Scripture. What is considered Scripture?

[2003cobra]

Again, in Matthew both a donkey and a colt are mentioned while in Mark and Luke only a colt is mentioned.

I did not ask what mentioned in the gospels.

I asked
Did He tell them to fetch one animal or two?


If you don’t know, just say so.

But don’t pretend you answered when you did not answer.

 

[daqq]

Over the years my hearing has evolved.

Most likely due to progressing through those generations you were talkin' about.

By the way, when you understand those four generations that way you effectively eliminate the former error of the false doctrine of "generational curses" which was taught in ancient times because of a misunderstanding of those passages which I quoted from the Torah, (Exo 20:5, Exo 34:7, Num 14:18, Dt 5:9). For Moses, according to Dt 24:16, cannot be teaching "generational curses", but must be intending something else. The Prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel must have picked up on this and that is the reason for them both mentioning the proverb, one of which occurrences was also quoted in the same post with the above Torah passages, here, (Eze 18:1-4), while Jeremiah mentions the same proverb once again in the same new covenant language which I previously referenced in what you responded to, (Jer 31:29-31). It can really only make sense one way: there be four "generations" to the first "age" of a man. Elohim will use them, (like four "beasts of man"), to bring about the destruction of the "old man", (beastly carnal nature), which is not for evil but for our own good, (Jer 31:27,28).

 

[2003cobra]

1 Corinthians 9:8-11 KJV
8 Say I these things as a man? or saith not the law the same also?
9 For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen?
10 Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope.
11 If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things?

Luke 13:12-15 KJV
12 And when Jesus saw her, he called her to him, and said unto her, Woman, thou art loosed from thine infirmity.
13 And he laid his hands on her: and immediately she was made straight, and glorified God.
14 And the ruler of the synagogue answered with indignation, because that Jesus had healed on the sabbath day, and said unto the people, There are six days in which men ought to work: in them therefore come and be healed, and not on the sabbath day.
15 The Lord then answered him, and said, Thou hypocrite, doth not each one of you on the sabbath loose his ox or his *** [donkey] from the stall, and lead him away to watering?

Luke 14:2-6 KJV
2 And, behold, there was a certain man before him which had the dropsy.
3 And Jesus answering spake unto the lawyers and Pharisees, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath day?
4 And they held their peace. And he took him, and healed him, and let him go;
5 And answered them, saying, Which of you shall have an *** [donkey] or an ox fallen into a pit, and will not straightway pull him out on the sabbath day?
6 And they could not answer him again to these things.

So you see, I have no reason or compulsion to entertain your assumptions, or to answer you according to your carnal minded delusions and faulty interpretations of what is written in the texts, (which you are constantly misrepresenting in your erroneous conclusions, lol).

Duly noted. You have no answer for the question.

These are possible answers:
1) Jesus told them to bring one animal.
2) Jesus told them to bring two animals.

 

[2003cobra]

More pontifications lain: Naught but assertions. Point? Posturing. The inevitable outcome of your stance and lack.


Repetition of assertion does not a good education make. It is really a stagnant education that does this. You cry foul as if a minster is not supposed to tell the truth if it is uncomfortable. Where do you get these clever-odd ideas? Your education IS lacking. It is evident.

For some odd reason, you were shocked. Don't pay mind to the messenger, it is the message: You are woefully lacking in the education of your self. Said better? Don't knock the delivery, read the message. Pay attention. It is time for school. -Lon

I get to add some more quotes that you use as insults to avoid answering straight-forward questions.

Yes — attacking the one who points out your errors.

 

[daqq]

I will again highlight your error for you:

Duly noted. You have no answer for the question.

These are possible answers:
1) Jesus told them to bring one animal.
2) Jesus told them to bring two animals.

I did not ask what mentioned in the gospels.

I asked
Did He tell them to fetch one animal or two?


If you don’t know, just say so.

But don’t pretend you answered when you did not answer.

Okay, this fourth time I will answer you a different way:

None of the above: he never mentions "animals" in any of those passages.

Now therefore, please quote any one of those passages which has the word "animal" in it.

And if you do not have a quote that includes the word "animal" from any one of those passages then why are you expecting me to agree with your interpretation of what is stated in those passages when I have already clearly and plainly answered you three times before now and surely answered you correctly according to what actually is in those passages? The overall point is this: your entire doctrine is based on your own sloppy reading and careless understanding of what you read in the scripture.

