Who can declare....

Who can declare that they are cognizant of the teachings of the Bible? I cannot make such a declaration.

 

cognizant

Anyone who is conscious, can read and comprehend.

Are you saying you read the bible but cannot comprehend the bible?

That is the only logical conclusion that I can come up here with.

 

The definition that you so adequately supplied does not say anything about "comprehension"... therefore, you have taken the definition out of context.

 

Neither is reading. However, in order to read and comprehend, you must be conscious.

Therefore my first question\statement stands: "Are you saying you read the bible but cannot comprehend the bible? "

 

Which does not address the OP. Can you declare that you are cognizant of the teachings of the Bible? A simple 'yes' or 'no' response is all that is necessary. The OP does not require any justification or rationalization. Any such justification or rationalization therefore would be considered off-topic.

 

Anyone who is conscious, can read and comprehend. This was answered in Post #2. It is not my problem you must constantly be obtuse on matters.

 

A false claim you have made. "anyone" is an absolute which in this case includes all people who are capable of reading. Reading and comprehending what is read are two different individual character traits involving the individual intellect. You cannot prove your false claim to have any truth in it.

Now back to the OP which said nothing about 'comprehension'.

 

Are you here just to argue and be obtuse?

 

Are you here just to argue against the English language and the definitions that have already been accepted by society and to which (by your provision of a definition) you also consent? Nice to also see that you paid no attention to the use of the term "fully" found within that definition you supplied.

 

You are just here to be obtuse. That much is clear.

 

As an epistemological sceptic, I'm not cognizant of anything.

 

Thank you for that honest answer. It is deeply appreciated.

 

Which definition of "obtuse" are you using?
"ob·tuse (b-ts, -tys, b-)
adj. ob·tus·er, ob·tus·est
1.
a. Lacking quickness of perception or intellect.
b. Characterized by a lack of intelligence or sensitivity: an obtuse remark.
c. Not distinctly felt: an obtuse pain.
2.
a. Not sharp, pointed, or acute in form; blunt.
b. Having an obtuse angle: an obtuse triangle.
c. Botany. Having a blunt or rounded tip: an obtuse leaf."

 

Are you an inanimate object?

 

I don't see "inanimate object" mentioned in the definitions. What does that have to do with being 'obtuse'? Not all inanimate objects are 'obtuse'.

 

That fully depends on what you mean by cognizant. Considering your long, long track record of trying to make or break someone's argument on how they are using a particular word, it would be wonderful if you were absolutely specific about what YOU take cognizant to mean. I don't want a a copy and paste job from a dictionary, explain it in your own words.

 

In the definitions that you used, the second one (a & b) applies to inanimate objects.

So once again, are you an inanimate object?

 

Definition of COGNIZANT


: knowledgeable of something especially through personal experience;


I am cognizant of the bible. Read a few pages somewhere along the line. Whats your point?

 

I think you know more than you realize. All of the stories in the Bible seek to answer just these three questions:

1. Are you "saved" because of entitlement/

2. Are you "saved" by your works?

3. Are you "saved" by your faith?

All you have to do is pick any story in the Bible and analyze it by those three questions.

Consider the Israelites/Hebrews/Jews. They got where they were by entitlement.

Moses and Noah are examples of work.

Job is an example of faith.

Other characters display a combination, such as Jesus (entitlement as the son of God). He flip-flopped between faith and works. Some of his stories emphasize one more than the other. He never could make up his mind.

Give it a try.

 

In deed, you are having a problem with the definitions of words:
"cognizant:
Fully informed; conscious."

I am truly surprised at you on this one, as that is the same definition that you gave in post #2.

You say you don't want a copy and paste job from a dictionary, so I gave the same definition that you supplied earlier. Are you now going to question the definition I use for 'cognizant'?

 

I think some people needlessly complicate things. These are books.. written over periods of thousands of years, by different authors. The original language, the time, & the Hermeneutics have to be taken into account, but it is not rocket science. It takes some research, & avoiding commentaries, but it can be done.

I think people get more confused by the widely varying interpretations or deductions ABOUT the various scripts, rather than what they say on the surface. If you spiritualise everything, you lose the intended meaning. All you have to do is ask, 'What does the author intend to communicate, here?' Words can be fuzzy, & translations are fuzzier. But it is much simpler, imo, than it is portrayed.

 

Being applied to something is not the something to which it is applied. I can apply apple juice to the surface of a car, but it is not going to be the same thing as wax specifically designed for automotive use. Fail on your part, because 'inanimate' is not mentioned in the definitions.

 

In the definitions that you used, the second one (a & b) applies to inanimate objects.

So once again, are you an inanimate object?

 

im cognizant of the teachings of the Bible

 

None of your response below addresses the question in the OP. Can you or can you not declare that you are cognizant of the teachings of the Bible?