Well that is not true. All you have provided is your opinion with no evidence saying you do not agree with the scriptures that have been posted that you do not believe or disagree with. If you have God's word to prove your claims prove them. If you do not why do you not believe the scriptures shared with you that show why you are in error?
The scriptures you’ve posted have not been cogent. And I’ve said as much.
Sure they have you just do close your eyes and ears to hearing the scriptures that disagree with you. According to the scriptures the same happened to JESUS and PAUL when they were talking to the JEWS who did not believe God's Word in MATTHEW 13:13-15 and ACTS 18:25-27, They were quoting from ISAIAH 6:9-10. Why? The natural man receives not the things of the spirit of God neither can he know them for they are foolishness unto him. It is hard to see when we close our eyes and ears to hearing God's Word.
3rdAngel said:
↑ If you have God's word to prove your claims prove them.
Your response...
I don’t need “God’s word” to prove anything of the sort. It’s plain as the nose on your face.
I see, you cannot prove any of your claims through the scriptures. Thanks for agreeing with me
So, you agree that the texts you’ve provided aren’t cogent? that’s a start...
Not at all. You just agreed with me that you have no scripture to support your claims and opinions. This was the point I was making earlier and shows why you are in error and unable to support your claims that man made teachings and traditions supersedes the Word of God.
The texts don’t prove history. Historical facts prove (or disprove) the texts. You’ve got the tail wagging the dog.
Nonsense. I posted to you that I have both the biblical historical texts supported and verified by the historical records to support my position. This is something you simply do not have to support your position and you know it
You said the scholars killed Jesus. But not all scholars killed Jesus. Scholarship, not the texts themselves, provide the litmus test. Again, you’ve got the tail wagging the dog.
I never said all scholars killed JESUS. Sadly, now your making things up and making unfounded claims that are not true.
I think you have that backward. You can’t prove that they are.
This is your view that you cannot prove because you do not believe the scriptures and what they teach. This is not my view. I choose to believe and follow God's Word over the teahcings and traditions of men that deny the Word of God.
Yes. It is your interpretation.
No it is called scripture, which was provided and speaks for itself. You simply choose not to believe it.
It means “to read out of” (as opposed to eisegesis, which means “to read into, which is what you’re doing here).
Indeed,
eisegesis is what
you are doing by trying to explain context from sources outside of scripture to interpret what the scriptures are teaching. As posted earlier context is applied to the scriptures that are being interpreted in surrounding scripture context, not to sources outside of the scriptures that are being examined. A good example of the above is our conversation on "THE LORDS DAY" where you claim, it is a reference to "SUNDAY" from sources "outside" of the scriptures where the scriptures themselves "NOWHERE" in the whole bible define "THE LORDS DAY" as Sunday or the first day of the week. This is simply another good example of a man made teaching and tradition read into the scriptures
eisegesis that is not there. Disagree? Prove it, and show me
exegesis read from the scriptures to interpret the scriptures.
When we’re dealing with texts of ancient origin, from foreign cultures, and written in foreign (and sometimes dead) languages, that have been edited, compiled, redacted, cobbled together, and glossed, yes, we do have to go to outside sources. Because what we’re ultimately dealing with are translations of editions, and not the texts, themselves. But we have to wade our way through the language, context, and editing first. We’re on step one. You’ve decided to skip step one and go straight to step 27.
Strawman alert - I am sorry did you say something? All I am hearing here are your excuses not to believe God's Word and making statements not relavant to our conversation or what you have done in our conversation. The translation of the bible have been already compiled by many experts in Hebrew and Greek and provided to us already today in many translations so that what we have today is very close to the original.
What you have provided in this discussion is "NONE" of the above in your post and our discussions which is talking about the original language and Hebrew and Greek Word meanings. The focus of the above is still in relation to the meaning of the scriptures applied to the original language. You have simply read sources outside of
exegesis of the scriptures and provided your opinion
eisegesis you cannot prove with evidence. A good example of evidence of my claims here is your handling as shown above already of "THE LORDS DAY" where you read into the scriptures from something that is not written in them
eisegesis.
Now that we have available to us close translations to the original Hebrew and Greek, are you an elder in a Church that does not know that you cannot understand the scriptures unless God is your guide and teacher *HEBREWS 8:11; JOHN 14:26; JOHN 16:13; JOHN 17:17; JOHN 7:17; JOHN 8:31-36; 1 JOHN 2:27. By not believing God's Word according to the scriptures you are seeing with your eyes but cannot see and hearing with your ears but cannot hear. Sadly though this is your own choosing.
Hope this helps