1,361 reputation
110
bio website
location East Coast USA
age
visits member for 1 year, 2 months
seen 13 mins ago

I'm basically a self-taught, now inactive, web designer who still seeks to learn more about css (and some javascript) while pushing it to its limits: all as a part-time hobby between my Ph.D. studies in Systematic Theology. For those interacting with me on Biblical Hermeneutics, this meta question of mine will reveal a lot about where I come from regarding that topic.


Apr
21
comment Are sins of the future forgiven? John 20:23
I could tell by your follow up paragraph after the scripture quote that it had to be a "error" in the statement. But I did not want to assume that, which is why I did not just make the edit myself.
Apr
20
comment Are sins of the future forgiven? John 20:23
I believe you are missing a "not" in this sentence: "Paul made it crystal clear in another place, however, that because all our sins--past, present, and future--are forgiven, we are [not?] therefore free to commit sins to our heart's content." Correct?
Apr
17
comment Is the “White Stone” of Revelation the “Urantia Book”?
@davidbrainerd: While I am not sure that I disagree with you about it being received "once one gets to heaven" (I'm still pondering if that is true), I'm fairly convinced that it is not "obvious" that is. From the textual evidence itself, I would lean toward it being something gained at Christ's 2nd coming to earth (based off Rev. 1:7). I would encourage you to possibly investigate your comment further and come up with a textual argument of exactly where/when (if possible) the "white stone" is given and add that as an answer here for further proof against it being the Urantia Book.
Apr
15
comment Accuracy of Alfred Edersheim's “Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah”
I guess it was a bit off-topic for the site
Apr
15
comment Accuracy of Alfred Edersheim's “Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah”
I'm not sure I can answer this question, but I was wondering, who to you is a "respected New Testament scholar" (this list?). So any writing post Dead Sea Scrolls/Nag Hammadi discoveries that use Edersheim in a favorable way?
Apr
15
comment Are the periods in Revelation a single period of 3 and 1/2 years or something else?
@Joseph: Thanks. That is assuming there is a grammatical nuance there at all. As the OP in that question notes, "some manuscripts have ὅτε," except it just so happens that the "some" is the "majority," so while the OP dismissed the fact that it could be ὅτε in all seven places, I would not be quick at all to dismiss such. For the record, I generally hold with the minority of (modern) scholars that the majority text is the correct reading. If such is the correct reading, then nothing is indicated at 8:1 for the 7th different from the other six.
Apr
15
comment Regarding Jesus' arrest, why might the gospels differ so much?
I think your second question should be its own question on this site, rather than wrapped up into this question. Both are valid, but the answer to the second is not directly related to the answer of the first question.
Apr
15
comment Is the “White Stone” of Revelation the “Urantia Book”?
@Daи: Is it "off topic"? It (1) asks about the interpretation of a specific text (Rev 2:17) and (2) can be answered from the text (see my answer). What more does it need to qualify? That it takes its own interpretation of the text is (I assume) not inherently invalid for the site. That it makes its interpretation from outside the text makes it questionable. In this case, however, that outside view is also what makes it answerable by the text.
Apr
13
comment How to save Paul from the Galatians 3 “seed” vs “seeds” argument blunder?
@fdb: Fair enough. I assumed you were replying to the series of both comments (I focused on my statements in the 1st of the two paired comments), but it appears you missed the context of the 2nd in the pair, which is the previous comment (it is a continuation of the discussion from that comment). So the present tense there in the 2nd of the pair is still intended to be in context of the "in eternity" from the first comment. I hope that clears it up. The elliptical thought was "land of Israel that is on the earth [in eternity] which is owned by all believers in Christ."
Apr
13
comment How to save Paul from the Galatians 3 “seed” vs “seeds” argument blunder?
@fdb: I did not say Christians now own the earth, I said they "will inherit the earth ... in eternity." It is a future ownership after Christ's 2nd coming. Also, "American 'Christians'" are not the only Christians on the planet (those are your words, not mine; I have fellowship with Christians from all three of the regions you mentioned). As to "non-Christians," I am assuming you already know the Bible's answer to that--their final destination is the lake of fire. All who refuse Christ's offering of Himself for them will get what they want, to be their own eternal burnt offering to God.
Apr
12
comment Time in first century Judaism
@Davïd: Thanks, I'll take a look. Yes, I addressed the date because both another answer here as well as the original question on C.SE that elicited this question had answers following a "theological" change by John argument, which I felt could not go unanswered (since I do not believe that is true).
