Pr0ton:


Now I'm clear on what we are arguing about here.



And that is not a contradiction to you? We are focusing on the word "hear" and not whether they understood what they heard or not.



First, and again, since we are focusing on the word "hear" why should you say that they didn't hear the voice even when the verse says they did?

Second, what is it that they did not understand? How could they not understand something they had not heard? "They heard a voice, but they didn't understand" has more meaning than "They did not hear the voice, but didn't understand". If you are going for the former sentence, remember we are focusing on the word "hear" i.e whether they heard or not, and not whether they understood or not.



Are you trying to say they heard the voice even when the verse apparently says they didn't?



It's rather: they heard the voice but didn't understand.



and, according to they verse, they didn't hear the voice. Maybe you should reread the verses.



Yeah.

very good, you agree, the two verse is talking about "hear" and not" understand" now this is my points, the word hear has two Greek meaning are;
" The genitive case is the
sense of "being aware but not
understanding", whereas the
other is in the sense of "you
heard it."

This two meaning are pointing to the same thing the word "hear" YOU HERED IT AND DO NOT UNDERSTAND IS AS GOOD AS YOU DID NOT HEARD IT.

The encounter made Paul to be blind, he couldn't have seen there reaction or faces,but after the encounter, he could've known the people what happened,honestly I don't know how to put it, but trust me, there is no contradiction in there, the misunderstanding come from the Greek and English meaning of the word.

I am busy I may not be able tp reply you the way you preferred.peace.

malvisguy212:
very good, you agree, the two verse is talking about "hear" and not" understand" now this is my points, the word hear has two Greek meaning are;
" The genitive case is the
sense of "being aware but not
understanding", whereas the
other is in the sense of "you
heard it."

This two meaning are pointing to the same thing the word "hear" YOU HERED IT AND DO NOT UNDERSTAND IS AS GOOD AS YOU DID NOT HEARD IT.

The same Greek word is used in the two verses and their meanings should be the same. If the writer had wanted it different he would have used a different word to clear up confusion, especially when he said to be divinely inspired.

The encounter made Paul to be blind, he couldn't have seen there reaction or faces,but after the encounter, he could've known the people what happened,honestly I don't know how to put it, but trust me, there is no contradiction in there, the misunderstanding come from the Greek and English meaning of the word.

I am busy I may not be able tp reply you the way you preferred.peace.

There is. It's just irreconcileable.

at the end of the day, when you can make any word mean anything there is no point arguing about contradictions. and if the hermeneutical gymnastics don't work there is always the good old technique of claiming that you've already explained it you don't want to keep going over it. That seems to be the latest trick, to just claim to have argued something conclusively without even touching on it.

udatso:

Chai........ See twisting. Malvisguy212. Please save yourself the trouble and tell him verses such as these can be best understood in the spirit. He needs the holy spirit to reconcile those verses. Tell him to pray to God and fast for holy spirit to reveal the knowledge within.

you don't know what you are talking about, I will not go into the quran to attack you as they say "two wrong cannot make a right" but know this the quran is the only religious book that abrogate it teaching and the same replace revelation are still in the quran, so pleased just stay out of this.

Pr0ton:


The same Greek word is used in the two verses and their meanings should be the same. If the writer had wanted it different he would have used a different word to clear up confusion, especially when he said to be divinely inspired.



There is. It's just irreconcileable.

what do you mean by "their"? We are not talking about two different word but ONE and it's the word "hear" and the word (hear) has two different meaning but if you pay close attention to the meaning,they are indicating the same thing. hearing the voice and do not see who is talking is the same thing as I do not hear.

Pr0ton:


So you don't know that Paul rebuked Peter in Gal. 2



You post contains flaws. The author of Matthew was never an eye witness. They (Matthew and Paul) also don't agree on so many things. For example, Matt 5:17 says Jesus didn't come to abolish the law, while Eph 2:15 says He came to abolish the law.



Peter sees himself as the head, Paul sees him as nothing Gal. 2:6

if you want to talk about peter dispute with Paul you can create a thread and demand for answer;
Galatians 2:12-13
For prior to the coming of certain men
from James, he used to eat with the
Gentiles; but when they came, he began
to withdraw and hold himself aloof,
fearing the party of the circumcision.
And the rest of the Jews joined him in
hypocrisy, with the result that even
Barnabas was carried away by their
hypocrisy.

