Conversation started Jan 9, 2013 at 14:08.
Jan 9, 2013 14:08
@JonEricson now, there is no need to be sarcastic ;)
Hi @Bob!
How are you?
Jan 9, 2013 14:57
Oh hi Jack.. I am doing well. You?
Hi Jon. Happy New Year.
Jon, I was just looking at your answer on Paul's allegory. You know, that if you don't know how to do magic, it looks like, well, magic.
Same with hermeneutics. If you can't reproduce Paul's hermeneutics, it is more likely you might say his exegesis is eisegesis.
The stuff he says about Genesis is only a sample of the allegory contained in Genesis. He shows us it to us so that we can go look closer.
Look at the blessing of Esau. When the law has dominion, there will be no grace. The elements of Gal 5 are contained in the blessing itself
I am in the process of passing a kidney stone, so it is hard to focus.
that doesn't sound like fun (the kidney stone part)
It always reminds me to enjoy the time I don't have one..
I have been blessed in so many ways that God gave me kidney stones and a bad back to keep me humble
indeed
And I still struggle with it ;-)
I just lost 1/2 of my job due to cutbacks, but last week a major bank called me and asked for my resume to work in the forensic IT dept. Seems they need someone good with pattern recognition, so God was watching out for me before I knew I needed it.
Jan 9, 2013 15:14
excellent! looks like we're in a similar line of work (digital forensics + machine learning)
Well, that hasn't been my line of work, but we'll see what happens
well I'm sure they're hiring you for a good reason ;)
@Bob I'm ok thanks :)
I am good at problem solving and pattern recognition
remember to use and '@' or folk you're chatting with might not notice the message eg @Jon above!
Jan 9, 2013 15:17
You used it on me and I still didn't notice ;-)
@jon I forhot to use the @
@BobJones will do
@Bob you may or may not be aware there is a 'formative' debate going on on the 'meta' site at the moment. If you have the time/inclination your input would be valuable
Questions like this one, this one and this one have so far failed to reach a clear consensus :)
and even the moderators are split
@DanO'Day that job sounds impressively scary ;)
@JackDouglas it sounds cooler than it is. The coolest part was my grad research. The job itself tends to not be as much fun, altho it has fun moments
@Jack it is a bit difficult to get excited about such things when there is always a move to marginalize me. If there was any sense that people were actually interested it might be different. So I rarely post anymore, and when I did it was to test the hermeneutic against questions that I didn't generate (sort of a blind test).
I've been asked to write the commentary stuff for a study Bible based on the hermeneutic that I use. So my time for 'play' has been reduced.
Jan 9, 2013 15:33
@BobJones I understand
Though I would like to say my answers on meta are mostly written with you in mind: I don't want you marginalized by site policy!
And I mostly find your posts useful when I take enough time to try and understand them
Whatever time you have for us I appreciate—real life takes priority though ;)
@Jack Not so much policy as personality. Gotta have a community to want to participate.
@BobJones How do you mean exactly? There would need to be more like-minded folk active on the site?
I get excited to see Christ in the scriptures. It's no fun to always have someone dumping water on it when you share.
If you look at my posts on Judah and Tamar, Acts 12, Gen1 and John 1, I see those kinds of pictures everywhere. I find it discouraging that those who say they love Christ would chuck it by a knee jerk reaction.
@BobJones I can certainly see that would be a discouragement
I have venues to teach where it is accepted enthusiastically. And people are seeing them for themselves. So it's not really worth my time to try and share it here.
Jan 9, 2013 15:42
@BobJones can you link to a couple representative responses here so I can try to figure out what you're talking about re:your hermeneutic ?
(pardon my ignorance)
@Bob, yes, please do. I'm doing my best to encourage folk to ignore answers they don't like or disagree with rather than discouraging the poster.
I mean please post a couple of links
@Dan You can see an example of the hermeneutic which shaows a shadow of Christ in Acts 12 hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/532/…
@BobJones can you also post an example or two of posts where you felt the response from the community wasn't helpful
@Dan Here is one which shows a prophecy of the birth of Christ in Gen 38 hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/180/…
@Dan here is one showing that Gen 1.1 is the source of John's Logos in John 1 hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/460/…
These are done using a first century hermeneutic
I am currently teaching a class from Matthew to show how he demonstrates the hermeneutic.
