Reputation
3,657
Top tag
Next privilege 4,000 Rep.
Access 'trusted user' tools
Badges
3 19
Impact
~162k people reached

Jun
24
revised How can we ensure a given “chiasm” was intentional by the author, and is not merely fanciful eisegesis?
fairly minor touch-ups here and there; some formatting changes
Jun
24
comment How can we ensure a given “chiasm” was intentional by the author, and is not merely fanciful eisegesis?
@FrankLuke: Good point. A good definition and biblical illustrations can be found at <kevinfannystevenson.blogspot.com/2014/02/…; Don
Jun
21
reviewed Leave Open Did Jesus primarily use an exegetical or hermeneutical approach in explaining the meaning of the Hebrew Scriptures?
Jun
21
reviewed Leave Open Who were the scholars responsible for the New English Translation?
Jun
16
awarded  Yearling
May
29
revised How to interpret John 6:32-33
fixed a couple errata
May
27
revised How to interpret John 6:32-33
judicious rewording here
May
26
answered How to interpret John 6:32-33
May
24
revised What does the word 'idols' mean in 1 John 5:21 and what exactly is idolatry?
minor fixup
May
17
comment Who is 'us' in 2 Peter 1
While I respect ScottS's answer, below, I can't help but feel there is no deeper significance or unusual logic involved in Peter's changing from first person singular to first person plural to second person plural, and then back again, and back and forth. To me, the switching back and forth is quite natural and logical and normal, and I would do the same thing were I to write to an assembly of Christians where my wife and I ("us") used to be members with them ("you" plural), especially if the purpose of my letter was to encourage and exhort them to progress in their faith.
May
16
comment Who is the “True Companion” in Philippians 4:3?
@David: How right you are. I've corrected my blunder. Thanks! Don
May
16
revised Who is the “True Companion” in Philippians 4:3?
made a correction or two
May
15
awarded  Custodian
May
15
reviewed Reviewed In Rev 19:16, why is the Name on the Word's thigh and robe?
May
15
reviewed Reviewed Is Saul's insult intended to be incoherent?
May
15
comment Is Saul's insult intended to be incoherent?
Citing a credible authority or two would have strengthened your argument, especially since the OP asked if Saul's invective included some common Hebrew tropes. Even if the "only" authority you cite is the Bible itself, so much the better, IMO. A good first attempt. Don
May
14
answered Who is the “True Companion” in Philippians 4:3?
May
10
comment What does μονογενὴς Θεὸς means in John 1:18?
@Joseph: As for Jesus, the antitype of Isaac, He too was the "one and only" child of promise, the seed of the woman (Genesis 3:15). In love, the Father allowed the heel of His μονογενής to be bruised at the cross by the seed of the serpent, so that whoever believed in the Son would not perish but have eternal life through Him (John 3:16). In turn, the head of the serpent's seed was crushed at Calvary when Jesus cried "Accomplished!"
May
10
comment What does μονογενὴς Θεὸς means in John 1:18?
@Joseph: From God's perspective, Isaac WAS Abe's firstborn--the firstborn child of the promise God made to Abe when he was 75 years old. God did not treat "firstborn" (according to the "flesh") Ishmael like chopped liver, however, and made some great promises to him and his descendants (Ge 17:20), even though he was not THE child of promise. Interestingly, God underscored the nature of the unilateral promise He made to Abe by putting him into a deep sleep, rather than walking through the sacrificial animals with Abe in "suzerain treaty" fashion. IOW, God's word alone was sufficient!
May
9
revised What does μονογενὴς Θεὸς means in John 1:18?
eliminated an unnecessary "in conclusion"