Even peter know what he was doing is wrong that why he withdraw himself.

"but should write to them to
abstain from the things polluted
by idols, and from sexual
immorality, and from what has
been strangled, and from blood."
Acts 15:20, ESV

"But when I saw that their conduct
was not in step with the truth of
the gospel, I said to Cephas
before them all, 'If you, though a
Jew, live like a Gentile and not
like a Jew, how can you force the
Gentiles to live like Jews?'” Gal.
2:14, ESV
(regarding abstaining from meat sacrificed to idols) "He requireth nothing at their hands but that which they were bound to do by brotherly concord." -Calvin's Commentary on Acts
"his conduct was greatly
aggravated by compelling the
Gentiles to observe Jewish
ceremonies, while he, being a
Jew, left himself at liberty. The
law was given to Jews, not to
Gentiles; so that he argues from
the less to the greater...he
compelled the Gentiles, by
withdrawing from their
communion, unless they chose to
submit to the yoke of the law"
Calvin's Commentary on Galatians
It seems that James was requiring
the Gentiles to live like Jews in
order to keep "brotherly concord."
Though nothing wrong in itself
with the meat, the Jews see it as
wrong so let's abstain to keep the
Gentile & Jewish church united. (a
lesson in our day regarding
alcohol consumption among
brothers?)

The context in eph2:15 is ONE IN CHRIST. The context does not indicating abandoned the law, it about one UNION.infacte Paul himself said this;

Galatians 3:28
There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither
slave nor free, nor is there male and
female, for you are all one in Christ
Jesus.
Galatians 6:15
Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision
means anything; what counts is the new
creation.

The law cannot saved us but it is the instruments which God will used to saved us, the law is to revealed our sinful nature,without the law I will not known "adultery" so when Paul mention we are One in christ, it indicating that we should look up to christ as a perfect example in keeping the law, infacte the context does not say we should abolished anything, read from verse one too the end.

Many christians cult are misinterpreting the bible, if you want to understand the bible, first understand the context.

malvisguy212:
hearing the voice and do not see who is talking is the same thing as I do not hear.

Classic!

^^ Classic indeed

he who has ears to hear, let him hear. He who has eyes to see, let him see. He who has eyes to see before he hears, let him synesthesise.

malvisguy212:
what do you mean by "their"? We are not talking about two different word but ONE and it's the word "hear" and the word (hear) has two different meaning but if you pay close attention to the meaning,they are indicating the same thing. hearing the voice and do not see who is talking is the same thing as I do not hear.

Wooow am impressed . . . really really impressed

PastorAIO:
he who has ears to hear, let him hear. He who has eyes to see, let him see. He who has eyes to see before he hears, let him synesthesise.

How about those who can't see? do we then assume that since they can't see they are equally deaf?

according to malviguy " hearing the voice and do not see who is talking is the same thing as I do not hear. chai

malvisguy212:
what do you mean by "their"? We are not talking about two different word but ONE and it's the word "hear" and the word (hear) has two different meaning but if you pay close attention to the meaning,they are indicating the same thing. [size=20]hearing the voice and do not see who is talking is the same thing as I do not hear.[/size]

What? Johnydon22 is that true?

johnydon22:


Wooow am impressed . . . really really impressed

I see, you are not bias this time, keep it up.

PastorAIO:


Classic!

good day my good friend.

This is another argument for another thread. You can create a thread for it.

malvisguy212:
if you want to talk about peter dispute with Paul you can create a thread and demand for answer;
Galatians 2:12-13
For prior to the coming of certain men
from James, he used to eat with the
Gentiles; but when they came, he began
to withdraw and hold himself aloof,
fearing the party of the circumcision.
And the rest of the Jews joined him in
hypocrisy, with the result that even
Barnabas was carried away by their
hypocrisy.

Even peter know what he was doing is wrong that why he withdraw himself.

