Updating for gitlab

archetypes/default.md

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+---
+title: "{{ replace .TranslationBaseName "-" " " | title }}"
+date: {{ .Date }}
+tags: [""]
+categories: [""]
+draft: false
+---
+
+
+

config.toml

@@ -0,0 +1,49 @@
+# Site settings
+baseurl = "//bible.hightower.space/"
+languageCode = "en"
+title = "Bible Research"
+theme = "hugo-theme-cactus-plus"
+
+[params]
+    author = "Floyd Hightower"
+    description = "Bible Research"
+    bio = "\"In your thinking be mature\""
+
+    enableRSS = true
+    enableToc = true
+
+    enableDisqus = false
+    disqusShortname = "your_disqus_short_name"
+
+    enableSummary = true
+    # Set the value to true if use description in post front matter replace content summary
+    useDescriptionReplaceSummary = true
+
+    enableTwitterCard = true
+    # The url for twitter card image, default is avatar.png in static/images directory
+    twitterCardImage = "./static/images/avatar.jpeg"
+
+    # Add custom assets with their paths relative to the static folder
+    customCSS = []
+    customJS  = []
+
+    # The variables below are optionally too and can be used to
+    # translate or customize each string of the theme.
+
+    # Navigation links
+    home = ""
+    about = ""
+    archive = ""
+    subscribe = ""
+
+    olderPosts = ""
+    newerPosts = ""
+    copyright = ""
+
+    # show latest posts in single page
+    showLatestPosts = false
+    readMore = ""
+
+    # 404 page
+    title404 = ""
+    subtitle404 = ""

content/about/_index.md

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+---
+title: "About the Bible Research Project"
+---
+
+Welcome to the Bible Research website! This is a site I have been working on for a while as a place to find helpful resources for reading, studying, understanding, and applying the Bible.
+
+I hope you enjoy! If you have any feedback, questions, or comments, feel free to <a href="mailto:[email protected]">contact me</a>. If you find these resources helpful, please [say thanks](https://saythanks.io/to/fhightower). It is really encouraging to hear that these resources are helpful.

content/posts/blog-objectives.md

@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+---
+title: Blog Objectives
+date: 2017-08-12T06:21:22-03:00
+description: "What is the objective of this blog?"
+tags:
+    - Question
+    - Why
+    - Objectives
+---
+
+The basic objective of this blog is to give me a platform to communicate some of the thoughts and observations I have that don't fit well into the [Bible Notes](http://bibleresearch.github.io/notes) project. My goal in voicing some of these thoughts is to provide more resources that will strengthen the Church and produce mature, thoughtful followers of Christ. It also gives me the chance to hone my writing and communication skills (which I then hope to use to strengthen the Church). In turn, the goal of strengthening the Church and maturing believers is to bring glory to God through the corporate Church and our individual lives. If this blog has a theme verse, it is 1 Corinthians 14:20:
+
+> "Brethren, do not be children in your thinking; yet in evil be infants, but in your thinking be mature."
+
+### Disclaimers
+
+The posts on this blog represent my views alone and not necessarily those of my friends, employer, or home Church.
+
+You may (and will likely) disagree with at least some of what I have to say... and that's not necessarily a bad thing! It means that the content in this blog is thought-provoking and that you are astute enough to carefully consider philosophical and theological content. My request is that any interactions on or surrounding this blog adhere to the following principle:
+
+> All human beings are created equal. Not all ideas are created equal. Thus, all human beings should be treated with equal (and high) regard; yet not all ideas deserve such high regard as some ideas are wrong, dangerous, and/or harmful.
+
+In this blog, my challenge both to myself and to you, the reader, is that we deal primarily with ideas and not human beings. While we may *identify* particular people who are holding to an idea we believe to be erroneous, it is **never** acceptable in a thoughtful (I hesitate to say 'scholastic' or 'academic') setting to attack the proponent of an idea rather than the idea. That person deserves a basic respect regardless of what they believe... but their beliefs do not necessarily merit respect as not all ideas are equally true. This is a principle and a skill that has, devastatingly, been neglected by most political figures (at least in America). Politics has become a form of entertainment in which most candidates attack people rather than ideas. The worldview behind this form of 'new politics' is absolutely wrong and will not be accepted in this blog. If you disagree with me, I would love to hear why. Attack my ideas... don't attack me.
+
+Be aware that I write as one who was been involved in many Churches in the United States and is addressing some of the challenges and shortcomings faced by the Church in the United States. I trust many of my articles will be helpful to believers in other countries, but my target audience are believers in America.
+
+A final disclaimer is that most of what I will write here has undoubtedly been written elsewhere. I am not audacious enough to believe that thousands of years of thoughtful Christians, many of whom are far more intelligent than I, have never observed the things which I am observing or thought the thoughts I am thinking. If much of what I write is entirely new, I would begin to be very nervous, indeed. I am not starting a blog because I believe I have something *new* to say, but because I have something *profitable* to say. I'm just a beggar handing out crumbs and showing other beggars where to find more crumbs.

