Area 51 » Culture

124

followers

Announcements

So, does StackExchange posting support Hebrew and Greek characters? That might be important. – C. Ross Jun 2 '10 at 14:21

כן, אפשר testing Hebrew characters. γυξγδ testing Greek characters – Good Person Jun 2 '10 at 15:29

@bmargulies I didn't intend to give the impression that the category was limited to professing Christians. I'll change the description up a bit to accommodate anybody who studies the canon of scripture. – Jonathan Sampson Jun 7 '10 at 14:14

show 17 more announcements

51 Example Questions (12 closed)

active newest votes

up vote 21 down vote

added by rlb.usa Jun 3 '10 at 20:23

up vote 19 down vote

added by Lance Roberts Jun 2 '10 at 5:04

Probably better written as "What is the best translation of <insert hebrew word here>?". I'll post that as another question. – Lance Roberts Jun 2 '10 at 5:22

@LanceRoberts - probably, but this could give an example which users may be more likely to post. – a_m0d Jun 2 '10 at 6:37

I prefer this more specific version as it provides a context which makes it a better question. – Rob Hyndman Jun 3 '10 at 4:33

up vote 19 down vote

added by malach Jun 2 '10 at 9:56

up vote 19 down vote

added by malach Jun 2 '10 at 11:25

For a solid exposition of Daniel, see Gordon Hugenberger's sermon series: rededicate.org/archives/DanielSeries/… In particular, see his summary of the different views on Daniel's 70 weeks here (expect a few typos): images.acswebnetworks.com/1/934/… Therein he says there is no gap. He says, "Daniel’s 70 weeks [are] not literal 'weeks of years' (the text nowhere says 'weeks of years'), but [are] symbolic and of uncertain length, where the symbolism is based on the very literal 70 years predicted by Jeremiah..." – metal Jun 22 '10 at 19:23

up vote 18 down vote

added by Jonathan Sampson Jun 2 '10 at 4:58

Most translations use "father" and the Greek has "pater" - father (cf. studylight.org/isb/…). Moreover, he was certainly Jesus's adopted father (on the importance of which, see reformedperspectives.org/newfiles/ra_mclaughlin/…), and the text calls Joseph and Mary his "parents" in 2:27. – metal Jun 22 '10 at 19:15

up vote 10 down vote

added by Jonathan Sampson Jun 2 '10 at 4:49

up vote 8 down vote

added by metal Jun 22 '10 at 19:40

up vote 6 down vote

added by malach Jun 2 '10 at 10:48

up vote 6 down vote

added by Eclipse Jun 17 '10 at 19:01

up vote 5 down vote

added by Nathan Feger Jun 16 '10 at 19:52

Sproul's Knowing Scripture is a good beginner's introduction (amazon.com/Knowing-Scripture-R-C-Sproul/dp/…). A level up may be Virkler's Hermeneutics (amazon.com/…). There are also specific books that deal with specific portions of the Bible, like Pratt's He Gave us Stories (on OT narratives), Longman's "How to Read ..." series which includes volumes on Genesis, Exodus, Psalms, and Proverbs. Etc. etc. – metal Jun 22 '10 at 19:29

@metal We're not actually answering the questions yet :) But +1 for Sproul. Excellent author, and brilliant mind. – Jonathan Sampson Jun 22 '10 at 20:27

up vote 4 down vote

added by Lance Roberts Jun 2 '10 at 4:57

up vote 4 down vote

added by Jonathan Sampson Jun 2 '10 at 5:35

closed as off topic by Jared Updike, RCIX, blundin, warren, C. Ross Jul 7 '10 at 14:23

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

It means does the Hebrew/Aramaic word for "day" in Genesis 1 mean a literal 24-hour day, or is is figurative for some period of time. It doesn't have to do with perspective, it's an objective question. – Lance Roberts Jun 2 '10 at 15:27

To be clear here Lance -- one can still agree on the (literal) meaning of the Hebrew word for day yet disagree on its literal or figurative interpretation. Not that that doesn't mean it's not a good question. – pc1oad1etter Jun 4 '10 at 14:56

