Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

100 Excellent

About BillyTheKid46

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

185 profile views
  1. I would suggest you further your research and not rely solely on what’s on the internet. Your proposition again on the use of grammar is an attempt to what end of your argument. I use scholastic research. Do you know who homer was, and the writings attributed to him? Your point for point argument shows a lack of interest, along with questionable research. The position that you take with the statue that comes from the courts of ancient Rome, leads me to believe you have no interest in the truth since a tree is used to depict a Stauros, upright stake. I use “we know” not to be judgmental, as you should know but you don’t. Then its up to those that need to know what the Watchtower has done with its research, is according to the ancient script. I also included a Strong’s definition. It depends on who recites it. There's plenty of 19th-century literature. Lastly, we may note, in regard to the material form of the cross that somewhat different ideas prevailed in Greece and Italy. The cross, mentioned even in the Old Testament, is called in Hebrew, 'êç, i.e. "wood", a word often translated crux by St. Jerome (Genesis 40:19; Joshua 8:29; Esther 5:14; 8:7; 9:25). In Greek it is called, which Burnouf would derive from the Sanskrit stâvora. The word was however frequently used in a broad sense. Speaking of Prometheus nailed to Mount Caucasus, Lucian uses the substantive and the verbs and, the latter being derived from which also signifies a cross. In the same way the rock to which Andromeda was fastened is called crux, or cross. The Latin word crux was applied to the simple pole, and indicated directly the nature and purpose of this instrument, being derived from the verb crucio, "to torment", "to torture" (Isid., Or., V, xvii, 33; Forcellini, s. vv. Crucio, Crux). It is also to be noted that the word furca must have been at least partially equivalent to crux. In fact the identification of those two words is constant in the legal diction of Justinian (Fr. xxviii, 15; Fr, xxxviii, S. 2; Digest. "De pænis", xlviii, 19). Do you know the purpose of the cross in Ancient Paganism? If Christians knew what the symbol represents, they would not be so quick to wear one. There are various points to research on, I have no need to research that material again. Staurogram, iconography, the new testament P45, P66, P77 has a similar likeness to nomina sarca. It should be understood that while the early meaning of stauros was a simple stake, pole, eventually received the same meaning for the crux. It was the ancient writers that chose not to change the definition. To them, crux meant the same regardless if it was a simple pole or a transverse addition to the pole. What is being lost, is the fact that Jesus carried his torture stake. He got help with that pole. The crossbeam most of the time was fixed to the prisoner. To be hoisted. I don’t believe we should be repetitive when something is purposely being overlooked. I also mentioned Stauroo, and XRISTOS. The NAS New Testament Greek Lexicon Strong's Number: 4717 Definition to stake, drive down stakes to fortify with driven stakes, to palisade to crucify to crucify one metaph. to crucify the flesh, destroy its power utterly (the nature of the figure implying that the destruction is attended with intense pain) However, as I mentioned to Butler, if you don’t like my answers, please don’t respond to my opinion and research. It’s that simple, state your case and move on. Let’s keep this in mind, this site has no scholastic prominence. Just opinions.
  2. Then that’s the mistake everyone keeps making, being wrong on how to interpret the word stauros in its original language. Triggering the same incompetence in research by many here. Research is a finer way to prevail since at the looks of things, anything relating to the positive aspect of the Watchtower relating to this matter is not of your personal liking. This would also have you wrong when stating I view the Watchtower’s definition of the word other than how it’s implied in its original context. But I see where you are edging to ad-hominem attacks like bulter when something is not of your liking. Perhaps getting an MA in linguistics would be an aid, but a Ph'd, should be better.
