quote:

ORIGINAL: SealedEternal

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi


You have, as anticipated, already demonstrated that it doesn't matter. I will save my time and effort for those who are interested in an honest debate.

An "honest" debate means that you present a position when you're repeatedly asked instead of trying to change the subject. You don't want to debate what the text of God's Word says but would rather hide behind some elites who claim it doesn't actually mean what it says.

SealedEternal

quote:


Greetings benelchi,

I honor your appeal ... and I will do my best to honor your terms ... I find them to be fair. I give to each person posting here the right to express themselves as best they can and I try to give each one my honest and heartfelt response. As the Lord gives me the time: Let us debate.


Thanks ...


Huckfinn

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

quote:

ORIGINAL: SealedEternal

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi


You have, as anticipated, already demonstrated that it doesn't matter. I will save my time and effort for those who are interested in an honest debate.

An "honest" debate means that you present a position when you're repeatedly asked instead of trying to change the subject. You don't want to debate what the text of God's Word says but would rather hide behind some elites who claim it doesn't actually mean what it says.

SealedEternal

I did not change the subject, I stated my position about the rules for the debate in my very first post on this topic. You so far have rejected the rules, so their clearly will be no honest debate from you.

Again for the record, this is what I said:

I am open to an honest debate on this topic if you are. A serious and honest debate would be far more enjoyable for me and would be something in which I would be happy to engage in providing that only credible sources for the arguments are allowed. And by credible source I mean that an argument based on Greek grammar should be supported by someone who is an academically accepted expert in Biblical Greek, like a translator involved on the committee any major biblical translation, a Greek professor at any major university, or someone who has been published in any academically accepted biblical Greek journal. Claims based on Hebrew linguistics, or claims based on archeological finds should come from sources equally as credible.

quote:


Great, that'll settle it.

SealedEternal

quote:

If I provide quotes from the writings of the early church that contradict some of your positions, will you abandon those positions unless you can find support from the early church writings for the position you hold? Or if not from their writings, from the writings of accepted scholars?

quote:

ORIGINAL: keepingfaith

quote:

If I provide quotes from the writings of the early church that contradict some of your positions, will you abandon those positions unless you can find support from the early church writings for the position you hold? Or if not from their writings, from the writings of accepted scholars?

If you cannot find support from the early church for the teachings you are presenting here... will you agree to abandon those positions?

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

quote:


Great, that'll settle it.

SealedEternal

I would hope, but somehow I really doubt it. I fully suspect you to continue make the claims you make even after people check and find out you have misled them.


For everyone else, Theyer's Lexicon says on page 492, second column, 9th line under the definition for ðᾱò:

"by hyperbole i.q. the great majority, the multitude"

quote:

In other words, I will base my understanding for scripture on sound reasoning and not just my personal opinion, will you?

quote:

"by hyperbole i.q. the great majority, the multitude"

quote:



I am open to an honest debate on this topic if you are. A serious and honest debate would be far more enjoyable for me and would be something in which I would be happy to engage in providing that only credible sources for the arguments are allowed. And by credible source I mean that an argument based on Greek grammar should be supported by someone who is an academically accepted expert in Biblical Greek, like a translator involved on the committee any major biblical translation, a Greek professor at any major university, or someone who has been published in any academically accepted biblical Greek journal. Claims based on Hebrew linguistics, or claims based on archeological finds should come from sources equally as credible.

I do expect that if you decide to engage in this kind of debate, you will be alone in defending the position you hold. Do you honestly believe that SE or Keepingfaith would be willing to discontinue arguing points for which they cannot find any support from any experts in the field of study on which their claims are based? Keepingfaith's "EVERYONE" argument is a great example of one of the unsupportable arguments that she refuses to drop. I really doubt that they would be willing to engage in this kind of debate if it meant giving up their "favorite" arguments.

quote:

Thank you SE and Keepingfaith for so clearly demonstrating the truth of my statement to Huckfinn. I believe your responses are quite revealing to many reading this thread.

