Reputation
3,323
Top tag
Next privilege 3,500 Rep.
Protect questions
Badges
7 34
Newest
 Custodian
Impact
~172k people reached

Jan
29
comment Why did Jesus fast in the wilderness?
@user11888 While I see that you have added some texts in your answer, could you expound on those texts(quote the texts and show from the wording how they support your conclusions). That way your audience will see "How" you arrived at your conclusions. Thank you!
Jan
29
reviewed Reviewed Is Revelation 3:14 saying that Christ was created by God?
Jan
29
comment Is Revelation 3:14 saying that Christ was created by God?
I believe you have a valuable answer, but it would benefit greatly if you would format it by: 1) Break it up into paragraphs, 2) Capitalize when needed, 3) Use the Blockquote icon in separating quotations from your commentary. The end result is that it is more "readable" and therefore more likely to generate positive responses. Thank you!
Jan
29
comment Is Revelation 3:14 saying that Christ was created by God?
Welcome to BHSE! We're a little different here, please take our Site Tour as it will help you in asking and answering questions. Thank you!
Jan
29
reviewed No Action Needed Why did Jesus fast in the wilderness?
Jan
29
reviewed Reviewed What is the Meaning of Gen. 37:10 ?
Jan
29
comment What is the Meaning of Gen. 37:10 ?
I extensively edited this question 1) To ask a question, 2) To refer it to a specific text. Feel free to change my edits, but consider our format in asking questions. You may also want to consider this question as a response to yours.
Jan
29
comment What is the Meaning of Gen. 37:10 ?
Welcome to BHSE! We're a little different here, please take the opportunity to read our Site Directives as it will help you in asking and answering questions, Thank you!
Jan
29
revised What is the Meaning of Gen. 37:10 ?
Formatting question to meet BHSE guidelines
Jan
29
reviewed Reviewed Did Mother Mary believe Jesus was crazy
Jan
29
reviewed No Action Needed Hosanna — when?
Jan
29
reviewed No Action Needed What/where is Topheth?
Jan
24
comment Do any scholars argue a textual theory where the NT text was edited to make the autographa?
@ScottS My reopen vote would include 1 caveat: to edit the question to include "an example" of Grisanti's methodology being applied: I believe James E. Smith's example of Gen. 14:14 would apply. The intent is to show that a scribal annotation which is clearly including in the text can pass the "Textual Criticism" application, and yet apply to "MT" Textual Criticism application. It also gives those who derive some other means an opportunity to express their view.
Jan
21
comment The Two witnesses and the Two Horns of The Beast
@Bagpipes I agree-however "contextually" a little lamb's 'horn' is difficult to ascertain. In comparison; the Lamb of Rev. 4 has 7 Horns, but we are told what they are. For the record, I hold that the "2 Witnesses" are actual individuals, who come in the "authority" of Moses and Elijah. The context of the verses implies that, and we have the 'law' of Dual Fulfillment; especially in the case of Elijah.
Jan
21
answered The Two witnesses and the Two Horns of The Beast
Jan
19
comment What does Luke 18:8 mean, and how is “faith” used in this context?
Thank you for your response! I am assuming that you are taking a 'pre-trib' view, where the church has been 'parousia' and those remaining are lacking faith.Can you imagine an instance where the Son of Man may not find the requisite 'faith' in the church?
Jan
17
comment A thousand years is like one day
@WillianVictorLedger Hi, and Wecome to BHSE! I took the liberty to 're-format' your question to fit our Site Directives. You can certainly review, change, or reverse them, but as it stands it will probably be closed. You may want to review other questions as well regarding the meaning of 2 Pet.-Thank you!
Jan
17
revised A thousand years is like one day
Formatted question to fit Site Directives
Jan
17
comment Do any scholars argue a textual theory where the NT text was edited to make the autographa?
@ALL Questions regarding Hermeneutical Approaches are "On Topic" per Site Rules. I can quote numerous other questions which have passed muster and garnered fine answers in the same category. I think we all need to take a deep breath, re-examine the question without being paralyzed by the "inerrancy issue", and allow those experts who perhaps haven't come to our Site yet, but have examined the sources ScottS is referring to, and can posit a credible response. Closing this question isn't going to make it go away, it's merely going to move it to another venue-and those w/the resources with it.
Jan
15
comment Do any scholars argue a textual theory where the NT text was edited to make the autographa?
@ScottS (cont.) What I discovered was that the MT View is 'counter-intuitive' to the "textual update" process; it simply dismisses anything that predates the Byzantine/Greek view. Wallace is emphatic about this; and he bemoans the fact that there are relatively few Textual Critics in the MT camp, whereas the vast majority are apologists. His view of course embraces Textual Criticism with both internal and external evidences. His orthodoxy, however procedes from a singular goal; which is to uncover the "Autographa". It's from that position he's maintained his theological integrity.