I don't think you're getting my point.
If I'm transcribing something for somebody, and I don't write down their words VERBATIM, but rather substitute my own interpretations into things, then I can significantly alter what they are saying.

Instead of saying, "John is not getting this job done", I could say "John is not doing his job", and the two have entirely different meanings.
Perhaps an honest mistake. Perhaps not. The significance is that it MEANS SOMETHING DIFFERENT than the originator intended.


Using your analogy, would you play the EXACT SAME NOTES as the other person?
Or would you alter the notes to give it a different sound?
Perhaps make it more jazzy when the other player had it more somber?

THAT is my point.


Yes. It is.

A) Saying Peter denied Jesus before the cock crows.
B) Saying Peter denied Jesus before the cock crowed 10 or 12 times.

Peter denies Jesus, then the cock crows.
Both A and B are true.

The cock crows once, then Peter denies Jesus. Then the cock crows 9 or 11 more times.
A is false, but B is true.

And it's this casual disregard for significant differences which make this leeway you introduce especially concerning with regards to believing the bible.


"That is that" to you.
To others who won't overlook the inherent contradiction in claims of what Jesus said, that is not just "that".

But while we're on the subject of the cock crowing, how many times did the cock crow?

How many times did the cock crow?
MAR 14:72 And the second time the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept.

MAT 26:74 Then began he to curse and to swear, saying, I know not the man. And immediately the cock crew.
MAT 26:75 And Peter remembered the word of Jesus, which said unto him, Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice. And he went out, and wept bitterly.

LUK 22:60 And Peter said, Man, I know not what thou sayest. And immediately, while he yet spake, the cock crew.
LUK 22:61 And the Lord turned, and looked upon Peter. And Peter remembered the word of the Lord, how he had said unto him, Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice.

JOH 13:38 Jesus answered him, Wilt thou lay down thy life for my sake? Verily, verily, I say unto thee, The cock shall not crow, still thou hast denied me thrice.

JOH 18:27 Peter then denied again: and immediately the cock crew.


Or are we to believe that Peter just denied Jesus a total of six times, three in one place and three in another?

Nope. I am also working and I am human. You are beginning to rant. If you don't like my answers, fine. No problem. I would never avoid answering your questions but in due time, not yours. You sure are a demanding thing aren't you. This is how it's going to work or it aint gonna work. I answer when I feel like and to what I feel like. You aint the boss bub.

"rant"? <snort>
Give me a break. I was ENTIRELY on topic and my comments were completely relevant.

If you want me to separate the ideas into separate posts, I will do it in this case because there is one aspect I would REALLY like elaboration on.
Specifically, my posts commentary on how you are SERIOUSLY diverging from any Christian biblical interpretation that I have ever seen. And I've talked to a few Christians on the subject, and can also show you other online interpretations of bible passages which you are seeing a different way.

I would seriously like that addressed.


Alias, I have talked to you with WAYYYY too many conversations to take your claim of "I would never avoid answering your questions..." seriously.
There are a variety of questions that have been REPEATEDLY asked, some WEEKS old, which you have consistently ignored.
Like the question of "Have you asked the "gay people" that you "know" about whether or not they chose to be gay?" question. VERY old question, and it would only take a few key-strokes to answer.

Don't try to b.s. me, or anybody else for that matter. I do have grounds for thinking that you avoid issues when convenient.

Now you're going off on a "gay" rant. Give me your contradiction and I will give you my interpretation. That's it. No more, no less. If that is not what you prefer than I suggest you shake another tree because whatever it is you're after you aint gonna find it here.

Again, you're reaching for ANY excuse to avoid what I'm talking about...
You claimed that you answer questions, in your own time.

I prove, with an example, that you DO NOT do that.

And you respond with non-sequitur....


There are issues on the first one that are still out there...
The second one? You just DROPPED the whole discussion completely.
And there's also a THIRD one out there right now that you haven't even commented on.

"Give me your contradiction and I will give you my interpretation."?
I guess I should have tried to annotate that I was hoping for a GOOD interpretation. Not just a half-assed excuse thrown together out of convenience...

If you're not wanting to really discuss these, then why do you reply in the first place?

When you stop your tirade, we can address whatever you wish. I am ready. Now you give me one question and one only and I will answer it and then you may ask another. If you cannot do that, I will stop right now and that will be it and you can claim you won or whatever it is you're after. Go.

Fine. If this will get you past your excuse of claiming "tirade" and "rant", let's do it...

Do you believe that the Bible states that Jesus had to keep the law perfectly in order to fulfill the prophecies?

I believe the bible states he was without sin in his life. I believe he fulfilled every prophecy about him. I don't know of any verse worded like your question. Spit it out.

And when you say "without sin", are you meaning that there are some things that would be "sins" for us mortals to do, but that it wasn't a "sin" for Jesus to do it?

Is that understanding correct?

Jesus was God and man. He is a unique individual. What would be sin for us would also be sin for him. Yes. I smell a trap, but go ahead and make a fool of yourself.