 

[2003cobra]

:nono: I'm the one that hung the jury and will not vote guilty. Innocence until proven guilty is the rule.
ANY shadow of doubt and you can no longer vote guilt. You'd be a biased juror on this and "couldn't" be even picked.
Forgive: Imho, you are wrongfully opinionated, as is Cobra.

Why would you imply that the false doctrine of inerrancy, a doctrine made by man and not presented in the scripture, is true until proven wrong?

Well, it has been proven wrong.

Perhaps if you were not so dependent on your support groups for validation, you could honestly accept the truth.

 

[2003cobra]

Incorrect at best. Lie at worst. I saw CLEARLY that he DID answer you. EVERYONE reading saw him answer you.
In a nutshell, that if I have two apples I ALSO have one apple. He said it that clearly.

You've said the same of every poster on TOL. You CAN get an infraction for lying. Being corrected several times, persistence would be a purposeful lie.

What was his answer, Lon?

Did he say the Lord told them to bring one animal or two?

I am not the one lying.

Answer the simple question: did he say the Lord told them to bring one animal or two?

 

[2003cobra]

I think we are to be Bereans, but we aren't to be jury members. Those must be called.
I see a large difference between Berean and jury member/judge.
Cobra is self-appointed prosecution AND judge.

I have judged no one. Judgment entails sentencing. You will stand before Jesus, not me, for judgment.

 

[daqq]

What was his answer, Lon?

Did he say the Lord told them to bring one animal or two?

I am not the one lying.

Answer the simple question: did he say the Lord told them to bring one animal or two?

"τους δε ανδρας τους οντας επι της θυρας του οικου επαταξαν αορασια απο μικρου εως μεγαλου και παρελυθησαν ζητουντες την θυραν" :chuckle:

 

[2003cobra]

Thanks for being deluded into thinking I have any ideas worth considering...lol. I can only participate as I have time. Seeing you have stated your concept of the scriptures in post 979, I should give you mine.

I hold to a different idea of inspiration than is common today. The proper doctrine is not taught as it once was and, unfortunately, we have fallen into bad habits. I do not believe the scriptures themselves were or are inspired. They are inerrant, but not inspired. By that I mean that God did not breathe, or somehow infuse, truth into man's words. They are inerrant for a different reason. They are inerrant because they are God's words, phrases and sentences; not man's.

All scripture is given by the process of inspiration (theopneustos - God breathed) 2Tim 3:16KJV. This process included God, the Holy Spirit, inspiring holy men chosen at different times to receive and record what they were supernaturally moved to write 2 Pet 1:21KJV.

Then God preserved those specific words. I think I heard someone say that because the originals are not in existence, that militates against the doctrine of inerrancy. I see it the other way around. God, in His wisdom, preserved the originals in the many copies that do exist and are in agreement. An original can easily be destroyed or damaged. And, if they had been preserved, knowing our penchant to revere physical artifacts, they would have been worshiped as relics and fought over.

So it is the men, who wrote the scriptures, who were inspired; not their words. And the Holy Spirit so captivated their human spirits that He was able to use their humanity to deposit the Written Word in the same way that the Living Word entered this world through Mary.

Thank you for your comments.

I understand that the early church did not consider inspiration as a criterion for canonicity. Metzger writes several pages on that topic in his book on the canon of the New Testament.

You need to reread 2 Peter 1. That passage says nothing about being moved to write. It says they spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

And you need to read the context of 2 Timothy 3. Go back a couple of verses and it is clear this is about the scripture Timothy knew from his youth. And inspiration does not imply infallibility.

The preponderance of manuscripts makes it clear that God has not preserved perfect manuscripts.

I appreciate your sharing your concept. I don’t think it is consistent with church history or the scripture itself, but I love your honest sharing!

As for the words not being the words of the writers, because the Holy Spirit captivated their human spirits, are you aware that Revelation is very poor Koine Greek with many errors (the kind Lon would ridicule)?

 

[2003cobra]

Delete

 

[2003cobra]

"τους δε ανδρας τους οντας επι της θυρας του οικου επαταξαν αορασια απο μικρου εως μεγαλου και παρελυθησαν ζητουντες την θυραν" :chuckle:

I take that as “I don’t know and am unwilling to honestly answer.”

And “I can’t answer without admitting there is an error.”

 

[2003cobra]

I will again highlight your error for you:





Okay, this fourth time I will answer you a different way:

None of the above: he never mentions "animals" in any of those passages.

