Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhy do you always want to reference the Greek text like you are a professional translator? You aren't even well enough versed in English to translate from Greek to English with the skill needed to argue what the text says(no offense.)
sorry uninterested in your dogma, make reference to the Greek text, otherwise we
shall conclude you have no idea what the text actually says.
Stick to arguing what you know because I doubt if the scripture really differs much from translations done by lingual scholars who would know the actual meaning in context and not just one word hiccups. You can't translate word for word from Greek to English.
Conclusion: One or two words being different, out of context, is hardly a basis for an argument.
Just shedding my perspective... one not coming from dogma.
-Removed-I am saying that i am uninterested in a theological premise for making assumptions
about the text, i am interested in what the text actually states. Yes i believe that the
phrase 'I AM', and any significance attributed to it is the result of religious dogma and
bias in translation.
2 edits
Originally posted by tomtom232So now you are telling me what i know and what i do not know? Look, I can read
Why do you always want to reference the Greek text like you are a professional translator? You aren't even well enough versed in English to translate from Greek to English with the skill needed to argue what the text says(no offense.)
Stick to arguing what you know because I doubt if the scripture really differs much from translations done by lingual sc ardly a basis for an argument.
Just shedding my perspective... one not coming from dogma.
Greek, I can read English, i understand Greek construct, i understand English
construct, do you? no? well no offence, but you dont know what you are talking
about. The rest of your text tells me that you dont know what you are talking about
because if you did, you would have made reference to the Greek text and you haven't.
I have studied it, in depth, you have not, your opinions are irrelevant. No offence,
just saying, your perspective is one of ignorance, as is self evident from your text.
for example
Conclusion: One or two words being different, out of context, is hardly a basis for an
argument.
what are you talking about? what words are out of context? what has context even
got to do with it?
Originally posted by tomtom232Wait, so you're claiming that an in-depth understanding of a text and it's meaning does not require knowing what the text originally, actually said? Yikes!
Why do you always want to reference the Greek text like you are a professional translator? You aren't even well enough versed in English to translate from Greek to English with the skill needed to argue what the text says(no offense.)
Stick to arguing what you know because I doubt if the scripture really differs much from translations done by lingual sc ...[text shortened]... ardly a basis for an argument.
Just shedding my perspective... one not coming from dogma.
1 edit
-Removed-Your absolutely correct, why bother, but then again, i only know what the text says, i dont
need to 'feel', the words, i can use my mind to reason, i dont need to take it upon trust
that the translation is accurate, i can just merrily go along in blissful ignorance, i dont
need to substantiate my arguments linguistically or textually, i have my dogma to
make arguments based on inaccurate translation, for me. Your absolutely correct, why
bother.