Jump to content

Origen

Moderators
  • Content count

    2,451
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    57

Origen last won the day on June 11

Origen had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,674,787 Excellent

About Origen

  • Rank
    MODERATOR

Interests

  • Interests
    Hebrew, Aramaic (and other cognate languages), Greek, Latin, textual criticism, exegesis, philosophy

Gender

  • Gender
    Male

State

  • State (No Abbreviations)
    TN

Denomination

  • Den
    Church of Christ

Recent Profile Visitors

406 profile views
  1. How am I going to have any fun now atpollard? lol
  2. lol Who ever it was it wasn't Origen. What? None of that had anything to do with Origen. All of your claims about Origen are wrong. It is as simply as that.
  3. Really! That is interesting. Can't take the HEAT!!!🔥
  4. He left on his own. That does not mean he won't be back. He believed he would throw out a bunch of hogwash and no one would know the difference, no one would call him on it. WRONG! He found out fact that it is one thing to make a claim (that is the easy part) and quite another thing to support that claim with evidence and arguments.
  5. Origen

    Greetings

    Hello and welcome OC7
  6. I am sure they don't. That, however, does not explain why anyone should accept your view over theirs and that is the point. They are experts in their field of study. They cite exegetical and grammatical evidence. You have none. So does their Bible and so does mine. It seems you might be suggesting that since you have the Spirit anyone who does not agree with you does not. I see no reason to believe that the indwelling of the Spirit within them is somehow not as valid or something less than what you claim to have. They do not simply claim we have the Spirit therefore you ought to believe us. They cite evidence for their claims concerning the text, and they have the expertise to support their view. The fact you won't even try to address the evidence means you are unable to address it in a meaning way.
  7. So you have no exegetical or grammatical evidence that might refute the numerous Greek scholars who disagree with your claim.
  8. So rather than address the evidence against you, you just ignore it and ask me a question about what I think which proves nothing about the text. That would do nothing to support your claim. Stick to the evidence. Now, you claim it "Truly I tell you today," is to be preferred. So let me ask you a relevant question, one concerning the evidence against your claim. Do you have any exegetical or grammatical evidence that might refute the numerous Greek scholars who disagree with you? The numerous Greek scholars who translated the KJV, NKJV, ESV, Net Bible, NASB, NLT, RS, NRSV, NIV, LEB, HCSB, CSB etc.?
  9. Thus the question is why chose your view over the other? You give no reasons why your ought to be accepted. "Truly I tell you today, you will be with me in paradise." Or "Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise." (1) Is Jesus pointing out to the criminal that "he is speaking to him on that very day" or is he telling the criminal that on that very same day he would be with him in paradise? If it is the first, then Jesus is saying something along the lines of: "believe me that I am speaking to you now" which makes no sense at all. There is no need or reason for Jesus to tell the criminal that he is speaking to on that day. The criminal already knows that Jesus is speaking to him on that day. It simply makes no sense. (2) Jesus' uses his trademark expression "Truly I say to you" (or "truly, truly") 72 times and it is NEVER modified by an adverb of time. (3) Jesus uses his trademark expression to emphasis what he is going to say not when he said. The 72 examplex in the N.T. verify this point. (4) Luke uses the adverb σήμερον ("today" or "this very day") to emphasize the immediacy of an event (See 2:11; 4:21; 5:26; 13:32-33; 22; 34, 61). Moreover, σήμερον is used 40 times in the New Testament, 11 times in Luke alone. And not once is it used in the sense of informing a person that he is being spoken to a certain time. (5) Every major translation has the comma before the adverb (i.e. KJV, NKJV, ESV, Net Bible, NASB, NLT, RS, NRSV, NIV, LEB, HCSB, CSB etc.). Give the number of Greek scholars who translated these versions, not one of them agree with you. In fact the only translation I know of which does is the cult NWT from the JWs.
  10. So Matthew Henry, Albert Barns, and John Wesley (who by the way all know Greek) are wrong but you are right, and your proof for this is you "don't thing so."
  11. Origen

    Gill's Commentary on John 19:14 reviewed

    Just think of how painful it was for me to address that nonsense. lol
  12. Origen

    David's Throne - Acts 2:29–36

    Thank you Becky.
  13. Origen

    Rate This Topic

    Hey I like really like that and I love your example. lol
×