{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@type":"Periodical","version":"1.0","generatedAt":"2026-06-21T14:53:21+00:00","magazine":{"id":"5a031e39cfebae297ca8bfe449ce59d6a0a8f013b1836a01e9c6446518c55409","slug":"dikaios1517-s-blog-0252d3","title":"Dikaios1517\u0027s Blog","summary":"My thoughts on various topics, including Nostr, Bitcoin, Christianity, and theology.","image":"https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/5c7bc3df8314f453c1d6a55a72c94253ad5ec414ea57082d58eaf44f405b604b.jpg","language":null,"pubkey":"b7274d28e3e983bf720db4b4a12a31f5c7ef262320d05c25ec90489ac99628cb","createdAt":"2026-06-01T20:29:22+00:00","url":"https:\/\/chat.decentnewsroom.com\/mag\/dikaios1517-s-blog-0252d3"},"categories":[{"slug":"nostr-80e94c","title":"Nostr","summary":"My thoughts on Nostr.","image":null,"url":"https:\/\/chat.decentnewsroom.com\/mag\/dikaios1517-s-blog-0252d3\/cat\/nostr-80e94c","articleCount":2,"articles":[{"title":"Is Nostr Actually Censorship Resistant?","slug":"Is-Nostr-Actually-Censorship-Resistant-5blu76","summary":"Nostr is often touted as decentralized and censorship resistant, such that even speech that would normally get a person banned on social media platforms can readily be found perusing popular Nostr clients. Is that actually the case though? I offer my opinion in this article.","content":"I have seen a lot of \u0022#Nostr\u00a0isn\u0027t actually censorship resistant\u0022 posts lately. It\u0027s nothing new. There has always been a bit of it in the past in various forms, and it is generally those same forms that are still repeated:\n\n\u003E \u0022Nostr isn\u0027t censorship resistant, because my posts are all hidden on Primal.\u0022\n\n\u003E \u0022...because Amethyst covers my posts with a warning for users whose follows have reported me too many times.\u0022\n\n\u003E \u0022...because the feds could raid the 5 relays you are using and your posts would all disappear.\u0022\n\n\u003E \u0022...because relays can blacklist you so you can\u0027t post to them anymore.\u0022\n\n\u003E \u0022...because Web-of-Trust keeps new users\u0027 posts from being seen by anyone.\u0022\n\nEvery one of these supposed evidences that Nostr isn\u0027t actually censorship resistant demonstrates ignorance about what that really means, and how it works on Nostr as compared with centralized, legacy social media, or even other attempts at decentralization, like Mastodon.\n\n## The Censorship Status Quo\n\nIf your account gets banned on Facebook, that\u0027s it, you\u0027re done. You have to start over and hope you can get everyone who was following your old account to follow your new one. If your post on X gets taken down for violating \u0022community standards,\u0022 there is no third party X client where it will still be visible to people. If you get shadow banned on TikTok so that the algorithm never surfaces your content, there is no alternative app you can point your followers to where they can choose a different algorithm that will show them your videos again.\n\nThese platforms are silos where a single company controls the client applications and\/or web interfaces, the user data stored on their servers, who can create an account, and how their posts will be (or won\u0027t be) shown to other users. If they take censorious actions against you as a user, your only recourse is to beg them to reverse it, and if they refuse then you are out of luck. That, my friends, is ***actual*** censorship, since the unilateral actions of ***one controlling entity*** can prevent your speech from being seen by any and all users of that platform.\n\nEven on Mastodon, if you anger the admin of your home instance, they can ban you and you have to start over with a new identity. Your previous social graph ***does not go with you***. A deletion request is also sent to other instances, and most of them will comply with it by deleting your posts. So, even though the ability to censor is spread between various instances, it is trivial for a single entity to effectively censor you if you get on their bad side.\n\nOn Nostr, all of these censorship vectors are mitigated, if not outright eliminated. Censorship resistance means that more individuals or entities would need to collude with one another to effectively keep a user\u0027s speech from being seen by most or all other users. Let\u0027s see how that works in practice by looking at some of the specific claims that Nostr is not actually censorship resistant.\n\n## Censorship by Nostr Client Devs\n\n\u003E \u0022Nostr isn\u0027t actually censorship resistant, because my posts are all hidden on Primal.\u0022\n\nOne client may decide to completely hide the posts made by a particular npub. There is no system I can imagine where this level of censorship cannot take place. If you rely on a piece of software created by someone else in order to see content from other users, the developer of that software will ***always*** have the ability to hide posts they don\u0027t want you to see for one reason or another. Nostr is not censorship resistant because it can somehow prevent software developers from hiding the posts of users they don\u0027t like. There is no way to prevent that while maintaining a fixed public key as your identity so that other users can reliably follow your posts.\n\nIf every post you made was from a new public key, then it really ***would*** be impossible to target you specifically for censorship, and some Nostr clients can do exactly that with an \u0022anon mode\u0022 toggle, such as Coracle or Anonostr, but that also precludes you from building a following, since no one knows what public key you will be posting from next, and as soon as there is a way to determine what key you will be posting from, client developers will also have a way to hide your posts again.\n\nNostr\u0027s censorship resistance in this situation is owing to the fact that if one client hides your posts, they are still visible on ***every other Nostr client*** without any action required on your part. Your posts are not censored to the same degree as they would have been on a centralized platform, since one client developer\u0027s actions do not result in your speech being hidden from most or all Nostr users. Your speech is being suppressed, but that suppression is nowhere near as effective as it would be if one entity controlled all of Nostr. Thus, Nostr is more resistant to that suppression of your speech than would have been the case elsewhere.\n\nThis fact also tends to keep clients from getting ban-happy and censoring absolutely every npub that has said something unkind about them. There\u0027s really no point in doing so, since those users\u0027 notes will still be visible on every other Nostr client. Therefore, the only npubs that tend to get censored are those that the client devs believe will negatively impact the experience of their users. They may be wrong in that assessment, but ***they have the right to make it***, and if you don\u0027t like it, the answer is quite simple: Use a different client, and encourage your followers to do the same if they aren\u0027t already. As you do, don\u0027t forget to note that this option in itself would ***never*** be available to you on centralized social media platforms. Your account would be completely useless and you would have to start over from scratch.\n\n## Censorship by User Reports\n\n\u003E \u0022Nostr isn\u0027t actually censorship resistant, because Amethyst covers my posts with a warning for users whose follows have reported me too many times.\u0022\n\nWhat was said above about a single client hiding a particular user\u0027s posts from other users is equally applicable here. Though you might be able to call it a form of censorship by speech suppression, it is not at all censorship to the degree that centralized platforms are capable of, since it only applies to those who use that particular client, and users of other clients will still see your posts without the need for you to take any action.\n\nIn this particular example, though, what is being called censorship is not really censorship at all. The client developer is not targeting the speech of any user or group of users for suppression whatsoever. The posts that are covered with a warning, and whether any posts get covered at all, is determined entirely by the users themselves, and it is different for each individual user based on who they are following and who those follows have reported. That\u0027s ***not*** censorship. That\u0027s user-controlled feed ***curation*** with a sensible default that can be adjusted to the user\u0027s preference.\n\nIt might be legitimate to classify it as censorship if the user wasn\u0027t aware that any post had been hidden. For the user to reasonably be considered in control of what posts they see, they must be ***aware*** that there are posts that are not being shown to them. In this case, the client ***does*** show the user a warning message in the place of the hidden note, with an explanation of why it was hidden, and the user can ***immediately choose to show it anyway*** if they prefer. In no sense can this be reasonably characterized as censorship.\n\n## Censorship by State Actors\n\n\u003E \u0022Nostr isn\u0027t actually censorship resistant, because the feds could raid the 5 relays you are using and your posts would all disappear.\u0022\n\nThere are many ways in which this example of Nostr\u0027s supposed lack of censorship resistance is just silly. Nevertheless, I wanted to include it not only because I have actually encountered it in the wild, but because it provides an opportunity to discuss ways that users can proactively prevent themselves from being censored, even in this extremely hypothetical instance.\n\nFirst, if the feds, or some other interested party, decided that the best way to keep your speech from being seen on Nostr was to physically raid the relays you set on your relay list and take them offline, it is unlikely that this would make your posts \u0022disappear\u0022 from Nostr entirely. First of all, there are various other relays that aggregate notes from known relays, and your notes would almost certainly be available on some of them. Any users reading from those aggregators would still see your previous notes.\n\nSecond, you can post your notes to ***more relays than you are advertising*** in your relay list. Several clients give you this option natively, such as Nostur and Nostrudel. You can also set a blastr relay, like wss:\/\/filter.nostr.wine, as one of your write relays, and every time you post a new note, it will be sent to several additional relays that are not advertised in your relay list. That way, if all of your preferred relays go down for any reason, fed raid or otherwise, all you need to do is publish a new relay list that includes a few of the relays where your notes were blasted, and you are back in business like nothing ever happened.\n\nThird, you can keep a ***private backup*** of your notes and easily broadcast them to more relays any time you want, using tools like NostrSync or Archivestr. You can even do this on a regular basis, if you don\u0027t want to set up a blastr relay. None of this requires any special hardware. Just go to one of these tools\u0027 websites, create an archive of your notes pulled from the relays you are currently writing to, and then broadcast it out to several additional relays. Then make note of which relays you broadcasted to, so you can switch to them in the event your current relays are no longer online.\n\nIf you ***really*** are concerned that a government entity would be so threatened by your speech that they would resort to raiding the servers hosting your notes, then I hope you have really solid op-sec, because the most effective way to shut down your speech is to find ***you***, not the relays you write to. Aside from that, it is also a good idea to select relays that are not located in the same jurisdiction. Choose relays that are in different countries, and even better if those countries are not always cooperative with one another.\n\n## Censorship by Relay Operators\n\n\u003E \u0022Nostr isn\u0027t actually censorship resistant, because relays can blacklist you so you can\u0027t post to them anymore.\u0022\n\nThis is very similar to the contention that a particular Nostr client can hide your posts from their users. Yes, a particular relay operator ***can*** prevent you from posting to their relay. That\u0027s not censorship, though. It is ***their relay*** to do with as they please. After all, you are not being censored because there are relays that only allow people who have paid the operator to post to them, are you? You are not being censored because some relays only allow those within a certain social group to post to them, are you? No. You can still use any number of public relays that allow anyone to post to them. If they choose to ban you, then you can just switch to using different ones. There are nearly 1,500 known relays to choose from that you can peruse at Nostr.Watch, so one relay, or even a sizable percentage of relays, banning you has absolutely ***no impact*** on whether your notes will be seen. Just update your relay list to some relays that haven\u0027t banned you and keep on posting.