@Jack Not really interested in that. There is one guy who is absolutely abusive, others who complain that IO give Christian answers to OT questions (obviously singled out from others who do the same)
@Jack the practice of down voting without comment, is presumably prejudice based on preconceptions rather than being helpful in producing 'good'answers
@BobJones I have had a conversation with the former individual about a month ago, I hope you have experienced nothing similar since.
Jan 9, 2013 15:54
@Jack, I haven't participated much in the last month.
Just checked: it was Nov 1st to be precise
The "Christian answers to OT questions" does not just affect you, others eg Kazark have provoked the same reaction
hence my hope to encourage you to participate in the debate :)
2
A: Are doctrinal answers ok?

KazarkThere is an inherent tension in a site that seeks to exegete a body of texts without a common ground. The main participants at this site seem to be Jews and Christians, but an atheist or a Buddhist or a Muslim could participate here too if they were interested in hermeneutics of ancient texts. W...

@BobJones We noticed :(
@Jack as for policies that make it difficult to participate: self-referencing. I have no one else to reference. I have literally been asked to write the book on it. You say you want experts, but that is not apparent from the policy.
@BobJones I am absolutely against any move to mandate referenceing: we are not wikipedia and I don't want us to move in that direction
This is one of the fundamental differences of opinion between myself and @Jon
@Jack Well I'm not up for constant tug of war.
@BobJones I don't think it will be like that. The debate will end and one side will win.
Winning is pretty much defined as "getting more votes on meta" on this network
Jan 9, 2013 16:02
@Jack It needs to get settled, it is too small of a group to have those divisions and expect community to grow
Of course I respect your decision if you don't want to get involved, but I hope you don't blame me for trying :)
@BobJones exactly
@Jack winning doesn't resolve things, it is self-policing, so people will continue to do what they do.
Community is community or it isn't
@BobJones no, I will delete comments if I have a mandate to do so
meta is the moderators mandate to use their powers
I don't usually 'make decisions' that isn't really the role
more of an 'implementer'
@Jack Jon also objects to me posting questions which concern sensus plenior saying that I am pushing an agenda.
We all have agendas.. It is my area of inetrest. Everyone else is doing the literal-historical thing
@BobJones Questions must start from the text or be about hermeneutical methods. If you follow those guidelines and anyone objects to your question please let me know!
@BobJones this is not supposed to be a site for just one hermemeutical method
far from it
Jan 9, 2013 16:10
@Jack Everything about sensus plenior is about a hermeneutic method
@BobJones exactly
you are even encouraged to 'ask and answer' your own questions in a sort of blog style
we just need to make sure the question and answer are distinct and both stand on their own merits
@Jack As accomodating as you are, it doesn't change the personality of SE
@BobJones minority viewpoints never get as highly voted as majority ones, no
but we can do much better than we are
@Jack You're in sales... right? ;-)
and though I approach God's revelation very differently to you, I have found your answers very useful a number of times: I know in my heart I need to adjust my framework, but I'm not sure how yet. My approach (and my heart) is just too... dry
@BobJones I'm an Oracle DBA :)
Jan 9, 2013 16:15
With the current environment, it is unlikely I would generate new questions, and I may dabble at others if they present an opportunity to show a unique angle. I just added to one where "He shall live" is hidden in "only" referring to Isaac as the only son
So God Told Abraham that Isaac would live while he was asking him to be sacrificed
@BobJones I already noticed that one :)
@Jack The method I use frees people up to get the same kind of testimony that Peter had when he said that Jesus was the Messiah, Son of God, and Jesus said that he Father had revealed it to him.
The Holy Ghost 'brings to remembrance' the things that need correlated in order to see the pictures of Christ.
@BobJones what verse(s) are you referring to?