  3. Typo, I’m sure you not going to relate to your own typo’s when it is done. Why get picky about certain people’s grammar when it doesn’t reflect on others with worse grammar. I’m sure you understood where I was heading. No mystery or conspiracy. For the cross, it’s the same common usage that can be seen in everyday objects. The Roman (T) was used in their victory banners that were paraded throughout their ceremonies. Many governors were insulted to think Christ was crucified on such a banner of high honor. The ancient writers that used plank instead of a pole or big stick of wood were implying having been tied to, as in. If Stauros is suspect in the original text then cross is more suspect. We would have to add “Stauroo” and “Xristos” to the mix. If these are implied, then Stauros to ancient non-Christian writers meant Stavros Crown Wreath, and not the actual bible depiction of Christ execution but the intent of the manner of his death. Pain, suffering etc. You will also find, the majority of the time when the (T) configuration was used, the crossbeam was already attached to the prisoner. How would we dismiss this with the fact Jesus carried his instrument of death? Can we say, because of hast, he wasn’t nailed to the crossbeam which would defeat the purpose to ease the prisoner to a fixed pole? How about Stauranthus Liebm. Rutaceae Origins: From the Greek stauros and Anthos “flower.” Stauracanthus link Fabaceae Origins: Greek stauros “a cross” and akantha, akanthes, “thorn”, “pickle.” Stauropsis Reichb.f. Orchidaceae Origins: Greek stauros “cross” and opis “appearance” alluding to the shape of flowers, to the cross-shaped lips. Staurospermum Thonn. Rubiaceae Greek stauros “cross, upright pale” and sperma seed The tau referenced is of the X, not T that was later adopted by the Romans. But, I'm sure you will find excellent material from the ancient writers as to their intent, and the intent of Christendom to want the Latin cross to prevail.
  4. I would suggest a finer research on the original text that dealt with only Stauros, not crux that was added later to the Greek text. I recall you mentioned something about getting an MA on theology. You will find in your course of historical linguistic studies, there is only one way to define stauros. Everything else is speculation for the skeptics.
  5. Then, the matter cannot be clear if we refuse to subject our research not to define the original text. While its true, scripture doesn’t specifically state the manner of Christ execution, scripture does specifically state in the original text the word Stauros. So, thank Jehovah God for that, not JWinsider or anyone having an alternative to the truth. But as you stated, it has become a matter of historical opinion since Christendom comprised the biggest lie to their worshipper of the cross. A symbol that has become a symbol of idolatry. Galatians 5:19-21 This is why good research is vital. It relates how Romans dealt with their 12 books of law, and the manner in which they dealt with convictions and preparations toward that end. Something scholars advocate in a school of thought. 1 Peter 5:8 With good research, while rummaging through the rubbish which is indeed what has taken place, we will find the ancient forms of execution provided a slow death that could take days, not minutes or hours. The fact that Jesus died quickly demonstrates the cruelty he was inflicted with to cause a rapid death.
  6. I would suggest further research for those that are interested in learning antiquity. The first thing to look for is the original language for the word crucifixion. 1. We know the cross was a pagan symbol. Was this a symbol of worship or was it just a trinket for adornment. 2. We know the method of impalement, can be traced as far back as the 10th century BC with the Mesopotamian, Babylonian, Carthaginian, Egyptian, etc. 3. We know that in the original language Sturous (Homeric) meant a single pole (upright stake) Palisade, fencing, or tree (xylon). Earlier versions defined it as a plank. As in walk the plank in Pirate times, bearing your own cross. 1. We know the Romans were not the originators of the crucifixion, but they did perfect the manner of cruelty to be imposed on criminals and slaves. 2. We know, the original word for crucifixion that was added later to symbolize an honorable and victorious death by Jesus Christ to inspire all of Christianity, cannot determine the manner of his execution, by modern understanding of the classic Greek pale, plank. 3. We know the first rendering of a torture stake was hidden for a very long time by those that couldn’t accept the original word to be at odds with a Christian symbol adopted by ancient paganism for Christianity. A symbol of worship (Idolatry) 4. We know, there are subtle differences in language between classic Greek (Homeric) and the Koine Greek. However, it translates about the same through ancient writing, not modern writing. Especially when dealing with Stauros meaning crossbeam in any form other than using sticks to wedge them at the base to secure the paling tree (torture stake) in place. 5. STRONGS NT 4716: σταυρός σταυρός, σταυροῦ, ὁ (from ἵστημι (root sta); cf. Latinstauro, English staff (see Skeat, Etymological Dictionary, under the word); Curtius, § 216; Vanicek, p. 1126); 1. an upright stake, especially a pointed one (Homer, Herodotus, Thucydides, Xenophon). 