Reputation
3,584
Top tag
Next privilege 4,000 Rep.
Access 'trusted user' tools
Badges
3 19
Impact
~161k people reached

Jul
26
comment Does Genesis 1:2 refer to the Spirit or a wind?
@DickHarfield: Your first comment's key words are "critical scholars." As Susan points out (OK, she hints), even critical scholars come with a boatload of assumptions. Furthermore, they do not constitute the only game in town. I would go so far to suggest they are in the minority among Christian theologians. Again, just because they're in the minority does not ipso facto make them wrong. It does give me pause, however, when I find out a critical scholar neither believes the Bible is God's word nor that the analogy of Scripture (i.e., Scripture interprets Scripture) is valid hermeneutically
Jul
25
comment Does Genesis 1:2 refer to the Spirit or a wind?
2 Timothy 3:16 speaks of the Scripture being "God-breathed (Theoneustos), and yet 2 Peter 1:20-21 tells us that "no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." Put the two expressions--God-breathed and moved by the Holy Spirit together (and not even mentioning Jesus' teaching on "the wind blowing where it listeth" in John 3)--and we begin to get a feeling for how God's Spirit moves. Even so, I have no problem with your "breath of God," since the word "breath" used figuratively leaves plenty of room for the breath being God's Spirit! Don
Jul
25
comment Does Genesis 1:2 refer to the Spirit or a wind?
Of the 30 versions of Scripture made available at biblestudytools.com, 28 of 30 translate ruach as Spirit (of Elohim). This is not to say that the majority of Bible translators are wrong, but it surely gives me pause when I'm reading Genesis 1:2 and wondering whether ruach is spirit, wind, breathe, or Spirit. According to the analogy of Scripture, not a single verse of the Bible should be read out of the largest possible context as possible; namely, the entire Bible. That's a basic rule of hermeneutics, which Jesus demonstrated by quoting umpteen OT passages. Interestingly,
Jul
22
comment Why is 'fine' added in the translation of ἱματίων in 1 Peter 3:3
@DavidMulder: Thanks, Dave. Paul's "take" on adornment (see footnote number one in my answer) makes a similar point. He's NOT saying women must not dress elegantly if they have the means to do so. Rather, he is saying that adorning oneself with good deeds is more significant to the local assembly and to God than merely adorning oneself with haute couture and bling! In a poorer congregation, dressing down could be a good deed for a woman who is well off. OTOH, in a richer congregation, dressing up could make the other women feel comfortable. The same thinking applies to public occasions. Don
Jul
13
comment Matt. 22:15-22 says, “Give back to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's.”Did Jesus proclaim a separation of church and state?
@MicahGafford: For some reason I am not able to post my rewritten answer to your question on 1 Peter 3:18. If you'd like a copy of it, I'll be glad to send it to you. Just write me at the email address indicated in my biography. Just click on my picture to access it. Thanks. Don
Jul
12
comment What “spirit” is 1 Peter 3:18 referring too?
@MicahGafford: You're probably right. I'll attempt a rewrite to see if I can come up with a better answer. Don
Jul
8
comment What “spirit” is 1 Peter 3:18 referring too?
Forgive me, I didn't know (and still don't) that comments were to be worded only in question form, which seems to be your guiding assumption. My "answer," as you call it was not an answer but a thank you, of sorts. As you already know, Dick, we will never see eye to eye on the issue of biblical authorship. Frankly, however, the people who insist that the names appended to various epistles are NOT necessarily --if ever--the people who wrote them need to assume the burden of proof as to why they aren't. The ethics of writing back then were not so different than as they are today.
Jul
4
comment What “spirit” is 1 Peter 3:18 referring too?
Thanks for your wording: "We need not even assume that the author of First Peter . . .." In other words, we CAN assume that Peter wrote the letter we call "First Peter," but we NEEDN'T assume. I can live with that. Don [P.S. One good reason for thinking the apostle Peter wrote First Peter is in verse one of chapter one: "Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ . . .." In Peter's day, one identified oneself as the writer of a letter at the very beginning, not the end, as we do today (by saying, for example, "Sincerely yours, Dick Harfield").
Jun
11
comment Jesus said Resist Not Evil, what is the context?
@e.s.Kohen: Thanks for the corrections. My information came from a old set of notes of mine which were not by any means what you would call scholarly! Don
Jun
5
comment Why is Wisdom personified as a woman?
@warren: Easy there, fella. I didn't say David wrote the Proverbs; I said that the OT book of Proverbs MAY have had its genesis in David's throne room where he and his son Solomon MAY have had some talks about spiritual things. David planted the seed, so to speak, and when Solomon was older and was wise enough to ask the Lord for wisdom (1 Kings 3:11 and 2 Chronicles 1:11), he channeled that wisdom into the writing and compiling of proverbs. Don
Jun
4
comment Why is Wisdom personified as a woman?
@warren: Are you suggesting that King David never shared some godly and practical wisdom with his son Solomon? At the very least, inspired writing seems to have run in the family. David was, after all, a contributor to the Psalter, and he had a gift with words. Like father, like son, yes? Don
Jun
4
comment What is the “Lot” in Proverbs 16:33
@JohnUnsworth: Thanks for the vote of confidence. I attribute--rightly or wrongly--the negative votes to my having offended a few of my fellow contributors back in November when I wrote this answer. These things happen; feathers get ruffled, and the chickens come home to roost. Don
Jun
1
comment Jesus said Resist Not Evil, what is the context?
@Tau: I've included an addendum to my answer by which I attempt to contextualize some of Jesus' teachings in the Sermon on the Mount, including his teaching on not resisting an evil person.
May
9
comment How did Joanna “get away with” sponsoring Jesus' ministry?
@Susan: How stupid of me. Luke's syntax tripped me up a bit. "Evil spirits" links to Mary, and "infirmities" links to Joanna. As Inspector Clousseau of Pink Panther fame would say, "Case is saul'-ved"! Don
May
7
comment How did Joanna “get away with” sponsoring Jesus' ministry?
@JonathanChell: What is the reference for Joanna being healed of some illness? (Just wondering.) Don
Apr
7
comment What did Satan mean, when he replied to God, “Skin for Skin”?
@Bagpipes: Offhand, I'd say that the skin condition with which Job was afflicted may have caused his skin to turn black. After all, Satan "smote Job with sore boils from the sole of his foot to the crown of his head" (2:7). Evidently, Job got some relief by scraping the boils with a fragment of broken pottery (2:8). Not a pretty sight, by any means!
Mar
17
comment Why is the word ἐβαπτίσθη used in Luke 11:38?
What you have here is an instance of Synoptic differences. Two folks witness (or are told about) an incident through the eyes of two or more people. One person or group "sees" the same incident differently than the other person or group. I, for example, can see a neighbor of mine dutifully washing his car. Another person sees the same person lovingly detailing his car. We both see the same behavior, but characterize it differently. In the Synoptic Gospels, something similar is occurring. Thanks to the Holy Spirit, the perspectives, though different, are equally true, accurate, and significant.
Mar
6
comment Why delay a blessing by asking for food?
Maybe Esau's stew was to die for! (A joke.)
Mar
6
comment What is the intended image of “pierced my hands and feet” in Psalm 22:16?
We'll need to agree to disagree agreeably on the nature of your hyperlink, Dick. It clearly has a liberal bias. A quick perusal of the menu of its various topics (e.g., "The Bible") reveals this to be the case. That's OK, too. "Fundamentalists" have their own biases, too. Truth is, we all do. About all we can aim for, whether liberal or conservative, is a fair fight with a minimum of ad hominems, ill will, and what I call "Job 12:2 thinking." I'll delete my last comment, Dick, and I'll venture forth to the Chat room. Don
Mar
6
comment What is the intended image of “pierced my hands and feet” in Psalm 22:16?
metaphors and similes and neglect to take away the main point of the psalm; namely, that the psalmist is relaying to us some horrible, awful, frightening, and injurious experience, which causes him to feel initially as though God has forsaken him. At the psalm's end (really, from v.22 ff.), however, he realizes God was well aware of his affliction and had not forsaken him after all (see esp. vv.22, 24, and 26). By the way, we need not force v.16 to be Messianic. Among the injuries Jesus sustained on the cross, however (not so coincidentally), were severe wounds in his hands and feet.