You don't read too good.Some of the subject was raised to eternal life and some of the subject was raised to eternal condemnation. What more can I say, how much more clearer can it be made?
The NASB has NONE of those raised being raised to eternal contempt.
I'm done wasting my time on stupidity. I'm pretty sure this is what the bible means by vain babblings.You don't read too good.
1 "Now at that time Michael, the great prince who stands guard over the sons of your people, will arise. And there will be a time of distress such as never occurred since there was a nation until that time; and at that time your people, everyone who is found written in the book, will be rescued. 2 Many of those who sleep in the dust of the ground will awake, these to everlasting life, but the others to disgrace and everlasting contempt."
What more can I say? How much more clearer can it be made? You want to interpret on the basis of verse 2 by itself; that's an invalid approach.
Your response is disappointing. You call "stupidity" what you have fostered by arguing over slightly-differing wordings. Instead of stating plainly what your issue is, you have jabbed and sparred, but now that I have responded with the same tone you used, and with a refutation of your position, you bug out.I'm done wasting my time on stupidity. I'm pretty sure this is what the bible means by vain babblings.
You're just proving my point over and over. You're throwing out proper grammar and twisting scripture to fit your view. Have at it with someone else.Your response is disappointing. You call "stupidity" what you have fostered by arguing over slightly-differing wordings. Instead of stating plainly what your issue is, you have jabbed and sparred, but now that I have responded with the same tone you used, and with a refutation of your position, you bug out.
Well, then, tuck your tail between your legs and run away.
I would say NLT or NIrV. The NIrV is a NIV meant for ESL individuals or younger Christians.What translation of the bible is the easiest to interpret?
You see it that way because you fail to put the verse in proper context. Likely due to your prejudice, which blinds you to the FACT that "these" in the NASB pertains to those who belong to God, the others away to eternal condemnation, same as KJV. Open your eyes, man. And stop inserting words that are not there, to try to prove your non-existent point.Some of the subject was raised to eternal life and some of the subject was raised to eternal condemnation. What more can I say, how much more clearer can it be made?
The NASB has NONE of those raised being raised to eternal contempt.
I don't have any prejudice, I don't care which way the resurrection goes. I didn't even notice there was a difference between the KJV and the NASB until I was going to post a verse from the NASB that might make it easier to understand and that's when I saw the two were different.You see it that way because you fail to put the verse in proper context. Likely due to your prejudice, which blinds you to the FACT that "these" in the NASB pertains to those who belong to God, the others away to eternal condemnation, same as KJV. Open your eyes, man. And stop inserting words that are not there, to try to prove your non-existent point.
Oh, really? You insisted on "all" multiple times and I pointed the fact out to you that the word is simply not there. Blind blind blind.I don't have any prejudice, I don't care which way the resurrection goes. I didn't even notice there was a difference between the KJV and the NASB until I was going to post a verse from the NASB that might make it easier to understand and that's when I saw the two were different.
I don't know where you keep coming up with me inserting words.
How would you prefer me make reference to all of the ones who were raised from the dead? How else can I say it. You do realize that all of the people weren't raised from the dead in that verse, only some of them were raised. Seriously I'm totally baffled by your comments.Oh, really? You insisted on "all" multiple times and I pointed the fact out to you that the word is simply not there. Blind blind blind.
We are NOT discussing those who were not raised. Red herring alert.How would you prefer me make reference to all of the ones who were raised from the dead? How else can I say it. You do realize that all of the people weren't raised from the dead in that verse, only some of them were raised. Seriously I'm totally baffled by your comments.
I'm sorry if I offended you, I'll let it go at thatWe are NOT discussing those who were not raised. Red herring alert.
You are insisting that in the NASB, all who are raised are all to eternal life, when the NASB does not say that. AT ALL.
How many times need you be informed that the "these" who are raised to eternal life belong to God?
The text plainly states the others are raised to eternal condemnation, but you keep denying it.
You have not offended me, you know I have a lot of respect for how you conduct yourself with all the criticism you take from others. It just baffles me that you so easily forget insisting the text says all when it does not, and not being able to see the point about who the "these" that are raised to eternal life are. It is plain as day to me; I do not even read the NASBI'm sorry if I offended you, I'll let it go at that![]()
What I did was quote Scripture.You're just proving my point over and over. You're throwing out proper grammar and twisting scripture to fit your view. Have at it with someone else.
One more attempt, this one is from the ESV.You have not offended me, you know I have a lot of respect for how you conduct yourself with all the criticism you take from others. It just baffles me that you so easily forget insisting the text says all when it does not, and not being able to see the point about who the "these" that are raised to eternal life are. It is plain as day to me; I do not even read the NASBYou brought it into the convo.