Bible Study Methods

[Jay Ross]

Yeah, I will leave it to you to enlighten me. Quite frankly, I'm not that interested and don't have the time. I have better things to worry about.

But David, I am only doing what I HAVE SEEN YOU DOING.

It seems that your understanding on something as trivial as this is a waste of time for you to come to grips with. You claim that you have a passion for theology, teaching, and preaching the Word of God, but you are not prepared to spend some time correcting your understanding on this question and will teach and preach from your ignorance when ever your are dealing with this area with respect to the history of Israel.

If you feel that you can correct everybody else, then please follow your expectation and spend some time learning about what is actually contained within the scriptures.

I am sure that when people actually read the passage I have suggested above they will realise that there is a time period required for both Judah and Benjamin to establish their descendants between the time that Joseph is dispatched down to Egypt as a slave and when both Judah and Benjamin go done to Egypt with their father, Jacob. Judah gets a grandson after his liaison with Tamar after his wife dies, and then one of the twin born to Tamar also marries and has a child. Benjamin is only 10 years old when Joseph is sent down to Egypt by his older brothers but he marries and has ten sons who go down to Egypt with their father and Jacob. The stories of both Judah and Benjamin logically demand that Joseph is second in command of Egypt for at least 14 - 17 years before the seven years of plenty starts. This suggests that Joseph was probably around 55 years of age when his brothers go down to Egypt to get grain and meet with him the first time unaware that he is their brother.

But as you say, David, this is nothing but a trivially matter. But if you treat this question as trivial, what other sections of the bible do you also treat as trivial?

Shalom

 

[reformed1689]

But David, I am only doing what I HAVE SEEN YOU DOING.

It seems that your understanding on something as trivial as this is a waste of time for you to come to grips with. You claim that you have a passion for theology, teaching, and preaching the Word of God, but you are not prepared to spend some time correcting your understanding on this question and will teach and preach from your ignorance when ever your are dealing with this area with respect to the history of Israel.

If you feel that you can correct everybody else, then please follow your expectation and spend some time learning about what is actually contained within the scriptures.

I am sure that when people actually read the passage I have suggested above they will realise that there is a time period required for both Judah and Benjamin to establish their descendants between the time that Joseph is dispatched down to Egypt as a slave and when both Judah and Benjamin go done to Egypt with their father, Jacob. Judah gets a grandson after his liaison with Tamar after his wife dies, and then one of the twin born to Tamar also marries and has a child. Benjamin is only 10 years old when Joseph is sent down to Egypt by his older brothers but he marries and has ten sons who go down to Egypt with their father and Jacob. The stories of both Judah and Benjamin logically demand that Joseph is second in command of Egypt for at least 14 - 17 years before the seven years of plenty starts. This suggests that Joseph was probably around 55 years of age when his brothers go down to Egypt to get grain and meet with him the first time unaware that he is their brother.

But as you say, David, this is nothing but a trivially matter. But if you treat this question as trivial, what other sections of the bible do you also treat as trivial?

Shalom

Strawman. I did not say that it was a trivial matter. I said, that at this time it is not of interest to me and I have better things to worry about (like people teaching falsehoods about sinlessness after salvation). There are some passages and topics of Scripture that ARE more important and consequential.

Furthermore, you are still making assumptions about timelines. If Benjamin was 10 when Joseph was sold then he would have been at least 30 years old by the time (based on the assumption of continuous timeline with no gaps) when the years of famine began. That is more than enough time to have as many kids as he had. It is up to you to show step by step how you arrive at your conclusions, without making assumptions, in order to say that I have been careless.

 

[John Caldwell]

David, I am going to use this as an illustration because it demonstrates what I have been unsuccessfully trying to communicate. I do not mean it as arguing against the comment itself or to be insulting in any way. It is an illustration.

Strawman. I did not say that it was a trivial matter. I said, that at this time it is not of interest to me and I have better things to worry about (like people teaching falsehoods about sinlessness after salvation)....

This is not true. By your own standard you did say that it was a trivial matter although your comments did not explicitly state those exact words. Looking for exact words is not how communication works. It is like complex doctrines of the Trinity which may not be stated in Scripture but is nevertheless what Scripture says. Some believe this is how Scripture says Penal Substitution Theory. Not directly in the text but communicated through the words.

