Let's try something new: Do we agree on anything?

P

Ps82

Well-known member
Hi TOL,
Of course, I'm starting the thread so I get to ask the first question. All who want can make remarks about the question.
At some point when a question seems answered then someone else can jump in and ask another question and so forth.

I would like to keep our question on one topic I'll call: Seeking to know our God. Here goes.

How many of you believe there is only ONE living God and he is an invisible Spirit?
 
annabenedetti

annabenedetti

like marbles on glass
chrysostom said:
I had to look that word up. I don't think we should be afraid of AI. He can be very useful.
Click to expand...

I think treating AI as if it's human is risky.

AI can be dangerous. The following sounds funny until maybe you're the one whose traffic stop gets finessed into a felony by a faulty AI transcipt. The article points out "it is often impossible, even for departments themselves, to tell which parts of a report were written by AI and which by an officer."

​

Cop Transforms Into Frog, According To AI-Generated Police Report​

​
A December test of AI report-writing tools in Heber City, Utah, produced a police report claiming an officer had shape-shifted into a frog after misinterpreting background audio from the Disney film The Princess and the Frog, forcing the department to explain how such a basic reality check failed.​
​
As more U.S. agencies quietly adopt generative AI systems like Axon’s Draft One to turn body-camera audio into official reports, the central question is whether any promised efficiency gains outweigh the new risks to accuracy, accountability and due process.​
 
Nick M

Nick M

God and sinners reconciled
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
chrysostom said:
I don't like the way you divide it.
Click to expand...
Thank you for the low hanging fruit.

7 But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel of the circumcised was to Peter

You can even look up the Greek. It is the gospel OF the uncircumcised. It shows possessions, not direction. It is our gospel.
 
Derf

Derf

Well-known member
Nick M said:
Thank you for the low hanging fruit.

7 But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel of the circumcised was to Peter

You can even look up the Greek. It is the gospel OF the uncircumcised. It shows possessions, not direction. It is our gospel.
Click to expand...
If you look up the Greek, you'll find that the word "gospel" is only used once in that verse. So the question then is whether "of the circumcised" means the gospel was different or the peop!e were different. The obvious answer is that the gospel is the same, but different peop!e were committed to Peter.

I'm sure we'll all agree on at least this point!
 
JudgeRightly

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
Derf said:
If you look up the Greek, you'll find that the word "gospel" is only used once in that verse. So the question then is whether "of the circumcised" means the gospel was different or the peop!e were different. The obvious answer is that the gospel is the same, but different peop!e were committed to Peter.

I'm sure we'll all agree on at least this point!
Click to expand...

Screenshot_20260113-195243.png

The grammar of verse 7 makes it clear that there are two gospels being discussed: that of the uncircumcised, that of the circumcised.
 
Nick M

Nick M

God and sinners reconciled
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Derf said:
If you look up the Greek, you'll find that the word "gospel" is only used once in that verse. So the question then is whether "of the circumcised" means the gospel was different or the peop!e were different. The obvious answer is that the gospel is the same, but different peop!e were committed to Peter.

I'm sure we'll all agree on at least this point!
Click to expand...

You are contradicting the Great Commission. Which is what everybody does right after saying it exists.
 
JudgeRightly

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
Derf said:
It doesn't.
Click to expand...

Denying it doesn't make it false, Derf.

I presented the verse from an interlinear. Paul said he was entrusted with the gospel of the uncircumcision, in the same way Peter was entrusted with the circumcision.

Meaning, they were both entrusted with a gospel.

Or are you asserting that Peter was given something different?

You're kicking against scripture, here.

"Just as"

Strong's g2531

- Lexical: καθώς
- Transliteration: kathos
- Part of Speech: Adverb
- Phonetic Spelling: kath-oce'
- Definition: according to the manner in which, in the degree that, just as, as.
- Origin: From kata and hos; just (or inasmuch) as, that.
- Usage: according to, (according, even) as, how, when.
- Translated as (count): as (127), just as (44), even as (7), Accordingly (1), as also (1), as usually (1), how (1), So also (1).

So whatever Paul was given, it was the same thing, same extent, same degree, that Peter was given. A gospel.

Paul was given the gospel of the uncircumcision, therefore, by inference, Peter was given the gospel of the circumcision.

If it was the same gospel, Paul could have just said "I was given the same gospel as Peter." But he didn't.

"The blue outfit was entrusted to Paul just as Peter the green."

The analogy uses the same sentence structure as Galatians 2:7.

Both Peter and Paul received an outfit. One is blue, one is green. Yet "outfit" is only used once, for Paul. Using your logic, Derf, Paul never received an outfit of his own, he was just given the same outfit Peter was given.

It makes perfect sense to read it as Peter and Paul having received their own outfits, one green and one blue, respectively, yet according to you somehow when it comes to the gospel of the uncircumcision given to Paul, it must be the same as the circumcision given to Peter.

Make it make sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top