Apr
11
comment How to save Paul from the Galatians 3 “seed” vs “seeds” argument blunder?
@davidbrainerd: So it is still possible the that the land of Israel that is on the earth which is owned by all believers in Christ goes specifically to ethnic Israel. There is no conflict with that and what I have argued in my answer.
Apr
11
comment How to save Paul from the Galatians 3 “seed” vs “seeds” argument blunder?
@david: Agree, land & physical. However, believer’s will inherit the earth (Ps 25:13, 37:9, 11, 22 [אָֽרֶץ]; Mt 5:5 [γῆ]), including Abraham (Rom 4:13 [κόσμου]), because we are joint-heirs (Rom 8:17; Eph 3:6) with He Who rules (Rev 11:15 [κόσμου]). Perhaps it will be divided up in eternity, but owned by the “collective.” I think it quite likely that on the new earth Abraham and ethnic Israel (those also part of believing Israel) will still get the portion we understand as the land of Israel today (but that could perhaps be a fulfillment only on this old earth in the millennial reign).
Apr
11
comment How to save Paul from the Galatians 3 “seed” vs “seeds” argument blunder?
@davidbrainerd: You can call God's epic victory in Chirst an "epic fail," that's your choice. Otherwise: (1) True, the "descendents will be counted" through Isaac not Ishmael; (2) which count is not Isaac's physical seed, but his (and Abraham's) spiritual seed, those who believe God's promise as they did; (3) which promise is fulfilled in Christ; (4) because only in Christ those reborn in the spirit are gathered. Abraham's faithful witness gendered Isaac's faith which gendered Jacob's, etc. So all who believe God's promises descend from their seed of faith witness--Gentiles included.
Apr
10
comment Who is “that (the) Prophet” in John 1:21? Is “that Prophet” Muhammad, as Islam teaches?
While I agree with Frank Luke's defense of Jesus as that Prophet, I believe you have the key here that the Jews did not entirely identify the two as the same person yet (Messiah and the Prophet Moses foretold in one). Even later John the Baptist was not certain if there was to be a second person to be looking for or not (Mt 11:3; Lk 7:19-20). This was because of the difficulty in reconciling the suffering servant of Isaiah with that of a triumphal king.
Apr
10
comment Why do the Jews in John 8:33 say that they have never been enslaved?
@Susan: Jesus was making a literal statement about the spiritual side of reality. I agree the Jews did misinterpret it to be referring to the physical side of reality, but not about their past as a people, rather with regard to themselves as individuals in the present. @user2479: οὐδενὶ δεδουλεύκαμεν πώποτε is (literal word order) "to not anyone | we have been slaves | never." Again, the statement is true because they are merely referring to themselves in the present, not as a people in the past.
Apr
9
comment Are the periods in Revelation a single period of 3 and 1/2 years or something else?
@user2479: (I got notified, thanks.) I can see we define things differently. I would include "figurative" within the realm of the historical/grammatical interpretation, not outside of it. I will not debate more here (since a comment thread is not the best place for it).
Apr
9
comment Are the periods in Revelation a single period of 3 and 1/2 years or something else?
@user2479: (I'm not alerted to your tag of me; maybe the hyphen after the name is messing it up). I think we are talking past each other. I agree "door" = "access" (figurative connotation). "I am the door" (figurative statement). The "I" is a literal Person (Christ). The concept of "door" is a literal idea with many connotations to it, the "access" idea here the key point. The concept of "access" is itself a literal idea. The result of this access, "he will be saved ..." (Jn 10:9) is a literal result. My point is, one (even God) cannot have a "purely" figurative statement that has any meaning.
Apr
8
comment Are the angels in 2 Peter 2:11 good or evil?
@user2479: I'm trying to understand your comment. I agree, no middle ground (redemption) for angels. I agree that any angel who did/does/will rail (like noted in 2 Pet 2:11) would be evil. However, 2:11 specifically states those noted in v.11 did not so rail.
Apr
8
comment Are the 'vessels of wrath' in Romans 9:22 'prepared for' or are they 'preparing themselves for destruction'?
I am not arguing they would repair themselves, I was only pointing out that if it were taken as a middle with the nets as the subject, that would be the translation (which I agree is clearly wrong). But my point was that example is not even a mid/pass form, it is an active form, so it is "James and John repairing the nets" and no middle idea at all, because it is not middle in form. Thus invalid for your argument.