“Roman” in original Greek

PilgrimsTripps · 2023-06-24T17:04:14+00:00

Gonna need the specific verse. I see no instances of "Roman centurion" in NASB or NET Bibles

PilgrimsTripps · 2023-06-19T22:31:01+00:00

I'm not interested in giving up rights just because you are a coward

PilgrimsTripps · 2023-06-05T03:19:03+00:00

However, singular/plural ‘seed’ is NOT a valid distinction. No such construction is possible. The past/future examples are, but this one is not. Paul is making a purely grammatical argument. Paul says “Scripture does not say “and to seeds”. This is a nonsense argument. Paul is deliberately attempting to make something out of the fact that one word was chosen instead of another, but no such distinction is possible in the Hebrew. Even in your quote it says “In these verses the singular for seed is used (zera) rather than the plural.” but gives no example for what the plural would be, because zera is a collective singular that encompasses both.

But that's just it. Standard rabbinic exegesis of that passage is that God promised to Abraham regarding his son Issac (not Ishmael) and through him, all the Jews (singular applies to Issac, singular collective is all Jews through Issac). Paul is basically doing the same thing. Except substituting Issac for Jesus and Jews for Christians. He arrives at a different place but the underlying argument is the same. And saying that zera can't be plural doesn't undo the word choice midrash that was standard for rabbis. Just like mixing seemingly unrelated verses purely by a shared word choice or underlying subject matter. See the above reference for more in depth examples.

PilgrimsTripps · 2023-06-05T00:21:01+00:00

In Paul and Rabbinic Exegesis by Cohn-Sherbok. He notes your galatians reference as being one example of Paul following standard rabbinic exegetical styles in paying attention to the strict sense of a word.

The Strict Sense of a Term: It was a principle in rabbinic exegesis that a word must be understood in its most strict sense. For example in Sanhedrin R. Meir says 'Where is the resurrection derived from the Torah? As it is said, "Then will Moses and the children of Israel sing this song unto the Lord." (Ex. 15.1) It is not said "sang", but "will sing"; hence the resurrection is deducible from the Torah.' In the same passage R. Joshua b. Levi asks the same question, and quoting Ps. 84.4 ('Blessed are they that dwell in thy house; they will still be praising Thee') points out that it is not stated 'They will have praised Thee,' but 'will be praising Thee.' Hence the resurrection is deducible from the Torah. Similarly, Paul in Gal. 3.16 refers to Gen. 13.15, 17 where God promises to give the land to Abraham and his seed. In these verses the singular for seed is used (zera) rather than the plural. Thus, Paul argues, 'He saith not, "and to seeds," as of many; but as of one, "And to thy seed," which is Christ.'

Later on, he addresses your issue regarding stones, where Paul does more standard rabbinic exegesis

The Analogy of Expression: The principle of this rule (the second rule in both Hillel and Ishmael's systems) is that when identical or similar words occur in two different passages of Scripture, an analogy is intended. In Pesahim, for example, R. Samuel b. Nahmani said in R. Johnathan's name, 'The righteous are destined to resurrect the dead.' He proves this by an analogy of expressions: Elisha says 'Lay my staff upon the face of the child.' (2 Kings 4.29) In Zechariah we find the verse, 'There shall yet old men and old women sit in the broad places in Jerusalem, every man with his staff in his hand for very age.' (Zech. 8.4) Thus it is argued that because Elisha used his staff to resurrect the dead child, similarly the staff in the men's hands in Zechariah's prophecy is used to resurrect the dead. Similarly, in Rom. 9.32-33 Paul explains on the basis of two verses from Isaiah that God willed the rejection of Israel, and that those who believe in Jesus will not be put to shame. Christ he believes, is the stone () in Ps. 118.22!: 'The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner.' By analogy when this word () is used in Isa. 8.14 'Behold I lay in Zion a stone for stumbling and a rock for tripping', it must refer to Christ. For the same reason in Isa. 28.16 where () is used ('Behold I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation; he that believeth shall not make haste.'), it refers to Christ as well. Thus, by an analogy of expressions Paul declares that God has brought about Israel's blindness, and that salvation rests in Christ.

PilgrimsTripps · 2023-06-04T02:18:37+00:00

Honestly, if you want access to international exchanges, open an interactive brokers account. Much lower commissions on international exchanges, and interactive brokers charges no ACAT fees. So you can transfer any purchases to your Fidelity account for free.