You may not have meant to say that it was trivial, but that is exactly what you said per your own standard of communication. You just did not use those exact words, which per your own statements (what you said) is not how communication works.



Again, that was illustration. My point is that your words are not greater than God's words. If you are going to insist people respect what you actually state in the text of a communication then perhaps you should render at least that same respect to God and what God has communicated to us in Scripture.

 

[Jay Ross]

Furthermore, you are still making assumptions about timelines. If Benjamin was 10 when Joseph was sold then he would have been at least 30 years old by the time (based on the assumption of continuous timeline with no gaps) when the years of famine began. That is more than enough time to have as many kids as he had. It is up to you to show step by step how you arrive at your conclusions, without making assumptions, in order to say that I have been careless.

I am making better assumptions than you did David based on the evidence found in Genesis 37-47 as the Bible is silent on the ages of when Judah and Benjamin had their children and in Judah's case when his son had a son as well. The evidence we have of Benjamin is in 46:21 which means that we have to draw a long bow for our assumptions such as Benjamin's age when he began having sons, were twin being born to him in the mix etc..

On the other hand, in Judah's case, chapter 38 is devoted to the telling of the story with respect to Judah's descendants. The first verse of chapter 38 seems to suggest that Judah did not seek out a wife until after Joseph had been sold to the traders who were going down to Egypt. So David, in keeping with your evidence, Judah only has around 22 years, to find a wife, bed her and then start a family of three sons, with the assumption that there we no daughters born into this family. Then Judah finds a wife for his first son but he is killed by God, so Tamar waits for the second son to be of age to marry her, who is also killed by God. Then Judah withholds his third son because of his fear that he too will die or be killed by God. Then Tamar, after waiting for a number of years, takes matters into her own hand and sets out to bed Judah after his wife had died, and out of that liaison twins were born. Then Perez marries and has two sons who go down to Egypt with his father and Jacob.

Now David, the above paragraph is factually based on Gen 38 and 46, so can you guess how many years passed, for all of the events in the biblical account to unfold? From your posts, David, there is only a window of 22 years or so. Perhaps you might like to explain how it would be possible for these events to take place within your window of opportunity.

Now David, I am not trying to make you look stupid, but unless you can provide a logical explanation to support your age theory, then …. well you know what the outcome will be and you will have done that by your own efforts.

What I would suggest, to you and others, is that there is probably a required time span of around 38 or so years for the above story of Judah's family and his descendants to unfold within. If this is the case then Joseph was around 55 years of age when his brothers made their first trek down to Egypt to get grain for the extended family of Jacob.

Shalom

PS: - This understanding also suits the time window when Jacob went to Haran to get a wife.

 

[reformed1689]

David, I am going to use this as an illustration because it demonstrates what I have been unsuccessfully trying to communicate. I do not mean it as arguing against the comment itself or to be insulting in any way. It is an illustration.



This is not true. By your own standard you did say that it was a trivial matter although your comments did not explicitly state those exact words. Looking for exact words is not how communication works. It is like complex doctrines of the Trinity which may not be stated in Scripture but is nevertheless what Scripture says. Some believe this is how Scripture says Penal Substitution Theory. Not directly in the text but communicated through the words.

You may not have meant to say that it was trivial, but that is exactly what you said per your own standard of communication. You just did not use those exact words, which per your own statements (what you said) is not how communication works.



Again, that was illustration. My point is that your words are not greater than God's words. If you are going to insist people respect what you actually state in the text of a communication then perhaps you should render at least that same respect to God and what God has communicated to us in Scripture.

Yeah that is not an equivalent comparison, and who is trolling now?

 

[reformed1689]

I am making better assumptions than you did David based on the evidence found in Genesis 37-47 as the Bible is silent on the ages of when Judah and Benjamin had their children and in Judah's case when his son had a son as well. The evidence we have of Benjamin is in 46:21 which means that we have to draw a long bow for our assumptions such as Benjamin's age when he began having sons, were twin being born to him in the mix etc..