For a view that takes the days as literal but the passage as a whole as a symbolic construction, see the framework interpretation (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framework_hypothesis). It "holds that the seven-day creation account ... is not a literal or scientific description of the origins of the universe; rather, it is an ancient religious text which outlines a theology of creation. The seven day 'framework' is therefore not meant to be chronological but is a literary or symbolic structure designed to reinforce the purposefulness of God in creation and the Sabbath commandment." – metal Jun 22 '10 at 20:14

up vote 4 down vote

added by Gordon Gustafson Jul 4 '10 at 0:38

This just might fit here -- i'm out of votes though. – RCIX Jul 6 '10 at 21:52

I so want to answer this in a comment.. ok, can't resist: the word in the Hebrew means to "murder" which cannot be applied to non-sentient beings. Also, if it were wrong to "kill", the death penalty as prescribed by God to Noah after the flood, sacrifices of animals, and eating of non-vegetable matter would be wrong. – warren Jul 7 '10 at 14:41

@warren: not that i don't believe you, but do you have a source for those two words being different in hebrew? – RCIX Jul 8 '10 at 0:17

@RCIX - off the top of my head, no . but I'll look it up – warren Jul 8 '10 at 13:33

wikipedia: "OT's examples of killings sanctioned by God are often cited for "murder" being a more accurate translation. Hebrew's other words for "kill," include הרג (harag) and המית (heimit), while רצח (ratzach), found in the Ten Commandments לא תרצח (lo tirtzach), is more specific. In the fullness of the OT, Ex 20:13 is abundantly evidenced as prohibiting unjust killing, not a universal injunction against all killing; retzach is never used in reference to slaying animals, nor taking life in war; its most frequent use is in reference to involuntary manslaughter and secondarily for murderers." – warren Jul 8 '10 at 13:41

show 1 more improvement suggestion

up vote 4 down vote

added by Wikis Jul 16 '10 at 19:12

up vote 3 down vote

added by malach Jun 2 '10 at 10:07

closed as off topic by Jared Updike, Jay Atkinson, Amichai, alexanderpas, antony.trupe Jun 17 '10 at 3:37

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

Way too big an issue for one question. – Lance Roberts Jun 2 '10 at 15:29

I would love to be able to discuss/question/evaluate whole concepts too. Otherwise the site is all locked up in nitty gritty details, but big hermeneutical concepts get left out. – malach Jun 3 '10 at 9:25

@Ralph I agree, but I wonder how well the SE engine can accommodate larger discussions on Scripture. – Jonathan Sampson Jun 3 '10 at 14:28

@Ralph, All SO/SE sites are about the details. When you expand to not being about the details, then you have a discussion site, because the questions are then subjective or vague. – Lance Roberts Jun 12 '10 at 16:31

There are some pretty broad questions on SO that remain open and have tons of upvotes (in part because they are broad). OTOH, IMO, narrower questions are more worthwhile. E.g., "Does <some NT passage> support tithing?" or "Does <some NT passage> show that we need not tithe any more?" – apollodude217 Jul 4 '10 at 21:57

show 2 more improvement suggestions

up vote 3 down vote

added by Martin Tóth Jun 26 '10 at 5:15

Provided this is understood to mean "What does Hallelujah mean in the Bible?", could be OK. – DJClayworth Jun 26 '10 at 17:51

up vote 2 down vote

added by Jonathan Sampson Jun 2 '10 at 4:46

	Are you talking gap theory here? – Lance Roberts Jun 2 '10 at 5:00
	No, the Gap Theory generally consists of a temporal-space between 1:1 and 1:2, if I'm not mistaken. – Jonathan Sampson Jun 2 '10 at 5:01
	Exactly, that's why I'm not understanding what this issue is. – Lance Roberts Jun 2 '10 at 5:05
	Some suggest that Genesis 1 speaks of one creation event, and Genesis 2 speaks of another, entirely different creation event. Others suggest Genesis 2 is a more detailed view of day 6, covering the events that transpired within the Garden. – Jonathan Sampson Jun 2 '10 at 5:08
	I think the question should be phrased in the less specific and less provocative way: what are some exegetical approaches to reconciling the apparently different creation events in Genesis 1 and 2? – Amichai Jun 14 '10 at 3:03