\n\nThis is why Nostr does not use home instances or home servers like Mastodon. That makes you beholden to ***one particular server admin*** who has the power to unilaterally ban you. Relay operators can\u0027t do that, because your identity is not intrinsically tied to a particular relay.\n\nBetter yet, if you are really convinced that a majority of relay operators would be ***so offended*** by what you have to say that they would ***all*** ban you, you can run your own relay. Yes, this requires a bit of technical know-how, but that is part of the cost of being nearly universally offensive online. Moreover, there are tools like Nostr Relay Tray that make it incredibly easy to run a personal relay that others can read from via clearnet without exposing your home IP.\n\n## Censorship Via Web-of-Trust Filters\n\n\u003E \u0022Nostr isn\u0027t actually censorship resistant, because Web-of-Trust keeps new users\u0027 posts from being seen by anyone.\u0022\n\nI am sympathetic to this argument, because while Web-of-Trust (WoT) is very effective at keeping spam from showing up in my feed, it also can keep posts from legitimate new users from showing up until they have managed to get a few followers. Depending on how reliant the bulk of Nostr users are on WoT to curate their feeds and their replies, it could make it incredibly difficult for new users to gain any traction, leaving them feeling like they are shouting into the void, until they finally leave because the only response they got back was from a bunch of bots.\n\nThat said, I am not aware of any WoT filters that are turned on by default. The end user has to ***manually*** opt-into using WoT to curate what they see. This takes WoT definitively out of the category of censorship, since it is not imposed by any client upon their users, but is entirely an optional means for users themselves to decide what content they want to see.\n\nThere are two main ways that WoT can be implemented for the purpose of limiting what posts a user sees in their feed. The first is by a Nostr client that shows posts or replies only from within the user\u0027s WoT. If I recall correctly, this was originally used by Coracle and Primal to ***expand*** the number of notes that users would see in their feed, rather than reduce them, because the default feeds only showed notes from a user\u0027s follows, but WoT allowed notes to be displayed from within a user\u0027s \u0022network.\u0022 Coracle iterated on this to develop client-side WoT scores that were unique to each user\u0027s view, and they could limit the feed and replies to only display notes from users who met a minimum WoT score set by the user. Jumble implemented the ability to filter based on WoT just for replies, since that is where the most obnoxious spam typically occurs, leaving no filtering on original posts. But all of these filters, regardless of client, have been ***opt-in only***, leaving it in the user\u0027s hands to determine whether to take advantage of the feature.\n\nThe second way Web-of-Trust has commonly been implemented is by relays. In this case, a relay can be set up with a whitelist of users who are permitted to post to it based on the relay owner\u0027s Web-of-Trust. This relay type was particularly popular before clients were fetching notes directly from the relays in a user\u0027s follows\u0027 relay lists in what is known as the outbox model. Back then, Nostr clients would only read notes from the specific relays the user listed as \u0022read\u0022 relays, so they could easily reduce spam by only reading from paid relays and WoT relays. That doesn\u0027t apply so much today, but even if it did, the choice to use a WoT relay is one made by each individual user. It is not imposed upon users, and therefore it cannot be legitimately classified as censorship.\n\n## Conclusion\n\nIn summary, many of the supposed examples of censorship still being possible on Nostr don\u0027t really count as censorship at all, because they are not examples of some authority like a client developer targeting specific posts, users, or topics they don\u0027t like and hiding them from their users without their knowledge and without any simple recourse. Most are actually 100% in the control of users themselves to determine what they do and do not see in their feeds. These tools are ***absolutely essential*** for users to have at their disposal, and we need to see ***more*** such tools implemented in other clients, so that users have the ability to curate their experience in accord with their own preferences.\n\nThose ways that actual suppression of speech is still possible on Nostr are greatly mitigated by the flexibility users have to choose between a wide variety of different clients and relays. If one client censors you, it doesn\u0027t really matter so long as there are still a number of other popular clients where your notes can still be seen. Yes, this means that some level of censorship ***can occur*** and ***is occurring*** on Nostr, but it is far less effective than it would be on any centralized platform. This severe reduction in the effectiveness of any effort at censorship is all that is meant when we say that Nostr is censorship resistant. We do not mean that the ability to censor particular users or groups of users is eliminated entirely. That is actually impossible to achieve.\n\nIt is my opinion that Nostr has proven itself to be the ***most*** censorship resistant social publishing protocol to date. There are still plenty of improvements that can be made, and tools that can be built to push censorship resistance even further, but I have yet to see anything else that comes close to Nostr ***in practice***, though some claim to be just as capable of censorship resistance in theory.","image":"https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/c8719c5e4b89a9e4c7b9e65e58e1e837355683883cda9b8b61fe0fdb604ca3ef","pubkey":"b7274d28e3e983bf720db4b4a12a31f5c7ef262320d05c25ec90489ac99628cb","kind":30023,"createdAt":"2026-06-01T04:12:16+00:00","publishedAt":"2026-05-31T03:38:07+00:00","topics":["longform"],"url":"https:\/\/chat.decentnewsroom.com\/mag\/dikaios1517-s-blog-0252d3\/cat\/nostr-80e94c\/d\/Is-Nostr-Actually-Censorship-Resistant-5blu76"},{"title":"Clients, Words, and Concepts","slug":"Clients-Words-and-Concepts-rsi5w6","summary":"The words we use can cause a lot of confusion if the concepts behind them are not clearly understood. Particularly when we use the same words to refer to different concepts. This is certainly the case in the recent arguments about whether Primal is a Nostr client or not.","content":"In theological study we have a saying:\n\n\u003E Theology is done at the concept level, not the word level.\n\nWhat is meant by this is a recognition that people often use the same words to refer to different concepts, and as long as you haven\u2019t defined what you mean by the words you are using, two people using the same word to refer to different concepts will continue to talk past one another and confuse anyone observing their interactions. Rather, we should first ensure that when we use a word, we are both understanding the same concept behind it, or agree to use different words for each concept, at least for the sake of our discussion.  \n  \nThis principle, it seems, must also be applied to Nostr concepts when we discuss them publicly. Specifically, I am talking about the basic building-blocks that are the foundation of the Nostr protocol: keys, notes, clients, and relays. These words refer to concepts, and they have a specific nuance in Nostr that they don\u2019t necessarily have in other contexts.\n\nKeys on Nostr aren\u2019t physical pieces of metal, shaped so they will each open a specific lock. Rather, they are cryptograpic key pairs used to sign and verify signatures using unforgeable math.\n\nNotes on Nostr aren\u2019t a string of text scribbled on a small sheet of paper. Rather, they are json text files containing metadata and content (an infinite variety of types of content, I might add), and signed by the author\u2019s private key.\n\nThen there are clients, and that brings us to the current debate about whether Primal in particular qualifies as a Nostr client or not. This is because folks are operating on two different definitions, two different but related concepts, of what constitutes a Nostr client.\n\n### The Broad Definition\n\nFor most non-technical folks, a Nostr client can be defined very broadly as any app that allows them to post content to Nostr, and to browse and interact with content other users have posted to Nostr. This definition is sufficient for them, because it emphasizes what they experience, and what is important to them.\n\nExactly how that content is retrieved by the app, or other technical considerations are not in view whatsoever under this very broad concept of what constitutes a Nostr client. Thus, those who operate with this concept are content to refer to Primal as a Nostr client, and they can\u2019t understand how anyone could reasonably state that it is not.\n\n\u201cOf course Primal is a Nostr client!\u201d they protest. \u201cI can go there and see notes from those I follow, explore to find others I might want to follow, post my own notes, and react, comment, and zap other users\u2019 notes. It does everything a client is supposed to do, so there\u2019s no reason not to call it a Nostr client.\u201d\n\n### The Narrow Definition\n\nThose who are more technically inclined, who understand the fundamentals of how Nostr works, specifically in order to maintain the principles of free speech, censorship resistance, and assurance that what the user is reading matches what the author actually posted, have a much narrower definition of what constitutes a Nostr client.\n\nUnder this definition, a Nostr client must perform the following functions:\n\n1. It must sign notes as requested by the user, or send signing requests to the user\u2019s preferred signer application.\n2. It must publish the user\u2019s signed notes to the user\u2019s preferred write relays.\n3. It must retrieve notes published by others from either their preferred write relays (outbox model) or the user\u2019s preferred relays or proxies.\n4. It must verify the validity of the signatures attached to notes received to ensure the note\u2019s author signed it with their private key and without any later alteration.\n\nIf a Nostr app does not perform all of these functions, it does not meet this narrower and more technical definition of a Nostr client, and those who subscribe to this definition are warranted in saying that Primal is not a Nostr client. It might be a Nostr app of some other kind, but it is not a client. I have seen terms like \u201clite-client\u201d or \u201cgateway\u201d suggested as alternative terms for apps that don\u2019t perform all of the above listed functions of a Nostr client.\n\nThis is not to say that all those who subscribe to the broader definition are non-technical, or don\u2019t understand why clients typically work this way. They simply may not ascribe to the more narrow definition, not believing that all of the above functions are intrinsic to the definition of what constitutes a Nostr client.\n\n### Why it Matters\n\nThe importance of these functions being done locally by the client is to limit the ways that a user can possibly be censored, or have their speech altered by any centralized entity.\n\n#### Signing Notes\n\nIf notes are not signed locally by the client, or signed by the user\u2019s preferred signer app, but rather sent to a central server that signs on their behalf, then the server has an opportunity to alter what was written by the note author before signing, so that it appears to everyone who later reads that note that it is exactly what the author intended to say.\n\nNote that this is possible for clients that have your private key to do locally, too, but it is much more difficult to do it selectively. This is also why it is important to stick with open-source apps where it is possible to verify the code that is running on your device.\n\nUsing remote signers that are on someone else\u2019s server, rather than running on your own device, also has this danger. You are trusting them not to alter the unsigned note before signing it.