6. We should know, the probability of the extended arm for the cross can be attributed to the Phoenician goddess Tanit. This could be seen with the Egyptian symbol ankn. 1. We know Constantine was most likely the originator of the Christian Latin Cross through recorded history, even though Lucian of Samosata is the one who referenced the shape of a cross, while Greek philosopher like Homer used the word Stavros as a surname for Christos. Unfortunately, this was lost in the translation in modern time, since Stavros means “crown wreath” a direct image of the thorn crown placed on Jesus. John 19:2 This became the fundamental bases for the Latin Cross. If this is accepted, then, the cross ancient writers were referring to was the thorn crown (Stavros) the cross that Jesus bear John 19:17, and not a, cross that he was executed on. 2. We should know the visualization of a torture pole (Flagellation), pillar, or stake. Jesus was scourged being tied to a pole. Was this the same pole that he ended up carrying? had [Him] flogged. ἐμαστίγωσεν (emastigōsen) Verb - Aorist Indicative Active - 3rd Person Singular Strong's Greek 3146: To flog, scourge, the victim being strapped to a pole or frame; met: I chastise. From mastix; to flog 3. We know the Pharisees and Sanhedrin wanted things done quickly before a specific time. Preparation is not a consideration. Therefore, slaves that normally would prepare a site were not used given the soldiers in scripture. Had Jesus not entered into the picture, only those convicted would have been sentenced to state execution. Jesus through Barabbas became an extra. The question then becomes, would Barabbas been sentenced at that time, since no insurrection was visible? meaning to prepare for Barabbas execution. 4. We know the cross hire (+) is most likely indicative to the Sun God and played no role in the crucifixion of Christ. 5. The TAU can be traced back to the Phoenician letter taw (X). This became the letter (T) in Roman time. If the T was used as a cross, the crossbeam most of the time would be secured to the convicted either by nails or rope. The crossbeam would be stretched to the back and shoulders of the convicted. This would allow to simply hoist the person to a prepared Crux simplex. 6. We know a dual beam cross could weigh between 100-300 pounds. Some scholars make it heavier. Jesus was forced to carry his instrument of death. Even at the low end, how far could a person already scourged carry a dual beam cross. Therefore, logic would lead us to believe Christ was not attached to the cross. The other would be the help Jesus received carrying the cross. Could a healthy person carry 100-300 pounds outside the kingdom gates, to a specified location valley of the skulls, without the aid of another? This is the image Christendom is selling, Jesus carried the complete cross. He wasn’t attached to the pole on his back. That leaves open to two possibilities. Jesus dragged a crossbeam, or the Torture pole became his torture stake. However, we wish to place the crossbeam, either on top as a T, or in the upper center a Latin Cross, soldiers were performing the execution, not slaves. What would have been the simplest way for a soldier given the time constraint could achieve this goal of crucifixion. 1. We know in Ancient Persia the gallows were equated to the cross, according to Ulfilas with the term “galga” used in the gothic testament. Gallows is in the shape of two T’s together. An (H) football goal post. 2. We know the weight of the body would not support a nail to the palm of the hand. Was the wrist considered part of the hand in ancient language? 3. We know there was no original definition for the Latin word CRUX in Greek, just like there is no crossing wording for crucifixion in Aramaic and Hebrew. Greeks came up with ana-stauro. There are many other research points. Needless to say, the article was written by Leolaia in 1990, unfortunately, has no serious understanding of the original Classic Greek. Not to mention other areas of incompetence done with the research. There is also the equivalency of a pole in mentioned in Esther 5:14 in some bible translation. Esther 5:14 New International Version (NIV) 14 His wife Zeresh and all his friends said to him, “Have a pole set up, reaching to a height of fifty cubits,[a] and ask the king in the morning to have Mordecai impaled on it. Then go with the king to the banquet and enjoy yourself.” This suggestion delighted Haman, and he had the pole set up. Even though Bruce W Longenecker gives some good points for the 21st century, I find the argument Martin Hengel will suffice to the 1990 article. So far, the Greek-speaking world, Greece, Asia Minor, Egypt and Syria, has been deliberately kept at the periphery of our discussion. The sources for crucifixion, which in the period of the empire markedly appears as a Roman punishment, are much fuller in Latin literature than in Greek. It can also be side when a US cop tells you to spread eagle, it can be a sacrificial stance. Therefore, those that wish to believe Jesus was crucified on a Latin Cross are free to think that way. They should also believe that Jesus married Mary Magdalene had historical children, and there’s one defending in the manner of their father’s death here. Those that believe, the Watchtower make up things as they go along, understanding the original classic Greek is the best understanding we can find written in its original wording by the original Bible writers that used in essence pale, plank, pole, strake, and tree.
