Search results

Wow... miss the point much? If Paul is not saying that trying to keep the Law is a complete waste, then Christians are still under ALL of the Sinai covenant. It's not a smorgasbord. The new covenant in Christ's blood COMPLETELY replaces the Sinai covenant. As Paul wrote to the Galatians, "Are...

There is no need to hijack this thread into a KJV-only bickerfest, but suffice to say that your premise is flawed and your comments are baseless.

Ah, instead of admitting you were wrong and discussing the text, you dismiss your critic as less spiritual than you. That's not the "marc" of a mature Christian. Rather, it's the mark of arrogance and self-righteousness.

"Slaved of God"? Perhaps that was a typo of "slaves", but that's still quite wrong. We are servants, not slaves.

Self-righteousness doesn't look good on you either.

If God were doing the revealing, He would tell you that "Messiah" and "Christ" mean exactly the same thing. Since He didn't, whatever "revealed" this claptrap to you wasn't God. Stop wasting your time with conspiracy theories rooted in rank ignorance, and stop playing one verse of Scripture off...

While I'd defer to a Hebrew scholar, the way I read the text, it is every tenth animal (of each kind), period; not just the newborns from that year.

Let me introduce you to a key component in the right interpretation of Scripture: context. Ignore it to your peril.

Thanks for posting this. Sadly, it's not often that something on this forum really makes me think. :)

What you presented against Büchsel’s interpretation primarily uses "your" interpretation (that which you hold) as its evidence. That is the essence of circular reasoning. Unless you can show that Westcott and Hort discussed this particular issue, and that Büchsel cited their work, your premise...

It sounds like you have a martyr complex. That's pretty common among cultists and other deluded people. You seem to think you're the only one who is capable of understanding Scripture; that's another common problem among cultists and deluded people.

Still wrong. The thread is not about Westcott and Hort at all... not even peripherally. Drop it, If you want so badly to bicker about W&H, start a new thread.

What are you saying by quoting these verses? Are you posting disjointed Scripture verses just to fill your day, or are you wanting to discuss something?

Your interpretations are hogwash.

10% was never the standard for giving in either testament. Under the Sinai covenant, tithing was not "giving"; it was mandatory surrender of agricultural goods by agricultural producers (not by everyone), and under the new covenant, there is no percentage either required or suggested...

Your post #57, second-last paragraph, last sentence. I forgive you. :)

Save your fingers and let the insults roll off. You won't convince them that their words are inappropriate because to them, we're profligate sinners who warrant such mistreatment.

Exactly. Logic seems to be the weak link with this particular legalist.

Fallacy: Circular reasoning. Fallacy: circular reasoning. Fallacy: circular reasoning. You've got nothing.

No, the thread is NOT about Westcott and Hort, full stop. Read the thread title!