DoctrinesofGraceBapt
Well-known member
Ah poor, DOGB. Get some more tissue ?.Congratulations on breaking up my response effectively as to not understand anything I said. But, that's what you do.
How does your obstinance in reading what others are saying effect me? You are the one missing out and acting the fool.
Rotfl... just because evidence was presented that you didn't search or study thoroughly, is no reason for you to pout.DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
What analysis of Hebrew terms? If you think what you presented was "thorough" analysis, you don't have a clue what your talking about. Read a word study for goodness sake. This is just more silly talk. I think you know that, hense your refusal to think through my statements as to make meaningful comments.
No, I'm pointing out your abysmal approach to word studies. It's like you don't care to be right. You only care about winning the argument.
Rotfl... your pompous claim that every Jew on the planet acknowledges a spiritual being with Jacob was laughable. That's your problem. Own up to it and grow up.DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
Do you deny that is the common Jewish response? If you do, you could justify such. Correct me with information as opposed to mocking my purposeful hyperbole.
No as I said, it was hyperbole. Have you never interacted with this kind of speech? It's commonly used to encourage others to seriously consider what they were saying. Like how you just throw things out there while justifying nothing. Why are you arguing that it's impossible for this to be spiritual being in the form of a man? This is when Jacob is named Israel. This is when the area was name Peniel, when Jacob said "For I have seen God face to face, and yet my life has been delivered.” But to you, Jacob just wrestled some guy. There seems to be a massive disconnect between the Scriptural narrative, it's relevant importance in the rest of the Tanahk, and your interpretation. To you, this is a meaningless factoid found in Genesis, but to the writers of Scripture, it seems far, far more important. Hosea interpreted this passage likewise: "He strove with the angel and prevailed; he wept and sought his favor. He met God at Bethel, and there God spoke with us—YHWH, the God of hosts, YHWH is his memorial name:" Hosea 12:4-5. But it doesn't matter what a Prophet said, it was just a man.
Because they were wresting. It's reasonable.DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
Hello, I'm asking why you favor struck over touch. Personally, I was just going with the ESV because it is a decent translation that is somewhat popular. If someone wished to disagree with that translation, okay. When you presented another translation, I asked if you had a reason for favoring struck over touch. That's all that going on here. So, why are you attacking me for asking a question? Sensitive much?
You do realize one doesn't dislocate a hip by striking it.
Well, you have been pretty stoney.
Hello, in this situation, I'm not the listener. You are. Again, is my point DOA because this listener has a heart of stone?
The ideas and terms are different. And that's why your switching because you're still coming up empty on support.DoctrinesofGraceBapt said:
Because in my mind, they are the same. On the other hand, I didn't think you would ever maturely deal with that reality.
And? Both relate to not using all the power one has in a situation for some reason. Which was my whole point in referencing meekness.
FYI, you do realize that my motives for "switching", as you put it, have no relevance to the validity of my argument.
And what's hilarious, the rabbit hole was on your own doing. An unsupported claim.
The irrationality of this response deserves no response.
God Bless