Mt 16:16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
Mt 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed [it] unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
ah yes :)
Jan 9, 2013 16:24
Peter saw what Jesus was doing and correlated it with what he knew of the Messiah through the scriptures.
@BobJones he still didn't quite get it though, did he?
Not at that time. His argument was.. Since you are the Son of God, you don't have to die, which was the same temptation of the serpent
@BobJones we like to tell God what kind of a God He should be, do we not
Not anymore... ;-)
The Bereans also checked what the disciples said against the scriptures they had. So everything said in the gospels should be fulfillment of prophecy.
They correlated what was said about Jesus with what they knew of the Messiah
@BobJones My tradition is bizarrely contradictory at times on sanctification btw at least if I understand what is said correctly
who are the Bereans?
Jan 9, 2013 16:29
10 ¶ And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews.
11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
The first part of the commentary is a stack of expositions like those I gave to Dan showing the hidden picture in every chapter of the OT
@BobJones ah, yes, of course
interesting point
that they were able to check what Paul was saying
@Jack the reason we are told that Jesus was in the temple at 12 yrs is because it fulfills the prophecy in the narrative of the nine kings of Chedloamer.
Every details fulfills prophecy
@BobJones where is that?
2 Kings?
Ge 14:4 Twelve years they served Chedorlaomer, and in the thirteenth year they rebelled.
The nine kings are a type/shadow of Christ wrestling between the flesh and the spirit
Many details in the story itself
Helps if I spell his name right
@BobJones I hesitate to add to this discussion, but... the issue isn't self-referenceing. You say (and I'm not saying otherwise) that you're an expert in a technique that, to some of us, doesn't look legitimate. So we ask you to show your work. No matter how expert you are, we're all just names on the internet, so a good answer needs to connect the dots. Asserting that X means Y, on its own, is maybe an interesting idea but nothing more.
Sorry, I didn't catch that you were in the middle of another thread while I was typing that. I won't be offended if you set my comment aside for the moment.
Jan 9, 2013 16:38
@monica.. actually I've had very direct conversations with Jon about self-referencing. If every metaphor were justified in the text of an answer the article becomes too large. Having offsite violates the polkicy of self-referencing
@monica no problem... Hope you had a nice holiday.
@BobJones Ok, obviously I don't have the context you do but that surprises me. Unless what you mean is that you want to store parts of answers elsewhere? That wouldn't work so well, but people link to external articles/books/etc all the time.
@monica and Jon doesn't want a bunch of questions asking to justify each metaphor
@BobJones Ok, sorry. I stand corrected.
No problem
@BobJones got it, thanks. Out of interest, are any of the other references to 'twelve years' related in your interpretation?
Jan 9, 2013 16:40
@monica it is just a problem of the venue
Hi @Monica :)
@Jack, yes there was a king who was 12 of whom it is said (inthe double entendre) "When he returned to Jerusalem he knew he was God"
@Jack and it also crosses with the feeding bread to the 4 and 5 thousand...
etc.
@Jack, the meaning have to cross everywhere. Chedorloamer means "handful of sheaves"
If Israel is the harvest, then Mary and Jospeh qualify as a handful of sheaves...
All the details come into play
@BobJones so other references to 'twelve years' are incidental if they don't 'cross' (correlate?) in other ways too?
no. thay all have to play a role
You can't just drop stuff that 'doesn't work'
Every donkey is a prophet... not just the ones that work
That's why it is not free-for-all allegory
If they don't all work everywhere the whole thing falls apart
@BobJones so 2 Peter 2:16 is ironic then!
Jan 9, 2013 16:47
That's why I say it is self-correcting
@JackDouglas hi.
The literal was a donkey speaking to a prophet... the allegory is that Balaam represent Herod, and the donkey John the Baptist.
@Bob btw, it may interest you that I think @Monica's answers consistently get fewer votes than they deserve too.
I haven't made a scoring run lately... I can look when I get a chance
'scoring run'? is that one of the tools of the interpretative technique?
Jan 9, 2013 16:51
Haha.. no . It's when I set aside time to read answers just to score them
@BobJones oops :)
@BobJones is it ironic then or are you saying it isn't intended to be?