  7. Needless to say, that was a misgiven since there was no Jewish word. The inference is mostly framed from the cross hire (X) that existed as opposed to the (+) embroidered in weaving that rarely was designed for a crucifixion. I do not recall a centered crossbeam, other than the symbolism that meant the 4 elements, earth, (air) wind, fire, water for Wiccan rituals. If we use Taoism there are five elements. The conspiracy comes from early on. Therefore, Cicero meant the obvious when trying to find a common word for the Hebrew language. For those that believe the Watchtower is being dogmatic about giving a view on how Christ died, must understand they use the same dogmatic approach to oppose it. There is a time to think the Watchtower is not dogmatic but instead, pragmatic. Warp and woof or filling weaving weft and woof have no significance to an actual application of a crucifixion.
  8. Straight out of the box, we would have to consider what Constantine might have been given to merging the pagan cross with Christianity. Regardless if he had access to historical documents, it would also include the many symbols that were associated back then, especially Pagan symbols. What common symbol did he find to depict Christ execution? This would have given Constantine an imprint to use the Pendant cross, crossbeam to unify both cultures of paganism and Christianity. The early church fathers made it a controversial symbol with how they wanted to see Christ crucified to represent for Christianity, a point of contention or a point of victory. Unless these arguments align on how the Bible uses the crucifixion as an inspiration and a judgment for our sins, anyone can view the information, and use it to speak of speculation as to how Jesus died. An obvious point being missed, Jesus was forced to carry the burden of the cross. John 19:17 was this a crossbeam? It is true that in ancient times, at certain times, poles would already be erected. This would be a problem with Jesus being placed in a pendant cross. The problem with that theory lies with one simple truth. Timing. When Barabbas was accused of whatever crime, murder, the Prefect (Tiberius) Pontus Pilate would have sentence Barabbas to death. That would mean Barabbas method of execution had not yet been decided. The idea of a pole being erected is problematic. If that site had been prepared, it would have been prepared for the 2 thieves that ended up next to Jesus. Jesus became an extra for that site. This would also indicate the hast those condemning Christ wanted it done. This conclusion would suggest Jesus carried a pole to a place of the crucifixion that had not been prepared out of hast. A crossbeam would need to have a notch curved out. The arms would have already been fastened to the crossbeam either by nails or rope. In that time, a definition of stauros would then be of a simple Roman crucifixion, called CRUX SIMPLEX, an upright pole given the timing. The execution was handled by Centurion soldiers, not laymen that usually worked to prepare a site for crucifixion. Now a crossbeam was usually placed over the shoulder to a length that would extend the arms. This means the pole would weigh less for being shorter if a person carried that burden on their shoulder. Also, Simon of Cyrene was forced to carry this cross. Matthew 27:32 Usually, a crossbeam was fastened to the person. It was easier to then nail or use a rope to join the 2 pieces. This means the pole Jesus was initially carrying was free from him. Now, some historians indicated Jesus was nailed to a tree. An optic that can be conceivable with ancient Roman. This would indicate an olive tree was chopped down and used to crucify Jesus. A simple pole that weighed enough to become a burden for Christ, given the scourging he received and the pain he was enduring. A pole that was not fastened to Jesus. All of this is indicative of what the Greek word means. Any Bible researcher would well be aware of all of this. http://www.helpfreetheearth.com/news1011_bible.html Now if we want to get technical. It appears the first mention on how Christians would be handled after a conviction comes from Cornelius Tacitus But all human efforts, all the lavish gifts of the emperor, and the propitiations of the gods did not banish the sinister belief that the conflagration was the result of an order. Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judæa, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired. Therefore, what proof do we need when all the facts speak for themselves. For me, there is no further discussion needed.
