Reputation
1,331
Top tag
Next privilege 1,500 Rep.
Approve tag wiki edits
Badges
1 11 24
Impact
~56k people reached

20h
accepted Who is John actually writing his seven epistles in Revelation?
21h
revised Who is John actually writing his seven epistles in Revelation?
added 7 characters in body
1d
asked Who is John actually writing his seven epistles in Revelation?
1d
accepted Rev 9:4: Do not hurt the non-existing grass?
1d
comment Rev 9:4: Do not hurt the non-existing grass?
So, what you are saying is that this verse should be rendered as something like "and they were told to hurt – not any grass of the earth, not any green thing, not any tree – but the people who have no seal...". I mean it is a kind of poetical way, so to say, to emphasize the locusts' main object of their pain-inflicting, right? Well, that makes perfect sense to me.
1d
comment Rev 9:4: Do not hurt the non-existing grass?
However, even if we take the figurative approach, it still doesn't answer my question. My question was how come the locusts are told not to hurt the grass when the grass is already gone, be it literal grass or figurative.
Apr
24
asked Rev 9:4: Do not hurt the non-existing grass?
Apr
24
revised 1st John 2:12-14: little children, young men and fathers
added 965 characters in body
Apr
24
comment 1st John 2:12-14: little children, young men and fathers
@Susan - Thanks. Just made it more focused.
Apr
24
revised 1st John 2:12-14: little children, young men and fathers
added 965 characters in body
Apr
24
asked 1st John 2:12-14: little children, young men and fathers
Apr
8
awarded  Popular Question
Mar
5
awarded  Notable Question
Feb
14
revised Does 2 Tim.1:16-18 imply that Onesiphorus is already dead?
added 4 characters in body
Feb
14
accepted Does 2 Tim.1:16-18 imply that Onesiphorus is already dead?
Feb
14
comment Does 2 Tim.1:16-18 imply that Onesiphorus is already dead?
Thanks for your answer. "By that I mean that we should build a doctrine upon this as a key text" - Did you mean to say "we should NOT" instead?
Feb
14
comment Does 2 Tim.1:16-18 imply that Onesiphorus is already dead?
2) the person Onesiphorus did really exist, except he might've gone by some other name, that is, not by name "Onesiphorus" that the author chose; but, on the other hand, in your answer you said "Onesiphorus in this case is further evidence that he was a literary construct and existed only within Second Timothy. Onesiphorus was not dead if he never lived." So, what's your point here about that person's existence? If this is the case of "a literary construct", did the person still exist regardless of what name he really had?
Feb
14
comment Does 2 Tim.1:16-18 imply that Onesiphorus is already dead?
1) "I am saying that when the anonymous author of 2 Tim was looking around for a name, he chose a name appropriate for the situation and was perhaps inspired by Onesimus, who also helped Paul in prison." - I am sorry for being such a dummy, but I still don't get it. I know that some names have meaning, for example, the name "Carpus" in 2 Tim. 4:13 means "fruit", but I am a bit puzzled by the apparent contradiction in your words. On one hand, you say "the anonymous author of 2 Tim was looking around for a name, he chose a name appropriate for the situation", which I take as your agreeing that ↙
Feb
13
comment Does 2 Tim.1:16-18 imply that Onesiphorus is already dead?
You've made a valid point here. Thank you.
Feb
13
comment Does 2 Tim.1:16-18 imply that Onesiphorus is already dead?
".. so it is likely that Onesiphorus was a literary construct invented by the actual author of 2 Timothy" - So you are saying here that the name Onesiphorus here is not actually a name that would be a reference to one particular person, but rather some phrase with the meaning of "bringing advantage", right? If so, then how should this verse be translated then? Something like "The Lord give mercy unto the house of the one who was to my advantage; for he oft refreshed me, and was not ashamed of my chain" or something? Will this rendition not be quite a stretch and rather awkward looking?