What the Bible realy teaches

Originally posted by FMF
The evidence is the text as it has been translated by "most translators".

evidence of what FMF?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
evidence of what FMF?

Evidence of how it ought to be translated.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I am not being defensive, i simply find your method of enquire tedious.

Well it brings us back to the initial question. Why should anyone accept the view of the one translator you have chosen to cite over the view of "most translators"?

Originally posted by FMF
Evidence of how it ought to be translated.

well please produce the evidence so that we can make an evaluation.

Originally posted by FMF
Well it brings us back to the initial question. Why should anyone accept the view of the one translator you have chosen to cite over the view of "most translators"?

on the basis of evidence FMF

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
well please produce the evidence so that we can make an evaluation.

The way it has been translated by most translators is the "evidence".

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
on the basis of evidence FMF

"German Bible translator L. Reinhardt" makes a claim that you happen to happen to agree with. "Most translators" would undoubtedly say he was wrong to say that their work was "false".

Originally posted by FMF
The way it has been translated by most translators is the "evidence".

evidence of what? accurate translation, erroneous translation, religious bias in translation? evidence of what dear FMF?

Originally posted by FMF
"German Bible translator L. Reinhardt" makes a claim that you happen to happen to agree with. "Most translators" would undoubtedly say he was wrong to say that their work was "false".

so they would.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
evidence of what? accurate translation, erroneous translation, religious bias in translation? evidence of what dear FMF?

Presumably you think that the way "German Bible translator L. Reinhardt" translates it is "evidence" of something? That is why you cited his view, surely?

Originally posted by johnnylongwoody
Ok, here is just one example.

When Jesus was crucified and he was speaking to the two
people crucified with him. He said to one of them,

Truly I tell you today you will be with me in paradise.

Experts disagree with the way and the context in which Jesus said those words.

Some say he meant......TODAY you will be with me in paradise.
...[text shortened]... that is a very simple example of how men have argued
for centuries over a small piece of text.

Just plain logic will tell you the comma should be after Today...

Originally posted by FMF
Presumably you think that the way "German Bible translator L. Reinhardt" translates it is "evidence" of something? That is why you cited his view, surely?

No deflections, please answer the question FMF, evidence of what?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
evidence of what? accurate translation, erroneous translation, religious bias in translation? evidence of what dear FMF?

Evidence of the "consensus" you said that needs to be reached.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
No deflections, please answer the question FMF, evidence of what?

there is no deflection. If the way "German Bible translator L. Reinhardt" translates it is "evidence", then the way "most translators translate it is "evidence" to the contrary.

Originally posted by FMF
Evidence of the "consensus" you said that needs to be reached.

so the way it has been translated is evidence of a consensus, hardly FMF, as you point, out the scholar I cited states quite the opposite , so that it is clearly not evidence of a consensus, so I will ask you again, the way that it has been translated is evidence of what?