sorry for insulting. that was not my intent. i chose my words carefully, though. i never equated the two, but noted that they tread dangerously close to each other.
i've just finished reading your rules. i find fault with a few of them as you, no doubt, find fault with my approach and biases.
@BobJones There's understand and then there's understanding. The rules make sense as English sentences, but I don't really get them. (As we have talked about before.)
@BobJones when it solves the clue and fits within the space allotted and facilitates answers to other clues. however, there are more than a few times where the word is erased to facilitate another answer.
Evan in a crossword puzzle the answer to a clue needs to satisfy the clue (the original intent); "sin" as an answer to "what makes bread rise?" would be wrong.
but you can look at any individual piece and say "that fits", and then (for better puzzles) you can also see the whole (a theme) on a different level. But you can't go for the whole while sacrificing the parts along the way.
Well, that's not the original intent for some of us.
@MonicaCellio Or more to the point: I've started puzzles, filled in the "correct" answer, and only discovered the mistake when I looked at the solution. I've noticed that I will self-justify almost anything.
Children can see anything you contextualize them to see; so what? They don't grow up in a vacuum, after all. And sometimes we think we're observing and it's really wishful thinking; brains are complicated.
@BobJones I think that's your challenge: how do you get people who have already decided one way to see it another. (And maybe you don't even try. I don't know.)
I just looked out the window at the clouds and there's a bunny up there. That doesn't make it so; it's just my perception. Even if the child with me also sees it.
@BobJones i never accused you of that. i'm asking a semantically and syntactically legitimate question. when you say "a mere man could not make the whole puzzle work" are you saying that if your observations (SP foundations) are correct, then that validates the divinity of Jesus, or are you saying that SP validates the role of the Holy Spirit in interpretation?
Yes. It validates the divinity of JEsus. Yes. The HS participates in flushing out pictures by helping to correlate scriptures that actually exist. After it has been flushed out, they can be validated without the HS
@BobJones are children seeing a "fuller sense" or are they making cognitive connections? my kids see Jesus in so many aspects of the OT and i don't disagree with them. however, i just think that's where the import of the task has reached its conclusion. as it points to (the need for?) Jesus, i understand and totally agree. to press it into service as the foundation for exegeting a text just seems a bit too far for me.
please understand that i can understand the idea of Jesus/God's pursuant love in the face of evil as evidenced by the story of Jacob, Leah, Rachel, and Laban.
do i find other things non Jesus-related fascinating about that story? and do i find other application? certainly.
@BobJones i can say that without SP, too. i was asking you what you meant when you said that phrase?
@MonicaCellio and that's where SP loses me. i put words in Bob's mouth and he ate them.
And would you trust the Kmart teller to judge the proper application of mechanical techniques to the repair of your car? Why would you trust someone who can't do it, and doesn't believe it exists to be able to evaluate it?
Why do you not just engage the examples I have given?
please understand that i can understand the idea of Jesus/God's pursuant love in the face of evil as evidenced by the story of Jacob, Leah, Rachel, and Laban.
@swash I don't even know how to answer you. I am flabbergasted that you would waste my time without even having read my stuff. Common courtesy would suggest that you know the topic before engaging.
@BobJones apologies. i dont think that this conversation should go any further. i apologize for wasting your time and for asking for questions without fully reading and comprehending your perspective. as an aside, do you see now why i said it treads so closely? we can't talk unless i have a grasp, and grasping is clearly not something that is facilitated by the practitioner.
@JackDouglas i'm out jack. i didn't attack, i simply made an observation. i appreciate that you don't toss out a corrective to him too.
@Bob please take it easy on Swash—he is a splendid chap :)
apologies for Brit idiom
@Bob incidentally I also haven't yet taken the time to read through your site, though I plan to do so at some point. I'm not expecting to suddenly agree with your method, but I am expecting to find it fascinating, and in some ways to be enriched in the process. One of the things I benefit from most on this site is the way I can be helped by contributions even when I disagree with the conclusions
@BobJones That's a tough nut to crack. As I mentioned above, when your answer implied that Paul wrote Hebrews, that was a huge stumbling block for me. I find your work endlessly fascinating, but also frustrating. The explanation of the seven messengers was an epiphany!
I want to ask this question:
Who was the author of Hebrews?
Who was the author of Hebrews, or who are the likely candidates?
But I get the message:
Oops! Your question couldn't be submitted because:
It does not meet our quality standards.
What am I doing wrong? What rule hav...
The author of Hebrews, being generally uncertain, often goes by the moniker "Autor". But who or what lies behind the mask? What clues do we have to work with that could tip us off to their identify? If one were to draw up a list of candidates, who would be on it and why?
More importantly, does t...
@JonEricson I have an idea that this is going to turn out to be a duplicate, but maybe it was on C.SE somewhere. Hence the second part of the question, which is what keeps drawing my interest back anyway. I've heard the list of authors speculated about enough, but the whether the answer to that riddle holds any real ramifications for our application of the text is what keeps me curious.
The authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews is an open question. The common scholarly opinion is that the author certainly wasn't Paul.
Most modern Bible translations make no mention of the author, but some older ones such as the King James Version do:
Personally, I find it hard to belie...
@JonEricson Hmm, yes I knew I'd seen that. Complete with upvotes from me for almost everybody involved except the accepted answer, which smells to me like somebody was rambling on beyond their pay-grade. Hard to tell with no references.
@JonEricson I tend to be pretty liberal with the vote button(s). It takes a pretty all round "meh" post (or a day I'm too busy to actually read) to not get my vote one way or another.
@Caleb I tend to feel bad if I vote without reading. My guess is that I lost the tab before I finished reading all the answers. (I'm sending the question to Instapaper so that I'll read it tonight.)
Speaking of which, I need to break off the Raspberry Pi site mods about educating their community on the value of voting. It took north of two weeks, three bumps and a bounty to drag out a single measly upvote on my question there. My answers haven't fared any better.
@JonEricson Ya I don't vote without actually reading unless there is something glaringly wrong and inexcusably bad or pure genius and obviously good that could stand on it's own and deserve a vote without the full thing.
I'm still grumpy over somebody that accused me of down voting without reading their post after I read every word twice before voting and the commented specifically as to why.
I want to ask this question:
Who was the author of Hebrews?
Who was the author of Hebrews, or who are the likely candidates?
But I get the message:
Oops! Your question couldn't be submitted because:
It does not meet our quality standards.
What am I doing wrong? What rule hav...
The authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews is an open question. The common scholarly opinion is that the author certainly wasn't Paul.
Most modern Bible translations make no mention of the author, but some older ones such as the King James Version do:
Personally, I find it hard to belie...