\n\nThe other massive issue with using a server to store multiple users\u2019 keys for remote signing is that it becomes a honeypot for identity thieves. Successfully breaching such a server\u2019s security will give them access to a large number of users\u2019 private keys all at once.\n\n#### Publishing to Relays\n\nIf notes are not sent by the client to the user\u2019s selected relays, but rather to a centralized server first, then that server can censor the user\u2019s speech by selectively publishing to relays only what the server operator agrees with. In extreme cases, the server could block all publishing to relays by a particular user, effectively shutting down their speech unless they switch to a different app.\n\nThe server operator can also mask the fact that they aren\u2019t publishing the user\u2019s notes by making it look like it was published in the UI, and the user is still able to see their own notes, but they never get any interaction from other users, because those notes were never forwarded to their preferred relays.\n\nIf you ever suspect such a thing is occurring, though, it is easy to hop onto a client like Jumble that allows you to view a particular relay\u2019s feed, and see if your notes show up there.\n\n#### Retrieving Notes from Relays\n\nIf an app does not retrieve notes from the user\u2019s preferred relays, or the preferred write relays of those they follow, but rather retrieves notes from a central server that in turn retrieves the notes from the relays, then it introduces an opportunity for selective censorship. The server can opt not to forward notes from specific users to the app, or to not forward notes that contain certain topics, opinions, or any other criteria that the server owner specifies.\n\nTo be sure, many people can see this as a service, depending on what type of content is being blocked. Most of us would like to not see spam, for instance. Many of us would also like to have filters for adult content, and especially for illegal content like CSAM. So when does this practice cross from being a desirable service to being censorship? When it is not something the user has asked for nor has any ability to configure or turn off, would be my contention.\n\nServer-side content moderation, only possible by requiring the use of a server between the app and the relays hosting the notes, allows for content filtering without the user even knowing it is happening, let alone having any say in how aggressive it is.\n\nOnce again, this type of content filtering can be done locally, as well. However, if you are using open source apps, you can verify whether the application does this, and the criteria it uses for it, whereas you cannot do so when the filtering is done server-side. Local content filtering is also more likely to have configuration options the user can turn off or otherwise adjust to their own preference.\n\n#### Local Signature Verification\n\nIf an app does not locally verify the signatures of all notes it receives, then the user is trusting that the server or relay providing those notes did not send forged or altered notes. Notes that claim to be written by an specific npub, but which that author never signed for, or the note they actually signed said something different.\n\nThis is a similar problem to that of offloading signing of the user\u2019s notes to a centralized server, except in reverse. Instead of the server being able to impersonate a particular user, or alter the content of their notes before they are published, because that user has entrusted the server with their private key, in this instance the server is able to impersonate ***any user*** it wants, but only users of their app will see the fake content.\n\nWhile something similar could be replicated locally by a client generating and displaying fake content, or altering content it receives before displaying it to the user, this is much less likely to occur, especially if you are using open source clients.\n\n#### So, What About Primal?\n\nWith this context, is it now possible to definitively say whether Primal is a Nostr client? No. It still depends on how you define what is essential to the definition of the term. If you subscribe to the broad definition, then yes, Primal is a Nostr client. However, if you believe apps should only be considered Nostr clients if they perform all of the functions listed in the narrow definition, then Primal is not a Nostr client.\n\nWhat you call it is far less important than understanding the tradeoffs of using Primal rather than a client that would fit the narrow definition.\n\nThe Primal app ***does*** sign your notes locally, or using your preferred signer, in the case of using the web app with a NIP-07 signer, or using the Android app with Amber. Your private key, is not being stored by Primal on their server, but is remaining local to your device, even if you aren\u2019t able to use a signer app like Amber, such as on iOS.\n\nThe Primal app ***does*** publish your notes directly to your preferred relays, if you don\u2019t have the \u201cEnhanced Privacy\u201d setting turned on in the Network Settings. If you turn that on, then your notes go to Primal\u2019s caching server first, and the server forwards them to your relays. Since the default setting is to have this feature turned off, since it is configurable by the user, and since it is trivial to verify whether Primal is actually forwarding your notes to your selected relays, this is a non-issue in my opinion. Moreover, it really does enhance your privacy, since your IP address is then hidden from the relays you post to, though not from Primal. You would get similar protection by simply using a VPN, though, and then even Primal would not see your IP address.\n\nAfter acknowledging the above, however\u2026\n\nThe Primal app ***does not*** read from the user\u2019s selected read relays, nor from their follows\u2019 selected write relays. Rather, it only reads from Primal\u2019s caching server. There is no way to change this behavior, other than to change the caching server. There is no setting to make Primal read from your relays instead.\n\nSome might argue that this is fine, because users have the ability to change which caching server they use. Sounds like a solid argument, but I don\u2019t know of any other caching servers that folks can switch to, if they prefer. Nor is it trivial for users to host their own caching server. And even if there are other caching servers they can choose, it just means ***that*** server now has the ability to censor what they see without them knowing or being able to configure what is being filtered out.\n\nFinally, the Primal app ***does not*** verify signatures locally for the notes it displays to you. Those signatures are verified by the server, which means that you are entirely trusting that the server is sending you only notes with valid signatures, and with exactly the content that was originally published by the note\u2019s author.\n\nSo long as you understand these tradeoffs, feel free to call the Primal app whatever you like in casual conversation. In technical discussions, though, it would probably be best to reserve the term \u201cclient\u201d to refer to apps that perform all of the functions of a Nostr client outlined above.","image":"https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/0d15bc86571539f7553d6b9ee91addd91269c7da3f68e4463f102970c3c912f8.webp","pubkey":"b7274d28e3e983bf720db4b4a12a31f5c7ef262320d05c25ec90489ac99628cb","kind":30023,"createdAt":"2025-11-07T01:25:20+00:00","publishedAt":"2025-11-07T01:18:33+00:00","topics":["longform","nostr","clients","primal","words","concepts","defineyourterms"],"url":"https:\/\/chat.decentnewsroom.com\/mag\/dikaios1517-s-blog-0252d3\/cat\/nostr-80e94c\/d\/Clients-Words-and-Concepts-rsi5w6"}]},{"slug":"bitcoin-f6a023","title":"Bitcoin","summary":"My thoughts on Bitcoin","image":null,"url":"https:\/\/chat.decentnewsroom.com\/mag\/dikaios1517-s-blog-0252d3\/cat\/bitcoin-f6a023","articleCount":2,"articles":[{"title":"Essential Essays from Anil","slug":"1733001418581","summary":"Anil Patel\u0027s (@anilsaidso on Twitter) list of essential essays that provide a foundational understanding of Bitcoin.","content":"For anyone interested in the list of essential essays from nostr:npub14hn6p34vegy4ckeklz8jq93mendym9asw8z2ej87x2wuwf8werasc6a32x ([@anilsaidso](https:\/\/x.com\/anilsaidso)) on Twitter that nostr:npub1h8nk2346qezka5cpm8jjh3yl5j88pf4ly2ptu7s6uu55wcfqy0wq36rpev mentioned on Read 856, here it is. I have compiled it with as many of the essays as I could find, along with the audio versions, when available. Additionally, if the author is on #Nostr, I have tagged their npub so you can thank them by zapping them some sats.\n\nAll credit for this list and the graphics accompanying each entry goes to nostr:npub14hn6p34vegy4ckeklz8jq93mendym9asw8z2ej87x2wuwf8werasc6a32x, whose original thread can be found here: [Anil\u0027s Essential Essays Thread](https:\/\/x.com\/anilsaidso\/status\/1290758632238276609)\n\n![Anil\u0027s Tweet](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/76b99225834f9d2b5f4ea1efa0d0c20bb497b45369da91487b80de89fc4f56e0.jpg)\n\n## 1. \n![Masters and Slaves of Money](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/2546dfaa314b1fd2ce2512519405487eaf74df6950632f94f58c61e7a8d07111.jpg)\n\n\u003E History shows us that the corruption of monetary systems leads to moral decay, social collapse, and slavery.\n\nEssay: https:\/\/breedlove22.medium.com\/masters-and-slaves-of-money-255ecc93404f\n\nAudio: https:\/\/fountain.fm\/episode\/RI0iCGRCCYdhnMXIN3L6\n\n## 2.\n![The Bitcoin Reformation](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/404b5d868f24e5f353cf6f6ccf7dfb27f86bc5efde753548719d92a046cdb986.jpg)\n\n\u003E The 21st century emergence of Bitcoin, encryption, the internet, and millennials are more than just trends; they herald a wave of change that exhibits similar dynamics as the 16-17th century revolution that took place in Europe.\n\nAuthor: nostr:npub13l3lyslfzyscrqg8saw4r09y70702s6r025hz52sajqrvdvf88zskh8xc2\n\nEssay: https:\/\/casebitcoin.com\/docs\/TheBitcoinReformation_TuurDemeester.pdf\n\nAudio: https:\/\/fountain.fm\/episode\/uLgBG2tyCLMlOp3g50EL\n\n## 3.\n![The Danger of the Collective \u0027We\u0027](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/a5a1e6e28fe92142bf6fcde0bf3681b927e414f18eca4fb8c8b9d537570c949e.jpg)\n\n\u003E There are many men out there who will parrot the \u0022debt is money WE owe OURSELVES\u0022 without acknowledging that \u0022WE\u0022 isn\u0027t a static entity, but a collection of individuals at different points in their lives.\n\nAuthor: nostr:npub1guh5grefa7vkay4ps6udxg8lrqxg2kgr3qh9n4gduxut64nfxq0q9y6hjy\n\nEssay: https:\/\/www.tftc.io\/issue-754-ludwig-von-mises-human-action\/\n\nAudio: https:\/\/fountain.fm\/episode\/UXacM2rkdcyjG9xp9O2l\n\n## 4.\n![The Bullish Case for Bitcoin](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/af60765a440a9fd4d301b1c7f43797b3fa8e0f9bb262bb63f9f9fd31b5e6424e.jpg)\n\n\u003E If Bitcoin exists for 20 years, there will be near-universal confidence that it will be available forever, much as people believe the Internet is a permanent feature of the modern world.\n\nEssay: https:\/\/vijayboyapati.medium.com\/the-bullish-case-for-bitcoin-6ecc8bdecc1\n\nAudio: https:\/\/fountain.fm\/episode\/jC3KbxTkXVzXO4vR7X3W\n\nAs you are surely aware, Vijay has expanded this into a book available here: [The Bullish Case for Bitcoin Book](https:\/\/www.bullishcaseforbitcoin.com\/product-page\/the-bullish-case-for-bitcoin-paperback-1)\n\nThere is also an audio book version available here: [The Bullish Case for Bitcoin Audio Book](https:\/\/www.audible.com\/pd\/The-Bullish-Case-for-Bitcoin-Audiobook\/B09QXR9GVL?eac_link=m4syoiXYyRJh\u0026ref=web_search_eac_asin_1\u0026eac_selected_type=asin\u0026eac_selected=B09QXR9GVL\u0026qid=2tIYC0F4Ya\u0026eac_id=135-0887332-3379864_2tIYC0F4Ya\u0026sr=1-1)\n\n## 5.\n![Bitcoin Becomes the Flag of Technology](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/0c1f799a44010b79db2762884deae7686f3ec0b13bf9a9f077faa3c95b2c645f.jpg)\n\n\u003E This realignment would not be traditional right vs left, but rather land vs cloud, state vs network, centralized vs decentralized, new money vs old, internationalist\/capitalist vs nationalist\/socialist, MMT vs BTC,...Hamilton vs Satoshi.\n\nEssay: https:\/\/nakamoto.com\/bitcoin-becomes-the-flag-of-technology\/\n\nAudio: https:\/\/fountain.fm\/episode\/tFJKjYLKhiFY8voDssZc\n\n## 6.\n[Gradually, Then Suddenly](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/fa4196f5c6183bda153e2e3c9911909d289b5a428852f5f07f7c1991191e7489.jpg)\n\n\u003E I became convinced that, whether bitcoin survives or not, the existing financial system is working on borrowed time.