"but should write to them to
abstain from the things polluted
by idols, and from sexual
immorality, and from what has
been strangled, and from blood."
Acts 15:20, ESV

"But when I saw that their conduct
was not in step with the truth of
the gospel, I said to Cephas
before them all, 'If you, though a
Jew, live like a Gentile and not
like a Jew, how can you force the
Gentiles to live like Jews?'” Gal.
2:14, ESV
(regarding abstaining from meat sacrificed to idols) "He requireth nothing at their hands but that which they were bound to do by brotherly concord." -Calvin's Commentary on Acts
"his conduct was greatly
aggravated by compelling the
Gentiles to observe Jewish
ceremonies, while he, being a
Jew, left himself at liberty. The
law was given to Jews, not to
Gentiles; so that he argues from
the less to the greater...he
compelled the Gentiles, by
withdrawing from their
communion, unless they chose to
submit to the yoke of the law"
Calvin's Commentary on Galatians
It seems that James was requiring
the Gentiles to live like Jews in
order to keep "brotherly concord."
Though nothing wrong in itself
with the meat, the Jews see it as
wrong so let's abstain to keep the
Gentile & Jewish church united. (a
lesson in our day regarding
alcohol consumption among
brothers?)

The context in eph2:15 is ONE IN CHRIST. The context does not indicating abandoned the law, it about one UNION.infacte Paul himself said this;

Galatians 3:28
There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither
slave nor free, nor is there male and
female, for you are all one in Christ
Jesus.
Galatians 6:15
Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision
means anything; what counts is the new
creation.

The law cannot saved us but it is the instruments which God will used to saved us, the law is to revealed our sinful nature,without the law I will not known "adultery" so when Paul mention we are One in christ, it indicating that we should look up to christ as a perfect example in keeping the law, infacte the context does not say we should abolished anything, read from verse one too the end.

Many christians cult are misinterpreting the bible, if you want to understand the bible, first understand the context.

malvisguy212:
I see, you are not bias this time, keep it up.

Indeed he is not bias on this. Weldone, monseur malvis

malvisguy212:
you don't know what you are talking about, I will not go into the quran to attack you as they say "two wrong cannot make a right" but know this the quran is the only religious book that abrogate it teaching and the same replace revelation are still in the quran, so pleased just stay out of this.

Hahaha suddenly malvisguy212 now the good guy.

You can't ask me to stay out of this
Am right here.......i have given you a good advice
to tell him it's the holy spirit and you failed to take my advice.
Grabbing my pop corn to see your more twisting of alukuo abi na aloku hear and understand explanation

malvisguy212:
I see, you are not bias this time, keep it up.

Hahahahahaha i mean am impressed at the glaring lie.. How can you even bear uttering such stuff in public.

hearing the voice and do not
see who is talking is the same thing as I do not
hear.

How can hearing something but not seeing still amount to not hearing it... Woooow am still impressed

Pr0ton:


What? Johnydon22 is that true?

Am impressed at the dumb dumber dumbest analogy i have ever seen on nairaland.. "hearing something but not seeing it means not hearing it" hahahahahaha i don die ooo pr0ton come hold me before i faint here..

johnydon22:


Am impressed at the dumb dumber dumbest analogy i have ever seen on nairaland.. "hearing something but not seeing it means not hearing it" hahahahahaha i don die ooo pr0ton come hold me before i faint here..

Abeg no faint oo

When I first read the sentence I had to ask a guy beside me just to be sure that I'm actually okay

malvisguy212:
The Greek word for "hear" (#191 akouo) is used in two Greek cases in these two
verses.
The two verse you quote are related with the same meaning. the case is the sense of "being aware but not understanding", whereas the other is in the sense of "you heard it."

If the bible is is god-inspired and god-dictated, it would be necessary for a mere mortal like to try to explain plain contradictions in it, whether it is related to Greek meaning or Hebrew meanings.

A god-inspired work should have no contradictions whatsoever.

johnydon22:


Hahahahahaha i mean am impressed at the glaring lie.. How can you even bear uttering such stuff in public.

How can hearing something but not seeing still amount to not hearing it... Woooow am still impressed

it is you guys here don't understand, hearing a word and you do not understand it meaning or see the man who is talking is as good as not hearing anything, that was what the Greek word of Akouo mean, and the two verse are related to this same meaning.

plaetton:


If the bible is is god-inspired and god-dictated, it would be necessary for a mere mortal like to try to explain plain contradictions in it, whether it is related to Greek meaning or Hebrew meanings.

A god-inspired work should have no contradictions whatsoever.

let me past my second post on this thread.

" The Bible must be the invention either of
good men or angels, bad men or devils,
or of God. However, it was not written by
good men, because good men would not
tell lies by saying ‘Thus saith the Lord;’ it
was not written by bad men because
they would not write about doing good
duty, while condemning sin, and
themselves to hell; thus, it must be
written by divine inspiration."

