6,235 reputation
1128
bio website simply-a-christian.com
location United States
age 33
visits member for 2 years
seen 22 hours ago

May
19
comment Language question in Mark 15:34
Ah, yes, I recall that now. That's obviously it. :)
May
19
comment Language question in Mark 15:34
But, why didn't the author simply translate the first statement in the first place and simply omit the rest (from "which" onwards). Any ideas?
May
19
comment The grammatical tense of the verb “judged” in 1Peter 4:6
Can you share from which Bible "not in English" you encountered your latter translation?
May
10
comment What is the significance of the phrase ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος in the Apocalypse?
In a week, I will review the answers to see which is most detailed, which has the most support (citations, quotes from scholars), and of course, which answers the questions posed. Thanks everyone for your contributions thus far. They are each excellent. Also, if you give your opinion on what something means, and it isn't that obvious, please corroborate your opinion by citing a reputable scholar who concurs with your opinion.
May
10
comment Did Avraham marry Hagar? Did Ya'akov marry Zilpah?
Since you're the only one who answered, you'll get the best answer.
May
8
comment What does μονογενὴς Θεὸς means in John 1:18?
But the reader should know that there can be no absolute certainty that μονογενὴς Θεὸς is the correct reading in John 1:18. The reader will then need to answer based on the assumption that it is the correct reading.
May
8
comment What is the significance of the phrase ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος in the Apocalypse?
But Rev. 1:11 is also a textual variant, with Ἐγώ ἐιμι τὸ Α καὶ τὸ Ω, Ὃ πρῶτος καὶ ὁ ἔσχατος being supported by hardly any witnesses. The majority omit it. As Heinrich Meyer notes, "The addition after λεγούσης, ʼεγώ εἰμι τὸ α καὶ τὸ ω, ὁ πρῶτος καὶ ὁ ἔσχατος καὶ (Elz.), is without attestation." And, I hate to admit it, but Rev. 22:13 is a bit ambiguous too as to who it is referring to by the phrase "the Alpha and the Omega."
May
7
comment What is the significance of the phrase ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος in the Apocalypse?
Hmm...I'm not so sure Rev. 1:8 is referring to Jesus. It seems ambiguous, especially in light of the textual variant. I examined Tischendorf's apparatus and hardly any witnesses support the reading in the Textus Receptus. Nonetheless, most excellent answer.
May
6
comment Where can I find Targum Neofiti online?
Very nice find.
May
6
comment What is the significance of the phrase ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος in the Apocalypse?
Could you add the actual Aramaic text of the cited targumim?
May
6
comment What is the significance of the phrase ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος in the Apocalypse?
I will be awarding a bounty of 500 for this question in two days, hopefully to encourage detailed and thorough answers.
May
4
comment On what basis do some modern Bible manuscripts omit Matt. 17:21?
BTW, if I originally made the question, I'd already have given you best answer for answering the question asked.
May
4
comment On what basis do some modern Bible manuscripts omit Matt. 17:21?
One should also note that Mark 9:29 has ...ἐν οὐδενὶ δύναται ἐξελθεῖν..., while Matthew 17:21 (in manuscripts which have it; and, there are many) has ...οὐκ ἐκπορεύεται... If indeed Matt. 17:21 was originally missing, and it was later incorporated by a scribe from Mark 9:29, how do you explain the dissimilarity of the Greek text? Certainly a scribe would have simply copied Mark 9:29 verbatim.
May
4
comment On what basis do some modern Bible manuscripts omit Matt. 17:21?
Did you say that Codex Sinaiticus is the earliest witness of all those that do and do not have Matt. 17:21? If so, did you not notice that Origen includes it, and he lived in late 2nd century to mid 3rd century (184/185 – 253/254)?
May
4
comment On what basis do some modern Bible manuscripts omit Matt. 17:21?
You answered the question that was asked, but you added some of your own insight. So, I must ask, what's the earliest witness of those that do not have the verse, and what's the earliest witness of those that do have the verse? You seem to believe that the earliest of them all do not have the verse, but I'm not so sure that's true.
May
2
comment Jeremiah 30:9, David as King
As much as it pains me to say this, and it does, you don't need to include the information about Jesus in your response. "This is not a Christian site," and since the question pertains to a passage of scripture in the Tanakh which makes no explicit mention of Jesus, there should be necessity to inlcude such information in your response in order to substantiate your claims. I do like that inclusion of 2 Sam. 7:8-13 though. :)
May
2
comment Jeremiah 30:9, David as King
I didn't downvote, but you may want to edit your response to align with the edited question.
May
1
comment Jeremiah 30:9, David as King
Why does it make sense if it only refers to a descendant of David and not David himself? How do we know it does not refer to a resurrected David himself? You have to substantiate your claim. :)
Apr
30
comment Are the 'vessels of wrath' in Romans 9:22 'prepared for' or are they 'preparing themselves for destruction'?
Wallace would have been quoting Chrysostom's own commentary on Rom. 9:22, the English translation of which is accessible via sites such as CCEL.org. The Greek text is available via Migne's Patrologia Graeca. There doesn't appear to be a Greek text of that particular book/ chapter of Irenaeus though: textexcavation.com/documents/images/ah4p081.jpg
Apr
22
comment Pagan hairstyle forbidden in Leviticus 19, who had it?
"Interestingly, Avram also says the 'round form', as can be seen from original Babylonian statues of their gods, is where our modern day 'halo', Jewish 'kipa' as well as some historical 'shaven crown or patch worn by monks and other clerics' can be traced." Of course. Very interesting; thanks for sharing that tidbit!