\n\nEssay: https:\/\/nakamotoinstitute.org\/mempool\/gradually-then-suddenly\/\n\nAudio: https:\/\/fountain.fm\/episode\/Mf6hgTFUNESqvdxEIOGZ\n\nParker Lewis went on to release several more articles in the Gradually, Then Suddenly series. They can be found here: [Gradually, Then Suddenly Series](https:\/\/nakamotoinstitute.org\/mempool\/series\/gradually-then-suddenly\/)\n\nnostr:npub1h8nk2346qezka5cpm8jjh3yl5j88pf4ly2ptu7s6uu55wcfqy0wq36rpev has, of course, read all of them for us. Listing them all here is beyond the scope of this article, but you can find them by searching the podcast feed here: [Bitcoin Audible Feed](https:\/\/fountain.fm\/show\/RtZlWdbEbpyEyjBNbeQ7)\n\nFinally, Parker Lewis has refined these articles and released them as a book, which is available here: [Gradually, Then Suddenly Book](https:\/\/academy.saifedean.com\/product\/gradually-then-suddenly-hardcover\/)\n\n## 7.\n![3 Reasons I\u0027m Investing in Bitcoin](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/1d8ad416d8c945bc9a371be837dd153e623bfe64cb0101bc0277dec282ab4f0a.jpg)\n\n\u003E Bitcoin is a beautifully-constructed protocol. Genius is apparent in its design to most people who study it in depth, in terms of the way it blends math, computer science, cyber security, monetary economics, and game theory.\n\nAuthor: nostr:npub1a2cww4kn9wqte4ry70vyfwqyqvpswksna27rtxd8vty6c74era8sdcw83a\n\nEssay: https:\/\/www.lynalden.com\/invest-in-bitcoin\/\n\nAudio: https:\/\/fountain.fm\/episode\/axeqKBvYCSP1s9aJIGSe\n\n## 8.\n![Why Bitcoin Matters](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/f1e45b5a1143d32fa5d4b37434605cd60e9bb5456023810a23b82eaa5fb4f63f.jpg)\n\n\u003E Bitcoin offers a sweeping vista of opportunity to re-imagine how the financial system can and should work in the Internet era..\n\nEssay: https:\/\/archive.nytimes.com\/dealbook.nytimes.com\/2014\/01\/21\/why-bitcoin-matters\/\n\n## 9.\n![Economics of Bitcoin as a Settlement Network](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/566a36c4363db741625b1fc803366123f46faf8e7e9484f746d32bc020807967.jpg)\n\n\u003E Using Bitcoin for consumer purchases is akin to driving a Concorde jet down the street to pick up groceries: a ridiculously expensive waste of an astonishing tool.\n\nAuthor: nostr:npub1gdu7w6l6w65qhrdeaf6eyywepwe7v7ezqtugsrxy7hl7ypjsvxksd76nak\n\nEssay: https:\/\/nakamotoinstitute.org\/mempool\/economics-of-bitcoin-as-a-settlement-network\/\n\nAudio: https:\/\/fountain.fm\/episode\/JoSpRFWJtoogn3lvTYlz\n\n## 10.\n![Decentralization: Why Dumb Networks Are Better](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/3dfea80fb51ff250e95ec2ebb9d683112684b33d62c56684f06bf7a480b9696b.jpg)\n\n\u003E The Internet is a dumb network, which is its defining and most valuable feature. The Internet\u2019s protocol (..) doesn\u2019t offer \u201cservices.\u201d It doesn\u2019t make decisions about content. It doesn\u2019t distinguish between photos, text, video and audio.\n\nEssay: https:\/\/fee.org\/articles\/decentralization-why-dumb-networks-are-better\/\n\nAudio: https:\/\/fountain.fm\/episode\/b7gOEqmWxn8RiDziffXf\n\n## 11.\n![Bitcoin: The Internet of Money](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/f9bcd5b4461f85f6ae49ee4019e8cc4caa031d8ad5b90e233dc62510c7595d56.jpg)\n\n\u003E Most people are only familiar with (b)itcoin the electronic currency, but more important is (B)itcoin, with a capital B, the underlying protocol, which encapsulates and distributes the functions of contract law.\n\nI was unable to find this essay or any audio version. Clicking on Anil\u0027s original link took me to Naval\u0027s blog, but that particular entry seems to have been removed.\n\n## 12.\n![Bitcoin Reveals Exchange Rate Manipulation](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/05df9e76dec7d8f2ed5e492d76df04ac17fa8f5a49e7f91850b06fcbc35b1989.jpg)\n\n\u003E Bitcoin can approximate unofficial exchange rates which, in turn, can be used to detect both the existence and the magnitude of the distortion caused by capital controls \u0026 exchange rate manipulations.\n\nEssay: https:\/\/papers.ssrn.com\/sol3\/Papers.cfm?abstract_id=2714921\n\n## 13.\n![It\u0027s the Settlement Assurances Stupid](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/198dadd36cad5729891e3393fa3fdbba524cae1a6e439f47493146ae2c1bc266.jpg)\n\n\u003E You can create something which looks cosmetically similar to Bitcoin, but you cannot replicate the settlement assurances which derive from the costliness of the ledger.\n\nEssay: https:\/\/medium.com\/@nic__carter\/its-the-settlement-assurances-stupid-5dcd1c3f4e41\n\nAudio: https:\/\/fountain.fm\/episode\/5NoPoiRU4NtF2YQN5QI1\n\n## 14.\n![Money, Blockchains, and Social Scalability](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/a1be77fc004ee81f69fc92f4dfb8c265e252d5a21ba21f3dd6dcfed32c2b7cfe.jpg)\n\n\u003E When we can secure the most important functionality of a financial network by computer science... we go from a system that is manual, local, and of inconsistent security to one that is automated, global, and much more secure.\n\nEssay: https:\/\/nakamotoinstitute.org\/library\/money-blockchains-and-social-scalability\/\n\nAudio: https:\/\/fountain.fm\/episode\/VMH9YmGVCF8c3I5zYkrc\n\n## 15.\n![The Bitcoin Central Bank\u0027s Perfect Monetary Policy](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/ee012bef60cd4a705537e0871acda69dfa40865b24a2c4b0f70d9c896bd7ed50.jpg)\n\n\u003E The BCB enforces the strictest deposit regulations in the world by requiring full reserves for all accounts. ..money is not destroyed when bank debts are repaid, so increased money hoarding does not cause liquidity traps..\n\nAuthor: nostr:npub1hxwmegqcfgevu4vsfjex0v3wgdyz8jtlgx8ndkh46t0lphtmtsnsuf40pf\n\nEssay: https:\/\/nakamotoinstitute.org\/mempool\/the-bitcoin-central-banks-perfect-monetary-policy\/\n\nAudio: https:\/\/fountain.fm\/episode\/ralOokFfhFfeZpYnGAsD\n\n## 16.\n![Bitcoin and Me](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/c2173720b7dfbce4d2d0f388f2806ba655634f4da14e551f9ca5eae11f911405.jpg)\n\n\u003E When Satoshi announced Bitcoin on the cryptography mailing list, he got a skeptical reception at best. Cryptographers have seen too many grand schemes by clueless noobs. They tend to have a knee jerk reaction.\n\nEssay: https:\/\/nakamotoinstitute.org\/library\/bitcoin-and-me\/\n\nAudio: https:\/\/fountain.fm\/episode\/Vx8hKhLZkkI4cq97qS4Z\n\n## 17.\n![Invalid Blocks Need Not Apply](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/f7e07785666eceea7995509d38e19762d5763298bf277feaeb8e7ad969b56b64.jpg)\n\n\u003E No matter who you are, or how big your company is, **\ud835\ude6e\ud835\ude64\ud835\ude6a\ud835\ude67 \ud835\ude69\ud835\ude67\ud835\ude56\ud835\ude63\ud835\ude68\ud835\ude56\ud835\ude58\ud835\ude69\ud835\ude5e\ud835\ude64\ud835\ude63 \ud835\ude6c\ud835\ude64\ud835\ude63\u2019\ud835\ude69 \ud835\ude65\ud835\ude67\ud835\ude64\ud835\ude65\ud835\ude56\ud835\ude5c\ud835\ude56\ud835\ude69\ud835\ude5a \ud835\ude5e\ud835\ude5b \ud835\ude5e\ud835\ude69\u2019\ud835\ude68 \ud835\ude5e\ud835\ude63\ud835\ude6b\ud835\ude56\ud835\ude61\ud835\ude5e\ud835\ude59.**\n\nEssay: https:\/\/nakamotoinstitute.org\/mempool\/bitcoin-miners-beware-invalid-blocks-need-not-apply\/\n\nAudio: https:\/\/fountain.fm\/episode\/bcSuBGmOGY2TecSov4rC\n\n## 18.\n![The Greatest Game](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/ca598d4b7ebe65bdd2d9699dba776dd333e72c89be09f661b785c3ee6ba5a975.jpg)\n\n\u003E Just like a company trying to protect itself from being destroyed by a new competitor, the actions and reactions of central banks and policy makers to protect the system that they know, are quite predictable.\n\nAuthor: nostr:npub1s05p3ha7en49dv8429tkk07nnfa9pcwczkf5x5qrdraqshxdje9sq6eyhe\n\nEssay: https:\/\/medium.com\/the-bitcoin-times\/the-greatest-game-b787ac3242b2\n\nAudio Part 1: https:\/\/fountain.fm\/episode\/5bYyGRmNATKaxminlvco\n\nAudio Part 2: https:\/\/fountain.fm\/episode\/92eU3h6gqbzng84zqQPZ\n\n## 19.\n![Bitcoin is Venice](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/c37a47134ef20a5c2a08a6227763b20057c51a81d15285bfda5eaa8d118c2368.jpg)\n\n\u003E Technology, industry, and society have advanced immeasurably since, and yet we still live by Venetian financial customs and have no idea why. Modern banking is the legacy of a problem that technology has since solved.\n\nAuthor: nostr:npub1sfhflz2msx45rfzjyf5tyj0x35pv4qtq3hh4v2jf8nhrtl79cavsl2ymqt\n\nEssay: https:\/\/allenfarrington.medium.com\/bitcoin-is-venice-8414dda42070\n\nAudio: https:\/\/fountain.fm\/episode\/s6Fu2VowAddRACCCIxQh\n\nAllen Farrington and Sacha Meyers have gone on to expand this into a book, as well. You can get the book here: [Bitcoin is Venice Book](https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/Bitcoin-Venice-Essays-Future-Capitalism\/dp\/B09TTTGT11)\n\nAnd wouldn\u0027t you know it, Guy Swann has narrated the audio book available here: [Bitcoin is Venice Audio Book](https:\/\/www.audible.com\/pd\/Bitcoin-is-Venice-Audiobook\/B0CCQD539W?eac_link=yrZ4RxHupcgL\u0026ref=web_search_eac_asin_1\u0026eac_selected_type=asin\u0026eac_selected=B0CCQD539W\u0026qid=pL7jjJ13ia\u0026eac_id=135-0887332-3379864_pL7jjJ13ia\u0026sr=1-1)\n\n## 20.\n![Can Governments Stop Bitcoin?](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/1757d1d93f2bb1e89198baf663a0fe8b89ab157ad9be89373f1c2dc0b8cd6c38.jpg)\n\n\u003E The rich and powerful will always design systems that benefit them before everyone else. The genius of Bitcoin is to take advantage of that very base reality and force them to get involved and help run the system, instead of attacking it.\n\nAuthor: nostr:npub1trr5r2nrpsk6xkjk5a7p6pfcryyt6yzsflwjmz6r7uj7lfkjxxtq78hdpu\n\nEssay: https:\/\/quillette.com\/2021\/02\/21\/can-governments-stop-bitcoin\/\n\nAudio: https:\/\/fountain.fm\/episode\/jeZ21IWIlbuC1OGnssy8\n\n## 21.\n![Bitcoin is Time](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/8253dad15da731bead11f999315689a232cde572fb2774fae501d7c43b1deae7.jpg)\n\n\u003E In the realm of infor\u00adma\u00adtion, there is no coin-stamping without time-stamping. The relent\u00adless beating of this clock is what gives rise to all the magical proper\u00adties of Bitcoin.\n\nAuthor: nostr:npub1dergggklka99wwrs92yz8wdjs952h2ux2ha2ed598ngwu9w7a6fsh9xzpc\n\nEssay: https:\/\/dergigi.com\/2021\/01\/14\/bitcoin-is-time\/\n\nAudio: https:\/\/fountain.fm\/episode\/pTevCY2vwanNsIso6F6X\n\n## 22.\n![The Stone Ridge Shareholder Letter 2020](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/d4d07542a757a0d370730057613510acd3db79d83ed25fe2b9a1ff41d55d39d9.jpg)\n\n\u003E You can stay on the Fiat Standard, in which some people get to produce unlimited new units of money for free, just not you. Or opt in to the Bitcoin Standard, in which no one gets to do that, including you.\n\nEssay: https:\/\/casebitcoin.com\/docs\/StoneRidge_2020_Shareholder_Letter.pdf\n\nAudio: https:\/\/fountain.fm\/episode\/PhBTa39qwbkwAtRnO38W\n\n## 23.\n![Everyone\u0027s a Scammer](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/dfd7e4368d3251a20f64735f577b34cdf791cf9289138b0333d53bd428b4f66b.jpg)\n\n\u003E Long term investors should use Bitcoin as their unit of account and every single investment should be compared to the expected returns of Bitcoin.\n\nEssay: https:\/\/nakamotoinstitute.org\/mempool\/everyones-a-scammer\/\n\nAudio: https:\/\/fountain.fm\/episode\/vyR2GUNfXtKRK8qwznki\n\n## 24.\n![Why the Yuppie Elite Dismiss Bitcoin](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/c8e84097fdcfae9dd3298dcfa7a12db9acde9dff7a4c612d7196fb67be32695d.jpg)\n\n\u003E When you\u2019re in the ivory tower, you think the term \u201civory tower\u201d is a silly misrepresentation of your very normal life; when you\u2019re no longer in the ivory tower, you realize how willfully out of touch you were with the world.