@Jack oh it is ironic.
the reference to Balaam as 'prophet' does seem pointed
@JackDouglas thanks. I appreciate the kind words and the vote of confidence.
@MonicaCellio You're welcome!
Jan 9, 2013 17:00
@Jack @Monica People score any way they want, which will always be that way, so many people give credit if they agree with it. I look to see if it gives a well-reasoned answer, or information I did not have previously. But the community is what it is.
@Caleb thanks for the edit
@BobJones I think the majority here do the same with a bit of laziness thrown in. If an answer is long or unfamiliar folk are very much less likely to up-vote but I don't think there is much we can do about that...
structuring answers with a catchy and concise summary at the top (rather than a conclusion at the bottom) helps I think
@BobJones I'm working my way backward through the chat messages. I think what I said was that it probably wasn't a good idea to flood the site with questions to justify each metaphor. One or two a week (or even more as we grow) would be great. 10 would be overwhelming.
@Jon Yeah.. that's what you said. Since nearly every word in a verse requires such treatment in order justify allegory, it isn't practical.
I have 12 pages jsutifying and explaining the first three words of Gen 1.1
@JonEricson I presume you mean 'flood the front page'?
and hello :)
Jan 9, 2013 17:07
@JackDouglas Right. (And good morning. ;-)
@MonicaCellio and @BobJones: My thoughts on this issue are represented well in this meta-post:
@Jon as I said... just not the right venue/format for handling it
5
A: What makes a good supported answer?

Jon EricsonThe core criteria for writing answers on the Stack Exchange model, not only on this site but across the entire network, is one of usefulness; this can be reflected simply by hovering over the vote buttons on the side of every post: Usefulness, unfortunately, is highly subjective. Unlike our pr...

I think it might be good if someone wrote a version of this post for BH.
@JonEricson I don't
@BobJones Well, I think it could work.
c.se is worlds apart from bh.se
Jan 9, 2013 17:10
@JackDouglas That's one of the reasons I haven't done it myself. ;-)
@JackDouglas I agree.
Generally, our problems are nicer to have. ;-)
they have to start insisting on wikipedia style 'supported' answers because they don't have the same solid ground as SO (as you say) and bh.se too in my opinion. Even on SO there not everything is rosy but it works well enough for the site to be useful overall.
Wow, thanks for the sudden influx of votes. If that was all one person, though, beware of serial voting.
2
" I'm working my way backward through the chat messages" ... that expolains why you never understand my posts ... I'll have to start writing them from the bottom up ;-)
@BobJones :-)
ha ha that worried me too :)
Jan 9, 2013 17:13
@BobJones Heh. I read them top down. But I think the more recent messages are more pressing. (We'll get to Paul and Galatians eventually. ;-)
hmm.. I almost always serial vote because that's how I review questions. I just go to the list and start down them.
@JackDouglas Have you noticed long answers getting fewer votes? I find them helpful (if well-structured and if they stay on-topic); a long answer that provides its supporting arguments and anticipates and addresses followup issues is exactly the kind of answer I want to vote up.
@BobJones I just made a scoring run. @MonicaCellio just gained some rep
@BobJones serial voting is when you vote for only one person, not when you vote a lot
Jan 9, 2013 17:15
@MonicaCellio well I may have just committed serial voting
@BobJones if you're running through the questions (front page, by tag, whatever) then you should be fine. If you're starting from a user's list of answers, that's where you can run into problems.
@MonicaCellio I'm not sure overall: I may just be describing my own laziness!
@dan I'll watch for you on "Criminal Minds" ;-)
@DanO'Day we'll see tomorrow. There's a script that runs once a night reversing serial votes.
@MonicaCellio noting worse than the votes just being reversed though...
Jan 9, 2013 17:16
@MonicaCellio Oh I see
well yours weren't the only votes I upvoted, but mostly they were yours
@JackDouglas good point. it's not like this will lead to automatic action against anybody.
If you only look at the score once a month it all works out
@DanO'Day thank you. There are plenty of good answers here too (or I wouldn't have the "Civic Duty" badge :-) ).
