Oneness Man, you're probably a decent fellow and all that, but...
I use Strongs often, but I do not rely solely on his concordance. I use others (i.e. Vine's Dictionary) and look for agreement among the resources. Why? Because Strong's isn't 100% correct 100% of the time.
Please know why this is important. Strongs is not scripture. Being the decent fellow that you probably are, you're probably not in the habit of intentionally offending people and maybe you would have presented your 'discovery' in a way that would not have offended me and the tens of thousands of people who make their career in the field of pharmacy.
If your understanding of pharmacology was as good as it could be, you would have never made the inference that a connection exists between 1st century medicine men and today's apothecary. Quantitative calculations for formulations and knowledge of empirical formulas were not used 21 centuries ago, but it is used today in the development of medications, including all the stuff you have in your medicine cabinet and some of the stuff in your first aid kit.
I strive for peace, and the subject of your thread was provocative. I'll accept a cyber-handshake from you, as dial-up permits.
__________________
I’m not a scholar, just a crazy Jewish Believer who wants to see no one deceived and everyone saved.
Shalom uv’racha b’shem Yeshua Mishikheinu!
Peace and blessings unto you in the Name of Yeshua, Our Messiah!
Oneness Man, you're probably a decent fellow and all that, but...
I use Strongs often, but I do not rely solely on his concordance. I use others (i.e. Vine's Dictionary) and look for agreement among the resources. Why? Because Strong's isn't 100% correct 100% of the time.
Please know why this is important. Strongs is not scripture. Being the decent fellow that you probably are, you're probably not in the habit of intentionally offending people and maybe you would have presented your 'discovery' in a way that would not have offended me and the tens of thousands of people who make their career in the field of pharmacy.
If your understanding of pharmacology was as good as it could be, you would have never made the inference that a connection exists between 1st century medicine men and today's apothecary. Quantitative calculations for formulations and knowledge of empirical formulas were not used 21 centuries ago, but it is used today in the development of medications, including all the stuff you have in your medicine cabinet and some of the stuff in your first aid kit.
I strive for peace, and the subject of your thread was provocative. I'll accept a cyber-handshake from you, as dial-up permits.
Spot on brother...
__________________ Everyone's Connected <-- Visit now and Easily Connect with your Facebook credentials!
Join EC, help make this site something worth its name. We need people to get on their and start discussion, post pictures, make and join groups! INVITE YOUR FRIENDS... ask me what I would do to get you to join and invite your friends!
Oneness Man, you're probably a decent fellow and all that, but...
I use Strongs often, but I do not rely solely on his concordance. I use others (i.e. Vine's Dictionary) and look for agreement among the resources. Why? Because Strong's isn't 100% correct 100% of the time.
Please know why this is important. Strongs is not scripture. Being the decent fellow that you probably are, you're probably not in the habit of intentionally offending people and maybe you would have presented your 'discovery' in a way that would not have offended me and the tens of thousands of people who make their career in the field of pharmacy.
If your understanding of pharmacology was as good as it could be, you would have never made the inference that a connection exists between 1st century medicine men and today's apothecary. Quantitative calculations for formulations and knowledge of empirical formulas were not used 21 centuries ago, but it is used today in the development of medications, including all the stuff you have in your medicine cabinet and some of the stuff in your first aid kit.
I strive for peace, and the subject of your thread was provocative. I'll accept a cyber-handshake from you, as dial-up permits.
LOL!!! You're an alright fellow. I don't try to offend but I do know how to offend people when it warrants. People who know me know that I have done this many times. I just gave what the scripture said and wasn't looking for people to attack like a dog either.
Hybrid Mode
