Evolution Trumps Creationism

[Foxaèr]

Which means that A/S/K essentially comes down to "persist in asking, and you will receive."

Those who persists in asking will get knocked alright. Right upside the head.

[Drich]

Which means that A/S/K essentially comes down to "persist in asking, and you will receive."

Those who persists in asking will get knocked alright. Right upside the head.

It completely depends on who is being a/s/ked

---

@Waratah:

I think, though I might be mistaken, Drich's failure to respond to your questions has to do with him being unable to see the subtle logical distinctions in the various formulations. His mind doesn't grok that kind of detail, so to him, I'm guessing, you are simply repeating yourself by saying the same thing multiple times using slightly different wording; he doesn't see any distinctions, so he treats them all as just variations on the same theme.

You could be right here since for some reason drich has kudos your post. This will be the second time that we will have kudos a post.

It could be my comprehension skills, but I think you are saying that drich comprehension skills are lacking? If so, do you agree drich with apophenia post?

The other way to take why drich has kudos your post is because it is well written of course but also because if he truly understands it gives him an out. This way he can publically still say a/s/k without looking like a complete liar. For this reason I will highlight the very pacific elements that concern god giving of the holy spirit in luke 11.

5 And He said to them, “Which of you shall have a friend, and go to him at midnight and say to him, Friend, lend me three loaves; 6 for a friend of mine has come to me on his journey, and I have nothing to set before him’; 7 and he will answer from within and say, ‘Do not trouble me; the door is now shut, and my children are with me in bed; I cannot rise and give to you’? 8 I say to you, though he will not rise and give to him because he is his friend, yet because of his persistence he will rise and give him as many as he needs. 9 “So I say to you, ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. 10 For everyone who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened. 11 If a son asks for bread[d] from any father among you, will he give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will he give him a serpent instead of a fish? 12 Or if he asks for an egg, will he offer him a scorpion? 13 If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him!”

I know I have highlight before and you accused me of cherry picking. The highlighted parts clearly shows the process to receive the holy spirit. If you disagree you must be able to prove otherwise. You have fail to do so, so far. I could be wrong.

Until you have proven me wrong I will point out your mistake each time you use a/s/k.

I will be away for a few days, so this is the reason I will not reply to any of your posts in the next few days.

I agree with alpo, because she identified the problem. I do not see the problem you are trying to bring to my attention. You presented a problem I provided a solution, you simply rephrased and do not see or understand how my original answer still answers your question. If you've asked another question I still do not see it.

[Jackalope]

Drich, it is really quite simple: can the clauses stand alone as complete sentences? If so, they are independent clauses. That they are translated from another language is problematic - however, the translator chose to represent them that way, and I assume it was not without reason.

That they are separated by semicolons in the translation further supports my position that they are independent clauses - and do not modify one another.

[Drich]

Drich, it is really quite simple: can the clauses stand alone as complete sentences? If so, they are independent clauses. That they are translated from another language is problematic - however, the translator chose to represent them that way, and I assume it was not without reason.

That they are separated by semicolons in the translation further supports my position that they are independent clauses - and do not modify one another.

If verse 9 were a stand alone verse or even the beginning of this precept I would agree. But it is not a/s/k was modeled in the parable. Remember verse 9 was the beginning of the explanation of the parable Jesus just told. And ties the parable to the precept.

[Minimalist]

Um.... you do know that this chapter and verse shit did not start until the 13th century, right?

Ancient Greek was written without capitals, punctuation or even spaces between words. The divisions by Langton are somewhat.....arbitrary!


Oh, and your bullshit OT was done even later.

[Drich]

Um.... you do know that this chapter and verse shit did not start until the 13th century, right?

Ancient Greek was written without capitals, punctuation or even spaces between words. The divisions by Langton are somewhat.....arbitrary!


Oh, and your bullshit OT was done even later.

I do indeed.
that however does not change the fact that the denotation of verse 9 and it content places what Christ said in verse 9 at the cross roads that ties the parable to its intended meaning.

[Minimalist]

As a matter of fact the whole chapter reads like a poorly edited amalgamation of assorted shit. Luke needed a better editor.

[Esquilax]

I do indeed.
that however does not change the fact that the denotation of verse 9 and it content places what Christ said in verse 9 at the cross roads that ties the parable to its intended meaning.

And just how the fuck do you know what the intended meaning was? The author has been dead for many, many years before you were even born, and as Min just reminded you, you're reading a translation of a translation of a facsimile of edited copies of a work written in a dead language long before there was such a thing as competent record keeping. And yet somehow, you know the intended meaning, despite never speaking with the person doing the intending, and lo and behold, miracle of miracles, it manages to fall precisely in line with what you want it to be?

You're getting worse at this, man.

[Drich]

I do indeed.
that however does not change the fact that the denotation of verse 9 and it content places what Christ said in verse 9 at the cross roads that ties the parable to its intended meaning.

And just how the fuck do you know what the intended meaning was? The author has been dead for many, many years before you were even born, and as Min just reminded you, you're reading a translation of a translation of a facsimile of edited copies of a work written in a dead language long before there was such a thing as competent record keeping. And yet somehow, you know the intended meaning, despite never speaking with the person doing the intending, and lo and behold, miracle of miracles, it manages to fall precisely in line with what you want it to be?

You're getting worse at this, man.

How do I know the meaning? Because I have read the text.

The text is not a translation of a translation, that is a popular misconception. It is a singular translation from a koine Greek text.

http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm...c=11&t=KJV

Tap on the tools bar next to the verse and you can have the orginal Greek words. Tap on the Greek words in the submenu and you can have the definitions.

[Esquilax]

But with the divisions and chapter/verse structure that wasn't present in the initial text... and yet somehow you think it's okay to switch between one version and the other, depending what will best suit your position, undoubtedly formed from reading the english text to begin with?