  9. There's not that much mystery with the crucifixion of Christ. The early church fathers are the ones that made it. Here's another example. The image of the Christian cross was at the center of controversy from the early years of the Church’s existence. Beginning with the Apostle Paul, Christian theologians and church leaders had to explain - even justify - the fact that their proclaimed Messiah was executed in a humiliating and cruel way. This kind of death penalty was intended for thieves, rebels, runaway slaves and deserters. Convicted persons were subjected to a particularly horrible, humiliating and public death. Many who have witnessed or heard of the crucifixion of Jesus could not understand how his followers find something positive or affirmative about it. Referring to the law recorded in the book of Deuteronomy (21: 22-23), many considered it a disqualifying curse. Others believed that Christ either escaped death in the last moments, or that another killed, perhaps Simon of Cyrenean, took his place. Confronting these views, the early followers of Christ, however, perceived something in this event that they considered salutary and victorious, and ultimately rethought the image of the cross, turning it into a sign of victory. In early centuries, they claimed that its vertical and horizontal directions were visible throughout the world: in ship masts, farmers' plows, axes, anchors, or even in the human body itself. It was a sign of its cosmic significance, stretching in all four directions and symbolically covering the height, depth and breadth of the cosmos. Some even saw the image of a crucified figure in the trophies of defeated enemies, erected on the battlefield. However, many do not know that the evidence that has been preserved demonstrates that the image of the real image of the cross did not appear with any regularity in Christian iconography until the middle of the fourth century. It took even longer to depict the crucifixion of Jesus and these images could not be clearly identified until the beginning of the fifth century, and in any quantity until the sixth century. The absence of earlier examples is difficult to explain, especially given the fact that early Christian documents do not shy away from discussing, protecting and describing the way Jesus died. Although the reasons for the apparent lack of a cross and crucifix are unclear (perhaps the image was either too graphically horrible or too sacred), many scholars associate his first appearance with the vision of the cross attributed to Emperor Constantine immediately before his battle with the enemy Maxtius in 312 However, the image that is most associated with Constantine was actually a christgram (or XP), not a cross. In addition, many of the earliest images of the cross of Jesus make it a more delicate scepter, decorated with precious stones, than a heavy and durable instrument of execution.
  10. It should be noted that Emperor Constantine not only abolished crucifixion but was the originator for the pendant cross to become a symbol for Christianity. About 300 years after the death of Christ. Did Constantine know the manner in how Christ was killed? The point of the crucifixion was to show the people the contempt and the utmost humiliation for a crime. If a crossbeam was used to show the utter discontent for a thief, then how much more of a humiliation or disgrace would it have been to display Jesus in an upright position for all to see. A position to demonstrate that Jesus didn’t have a right to be considered a murderer, and receive a murderer’s death, but to humiliate and disgrace him as the king of the Jews. He replaced the murderer Barnabas guilt, without having any guilt according to Pilate. So, was Jesus crucifixion by design, or utter contempt to be placed in a stake, instead of a pendant cross, that was envisioned by Constantine? That the majority of Christendom now accepts as fact, the Pendant Cross. Assumptions are a poor excuse for what the definition of a Greek word actually means. 4717 διαμερίζω (σταυρός) otaupow stauroo {stow-ro-o} 1. To stake, drive down stakes 2. To fortify with driven stakes, to palisade 3. To crucify Liddell-Scott, Greek Lexicon 39584 σταυρόω σταυρόω, f. ώσω, (σταυρός) to fence with pales, impalisade, Thuc. II. to crucify, Polyb., N.T. 891 Cross 891.01 The instrument of a slave's death, associated with the ideas of pain, guilt, and ignominy. "The very name," writes Cicero (Pro Rab., 5), "ought to be excluded not merely from the body, but from the thought, eyes, and ears of Roman citizens." The Hebrews, having no term for it as not being a punishment in their nation, called it "warp and woof." 891.05 The Andrew's cross is shaped like an X, through Hippolytus says he was crucified upright. 891.06 The Anthony cross (embroidered on his cope) was shaped as a T. The pagan Egyptians, Copts, Indians, and Persians, all have the same sacred emblem. One thing that we can be confident on, the Symbol (X) cross that was used in ancient times, and the symbol (T) that was used in ancient times, have no substance to be relied on for the crucifixion of Christ. The only remaining possibilities are the Pendant Cross, (Constantine new vision) or the Upright Stake, (Greek interpretation). The other thing to note about Emperor Constantine, the pendant cross was in use by the pagans. Constantine merged paganism with Christianity for the benefit to please them all, and not have conflicts in his Kingdom because of religion. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-j2FDvxnBrk My understanding of military fortifications when Palisades, where erected, were upright poles. What could have happened with Jesus? This would envision an upright pole, staked with smaller sticks in the ground to hold the pole upright. This is by definition what the Greek word Stauros depicts if you use it as a military option. Were those soldiers at the feet of Christ? Now former witnesses need to run their own research if they wish to understand the conditions of that time. The disservice is not entirely their fault. The misinformation comes from those that are in the organization but are no longer in good standing to plant such disingenuous seeds. Even former Bethel members are inclined to disagree with the Watchtower without having a proper foundation from their research. To those, I would say, get a degree in religion. Then they will notice, what the Watchtower offers about the cross is correct.