\n\nEssay: https:\/\/www.citadel21.com\/why-the-yuppie-elite-dismiss-bitcoin\n\nAudio: https:\/\/fountain.fm\/episode\/7do5K4pPNljOf2W3rR2V\n\nYou might notice that many of the above essays are available from the [Satoshi Nakamoto Institute](https:\/\/nakamotoinstitute.org\/). It is a veritable treasure trove of excellent writing on subjects surrounding #Bitcoin and #AustrianEconomics. If you find value in them keeping these written works online for the next wave of new Bitcoiners to have an excellent source of education, please consider [donating](https:\/\/pay.zaprite.com\/pl_vNYDp4YBSd) to the cause.","image":"https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/3d230a0349aa4999b466a5c0ff1523944decdf382e026a8c87474a33bc4e5923.jpg","pubkey":"b7274d28e3e983bf720db4b4a12a31f5c7ef262320d05c25ec90489ac99628cb","kind":30023,"createdAt":"2025-02-04T05:31:13+00:00","publishedAt":"2024-12-01T03:27:17+00:00","topics":["nostr","bitcoin","austrianeconomics"],"url":"https:\/\/chat.decentnewsroom.com\/mag\/dikaios1517-s-blog-0252d3\/cat\/bitcoin-f6a023\/d\/1733001418581"},{"title":"Bitcoin is Hard, but it\u0027s Not Difficult","slug":"01ba7b21","summary":"Bitcoin is not more difficult to use than fiat when properly compared.","content":"There is a general perception surrounding Bitcoin that it is prohibitively difficult to use for the average person. This perception can even infect those who are familiar with the various tools to optimally preserve their privacy, sovereignty, and security while using Bitcoin. After all, there\u2019s 12 words you have to keep safe, or someone might steal all of your money. There\u2019s all these tools like hardware wallets, software wallets, running a node, coin-join, and so much more you have to figure out in order to save and transact in Bitcoin securely and privately. Not to mention everything you have to learn if you want to use Lightning in a sovereign way, such as setting up channels, managing liquidity, learning LNURL, and setting up a domain so you can have a Lightning address.\n\nAll of these things can be intimidating for those considering whether they want to adopt Bitcoin, especially when comparing it with how little is needed for how most people interact with fiat today. As long as they have a debit card with their four-digit PIN memorized, and their password to their online banking, they have access to their money, and can use it virtually anywhere. Moreover, if they mess something up, they can just go to their financial institution and get a new debit card, or have their password reset. If a fraudster gets access to their account, their bank can often credit the money back to them and change their account information. The very real danger in Bitcoin of losing your funds and having no way of getting them back is scary for a lot of people.\n\nOne answer that Bitcoiners often give is, \u201cDon\u2019t worry. We\u2019re still early and these tools will get easier to use as time goes on.\u201d All that really tells someone is, \u201cIt might be better for you to wait and see if it actually does get easier.\u201d Ease of use is a major factor for most people, and telling them that it is something they can expect from Bitcoin in the future just makes them more likely to wait until that hypothetical future arrives before they adopt it.\n\nThis perception of Bitcoin\u2019s difficulty is really just a matter of perspective, though. Bitcoin looks incredibly difficult to use when you compare the way most people currently interact with fiat to using Bitcoin in a sovereign and private manner. This is comparing apples to oranges, though. If you instead compare apples to apples, looking at what it would take to use fiat digitally in a sovereign and private manner, suddenly Bitcoin is not more difficult than fiat, but less.\n\nSomeone may say, \u201cUsing fiat in a sovereign and private manner is easy! Just use cash.\u201d Let\u2019s explore that idea a bit, though. Cash can be very useful for transacting privately and without any intermediaries, but that usefulness diminishes when you want to transact with someone who is not within a short drive from you. As soon as you want to purchase something from a merchant in another state, or even the other side of the same state, a large amount of friction is added because you must travel to one another to complete the transaction. The farther you have to travel to transact in cash, the more convenient Bitcoin\u2019s privacy tools begin to look. Indeed, the types of transactions that cash can easily make private and sovereign are exceptionally limited.\n\nThe next thing to consider is that cash may be convenient for transacting locally in a private manner, but it is much less convenient for storing your wealth privately and securely. If you want to store large sums of cash privately, a fire rated safe is much more expensive than memorizing 12 words, and is not impenetrable. Its only benefit is in making it take longer for fire to burn your cash or for a thief to break in and steal it, and that added length of time is measured in mere minutes. Meanwhile, the amount of time it would take someone to access the Bitcoin stored in 12 memorized words is measured in billions of years and the cost to secure it is just the transaction fee. Choosing to hide your cash instead may be less expensive than a safe, but then you will need to do some research on how best to protect it from the elements, which adds complexity, expense, and physical labor that is more cumbersome than rolling dice a few times and memorizing 12 words. Regardless of the method, securing cash is more difficult than securing Bitcoin and carries less assurances against theft or destruction. These shortcomings of storing wealth in cash become even more acute if you ever need to move that wealth, especially across any national border. Hiding thousands of dollars of cash in your luggage is much more difficult than carrying 12 words in your head that preserve your access to millions of sats.\n\nWhere there is no contest between the ease of using Bitcoin vs. fiat, though, is when you attempt to use fiat digitally in a private and\/or sovereign manner. While privacy in Bitcoin is certainly an involved process, digital fiat is nearly impossible to use privately and is fraught with even worse \u201cgotchas\u201d. Forget about trying to use digital fiat in a sovereign manner. That actually ***is*** impossible. When people say using fiat is easier than using Bitcoin, they mean that using centralized, custodial, financial institutions that are surveilling your every transaction is easier than using self-custody, sovereign, Bitcoin. That\u2019s a completely lopsided comparison, but it\u2019s the only one that most people can imagine making, because they have never attempted to use digital fiat in a private manner in the first place.\n\nWhat we should do is compare using Bitcoin in a sovereign and private way with using digital fiat in the same way, and likewise compare using Bitcoin via custodians to using digital fiat via banks and bank alternatives. When we do so, we find that not only is Bitcoin much easier to use privately than digital fiat, but it is impossible to use the latter in a sovereign manner and custodial Bitcoin is even easier to use than custodial fiat.\n\nAnyone can get set up on a custodial wallet, with a Lightning Address, and be zapping people on Nostr, in less than 5 minutes. When was the last time you could do anything similar when setting up a bank account? Buying anything online with a custodial wallet has far less friction than using a debit or credit card. Scan the QR code and hit send. Done. No filling out card numbers, expiration dates, and billing addresses. Do you want to send money to your friend? All you need is their Lightning Address, and even if they are using a completely different custodian than you are, they receive the funds instantly and with virtually no fee. Custodial Bitcoin on Lightning already has better ease of use than any fiat custodian can provide, and it\u2019s only improving.\n\nNow, admittedly, the ideal in Bitcoin is to avoid custodians if you possibly can, and that is where things begin to get complicated, adding difficulty for the average user. However, avoiding custodians is not complicated or difficult with digital fiat, it\u2019s entirely impossible. Most of us just never consider that fact when comparing the two. Instead we put the way we commonly use our fully centralized and surveilled custodial fiat up against the way we are told we ought to use Bitcoin to preserve our sovereignty and privacy, and we conclude Bitcoin is way more difficult, when that could not be farther from the truth. Sovereign, self-custody Bitcoin is far easier than sovereign, self-custody digital fiat, considering that the latter doesn\u2019t even exist, and custodial Bitcoin is far easier than custodial fiat.\n\nThen, when you add back into the equation the fact that fiat is constantly stealing from you, while Bitcoin is hard money that cannot have its supply arbitrarily inflated, the comparison is no contest. Bitcoin is far superior to fiat in every way! The tools to really take personal ownership of it without custodial risk may initially be intimidating, but they are not difficult if you take them on incrementally. You don\u2019t need to dive immediately into hardware wallets, running a node, or managing the liquidity in your Lightning channels. You can start with a basic wallet app on your phone and your first few thousand sats and venture forth from there at your own pace. Bitcoin is hard money that won\u2019t steal the value of your time and energy from you, but it\u2019s not difficult to learn if you approach it like anything else new you have learned before. Take your time, and get comfortable with one new idea or tool every week or two, and before you know it you\u2019ll be the one telling your friends and family just how easy it really is.","image":null,"pubkey":"b7274d28e3e983bf720db4b4a12a31f5c7ef262320d05c25ec90489ac99628cb","kind":30023,"createdAt":"2024-07-19T02:04:30+00:00","publishedAt":"2023-10-04T01:07:10+00:00","topics":null,"url":"https:\/\/chat.decentnewsroom.com\/mag\/dikaios1517-s-blog-0252d3\/cat\/bitcoin-f6a023\/d\/01ba7b21"}]},{"slug":"seminary-papers-dfc924","title":"Seminary Papers","summary":"Papers I have written for seminary classes and published as longform notes.","image":null,"url":"https:\/\/chat.decentnewsroom.com\/mag\/dikaios1517-s-blog-0252d3\/cat\/seminary-papers-dfc924","articleCount":5,"articles":[{"title":"The Sabbath and the Doctrine of Creation","slug":"The-Sabbath-and-the-Doctrine-of-Creation-tgxrwz","summary":"How does the Bible\u0027s teaching on the Sabbath in Exodus 20 inform our view of the days of creation in Genesis 1? This seminary paper is my brief exploration of that topic.","content":"The [first chapter of Genesis](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/gen\/1\/1\/s_1001) depicts the creation account in language that can only be described as methodical and majestic. Methodical, because there is an unmistakable pattern which each day follows, and a symmetry which the six days combine to display. Majestic, because we are told that by the power of God\u2019s command all things came into being *ex nihilo*, out of nothing. These factors have led many to conclude that the days of creation should not be taken in a normal, historical sense. Instead, they say that we ought to take the account figuratively, or at least more loosely.\n\nFor instance, Lee Irons explained the increasingly popular Framework Interpretation with these words, *\u201cWhat sets the framework interpretation apart is its claim that the total picture of the creation week is figurative. The creation history is figuratively presented as an ordinary week in which the divine craftsman goes about His creative toil for six days and finally rests from and in His completed work on the seventh.\u201d*  To be fair, Irons views the days of creation as literal solar days, but he believes that the fourth, fifth, and sixth days are not separate from the first, second, and third. That is what he means when he says that the creation week is figurative. He does not see it as six chronological days followed by the first Sabbath. He admits that the traditional week is what the text portrays, but he argues for a figurative interpretation which could involve less days, and a different order.\n\n## Obvious \u0026 Intentional Pattern\nThe language of the first chapter of Genesis is certainly unique. Each day follows a very distinct pattern apparent even in casual reading of the text. First we have the narrative, \u201cAnd God said,\u201d followed by his creative declaration, (e.g. \u201cLet there be light.\u201d). Then we see the results of his almighty command, with God\u2019s assessment of his work on each day as \u201cgood.\u201d Finally it is set in its temporal framework with the words, \u201cAnd there was evening and there was morning.\u201d The six days all follow this pattern, giving the impression that it is an intentional literary device.\n\nA more subtle pattern also appears in the six days, relating to what God created on each day. Victor Hamilton notes this saying:\n\n\u003E *It is not difficult to see that the first six days fall into two groups of three. Thus on day one, God created light in general or light bearers; on day four, there were specific kinds of light. On day two, the firmament separated waters above from waters below; on day five, God made creatures of sky and water. On day three, God created the earth; on day six, He made the creatures of land.