Reputation
2,662
Next tag badge:
26/100 score
1/20 answers
Badges
6 30 69
Impact
~183k people reached

Nov
7
comment Terminology of “goodness” in Romans 7
Actually, you do have to be a master to spot when something that seems obvious to untrained eyes actually involves important subtleties. I may not know Greek but I am bilingual and I know from experience that the sort of thing your asserting is obvious might actually have other explanations. And it seems you are unable to rule out other possibilities because you don't even know what they might be. Ergo my assessment that this unconvincing.
Nov
7
comment Terminology of “goodness” in Romans 7
I'm sorry but this is utterly unconvincing. You may even be right —the mastery of Greek that would be needed to verify or debunk this is above my paygrade— but I don't see any evidence presented there that backs up your conclusion. You've taken a couple disparate texts from different authors with different immediate contexts, ignored seemly a lot of uses where each term could potentially be construed differently, and drawn out something tenuous based on the English renderings. I would expect an answer to teach something about the Greek approaches concepts such as "inner" vs. "outer".
Nov
5
comment Does the original Hebrew support the NLT of Genesis 6:3?
@seedy3 This and several other "unanswered" questions you might run across actually did get answered early on, but more recently the contributor, for personal reasons, went through a process to have their contributions removed. Normally such posts would be anonymized and remain visible to the community, but there were complications and we ended up having to remove them entirely in this case. Hence a few old questions around here are again in need of answers.
Nov
5
comment Does Revelation 22:5 contradict 1 Corinthians 15:28?
@WoundedEgo SE sites are community moderated. If you think my answer is crappy down-vote it. If you think it doesn't answer the question or show its work or otherwise doesn't qualify to be on this site then flag it as such. Flags first go to high rep community members for validation and even if it escalates to moderators to for review I recuse myself from handling flags on my own posts. If you don't want just a binary pass/fail review then post on meta and ask the community what they think of the post and invite discussion on whether it should be deleted or not.
Nov
5
comment Does the original Hebrew support the NLT of Genesis 6:3?
Please see the discussion on our meta site about this answer. I have undeleted it on the benefit of the doubt and to make discussion about it earlier. That being said I think it needs to be edited to at least touch on the specifics of this verse to really fit this site.
Nov
4
comment Does the original Hebrew support the NLT of Genesis 6:3?
This answer only presents an argument from authority: scholars were involved in the translation ergo their translation must be good. This does not answer the actual question asked or fit the motif on this site of actually examining the text in question. This is interesting tangential information but answering this question on this site will require diving into the actual Hebrew text.
Oct
6
comment 1 Cor 13:10 - Did Paul use “perfect” [teleios] in the sense of maturity?
Even with the edits I'm having trouble seeing how this question is really unique. Whether or not to open the related cessation can of worms or not is up to answers depending on how they think it factors into the text, but the basic question about what the word means in context seems to have been asked already. On the other hand it sounds like you have a very definite answer in mind. Perhaps what you mean to do is answer one of those other questions? If you think the extant answers are straw-men, why not posit an answer that you think isn't?
Oct
6
comment What does Paul mean by 'Completeness' in 1 Corinthians 13:8-10?
@Jas3.1 I'm not sure it's fair to call that "the cessation position". Yes this verse gets cited by a lot of cessationists in support of their position, but many others (myself included) will cringe at that handling of this verse even if they agree with the gist of the position.
Oct
3
comment Was Paul arguing that Christians are the “true Temple,” in contrast The Temple?
Honestly as worded it's a little puzzling to me what you see as the alternatives here, but maybe that's for answerers to sort out anyway…
Oct
3
comment Who is the “man of lawlessness” in 2 Thess 2?
Trying to turn the passage around to make this a "confession" that Jesus wasn't God at all is a bizarrely misguided interpretation that takes the plain sense of the words and twists them to say the opposite of what they say. This is a terrible application of basic hermeneutics. Argue that the book is corrupt or the author disillusional or whatever you like — virtually anything would be more rational than taking words that specifically disprove your point and trying to pretend that they support it.
Oct
3
comment Who is the “man of lawlessness” in 2 Thess 2?
