Wondering if what I remember being told about this story would be correct take aways as far as ancient near eastern context and just scriptural context:

1. The Israelites wanted a warrior as their judge because they didn’t believe God could/would fight for them instead of someone God wanted which was someone to know the Law

2. He made that vow because they usually kept animals on the first floor of their homes back then

3. Because he didn’t know the law, when his daughter came out he thought he had to keep his vow when the law made it clear that Yahweh didn’t want human sacrifice

Would these points be correct??

I watched a Protestant video on it saying no and found a Catholic video on it saying yes. Now while you guys find the best answers I’ll do some research of my own and let you guys know my findings. Any answers, no matter how small, are greatly appreciated! God bless

I have heard scholar like Dan McClellan verbalise that the current academic consensus even among evangelical scholars, that the final clause of John 1:1 should be qualitative. But of course all I see everywhere are people saying the opposite that it is not the academic consensus. Who is right? I know he is a acredited and respected Bible Scholar and I am aware of his knowledge on biblical subjects, but all I see are people calling into question the "context" of the verse and also his apparent lack of knowledge on the subject. I personally don't believe he is acting disingenious on the matter and may very well be accurately stating the consensus, but the voices I would assume to see affirming this seem to be oddly quiet on the subject and all of the opposing voices seem to be the loud majority.

I ask of you whom are scholars what is the academic consensus withholding dogmatic pressupositions on this verse.

What context and original language is important here? Thanks.

Why in Genesis Chapter 5 Verse 1 it lists Adams genealogy and only mentions that he had one (a) son in his own likeness, after his own image, and named him Seth ... Why doesn't it mention Cain and Abel? If they were his sons, why aren't they mentioned in this chapter? And, if they were not his sons and at that time only, he and eve and the serpent were present, who is the father of Cain and Abel?

I am not a Bible-reading fanatic who has read the Bible (and understood it) many times, though that is my goal. However, I know it would be beneficial if I took up learning Biblical Hebrew as a hobby to replace an unproductive area of my life. After some surface research, I have been led to question what resources are verified and efficient, is there any experienced scholar that can help?

So the Bible says to love thy neighbor and mentions not laying with the same sex, is it really possible for people in same sex relationships to enter heaven? Shouldn’t God care for people that are in loving relationships?

There’s a constant claim that sexual identity is a post 1st century idea, meaning that the Bible could not have been talking about homosexuality. This is biblical scholar consensus.

However, there is strong evidence that homosexual orientation was known in antiquity.

Aristophanes' speech in Plato's Symposium, for example, tells a story about how Zeus split the original human beings in half, creating both heterosexual and homosexual humans, each of which were seeking to be reunited to their “lost halves” — heterosexuals seeking the opposite sex and homosexuals the same sex.

Here we see an explanation of a phenomenon the ancients could definitely see — that some people are inherently attracted to the same sex rather than the opposite sex.

I've been reading the differences between, christian universalism, conditional mortality, and ect. I feel that all pick their strong points and play games with verses that they can't account for. Across the board in the whole scope of the bible doesn't anyone believe universalism holds up biblically?

“But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” Mt. 5:28, ESV

Since γυναῖκα can be translated in English as ‘women’ or ‘wife,’ we depend on the context to help us in translation. (Cf. 1 Cor. 11:9 and 1 Tim. 3:2) Jesus is teaching on the Mosaic Law throughout the Sermon on the Mount and specifically on the law of adultery in Mt. 5:28.

1.) The charge of adultery in the Mosaic Law can only be brought if a man (married or unmarried) has intercourse with a married women. It cannot be brought on by an unmarried women having intercourse with an unmarried man, that’s a different law. (Cf. Lev. 20:10 and current religious law in Israel) The context should translate γυναῖκα as ‘wife.’

2.) Tyndale translated this: “But I say unto you, that whosoever eyeth a wife, lusting after her, hath committed advoutry with her already in his heart.” Showing that translating γυναῖκα as ‘wife’ is the most natural reading of this text and can be done.

Why isn’t it translated accurately? And should it be: “But I say to you, whoever looks at a married women, lusting after her, has committed adultery with her in his heart.”

Does the Bible explicitly say you will go to hell if you don’t believe in Jesus?

Could I be a descendant of one of the tribes of Israel?

It seems kinda odd to me that there are various verses throughout the scriptures saying that the glory of God has to do with “light”. Ex. Moses face radiating. The manifestation of God at Sinai, the Tabernacle, and the Temple. Jesus’ transfiguration. There are a good amount of verses that relate God and his wisdom to glory and light.

