RE: 3 reasons for Christians to start questionng their faith
March 27, 2013 at 9:03 pm
(This post was last modified: March 27, 2013 at 9:04 pm by Drich.)
(March 27, 2013 at 4:52 pm)JesusHChrist Wrote: So there is nothing inherently immoral about genocide?Noope.
Quote: From what you are saying there is at least one circumstance where genocide, baby-killing and what not are OK?yuuup.
(March 27, 2013 at 6:41 pm)smax Wrote:(March 27, 2013 at 2:20 pm)Drich Wrote: \
Ah, no. Nice try at an contextual exegesis though. Here's a tip when trying to build a contextual exegesis one must take a broader swath of scripture than just a glimps of one verse before the verse in question for example The NKJV identifies and groups the following verses together:
There is your problem right there. You make the very common error of assuming that the King James Version of the bible has most effectively sorted out the information in translation.
Quite the opposite is true, however, and many other examples could be provided.
Most translations agree that verses 20 and 21 were meant to convey a single thought, which is that prophets should be heard and received, but also questioned in order to verify the truth of what they are saying.
These two verse have most often been translated without a period between them, or by using of a comma or semi-colon, proving that most translators agree that a single thought is meant to be conveyed.
And your explanation makes no sense on any level, and you will find little or no credible support for your position that this verse actually calls for Christians to question their very faith.
You obviously need to brush up on the historical context of Paul's letters and the issues he was dealing with. He admonished the Corinthians regarding the same issue:
Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said. 1 Cor 14:29
So, while you are correct in your assertion that Paul is giving various instructions, you are wrong to have assumed a subject break between verses 20 and 21.
Quote:As you can see there is not one aspect of what i believe that has not been tested by me, and again by people like you everyday for the last 6 years. what you have asked and are learning to do now for yourself is an old hat that I wear comfortably.
I'm sure I don't know what you mean by this. What exactly is it that I'm doing that you, yourself, are so familiar with?
Before i proceed with following this red herring do you conceed the rest of the arguement?
