Sentences with phrase «bible scholar»

Well, this is weak exegesis; but there's no reason in general that an atheist can not be a bible scholar.

This is one dumb bible scholar who needs to stop frying her brains on drugs.

there is no way Jennifer Wright Knust is a bible scholar or pastor in any church that follows Christian theology... a typical liberal progressive....

this so - called «bible scholar and pastor» knust, has just succeeded in turning d bible up side.she is clearly a messenger with a message from satan's inner circle

However, you don't need to be a bible scholar to know what Jesus would believe, you would just have to read the bible.

Well, we know the writer of this is no bible scholar.

Plus we look at the life of French theologian - activist Simone Weil and hear from bible scholar supremo NT Wright

that's a ridiculous argument and any honest bible scholar will tell you that.

Let's see a passionate bible scholar and believer.

It's good to follow a bible scholar who gets it and asks all the best questions.

He is a former Christian bible scholar who studied the bible and found the mistakes and became an agnostic.

Take it from one bible scholar and preacher to another, you don't know what you are talking about.

ok Master, we'll defer to you then as the ultimate bible scholar.

Gary wrong again, Gary wrong again: I was a guest before this on this blog: Even check out Martin Zender; The World's most outspoken bible scholar facebook; You will find me there; he knows me, and his crew knows of me; Father has others too that have been with me for years that are not in my city through their ministries also that have come up along side of me, but I do not want you to come against them as they have their own trials to overcome, therefore; no names given there, they also know me and my testimony: I am God's workmanship therefore, I was brought up in Christ along side witnesses as His testimony: Gary; this is going to be shocking, but because God does not inform you of a thing, means to me, that He has kept very much from you: Now why would that be?

I'm not a bible scholar.

This lady calls herself a «bible scholar».

Hmmm... I guarantee there isn't a credible bible scholar out there that would agree with one of her biblical translations.

bible scholars please back that up

Besides the obvious creation narrative of «6 days» of creation even when adjusted for the «thousand years is as a day» still leaves wildly inaccurate time frames, coupled with the Adam lineage down to Abraham all written thousands of years after the supposed events took place by Moses, set's a definate time frame for how old the earth and most bible scholars proclaim this to be between 6,000 to 9,000 years old.

Most bible scholars will tell you that.

The arrogance to act as if your version of Abraham's god is any different... Noah's boat, The Garden of Eden, Living in a fish for 3 days, Satan existing, The slavery, The changing morals, The contradictions, The need to kill jesus, The fact that bible scholars can not agree to what it says, and the 3 gods all rolled up in one thingy.

Kermit here is my recnt list of reasons to NOT belive in the bible: Noah's boat, The Garden of Eden, am man iving in a fish for 3 days, Satan existing, The slavery, The changing morals, The contradictions, The need to kill jesus, The fact that bible scholars can not agree to what it says

randy; why do so many bible scholars proclaim the New World Translation «the most accurate», please do the research and you may want to read it yourself before misleading people about who was on the committee and how it was done.

With either choice, you can find seminary - trained pastors and Bibles scholars who support one candidate or the other and use the Bible to do so, while accusing the other side of being biblically illiterate.

You don't seem to understand that liberal bible scholars still believe in the resurrection, just that it was spiritual as opposed to physical.

Not exact matches

Please list your credentials as an expert in the original languages to validate your disapproval of the work done by dozens of BIBLICAL SCHOLARS who created the English Bibles.

There are parts of the bible even christian biblical scholars admit are likely fraudulent.

scholars go into all the different versions of the bible that were killed over and elected on that became the modern bible.

The bible was first written in Greek because Greek was the language of the Roman scholars.

The onus is on you to show how the bible is considered by the majority of serious historians and classical scholars to be a reliable historical reference.

steve: i say there are theologians and biblical scholars on both sides, and you say «the bible in no uncertain terms calls homosexuality sin»... how circular is that?

His first book was a collection of many scholars providing historical back ground on the bible, God, Jesus.

you guys know, don't you, that there are theological discussions with biblical scholars on both sides of the debate on whether the bible condemns homosexuality and homosexual behavior?

You understand that the bible was written by scholars and not a magical man, right?

I respect his education and passion in regards to religion and his being a scholar and author, but anyone can take a single verse out of the bible and attempt to give it individual meaning.

Great biblical scholars have and resoundingly do disagree with your God of wrath interpretation of the bible.

Will they only sell Bibles from which any psalms associated with David are removed (I hear he exhibited considerable moral failings), or will they concede to more «liberal» historical - critical scholars that David's authorship is questionable and thus avoid the need to remove any psalms...?

There is also nothing new here; the church and many other scholars have been well aware of the impossibility of fixing a date for Jesus» birth for millennia, due to a near complete lack of detail in that regard in the bible.

Obviously the iron age «scholars» who penned the bible and didn't even know the Earth was orbiting the Sun.

What I have seen is scholars who have spent decades of their lives reading and researching the bible unable to agree on whether or not ho.mo.se.xuality, as we know and understand it today, is condemned in the bible.

You people are hilarious, pretending to be scholars of the bible when you can barely manage to write a simple sentence.

Also, I'm not against reading books written by biblical scholars, I just started down this path because Jeremy stated that this is the best book about Jesus, rather than applying that attribute to the bible itself.

And there's no legitimate Bible scholar in the world who views the NIV as anything other than a watered down people's version of the BIble.

Scholars of religion are obviously totally uninformed, because you are qualified to judge exactly what Christianity is or isn't, just on the basis of having been a member of one subsect or other for your whole life, and maybe having read some small bits of the bible fifteen or twenty years ago.

Not a church, not a clergyman, not a bible, not a book, not a scholar.

Nothing helps in separating the various strands of data here, yet there is no Old Testament scholar I know of who believes that the present text as our bibles have it in Exodus Nineteen is from a single source.

When we found the dead sea scrolls in the 1940s, great scholars and religious leaders poured over them and found lots of mistakes with our current bibles, king james version included.

Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son — Forget about how the scholars interprets the bible for a few minutes, can you tell us your qualifications as a Biblical scholar as well?

Also, bear in mind King Josiah's reforms to the hebrew bible not to mention the convenient «discovery» of one of the lost books of Moses during his reign, ie Deuteronomy (which most scholars agree was not written in the time of «Moses»... provided Moses even existed... no evidence he or any of the Patriachs ever existed... except David) when you start to look at the evidence and history of judaism and christianity it becomes quite clear that these religions are not what they claim to be.

Not most importantly that since the bible is the most heavily researched book in the history of the world by wide orders of magnitude, scholars have thoroughly examined textual criticism issues such as this, and the Christian can rest assured that: — the bible we have is over 99 % original text — none of the verses under issue affect the Christian message of salvation through faith in the atoning work of Jesus on the cross at all, not even the smallest amount.