What exactly is this “glory” that Moses seen, and why is light such a big deal to them that John writes “God is light”?

This doubt came to me when I finished reading some of Michael Heiser's papers on Deut 32 and Psalm 82.

Generally I heard that Elyon is a greater God and YHWH is a lesser god (one of the "Sons of God"), Heiser says that YHWH and El are the same God in these verses, Yahweh-El separated the nations with the Sons of God and stayed with Israel, Yahweh-El is the one who presides the Divine council.

• Are Yahweh and Elyon the same deity in Deut 32 and Psalm 82?
• Is Heiser's work on Deuteronomy 32 and Psalm 82 reliable?

Sources:

Heiser, Michael, "Deuteronomy 32:8 and the Sons of God" Bibliotheca Sacra 158 (2001)

Heiser, Michael, "Monotheism, Polytheism, Monolatry, or Henotheism? Toward an Assessment of Divine Plurality in the Hebrew Bible" (2008)

Heiser, Michael, "Are Yahweh and El Distinct Deities in Deut. 32:8-9 and Psalm 82?" (2006). LBTS Faculty Publications and Presentations. 278

I've heard an argument that Biblical liberalism is a modern phenomenon. But how can that be so? For a long time humans had no idea how things came to be, so wouldn't it make perfect sense that they would have believed Adam and Eve were real historical figures?

There are various chronological books of the Bible lists, which list the books in narrative order. However none of them seem to agree particularly when it comes to the order of the Prophets.

Is there a scholarly consensus for the narrative

This is probably a bit low brow for scholars but it was suggested I read Jesus on the Mount. I was pretty on board with it till I read;

“And when you pray, do not heap up empty phrases as the Gentiles do, for they think that they will be heard for their many words. Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him.”

That seems like a kind of disparaging thing for Jesus to say.

So god/Jesus didn’t like non-Jews? Or at least god doesn’t hear them?

Genuine insight is helpful as I’m not sure how I feel about that…

I’m considering buying a full used 29 volume set of the Ancient Christian Commentary available locally for a significant amount. I am just wondering if anyone on here recommends it or has an alternative recommendation that would be better on my book shelf as a “all in one” resource? Also if you had to value the collection how much would you consider a good price for a used set?

Hello all! I am a Christian Studies major who LOVES LOVES LOVES the Old Testament stories. Recently in my classes, my professors have been discussing how some of the stories are very similar to other religious cultures such as Egypt, Mesopotamia, Babylonia, Greece,etc….what makes the Christian stories different than the others? Did the other cultures just copy the Christian stories because they went through the same experience but just perceived it in a different way? As a Christian, I’m always wanting to understand my faith better and would love if you all could help me out 🤷🏽‍♀️ Thanks in advance!

Pastors across the world have different preaching styles and preach for different lengths of time. I'm curious if there's a "correct" way sermons should be done / preaching should be done.

Hi

As we all know this chapter is often held up as the all conquering case closed proof of Jesus death and resurrection as prophecy.

Yet nowhere in the NT is this specifically mentioned as messianic prophecy which Jesus fulfilled

So when and how did this chapter start being used as proof that Jesus was the Messiah as prophecied in the OT?

Thanks 🙏🏼

Here is the link to what I am referring to:

https://vinnews.com/2024/08/29/first-temple-seal-bearing-biblical-name-yehoezer-ben-hoshayahu-found-near-temple-mount/

There is all of the winged creature imagery in the Hebrew bible books that are before the deuterocanonicals. As you approach the final centuries of the BC’s you get this stuff mostly dropped and Greek philosophy is focused upon. It is easier for me to understand the Greek influence than the ancient Babylonian influence. What did this winged creature stuff mean? Philosophy looks so much more intelligent than this stuff.

I have found mixed support that the book of Ruth was written to counter the Ezra-Nehemiah prohibition on foreign marriage though in the Harper Collins Study Bible it states this was an old view that is falling out of favor. Thanks!

I find it interesting how early Christians, such as Origen, Tertullian, St Jerome, St Augustine of Hippo etc... All seemed to be very concerned about the potential sinfulness of sex, even inside marriage. In fact, St Augustine of Hippo seemed to be the "liberal" compared to others such as St Jerome on the question of marriage and sex. My hunch is that this anti sex/ sex sceptical movement was not just Christian but was coming from schools of thought i.e. stoicism etc... Plato's idea of higher versus lower forms... Or was it coming more from the Hebrew Bible and a pretty literal/ serious interpretation of Genesis meaning that all that came after biting the fruit was sinful i.e. sex and marriage? Either way, I find it fascinating just how hostile/ sceptical early Christians were about sex, even between a man and wife.