Avoiding questions

[Drich]

Yeshua didn't "correct" him, he stated that he didn't deserve to be called good and that only one (God) deserved that adjective. I'm curious as to where you got all of the back-story to support what I don't see written...

Because a similar thing happens when He introduces Himself to the other deciples. Christ was considered to be a teacher or Rabbi. A common greeting to a Rabbi is to start one's request with the phrase "Good Rabbi." Here are a few examples where Christ accepts the usage of this term when those to know Him call Him this.http://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=Good+teacher&qs_version=NKJV

Which makes the only distinction between what the Rich young ruler said, and what the Deciples Call Jesus is the knoweledge of Who Christ was. Which is why we can call what Christ did a correction or rather a test. Did the rich young man know who Christ was? Was He willing to give what He had up and follow him as the deciples did? The answer to both was no, and the young man knew it. That is why he went away disappointed.

---

Don't forget my original question

Question: How was it possible for darkness to cover the ocean when the ocean was not there?I am just following the story of the holy bible and its mistakes. First line says creation of earth, second line clarifies the earth is empty.You have made claims without substantiation.

Can we use the same english version of the holy bible, so there is no discrepancy. So could you please copy and paste Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 from your named source, whatever english version you want.

Also don't forget these questions

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?

Who's to say if anyone's Hebrew is perfect?
I can see the first two lines as an analogy and NOT a literal interpretation.
http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInter...f/gen1.pdf

The word for "earth" was הארץ , nf. country, land; earth, ground, geo-; territory
Tanslation here: http://translation.babylon.com/hebrew/to-english/

You do know that the Hebrew Bible was meant to provoke thought and discussion, don't you?

So, if you can apply "earth" to mean "matter", it may make sense, but I bet that you can't do that.
.
[/quote]

---

Drich, love, would you mind providing me with the full title of this concordance of Bullinger's which you are referencing, because in addition to finding that Bullinger was a class 'A' nutball not even accepted by his own kind (he believed Jesus was crucified with four thieves, not two, and noted dispensationalist Harry A. Ironside declared Bullinger's views an "absolutely Satanic perversion of the truth"), the only reference to a concordance by him (google, Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and Worldcat, the world's largest library catalog) is a concordance of the New Testament (A Critical Lexicon and Concordance to the English and Greek New Testament, which I don't need to point out is not a relevant authority for Genesis). Please cite a reference which even mentions such a concordance. (It's possible it's in his companion to the bible, which I'm torrenting as we speak; I have examined the complete appendices to that work, and if worse comes to worse, it's only $3 from Amazon or B&N.)

Please. Tell me more about this Bullinger's concordance of yours ("Bullinger's exhaustive lexicon and concordance"), its full title, where you obtained it, and how I might obtain a copy. I've got a handful of concordances and bible study aids, most not installed, but would welcome adding another resource to my counter-apologetics.

(ETA: It appears that I can download a free copy of Bullinger's New Testament concordance, so if that's the work you were citing, let me know so I can verify the accuracy and cogency of the citation.)

It seems my spelling is not the only thing faulty. The bullingers i have is the Greek New testament. I was relying on some work i did on a similar discussion a few months ago, and simply got mixed up in reference material and in meaning. I went to: http://www.studylight.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=0922

My mistake. (actually i have made this mistake here or one of the other forums before. The Bullingers is my Goto Hard copy resource that i have used for the better part of 20 years. The majority of what i have committed to memory has come from that source material. I assumed rather than checked and verified. Good Call thanks for keeping me honest, even if it makes me look like a fool.)