243 reputation
14
bio website withouthavingseen.com
location Bethesda, MD
age 37
visits member for 3 years, 1 month
seen Jan 2 '12 at 3:45

I'm a technical writer at MicroStrategy in Vienna, VA.

I like running 5k, 8k, 10k, and marathons; watching movies; and reading philosophy or novels. My favorite activity, though, is hiking/backpacking/camping in wild areas and faraway lands ranging from Cambodia to my own backyard. And bringing my camera along is likely to make anything into pure joy.


Oct
19
awarded  Yearling
Jan
2
awarded  Commentator
Jan
2
comment Why did John take Mary, who was married, into his home?
@LanceRoberts: When Jesus means to countermand the Pharisaic interpretation of the Law, he announces as much: "You have heard it said..." Why on earth would Jesus change the Jewish custom about the care of one's dependents?
Jan
2
comment Why did John take Mary, who was married, into his home?
@Kazark: Jesus gained the wrath of the Pharisees for disputing their rigid interpretations of the law and for calling them on their hypocrisy.
Dec
30
comment Why did John take Mary, who was married, into his home?
@LanceRoberts et al., Jesus obeyed the Jewish law. There wouldn't have been even a question of whose responsibility Mary would be. It would have been a younger son if one had existed. "Cousin" is a neuter word in English, but in Semitic languages "cousin" (DVD or DVDVT) is either masculine or feminine, just as brother and sister are a matched set. This pattern exists in any number of modern languages as well. The word is used in Biblical Hebrew more or less interchangeably with brothers and sisters. That was my point. The use of the words "brothers" or "sisters" doesn't make a difference.
Dec
25
comment Why did John take Mary, who was married, into his home?
Semitic cultures didn't (and don't) make as sharp a distinction between brother and cousin as we do. The difference is always there, but it is accentuated when the nuclear, rather than the extended, family becomes dominant in the modern period. And that comes to my point: if Jesus had brothers, i.e., if Mary had other sons or married daughters, then she would not have been Jesus' responsibility to delegate. That he delegates the responsibility indicates there was nobody else to whom it could naturally fall. She had no other sons or sons-in-law.
Dec
24
comment Why did John take Mary, who was married, into his home?
And it is evidence of Jesus being an only child. It wouldn't make sense for her to move in with an unrelated man if she had either a son or married daughter to care for her.
Nov
24
answered Does Paul reject the idea of celebrating holidays in Galatians?
Oct
24
comment How consistent were Augustine's hermeneutics?
@JonEricson - not at all. I fiddled with the italics but it wasn't quite working out, and I decided just to move on. Thanks.
Oct
24
comment Which hermeneutical approaches support a literal interpretation of the Creation account?
@JonEricson - and I see you like Alvin Plantinga. Excellent! I read his Warranted Christian Belief in my epistemology class while in (Catholic) seminary. (I left without getting ordained.)
Oct
24
comment Which hermeneutical approaches support a literal interpretation of the Creation account?
Well, thanks. I appreciate that. You know, actually, on the modern scene, this sort of thing is bound to come up. English-speaking culture in particular - because of the history of Anglicanism and other Protestant groups in Great Britain and its colonies - is really, really given to a modernist vs. fundamentalist war: either you interpret the Bible at face value, as if it were no more complicated than a phone book, or else you don't believe it at all. Funny enough, that is one point upon which both fundamentalists and modern Bible-trashers agree!
Oct
21
answered How consistent were Augustine's hermeneutics?
Oct
21
revised
added 151 characters in body
Oct
20
suggested suggested edit on
Oct
20
wiki
Oct
20
awarded  Supporter
Oct
20
comment Which hermeneutical approaches support a literal interpretation of the Creation account?
@Ray, I did not fail to answer the question, but rather chose to answer a prior question whose answer obviates the question asked. If somebody asked me the best interstate highway to travel from New York to London, I would be bound in duty to tell him that there was no interstate route that could answer his need. In like manner, here I am in duty bound to explain why the question asked isn't an entirely sound itself. I did so at some length to make my point clear, and also to try to make it clear that I am not discounting the scriptures and do indeed believe them to be fully inspired.
Oct
19
awarded  Teacher
Oct
19
answered Which hermeneutical approaches support a literal interpretation of the Creation account?
Oct
19
awarded  Autobiographer