7

Occam's Razor is often expressed as "the simplest explanation is usually the best one", but that is a misleading oversimplification unless one properly defines what "simplest" means. It would be better stated as "the best explanations answer more questions than they raise". In this case, if one ignores all external evidence, ...


5

Yes, these three texts are evidence of the pre-existence of the One they describe and yes they express more of the manner of his coming and of the purpose of his coming. The full proof was when he rose from the dead : only then is he declared (publicly) to be the Son of God. For, note, that John’s gospel account was not published until late in the first ...


5

As a believer in what some choose to term 'the tripartite nature of humanity' I would say that Jesus omits nothing in the text by only making reference to two nouns: And be not afraid of those killing the body, and are not able to kill the soul, but fear rather Him who is able both soul and body to destroy in gehenna. [Matthew 10:28 YLT] The soul is the ...


4

When a sentence in the Old Testament ends with a question-mark, it needs to be borne in mind that the writer, in and of himself, might not have yet know the answer. He's writing a thought that troubled him. You have listed five such questions. Of course, some questions are rhetorical, such as God's list of questions to Job (chapters 38 to 42, which silenced ...


4

"Is this proof of the pre-existence of Jesus Christ before His incarnation as a man?" Yes. It is a direct statement of such. John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me. - John 1:15 A literal rendering of the italicized portion of this verse (...


3

I won't give an answer on whether or not the "Samuel" in 1 Samuel 28 was actually Samuel. I will simply show why an unambiguous reading of the text is not always the most optimal(i.e. the one you would want to take). Not that it's necessarily wrong, just that it isn't necessarily correct. You say that the fact that the Biblical authors referred to ...


2

This article on The Basics of Sound Biblical Interpretation puts the principle Scripture interprets scripture and the less clear or plain passages of scripture MUST be interpreted in the light of the clearer passages in its proper context within the modern hermeneutical method called Historical Grammatical which started in the 18th century 1: It is a ...


2

These resources provide a good introduction to the Tripartite theory and the Biblical verses that suggest it: The wikipedia article The 1931 journal article Thoughts on the Tripartite Theory of Human Nature from the Evangelical Quarterly journal, which also argues against the Tripartite theory as not reconcilable with Biblical data A GotQuestions web ...


1

Is Isaiah 2:9-22 about the Second Coming of Christ? Possibly, but it will depend on how one interprets this particular passage of Scripture. Jim Haeffele is a church pastor in the Church of God and he links this passage of the Prophet Isaiah to the Second Coming of Christ. The Day of the Lord Prophecies about the coming Day of the Lord can be found in the ...


1

I do not recall reading about this in any writing from one of the church fathers. The church fathers may have missed out on thinking through how it is possible that the Bible contains a lot more stories of humor than we realize. Many modern people can attest to experiencing events that they might call, "serendipitous synchronicity." I could easily ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible