@
gregloa Woof. I know you're getting upset when i see wall of text with no paragraph brakes😅
I'm just gonna say a few things and leave it at that.
Do feel free to make a response though.
The video is nothing more than the arrogance of another know it all atheistic choice
Dan McClellan is not an atheist.
Mormon, actually. So a weird sort of Christian but a sect of Christianity non the less and by no means an Atheist.
But he is indeed a published Biblical scholar so the ad hominem basis of your criticism is not a good look... After all, you made no response to the actual content of his criticism.
Think on that.
Is Gods Word not clear that Man is better off without women?
How could any thoughtful person make that conclusion from god saying it is not right that man should be alone...and making for him a
woman to be his companion?
Do you think god was wrong to do so? Surely that's a necessary conclusion if you say man would have been better off without woman...
Do you find you have issues with women in general?
. You have to take the Bible entirely, not partially
Do you remember the two mistakes i mentioned at the start?
That's one of them: Supposing that the Bible is univocal, that it has one voice, one message and one narrative instead of a myriad over the course of the centuries of writing of which it is composed.
and to say the KJV matches the Hebrew text perfectly is absurd
lol that
would be an absurd thing to say...which is fine because i did not say that.
In fact most of the texts which are written in "plain english" do not use the pluperfect "had formed" for the reasons i mentioned. The NIV is one of the few that do. Why do you suppose that is?
Aaaanyway.
I think we can agree that we've reached the end of the productive portion of this conversation.
You've made it clear that you're not open to entertaining this argument while i feel that you have made no substantive argument in rebuttal.
As i said, do please make a response if you would like to do so and we'll leave it at that.👍
