Reputation
6,729
Next tag badge:
90/100 score
19/20 answers
Badges
1 6 29
Impact
~58k people reached

5h
comment Two words for ‘fish’ in Jonah 2
@Davïd: Thanks for the mention of accenting. I am one who holds to the consonantal text as being inspired, the accenting and vowel pointing being potentially flexible (i.e. good and useful commentary on the proper pronunciation of the text, but not necessarily inspired). So in my view, it is possible the he ending here is not supposed to be accented. Is there any other objection you could offer to thwart the he being seen as locative in some sense? I am certain you are more skilled in Hebrew than I, and at present I have not found a reason to remove the locative he from consideration.
16h
comment Two words for ‘fish’ in Jonah 2
Actually, I read the HALOT (1999 in my Logos Bible Software) entry to say that the collective use of the דָּג form is in Neh 13:16 (which makes sense there). So I am not sure there is a contradiction on that account, and it may well be the feminine form; but then one wonders why the switch to the feminine from the masculine and then back to the masculine? Even though my he locative is a conjecture, in some ways it still makes more sense to me, as it would still be the masculine. Mysteries...
19h
answered Two words for ‘fish’ in Jonah 2
1d
comment Did God ever go to the hell?
@anonymous: No, I disagree with some of Blessed Geek's statements. "Hell" is just a term used to translate some Greek and Hebrew words into English, so if one wants to use the term to translate "Sheol" or "Hades," I'm fine with that (though translating those as "hell" and also the "lake of fire" location as "hell" confuses things in my opinion). What I am saying is their is no OT or NT references to connect Hell as equal to the kingdom of Lucifer/Satan/Devil where he rules and currently abides.
1d
comment Did God ever go to the hell?
@anonymous: There is no support in Scripture for the basis of your comment that Lucifer (or Satan, or the Devil) "went somewhere and create [sic] his own kingdom, called Hell." Mt 25:41 notes that the "eternal fire" (τὸ πῦρ τὸ αἰώνιον; which, by the way, is distinct from Sheol/Hades) was created for the Devil, which Rev 20:10 reveals is the place he is finally judged. Satan himself is revealed to be loose in this world (e.g. Job 2:2; 1 Thes 2:8), and not ever noted as "in the Hell" (Sheol/Hades) as your question indicates. Such an idea is a popular misconception.
1d
comment Where is Dalmanutha?
Given what @JackDouglas noted about the parallel passage of Mt 15:39 referring to Magdala, it seems strange for these men to dogmatically affirm the site of/around Magdala cannot also be related to Dalmanoutha (whether a different name for the same place, a set of sister cities next to each other grown into one larger city, a neighborhood district within Magdala, possibly even a regional name, thought that seems unlikely, as the larger the area it intends to refer to, the more likely one would find the name attested to elsewhere in literature). Still, interesting info.
1d
revised 1 Cor 15:5: “And that He was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve” - How was that possible?
edited tags
1d
revised 1 Cor 15:5: “And that He was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve” - How was that possible?
added 12 characters in body
1d
answered 1 Cor 15:5: “And that He was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve” - How was that possible?
2d
comment Revelation 21:21 - How can gold appear clear?
+1 for the very "common knowledge" links referring to transparent gold, something the other answers missed checking into. I do not, however, believe the interpretation you offer from Rev 21:2 is correct. I believe the transparency is so the light of God can radiate out within and from Jerusalem to the new heavens and earth (Rev 21:23-24) .
2d
comment How prominent are bible scholars that think that the “simplest reading” of some possibly polytheistic verses are the correct interpretation?
@JimThio: Google translate is not "unbiased," it is "mechanical." It cannot account for the best word choice among possible choices, because it cannot account for the context of the statement. That is why a selected word in the translation section offers up other "options" to choose, and why there is a "Wrong?" selection to correct the mechanical filter. But there is still the issue that interpretation is different from translation, and "closest interpretation" is not necessarily the same as "simplest reading" (i.e. "raining cats and dogs" [trans.] means "raining very hard" [inter.]).
2d
awarded  Popular Question
May
27
comment How prominent are bible scholars that think that the “simplest reading” of some possibly polytheistic verses are the correct interpretation?
@JimThio: I said we all have a filter ("All language is interpreted through a filter"). You do, I do. Also, your question is about "interpretation" of a text, not "translation" of a text (though all translation involves some interpretation). I agree the translation would be "the president lied," but the interpretation of what that phrase means could be any of those I gave, depending upon the context of the statement. Do not confuse the terms translation and interpretation, as the latter is broader than the former.
May
27
comment Why is “Elyon” Translated as “The” Most High?
@JimThio: Recall I noted "variants in different copies" affects translation. One must choose the variant deemed best before translating, and one's selection of that will affect other translations of the term. So for those like me who take the Hebrew text as more authoritative than translations, that will inform my decisions; while those choosing to take a translation over the original language form may make different conclusions/translations. I think, however, that I have adequately answered "why" the article "the" is often added in Deut 32:8. Whether you agree that it should is your opinion.
May
27
comment Why is “Elyon” Translated as “The” Most High?
@Schuh: I clarified my preference for translation, though as I describe, it makes little actual difference, as the referent is the same no matter what.
May
27
revised Why is “Elyon” Translated as “The” Most High?
Added translation discussion
May
27
revised Why is “Elyon” Translated as “The” Most High?
Clarified
May
27
comment Why is “Elyon” Translated as “The” Most High?
@Schuh: (1) No, I am not saying Elyon should be rendered as YHWH, but that the text supports that the referent of both is to the same Being. (2) There is nothing logically contradictory to Abram swearing "to YHWH, the God most high," for God had the name YHWH prior to revealing it to Moses (Gen 12:8 testifies to Abram calling on YHWH, even in the LXX). (3) I do not take YHWH as being a late edit to the verse and consider the Hebrew text the locus of preservation over any translation of that text.
May
26
answered Why is “Elyon” Translated as “The” Most High?
May
25
revised How prominent are bible scholars that think that the “simplest reading” of some possibly polytheistic verses are the correct interpretation?
Modified some wording