@MonicaCellio I've been looking forward to some serial voting: there are tons of moderator tools just siting idle. ;-)
I would have kept going but it informed me I was running out of votes haha
Jan 9, 2013 17:21
what's shakin?
@JackDouglas I'm not sure we need to insist on WIkipedia-style attributions, but I do think we should encourage them:
5
Q: Should we require answers to cite sources?

Jon EricsonOver on the Skeptic site, they have a rule that all answers include references to sources. It's a hugely different site than ours, so such a rule isn't necessarily appropriate here. But there are answers that draw on knowledge outside of the texts in question that probably need to cite referenc...

@Soldarnal wrote: "So I'm not sure that we should require sources, since often something can be reasoned from the text. But their presence or lack thereof is certainly something to consider when deciding whether an answer is useful."
3
" For instance, if someone has written a paper or article on the subject at hand, they could cite themselves. (I really hope this would be uncommon unless the author is an established expert. But I understand that this may be the only option for some Sensus Plenior answers.)"
@JonEricson and hence how to vote: I agree with all that
but not with any move to 'encourage' by other means
i think that it probably boils down to weasel words. "some say" or "most scholars" needs attribution (i'm also guilty of this)
@swasheck In my view "X is true" is better than weasel words
@swasheck me too - and I'm not allowed to do it at the seminary so I should know better
Jan 9, 2013 17:25
also ... most words that end with "-ly" are subjective
@swasheck "All we know is, he's called the Stig."
@JackDouglas that's fair, but still should be cited unless it's established kerygma
@JackDouglas Yeah. It gets tricky when we want to explain in the comments why we are downvoting.
the other thought is that maybe we could start using the wiki function of the SE network better.
wiki function?
Jan 9, 2013 17:26
and funnel citations through the SE wiki?
@swasheck Tag wikis or Community Wiki?
@BobJones yeah. some sort of SE blog post a while ago
@JonEricson you're losing me
@JonEricson because i'm totally ignorant when it comes to that
CW is kind of deprecated
if that is what you are referring to
i just thought that there was a wiki function.
@JackDouglas so is it just tag wiki now?
@swasheck well, that is something completely different
and often ignored tbh
Jan 9, 2013 17:29
at any rate, if we could have somewhat of research base --- a repo for citations --- would that make citing things a bit more integrated from the SE perspective?
dont know ... just spitballing
You are a utopian :)
@JackDouglas perhaps.
@JackDouglas are you familiar with the blog post to which i am referring? it had overlapping circles or somesuch
@swasheck Tools we have available include tag wikis and canonical answers. We may find some questions (or answers) getting linked because they already address something. That's a good thing IMO.
@MonicaCellio sure. linking to other answers would be good too.
Jan 9, 2013 17:31
just trying to present potential solutions for the problem du jour
@JackDouglas hey ... yeah ... that picture is somewhat what i was thinking to be tools on the SE network but i have misremembered, apparently.
@MonicaCellio I think self-answered questions work well for this sort of thing. One advantage is that the answers references are vetted in the same way that all other content is vetted: voting.
2
@JonEricson Please do get to Galatians eventually. :) I was hoping after your recent answer that you might address my question which I had written hoping for an answer from @BobJones as well
2
@Soldarnal Perfect. I was thinking the best way to answer the comments was with another self-answered question. You saved me the effort of writing the question!
@soldarnal sorry hadn't been around much.. mmissed it
I'll look
I did a teaching on his methjod a few months ago.. see if I can find my notes, or have to reproduce them.
Jan 9, 2013 18:22
Hi @Bruce, how are you?
@JackDouglas I'm well, how are you?
@BruceAlderman Good, thanks. Happy New Year :)
@JackDouglas Happy New Year. I can't believe 2011 is gone.
2
And 2012, for that matter. Time flies.
I know, it just gets worse too. Though actually I'm quite looking forward to dying ;)
@BruceAlderman :-)
Jan 9, 2013 18:30
Have you been following any of the discussion in here and on meta btw?
@JackDouglas I'm trying to catch up.
ha, good luck with that!
