3,731 reputation
1124
bio website
location
age
visits member for 2 years, 6 months
seen Jul 15 at 15:04

m.a. biblical studies (new testament)

thesis: the grammatical and cultural role of luke's portrayal of possessions in luke-acts


Aug
30
answered Why is Rahab and not the spies included in the “Hall of Faith”?
Aug
28
comment Doesn't Titus 1:12 show that apostle Paul promotes racism?
Mike, I appreciate your response I am having trouble connecting the dots within it. If I understand correctly, you start well with addressing contemporary culture, but then you talk about where Paul came from. I don't see the logical connection in your bold section - how his sacrifice clears him of accusations of racism. Then, finally, you briefly mention the Cretan poet. I was wondering if you could flesh out these logical connections, perhaps cutting some things that may be extraneous, and then focus a bit more on the poet, and the immediate context of the verse.
Aug
22
comment Did Abner take Saul's concubine?
I would venture a guess that if the affront to the throne is accurate, then Abner probably did not take Saul's concubine, given the broader context of Abner's coalition with David to reunify the kingdom under David's reign. Additionally, Abner calls down a curse upon himself during this confrontation with Ish-Bosheth if he does not complete this activity.
Aug
21
comment Was 'σκύβαλον' (skubalon) profanity?
Apparently, it's not a very common word
Aug
21
comment Was 'σκύβαλον' (skubalon) profanity?
@Eric this is a good question, by the way. It's easy to associate it with crap or some more forceful term to us and pastors love to emphasize both sides (there's no need to cuss, or "hey look how forceful Paul was being"). However, I suspect that the answer to the question (based on your comment) will be more readily answered with a survey of literature contemporary to Paul.
Aug
21
comment Was 'σκύβαλον' (skubalon) profanity?
@BlessedGeek sometimes it's hard to detect humor or sarcasm in the written word, so no worries.
Aug
18
comment Are we to consider texts such as Song of Songs 2:3 to be euphemistically sexual?
I honestly believe that euphemistic perspectives were born of the embarrassment that can arise around sex. I think that it's a fine teaching point, but Clarke goes way too far in my opinion. There's also no real reason to reject the literal understanding of the text so why jump through unnecessary exegetical hoops to do so.
Aug
14
revised Was 'σκύβαλον' (skubalon) profanity?
added greek work and transliteration. skuvbalon is a keyboard amalgamation with most greek fonts; edited title
Aug
14
comment Was 'σκύβαλον' (skubalon) profanity?
fascinating article bible.org/article/toward-evangelical-theology-cussing. it doesn't address your question in its entirety, but may have some relevant application.
Aug
14
comment Bart D. Ehrman - respected critic?
I will also agree that this is a good list of Ehrman's qualifications. Having said that, his bizarre opinions surrounding source criticism necessarily affect his text criticism.
Aug
10
comment What is “the gift of God” in Eph 2:8
"It", as you rightly pointed out, is an addition as an English convention to smooth the reading. I feel that it makes perfect since without "it" though. I am going to +1 you for this analysis, but would slightly disagree that "it" would refer to "the gift." Instead, I would tend to see the English "it" as implicitly introducing a content clause ("that you are having come to be saved") which is the referent object for the subsequent τοῦτο in the next phrase.
Aug
10
comment What is “the gift of God” in Eph 2:8
This is a good theological answer to the question but would you be willing to revise this answer to include a bit more analysis of the text to support its theological suppositions and assertions?
Aug
10
comment What is “the gift of God” in Eph 2:8
I'd comment, but by the time I get to the bottom of your post I forget what I'm going to say. A technicality is that you're reading cause into the dative τῇ ... χάριτί. This is normally understood as a dative of means ("by"). ἐστε is present, active, indicative, 2nd plural which is simply "you are" but when combined with the perfect participle it's "you are having come to be saved." The entire phrase is "For by grace you (pl) are having come to be saved."
Aug
6
comment What language did Jesus commonly speak?
@JonEricson By the time of Jesus, Attic Greek had probably fallen out of use. Koine Greek was the lingua franca by the time the LXX was written. Lingua franca doesn't mean that everyone had to always speak that language, but that it was the language of commerce and governmental interaction. I don't think that the case for Hebrew over Greek is convincing and that they were probably employed equally, and that Aramaic was the "primary" language of "social" interaction.
Aug
6
comment What is the meaning of “poor in spirit” in Matthew 5:3
As an aside, this is normally understood to be a Matthean addition considering the more plain reading in Luke's parallel. However, the point still stands.
Jul
18
comment What exactly did Moses do wrong at Meribah?
He also gets to view it, just not enter it. Great answer.
Jul
18
awarded  Citizen Patrol
Jul
17
answered 1 Pet 3:3 (NASB) “Your adornment must not be *merely* external”
Jul
17
comment 1 Pet 3:3 (NASB) “Your adornment must not be *merely* external”
I'm in agreement with you, Mike. This seems like an interpretive decision that made sense to the translation committee. I'm not really sure why, and I don't think that they have provided access to their translation notes. This is actually a fascinating passage to translate given the wide semantic range of κόσμος. Good, no GREAT question.
Jul
12
comment Acts 1:19: “that field is called in their proper tongue” - spoken by Peter or by Luke?
'Plus, the phrase "in their own tongue" in Acts 1:19 indicates further that it is a reference to those who were born and grew up in Jerusalem - not those who came there with their other tongues.' Which also seems to confirm a redaction perspective since such a distinction wouldn't have needed to have been made if everyone was speaking the same language. To be sure, Galilean was not a different language, but a distinct dialect within a language. Much like "Southern English" vs. "Queen's English" vs. "American English" ...