show 1 more improvement suggestion

up vote 2 down vote

added by Jonathan Sampson Jun 2 '10 at 4:54

up vote 2 down vote

added by Jonathan Sampson Jun 2 '10 at 5:02

closed as off topic by Lance Roberts, Jay Atkinson, Amichai, alexanderpas, antony.trupe Jun 17 '10 at 3:37

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

While I think it teaches against it, this would be off-topic for the specified sites. – Lance Roberts Jun 2 '10 at 5:06

I don't think you should try to cover one topical issue in a question, you should go more for, "does 'wine' in the Bible mean alcoholic or non-alcoholic wine" (though I'd put the greek word in there if I had it on the top of my head). – Lance Roberts Jun 2 '10 at 5:21

"oinos," part of a study I did last week. Seems that a specific reference would be needed, since "wine" may be used for both fermented and non-fermented juices. – Jonathan Sampson Jun 2 '10 at 5:24

I think it's on-topic now since there are verses in specific contexts that are for and against. The question is, "Taken as a whole, does the Bible prohibit drinking?" In answer, the Wikipedia gets it right: "On the whole, [the Bible] displays an ambivalence toward intoxicating drinks, considering them both a blessing from God that brings joy and merriment and potentially dangerous beverages that can be sinfully abused" (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_in_the_Bible). – metal Jun 22 '10 at 20:01

The claim about "oinos" being both fermented and unfermented grape juice is a case of special pleading, IMHO. – metal Jun 22 '10 at 20:07

show 5 more improvement suggestions

up vote 2 down vote

added by Jonathan Sampson Jun 2 '10 at 5:11

A little broad for one question. – Lance Roberts Jun 2 '10 at 5:19

Correct, would be better if a specific passage were referenced. – Jonathan Sampson Jun 2 '10 at 5:21

What if I am looking for some passages to answer the question? This could be great to valuate common believes against the word. – malach Jun 2 '10 at 12:34

up vote 2 down vote

added by Nathan DeWitt Jul 7 '10 at 12:47

up vote 2 down vote

added by Wikis Jul 14 '10 at 19:45

Luke's account might be the odd one out. – Wikis Jul 14 '10 at 19:46

up vote 1 down vote

added by Jonathan Sampson Jun 2 '10 at 4:50

	This is a little broad, but probably specific enough to pass muster. – Lance Roberts Jun 2 '10 at 5:21
	@Lance the body of the question would, of course, contain references to specific passages. – Jonathan Sampson Jun 7 '10 at 14:19

up vote 1 down vote

added by Amichai Jun 14 '10 at 3:09

up vote 1 down vote

added by RCIX Jun 17 '10 at 3:10

Is the New Jerusalem a city or is it a people? – malach Jul 21 '10 at 6:16

up vote 1 down vote

added by txwikinger Jul 3 '10 at 13:55

up vote 1 down vote

added by txwikinger Jul 3 '10 at 23:50

up vote 1 down vote

added by txwikinger Jul 3 '10 at 23:52

up vote 1 down vote

added by Nathan DeWitt Jul 7 '10 at 12:48

up vote 1 down vote

added by Wikis Jul 14 '10 at 19:42

If you're interested, the answer is both - see Matthew 16:18 for universal and Matthew 18:17 for local. – Wikis Jul 14 '10 at 19:43

up vote 0 down vote

added by malach Jun 2 '10 at 10:34

closed as off topic by Rob Hyndman, Jonathan Sampson, Lance Roberts, Jared Updike, Eric Petroelje Jun 16 '10 at 21:15

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

up vote 0 down vote

added by malach Jun 2 '10 at 11:02

closed as off topic by Lance Roberts, Amichai, metal, random, Blake Jul 10 '10 at 1:32

