1,484 reputation
315
bio website
location
age
visits member for 1 year
seen 12 hours ago

Jul
26
comment A thousand years is one day
@Liam Seems more of a rhetorical comment than a properly posed question. I would vote to close unless you have a legitimate question.
Jul
26
comment How did Paul “see that someone had faith” in Acts 14?
Perhaps the best answer that can be given is in the context of Paul's preaching, he saw the man was "receptive"(had faith to believe). +1
Jul
26
comment What is the Righteousness of God in Romans 1:17?
An excellent rendition of "dikaiosune" can be found here wenstrom.org/downloads/written/word_studies/greek/…
Jul
26
comment What is the Righteousness of God in Romans 1:17?
This is the justice/righteousness debate brought on by the Reformer's insistence on "Salvation by faith alone, apart from the law". Whereas "dikaiosunE" means righteousness, it can also mean justice(18. Plato used the word in this sense, therefore, dikaiosune meant “adjustment to the law,” and that is the sense in which “righteousness” is a correct translation, but “justice” is equally accurate.) The word used in Greek had legal ramifications, and the Vulgate translated it iustitia enim Dei, keeping the legal sense.
Jul
26
comment Inconsistent translations of Revelation 13:10?
@jlovegren This is why I like the KJV-yes, it uses the TR rather than the Alexandrinus, but take a step back and look at what it's saying; is God helpless in the face of adversity-essentially Buddhist? Or does one "reap what one sows" a truth illustrated throughout the Scripture? Modern thought has crept into modern interpretations.
Jul
26
comment What is meant by the term “the times of the gentiles” in Luke 21:24
@Richard I have difficulty with your question: 1) Are you merely asking for exegesis on "Times of the Gentiles"? That would be a good question. 2) Are you asking if the interpretation of "Times of the Gentiles" supports a Futurist/Dispensational hermeneutic? That would also be a good question, providing you cited your source for (1). Are you attempting to extrapolate a different meaning than what you quoted? You could address it by "answering your question" or ask a question stating your meaning(with support).
Jul
26
comment Women in Galatians
Your answer was good, but you could have embellished it more with textual reference to make your case. You might want to consider some of the suggestions on what constitutes a good answer, found here(meta.hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/653/…).
Jul
26
comment Women in Galatians
Welcome to Biblical Hermeneutics Stack Exchange! Be sure to take our site tour to learn more about us. We're a little different from other sites,
Jul
24
comment What, exactly, counts as a “vain repetition” (Matthew 6:7)?
@MattGutting I appologize-I don't know how to get the 'Greek' text to appear in my answer. I'm not a Greek scholar, hence I'm not certain of the etymology of the word. It's almost certain the Lord didn't speak it in classic Koine Greek, therefore, whatever word was translated represented the word best describing the original intent of the Lord. It appears that all of your sources use the same definition; the discussion appears to be about modern translators finding 'relevancy' with their audience vs it's most accurate rendition.
Jul
24
comment Is Jesus Christ the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit?
@Vince I sense there's more to this question than meets the eye-are you arguing for "Jesus Only"(Apostolic Holiness)? A single passage will not resolve the controversy, yet if you look at Jesus's baptism, the evidence for the Trinity is irrefutable. There is also the matter of Christian tradition, from the Didache onward which confirmed the Trinity.
Jul
20
comment What is the traditional understanding of God's Marriage Contract(Ketubah) with Israel?
@caseyr547 Thank you for your response! I vigorously disagree with Replacement Theology; one reason is "When was the wedding ceremony for the church?" None, that I know of. Also, Dual Covenant Theology rests on 2 different sacrifices-where was the other sacrifice? I like Irenaeus's answer in this regard(home.newadvent.org/fathers/0103409.htm). I am more concerned about how this marriage covenant was made, and what was the traditional(read OT) understanding is in regards to it.
Jul
15
comment Did Elijah break the Torah by encountering ravens and/or failing to appear at Jerusalem?
