How crappy does your interpretation have to be to rest it entirely on “bad translation”?How hideously crappy does a mis-translation actually have to be, in your opinion, to no longer constitute "Scripture"?
How crappy does your interpretation have to be to rest it entirely on “bad translation”?How hideously crappy does a mis-translation actually have to be, in your opinion, to no longer constitute "Scripture"?
Translation was your topic.Bait refused. "Please try to stay on-topic."
Do you deny these verses?How hideously crappy does a mis-translation actually have to be, in your opinion, to no longer constitute "Scripture"?
And, when any 'case' to such effect is ignored, what case can be made? Nobody still reading this can miss that.
So, to make that point:
Asked and answered, by more than a few here other than me, in this thread, including even before the troll came aboard.
The Messiah Yahushua said NOTHING of the SORT. And any literate pre-teen with an e-sword or BLB on-line look-up concordance can prove the point.
So based on this, you do stone people to death for working on sabbath? Or you just dont accept the changes that make things harder for you?Well, since you yourself noted that those of us who DO exactly that, and advocate that UNLESS we realize what He said in His Very First Public Address, in Matthew 5, is True, and He did NOT change "one yod or tiddle" of His Instruction about ANYTHING - including marriage - have felt like we were being throttled from a proper response to the @Mr.M blasphemy...
(Lest you forget, you yourself said:
)
... AND because such a VERY wide anti-Torah net has been cast here...
exactly WHAT did you mean?
And let me make this as clear as possible in a milieu of censorship:
What was it that we so wanted to say, that needed to be said against the blasphemy that Yahushua lied to all of us by doing something He just said He would not do?
And how would you address the bald-faced lie that He doesn't know enough about His own Written Word to distinguish between "putting away," and "divorce?" (And, enlighten us, please as to why you can say it, but we can't.)
And finally, how conducive is it to BF's "core purpose" to have such blasphemy used to make claims that would make any so-called "TO" type here throw up? That their marriage to a 'divorcee' is "adultery," and they must put her away; that no woman here who IS 'divorced,' even with a 'get,' is worthy of remarriage?
And, yes, read it - that their "salvation" is clearly in question.
I’m sorry sir but we’re straying too close to the line here. This line of conversation has exhausted its usefulness. Everyone has stared their opinion, no one has changed theirs. Unless someone has something new to add or a different angle to pursue then let’s leave it here for now.So based on this, you do stone people to death for working on sabbath? Or you just dont accept the changes that make things harder for you?
Endlessly repeating the same BS, and demonstrated bad translation over and over and over and over and over does not constitute argument.Do you deny these verses?
I am shocked that a brand new member can join, waltz in here and start dropping vitriolic grenades all over without their membership being reconsidered...I’m sorry sir but we’re straying too close to the line here. This line of conversation has exhausted its usefulness. Everyone has stared their opinion, no one has changed theirs. Unless someone has something new to add or a different angle to pursue then let’s leave it here for now.
Had he espoused That Thing Which Shall Not Be Mentioned, instead of accusing lawfully divorced women and their now-husbands of "adultery" --I am shocked that a brand new member can join, waltz in here and start dropping vitriolic grenades all over without their membership being reconsidered...
I would hope that this kind of thing is not normalized...
I know where you are coming from but, I am making a completely different argument. I am not trying to equate the two. I am simply shocked that a new, unknown member could join and instantly become a wrecking ball within the forum without their very existence here being in question.Had he espoused That Thing Which Shall Not Be Mentioned, instead of accusing lawfully divorced women and their now-husbands of "adultery" --
-- we all know it would have been quite different.
There’s definitely more art than science in trying to split the lane between healthy debate and and unprofitable disputes.I know where you are coming from but, I am making a completely different argument. I am not trying to equate the two. I am simply shocked that a new, unknown member could join and instantly become a wrecking ball within the forum without their very existence here being in question.
If this was a longstanding member, I would expect some latitude given for the time of peace that they would have previously displayed. That said, If this is the first interaction we are having with "Mr. M" I can only imagine that it is going to be divisive without purpose from here on out.
I do not want to diminish the difficulty in moderating... I did want to voice my opinion on the issue. Obviously...There’s definitely more art than science in trying to split the lane between healthy debate and and unprofitable disputes.
Our creator directly told us He changed that when He was walking among us in the flesh. Why don't you believe Him?Argue with this.
Deuteronomy 24:2 KJV - 2 And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man's wife.
Actually study your Bibles and don’t automatically rely on some guy’s translation choices of words into English.
Did the Jews feel like that towards anyone in scripture? You hate me because I speak the truth. In this thread people have articulated how they think i should be beat for preaching the truth. It is Adultery to remarry after divorcing someone, or to marry a divorced woman. Repent.I am shocked that a brand new member can join, waltz in here and start dropping vitriolic grenades all over without their membership being reconsidered...
I would hope that this kind of thing is not normalized...
So far its been said i should be beaten and kicked out of fellowship for sharing the truth.I know where you are coming from but, I am making a completely different argument. I am not trying to equate the two. I am simply shocked that a new, unknown member could join and instantly become a wrecking ball within the forum without their very existence here being in question.
If this was a longstanding member, I would expect some latitude given for the time of peace that they would have previously displayed. That said, If this is the first interaction we are having with "Mr. M" I can only imagine that it is going to be divisive without purpose from here on out.
Yahushua's words are not BS, repent.Endlessly repeating the same BS, and demonstrated bad translation over and over and over and over and over does not constitute argument.
Asked and answered. And answered.
On page 1 of this endless screed, no less. And since. And you never even had the integrity to name, as requested, the SOURCE of that hideous 'translation'.
So when moses tells you what Yahuah says you listen.Do you know the biblical definition of righteousness and darkness?
Righteousness:
Isaiah 51:7
Listen to me, you who know righteousness, the people in whose heart is my law; fear not the reproach of man, nor be dismayed at their revilings.
Darkness:
Isaiah 8:20
To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.
Deut 6:25
And if we are careful to obey all this law before the LORD our God, as he has commanded us, that will be our righteousness.”
2 John 3:4 - Sin is transgression of the torah. It’s repeated in the torah that it’s sin to add and take away from the perfect instructions, which obviously includes this portion:
Deut 24:1 KJV
When a man takes a wife and marries her, and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some uncleanness in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce, puts it in her hand, and sends her out of his house, 2when she has departed from his house, and goes and becomes another man’s wife, 3if the latter husband detests her and writes her a certificate of divorce, puts it in her hand, and sends her out of his house, or if the latter husband dies who took her as his wife, 4then her former husband who divorced her must not take her back to be his wife after she has been defiled; for that is an abomination before the Lord, and you shall not bring sin on the land which the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance.
The real Messiah said he’s not changing the smallest iota. He said it’d be easier for heaven and earth to pass away. I trust him over a translator - and if you simply use online tools to study the Greek - you’d see the translators are indeed in error. Sometimes they will literally translate the same word differently in the same verse! How’s that for deception. They may translate the Greek word for Passover 99.99% of the time but then randomly choose to translate it to “Easter.”
If a man could still divorce his wife, the disciples wouldn't have said "it is better not to marry". They say this because once He makes man and wife 1 flesh, man cannot separate it unless she commits fornication.@Mr.M it’s been explained to you but I will tell you again. Put away does not equal divorce, despite what your favorite English translation tells you. Was the NT written in English or Greek?
If you refuse to hear then you refuse and we can’t help you. Many modern translation falsely render put away as divorce. These passages do not mean what you think they mean.