What are your qualifications to analyze RHClark's posts?
I care enough about the scriptures to have spent a goodly portion of the last 26 years of my life studying them.
But don't take my word for anything, be a Berean, as I am sure you know you are supposed to be (because you also study, right?).
And don't forget the analogy of faith, or audience relevance, or the nuances of the Greek language.
Your first sentence is enough. Adding other books is a waste of time.
The first four years I was a Christian I used four Greek books and a Hebrew interlinear to learn what the Bible "really" says. I had full SETS of commentaries. They contradicted each other and at time God's Word. I finally concluded the translators pretty much agree and all we have to do to learn what God wants is read a Bible in the language we normally use. There's no need to learn "nuances of the Greek language" to learn John 3:16 or Mark 16:16. Or even John 14:15 and John 15:14.
I am confused. What "other books" are you referring to?
Any one who ignores the nuances of the Greek language will be easily led astray. Witness how many are just that!
Imagine someone reading in English "it is raining cats and dogs" but they do not understand the idioms of the native users?
Can you show me an example of "raining cats and dogs" in any translation of the Bible? You seem to think God is not able to protect His Word from one language to another. Like I posted, I discovered the commentaries contradicted each other and occasionally the Bible. I didn't find "nuances of the Greek language" to change any of the meanings in the Bibles I used. The books other than the Bible can and do lead people astray.
"Only Christ is the fullness of God's revelation." Everyday Hunter