*\n\nThe first three days God forms, and the last three he fills what he had formed, each in its turn. Perhaps this pattern, more than the first, leads many to the conclusion that the creation account is figurative to one extent or another. But the days of creation are not a self-contained literary unit with no bearing on the rest of Scripture. Our understanding of the creation week, and whether or not there were six ordinary days on which God worked, with a seventh day of rest, must be informed by the rest of Scripture.\n\n## The Creation Mandate of Rest\nOf course, I am referring to the fourth commandment in particular. In [Exodus 20](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/exo\/20\/1\/s_70001), God\u2019s words to Moses make the creation week the basis for the commandment to observe the sabbath. Here is how the ESV renders the text:\n\n\u003E *Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy... For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day. **Therefore** the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy. ([Ex. 20:8,11](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/exo\/20\/8-11\/s_70008))*\n\nNow, if the creation week is the model and specified reason for the Sabbath, and the commandment is to work for six ordinary days and rest on the seventh, we should expect that the days of creation were ordinary days as well. It would make no sense to base the Sabbath on the creation week, if God actually took eons of time, or even a mere four days, rather than six days. Dr. Robert Reymond notes this argument as well:\n\n\u003E *If we follow the **analogia Scripturae** principle of hermeneutics enunciated in the [Westminster Confession of Faith](https:\/\/www.opc.org\/wcf.html) to the effect that \u201cthe infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is Scripture itself: and therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly,\u0022 then the \u201cordinary day\u201d view has most to commend it since Moses grounds the commandment regarding seventh-day Sabbath observance in the fact of the divine Exemplar\u2019s activity.*\n\nThe Sabbath was instituted by divine example in the first chapter of Genesis. Any interpretation which undermines this example should be highly suspect by anyone who acknowledges Scripture as the foundation and ultimate authority in their epistemology. The text in Exodus 20 certainly treats the creation week as equivalent to the week leading to the Sabbath, for which it is the model. Using that as our guide, we would be right to interpret the creation week as six ordinary days of work, followed by a day of rest.\n\n## Evening and Morning\nWhat about the text of Genesis 1 itself? Is there anything which would suggest a figurative interpretation? To the contrary, the text of Genesis 1 also supports the \u201cordinary day\u201d interpretation, in a few major ways.\n\nFirst, whenever the word \u2018day\u2019 is used in Scripture with a number -- such as the \u2018first\u2019 day, or \u2018second\u2019 day -- it is always referring to a calendar day. If that is not the case in Genesis 1, it would be the **only** example of a deviation from this principle in Scripture.\n\nSecond, the text seems to make the \u0022ordinary day\u0022 interpretation unavoidable when it repeats the refrain, *\u201cAnd there was evening and there was morning, the ___ day.\u201d* ([Genesis 1:5](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/gen\/1\/5\/s_1005), [8](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/gen\/1\/8\/s_1008), [13](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/gen\/1\/13\/s_1013), [19](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/gen\/1\/19\/s_1019), [23](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/gen\/1\/23\/s_1023), \u0026 [31](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/gen\/1\/31\/s_1031)) It is almost as though God is telling us, *\u201cDon\u2019t be confused about what I mean by the word \u2018day\u2019. I mean **evening and morning**.\u201d* A measurable span of time is clearly specified.\n\nThird, there are things created on earlier days, that require things created on later days to continue to exist. We see this in the third and fifth days specifically. On the third day, God created dry land and all plants ([vv. 9-13](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/gen\/1\/9-13\/s_1009)), but God didn\u2019t create the sun for photosynthesis till the fourth day ([vv. 14-19](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/gen\/1\/14-19\/s_1014)), or any living creatures to pollinate the plants until the fifth day ([vv. 20-23](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/gen\/1\/20-23\/s_1020)). It does not, therefore, seem likely that there could have been a long span of time between the third and fifth days.\n\nSo it is that we see, both in the treatment of the creation week by other passages of Scripture, and the text of Genesis 1 itself, that the creation week should rightly be understood as a normal seven day period. The fact that there exists a pattern in the ordering of the days, with the first three days of forming and last three days of filling, only serves to teach us that our God is a God of order.\n\n\u003E *Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding. Who determined its measurements--surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? On what were its bases sunk, or who laid its cornerstone, when the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy? ([Job 38:4-7](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/job\/38\/4-7\/s_474004))*","image":"https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/e558385fb5396847bcc11daa102294f51e2b6ee923a5eab1bd22db47dfb91de5.png","pubkey":"b7274d28e3e983bf720db4b4a12a31f5c7ef262320d05c25ec90489ac99628cb","kind":30023,"createdAt":"2025-11-08T08:54:30+00:00","publishedAt":"2025-10-11T04:29:06+00:00","topics":["longform","seminary","christian","reformed","catholic","genesis","creation"],"url":"https:\/\/chat.decentnewsroom.com\/mag\/dikaios1517-s-blog-0252d3\/cat\/seminary-papers-dfc924\/d\/The-Sabbath-and-the-Doctrine-of-Creation-tgxrwz"},{"title":"Appointed to His Service - The Call to Ministry","slug":"Appointed-to-His-Service-The-Call-to-Ministry-9i71es","summary":"Is the call to be a minister similar to that of any other vocation, or is it wholly unique from secular careers? This is a short seminary paper I wrote on the subject.","content":"Of what nature is the call to the ministry? Is the vocation of pastor like any other common vocation that a man might pursue, or is there something unique about it, such that it must be set apart from other professions or careers?\n\nTo be sure, there have been plenty of men who approached the work of gospel ministry as they would any other vocation. They consider the nature of the work to be less of a toil than, say, plowing a field\u2014the income to be more easily earned, and the respect gained from the office to be a pleasant icing on the cake\u2014but by this very line of thinking they prove themselves to neither understand the gravity of the calling of God to such an office, nor of the true nature of the work involved.\n\nEdmund Clowney puts it in even more stark terms saying:\n\n\u003E *Let a man choose the ministry for professional dignity, easy income, personal prestige, or public praise and **he has rejected the ministry of Christ**. Paul shows us what to expect: ridicule, humiliation, persecution, heartache, while **we borrow other people\u0027s troubles to make them the burdens of a pastor\u0027s love**.*\n\nIf the man seeking to enter gospel ministry has it in his mind that he is entering a vocation like any other, and for similar reasons, then he is grossly mistaken, to the point of having rejected what true gospel ministry is; namely embracing the reproach of Christ as we are told Moses did by the author of Hebrews: *\u201cHe considered the reproach of Christ greater wealth than the treasures of Egypt, for he was looking to the reward.\u201d ([Hebrews 11:26](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/heb\/11\/26\/s_1144026))* The one whom God calls to ministry should similarly expect to share in the reproach of Christ.\n\n## A Divine Calling\nThe call to gospel ministry, then, is not a vocation one chooses, but one a man is appointed to by God. We see this in the calling of Jeremiah, where God says to him, *\u201cBefore I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; **I appointed you a prophet** to the nations.\u201d ([Jeremiah 1:5](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/jer\/1\/5\/s_746005))*, and likewise in the calling of Paul: *\u201cWhile they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, **the Holy Spirit said**, \u2018Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work **to which I have called them**.\u2019\u201d ([Acts 13:2](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/act\/13\/2\/s_1031002))*\n\nWe may think, *\u0022Well, that is true of prophets and apostles, but not so much when talking about the call to be a pastor,\u0022* but we are not left with that conclusion open to us. Just as God called the prophets and apostles, he likewise calls *\u201cthe evangelists, the **shepherds, and teachers**, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ.\u201d ([Ephesians 4:11,12](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/eph\/4\/11-12\/s_1101011))*\n\n## The Inward Call\nThis call is evidenced inwardly in the man called, because he finds within himself an earnest and burning desire to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ. He can say with the Apostle Paul, *\u201cFor necessity is laid upon me. Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel!\u201d ([1 Corinthians 9:16](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/1co\/9\/16\/s_1071016))* This desire to bring the Word of God to the people of God, when born out of a genuine concern for their edification and spiritual well-being, is the primary inward evidence that a man has been called by God, for he would not be satisfied to continue in any secular profession. Charles H. Spurgeon concurs:\n\n\u003E *If any student in this room could be content to be a newspaper editor, or a grocer, or a farmer or a doctor, or a lawyer, or a senator, or a king, in the name of heaven and earth let him go his way; he is not the man in whom dwells the Spirit of God in its fulness, for **a man so filled with God would utterly weary of any pursuit but that for which his inmost soul pants**. If on the other hand, you can say that for all the wealth of both the Indies you could not and dare not espouse any other calling so as to be put aside from preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ, then, depend upon it, if other things be equally satisfactory, you have the signs of this apostleship.*\n\n## The Outward Confirmation\nThis inward calling must be met with the outward calling of the church to confirm it. For though it is Christ and Christ alone who calls a man to minister his gospel to the world and to his church, he also imparts to the same all those gifts which are requisite to that calling. He does not call a man only to leave him destitute of the means necessary to answer that call. The Apostle Paul acknowledges this principle saying, *\u201cOf this gospel I was made a minister according to the gift of God\u2019s grace, which was given me by the working of his power.\u201d ([Ephesians 3:7](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/eph\/3\/7\/s_1100007))* That is, to be made a minister by God is to be gifted with the measure of grace requisite to the task.\n\nWhen these gifts are exercised by a man called by Christ to gospel ministry, within the context of the church, they are recognized by those who are encouraged in their faith through them. In this way, the church does not call the man to ministry, but merely **recognizes that God himself has already called him** and gifted him accordingly. Clowney agrees:\n\n\u003E *Other ministers or the church as a whole **cannot delegate authority to him** who is to be a minister of Christ. They can **only give orderly recognition to the fact that Christ has called this man**. The evidence they recognize is the fruitfulness of the gifts of Christ in the life of his minister.*\n\nThus, this outward call of the church, eventually confirmed by a particular church calling the man as their pastor and the laying on of hands by other men likewise called of God, **begins in his local church** as he exercises the gifts he has been given. This naturally means that local churches must provide opportunities for men to explore and exercise their gifts, so that the church may recognize and support him in developing them for the edification of Christ\u0027s body. Whether this is by leading a Bible study, Sunday School class, or even exhorting in an evening service, **the church cannot recognize gifts that are never given the opportunity to be observed**.