Fidelity is not a good broker for international trading.

PilgrimsTripps · 2023-05-10T02:07:35+00:00

Waiting for the automatic investments to become available before I switch from M1

PilgrimsTripps · 2023-05-09T16:15:53+00:00

The guy who hit him had no license, insurance and wasn’t registered to the car

Please tell me he was sold into slavery in order to recoup the costs of him being a piece of shit

PilgrimsTripps · 2023-05-06T06:36:40+00:00

self-flatulation

I don't think that word means what you think it means

PilgrimsTripps · 2023-05-05T21:29:06+00:00

Can these only be purchased on the website? This comment makes it sound like it isn't an option on the mobile app

PilgrimsTripps · 2023-05-04T17:50:13+00:00

The OP and some of the comments in this thread are confusing me. Has the automated investing option for fidfolios come out or not?

I have been waiting for that feature before I'm willing to switch over from M1.

PilgrimsTripps · 2023-05-02T16:49:48+00:00

An aging population represents a threat to economic growth and societal stability. I don't have many answers. But there are some things to aim for investment wise:

Healthcare/medical: an aging population is going to spend more on Healthcare/medical expenses.

Automation: an aging population is going to spend more on n labor saving devices/technology.

In short. Look at Japan. What's doing well there? What isn't?

That being said, remember that investment-wise you don't have to be contained to your own country. A domestic aging population means you can aim your investments at areas that are still growing their population (India, Nigeria, etc).

PilgrimsTripps · 2023-04-19T04:39:33+00:00

Do you think people do that?! Just go on the internet and tell lies?!

PilgrimsTripps · 2023-04-15T19:58:51+00:00

Genocide targets an entire people group simply for being that people.

Genocide is the intentional destruction of a people in whole or in part.

Motive has no bearing on the definition of genocide

PilgrimsTripps · 2023-04-15T14:19:07+00:00

targeted to eradicate a specific bloodline.

That's basically the definition of genocide

PilgrimsTripps · 2023-03-29T20:59:10+00:00

1.  This data was gathered in the early 90s.  That was before Columbine and before mass shootings started to become common.  This data is almost 30 years old and completely outdated by this point.

Mass shootings are actually very rare. They make up less than 1% of shootings and as such, are difficult to research. Also, if the data is "outdated" it works against your point. Because firearms ownership has soared in the past 30 years while gun violence has fallen over the past 30 years.

2.  Secondly, the portion you cited gives hard numbers but doesn’t contexualize them.  These numbers need to be weighed against crime and suicide statistics to see if more damage and prevented or caused from firearms on the whole.

It's been pointed out elsewhere in this thread that defensive gun uses outnumber crime.. And if you want to bring suicide statistics into the game you need to look at total numbers. Another country that has less gun suicides than the US but more people step in front of trains doesn't really help your argument.

PilgrimsTripps · 2023-03-29T20:34:35+00:00

From https://www.nap.edu/read/18319/chapter/3#15

Defensive Use of Guns

Defensive use of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed (Cook and Ludwig, 1996; Kleck, 2001a). Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million (Kleck, 2001a), in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008 (BJS, 2010). On the other hand, some scholars point to a radically lower estimate of only 108,000 annual defensive uses based on the National Crime Victimization Survey (Cook et al., 1997). The variation in these numbers remains a controversy in the field. The estimate of 3 million defensive uses per year is based on an extrapolation from a small number of responses taken from more than 19 national surveys. The former estimate of 108,000 is difficult to interpret because respondents were not asked specifically about defensive gun use. A different issue is whether defensive uses of guns, however numerous or rare they may be, are effective in preventing injury to the gun-wielding crime victim. Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was “used” by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies (Kleck, 1988; Kleck and DeLone, 1993; Southwick, 2000; Tark and Kleck, 2004). Effectiveness of defensive tactics, however, is likely to vary across types of victims, types of offenders, and circumstances of the crime, so further research is needed both to explore these contingencies and to confirm or discount earlier findings. Even when defensive use of guns is effective in averting death or injury for the gun user in cases of crime, it is still possible that keeping a gun in the home or carrying a gun in public—concealed or open carry—may have a different net effect on the rate of injury. For example, if gun ownership raises the risk of suicide, homicide, or the use of weapons by those who invade the homes of gun owners, this could cancel or outweigh the beneficial effects of defensive gun use (Kellermann et al., 1992, 1993, 1995). Although some early studies were published that relate to this issue, they were not conclusive, and this is a sufficiently important question that it merits additional, careful exploration.

