Avoiding questions

[Drich]

Drich, how can Jesus be God if he said that he wasn't good, that only God was and he exhibited a will that was not God's? (feel free to call me blashemous)
.

that not what is being communicated in Mark 10:
17 Jesus started to leave, but a man ran to him and bowed down on his knees before him. The man asked, “Good Teacher, what must I do to get the life that never ends?”

18 Jesus answered, “Why do you call me good? Only God is good. 19 And you know his commands: ‘You must not murder anyone, you must not commit adultery, you must not steal, you must not lie, you must not cheat, you must respect your father and mother ….’[d]”


The rich young man did not know Christ to be God, so Christ corrected Him (looking for the affirmation of the Holy Spirit with in him, as He found with the other deciples. They Knew Him to be God because God revealed to them) The rich young ruler when corrected did not insist that he knew Christ to be God. Which meant he was just blowing smoke to get in good with what at best he thought was a phrophet.

---

Fuck me, why not say this in the first place, instead of fucking wasting everyone's time.

You didn't ask that the first time.

You called it a bible first, "blue letter bible"

Because that is what it is called!
http://www.blueletterbible.org/index.cfm
It says it there right on the home page!

Is there a strongest one?

Their is if you are looking from a specific denominational perspective. If I want the strongest R/C version I would look to the vulgate of the LXX.

What does "pearls before swine excersize" mean?

Christ tells us not to throw our pearls of wisdom before swine. If you have no intrest in anything you are asking you can easily be judged a swine, or someone just looking for a way to trample what if offered into the mud.

Blue is not a bible. So for all verses it would be the NKJV for Darkstar

http://www.blueletterbible.org/index.cfm again tell that to the people who named and published the Blue letter Bible!

As you and I agree blue letter is not a bible. So which greek version is used for Minimalist?

You beg the question here.

It is the ocean. I assume it was not there due to the words "completely empty"

Completely empty of what? See this is where we would default to the Blue letter BIBLE:
The Hebrew word that is translated into the term 'completely empty" is:בהו bohuw
Which means with out life, or completely empty of any type of life.
This is underscored by how this same word is used in Isa 34:11. Now as water is not alive we know the Hebrew word is further supported by this passage, and when we put everything in it's proper context Gen 1:1 God created the Heavens and the EARTH, we know it to mean God created All of the Heavens and a Completed Earth (Rocks Minierals and Water minus dry land and life) as per verse 3 and 4.

Here is the question again

Question: How was it possible for darkness to cover the ocean when the ocean was not there?

Again how do you know it is not there? With a proper exegesis of scripture we know Water to be present at the point of Gen 1:2. Is it by simple faith that you believe water to be not there? If not then please explain what evidence you have to prove how you know their was no water present at the time of Gen 2 or Gen 3.

And don't forget the ones you avoided

How could god spirit move over water that was not there? The very first 2 lines of the bible and there are errors. How is it that your supposed god stuffed up the first 2 lines? If god is perfect, why are the first 2 lines wrong?[quote]

quid pro quoe Clairese, you answer me completly and i will answer you.

Thanks for the NOT providing link. Your problem is you used a capital for the word One. Just admit you were being a plus your example is not the same as what you used it for.

Per your request: "You were being a Jerk off."

Thank you. I would like to point out texts other than the bible have had the same thing happen.

Not generally no. for if you took a book, a movie, a newspaper they would all be contextually translated and not literally translated. That is why you can NOT take the english at face value like you tried to do with the easy to read gen 2. You have a contextual translation, desperatly trying to assign a literal meaning to what you just read. It does not work that way.