For to us a child is born,
to us a son is given,
and the government will be on his shoulders.
And he will be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Isaiah 9:6
The text is rather interesting and is another of those texts used by those who are determined to impose a bias on scripture where none exists in the text.
The phrase that is of interest is 'Mighty God', which is prophetically applied to Jesus. I would like to ask those who know anything about the Bible why the text is not translated as Almighty God if it is to be assumed that it is made with reference to God the father?
Originally posted by CalJustIt is reflective of the type of argument that one is used to, when presented with a reasonable question it must be noted that Christians like divesgeester usually resort to this kind of irrelevancy, being devoid of reason they need to make some kind of emotive remark. The question that I ask myself is why? and the reasons are usually a lack of knowledge concerning the Bible and their professed beliefs, they believe something but have no idea why they believe it or they are wary that a cherished belief will be subject to scrutiny and forced to admit that it has no scriptural basis and they become emotional.
That is not an argument.
RC made a reasonable request, which deserves a reasoned, not emotional, response.
(Although I am still waiting for a reasoned response from RC to my PROCESS vs CONTENT argument...)
I did not respond to your text because it contained no scriptural references which i tried to make a case for including. If you include scriptural references, i will be happy to comment upon them if I can.
01 Feb 14
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWithout scriptural references there is no basis for argument?
I did not respond to your text because it contained no scriptural references which i tried to make a case for including. If you include scriptural references, i will be happy to comment upon them if I can.
🙄
Do you mean to say you have no opinions outside of biblical exegesis?
Again, 🙄
Edit - Afterthought: Actually, my point was to show that the same PROCESS used by JWs and all others can lead to different interpretations. This Thesis is, I would suggest, relevant to your innumerable threads trying to prove that your very specific interpretation is always the correct one! Surely you should be able to refute that thesis?
01 Feb 14
Originally posted by CalJustI am uninterested in arguing for arguments sake, I am interested in the Bible and accurate translation.
Without scriptural references there is no basis for argument?
🙄
Do you mean to say you have no opinions outside of biblical exegesis?
Again, 🙄
-Removed-Another irrelevancy, the question is not about Jehovahs witnesses, the question is about the translation of the term 'Mighty God'. You can read? you can comprehend what you read? You did attend school at least for some of the time? I repeat it if you are having difficulties understanding it,
why the text (Isaiah 9:6) is not translated as Almighty God if it is to be assumed that it is made with reference to God the father?
01 Feb 14
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI am not arguing for argument's sake either.
I am uninterested in arguing for arguments sake, I am interested in the Bible and accurate translation.
I was responding to YOUR thread which states - in detail - how you arrive at your particular interpretation of scripture.
But if you have no response, then that is also OK. None of us are perfect.
I suppose it is too much to expect you to acknowledge that you have no suitable reply, rather than the lame excuse: that would be arguing for argument's sake...