On the other hand, in Judah's case, chapter 38 is devoted to the telling of the story with respect to Judah's descendants. The first verse of chapter 38 seems to suggest that Judah did not seek out a wife until after Joseph had been sold to the traders who were going down to Egypt. So David, in keeping with your evidence, Judah only has around 22 years, to find a wife, bed her and then start a family of three sons, with the assumption that there we no daughters born into this family. Then Judah finds a wife for his first son but he is killed by God, so Tamar waits for the second son to be of age to marry her, who is also killed by God. Then Judah withholds his third son because of his fear that he too will die or be killed by God. Then Tamar, after waiting for a number of years, takes matters into her own hand and sets out to bed Judah after his wife had died, and out of that liaison twins were born. Then Perez marries and has two sons who go down to Egypt with his father and Jacob.

Now David, the above paragraph is factually based on Gen 38 and 46, so can you guess how many years passed, for all of the events in the biblical account to unfold? From your posts, David, there is only a window of 22 years or so. Perhaps you might like to explain how it would be possible for these events to take place within your window of opportunity.

Now David, I am not trying to make you look stupid, but unless you can provide a logical explanation to support your age theory, then …. well you know what the outcome will be and you will have done that by your own efforts.

What I would suggest, to you and others, is that there is probably a required time span of around 38 or so years for the above story of Judah's family and his descendants to unfold within. If this is the case then Joseph was around 55 years of age when his brothers mad their first trek down to Egypt to get grain for the extended family of Jacob.

Shalom

PS: - This understanding also suits the time window when Jacob went to Haran to get a wife.

Again, it is all based on assumptions.

 

[John Caldwell]

Yeah that is not an equivalent comparison, and who is trolling now?

I am (obviously) not trolling as I started this thread.

I did not think you were participating as a troll.

The point is you object to your exact method of biblical interpretation as being a logical fallacy when applied to your own words.

Why less a standard when dealing with Scripture?

 

[reformed1689]

The point is you object to your exact method of biblical interpretation as being a logical fallacy when applied to your own words.

Except that is not true. Because you can actually speak to the author of my words, me, and know what I was saying. Not to mention, the very context of all of my posts also show that it is not a matter of me thinking this is a trivial matter, it is a matter of relevance to the overall topic. I never said this was not an important topic, I just said, at this point, I do not have interest to delve into the topic right now. I have other matters to attend to rather than how old Joseph was. That being said. I made my case for how old Joseph was. So obviously it was important enough for me to investigate. Ross said he disagrees but refuses to show why he disagrees just states I need to study more.

 

[John Caldwell]

Except that is not true. Because you can actually speak to the author of my words, me, and know what I was saying. Not to mention, the very context of all of my posts also show that it is not a matter of me thinking this is a trivial matter, it is a matter of relevance to the overall topic. I never said this was not an important topic, I just said, at this point, I do not have interest to delve into the topic right now. I have other matters to attend to rather than how old Joseph was. That being said. I made my case for how old Joseph was. So obviously it was important enough for me to investigate. Ross said he disagrees but refuses to show why he disagrees just states I need to study more.

I do not believe the idea we cannot speak with God is true or that it is a reason to rely on what we believe God may have wanted to imply as if it is what He did communicate in the actual biblical text. I believe God meant to communicate what He communicated in what is written (I believe God is articulate enough to have "breathed" His Words without the need for men to add what they believe He was "really" trying to communicate.

You are wrong in that you did say (by your own standard) that it is trivial - not by your actual words but because that is what we see you really said at the time. What you are now saying is that you misspoke before and should not have said it was trivial. This is your method of interpretation, not mine (I actually believe the text of Scripture... every jot and tittle, is really important).

 

[reformed1689]

I do not believe the idea we cannot speak with God is true or that it is a reason to rely on what we believe God may have wanted to imply as if it is what He did communicate in the actual biblical text. I believe God meant to communicate what He communicated in what is written (I believe God is articulate enough to have "breathed" His Words without the need for men to add what they believe He was "really" trying to communicate.

You are wrong in that you did say (by your own standard) that it is trivial - not by your actual words but because that is what we see you really said at the time. What you are now saying is that you misspoke before and should not have said it was trivial. This is your method of interpretation, not mine (I actually believe the text of Scripture... every jot and tittle, is really important).

