Maggie

[Maggie @Barbara33623276]

@markalancraig @Mikeman1019 @abi4560 “No man comes to the Father but by Jesus”…. In 2 kings there is no mention of Elijah requiring any assistance from Jesus of Nazareth to ascend to heaven. This passage from Matthew does not refute that.

[Maggie @Barbara33623276]

@Mikeman1019 @abi4560 Elijah might disagree.

[Maggie @Barbara33623276]

@GarrettBrimer12 @Metadrene Eramus included the text under pressure and documented his doubts to its authenticity in the Annotations and Apologies. It is NOT included in most translations. Why be dishonest? This is a well known late addition (glad I could educate you on a subject you clearly didn’t know)

[Maggie @Barbara33623276]

@GarrettBrimer12 @Metadrene Fantastic because that is what we are discussing (not any of the other passages you desperately want to change the subject with). The Johannine Comma is universally acknowledged to be a late addition and not the proof text that you “need to leave … again”.

[Maggie @Barbara33623276]

@GarrettBrimer12 @Metadrene Yet you adhere to the King James translation which relied heavily on the work of the Erasmus 1522 edition which introduced the Johannine Comma, a passage not originally found in Johns 1st epistle. Everyone knows it is an addition and that is why most translations omit it.

[Maggie @Barbara33623276]

@GarrettBrimer12 @Metadrene Neither Tertullian, Origen, Chrysostom, nor the Council of Nicea used this passage in their debates regarding the nature of Jesus. Why? Because it wasn’t available. If it did exist it would have been exactly the passage they needed to point to a trinity. Funny how they missed it

[Maggie @Barbara33623276]

@GarrettBrimer12 @Metadrene Again… The Johannine comma is universally recognized as an interpolation; a late insertion by Erasmus which does not appear in any Greek manuscripts prior to the 16th century (1522). Which is why you found it in the King James version. Most translations do not include it.

[Maggie @Barbara33623276]

@X6599585816211 @Metadrene And yet neither Tertullian, Origen nor the Council of Nicea used this passage in their debates regarding the nature of Jesus. Why? Because it wasn’t available. If it did exist it would have been exactly the passage they needed to point to a trinity. Funny how they missed it.

[Maggie @Barbara33623276]

@X6599585816211 @Metadrene I never said it was invented by Eramus, rather he was pressured to incorporate it and expressed his doubts of its authenticity. This is well known and why most translations do not include it. Why be dishonest about it? Easy enough to research the topic.

[Maggie @Barbara33623276]

@X6599585816211 @Metadrene The Johannine comma is universally recognized as an interpolation; a late insertion by Erasmus which does not appear in any Greek manuscripts prior to the 16th century (1522). Which is why you found it in the King James version. Most translations do not include it.

[Maggie @Barbara33623276]

@ShawnA19881 @abi4560 I guess Shawn A knows his response is nonsense since he blocked me from responding. Keep coping Shawn! 😂

[Maggie @Barbara33623276]

@ShawnA19881 @abi4560 The second temple sacrifices continued for 40 years after Jesus of Nazareth was crucified. The crucifixion had no impact on Temple observances. Paul himself participated in them as we read in Acts.

[Maggie @Barbara33623276]

@TJadlow @one_skeptical @darwintojesus Oh my. Still too fast.

You falsely assume I’m an atheist.

Keep repeating your sad tropes when someone doesn’t follow your script. I’m still waiting for you to answer my question.

[Maggie @Barbara33623276]

@TJadlow @one_skeptical @darwintojesus I don't know why this is so difficult for you, frankly. I can do exactly what you brought into the debate with Matt Dillahunty.

[Maggie @Barbara33623276]

@TJadlow @one_skeptical @darwintojesus Or I could completely ignore the topic of the debate and run my own script and concurrently fail to answer questions. See! I can do that too.

[Maggie @Barbara33623276]

@TJadlow @one_skeptical @darwintojesus Do what? Parrot philosophical ideas? Sure. Attack individuals rather than addressing the presented arguments? Unlike you, It’s not my go to, but I probably could. Put words into others mouths and claim that’s what they asserted and call it a win? Why not? That was all you brought

[Maggie @Barbara33623276]

@TJadlow @one_skeptical @darwintojesus It was quite apparent to the audience that you were running a script - parroting philosophical ideas you don’t understand and can’t defend when challenged. When challenged you attacked the debater rather than articulately defining your position, which you could not seem to do.

[Maggie @Barbara33623276]

@TJadlow @one_skeptical @darwintojesus Yes.

[Maggie @Barbara33623276]

@TJadlow @one_skeptical @darwintojesus

[Maggie @Barbara33623276]

@TJadlow @one_skeptical @darwintojesus