- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (Towshab @ Nov. 29 2007,12:32) Quote (david @ Nov. 28 2007,18:41) Quote A foal, more specifically a colt, would not be classified as a 'full grown animal'. A colt is a male foal and is one year or younger. The NWT translators should have stuck to Greek only. If you're saying that the expression a “full grown colt” makes no sense to you, I suggest you google it and find that it occurs 989 times (an not in reference to the Bible.)
“Results 1 – 17 of 17 for “full grown colt”. (0.09 seconds)”
Let's see, one was about popular Scandinavian Yule stories, another was from mythfolklore.net, another from popular Norse tales, etc. Yeah those are some great examples since they are all fictional. Hey there was one from a Charles Darwin book though!
From http://www.equine-world.co.uk/about_horses/equine_gender.htm
Filly – A female horse or pony not yet full grown.
Colt – A male horse or pony not yet full grown or gelded (castrated).
Mare – A fully grown female horse or pony.
Stallion – A fully grown male horse or pony that has not been gelded (castrated). Stallions are also known as “Entire”.
Perhaps, don't include the dash in “full-grown colt,” and you'll get more than 17.Why didn't you try misspelling it too. Ridiculous!
Try “full grown colt”
Results 1 – 10 of about 990 for “full grown colt”. (0.13 seconds)So again, you are clearly obviously wrong and apparently have no clue of what you speak.
Apparently those 990 people or websites that have the phrase “full grown colt” have no idea what they're talking about.
Google “full grown baby” and get 2600 choices. Ah, you say, a baby isn't full grown until it's a man. Well, apparently this isn't the way people speak. There is such a thing as a full grown colt.
I'm pretty much done with you and these blunders of yours. As of this moment, mostly out of respect for others who may be stumbled over such ridiculous arguments (and I can't see how) I have decided to let you speak to the air.
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Nov. 29 2007,12:45) Quote (Towshab @ Nov. 29 2007,12:18) Quote (david @ Nov. 28 2007,18:34) Quote And why did Jesus not sit on both animals? Even your NWT says he did: 'and he seated himself upon them' (Mat 21:7b). Again, my calling this argument “pathetic” stands.
For the verse in full:
And they brought the ass and its colt, and they put upon these THEIR OUTER GARMENTS, and he seated himself upon them. [THAT IS, THE OUTER GARMENTS.]And what where the outer garments on? Both of the animals. So he was still sitting on both animals. Either way he's straddling to animals. You can call it 'pathetic' all day long but its still funny as can be to see Matthew make this blunder.
Quote Obviously, sitting on more than one animal at the same time is ridiculous. But he can sit on more than one garment at the same time. Is this the sort of argumentation you are reduced to?
Nah its just funny. Almost as funny as how hard you try to defend it.
DavidI agree. This is proof he will go to any extreme to try and prove his rediculous points.
Right WJ. There is only one word to describe this, and you found it.Quote (david @ Nov. 29 2007,00:37) Quote (Towshab @ Nov. 29 2007,12:32) Quote (david @ Nov. 28 2007,18:41) Quote A foal, more specifically a colt, would not be classified as a 'full grown animal'. A colt is a male foal and is one year or younger. The NWT translators should have stuck to Greek only. If you're saying that the expression a “full grown colt” makes no sense to you, I suggest you google it and find that it occurs 989 times (an not in reference to the Bible.)
“Results 1 – 17 of 17 for “full grown colt”. (0.09 seconds)”
Let's see, one was about popular Scandinavian Yule stories, another was from mythfolklore.net, another from popular Norse tales, etc. Yeah those are some great examples since they are all fictional. Hey there was one from a Charles Darwin book though!
From http://www.equine-world.co.uk/about_horses/equine_gender.htm
Filly – A female horse or pony not yet full grown.
Colt – A male horse or pony not yet full grown or gelded (castrated).
Mare – A fully grown female horse or pony.
Stallion – A fully grown male horse or pony that has not been gelded (castrated). Stallions are also known as “Entire”.
Perhaps, don't include the dash in “full-grown colt,” and you'll get more than 17.Why didn't you try misspelling it too. Ridiculous!
Try “full grown colt”
Results 1 – 10 of about 990 for “full grown colt”. (0.13 seconds)So again, you are clearly obviously wrong and apparently have no clue of what you speak.
Apparently those 990 people or websites that have the phrase “full grown colt” have no idea what they're talking about.
Google “full grown baby” and get 2600 choices. Ah, you say, a baby isn't full grown until it's a man. Well, apparently this isn't the way people speak. There is such a thing as a full grown colt.
I'm pretty much done with you and these blunders of yours. As of this moment, mostly out of respect for others who may be stumbled over such ridiculous arguments (and I can't see how) I have decided to let you speak to the air.
Actually if you do an advanced search so you can list 100 hits per page, that is when you come back with 17 results. Did you not notice that if you do a basic search of 10 results per, that supposed 990 hits is only 2 pages of 10 max? Click the second page david. There isn't another 10 on the 2nd page.And a dash (although I did NOT use a dash if you'll look) does not do anything in google except join to words together in a phase. Try it sometime.
