56
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 92:
Line 92: + + + +
Talk:Conservative Bible Project (view source)
Revision as of 18:52, January 7, 2010
, 18:52, January 7, 2010Finished? I don't think so...
The liberal comments also claimed that because the narrative about Jesus's infancy in Luke does not appear in the other Gospels, then we should accept the also-not-referenced verse about forgiving those who crucified Jesus. That's obviously a non sequitur, because the other Gospels ''do'' recount Jesus's words during the Passion and this verse was not recorded by eyewitnesses. Luke, who was not an eyewitness, would not add a quotation that the eyewitnesses omitted.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:25, 25 December 2009 (EST)
The liberal comments also claimed that because the narrative about Jesus's infancy in Luke does not appear in the other Gospels, then we should accept the also-not-referenced verse about forgiving those who crucified Jesus. That's obviously a non sequitur, because the other Gospels ''do'' recount Jesus's words during the Passion and this verse was not recorded by eyewitnesses. Luke, who was not an eyewitness, would not add a quotation that the eyewitnesses omitted.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:25, 25 December 2009 (EST)
== Mark Done? ==
I'm surprised to read that the translation of Mark is considered "finished." In my opinion, reading over the gospel of Mark, as it stands right now, it does not read as a finished translation at all! Reading over the talk pages, it seems that a consensus was never really reached about using the term "Divine Guide" for "Holy Spirit" (a term that still strikes me as New Age-y and liberal). The discussion over the term "grape juice" seems to have been tabled indefinitely. Overall, even though some of the translation choices are decent, this book looks very unfinished. --[[User:Caspianrex|Cory Howell]] 13:52, 7 January 2010 (EST)