Who are they?
Sorry I don't understand - please clarify / expand
I think Peter is referring to this excerpt:
Well, you know the narrative takes us through the highlights (and the lowlights) of the life and pilgrimage of Isaac and then Jake and then Joe. In chapter 49, Jake reports this vision that God’s given him regarding his kids. There’s a line that will be alluded to in Isa 42 and 49. Remember the promise to Abraham and Sarah that kings would come from them? Check out Genesis 49:10: “The scepter will not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, until he, to whom it belongs, comes.” The promise is going to come about through the line of Judah. We learn how God is faithful to the promise as He protects this little family from extinction by making a way for them to flourish in Egypt for a while. By the end of Genesis, Jake dies, then Joe, but the story is not over.
Ferris, P. W. (2016). OT231 Survey of the Major Prophets. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.
Sorry i was not clear. The above fragment is from the course, which seem to use queer names out of context. It uses Abe for Abraham. Just wondering if these are typos or something else.
Thanks PetahChristian
So it looks as though these terms are being used for Jacob and Joseph respectively.
Without understanding more of the context / style of presentation it is difficult to comment but, personally, I don't find it helpful
Now I kind of get that these are the short names. However they may not be easily understood that way by everyone.
You mean ir-respectiveliy? Or disrespectively? Or, cutesy, cutesy?
Just wondering if these are typos or something else.
Dr. Ferris uses these casual nicknames frequently in the course (Abe for Abraham, Jake for Jacob, Joe for Joseph, etc.). The transcript matches what the speaker says, so they are not typos (although we did have a discussion of how to spell his nickname for Isaac…we ended up going with "Zac" instead of "Zack"). I hope they aren't too confusing. They definitely come across better in the videos than they do just reading through the transcripts.
Just wondering if these are typos or something else. Dr. Ferris uses these casual nicknames frequently in the course (Abe for Abraham, Jake for Jacob, Joe for Joseph, etc.). The transcript matches what the speaker says, so they are not typos (although we did have a discussion of how to spell his nickname for Isaac…we ended up going with "Zac" instead of "Zack"). I hope they aren't too confusing. They definitely come across better in the videos than they do just reading through the transcripts.
I'm truly amazed that the use of these 'nicknames' or abbreviated names was acceptable in teaching from Scripture. I find it disrespectful and insulting not only concerning the prophets, but also to the student who takes Bible seriously. The issue is not about the terms being confusing, but whether they should have been used at all.
If Faithlife had a discussion about this with the contracted speaker - couldn't it have been prevented? I might add that if it is the practice to speak in this way regarding the prophets in the United States, it is certainly not the case elsewhere where these products are also sold. Keep well Paul
I might add that if it is the practice to speak in this way regarding the prophets in the United States, it is certainly not the case elsewhere where these products are also sold.
While it may be the usual practice in some areas, I do not believe it is widespread in the US. Personally, I find it off-putting and a pathetic attempt at trying to be humorous, perhaps with some misguided attempt to make the Bible "relevant" to young adults. If find this disturbing and will refrain from purchasing any course featuring Dr Ferris.
I might add that if it is the practice to speak in this way regarding the prophets in the United States, it is certainly not the case elsewhere where these products are also sold. While it may be the usual practice in some areas, I do not believe it is widespread in the US. Personally, I find it off-putting and a pathetic attempt at trying to be humorous, perhaps with some misguided attempt to make the Bible "relevant" to young adults. If find this disturbing and will refrain from purchasing any course featuring Dr Ferris.
It strikes me as something that could work in the right context with the right audience, but could easily become trite if overdone. The two situations where it would seem most natural to me would be:
1) If you're trying to convey the feel of a shortened or familiar form found in the source text; or
2) You're taking a moment to emphasize the ordinary humanity of a Biblical figure.
Taken much beyond that, I think it would start feeling trite to me.
1. This certainly is not a good example for any culture to emulate, or encourage. Will we tolerate the world calling revered biblical characters with such casual names?
2. It makes it harder and not easier for it to be understood by other cultures where at least a small portion of Logos customers are.
3. To my knowledge a name is a name and it is not usually a good etiquette to address somebody by a name than what the person addressed would prefer. Should we care less for Biblical characters? I am not oblivious of names getting contextualised when translated into other langusages.
4. God forbid! How ridiculous logos commentaries and courses would read like in English if this practice was permitted as an editorial policy for every biblical name in logos publications!
I don't own this course at this point in time but will look at it in the future when my budget and the price meet in a happy place. While this is a little bit quirky I would not boycott anything by this speaker just because he chooses to use these shortened names. For me while I appreciate that we have the lives of these men and women presented to us in the biblical text in order that we might learn about God, about us, our relationship with God and one another and most importantly of God's plan of salvation and our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, I would not go so far as saying that they should be revered. They are sinners just like us, fallible and capable of failing God and the story of their lives in the scriptures tells us of both their failure and faith.
I think if it does not then a note to the student should be added to the start of the course explaining the speakers naming convention used throughout the course along with, possibly when the character is first discussed in the course, a discussion of their full name and its meaning so that this is not lost by the use of the short form names.
Please note I am only saying what I feel comfortable with in terms of usage of these names in this format. I do not mean to direspect or invalidate anyone who takes a different view on this topic. I don't believe anyone here is suggesting this issue is critical to our salvation so I think a range of views is what we should expect, whether those views are culturally driven, possibly by the era in which we grew up or they are just personal preferences.
I don't believe anyone here is suggesting this issue is critical to our salvation so I think a range of views is what we should expect, whether those views are culturally driven, possibly by the era in which we grew up or they are just personal preferences.
I completely agree with that. The goal is to convey God's word as effectively as possible. To the hipsters may we become hipsters, to the old fogies may we become old fogies (o.k., that's an easy one for me), to the geeks may we become geeks . . .
