Search results

The Jews have never reckoned Job among the Prophets, but rather among the Writings. The New Testament doesn't quote Job as a prophet, either. There's no evidence the early church treated it as such. I might suggest that you put this question to your pastor. Not everything in the Bible is...

I am fond of pointing out that the vowel points that were added by the Masoretes ought to be ignored. One of the main purposes they had for adding vowel points was to EXCLUDE any reading of the text that was too... Christian. So, the vowel points are, at a baseline, anti-Christian. Secondly...

Haha I'm a bit overwhelmed, tbh. I generally don't post much over the weekends (I spend them with my family). I came back on a Monday to SO many posts. And both you and Dak are... complicated. Y'all's posts tend to require a bunch of external reading.

As nearly as I can tell... Job isn't even a Hebrew book. Job lives before there's such a thing as Israel. He doesn't speak to any chosen people... only to righteousness (or the the lack thereof).

All that is clear from Hebrews is that the priesthood follows with the office of king. The timing is not specific here. Acts 13 provides a stronger argument. But let me repeat myself, as neither you nor @dak seems to have heard what I said. The Bible can say that Jesus glorification...

No - how does that foreshadow Christ?

Yes, that's causation. Obeying God results in not making mistakes, which results in not reaping the consequences of mistakes, which we could call a state of safety, which is the definition of salvation. Yes. One could run directly towards the edge of a cliff and still be saved... by someone...

The video is solid. Nonetheless, some Elohim clearly were fictional. For instance, Anat is a vulture goddess of Ugarit whose father was said to be El. She numbers among the Elohim despite not being... y'know... real.

You added to it? (I think) You and @GodsGrace seem to agree that I misunderstand, so I probably am, but... I'll still stick with my original statement. Relationships are more important than doctrinal correctness. Correct doctrine and 5 bucks will buy you a cup of coffee (boy, this saying...

It's a word in the Bible: Hypostatis Only the book of Hebrews seems to use it for its metaphysical sense (x3). Logos pre-exists, not necessarily Christ. Christ can mean a couple different things. The Biblical meaning seems to be 'anointed,' in the sense of being consecrated as a priest or a...

I wonder where you found that? The conflicting genealogies of Matt and Luke are interesting to me, given the hostility that the rest of the NT shows for genealogies (cf Titus 3:9). I have generally found Matthew's to have a non-genealogical meaning (its purpose is to count generations, showing...

I just did a few Google searches. I didn't do actual research to substantiate anything. Here:

@dak has put a differentiation between the pre-existing Logos, and the man Jesus who was anointed Christ. I await clarification myself as to the relationship between the two, and the theological implications of such. I have some ideas how/why that might be possible. I'm not sure at all that...

Correction - quick research shows that the 1st two chapters of Luke are absent from the oldest manuscripts. @dak

I think we're basically on the same page here. If this is so, what do we do with the accounts of the virgin birth in Matthew and Luke? Neither appears to be a late addition to those books. If they were "corrected" after the fact, it isn't obvious. Is there a way that we can retain both the...

Are you talking about the Substitutionary Theory of Atonement? I'd be okay with that idea being undermined. I find that it did not exist til the 10th century. Innovation is not a good thing in the field of Theology. Also, it takes the idea of redemption and tries to call it atonement. They...

Yes, I think so. Relationship trumps doctrine.

That's why it's better to define oneself in terms of WHO we trust, rather than WHAT we believe. It started so well...

I think the issue only exists if one holds to a Trinitarian formulation that requires the Father and Son to be separate Persons, starting from eternity past. I don't hold that view. I would like to elaborate on that, but I think the forum rules here prohibit debates on the Trinity, so I won't.

My source on this is Stories from Ancient Canaan, particularly the story called Kirta. Kirta is the name of the main character, an ancient king of Ugarit. (Ugarit is a city of the Amorites, who are a tribe of Canaanites) There's no mention of anointing in the story, or the rest of the book for...