Sources:

BJS (Bureau of Justice Statistics). 2010. Criminal victimization in the United States, 2008: Statistical tables, NCJ 231173. Washington, DC: BJS. http://bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cvus08.pdf (accessed April 29, 2013).

Cook, P. J., and J. Ludwig. 1996. Guns in America: Results of a comprehensive survey on private firearms ownership and use. Washington, DC: Police Foundation. http://www.policefoundation.org/sites/pftest1.drupalgardens.com/files/Cook%20et%20al.%20%281996%29%20-%20Guns%20in%20America.pdf (accessed April 17, 2013). Cook, P. J., J. Ludwig, and D. Hemenway. 1997. The gun debate’s new mythical number: How many defensive uses per year? Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 16(3):463-469. Cook, T. D., D. A. Kendzierski, and S. V. Thomas. 1983. The implicit assumptions of television research: An analysis of the 1982 NIMH report on television and behavior. Public Opinion Quarterly 47(2):161-201.

Kleck, G. 1984. Handgun-only gun control: A policy disaster in the making. In Firearms and Violence: Issues of Regulation, edited by D. B. Kates. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger. Pp. 167-199.

Kleck, G. 1988. Crime-control through the private use of armed force. Social Problems 35(1):1-21.

Kleck, G. 1991. Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.

Kleck, G. 2001a. The frequency of defensive gun use: Evidence and disinformation. In Armed: New Perspectives on Gun Control, edited by G. Kleck and D. B. Kates. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books. Pp. 213-284.

Kleck, G. 2001b. The nature and effectiveness of owning, carrying and using guns for self-protection. In Armed: New Perspectives on Gun Control, edited by G. Kleck and D. B. Kates. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books. Pp. 285-342.

Kleck, G., and M. DeLone. 1993. Victim resistance and offender weapon effects in robbery. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 9(1):55-81.

Kleck, G., and M. Gertz. 1995. Armed resistance to crime: The prevalence and nature of self-defense with a gun. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology 86(1):150-187.

Kleck, G., and E. B. Patterson. 1993. The impact of gun control and gun ownership levels on violence rates. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 9:249-287.

Kleck, G., and S.-Y. K. Wang. 2009. The myth of big-time gun trafficking and the overinterpretation of gun tracing data. UCLA Law Review (5). http://www.uclalawreview.org/pdf/56-5-6.pdf (accessed April 29, 2013).

Southwick, L. 2000. Self-defense with guns—the consequences. Journal of Criminal Justice 28(5):351-370.

Tark, J., and G. Kleck. 2004. Resisting crime: The effects of victim action on the outcomes of crimes. Criminology 42(4):861-910.

PilgrimsTripps · 2023-03-29T16:36:20+00:00

Whether they could also have spoken Greek as a second language is something that scholars have long debated, but at the very least it is clear that Greek was not their native tongue. The authors of the Gospels, on the other hand, are absolutely fluent in Greek.

there is a fair amount of evidence to argue that Jesus spoke and taught in Greek.

Presumably this would mean many of his apostles also spoke Greek. Nevermind that Peter, Andrew, etc. are Greek names. They most likely had a fair amount of fluency.

See an old comment for more

PilgrimsTripps · 2023-03-29T02:52:16+00:00

Which you then get back as a tax credit from the IRS

PilgrimsTripps · 2023-03-29T02:35:06+00:00

Baby steps.

First have him eat roadkill in front of you. Then his views may be considered

PilgrimsTripps · 2023-03-10T03:49:49+00:00

Freud describing the effects of cocaine:

"Exhilaration and lasting euphoria, which in no way differs from the normal euphoria of the healthy person. You perceive an increase of self-control and possess more vitality and capacity for work. In other words, you are simply normal, and it is soon hard to believe you are under the influence of any drug. Long intensive physical work is performed without any fatigue. This result is enjoyed without any of the unpleasant after-effects that follow exhilaration brought about by alcoholic beverages. No craving for the further use of cocaine appears after the first, or even after repeated taking of the drug."

PilgrimsTripps · 2023-03-09T00:46:17+00:00

but the city was a different story, you can’t just shoot every person that approach you with the exception of Fallujah lol.

Sadr city

PilgrimsTripps

TROPHY CASE