  11. Not in the sense that it is being claimed.
  12. To answer question 1, yes, the Watchtower first published a Greek interlinear in 1969. ESV John 7:15 The Jews therefore marveled, saying, "How is it that this man has learning, when he has never studied?" KJV John 7:15 And the Jews marvelled, saying, How knoweth this man letters, having never learned? NAS John 7:15 The Jews therefore were marveling, saying, "How has this man become learned, having never been educated?" BGT John 7:15 ἐθαύμαζον οὖν οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι λέγοντες· πῶς οὗτος γράμματα οἶδεν μὴ μεμαθηκώς; BYZ John 7:15 Καὶ ἐθαύμαζον οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι λέγοντες, Πῶς οὗτος γράμματα οἶδεν, μὴ μεμαθηκώς; 5636 γράμμα, ατος, τό (1) literally what is written; (2) of the alphabet letter (GA 6.11); by extension plural γράμματα, of education letters, learning (JN 7.15); (3) as a piece of writing letter, document, book (AC 28.21); (4) as a promissory note record of debts, contract, account (LU 16.6) There are many lexicons. No one will ever be satisfied with any linear translation of ancient works. Linguistics is best left to the professionals. I don’t see that much of a difference between the translation committee of the Watchtower to any other lexicons that in theory end up with the same context. The wording and definitions are the cause of contention. The other. I don’t believe the Watchtower produced an interlinear for Hebrew. The odd thing, some speculate they did. The speculation comes from the 1971 study bible edition, referenced as the fat boy as referenced by JWinsider. Maybe from the Bible Student era. Pre-1931. If you have a copy of a Hebrew interlinear by the Watchtower, share the wealth. Blood It is true there was an ancient ritual of drinking or tasting the blood of a defeated gladiator. There were other pagan rituals that could have influenced the book of acts. Romans and Greeks could have been influenced by earlier forms of God worship. Are some of these rituals still practiced today? In Africa, India etc. Santeria. How about vampirism. How about a dish called blood pudding that is a delight in some countries? Just don’t upset a voodoo priest. The point of blood is of course whole blood.
  13. According to former witness websites. There are 8 versions of the revised 2013 NWT. Which one is being compared to 1984 as opposed to the rest of the Bibles published by the Watchtower. Interpretation and translation are updated as new material are discovered that will aid in those revisions. Is the Watchtower the only one that has revised their bible? I can think of many. 2017-International Standard Version John 7:15 15The Jewish leaders were astonished and remarked, “How can this man be so educated when he has never gone to school?” It appears by comparing both texts in the NWT of John 7:15 it is referring to education. The revision does not imply anything else even if the wording has changed. The first thing to consider, were John works letters and a revelation? 1984, and 2013 are still correct in context. There is no conflict. https://returnofbenjamin.wordpress.com/2011/03/23/mistranslation-pet-peves-and-the-isv/
  14. Wow! Your writing skills just jumped 3-fold. It looks like the work of someone working in the writing department. If not, it was IM’d that way. To be clear. I understand the topic. Making assumptions that don’t reflect Christian values has NOTHING to do with the GB. So concentrate on the FACTS. There is only one way to interpret human rules. The GB doesn’t make human rules. They follow God’s command. Therefore, concentrate on understanding the assumption you are supplying.
  15. This would imply, the lack of respect for local laws. Be careful, in some countries, people sometimes get arrested on principle. Can you offer an example where a democratic municipality allow lawbreakers to roam their streets freely while the government looks the other way? in other words, the government won't take action. I like the terminology of CEV bible on this one. Proverbs 28:4-6 Contemporary English Version (CEV) 4 Lawbreakers praise criminals, but law-abiding citizens always oppose them. 5 Criminals don’t know what justice means, but all who respect the Lord understand it completely. 6 It’s better to be poor and live right, than to be rich and dishonest.

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation