ECT 'Euangelizo' is not even a grammatical question in Galatians--or anywhere.

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
You're just arrogant. You've insulated yourself from criticism.

If a passage supports 2P2P, you will enjoy your favorite translation.

If it does not, the translation is a criminal.

I still don't know what on earth lie you see in Mk 1:2 in the NIV. You are about the worst communicator I have encountered. Well, Danoh was worse, but he left.

Mark 1:2 (NIV)

What prophets?
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Mark 1:2 (NIV)

What prophets?


If you want to communicate, you answer: What prophets is Mark 1:2 talking about?

Well, guess what? Your 'hated' NIV is not in the plural. it says Isaiah the prophet.

Your communication and comprehension is derelict.

To tie back to the actual conversation, the question was what is the lie? You are just one ignorant, obscuring meander after another. What are you here for? What are you about?
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Mark 1:2 (NIV)

What prophets?


If you want to communicate, you answer: What prophets is Mark 1:2 talking about?

Well, guess what? Your 'hated' NIV is not in the plural. it says Isaiah the prophet.

Your communication and comprehension is derelict.


The hated NIV says Isaiah the prophet, gosh, do you know how to muck up a discussion. What are you about? ANYTHING BUT THE OP TOPIC, THAT'S WHAT!!!
 

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
If you want to communicate, you answer: What prophets is Mark 1:2 talking about?

Well, guess what? Your 'hated' NIV is not in the plural. it says Isaiah the prophet.

Your communication and comprehension is derelict.


The hated NIV says Isaiah the prophet, gosh, do you know how to muck up a discussion. What are you about? ANYTHING BUT THE OP TOPIC, THAT'S WHAT!!!

Mark 1:2 (NIV)

is still a lie.

Why would you study a "bible" that lies to you?
 

Danoh

New member
Aaaaagh, are you actually that simplistic?
Narrative: Paul rode a boat from Greece to Ephesus.
Doctrine: the grace of God in Christ saves us.

Try to learn how to think.

If Paul does something with Titus because otherwise Titus might die at the hands of Judaizers, you can't really call that a doctrinal teaching. he also slapped a high priest.

Not necessarily.

And your examples there - fact is that what Paul and they each said and did in both those instances was done in light of doctrinal viewpoint - his in light of theirs and vis versa.

Doctrine in Scripture often plays out within a narrative.

Even the off-base WWJD movement some years back, nevertheless got that much right.

Narrative is partly why your views so often clash as they do on here - your narrative is too often external to the Scripture - due to how often; off you went into endless books "about" in search of what Scripture's narrative might be "as asserted by Dr. So and so..."
 

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Narrative is partly why your views so often clash as they do on here - your narrative is too often external to the Scripture - due to how often; off you went into endless books "about" in search of what Scripture's narrative might be "as asserted by Dr. So and so..."

The Holfordian Compelsion Complex?
 

DAN P

Well-known member
Sorry dan but that is stupidity. I only have 4 graduate years in Greek and 3 of those under the textbook writer Ed Goodrick. When you diagram, you find the case or declension of the nouns before you slot them.


Hi and IF can really check the Greek text , CHECK 1 Cor 15:1 !!

Paul uses the GOSPEL / EUANGELION and says which I PREACHED / EUANGELKZO and are used in one verse together ~~

EUANGELION means , a good message !!

EUANGELIZO means I PREached !!

dan p
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Hi and IF can really check the Greek text , CHECK 1 Cor 15:1 !!

Paul uses the GOSPEL / EUANGELION and says which I PREACHED / EUANGELKZO and are used in one verse together ~~

EUANGELION means , a good message !!


EUANGELIZO means I PREached !!

dan p



Thanks for starting the conversation over from scratch. Where do we differ?
 

DAN P

Well-known member
Thanks for starting the conversation over from scratch. Where do we differ?


Hi and we differ plenty !!

#1, First verb is I DECLARE is spoken in thre Greek PRESENT GTENSE in the Dispensatilon of the Grace God or the MYSTERY that Paul is DECLARING !!

#2 , The second Greek verb is I PREACHED which is in the Greek AORIST TENSE of when Paul began preaching the MHYSTRY !!

#3, The third verb YE HAVE RECEIVED is in the Greek AORIST TENSE points to when Paul preached the MYSTERY and to gthe point in time that tgnhey received it's ;pfreaching !

#4 The fourth verb is YE STAND which is in the Greek PERFECT TENSE which points back to the beginning of the MYSTERYH and Paul's CONTINULOUS ACTION of Paul p;reaching that MYSTERY and this is why we will never agree !!

Many use Paul when it is CONVENIENT and then LAPSE back to an Acts 2 position and never say HOW they were really SAVED , so stop your EVASION and give the PATTERN as to how Paul was saved and then How you were saved !!

Any Greek scholar like you should know how it happened OR maybe explain HOW Peter was SAVED ??

dan p
 
Last edited:

DAN P

Well-known member
'euangelizo' is to preach the one gospel. They had a different way of writing 'preached two gospels.'


Hi and just where in 1 Cor 15:1 does it say HEIS / ONE Evangelizo ??

You are not just streching it, but ADDING THE GREEK word HEIS , are you not ??

So what gospel was Peter saved under and give a verse How Peter was saved , IF you can ??

dan p
 
Last edited:

Danoh

New member

He's right about declension - but then appears to forget its role in identifying, for example, number or quantity, as well as difference.

As in Gal. 1's "another which is not another" - the variation between the two Greek words for "another" there is because the sense is that of "another of a different kind - which is not another of the same kind - where there are two or more."

Paul's whole point to the Galatians is that for anyone to come along and mix that means of righteousness which was preached before the Cross: the Law for righteousness - with that means of righteousness preached after the Cross: Grace - the righteousness of God without the Law - is to end up at another "gospel" which is in fact, not another at all - neither the one, nor the other.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
The Holfordian Compelsion Complex?


Danoh is pathologically unable to speak accurately. Narrative referred to non-doctrinal sections of the NT. I have long had him on ignore for obtusity and communication sabotage. Even when the question is that simple, it comes out as muck in his head.
 
Top