I'm quite aware of that. That's the point of the verse! But whole reason this verse makes a big deal about “Jesus Christ coming among humans” is that because Jesus was being considered as one with God then his taking on flesh — “being found in appearance as a man” — was a big deal and tantamount to a claim that the divine took on a physical form. The heresy that was common at the time that the author had in mind was one that claimed that God appearing as Jesus was not really physically human, that he was just a mirage. Hence the need for a confession that God really did take on flesh.
Oct
3
comment Who is the “man of lawlessness” in 2 Thess 2?
You should read the whole of 1st John because the very verse you quote in support of your position is, in the context of the book, making exactly the opposite claim. Confessing that Jesus came in the flesh is a meaningful test for true vs. false prophets specifically because Jesus had, in the sentences immediately prior, been labeled as God's Son and hence the divine being taking on human flesh is a big deal. The essence of the necessary confession acknowledges that Jesus was God in the flesh and hence more than human—quite the opposite of denying him being anything more than human!
Oct
1
comment 2 Corinthians 5:21 - When and how was Christ, who knew no sin, made “sin”?
This is a fine question but as written it has two parts. One of those parts asking for analysis for how this verse should be interpreted is very much off limits for Christianity but quite on topic for Biblical Hermeneutics. As a result I have migrated the question here to be answered. On the other hand the bit about church history and how the church fathers interpreted this is not on topic here but would be on C.SE. I would encourage you to re-post a version of this question over there that asks just the latter part (and also specifies what group of church fathers you're interested in).
Sep
30
comment In Mark 5:9 does Jesus ask for a name or a title?
You can only assume what you claim to assume in this answer if you have previously assumed that nothing else the Gospel accounts tell us about Jesus knowledge about things that weren't readily observable (e.g. Philip under the fig tree or the Samaritan woman's marital history). If you've started with the presupposition that Jesus was not divine then this argument could make sense, but as far as arguing from this passage you've done nothing but beg the question based on a presumption that other accounts in the same text must be false.
Sep
15
comment Does Apostle Paul give a warning against different denominations?
This is really really poor hermeneutics; in fact it has more of the trappings of you going off on a personal rant than it does textual analysis. To top it off your personal opinions an this matter are very unbalanced. I don't dispute that there are aspects of what this text talks about at work today, but the idea of denominations itself involves other factors other than divisiveness. Sometimes they a framework in which the "better way" can actually be lived out. This answer simply fails to engage either the original text and its context or the modern issue and its various facets.
Sep
14
comment What was meant by “paradise” when Jesus spoke to the thief on the cross?
Please edit your supporting reasoning into your answer. Comments are ephemeral and may eventually removed.
Sep
13
comment What was meant by “paradise” when Jesus spoke to the thief on the cross?
You've not shown how you're getting from "garden" to "paradise" being the same thing. You've asserted it but shown no evidence. Furthermore you didn't address the actual concerns from my first comment (which should be done by editing your post to cover the bases rather that commenting by the way). Lastly I have a hard time the thief would find any comfort at all in Jesus' statement given your interpretation. If the statement doesn't have any bearing on an afterlife and is just about where he's to be buried I imagine he's past caring too much about that.
Sep
13
comment What was meant by “paradise” when Jesus spoke to the thief on the cross?
So your interpretation of this saying is roughly "Today you will be six feet under right along side me"? Doesn't that seem a bit incongruous with the start of the remark? Why make such a big deal about it if he's about to say something mundane? Verily verily I say unto you, today I had scrambled eggs for breakfast. See how odd that sounds? Most people don't start their unremarkable sayings that way, and Jesus hadn't made a habit of saying "Truly I say to you" right before stating the patently obvious.
Aug
14
comment What are the implications of calling Jesus “the son of Mary” in Mark 6:3?
Mod Notice: Comments are not the place to debate theological issues. They can be used to request clarifications or suggest improvements to posts, but let's not use them as a make shift debate platform. You can use the Biblical Hermeneutics Chat system if you want to discuss something.
Jun
4
comment Matt. 27:52 “tombs also were opened” apocalyptic symbolism?
@Tau Please see my follow up comments in chat starting here. I'm cleaning this space up a little as our comments now are likely not helpful to the original poster or readers.