- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (Ed J @ April 20 2014,19:33) Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 21 2014,11:39) Apparently, neither me nor journey nor Pierre nor t8 have actually SEEN that answer. So if you did indeed answer it in a DIRECT and HONEST and COMPLETE manner, just re-post it for us so we can see it, and move on from this discussion.
C. Therefore: “Jesus was NOT calling Judas 'the devil' nor was Jesus even calling Judas 'a devil'”
is a true statement, even though you may yet consider it wrong.
So what's the only logical conclusion then, Ed? If the KJV says Jesus called Judas “a devil”, and you say Jesus couldn't have been calling Judas “a devil”, the KJV must have been WRONG, right?Just say that.
Quote (Ed J @ April 20 2014,19:39) Quote (mikeboll64 @ April 21 2014,11:37) Ed, You are PURPOSELY quoting t8's comments and questions out of context to paint a very DIFFERENT story than the one that actually occurred.
Do it again, and you'll have two tiles to cry about.
Please explain what you mean?
Does the context change the words?If so then please show how not including his whole post changes the words I highlighted?
Looking forward to this.
From page 13:Quote (Ed J @ April 20 2014,18:20) Quote (t8 @ April 21 2014,10:32) Ed J, I have told you before that I am not tiling anyone for disagreeing with me. That is simply not the case. 2) The AKJV is not a perfect translation.
Agree to that, and I will remove the tile.
It simply is the case, because YOU refuse to remove the tile unless I agree with your doctrine.So please stop the lies, OK?
Now Ed, can you SERIOUSLY not see the DECEIVIOUS SLANT in that post? Can you SERIOUSLY not see how you posted a PORTION of the words t8 said – out of context – to make it seem like t8 is forcing you to agree with something he believes in order to remove the tile?
If you cannot, I will walk you through it step by step. But since I know you did what you did ON PURPOSE, I also know that you are smart enough to KNOW what you did.
So if you make me walk you through it, I will give you the tile you already deserve, just for making me go through that trouble.
Is it worth another tile to have me point out what you did wrong in that post? Or is it all coming back to you now?
Quote (terraricca @ April 21 2014,10:53) Quote (Ed J @ April 21 2014,19:47) 1 now please remove the tile
Well done, Ed! See how EASY that was?
Of course we all now KNOW that your claims of a “perfect” AKJV Bible are just hot air – since you DON'T actually believe it is perfect after all. And that means your numerology theory is all messed up, since the perfection of that theory was based on the perfection of the KJV Bible, right?
t8, Eddy has finally DIRECTLY answered the simple question you asked him all those months ago.
(For the record, I believe the KJV is spot on with their translation of John 6:70. But I'm glad you were finally able to DIRECTLY answer a simple question, Ed. Now maybe we can put this whole thing behind us……… until the next question!
)Quote (Ed J @ April 22 2014,01:47) 1 now please remove the tile
1) Your interpretation of John 6:70;
2) The AKJV translation of this verse.Hooray. For the record, Ed J says that his interpretation of John 6:70 is correct while the AKJV is not. Therefore, by his own admission, the AKJV is not a perfect translation. Wow two giants go head to head and Ed J is the victor.
So next time you see Ed J post his numerics, remember that his method is in the least, not perfect, and in the most, totally bogus.
Been so long that I have removed a tile, I cannot remember the exact procedure. Mike, do you want the honour?
Quote (t8 @ April 22 2014,11:46) Quote (Ed J @ April 22 2014,01:47) 1 now please remove the tile
1) Your interpretation of John 6:70;
2) The AKJV translation of this verse.Hooray. For the record, Ed J says that his interpretation of John 6:70 is correct while the AKJV is not. Therefore, by his own admission, the AKJV is not a perfect translation. Wow two giants go head to head and Ed J is the victor.
So next time you see Ed J post his numerics, remember that his method is in the least, not perfect, and in the most, totally bogus.