Now therefore, please quote any one of those passages which has the word "animal" in it.

And if you do not have a quote that includes the word "animal" from any one of those passages then why are you expecting me to agree with your interpretation of what is stated in those passages when I have already clearly and plainly answered you three times before now and surely answered you correctly according to what actually is in those passages? The overall point is this: your entire doctrine is based on your own sloppy reading and careless understanding of what you read in the scripture.

Ah, you hope to avoid answering with a technicality.

Matthew said Jesus told them
“Go into the village ahead of you, and immediately you will find a donkey tied, and a colt with her; untie them and bring them to me.”

Mark said Jesus told them:
“Go into the village ahead of you, and immediately as you enter it, you will find tied there a colt that has never been ridden; untie it and bring it.‘

Luke said Jesus told them:
“Go into the village ahead of you, and as you enter it you will find tied there a colt that has never been ridden. Untie it and bring it here.”

Which is wrong? Which one misquotes Jesus?

You are just evading, but even a greased piglet runs away or gets caught.

 

[Lon]

I get to add some more quotes that you use as insults to avoid answering straight-forward questions.

You CANNOT discern a STRAIGHT forward message. You are thick. Sorry (more in a second)...

Yes — attacking thw one who points out your errors.

"If" the problem is his head, yes. Why? Schoolyard bullying? :nono: Because it IS the problem. You do not think well.
It IS the place to start. No teacher is going to be slammed for telling Johnny Cobra that his problem is not paying attention and his lack thereof for it. Nobody, that is, but perhaps Johnny Cobra.

Why would you imply that the false doctrine of inerrancy, a doctrine made by man and not presented in the scripture, is true until proven wrong?

There, you said it: One is an assumption as is the other. In the U.S. we RIGHTFULLY assume innocence UNLESS or UNTIL guilt is PROVED. You? :nono: You haven't proven a thing. You 'think' repetition is an indicator, worse, a 'proof.'
:nono: That is ignorance (yours), poor thinking. Poor education and thinking ARE the culprit here. You? Too arrogant to be shown wrong.

Well, it has been proven wrong.

See what I mean?

Which is wrong? Which one misquotes Jesus?

You are just evading, but even a greased piglet runs away or gets caught.

Which IS wrong? Matthew or Luke? Commit. Tell me which one is wrong. YOU commit. Tell us plainly.

Perhaps if you were not so dependent on your support groups for validation, you could honestly accept the truth.

Naw, it is just intelligence rightly executed, Cobra. It really is. Sorry about that.

 

[2003cobra]

You CANNOT discern a STRAIGHT forward message. You are thick. Sorry (more in a second)...


"If" the problem is his head, yes. Why? Schoolyard bullying? :nono: Because it IS the problem. You do not think well.
It IS the place to start. No teacher is going to be slammed for telling Johnny Cobra that his problem is not paying attention and his lack thereof for it. Nobody, that is, but perhaps Johnny Cobra.
There, you said it: One is an assumption as is the other. In the U.S. we RIGHTFULLY assume innocence UNLESS or UNTIL guilt is PROVED. You? :nono: You haven't proven a thing. You 'think' repetition is an indicator, worse, a 'proof.'
:nono: That is ignorance (yours), poor thinking. Poor education and thinking ARE the culprit here. You? Too arrogant to be shown wrong.


See what I mean? Which IS wrong? Matthew or Luke? Commit. Tell me which one is wrong.

Naw, it is just intelligence rightly executed, Cobra. It really is. Sorry about that.

I know you would rather insult me than talk honestly about the scriptures, but I will ask you anyway:

Matthew said Jesus told them
“Go into the village ahead of you, and immediately you will find a donkey tied, and a colt with her; untie them and bring them to me.”

Mark said Jesus told them:
“Go into the village ahead of you, and immediately as you enter it, you will find tied there a colt that has never been ridden; untie it and bring it.‘

Luke said Jesus told them:
“Go into the village ahead of you, and as you enter it you will find tied there a colt that has never been ridden. Untie it and bring it here.”

Which is wrong? Which one misquotes Jesus?


I think in the past you wrote that Jesus sent them for one animal and Jesus rode one animal. Are you still holding to that, or do I recall incorrectly?

As I have said in the past, I believe Matthew is wrong. I think whoever wrote Matthew misunderstood Zech 9.9 and altered the facts to match their flawed understanding of the passage. John also presents Jesus as finding and using one animal.