Beyond that, david you are being dishonest. The NWT does NOT say '”full grown colt”.
Zec 9:9 “Be very joyful, O daughter of Zion. Shout in triumph, O daughter of Jerusalem. Look! Your king himself comes to you. He is righteous, yes, saved; humble, and riding upon an ass, even upon a full-grown animal the son of a she-ass.
“Full-grown animal” david, not “full-grown colt”. A foal, or colt for a male, is NOT a full grown animal.
Is this haw you and the others on here debate, by being dishonest?
Glad to help keep you in line. Face it, the NWT writers were not Hebrew/Aramaic experts.
Ok, how does this work, the believers only thing. Tow is the one that started this thread. But he's not allowed in it? HE'll just create another thread of similar content. But it will be a quiet place perhaps. I didn't even notice the “believers only” thing until just a minute ago. So is the vote done, then?
No I won't make another thread HERE. Kejonn has literally begged me to leave this board since I came so now I'm going to rid him of his last vestige of Jesus being anything but an itinerant preacher at best. So close. Farewell Christians!
Quote (kenrch @ Nov. 29 2007,15:31) What did he say? WOW!
He said Jesus never claimed to be the messiah. Is he right??Stuart
Quote (Towshab @ Nov. 13 2007,11:35) Here is an ever so subtle form of anti-semitism that is prevalent on the GT (Greek Text). Who was the person to betray Jesus, the one apostle that everyone wants to despise? Judas Iscariot. Well the issue with this is the name and how it gives a very subtle but definite anti-Jewish feeling. The word ‘Jew’ comes from the name ‘Judah’. Judaism is simply ‘Judah-ism’. While not technically accurate the word title ‘Jew’ has come to imply all physical and spiritual descendents of Jacob and ‘Judaism’ is the religion many of those same people practice.
Now think of the most despised apostle, Judas. Judas, Judah, Judaism. Judas was used to represent the faith of Judaism. In Greek, Judas is ‘Ioudas’. Now look forward in your GT to Heb 8:8
Heb 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
What is the Greek word for Judah here? ‘Ioudas’!!! So just like the Gospels tried to present, Judas-ism was an evil force opposed to Jesus and his ministry! And who wanted to sell Joseph to the Midianites? Judah! So move forward in time and Judah (Judas, ‘Ioudas’) is the one who again sells his ‘brother’ for silver!
Down with the Jews! Down with Judas-ism!
I've been reading the bible for 20 years or so, and since then it has been a great guide for me regarding the Jewish people.I love them all the more. So if the New Testament is conspiring against the Jews and trying to make people hate them, then it isn't working for me.
Can I suggest that it would only work for people who have hate in their heart.
Similarly the bible records something of the Babylonians and the Egyptians and yet I consider them not. But a man who has hate could hate them too.
To be fair to yourself Towshab, perhaps you should consider that the Tanak could be conspiring against the Egyptians and the Babylonians. After all most references to them are negative.
Or could it be that the books in the Old Testament and New are just recording events that have happened, whether they are good or bad, they are just true in regards to what happened.
Also, even though man is generally shown in a bad light in scripture, are we to hate all men, after all we have ALL fallen short of the glory of God and our righteousness is as filthy rags. Is all scripture a conspiracy against humanity?
Or could it be that you have a bias and tend to see what you want to see?
Quote (Towshab @ Nov. 30 2007,15:00) No I won't make another thread HERE. Kejonn has literally begged me to leave this board since I came so now I'm going to rid him of his last vestige of Jesus being anything but an itinerant preacher at best. So close. Farewell Christians!
Oh, OK.Bye.
Quote (Towshab @ Nov. 27 2007,20:02) Quote (david @ Nov. 27 2007,19:54) Quote What am I supposed to run out and buy those books? Please list more than page references from some obscure books. The encyclopedia judaica isn't really that obscure.
Regardless, I won't be purchasing a copy any time soon. I see my local library has a copy so if I should have the free time i will stop by and check this reference out. Cross your fingers so you won't have egg on your face should this prove to be false.
To david: if you wish to continue this go here and take up the cause here. I will not discuss it here since I am respecting this board and some other requests.Quote (kenrch @ Nov. 28 2007,22:31) What did he say? WOW!
Thanks kenreich. This book shows that some Christians may be waking up to reality. I may pick up the book at my local library. Maybe you should too?Quote (Towshab @ Dec. 01 2007,13:09) Quote (kenrch @ Nov. 28 2007,22:31) What did he say? WOW!
Thanks kenreich. This book shows that some Christians may be waking up to reality. I may pick up the book at my local library. Maybe you should too?
TowBefore you waste your money.
He is not saying that Yeshua is not the Messiah.
If you listen real close you willl see he is simply trying to suck people into buying his book.
Sad.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