\n\n## The Importance of Education\nNeither the inward or outward call negate the requirement of dedicated theological study and training. As the author of Hebrews points out, a teaching role within the church is not for the novice, but for *\u201cthose who have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil\u201d ([Hebrews 5:12-14](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/heb\/5\/12-14\/s_1138012))*. Moreover, if it is incumbent upon all Christians to *\u201calways [be] prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you,\u201d ([1 Peter 3:15](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/1pe\/3\/15\/s_1154015))* how much more so those who have been called to the gospel ministry? This makes it most necessary for those who would pursue such a call to undergo thorough training and equipping, that they may add understanding, experience, and skill to the zeal and gifting they already posses.\n\nWe may conclude, then, that the call to the ministry is not to be entered on a whim, nor as a man might just as easily choose to be a plumber or an accountant, but is a calling from God that **he cannot but obey**. Likewise, his gifting to this call from God will make itself known as he ministers within his local body, and it will be honed and improved upon through theological education and training.\n\n\u003E *Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching. ([1 Timothy 5:17](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/1ti\/5\/17\/s_1124017))*","image":"https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/75b6b0836f8b1a34f193c48acc8f23cc853ac42a8d5b5881502749a63aac3fb4.png","pubkey":"b7274d28e3e983bf720db4b4a12a31f5c7ef262320d05c25ec90489ac99628cb","kind":30023,"createdAt":"2025-11-09T00:18:14+00:00","publishedAt":"2025-10-17T17:24:38+00:00","topics":["longform","christian","reformed","catholic","seminary","ministry"],"url":"https:\/\/chat.decentnewsroom.com\/mag\/dikaios1517-s-blog-0252d3\/cat\/seminary-papers-dfc924\/d\/Appointed-to-His-Service-The-Call-to-Ministry-9i71es"},{"title":"The Date of the Exodus","slug":"The-Date-of-the-Exodus-uf1q64","summary":"There are two commonly proposed dates for the Exodus. In this paper I give the biblical and archaeological support for the early date of about 1446 B.C.","content":"When approaching the question of when exactly the biblical Exodus took place, I had to ask myself, \u201cWhy does it matter?\u201d As long as we can trust that the Exodus **did happen at some point** in history, does it really matter what the actual date was?\n\nI believe it is important for at least three reasons. First, so we can have an historical context to place the biblical account within for the sake of better understanding the text. This helps us to grasp what God intends from the text so that we may rightly apply it in our own lives. Second, it provides a more vivid, fixed, and certain historical setting for the biblical narrative to help lend credibility with unbelievers and critics who would readily relegate the story of the Exodus to the realm of myth and fantasy. Third, and most importantly, being able to date the Exodus is important because the inerrancy of the Bible is important.\n\n## Inerrancy and the Exodus\nTo understand why the date of the Exodus is tied to the claim that the Bible is inerrant requires a bit of explanation. The Exodus account is mentioned in other places in Scripture, and while dates are not mentioned, lengths of time certainly are. If those lengths of time are viewed as round numbers, exact precision is not required. However, a discrepancy of 150-180 years cannot be so readily explained, and therefore calls the inerrancy of the text into question.\n\nOne instance of a length of time being specified is found in [1 Kings 6:1](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/1ki\/6\/1\/s_297001), which tells us that Solomon began building the temple 480 years after the people of Israel left the land of Egypt. Now, 480 could be a round number, but not quite so rounded as, say, 400 or 500 would be. There is wiggle-room for a difference of maybe 5 years more or less, such that it could have been between 475-485 years, rather than exactly 480, but it could not have been 430 years, as no one would round that number to 480, nor would it be legitimate to do so.\n\nWe are relatively certain that Solomon began building the temple in about 966 B.C. This is because [2 Chronicles 12:2-9](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/2ch\/12\/2-9\/s_379002) tells us that Shishak, Pharaoh in Egypt from 945-924 B.C., invaded Judah in the **fifth year** of Solomon\u0027s son Rehoboam\u0027s reign. Before Rehoboam succeeded his father, Solomon had reigned for **40 years**, and he began building the temple in the **fourth year** of his reign. So there is only a period of 41 (40 + 5 - 4) or so years between the founding of the temple and Shishak\u0027s invasion. The recods of this invasion indicate it occurred in 925 B.C., toward the end of Shishak\u0027s reign. Subtracting 41 years from the date of Shishak\u0027s invasion gives us the 966 B.C. (-925 - 41 = -966) date for the founding of the temple, and subtracting another 480 years from that date gives us 1446 B.C., or thereabouts, for the date of Israel leaving Egypt in the Exodus.\n\nYet there are many who argue that the Exodus occurred in sometime in the 13th century B.C. which was only about 300 years prior. I don\u0027t know about you, but I would not consider it in any way acceptable to round 300-325 years up to 480. If the later date of between 1290-1270 B.C. is taken to be accurate in spite of this, then Bruce K. Waltke has this to say on the matter:\n\n\u003E *\u201cEither the biblical prophet-historians have committed a historical blunder, and therefore the Bible is less than a completely trustworthy historical document on which man can rest his faith, or the numbers in the Bible must be interpreted as meaning something other than their face value.\u201d* \n\nOr to say it another way, either the Bible is wrong about the 480 year figure, or that number doesn\u0027t really doesn\u2019t mean what it seems to mean. This calls into question either the inerrancy of Scripture, or the natural, grammatical historical, reading of the text. So, yes, the date of the Exodus is important indeed.\n\n## Scripture vs. Archaeology\nThere are several ways one could go about investigating the date of the Exodus. For my purposes, we will assume that the Bible is accurate in everything it says, in the sense that it is intended to be understood, and it is simply a matter of interpreting the text properly. I readily recognize that this is a massive assumption that I have not proven in this paper. However, it is a subject that would require a separate paper to explore, and is therefore outside the scope of this publication. At this time I merely intend to prove that anyone who accepts the Bible as the inerrant Word of God will find the early date of the Exodus to be the only valid option.\n\nDon\u0027t worry, though. I am sure my time in seminary will afford me ample opportunity to write separately on the issue of inerrancy which we are here assuming. Stay tuned.\n\nThis means that the text itself will be our primary source of evidence for the date of the Exodus, with archaeological evidence providing support, rather than proof. In their introduction to the Old Testament, Raymond Dillard and Tremper Longman III explain the limited value of archaeological evidence by saying, *\u201cThey are not brute facts with which the biblical material must conform and that can prove or disprove the Bible. Archaeology rather produces evidence that, like the Bible, Must be interpreted.\u201d*\n\nThat said, I hope to show both...\n1. That the text of the Bible itself provides ample of evidence for the early date of the Exodus.\n2. That the archaeological evidence fits with the early date, as well.\n\nMeanwhile, the late date would require us to compromise our conviction regarding integrity of the biblical account.\n\n## Biblical Evidence for 1446 B.C.\nThe first textual evidence is the passage [1 Kings 6:1](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/1ki\/6\/1\/s_297001) itself, which I have already mentioned. Proponents of the late date argue that this passage doesn\u2019t really mean 480 years, but rather *\u201ca representative number to stand for 12 **idealized generations** of 40 years each.\u201d* These supposed twelve generations only being about 25 years in reality would mean that the Exodus occurred about 300 years before work on the temple began, giving a date of about 1260 B.C. However there is no indication in the passage or the surrounding context to suggest that 1 Kings 6:1 is talking about anything other than 480 years. Any attempt to make the 480 years amount to a shorter period of time is imposed upon the text in order to fit the conclusion that the Exodus must have occurred later.\n\nSince we\u2019re counting generations, another important textual consideration is [1 Chron 6:33-37](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/1ch\/6\/33-37\/s_344033), which tells us there were at least 18 generations between Korah in Moses\u2019 time and Heman in David\u2019s time, which would mean 19 generations between Moses and Solomon. The length of 480 years provides ample time for 19 generations of more than 25 years each. The later date of the Exodus, with its mere 324 years forces the length of these generations down to an average of only 17 years each, which is not likely.\n\nThe entire book of Judges provides another basis for critique of the late date, since adding together the length of time each judge served Israel amounts to just over 400 years. This can conceivably be reduced to the 350 years required for the early date of the Exodus, if we grant that some of the judges\u2019 terms of service overlapped. However, the late date would require us to fit all of these judges\u0027 terms into only 170 years, which is simply not possible.\n\nThe book of Judges also gives us an interesting length of time that can play a part in dating the Exodus, found in [Judges 11:26](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/jdg\/11\/26\/s_222026). John MacArthur pointed to this text as evidence for the early date saying, \n\n\u003E *\u201cJephthah noted that, by his day, Israel had possessed Heshbon for 300 years. By calculating backward and forward from Jephthah, and taking into account different periods of foreign oppression, judgeships and kingships, the wilderness wanderings, and the initial entry and conquest of Canaan under Joshua, this amounts to 480 years and, thus, the early date is confirmed.\u201d*\n\nWe know that Jephthah\u2019s time was about 1100 B.C., since he was two generations or so preceeding the first king of Israel, Saul. Remembering that Solomon\u0027s reign began in 970 B.C., his father David reigned from 1010-970, and Saul reigned from 1050-1010. Two generations before him would have been right around 1100 B.C. for Jephthah\u0027s time. If you subtract 300 years from then, you have Joshua conquering Heshbon, east of the Jordan, in about 1400 B.C.; well before the late date of the Exodus supposes Israel as having even left Egypt. Yet, it fits well with the early date, leaving time for 40 years of Israel wandering in the wilderness, to have them leaving Egypt in the 1440\u2019s B.C.\n\n## Biblical Evidence for the 13th Century B.C.\nThe above is quite compelling, in my opinion, but we can\u2019t ignore the textual evidence that seems to support the late date for the Exodus. It comes down to one primary text, which I think is easily dealt with when compared with the weight of the testimony supporting the earlier date.\n\nIt is argued that [Exodus 1:11](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/exo\/1\/11\/s_51011) tells us the Israelites built the city of Raamses, and the argument is that this is referring to a city which was built by the Pharaoh Rameses II, who reigned in the 13th century B.C. But this is not solid ground to stand on. There is no need in the text to identify the city the Israelites built with the city Rameses II built, except for similarity in name. Remember that the Israelites settled in the land of Rameses in [Genesis 47:11](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/gen\/47\/11\/s_47011), which was long centuries before Rameses II\u2019s time.