Reputation
7,020
Next tag badge:
96/100 score
21/20 answers
Badges
1 8 30
Newest
 Necromancer
Impact
~65k people reached

Jun
29
comment Follow up question regarding the word hate Luke 14.26
@Kelsey48: The word διχάζω does not carry (of itself) any emotional connotation. It simply means "to divide in two," or "to separate." Obviously, such could come about because of the "hate" of one for another, but the term itself (as best I can tell) does not carry any such idea without context adding that idea to what caused the division.
Jun
16
comment What is “the gift of God” in Eph 2:8
@JackDouglas: I do not believe John 6:29 (in the context of John 6) indicates faith is a work done by people there, either (and so does not contradict the statement made here about Eph 2:8). But that is another question...
Jun
10
comment Are there two distinct words [‘lexemes’] for ‘fish’ in Jonah 2?
@Joseph: I totally agree with Davïd that you need to argue for a Hiphil Inf. Abs., not a Piel (follow the trail back from that comment). That matches the consonantal textform and forms of the other (disputed) uses of Inf. Abs. with a construct noun.
Jun
9
comment Which “house of the forest of Lebanon” had gold “shields” & “vessels” (1 Kg 10:17, 21)?
@JoshuaBigbee: That sounds like a good base passage to answer the question, though whether (2) or (3) may still need addressing.
Jun
9
comment Should different but synonymous words be translated differently?
@JoshuaBigbee: Well, what I mean is the fact of whether escalation is intended or not is the answer to the question of what word distinction (if any at all) should be done. I'll reword that sentence.
Jun
8
comment Are there two distinct words [‘lexemes’] for ‘fish’ in Jonah 2?
That was quite a change of direction, but an interesting addition to the discussion. Do you happen to know if any other scholars have taken this approach to the Jonah 2:1 passage?
Jun
4
comment Matt. 27:52 “tombs also were opened” apocalyptic symbolism?
While I understand what you are seeking for (examples of literary use of resurrection bodies as apocalyptic symbols of something), I struggle with what is to me a false dichotomy when you state: "The question is about the meaning of the text Matt. 27:52-53 as we have it ... it is not about the historicity of the event, not the question: Did it happen?" If a record of an historical event is "the meaning of the text" (at least in part), but you eliminate that from discussion, then you have eliminated a real (or at least open and honest) pursuit of "the meaning of the text."
Jun
1
comment Are there two distinct words [‘lexemes’] for ‘fish’ in Jonah 2?
@Davïd: Nope, not the first in history. I did find a scholarly reference to add to the answer that at least shows others see it as "possible." If you (or anyone) happens to have access to the original reference, feel free to edit that into the answer (but please translate into English).
Jun
1
comment Meaning of (et)“את” and (v'et)“וְאֵ֥ת” in Genesis 1:1
The issues with this answer cannot be counted in one comment. A few: (1) "The very next use of “the-earth” lacks either (et) or (v-et)," yes, because "earth" is the subject, not the direct object, which is what et marks. (2) You missed five et's in your first grouping and Genesis 2 counting alone: 1:17, 22, 27, 28, 2:3 (1st four have 3rd plural pronominal suffixes on them; אֹתָ֛ם; last 3rd singular, אֹת֑וֹ), which throws your counts off. (3) Your numerology imposed upon the text (22, 12) is not given significance in Gen 1-3 itself, which is contradictory to your premise of context. Etc.
May
30
comment Are there two distinct words [‘lexemes’] 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.
May
29
comment Are there two distinct words [‘lexemes’] 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...
May
28
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.
May
28
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) .
May
28
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.]).
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
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
22
comment Meaning of (et)“את” and (v'et)“וְאֵ֥ת” in Genesis 1:1
Additionally, the word preceding the et is not as significant as what follows, for Hebrew does not order sentences like English, and the et is often going to relate to the first word in the clause, because the first word is often the verb, and so et, being the direct object marker, relates to the verb more than the subject of the clause. The structure of Hebrew clauses are often (not always) VERB SUBJECT et DIRECT OBJECT. So you place too much weight on the word preceding et because you ignore the objective rules of grammar for the Hebrew language.
May
22
comment Meaning of (et)“את” and (v'et)“וְאֵ֥ת” in Genesis 1:1
But your pattern of seven breaks down from the start, because Gen 1:1 has two et's in it, for the "second word" (וְאֵ֥ת) is also the word et, only with the waw conjunction ("and") prefixed to it (which is how Hebrew grammar works with that conjunction). So your count is already objectively off in your analysis, starting at v.1 (and I have not bothered to analyze if you missed any others in your count).