Pr0ton:
This is another argument for another thread. You can create a thread for it.

this thread has been around for a while, https://www.nairaland.com/1981918/did-paul-invent-christianity

malvisguy212:
let me past my second post on this thread.

" The Bible must be the invention either of
good men or angels, bad men or devils,
or of God. However, it was not written by
good men, because good men would not
tell lies by saying ‘Thus saith the Lord;’ it
was not written by bad men because
they would not write about doing good
duty, while condemning sin, and
themselves to hell; thus, it must be
written by divine inspiration."

Lol.
..and the divine inspiration is what is causing the confusion?
Is that your point?

plaetton:


Lol.
..and the divine inspiration is what is causing the confusion?
Is that your point?

yes, to the canal minded man,the word of God is foolishness to them, the reason why there is soo much controversy surrounding Paul is because Paul teach what other prophet preach, and to do this, he need to break it down.to understand the teaching of Paul you need to be guided by the holy spirit,a teachable spirit.

malvisguy212:
yes, to the canal minded man,the word of God is foolishness to them, the reason why there is soo much controversy surrounding Paul is because Paul teach what other prophet preach, and to do this, he need to break it down.to understand the teaching of Paul you need to be guided by the holy spirit,a teachable spirit.

This pure baloney, and it amazes me that you do not recognize the glaring contradictions in what you write.

Why would a wise god who is all knowing, who created the languages that we understand and speak not inspire a written work that should not require deciphering?

Does that mean that god didn't know how to express himself in simple Hebrew, Greek, roman, or English?

Funny that you don't see how silly it sounds that god gave Paul something to decipher for humanity, and then Paul ended up making a mess of it.
Lol.

malvisguy212:
yes, to the canal minded man,the word of God is foolishness to them, the reason why there is soo much controversy surrounding Paul is because Paul teach what other prophet preach, and to do this, he need to break it down.to understand the teaching of Paul you need to be guided by the holy spirit,a teachable spirit.

Smh

plaetton:


This pure baloney, and it amazes me that you do not recognize the glaring contradictions in what you write.

Why would a wise god who is all knowing, who created the languages that we understand and speak not inspire a written work that should not require deciphering?

Does that mean that god didn't know how to express himself in simple Hebrew, Greek, roman, or English?

Funny that you don't see how silly it sounds that god gave Paul something to decipher for humanity, and then Paul ended up making a mess of it.
Lol.

the bible is the word of God but there is some verse the writer add there opinion and also, it will be difficult to reconciled English meaning and Hebrew or Greek together. Before you conclude your opinion on contradiction, check for the possible answer to you question, you must know the Hebrew and Greek word of every words, good evening.

malvisguy212:
the bible is the word of God but there is some verse the writer add there opinion and also, it will be difficult to reconciled English meaning and Hebrew or Greek together. Before you conclude your opinion on contradiction, check for the possible answer to you question, you must know the Hebrew and Greek word of every words, good evening.

Eff-ing bulkshyte.

So everyone in the world is required to be fluent in Hebrew and Greek to understand message of god as written in the bible?

Funny that you are conceding that some parts of the bible(god's word) contain falsehoods not inspired by god.
Very interesting indeed.

Hhhmm!
I Wonder what parts if the bible we find these falsehoods.

Could it be the virgin birth, the miracles, the Crucifixion, the resurrection, or the ascension?

And these were all part of god's plan?

Gosh!

Hypocrisy.

plaetton:

Eff-ing bulkshyte.

So everyone in the world is required to be fluent in Hebrew and Greek to understand message of god as written in the bible?

Funny that you are conceding that some parts of the bible(god's word) contain falsehoods not inspired by god.
Very interesting indeed.

Hhhmm!
I Wonder what parts if the bible we find these falsehoods.

Could it be the virgin birth, the miracles, the Crucifixion, the resurrection, or the ascension?

And these were all part of god's plan?

Gosh!

you guys are bias, if you want to learn yoruba you will have to learn every word first.the bible is translated in Greek Hebrew and Aramic , you will have to understand the meaning of each word before you made your conclusion, let me give you an example of hausa language;

Ina kwana in English is good morning but when you look into it once again; ina kwana soppose to be " where you sleep". This is what the op soppose to understand, every languages has this problems.I can give you thousands of example and contradiction in hausa language that people have no problems with.