Hi T8,Thank you for being reasonable – for the moment anyways – and removing the tile.
Here's a link where we can discuss things specific to the “AKJV Bible” such as reliability, ect… (Link)God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote (t8 @ April 21 2014,18:47) Been so long that I have removed a tile, I cannot remember the exact procedure. Mike, do you want the honour? Hi Guys, I haven't got a lot of time right now,
I would like to make a conclusional statement for the record.
And the “Scripture” I would like to cite is located in Luke 18:2-6…“There was in a city a judge, which feared not God, neither regarded man: And there was
a widow in that city; and she came unto him, saying, Avenge me of mine adversary.
And he would not for a while: but afterward he said within himself, Though I fear not
God, nor regard man; Yet because this widow troubleth me, I will avenge her, lest
by her continual coming she weary me. And the Lord said, Hear what the unjust judge saith.”T8 has avenged me of mine adversary (the one roaming around seeking whom he may devour)…
…though our outward man perish, yet the inward man is renewed day by day.Two giants go head to head (satan vs Ed J),
……..and Ed J is the victor……..Hooray!God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote (Ed J @ April 24 2014,11:43) Hi Guys, I haven't got a lot of time right now, I would like to make a conclusional statement for the record.
And the “Scripture” I would like to cite is located in Luke 18:2-6…“There was in a city a judge, which feared not God, neither regarded man: And there was
a widow in that city; and she came unto him, saying, Avenge me of mine adversary.
And he would not for a while: but afterward he said within himself, Though I fear not
God, nor regard man; Yet because this widow troubleth me, I will avenge her, lest
by her continual coming she weary me. And the Lord said, Hear what the unjust judge saith.”T8 has avenged me of mine adversary (the one roaming around seeking whom he may devour)…
…though our outward man perish, yet the inward man is renewed day by day.Two giants go head to head (satan vs Ed J),
……..and Ed J is the victor……..Hooray!God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
edjI feel sorry for you ; for the state of mind you have cultivated
Quote (terraricca @ April 24 2014,19:28) Quote (Ed J @ April 24 2014,11:43) Two giants go head to head (satan vs Ed J),
……..and Ed J is the victor……..Hooray!
edjI feel sorry for you ; for the state of mind you have cultivated
I was thinking the same thing, Pierre.Ed, in what way are you the “victor” here?
It seems to me that t8 made a great point AGAINST you, and it took months of you avoiding his point before you finally accepted that he was right and you were wrong.
The tile wasn't for you being wrong, but for you refusing to deal with the fact that you WERE wrong.
You've finally accepted that one of your two points were wrong (since the two points were conflicting). And that means t8 patiently put up with a bunch of unnecessary garbage from you until you finally admitted your error, and gave t8 his “victory”.
The fact that you see it another way than the way it really happened shows that your pride still won't allow you to just let this thing go.
Mike and T,
It sounds to me like Ed is complimenting T8.
T8 being the judge who avenged Ed his enemy Satan. In that case Ed is the victor even if it took him a while.
I do not see what I could be missing.
Quote (kerwin @ April 27 2014,13:38) Mike and T, It sounds to me like Ed is complimenting T8.
T8 being the judge who avenged Ed his enemy Satan. In that case Ed is the victor even if it took him a while.
I do not see what I could be missing.
kERWINIf this is true ,then I have made a big error and do apologize to edj for it ,of cause my English is not the best so I will see what Mike or t8 says on this
(YOU UNDERSTAND THAT SATAN COULD BE USED ALLEGORICALLY TO BE ANYONE ,RIGHT )
Kerwin,
If Ed was indeed complimenting t8 for helping him to gain victory over his enemy Satan, who had Ed bound for a few months, then I also apologize to Ed.
But I think Ed was referring to t8 as “satan”, and touting his own victory over t8/satan.
Hopefully Ed J meant it in the best way. But yeah, I didn't read it that way initially, but it is possible.
confirm it one way or the other thank you- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