 

[2003cobra]

You CANNOT discern a STRAIGHT forward message. You are thick. Sorry (more in a second)...


"If" the problem is his head, yes. Why? Schoolyard bullying? :nono: Because it IS the problem. You do not think well.
It IS the place to start. No teacher is going to be slammed for telling Johnny Cobra that his problem is not paying attention and his lack thereof for it. Nobody, that is, but perhaps Johnny Cobra.
There, you said it: One is an assumption as is the other. In the U.S. we RIGHTFULLY assume innocence UNLESS or UNTIL guilt is PROVED. You? :nono: You haven't proven a thing. You 'think' repetition is an indicator, worse, a 'proof.'
:nono: That is ignorance (yours), poor thinking. Poor education and thinking ARE the culprit here. You? Too arrogant to be shown wrong.


See what I mean? Which IS wrong? Matthew or Luke? Commit. Tell me which one is wrong. YOU commit. Tell us plainly.

Naw, it is just intelligence rightly executed, Cobra. It really is. Sorry about that.

I will add:
Innocent until proven guilty is not parallel to perfect until proven imperfect.

Things written by people are expected to be imperfect.

Perfection is the extraordinary situation. And extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

And the Bible never claims to be perfect.

 

[daqq]

Originally Posted by daqq
"τους δε ανδρας τους οντας επι της θυρας του οικου επαταξαν αορασια απο μικρου εως μεγαλου και παρελυθησαν ζητουντες την θυραν" :chuckle:

I take that as “I don’t know and am unwilling to honestly answer.”

And “I can’t answer without admitting there is an error.”

:rotfl: You can take it howsoever you will, for I know you will anyway, but you do prove that statement true with your responses and accusations that I have not answered you, (and I have indeed answered you four times now).

 

[daqq]

You are just evading, but even a greased piglet runs away or gets caught.

Who was it that was whining and crying about insults being hurled at him just a few pages back? You've lost it, you lose, even at your own childish game.

Have a nice thread . . . (dear Watchman, yes, I know it is not his thread, lol).

 

[Lon]

Duly noted. You have no answer for the question.

These are possible answers:
1) Jesus told them to bring one animal.
2) Jesus told them to bring two animals.

Er, no. There is a third, a fourth, and an eightieth. Your 'logic' is a 'my way or the highway' man-made dilemma in your own head.
You, thus far, cannot think outside of its very limited confines. I'm sorry you equate assessment for slams The problem IS you.

What was his answer, Lon?

Did he say the Lord told them to bring one animal or two?

I am not the one lying.

Answer the simple question: did he say the Lord told them to bring one animal or two?

Easy peasy to give you possible solutions that actually work. You? You ONLY want to shoot them down. You can't.

Here try this one, you will not be able to shoot it down (you'll try)
1) He told separate disciples (two)separately to go after the donkey and colt.
2) Matthew is rather quoting Zechariah 9:9 in paraphrase
3) all of them are wrong John 12:14 :sigh:
4) Jesus sent them after one donkey, they had to bring back two first, because it was a colt with mother and second, to fulfill prophecy, all beyond the disciples' control, but well within Jesus' power and the prophecy that made it happen. Thus, Matthew is right because Jesus did 'instruct' them to fetch the donkey yet had known all along two would come back, thus they were sent to bring one in question, but two would come back.
80) Cobra doesn't know, he is just confused and 'mistake' excuses his confusion for himself. He'd always rather accuse an Apostle or disciple than see that he is on the short end of the stick

Poor Cobra, he can't understand inerrancy or AT LEAST giving the benefit of doubt and not worrying about it toward inerrancy (innocent until PROVEN guilty). Poor Cobra cannot grasp this, has no clue what it means.

 

[2003cobra]

:rotfl: You can take it howsoever you will, for I know you will anyway, but you do prove that statement true with your responses and accusations that I have not answered you, (and I have indeed answered you four times now).

No, you did not answer this:

Matthew said Jesus told them
“Go into the village ahead of you, and immediately you will find a donkey tied, and a colt with her; untie them and bring them to me.”

Mark said Jesus told them:
“Go into the village ahead of you, and immediately as you enter it, you will find tied there a colt that has never been ridden; untie it and bring it.‘

Luke said Jesus told them:
“Go into the village ahead of you, and as you enter it you will find tied there a colt that has never been ridden. Untie it and bring it here.”

Which is wrong? Which one misquotes Jesus?