Originally posted by RJHinds
It was you that did not understand the Holy Bible that I was trying to
explain to you. The only trouble I remember having is understanding
maybe one thiing you said and that was because you were not very
clear in your statement what you meant.
The only trouble I remember having is understanding
maybe one thiing you said and that was because you were not very
clear in your statement what you meant.
C'mon. At least exhibit a little integrity.
You read the following written by that pastor:
[quote]Recently I have been studying the Gospel of John noticed that John 3:16 was not in red. The passage before it is, but not John 3:16.r
To which you responded:
I wonder what translation he was looking at, if it was a red letter edition, that did not have John 3:16 in red.
Clearly it was a red letter edition, but you failed to understand this.
[/quote]
You read the following written by me:
[quote]It isn't that John said it to Nicodemus, rather the writer of John was making a general comment.
To which you responded:
I read the reference you gave very carefully. It does not say John said anything to Nicodemus.
Clearly I wasn't asserting that "John said it to Nicodemus", but you failed to understand this.
[/quote]
You read the following written by me:
[quote]It's my understanding that the original text does not include quotation marks....Some translations don't use quotation marks leaving it ambiguous, others attribute it to Jesus and others attribute it to John.
To which you responded with the following:
About the quotation marks, that is done because it is an english
translation and we use quotation marks in English when we repeat
what someone has said. The whole Hebrew and Greek original
text did not use quotation marks. There was no such thing back
then. It had not been invented at that time. Do more study before
you make these statements off the top of your head.
Clearly I understood that the original text did not have quotation marks, but you failed to understand this. To make matters worse, you capped it off with a snide remark.
[/quote]
So as I said, "Keep in mind that in the 'Who was (is) Jesus' thread, it was you that seemed to struggle to understand much of what you read."
You did show that you struggled to understand much of what you read as I've proven above. Instead of admitting it, you've shown a complete lack of integrity in denying it.
Clearly there was more than "maybe one thing" and it wasn't because I was
"not very clear in [my] statement what [I] meant" as you've asserted.
So set your pride aside and admit that you struggled to understand much of what you read. You should also seriously consider how well someone with reading skills that deficient could possibly understand the "Holy Bible".