I really like this answer (even though it doesn't cite a source):
1
A: What are the differences between Hebrew and Aramaic?

Frank LukeThe two languages are related (both are Northwest Semtic languages) and eventually shared a script. Hebrew, prior to the exile used its own script called Paleo-Hebrew. It was still used afterwards in isolated places and instances, but what we now call Aramaic Square replaced it for the most par...

@MonicaCellio Frank's answers are great
@JackDouglas Agreed. He's in (or has been in) seminary, hasn't he? Or am I confused.
Jan 9, 2013 18:33
I'd be willing to bet he'll be able to recommend a book—I have one (on another subject) at his recommendation
Apr 10 '12 at 15:22, by Frank Luke
@RonMaimon Who says that? I am a seminary grad. I have copies of Gesenius' Hebrew Grammar and Waltke/O
@JackDouglas The Aramaic I've learned has been as a side-effect of studying (a) talmud and (b) liturgy. So I've noticed (and asked about) some of the things he points out, but others are new to me. It highlights my need for a more structured treatment.
Apr 10 '12 at 14:15, by Frank Luke
I am a seminary graduate and have been studying Biblical Hebrew since 1997 when I first took it from Dr. Robert L. Cate. He was recognized as one of the top Hebrew scholars of his generation. He also held to the documentary hypothesis (at least to some extent). That was at Oklahoma State. I then went to seminary and studied under Dr. Roger Cotton and Dr. Wave Nunnally. Unfortunately, Dr. Stanley Horton (also one of the best in his generation) had retired by then.
@JackDouglas thanks for the reminder. I had seen the frist of those but forgotten.
@MonicaCellio btw your comment serves to back up Franks answer to a certain extent, at least I think a newcomer would see it that way. That and the votes he gets...
He's been active in here before from time to time
@JackDouglas backing him up was my primary purpose in commenting. But given all the discussions we've been having, I couldn't not ask for a source. :-)
Jan 9, 2013 18:38
@BruceAlderman I'm glad you are making the effort to do that, thanks. I think the site is going through a formative period where crucial decisions are made as to direction—I hope you find you'd like to add your own input.
@MonicaCellio You did it is a way that I whole-heartedly approve of fwiw
@JackDouglas thanks. Wow, three more votes since I linked here -- the site is hopping today! :-)
@JackDouglas @MonicaCellio I took a semester of Aramaic and I still learned a bunch from that post
@JackDouglas I think we need a meta post that differentiates the sorts of interactions that build up people on the site (and the site itself) from similar interactions that tear people down. (And encourages more of the former. ;-)
2
@DanO'Day neat. The participle part was new to me, and while I'd noticed the terminal alef I hadn't quite picked up that it's a definite-article marker.
Some I know from liturgy, e.g. we sing psukei d'zimra, songs of praise.
And kaddish d'rabbanan, kaddish of the rabbis.
@JonEricson I feel a bit odd saying this, but, I think I agree
Jan 9, 2013 18:45
It assumes that you already know Hebrew
But I'm not sure I recommend it without having a good instructor also. For one, there was no answer key to the translation exercises
I've been meaning to pick up a copy of amazon.com/Introduction-Aramaic-Frederick-E-Greenspahn/dp/… but I have not heard any reviews of it yet
But if you are strong in Hebrew, you won't have issues with it. I'm sure you'd be fine @MonicaCellio (you're stronger in Hebrew than I was when I took it)
@DanO'Day wait, what? I'm not all that strong in Hebrew; I just know how to use reference books. :-) (There are several verb stems that I can't reliably recognize in the wild yet.)
Thanks for the book links; will take a look!
yeah but you are exposed to it a lot more. I just took a few semesters of it in college
and I'm doing a sort of biblical language renewal the past couple of years by retaking courses in languages at a local seminary (for credit - forces me to be accountable)
but I'm debating taking any actual exegesis course because so much theology/doctrine is injected into the instruction - and I come from a very different perspective than that of the seminary
@MonicaCellio :)
 
Conversation ended Jan 9, 2013 at 18:55.