Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

12

None of these are called "the ten commandments" in the text, though Moshe, in Deut 4:13 and Deut 10:4, does refer to the "ten words" and probably means Exodus 20. (Words -- d'varim -- rather than commandments -- mitzvot.) The text does not ever assert that there are only ten commandments that matter. There are many lists (of length greater than 10) of ...


8

A detailed study on this issue by Daniel B. Wallace of the Evangelical Theological Society discusses five possibilities: Text-Critical: The text as it stands is incorrect and needs to be emended. Dominical: Jesus himself made a mistake or was intentionally midrashic (i.e., he embellished the OT story to make his point). Source-critical: Mark’s source ...


8

[JPS translation and verse numbering throughout, unless otherwise noted] Joel is a short book (just three or four chapters depending on how their broken up), rich with themes of eschatology, repentance, redemption and a very sardonic description of famine: Awake, ye drunkards, and weep, and wail, all ye drinkers of wine, because of the sweet wine, for ...


8

There are plenty of web sites that will give you comparatives, however, my broad take on the subject is that the LXX is not generally speaking considered more authoritative than any Hebrew text. The translators were not especially careful (though certainly not sloppy.) The amount of textual variants in the Hebrew text are MUCH smaller than in the Greek, for ...


8

Mark is more reliable.¹ Even if you were to completely discredit Mark², something is more than nothing. You cannot reasonably compare the accuracy of one document that exists with one that is only speculated to exist. Anybody that tries to tell you differently is selling something³. Answering your stated question is really that simple. In the world of ...


7

Fraser Orr's answer is excellent and I only hope to supplement his excellent answer with a few thoughts regarding "reliability." When asking a question like this, it's important to state your purpose. Why are you asking this question? The logic is such that they have reliable uses and applications within their own domains and we need to know the domain in ...


7

Check Tommy Wasserman's new(ish) critical edition of the text with commentary, it is more recent than NA28 and is certainly more complete with regard to manuscript evidence. His comments will be more detailed than those in UBS, though the comments there are often quite good. It should address the issue quite nicely. I don't have it on hand right now or I ...


6

According to Dr. Constantinou many of the books were separated when they were translated into Greek because the addition of vowels made individual scrolls too ponderous. Since Bibles in English tend to follow the Septuagint order even though they follow the Masoretic texts, they remain split. I went back and found the place where she discusses this: here. ...


6

I accessed "The Wisdom of Ben Sira: portions of the Book Ecclesiasticus from Hebrew manuscripts in the Cairo Genizah collection," edited by S. Schechter and C. Taylor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1899. It is accessible here. Fortunately, this book did have verse 3:17 in it, which follows: .בני בעשרך התהלך בענוה ותאהב מנותן מתנות בני ...


6

In response to your question: I am curious if any scholars have argued that either [ὁ] κύριος ([the] Lord) or ὁ θεός (the God) are the preferred reading of this passage, [...] Yes. I have treated Jude 5 (and the whole book) extensively in my monograph on Jude. The book is available here. You might find this blogpost is a helpful summary of my ...


6

user959 has a good answer which tells me that I should probably spend more time reading the translation committee's commentary. Having said that, textual criticism is quite interesting. While using text criticism, we look at two primary areas of evidence to support a reading: external evidence and internal evidence. With external evidence we evaluate the ...


5

I think "which is more reliable" is too imprecise a question. There are situations where the Dead Sea scrolls agree with the MT against LXX and vice-versa, and in some cases there's just no way to know which version is older. One more precise question is how often are the Qumran manuscripts close to MT and how often are they close to LXX. Wikipedia says ...


5

The best evidence against John the beloved disciple as the sole author is found in John 21:20-24, particularly verse 24: This is the disciple who is bearing witness about these things, and who has written these things, and we know that his testimony is true. [emphasis mine] A straightforward reading of this suggests that the beloved disciple had ...


5

It is often believed that the author of the second book references the first book. This is based on both using otherwise rare words (such as "multiply" in Jude 2 being used in 1 Peter 1:2 and 2 Peter 1:2) and themes ("our common salvation" in Jude 3 and "a faith of the same kind as ours" in 2 Peter 1:2). Whether Jude quotes 2 Peter or 2 Peter uses content ...


5

Most readers notice the connection between Jude 6 and 2 Peter 2.4, but the similarities go beyond that. Second Peter has a lot more material in between some of the parallels, but the two epistles actually touch on much of the same subject matter, in the same order: Jude 1 = 2 Peter 1.2 Jude 4-5 = 2 Peter 2.1 Jude 6-10 = 2 Peter 2.4-12 Jude 12-13 = 2 Peter ...