Thank you for this thorough explanation!
Jul
14
comment Explain 1 Cor 5:5
@rhetorician Thanks Don, for another fine answer!
Jul
12
comment Was Paul being facetious when he referred to a man going to Paradise in 2nd Corinthians chapter 12?
@Bye Mark is correct, Paul is speaking in 3rd person singular when refering to the revelations, yet 1st peerson singular when speaking of his infirmities. He betrays himself in vs 7,"...lest I should be exalted above measure by the abundance of revelations.." His method of speaking can be described as "Illeism", where the narrator seeks to convey impartiality, although he is also the protagonist. A young Marine in bootcamp is taught this to convey his thoughts in this method, as his DI doesn't regard his opinion, only what his sensory organs tell him.
Jul
8
comment Is the “7th seal” opened before the “6th seal” book of Revelation
@Bagpipes 1)So do I(Rapture) 2)How long is a biblical 'day'? In Rev. 17:12, the 10 Horns only reign 1 hour...really, only 60 minutes? What we are seeing is a shift, which is correlated to the Beast rising out of the sea. The "Lamb" opens the seals, which starts with the 'rider on the white horse' see answer hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/q/11588/2479. If you take a Dispensational view, then a lot of things happen in a very short time, including kings 'ruling for 1 hour'. A Historicist View takes in the whole measure of time, a more honest answer (IMHO).
Jul
8
comment Is the “7th seal” opened before the “6th seal” book of Revelation
@Bagpipes I have been giving your question a lot of consideration: 1) the seals are opened by the Lamb, the trumpet and bowl angels are sent from the Throne of God. 2) The scroll is progressively unrolled, and the seals are broken off progressively. Once the seal is opened, or trumpet sounded, or bowl poured, then it is out there. In the 5th seal, the martyrs didn't stop being martyred after the seal was opened. 3) The 6th seal uses both literal and figurative imagery. We can see "eclipses" and "blood moons"; sky "rolling up like a scroll" is figurative, as well as stars cast on the earth.
Jul
8
comment Is the “7th seal” opened before the “6th seal” book of Revelation
@Bagpipes When you say "I don't believe in the Rapture", are you saying, 'I don't believe in the Rapture at all', or are you saying 'I don't believe in 'pre-trib' or 'post-trib' Rapture?
Jul
8
comment What is the original Number of the Beast?
@lasersauce In 1 sense, yes. Scripture does say,"...But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."(1 Cor. 2:14) Yet, the passage Rev. 13:18) calls for wisdom which 1 Cor. 2:6-7 say is not of this world. The answer is contained in the proper understanding of the number-just not in the classic "Greek" understanding. I have written a great deal about this, the 'number' is just one aspect that points to the same thing.
Jul
6
comment What is the original Number of the Beast?
@Jas3.1 I am saying that you can "count" to 6 three times and arrive at 18. The issue of "six hundred and sixty-six", whether it is in Greek, Aramaic, Hebrew, or any other language makes no sense as a number, unless you "apply wisdom", which is not the same as the many number of gemmetrial systems out there, which started from "Nero Caesar" to "Barak Obama" and everyone in between. Who knows, maybe there is a kid with a sharp pencil who can make the numbers mean you(or me). But they are wrong, for a variety of reasons, one of which it is the number of 'man', not "a man".
Jul
5
comment What is the original Number of the Beast?
@Jas.1 I understand that, and I explained that in my comments. We are seeking "wisdom", and the "wisdom" tells us that six hundred and sixty-six doesn't mean anything, it's the 3 sixes that does. John probably spoke Aramaic, did God communicate it to him in classic Koine Greek? The truth has been hid from classic Greek scholars for centuries, and yet it can be known by children. A child can count to six, 3 times; whereas a classic Greek scholar only knows what to do with six hundred and sixty six. There is more to this than the number, but the number tells you it is 'man', rather than a man.