOU have formal education in those languages? If so, provide your credentials so that those of us who don't know have a better perspective on which to balance the arguments.
Right now you've only provided readers with strong reason to doubt your version.
And, unfortunately, it is also true that many people hide their identities because they have no credentials or they know their identity itself would make their argument suspect.
For the present, to those of us who aren't so erudite, your arguments have no substance, just fluff.
I do not know Greek and cannot say for sure what aionios means. But if the 'eternal' punishment in Matthew 25:46 is not eternal then neither is the 'eternal' life in the very same sentence. One wonders which ends first. Maybe there is only so much room in heaven and the righteous 'sheep' have to be euthanized to make room for the unrighteous 'goats'. Or maybe the sheep go first so the Lord can have some peace and quiet before bringing in those raucous goats. Or could there be an overlap where the righteous, who know their days are numbered, suddenly have to put up with the unrighteous, who presumably do get to hang around forever (?) No wonder there will be a war in heaven!
Or could it be that one fine day the Lord gets tired of the whole business and just snuffs everybody's candle...
Again I do not know Greek (and have forgotten most of the Latin I once knew) but when translating a word one way leads to such a wacky set of theological options, it seems to me that it is time to open Occam's shaving kit. Ainios really means eternal.
LOL!!! I can hardly stop laughing! Too soon to rep again.
Here is another possibility. God came into the world as the man Jesus, there was no son of God. Therefore, there would be no past history for Jesus.
That would mean both genealogies are wrong. This is compatible with my idea that the two genealogies were each created by the respective authors for their own particular purposes.
Here is another possibility. God came into the world as the man Jesus, there was no son of God. So, there would be no past history for Jesus.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jesus wasn't born.
