[jlisenbe]

God bless you WG. I can believe your ideas or I can believe the clear and plain teachings of the Bible. I’m going with the Bible. It requires no excuses or illogical explanations.

[Wondergirl]

"The clear and plain teachings of the Bible" that have been messed with (added to, changed, deleted) by many translators, some with their own agendas or their church's agenda, through the centuries.

[jlisenbe]

If that is true, and there is no evidence of it, but if it’s true, then no part is reliable. That would include the parts you believe. All discussions of the Bible would just be fruitless nonsense since it would be impossible to determine the genuine.

Have you ever considered the extreme measures you must take to attempt to explain away the parts of the Bible you don’t like?

[Wondergirl]

Didn't you read what Athos wrote about all those translators? He knew whereof he spoke. I spent four years in a Christian college discussing that sort of thing. This has nothing to do with parts I don't like (whatever THAT means). The part I live by are Jesus' words in John 13, 34"A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. 35By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another."

We follow that and all is well.

[jlisenbe]

Yeah, I read what Athos wrote. He, apparently like you, had no support for his beliefs. But if you know of NT passages that were corrupted by "translators", then put it out for us to see. In your four years of discussing such things, surely you have good examples of this. I'd like to see them. Until you can, then there is no point in talking about it. It's all just idle speculation.

How do you know the John passage you mentioned was not corrupted by a "translator"?

It comes down to a simple rule for you. You accept what you like and discard what you don't like. That has been apparent for a long time.

[Wondergirl]

Love one another. So let it be written, so let it be done.

[jlisenbe]

It's what I dislike about trying to discuss anything with you. The Hebrews passage is a perfect example.

1. You claimed I took it out of context. I provided the context, so you then went to...
2. The "translator" miswrote the Prov, 3 passage. I provided the answer for that as well, then you went to...
3. The "translators" corrupted much of the NT. You claimed to have talked about those places for four years in college. I asked you to show us where that happened, and now we are here, which is nowhere.

It's simply true. You accept what you like and discard what you dislike. It certainly seems that you are attempting to manufacture your own truth.

[Wondergirl]

Love one another. So let it be written, so let it be done.

[jlisenbe]

Thus sayeth Wondergirl.

[Wondergirl]

Jesus. John 13:34: "Love one another."

[jlisenbe]

That's one of those corrupted texts, isn't it? Remember those dishonest translators you mentioned?

[jlisenbe]

This bear repeating.

But if you know of NT passages that were corrupted by "translators", then put it out for us to see. In your four years of discussing such things, surely you have good examples of this. I'd like to see them.

[tomder55]

Titus 3:9

[jlisenbe]

I don't think a discussion about the reliability of the text of the NT is a "foolish controversy". But it's good to let it drop. Unproductive, as it turned out.