Strawman and flat out falsehoods. I never said it was trivial. Those are your words, not mine.

 

[John Caldwell]

Strawman and flat out falsehoods. I never said it was trivial. Those are your words, not mine.

Apply that standard to Scripture and you will be on a more correct path.

 

[reformed1689]

Apply that standard to Scripture and you will be on a more correct path.

Goodbye John. I'm done debating with you.

 

[John Caldwell]

Goodbye John. I'm done debating with you.

You never really started.

We could never agree on what constitutes Scripture (I believe it is "what is written" rather than what people may feel is implied).

Debate necessities a common set of principles.

You have stated your opinions quite often and told us what you feel God meant when He had certain verses pinned, but to my knowledge you have never really entered into a debate on this forum with anyone.

 

[Jay Ross]

Again, it is all based on assumptions.

David, your argument against what I have written in my previous post is that it is all based on assumptions, but the reality is that your theory on how old Joseph was is based on flimsier assumptions than the assumptions that I used in what I have posted. You are using a double standard. Your age theory is okay because you posted it, but others are wrong because you did not post it and it makes you look stupid, which is all of your own doing.

David you claim that you like to know the truth and to speak the truth, but that truth is your "truth" and not the truth that is found in the bible.

You have proved my point about yourself and I know, that, as a person, I would not consult you about the "Mountain" of the Lord or listen to what you believe about God's kingdom that he is going to establish in our near future.

I am done with trying to enlighten you with something that is so trivial in your expressed opinion, because you have bigger things to worry about which you believe are wrong.

Have a good day, now.

 

[Enoch111]

We could never agree on what constitutes Scripture (I believe it is "what is written" rather than what people may feel is implied).

There is no question that many things are implied in Scripture. And that is NOT according to *what people may feel* but according to Gospel truth and Bible truth. One of the major fallacies among Christians today is that unless something is explicitly stated, it is not valid. Well that is sheer nonsense.

 

[John Caldwell]

There is no question that many things are implied in Scripture. And that is according to *what people may feel* but according to Gospel truth and Bible truth. One of the major fallacies among Christians today is that unless something is explicitly stated, it is not valid. Well that is sheer nonsense.

The problem with using "implied in" Scripture as if it were actually stated is that it is subjective. Apostolic succession can be said to be implied (very clearly, in fact) in Scripture as can the opposing view. Jehovah Witness doctrines can be seen as being "implied" in Scripture. So can infant baptism and believers baptism.

The test is always what is written, not what men believed to be implied. As I stated before (which you seem to have ignored) not all of our doctrines meet this standard. BUT not all of our doctrines are equal, either.

The difference should be plain. @David Taylor said that 1 John 2:2 says that God was wrathful towards Christ. I could just as easily say 1 John 2:2 says God was never wrathful towards Christ. It does not say that either.

My point is @David Taylor 's method is called eisegesis. This is not saying his conclusions are right or wrong - but the method is wrong and dangerous. He reads his conclusions into the test and says these theories are what is said even though they are foreign to the text itself.

He is wrong (in method) and should know better because (given his background) @David Taylor was taught better.

 

[reformed1689]

David, your argument against what I have written in my previous post is that it is all based on assumptions, but the reality is that your theory on how old Joseph was is based on flimsier assumptions than the assumptions that I used in what I have posted. You are using a double standard. Your age theory is okay because you posted it, but others are wrong because you did not post it and it makes you look stupid, which is all of your own doing.

I did not say you were wrong. I ALSO admitted I had to make assumptions. But I also asked you to show specifically how you arrived at yours as I did. Something you have yet to do in detail other than making some cursory claims. I gave an age range and you said it was wrong. So apparently what you accuse me of, my age theory being ok because I posted it and others wrong, is actually what youhave done.

David you claim that you like to know the truth and to speak the truth, but that truth is your "truth" and not the truth that is found in the bible.

This is false witness. I expect an apology that I doubt I will receive.

You have proved my point about yourself and I know, that, as a person, I would not consult you about the "Mountain" of the Lord or listen to what you believe about God's kingdom that he is going to establish in our near future.

I have proved nothing except that I was right and you were just trolling and had no intent of actual debate/discussion. Glad to know I was right but as soon as I finish with this you will be on my ignore list.

I am done with trying to enlighten you with something that is so trivial in your expressed opinion, because you have bigger things to worry about which you believe are wrong.

More lies. I never said it was trivial. Those were your words, not mine.

You and Caldwell are both alike.

There is no question that many things are implied in Scripture. And that is according to *what people may feel* but according to Gospel truth and Bible truth. One of the major fallacies among Christians today is that unless something is explicitly stated, it is not valid. Well that is sheer nonsense.

Agreed.

 

[Jay Ross]

@David Taylor

For what it is worth, I also questioned John Cadwell's ability to interpret scripture with a simple test, just like the test I asked you to do.

In my humble opinion, you both leave a lot to be desired with respect to Biblical interpretation, but the truth of the matter is found in the respective responses that you each made and when comparing those responses, John actually comes out on top for what it is worth.

But since you are going to put me on your ignore list, I though that a comparison between the two of you and your responses is worth recording on this forum.

Have a good day now.

 

[John Caldwell]

@David Taylor

For what it is worth, I also questioned John Cadwell's ability to interpret scripture with a simple test, just like the test I asked you to do.

In my humble opinion, you both leave a lot to be desired with respect to Biblical interpretation, but the truth of the matter is found in the respective responses that you each made and when comparing those responses, John actually comes out on top for what it is worth.

But since you are going to put me on your ignore list, I though that a comparison between the two of you and your responses is worth recording on this forum.

Have a good day now.

I believe it is always good to question one another's skills.

We have to look at the reasons for our conclusions and then decide for ourselves which one is most appropriate.

For the age question I never took the time to conduct a time-line. That said, you have me interested because if we consider "son" to refer to Joseph's "calling" rather than his birth (which, linguistically, can be done) we come up with Joseph being 54 years old when Jacob was 130 years old.

This is the same age that you worked out with your time-line.

There are these types of issues in Scripture (I cannot remember where I studied the topic but in the above case "son" can refer to the time Joseph was considered to have become associated as the builder of Israel). Another example is the sun standing still (which is often mentioned in ANE writing as an omen, referring to the sun and moon being visible concurrently rather than appearing to stop in the sky).

It is, granted, trivial. But it is a good exercise.

 

[Jay Ross]

I believe it is always good to question one another's skills.

We have to look at the reasons for our conclusions and then decide for ourselves which one is most appropriate.

For the age question I never took the time to conduct a time-line. That said, you have me interested because if we consider "son" to refer to Joseph's "calling" rather than his birth (which, linguistically, can be done) we come up with Joseph being 54 years old when Jacob was 130 years old.

This is the same age that you worked out with your time-line.

There are these types of issues in Scripture (I cannot remember where I studied the topic but in the above case "son" can refer to the time Joseph was considered to have become associated as the builder of Israel). Another example is the sun standing still (which is often mentioned in ANE writing as an omen, referring to the sun and moon being visible concurrently rather than appearing to stop in the sky).

It is, granted, trivial. But it is a good exercise.

John, it is also important to understand when Jacob went up to live with Laban for 40 years. Many "scholars" state that Jacob only lived in Haran for 20 years but if the first son was born in the 8th year from when Jacob arrive in Haran, and Joseph was born 6 years before Jacob fled Haran with his wives, children and livestock, then there is only 7 years in which the other 9 sons plus Dianna could have been born in. The account of the births of Jacob's sons and daughter through their mother Leah, would suggest that this is not possible for her to give birth to six children over a seven year period.

The other question that is answered is at what age did Jacob go up to live with Laban. From my research of the timelines, it would seem that Jacob was somewhere around the age of 42 years old. Jacob clearly tells us that he spent 40 years in Haran before he set out to return to his fathers household.

Although there are a number of assumptions made to establish this period of time from when Jacob went up to Haran and then down to Egypt, the numbers all seem to gel together to form a believable timeline over this period.

But, it takes time to ponder these timelines and come to a understanding of how all of these events unfolded.

Shalom