content/posts/cain-and-abel.md

@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+---
+title: Cain & Abel
+date: 2017-10-23T06:21:22-03:00
+description: "Why was Abel's sacrifice accepted while Cain's was not?"
+tags:
+    - Question
+    - Cain
+    - Abel
+    - Offering
+    - Genesis
+    - Old Testament
+---
+
+Genesis 4:1-15 describes the infamous story of Cain and Abel. In this story, two brothers, Cain (a "tiller of the ground") and Abel (a "keeper of flocks"), bring a sacrifice before God (see Genesis 4:2-3). Verses three and four tell us that Cain brings "an offering of the fruit of the ground" and Abel brings "the firstlings of his flock and their fat portions". The end of verse four and beginning of verse five reads: "And the LORD had regard for Abel and for his offering; but for Cain and for his offering He had no regard.". What was it about Abel's offering that made it acceptable to God while Cain's offering was not acceptable? In Hebrews 11:4, we read that Abel "offered to God a *better* sacrifice than Cain..." (emphasis added). What made his sacrifice better? In this post, I make three observations on how Abel's sacrifice differs from Cain's in regard to the type, quality, and attitude of the offerings. I also propose that the primary reason Abel's sacrifice was accepted and Cain's was rejected was the attitude with which each sacrifice was brought.
+
+The first observation is that the two sacrifices are of different **types**. Abel brings "the firstlings of his flock and their fat portions" while Cain brings "the fruit of the ground". Abel brings an animal sacrifice and Cain brings a sacrifice of produce; each brings an offering corresponding to his occupation. Some have suggested that Abel's offering was accepted because of its type, namely that is was an animal sacrifice. Passages like Hebrews 9:22 and Leviticus 17:11 describe the significance of blood in a sacrifice and some believe this is what sets Abel's sacrifice apart. Most people who hold this view, defend it in one of two ways. First, they point to the animal killed to provide Adam and Eve with clothing in Genesis 3:21 as setting the standard for animal sacrifice. Second, they argue that there was likely some direct revelation from God to Cain and Abel describing when and where to offer the sacrifice as well as what to offer. To be honest, I *want* to agree with this view, but there is nothing in Genesis 4 to support it and I choose to err on the side of the most clear reading of a text.
+
+The second observation from this passage is that the **quality** of the offerings are different. Notice how Abel's offering consisted of the "firstlings" (the first child born to an animal) and "their fat portions" (Genesis 4:4). Abel offered the best he has. When it comes to Cain's sacrifice, described in verse three, it doesn't appear that he offered anything of exceptional value. Cain does not go out of his way to worship God; he only worships Him as easily and simply as he can.
+
+The third observation is that there is a difference not only in the type and quality of the sacrifice but also in the **attitude** of the person making the sacrifice. Notice that at the end of Genesis 4:4, it says that God had regard for "Abel *and* for his offering" (emphasis added). In the same way, God had no regard "for Cain *and* for his offering" (emphasis added). God regards or rejects both the offering *and* the one bringing the offering. Hebrews 11:4 is helpful on this point as the author uses Abel (and not Cain) as an example of faith. If we define "faith" as trusting the promises of God, we see from Hebrews that Abel trusts God promises (most likely the promise given in Genesis 3:15) while it appears Cain does not. Both Cain and Abel come with an offering, but the heart behind the two offerings are very different.
+
+Based on these three observations, I propose that God had regard for Abel's sacrifice rather than Cain's because Abel came with an attitude of faith and trust that led him to offer God his very best. In other words, I think that the primary difference between the two sacrifices is the heart attitude (which affected the difference in the quality of the two sacrifices). While the type of sacrifice offered is very critical later in the Old Testament, I see no indication in this text that Cain brought an offering of the wrong type. It may be the case that they had some special revelation from God detailing the type of the sacrifice to be brought, but a simple, text-centered approach to this passage does not provide any support for this view. He simply came with the wrong attitude (and therefore an offering of poor quality).

