Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 127: Line 127:     
::::::::::::::::::All of your "experts" are simply sites citing the exact same source, Thayer's Greek-English lexicon.  To suggest that questioning that ''single'' definition is rejecting all authority is absurd.  Healthy skepticism is necessary to any intellectual project such as this.  Relying on a single authority as definitive is absurd.  The biblical concept of "rich" is far different than the present.  Denying that is patently ridiculous, and ignores millenia of economic and social change. That is why this project is necessary.  Like Luther's 500 years ago, it is an attempt to ground our knowledge in the original ''meaning'' of God's word. [[User:RodWeathers|- Rod Weathers]] 23:01, 26 December 2008 (EST)
 
::::::::::::::::::All of your "experts" are simply sites citing the exact same source, Thayer's Greek-English lexicon.  To suggest that questioning that ''single'' definition is rejecting all authority is absurd.  Healthy skepticism is necessary to any intellectual project such as this.  Relying on a single authority as definitive is absurd.  The biblical concept of "rich" is far different than the present.  Denying that is patently ridiculous, and ignores millenia of economic and social change. That is why this project is necessary.  Like Luther's 500 years ago, it is an attempt to ground our knowledge in the original ''meaning'' of God's word. [[User:RodWeathers|- Rod Weathers]] 23:01, 26 December 2008 (EST)
 +
 +
(Undent) Well I have 2 more (different) in hard copy.  ''The Complete Word Study New Testament'' Spiros Zodhiates, which says it means "rich" And the ''Linguistic Key to the Greek New Testament'' Rienecker and Rogers.  which says it means "rich" --[[User:CPAdmin1|Tim]] <small>(CPAdmin1)</small><sup>[[User talk:CPAdmin1|talk]]</sup> 23:14, 26 December 2008 (EST)
    
:::::::::::::::: Tim, the essence of this project is to open your mind and think for yourself, and not rely on an argument that "the experts say such-and-such."  Yes, some and perhaps all of the unnamed experts are liberals.  The process of inducing people to rely on "the perceived view of experts is a misleading one.  In courts of law it is generally not allowed without also hearing from an expert with the opposite view.   
 
:::::::::::::::: Tim, the essence of this project is to open your mind and think for yourself, and not rely on an argument that "the experts say such-and-such."  Yes, some and perhaps all of the unnamed experts are liberals.  The process of inducing people to rely on "the perceived view of experts is a misleading one.  In courts of law it is generally not allowed without also hearing from an expert with the opposite view.   
Siteadmin, Upload, Automoderated users, edit
2,144

edits

Navigation menu