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

	Should philosophical, linguistic etc. hermeneutics be used on the Bible as well? This for me seems to be a meta question on biblical hermeneutics and therefore valid. – malach Jun 2 '10 at 11:23
	I think that would be more textual criticism, not true hermeneutics. Therefore my answer to the question would be no, and I would consider it off-topic. Plus if it's a meta question, then it will have it's own meta site. Meta questions are off-topic. – Lance Roberts Jun 2 '10 at 15:33
	There will never be a meta.BibHerm.com page. Wouldn't it be great to ask about questions like "What tool set/methods are there to do hermeneutics?" – malach Jun 3 '10 at 9:27
	@Ralph, I thought all the SE sites would have their own meta site? Do you know differently? – Lance Roberts Jun 3 '10 at 16:09

up vote 0 down vote

added by malach Jun 2 '10 at 11:24

closed as off topic by Rob Hyndman, Jonathan Sampson, Lance Roberts, Jay Atkinson, alexanderpas Jun 16 '10 at 21:49

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

WAY too broad a question. It would need to be broken down to specific issues, like the verses in Daniel or Matthew and their interpretation. – Lance Roberts Jun 2 '10 at 15:35

Discussing Dan 9:24-27 will immediately lead to a discussion of dispensationalism, if somebody would question the gap theory between week 69 and 70, which is a major basis for rapture, tribulation, and dispensationalism. Instead of in the question, the theme would be in the answer, if you really want to do the verses justice. – malach Jun 3 '10 at 9:29

But remember, like SO, these aren't discussion sites, they're question and answer sites. – Lance Roberts Jun 3 '10 at 16:10

up vote 0 down vote

added by C. Ross Jun 2 '10 at 14:23

closed as off topic by Rob Hyndman, Jonathan Sampson, Jared Updike, Jay Atkinson, alexanderpas Jun 16 '10 at 21:49

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

Too subjective and broad. Asking "why" some third party does something is going to be hard to pin down. – Lance Roberts Jun 2 '10 at 15:34

"Why" can be determined from interpreter's notes. "Who is right" can be and endless debate. – richardtallent Jun 3 '10 at 6:26

This question wouldn't always be answered through exegesis, as the NIV and the KJV both come from different source documents, and so the differences may have arisen much earlier in history. Whilst the KJV and the NIV may say something differently, it may also be the case that they are both accurate translations, of two difference source texts. – Jonathan Sampson Jun 3 '10 at 14:25

up vote 0 down vote

added by RCIX Jun 17 '10 at 3:17

closed as off topic by Eclipse, Amichai, TehShrike, blundin, Ovi Tisler Jun 24 '10 at 3:28

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

intended to be off topic – RCIX Jun 17 '10 at 3:18

up vote 0 down vote

added by txwikinger Jul 3 '10 at 23:51

closed as off topic by Nathan DeWitt, warren, Wikis, DJClayworth, Jason Berg Jul 20 '10 at 5:19

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

Obviously an off-topic example :) – txwikinger Jul 3 '10 at 23:51

up vote 0 down vote

added by Gordon Gustafson, edited by WikiSpeedia hang-around Jul 11 '10 at 20:16

up vote 0 down vote

added by Gordon Gustafson Jul 4 '10 at 0:40

closed as off topic by Nathan DeWitt, random, Kramii, warren, Steve S Jul 8 '10 at 16:13

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

This is not connected to the actual interpretation of the text. – Chet Jul 15 '10 at 22:09

up vote 0 down vote

added by Wikis Jul 14 '10 at 19:41

	I really don't know if this is on or off topic - I'm adding it to find out! =:-) – Wikis Jul 14 '10 at 19:41
	I'm not sure if this is a hermeneutics question as much as a theological one... I have my personal views on the matter from a theological standpoint - though I've reached them in the larger corpus of scripture as a whole, which implies a hermeneutical approach to a theological understanding – warren Jul 14 '10 at 20:38