content/posts/canaan-and-ham.md

@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+---
+title: Why is Canaan Cursed Rather than Ham?
+date: 2017-09-14T06:21:22-03:00
+description: "Characteristic of the strange stories in Genesis, the story of Shem, Ham (and Canaan), and Japheth in Genesis 9:18-27 is the subject of much debate. Of particular interest is this: Why does Noah curse Canaan (Ham's son) if Ham was the one who perpetrated the crime in question?"
+tags:
+    - Question
+    - Canaan
+    - Noah
+    - Ham
+    - Genesis
+    - Old Testament
+---
+
+The text does not give us enough details to know exactly why, but I think there are a few things we can conclude from the passage:
+
+1. Part of the reason some readers take issue with this passage is that they think Ham is getting off without punishment for his offense. The punishment that fell to Canaan, however, would have felt like a punishment to Ham as well. His line was not blessed and one of his sons was cursed.
+2. It is not unreasonable to conclude that Noah knew that Canaan had the same attitude as Ham. If this is the case, the punishment should not be viewed as arbitrarily vindicative, but a just focusing of punishment on the guilty parties while excluding Ham's other children (see Genesis 10:6). By punishing Canaan, Noah may have been sparing Ham's other sons. It is also possible that Noah had some prophetic revelation by which he knew of the immorality that would come from Canaan.
+
+At the end of the day, we are not given the details of why Noah chooses to curse Canaan rather than Ham, so we don't know. I think point two above is plausible, but there certainly could be another explanation as well.

content/posts/defending-protevangelium.md

@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
+---
+title: Satan or Serpent? Understanding the Protevangelium.
+date: 2017-08-25T06:21:22-03:00
+description: "Are we right to interpret Genesis 3:15 as applying to Satan?"
+tags:
+    - Question
+    - Protevangelium
+    - Interpretation
+    - Satan
+    - Serpent
+    - Adam and Eve
+    - Eden
+    - Genesis
+    - Old Testament
+---
+
+I was recently reading through Genesis and paused when I got to Genesis 3:14-15. I have always been taught that Genesis 3:15 was directed not at the physical serpent (that is, the creature itself), but the spiritual 'serpent' (who is Satan). But in my recent reading, I asked myself: Are we right to interpret Genesis 3:15 in this way? This post contains my conclusion on the subject after thought and investigation.
+
+Genesis 3:14-15 (in the NASB) reads:
+
+> “14 Because you have done this,
+Cursed are you more than all cattle,
+And more than every beast of the field;
+On your belly you will go,
+And dust you will eat
+All the days of your life;
+15 And I will put enmity
+Between you and the woman,
+And between your seed and her seed;
+He shall bruise you on the head,
+And you shall bruise him on the heel.”
+
+I believe these two verses can be broken down as follows:
+
+1. Verse 14 - This verse clearly refers to the physical creature because of the comparison to other creatures ("more than all cattle, and more than every beast of the field") and the description of the physiological changes that were to occur in the creature ("on your belly you will go, and dust you will eat all the days of your life").
+2. Verse 15 (first clause) - May be referring to both the physical and spiritual serpent, but it is certainly directed at the spiritual serpent (Satan) and, if it applies to both, is to be read as apply more or most clearly to Satan rather than the creature. This argument is based primarily on the fact that the word "enmity" is used. This word, referring to intense hatred or a 'blood-feud' (to borrow the words of one commentary\*), is only used in three other places in the Old Testament (Numbers 35:21-22, Ezekiel 25:15, and Ezekiel 35:5.). In each of these locations, it captures intense animosity between two conscious parties who are intentionally antagonizing one another. As such, it appears more appropriate that this clause is primarily referring to the hatred that will come between the seed of Satan and the seed of Eve rather than the seed of the creature we call a serpent. Snakes may be smart, but it seems a stretch to use the relatively rare term "enmity" to describe the relationship between men and snakes.
+3. Verse 15 (second clause) - This verse is focused directly at Satan. This is proved by the use of the singular pronoun "He" to describe the seed of Eve that will crush Satan's head. There will be animosity between Eve's seed (plural) and Satan's seed (plural), but there will be one specific seed (singular) that will deal a deadly blow to Satan (singular).
+
+In short, yes, it is appropriate to interpret Genesis 3:15 such that it is being applied to Satan rather than the physical serpent. This is why many have called this verse the "[Protevangelium](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protevangelium)", hailing it as an early proclamation of the Gospel. There is one man who came from Eve's seed who will [permanently defeat Satan](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+20%3A1-10&version=NASB)!
+
+## Footnotes
+
+\* - [http://biblehub.com/commentaries/cambridge/genesis/3.htm](http://biblehub.com/commentaries/cambridge/genesis/3.htm)