4

The Hittite treaties changed shape over time. Archeology has uncovered several examples of sometimes radical differences from one century to the next. The 10 Commandments are shaped like a Suzerainty Covenant, so is the book of Deuteronomy. When these forms are laid out next to the 10 Commandments or Dt, they both conform to the treaties from 1,200-1,500 ...


4

For context, the Gileadites were the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh who chose to occupy the land on the opposite side of the Jordan from the rest of Israel. This region was called Gilead. The Ephraimites had crossed the Jordan in order to confront the Gileadites, but were defeated by their fellow Israelites. The passage in question ...


4

Mark 13 is not critical to dating this gospel, but can help corroborate external evidence, and perhaps help improve our precision in dating it. External Evidence The earliest external evidence we have, from a second century bishop named Papias, says Mark was based on Peter's preaching: Mark having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately ...


4

The existence of Q was first inferred by 19th century German theologians from a statement made by the 2nd century bishop Papias of Hierapolis. Papias is quoted in Eusebius' History of the Church as saying, "Matthew wrote the oracles in the Hebrew language, and every one interpreted them as he was able." (History of the Church, 3.39.16). The Germans pointed ...


3

I'm not aware of anyone who has argued that none of the synoptic gospels relied on each other. This is primarily because we know Luke used sources (Luke 1:1-3). You may be able to find someone arguing that Matthew and Mark wrote independently from each other, but I doubt it.


3

Firstly, I believe in the inerrancy of God's Word, but I don't believe it is always helpful to bend over backwards making things 'fit' - sometimes we have to just accept that we don't have the knowledge to do so (and in those cases I'd say the things that have been revealed are the things that matter - and also go along with jrdioko's quote against the ...


3

First, I think it obvious that Jonah did not put this prayer to paper inside the leviathan, but wrote these words sometime later. Second, it isn't obvious who the author of the book itself is. Perhaps Jonah himself wrote it, but we really don't know. Third, it's unavoidable to notice that the book includes details that smack of hyperbole1: Jonah ...


3

The passage in question is Philippians 2:5-11 (NET Bible): You should have the same attitude toward one another that Christ Jesus had, who though he existed in the form of God did not regard equality with God as something to be grasped, but emptied himself by taking on the form of a slave, by looking like other men, and by sharing in human nature. He ...


3

Excellent reasons have been given for a pre-exilic authorship of the book of Joel. I wanted to present some of the reasons for a post-exilic authorship. The temple is standing, and the priesthood is active. (1.9,13,16; 2.17) This could certainly apply to the pre-exilic period, but of course could also apply to the post-exilic. 'Israel' is mentioned by name ...


3

The name was probably "Nevel", meaning "Harp". He was apparently a loyalist to the House of Saul living in Judah, which shows you how successful Saul was in maintain discipline in the kingdom, but which did not endear him to the author of I Samuel, who clearly sides with David and sees Nevel as a traitor to the tribe of Judah and calls him Naval. A Saul ...


3

The Tetragrammaton, or "YHWH" which is often pronounced "Yahweh" or "Jehovah", is the proper name of the God of the Bible. The word "Elohim" or any variation thereof ("El", "Eloh", "Elah".. etc) is a title which means simply "God" or more precisely, "Mighty Ones" (in the case of "Elohim", or in the singular for all the others) and not a proper name. Just as ...


2

Is it at all possible that these two books were written completely independent of one another by the individual prompting of the Holy Spirit? From a Christian perspective, the Holy Spirit is indeed the true Author of God's word and merely works through men by divine inspiration (as affirmed by Peter in 2 Peter 1:20-21). Given this, is it not quite feasible ...


2

@jrdioko lists five possibilities in his answer. Others have made the case for this not being an error. I'll consider the other options. If "in the time of Abiathar the high priest" is intended to mean "while Abiathar was high priest," who introduced the error? But first, my assumptions. I believe the Bible is infallible but not inerrant. That is, God chose ...


2

This question is hotly debated, and there's no real consensus. There's a very recent monograph on exactly this topic, Goodacre's "Thomas and the gospels". He argues strongly that Thomas is dependent on Matthew and Luke. According to Goodacre in an interview with his publisher, scholars are divided roughly 50/50 on whether Thomas is early and independent ...


2

The evidence, and the consensus of critical scholars, is that the Deuteronomic History (Joshua, Judges, 1 Samuel, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings and 2 Kings), written before the Babylonian Exile, was the main source for the Book of Chronicles (now 1 Chronicles and 2 Chronicles), but that the author of Chronicles probably had other material available as well. Chronicles ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible