Reputation
3,026
Top tag
Next privilege 3,500 Rep.
Protect questions
Badges
8 40
Newest
 Altruist
Impact
~200k people reached

13h
comment In Luke 1:41 why does Luke say that Elizabeth was *filled* with πνευματος αγιου?
@WoundedEgo Downvote if you wish; I provided a proper context by which to understand the verse. If you cite Jesus's words to describe the Holy Spirit, He is 1) A Person, 2) Sensed or felt, rather than seen, 3) Manifests entirely at His discretion, rather than at some will or contrivence of man.
13h
comment In Luke 1:41 why does Luke say that Elizabeth was *filled* with πνευματος αγιου?
@WoundedEgo But I did. the Person of the Holy Spirit manifested Himself to Elizabeth, that manifestation was felt. Since "fulness" describes a feeling, rather than a unit of measurement, the "fulness" of the Person of the Holy Spirit is what caused her to prophesy. Again, it is not a quantitative measurement, nor is there some "graduated scale" by which we can determine the amount. The sensation was "fulness", the outcome was prophecy.
14h
comment In Luke 1:41 why does Luke say that Elizabeth was *filled* with πνευματος αγιου?
@WoundedEgo The answer is spiritual, not scientific. However, it is hermeneutical in that Jesus used those terms to describe what "Spirit" meant. And yes, from the earliest records "Holy Spirit" was capitalized; since it referenced a specific Person, and not just 'a' person or the essense of a person. If you are looking for a scientific explanation, then you will be sadly disappointed. But if you are looking for an answer consistant with the reading of the text, then my answer explains in context what is meant by the text.
14h
answered In Luke 1:41 why does Luke say that Elizabeth was *filled* with πνευματος αγιου?
Apr
16
revised How is the Shema interpreted by those who think Israel had henotheistic beliefs?
Add scripture reference to the Shema
Apr
12
comment Why were there two thieves crucified with Jesus?
@LindaLawson-Bruton I apologize for not specifically addressing that issue, although(IMO) I think it is a separate question. Whether or not a "Sanhedrin Law" was in effect, to remove the 'leaven'(chametz) was certainly part of the celebration of the feast, and the 'cursed' were chametz. All throughout the Law evil, and the evildoer was to be removed; from one's house, place of worship, city, and country. Yes, the Romans were pagans, and a constant source of vexation for religious Jews. To take down the bodies of condemned criminals was removing "chametz".
Apr
11
comment Why were there two thieves crucified with Jesus?
@C.Kelly With that many points for an answer, you might want to 'spruce it up'.....;>)
Apr
10
revised Why were there two thieves crucified with Jesus?
edited body
Apr
10
comment Why were there two thieves crucified with Jesus?
@C.Kelly Although I felt there are elements missing in this answer, it contained enough of them to award my bounty. " One might even interpret the cross AS the symbol of his glorification [John 17:1] and these two thieves as symbols of the elect and the reprobate" best captures the true meaning of the 2 thieves. I explained the Gen. 3:15 passage in my answer that "hermeneutically qualifies" this, but your answer contains the gist of it-Thank you!
Apr
10
awarded  Altruist
Apr
9
comment Why were there two thieves crucified with Jesus?
Thank you for your response! I wanted to include the excerpt in my own, but got waylaid by the different elements. Using the pictorals helped to clarify it-thanks!
Apr
9
answered Why were there two thieves crucified with Jesus?
Apr
8
comment Why were there two thieves crucified with Jesus?
I like this answer, because although I don't think it's complete, it attempts to address the "Why"; which explains the "How". It is very true that the Sanhedrin could have put Jesus to death without Pilate's consent-by stoning. But in order to fulfill the Law and prophecy(He) who is hung is acursed of God-Deut. 21:23), this required the Roman's consent, which meant crucifixion. All the Law and the Prophets foreshadowed and told this event, and likewise, all the New Testament writers witness that Christ died for all mankind-who (in effect) put Him to death.
Apr
7
comment Why were there two thieves crucified with Jesus?
@C.Kelly I believe we are beginning to see a "hermeneutical pattern" emerge with this answer. There are many other examples which I'm sure you could cite-both Old and New Testament. Is there "a defining statement" from scripture under which all these examples could be catagorized.......? We are getting on the right path with this answer,
Apr
7
comment Why were there two thieves crucified with Jesus?
This is an answer that is neither supported by the text, nor in any way hermeneutically sound. If you are 'serious' about this answer, please add in the evidences to support your conclusions. Thank you.
Apr
4
comment Why were there two thieves crucified with Jesus?
@BruceWeigard Perhaps the question would be better stated with the 1st word being WHY instead of Why. When you understand the WHY you understand the How....
Apr
4
comment Why were there two thieves crucified with Jesus?
There is nothing in the crucifixion that was left to chance.... and the scene is so indelibly painted that even those who have never read the bible can describe it. Are there clues in the text which depict this scene...? We must go beyond a 'surface' search but I believe there are. A point to remember is the "event" is not merely a 'linear moment' in a linear time frame-it was foretold about and described from Genesis to Revelations. When we look at time from God's perspective, it is the one defining moment for God's interaction with mankind. That's how we have to see it(IMO).
Apr
4
comment Why were there two thieves crucified with Jesus?
Thank you for your response! I appreciate your comment about the Passover mistakenly called the Feast of the Unleavened Bread-though there are some who would disagree. Isa. 53:12 does state He was numbered amongst the transgressors, but doesn't(on the surface) state how or how many. Could there be another passage which illuminates this?
Apr
3
comment Why were there two thieves crucified with Jesus?
@enegue The Law is perfect(Ps. 19/Rom. 3). Jesus came to "fulfill the Law, not abolish it"(Mt. 5:17). The "Law" never saved anyone, grace(unmerited favor) always did. This 'grace', seen in the Old Testament through the sacrifices, feasts, offerings were all signs given by God, waiting to be fulfilled in Christ(our Great High Priest-Heb. 8-9). The leaven of the Scribes and Pharisees was self-righteousness, they saw their own actions as fulfillment of God's righteousness, rather than grace, extended by faith through God's Covenant in obedience to His commands.
Apr
3
comment Why were there two thieves crucified with Jesus?
@curiousdannii I have my reasons....;>), and I want to compare. Besides, this is an excellent question for a large audience.