Reputation
4,004
Next tag badge:
98/100 score
15/20 answers
Badges
12 30
Newest
 Nice Answer
Impact
~159k people reached

Mar
16
comment Did Paul intend his letters be taken as Scripture?
I'm not sure that the concept of canonization was pressing authors like Paul into writing letters to people and churches around the known world. Also in 2nd Peter, we see that these authors were carried along by the Holy Spirit as they engaged specific circumstances. As these specific circumstances were addressed, so too were many future circumstances, with timeless truths. Also, I believe that I remember that the early conception of the apostle was one who saw Jesus. Thus, Paul had basis for such a claim.
Mar
16
answered What does “Under the Sun” mean in Ecclesiastes?
Mar
14
comment Is interpretation and application of the Bible dynamic?
original intended meaning should ALWAYS be the foundation for any "new" insight. great point, jon.
Mar
14
comment Is interpretation and application of the Bible dynamic?
Also, check out Kevin Vanhoozer speaks to the concept of the "narrative arc." How the contextual setting of the passage in question influences how the hearers would have understood what was going on, and the trajectory upon which the author seems to be heading, can help inform how to go about developing a contemporary parallel conception of the situation under consideration.
Mar
14
answered Is interpretation and application of the Bible dynamic?
Mar
14
comment Does the phrase “born of water and the Spirit” refer to one, or two births?
So sorry about that. My sloth is showing. "GS" is Granville-Sharpe's rule. καὶ takes on many meanings. My Greek professor has this saying, "καὶ means 'and', it can also mean 'also,' it can even mean 'even.'" The importance of καὶ is how it coordinates what it's surrounding - and there are many ways in which that can happen.
Mar
14
revised Does the phrase “born of water and the Spirit” refer to one, or two births?
added 1 characters in body
Mar
14
answered Who are the “children”, “fathers” and “young men” addressed in 1 John 2?
Mar
14
revised Does the phrase “born of water and the Spirit” refer to one, or two births?
removed superfluous comma
Mar
14
answered Does the phrase “born of water and the Spirit” refer to one, or two births?
Mar
13
comment Women and chief men stirred up - Acts 13:50
the old copulative kai
Mar
13
comment Why, in Ezekiel 28, is the King of Tyre conflated with Lucifer?
Judaism's conception of the "fallenness" of the nephilim comes from a blending of Genesis 6 and some other literature (1 Enoch, I believe). Great add, J.C.
Mar
12
revised Why, in Ezekiel 28, is the King of Tyre conflated with Lucifer?
added final "e" on fine.
Mar
12
answered Why, in Ezekiel 28, is the King of Tyre conflated with Lucifer?
Mar
12
comment Why would God disapprove of rituals he ordained?
The syncretism and comingling of Yahweh and Baal (in particular) betrayed a cavalier, or even faithless, understanding of whom Yahweh was/is was what was particularly revolting. The rituals that were ordained were to foster relationship with Yahweh, but were twisted into festivals celebrating other gods, taking for granted that Yahweh would be OK with it since it was something that he ordained.
Mar
8
comment Is John 7:53-8:11 original to John's gospel?
Additionally, Johannine authorship does not = inspired or legitimate something that was clearly added later in the process as necessarily part of the original text.
Mar
8
comment Is John 7:53-8:11 original to John's gospel?
My response to that would be that what has been passed down to us has been necessarily modified for purposes of comprehension, or other theological aims. Did God directly inspire the King James Version, or is it an interpretation of an inspired text? However, at the time, the King James Version made the underlying theology and message of the original texts more accessible to the greater populace.
Mar
8
comment Is John 7:53-8:11 original to John's gospel?
I guess my contention would be along those lines. This is not the first, arbitrary comment that @LanceRoberts has made about text criticism, which is also not germane to the conversation so I responded and now we're in this little discussion.
Mar
8
comment Is John 7:53-8:11 original to John's gospel?
@LanceRoberts, please cite your sources. "Pretty far back" doesn't count. While Wikipedia isn't necessarily a scholarly source, I understand your inherent mistrust of it. What would you consider an authoritative source?
Mar
8
comment Is John 7:53-8:11 original to John's gospel?
@LanceRoberts I'm not certain you have a proper perspective on textual criticism. Based on your first sentence, it sounds like you believe that the sole intent of the text critic is to cast doubt on Biblical inspiration. Not only is this quite the serious accusation, it is also an unfair assessment of many folks who are brothers and sisters in Christ. I take issue not only with your approach, but also your logic. You clearly have no grasp of the process of the textual criticism otherwise these wild accusations would be filtered a bit better.