Tell that to Greek Orthodox Priest who knows greek better than all who do not speak greek. I guess it is all "greek" to the people on that site.
That is an argument without substance, and its premise would require you to side with the Greeks in their dissension from Rome on any linguistic issues on the filique, or any that relate to papal infallibility and power, purgatory, etc.
The reality is that knowing Greek does not automatically confer veracity (there are Greek speaking JW's), especially in an age when linguistical claims can be examined. And in the light of which it is easy to see that New Testament pastors were not formally referred to as priests, but bishops/elders, (Titus 1:5-7) both denoting the same persons in the same pastoral office.
And in this case there is no dispute that in the N.T. the Greek has words it can use for cousins [or other kin] which are different words than “adelphos” (“suggenēs:” Luke 1:36,58; 2:44; 21:16; 14:12; Mk. 6:4; Jn. 18:26; Acts10:24; Rom.9:3; 16:7,11,21; or “anepsios:” Col 4:10: ), and that adelphos often refers to biological siblings.
As for my next claim, it would be more accurate to say that when adelphos is used with a parent (not necessarily named), or when one is named as a brother then that it is less likely to be used in the wider sense, (avoiding duplicates: Mt. 1:2,11; 4:18,21; 10:2; 14:3; 17:1; Mk. 5:37; cf. Mt. 13:55)
However, the reality is that the dispute about PMV cannot be determined by linguistics, due to the lack of precision, though they have their influence, while context and the principal of exceptions being manifest play a strong role.
And in regards to the latter, my statements that celibate marriage is unknown in Scripture (presuming ability), and that this is contrary to its description, (Gn. 2:24; Mt. 19:4,5) are also true, as well as the fact that the Holy Spirit abundantly records significant deviations from the norm. And by which we know the virgin birth of the Lord Jesus and His sinlessness, and many other things, from the age of Methuselah to the strength of Samson to the number of toes of Goliath, to the supernatural transport of Phillip, to the signs of an apostle, etc., etc.
And which leaves the Catholic trying to defend cardinal doctrines of Marian exceptions without such revelation or any actual substantiation such as like core Scriptural doctrines have, leaving any real argumentation to being based on silence, that Scripture does not disallow what Rome claims.
The reality is that while the Roman Catholic apologists try far more to defend these Marian exceptions from Scripture than what Rome “officially” does as in the CCC or approved notes, any RCA with such private interpretations of Scripture are merely a “peon with an opinion,” as i think Akin described himself, and these exceptions were not based upon the weight of Scriptural warrant but come from Tradition, and by extension the self-proclaimed assuredly infallible of Rome.
Thus for all the various (and sometimes contradictory) polemical prolixity of such RCAs trying to wrest support from Scripture, as said, that is not their real authority and assurance, and the issue remains that of authority, which has previously dealt with extensively in many other threads.
The lawyering of scripture does not mean just that any someone's opinion is right. I would go by all the history of the immediate people involved from the first generations of the church through time. This is what tradition holds for us. This sounds like a progressive lawyer twisting what the founding fathers of this country have declared. Which sad to say is slowly happening.
It is not about siding but shows that two ancient traditions of the church agree on alot more than disagreements. Anyone can use scripture like a lawyer. The enemy tried it with Christ our Savior. When we deny the history than try to make it after two thousand years for a socalled better interpreting of text than the original generations of the church leaders. It just shows why tradition matters in my view.
Look no matter what God's Divine Mercy can and will overrule and forgive a contrite heart. No matter how formal or informal.
Praise be to Jesus!!
It’s an argument without substance also because most of Jesus’ disciples were of humble station in life and without a “higher” education.
Saul had probably the best education available yet he spoke of himself as “ignorant” of the truth.
So a Greek Orthodox priest can express error in the most polished of Greek language and it will still be error.
ABSOLUTELY INDEED.