Nathan_Jr
-
Posts
2,990 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
67
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Gallery
Everything posted by Nathan_Jr
-
mmmmmmm....yummm! ...kimchi... Wait! You distracted me! I don't even have time to write this post. Try making up systems of logic yourself. It's hard enough without eight people throwing jokes at you.
-
No, no, no, no, NO!!!!!! You obviously missed it the first time. You should go back and read the duck equation I posted. Read it again and again until it infects your brain. Read it until it ferments in your shoes.
-
Prepositions. Nothing but prepositions. Until conjunctions. Try writing THAT in cursive. Put it in a bag, Jasper! Evidence. Pure, cold-pressed evidence. Even envelope rainbows! See? Isn't that just wonderful. Bless your little hearts!
-
Everything is based on this axiom: Waterhead babies carve cloudy blenders. Rip currents. Even gloves. Did I mention gloves? HOWEVER, bacon breath.
-
I'm assuming quince is unprovable if cardboard Africa. It's a totally different system of logic.
-
A bowl of fruit + dogs + lmlmlmlmnopqrstutututuvwvwvw + gloves + spacecraft + 398 + Elizabeth Gardner = duck
-
Marcion proposed a cannon in the 2nd century. He was a hardcore follower of Paul and Paul only. His canon included ten letters of Paul and a shorter version of Luke. None of the pastoral epistles were in Marcion's canon, probably because they weren't written yet, or else he didn't think Paul wrote them. He didn't think any OT books should be included because he thought they were about a different god. **cdcdcdcdcdcdcdcd ccddccddccddccdd ef
-
I rest my case.
-
Do you accept the definitions of 'canon' I provided? Do you understand that any written work cannot prescribe itself to be canonical?
-
I do. How (H-O-W) does ababababa explain how (H-O-W) the Biblical canon was formed?
-
A more accurate question according to the scientific precision of usage is: WITAF does abababababa have to do with the how the Biblical canon was formed???
-
A literary or scriptural work is not written with canonical member status in mind. A literary or scriptural work may not refer nor validate itself for inclusion in the canon.
-
The following definitions of Canon are to be carefully considered and understood before posting on this topic. Canon has other definitions, but these are applicable in this context. These are relevant definitions for here and now. Canon New Oxford American Dictionary noun A collection or list of sacred books accepted as genuine the works of a particular author or artist that are recognized as genuine. the list of works considered to be permanently established as being of the highest quality Canon Cambridge Dictionary noun The writings or other works that are generally agreed to be good, important, and worth studying. Canon Merriam-Webster Dictionary noun a: an authoritative list of books accepted as Holy Scripture b: the authentic works of a writer c: a sanctioned or accepted group or body of related works
-
-
-
But it's not knowledge at all. It's belief. Or as you've seen me render it more accurately according to scientifically precise usage as seen through spiritual binoculars: BELEEF. It's a pseudo knowledge. BELEEF takes the place of absent knowledge. One cannot believe one's way to knowing. victor wants you to BLEEVE that you know that you know that you know. BELEEVING is not knowing. A higher knowledge is available. It can be seen, but it can't be described. It is nothing to be possessed. Anyone who claims to have it is the one who most certainly does not. ALL scripture (not just ancient Near Eastern) POINTS to that which cannot be named. But the pointer itself is not the knowledge, the Truth. Christ said KNOW the Truth. BELEEF has no place where Truth is concerned. The paradox is spiritual knowledge is available once one has wiped away all knowledge and belief. It cannot be found in a class. Only a completely free mind can perceive the Truth pointed to in scripture. Another cannot perceive it for you. This is the childlike mind. Not childish. Childlike. A child's mind is not yet filled with belief and knowledge; rather, a child's mind is empty and free to be in awe of God.
-
Uh-oh
-
Thanks, Mark. In other words, it's a man-made private interpretation?
-
Thanks, Mark. I thought this had been mentioned. My thought was first, your post was second - the second time establishes it! Hey! I didn't write the book. Perhaps there's some phrasing in the Bible detailing the required replacement of God's only begotten.. Or the desired replacement. Or the necessary replacement. Specifically, where in the Bible does it say that the Bible+Christ-in-you+believing+renewed-mind shall replace God's only begotten? You have the software it might be easier for you to find.
-
Lord's Year or Year of the Lord = Anno Domini Our = Nostri
-
An error in translation? Translation? Did he mean compilation? Or composition? Or assembly? It may seem like a minor error, but in the context of assertions of mathematical accuracy, scientific precision, and tailor-made gloves, these mark misses matter. Either victor starts saying what he means and meaning what he says or else this whole PFAL thing will just fall to pieces.... oh... wait...
-
What is the literal meaning of the Latin phrase Anno Domini?
-
I don't know.
-
I can assure you, you have no clear perception whatsoever what I can or want to understand. Your perceptions are dead wrong. You continue with your assumptions. You continue with your accusations. Like the accuser. I would proceed with caution, if I were you.
-
Sounds like this is an answer to one of my many question you've evaded. Where is God? He's far away, up there? NOT a trick question. If that's your answer, ok. I'm just trying to understand. I don't like making assumptions.