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi


Thank you SE and Keepingfaith for so clearly demonstrating the truth of my statement to Huckfinn. I believe your responses are quite revealing to many reading this thread.

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

quote:

ORIGINAL: SealedEternal

I hope they do. So you're saying if they find that Thayer says it's an all inclusive term, then they may assume that you're teaching falsely?

SealedEternal

If they find that that Theyer says it is always an all inclusive term then, yes. However, since I have the book on my bookself, I know for a fact that it does not say what you have told people it says and I welcome the opportunity to have people to check it for themselves.

The references is "Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament" by Joseph H. Thayer. ISBN 978-1-56563-209-7

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

quote:



I am open to an honest debate on this topic if you are. A serious and honest debate would be far more enjoyable for me and would be something in which I would be happy to engage in providing that only credible sources for the arguments are allowed. And by credible source I mean that an argument based on Greek grammar should be supported by someone who is an academically accepted expert in Biblical Greek, like a translator involved on the committee any major biblical translation, a Greek professor at any major university, or someone who has been published in any academically accepted biblical Greek journal. Claims based on Hebrew linguistics, or claims based on archeological finds should come from sources equally as credible.

I do expect that if you decide to engage in this kind of debate, you will be alone in defending the position you hold. Do you honestly believe that SE or Keepingfaith would be willing to discontinue arguing points for which they cannot find any support from any experts in the field of study on which their claims are based? Keepingfaith's "EVERYONE" argument is a great example of one of the unsupportable arguments that she refuses to drop. I really doubt that they would be willing to engage in this kind of debate if it meant giving up their "favorite" arguments.

Thank you SE and Keepingfaith for so clearly demonstrating the truth of my statement to Huckfinn. I believe your responses are quite revealing to many reading this thread.

quote:

ORIGINAL: keepingfaith

quote:

Thank you SE and Keepingfaith for so clearly demonstrating the truth of my statement to Huckfinn. I believe your responses are quite revealing to many reading this thread.

There is not a more credible source than Jesus. His Words need no interpretation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: AbbyGrace

quote:

ORIGINAL: keepingfaith

quote:

Thank you SE and Keepingfaith for so clearly demonstrating the truth of my statement to Huckfinn. I believe your responses are quite revealing to many reading this thread.

There is not a more credible source than Jesus. His Words need no interpretation.

When, one clearly doesnt understand, yes...it does need interpretation.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SealedEternal

quote:

ORIGINAL: AbbyGrace

quote:

ORIGINAL: keepingfaith

quote:

Thank you SE and Keepingfaith for so clearly demonstrating the truth of my statement to Huckfinn. I believe your responses are quite revealing to many reading this thread.

There is not a more credible source than Jesus. His Words need no interpretation.

When, one clearly doesnt understand, yes...it does need interpretation.

Does anyone not understand "Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and he who marries one who is divorced from a husband commits adultery”? How many "interpretations" are there of such an unequivocal statement?

SealedEternal

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

Well to begin with every one of the translators of the NASB (whose translation you quoted here) disagrees with your understanding of this verse i.e. the men who took the Greek and translated in to these English words you have quoted.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SealedEternal

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

Well to begin with every one of the translators of the NASB (whose translation you quoted here) disagrees with your understanding of this verse i.e. the men who took the Greek and translated in to these English words you have quoted.

Their translation doesn't at all indicate that they disagreed with me. Perhaps they rationalized in their minds (as many do) that it doesn't actually mean what they translated, but there is no doubt that they agreed with me that the term there is all inclusive. If they thought the text itself was referring to "some" or "most" they surely would have translated it that way, but they knew the term meant "everyone".

SealedEternal

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

quote:

ORIGINAL: SealedEternal

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

Well to begin with every one of the translators of the NASB (whose translation you quoted here) disagrees with your understanding of this verse i.e. the men who took the Greek and translated in to these English words you have quoted.

Their translation doesn't at all indicate that they disagreed with me. Perhaps they rationalized in their minds (as many do) that it doesn't actually mean what they translated, but there is no doubt that they agreed with me that the term there is all inclusive. If they thought the text itself was referring to "some" or "most" they surely would have translated it that way, but they knew the term meant "everyone".

SealedEternal

Here is the list of NASB translators, would you like to provide one reference from anyone of of these men that supports the grammar claim you have made i.e. the claim that πᾱς MUST always mean "everyone" without exception; most scholars will accept that πᾱς can mean an all inclusive "everyone", but reject your claim that it MUST. Some of these men even support Piper's view on divorce and remarriage, but they still don't agree with your contention about the Greek grammar. Not one of them.

Dr. Peter Ahn
Dr. Warren Allen
Dr. Gleason Archer
Dr. Herman Austel
Dr. Kenneth Lee Barker
Dr. Fred Bush
Dr. David L. Cooper
Dr. Richard W. Cramer
Dr. Edward R. Dalglish
Dr. Charles Lee Feinberg
Dr. Harvey Finley
Dr. Paul Gray
Dr. Edward F. Harrison
Dr. John Hartley
Dr. F. B Huey, Jr.
Dr. Charles Isbell
Dr. David W. Kerr
Dr. William L. Lane
Dr. Timothy Lin
Dr. Oscar Lowry
Dr. Elmer Martens
Dr. Henry R. Moeller
Dr. Reuben A. Olson
Dr. J. Barton Payne
Dr. Walter Penner
Dr. John Rea
Dr. W.L. Reed
Dr. Robert N. Schaper
Dr. Moisés Silva
Dr. Ralph L. Smith
Dr. Merrill C. Tenney
Dr. Robert L. Thomas
Dr. George Townsend
Dr. Bruce Waltke
Dr. Lowell C. Wendt
Dr. William C. Williams
Dr. Herbert M. Wolf
Dr. Kenneth Wuest
Dr. Fred Young
Dr. Timothy L. Deahl
Dr. Paul Enns
Dr. Buist M. Fanning
Dr. Thomas Finley
Dr. Osvaldo Garcia
Dr. Kenneth Hanna
Dr. W. Hall Harris
Rev. Eduardo Hernandez
Dr. Harold Hoehner
Dr. J. Carl Laney
Dr. David K. Lowery
Dr. Ted Martin
Dr. H. Bruce Stokes
Dr. Duane Wetzler
Dr. Dale Wheeler
Dr. Don Wilkins

Dr. George Blankenbaker
Dr. Frank G. Carver
Dr. Robert Saucy


Critical consultants to NASB Update
Dr. C.S. Lovett
Dr. Robert Sloan
Dr. Donald Verleur
Dr. James White

You have to love statement I bolded in SE post. What he is saying is that all of the translators of the NASB of misunderstood their own translation, but he (someone who doesn't know Greek) was able to understand what all of these well studied biblical Greek and Hebrew scholars have missed!

Thanks again SE for so aptly demonstrating my point!

quote:

Well to begin with every one of the translators of the NASB (whose translation you quoted here) disagrees with your understanding of this verse i.e. the men who read the Greek and translated it into these English words that you have quoted.

quote:

ORIGINAL: iwillfearnoevil

i go away for a week and keepingfaith and sealedeternal are still exclusively quoting certain scripture to try to fit it in their argument conveniently not quoting the various exceptions by Jesus and Paul ...

quote:

ORIGINAL: iwillfearnoevil

i go away for a week and keepingfaith and sealedeternal are still exclusively quoting certain scripture to try to fit it in their argument conveniently not quoting the various exceptions by Jesus and Paul ...

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaveW
And I always thought the New Covenant had more Grace than the Mosaic

quote:

ORIGINAL: benelchi

quote:

(Quote keepingfaith Reference to Early Church and Remarriage After Divorce)
I highly regard the writings of the earliest church 0