\n\nThere is another problem with identifying the city of Rameses in Exodus 1:11 with Rameses II, having to do with the date of Moses\u2019 birth. Moses was 80 when he led the people of Israel out of Egypt. If the late date of 1290-1270 is true, then Moses would have been born between 1370-1350 B.C., and the book of Exodus depicts the people of Israel building the city of Raamses **at or before the time of Moses\u2019 birth**. This would mean they built the city named after the Pharaoh Rameses II **at least 35 years before he was Pharaoh**, since his reign did not begin until 1279 B.C.\n\n## Archaeological Evidence Confirming 1446 B.C.\nThis brings us to the archaeological evidence for the early date. Since we have seen that the evidence provided by Scripture itself is overwhelmingly in favor of the early date, our concern is to see if the archaeological evidence supports or contradicts our conclusions. This is not a matter of finding proof for what the Bible says, but of finding corroborative evidence.\n\nThat is exactly what we do find, and one of the places archaeologist have looked is the ancient cities that Joshua conquered in Canaan. If the evidence supports a conquest of Canaan around 1400 B.C., then that would lend credence to an Exodus in the 1440\u2019s. Samples of pottery from that time period suggest that another culture moved into the area about that time.  Since the Israelites only destroyed a select few cities, and simply took over the rest ([Joshua 11:13](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/jos\/11\/13\/s_198013)), including all of their goods, this would make sense. Jericho and Hazor, two cities which the Israelites are said to have burned, ([Joshua 6:24](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/jos\/6\/24\/s_193024) \u0026 [11:13](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/jos\/11\/13\/s_198013)) show evidence of having been burned during that time period.  Hazor is especially notable, since there is evidence it was destroyed two other times which could give evidence to the later date of the Exodus, which favors the last of the three, except that evidence shows that it was never rebuilt after this third burning, yet [Judges 4:2](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/jdg\/4\/2\/s_215002) tells us that the king of Canaan at the time reigned at Hazor. If Hazor was destroyed by the Israelites when Joshua conquered Canaan, and not rebuilt afterward, then the king of Canaan in Judges **could not have ruled from there**, unless he enjoyed ruling from an ash heap. However, if it was destroyed by the Israelites at an earlier date, rebuilt and then destroyed permanently much later, then that would allow for the account in Judges. \n\nAnother significant piece of archaeological evidence is the \u0022Israel Stele,\u0022 or \u0022Merneptah Stele.\u0022 This inscribed stone tablet includes the Pharaoh Merneptah\u0027s account of his conquests in the land of Canaan at the time, which is reliably placed as being written in 1208 B.C. In this account, he is depicted as defeating Israel during his conquests in Canaan saying, *\u0022Israel is laid waste, its seed is no more.\u0022* However, if Israel really did leave Egypt in the Exodus during Ramses II\u0027s reign, around 1270 B.C., they would not have even been in the land of Canaan yet, let alone have had time to establish a national presence in the land. As archaeologist and pastor [Bryan Windle notes](https:\/\/biblearchaeology.org\/research\/chronological-categories\/exodus-era\/4919-top-ten-discoveries-related-to-moses-and-the-exod):\n\n\u003E *It is doubtful that there would be enough time from 1270 BC to 1208 BC to account for the Exodus, the 40 years of wandering in the desert, the seven-year Conquest of Canaan, the settlement of the tribes in their territories, and the establishment of a national presence in the land, all before Merneptah claims to have conquered the Israelites. Merneptah\u2019s Canaanite campaign instead likely dates to the time of the Judges, when the nation of Israel was already settled in Canaan.*\n\nAnother thing we can look for as evidence for the dating of the Exodus is an economic decline in Egypt, having lost so much slave labor all at once. We do see exactly this after the reign of Amenhotep II in the 15th century B.C. Indeed, before the end of his reign, Amenhotep II led a raid into Palestine to bring an unusually large number of slaves back home to Egypt. His predecessor, Thutmose III had made similar raids in which he boasted of having taken 5,903 slaves on his first campaign. Amenhotep II had also made previous raids in which he said he took 2,214 captives home as slaves. In the raid he made after the early date of the Exodus, though, he claims to have taken **101,128 captives** as slaves. Why such a drastically higher number than other raids? It would make sense if he needed to replenish as many of the slaves lost in the Exodus as he could.\n\nTo round out the archaeological evidence, the Amarna letters should be mentioned. In these letters, the Canaanite kings request aid from the Egyptian pharaoh against a people they call the *\u2018Apiru*. Now, this was a term used to refer to a social class known as nomadic raiders and plunderers. Considering the amount of trouble these particular \u2018Apiru were causing the Canaanite kings of the time, and our suggested date of the early conquest of Canaan by the nomadic Israelites, it is possible that the Canaanites referred to the Israelites with this derogatory term. C. De Wit, who believed that most of the archaeological evidence favors the later date, nevertheless said that while there is no direct correlation between the \u2018Apiru and the Hebrews, the Hebrews could be identified as \u2018Apiru.  In other words, Hebrews may have been considered \u0027Apiru, but \u0027Apiru are not necessarily always and only Hebrews. This is probably the least substantial of all the archaeological evidence presented, but it does seem to fit with the time table, and by no means contradicts the biblical account.\n\nSo we see that the Biblical evidence weighs heavily on the side of those who would place the date of the Exodus at 1446 B.C. while the archaeological evidence certainly allows for this assertion and even provides some strong support. The late date, however, is hard-pressed to try and fit into the biblical timeline, despite some archaeological support it has on its side. Archaeology, with its heavy reliance on subjective interpretation, should not be used as the primary basis for the date of the Exodus, especially when we have the sure and steadfast testimony of the Word of God to guide us. \n\n\u003E *I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. You shall have no other gods before me. ([Genesis 20:2-3](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/exo\/20\/2-3\/s_70002))","image":"https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/a72900328bfceeaed2c89997ed52a978e8274a60f3f96e3782ad8d5d19e19678.webp","pubkey":"b7274d28e3e983bf720db4b4a12a31f5c7ef262320d05c25ec90489ac99628cb","kind":30023,"createdAt":"2025-11-09T08:44:48+00:00","publishedAt":"2025-11-01T18:57:02+00:00","topics":["longform","christian","reformed","catholic","seminary","exodus"],"url":"https:\/\/chat.decentnewsroom.com\/mag\/dikaios1517-s-blog-0252d3\/cat\/seminary-papers-dfc924\/d\/The-Date-of-the-Exodus-uf1q64"},{"title":"You Shall Not Do As They Do","slug":"You-Shall-Not-Do-As-They-Do-980cp6","summary":"It can be tempting to lump the ceremonial sacrifices of Israel into the same category as that of the pagan peoples of the ancient Near East that neighbored them. In this paper, I show that the sacrifices performed by Israel were very different from their ancient pagan counterparts.","content":"In this paper we will be looking at the types of sacrifices prescribed for the people of God in the book of Leviticus and taking special note of how they differed from the sacrifices performed by the pagan peoples of the time. Moreover, we will see how they point toward the messiah, who would be the ultimate sacrifice. My intention is to show that Israel was **distinct from her neighbors** both in the way the nation conducted their sacrificial offerings, and the reasons why they performed them.\n\nThe temptation when approaching the ritual sacrifices of the ancient Near East is to assume that all the people groups sacrificed to their various gods in basically the same way and for basically the same reasons. In reality, the sacrifices ordained by God for the people of Israel were specifically designed to be different from the peoples around them.\n\n## Pagans and Hebrews Compared\nThe first major difference between the pagans and the Israelites in their sacrificial rituals is the object of their worship. The pagans worshiped idols made by their own hands, which they believed were a physical conduit of sorts for their gods. They believed that through these totems they could access their gods, and that their gods in turn could access the physical realm. As J.I. Packer and M.C. Tenney point out, some believed that their sacrifices were *\u201ca meal for the god, the source of his nutrition.\u201d* The sacrifices were intended to placate said god in order to obtain some blessing or aid from him, whether that may be in the form of aid in battle, or a plentiful harvest.\n\nThe Hebrews, on the other hand, were forbidden from using idols in their worship. Just look at the fallout from them forming the golden calf in [Exodus 32:33-35](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/exo\/32\/33-35\/s_82033). \n\n\u003E *But the LORD said to Moses, \u0022Whoever has sinned against me, I will blot out of my book. But now go, lead the people to the place about which I have spoken to you; behold, my angel shall go before you. Nevertheless, in the day when I visit, I will visit their sin upon them.\u0022 Then **the LORD sent a plague on the people, because they made the calf**, the one that Aaron made.*\n\nThey were not just forbidden from making idols representing pagan gods, but even idols representing their own, true God, or any other heavenly or earthly being. ([Exodus 20:4-6](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/exo\/20\/4-6\/s_70004)) Their worship was ever and always to be directed toward the **invisible God** who had no need to be fed by mere men, but was rather **pleased by the aroma** of the earnest worship of his people.\n\n\u003E *And when the LORD **smelled the pleasing aroma**, the LORD said in his heart, \u0022I will never again curse the ground because of man, for the intention of man\u0027s heart is evil from his youth. Neither will I ever again strike down every living creature as I have done. ([Genesis 8:21](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/gen\/8\/21\/s_8021))*\n\n\u003E *And the priest shall throw the blood on the altar of the LORD at the entrance of the tent of meeting and burn the fat for **a pleasing aroma to the LORD**. ([Leviticus 17:6](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/lev\/17\/6\/s_107006))*\n\nWhile these offerings are customarily called \u0022food offerings,\u0022 there is no hint of any understanding that it was God who ate them. Rather, some were specifically instructed to be eaten by the priests ([Leviticus 7:6-7](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/lev\/7\/6-7\/s_97006)) or by the one who brought the offering ([Leviticus 7:11-21](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/lev\/7\/11-21\/s_97011)).\n\nThis leads to the second distinction between the Israelites and the pagans. Not only do they differ in the **objects** of their worship, but also the **method** of their worship. The pagans, as John MacArthur noted in his commentary, sacrificed *\u201chorses, dogs, pigs, camels, and donkeys,\u201d* animals that the Israelites were not permitted to sacrifice, and in the case of some, such as the Canaanites, they even sacrificed human children. Similarly, the drinking of blood was also a feature in much of pagan worship, which was expressly forbidden to the Israelites ([Leviticus 7:26](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/lev\/7\/26\/s_97026)).\n\nEven cases where they sacrificed the same types of animals, they were not allowed to do so in the same way. For instance, according to excavations at Ras Shamra, the Canaanites would boil a sacrificial young goat in milk. While the Hebrews also sacrificed goats, they were told, *\u201cYou shall not boil a young goat in its mother\u2019s milk\u201d* ([Exodus 23:19](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/exo\/23\/19\/s_73019)).\n\nFinally, the Israelites were distinct from the pagans in their sacrificial practices because they sacrificed for different **reasons**. The pagans sought to gain favor from their gods in order to coerce them into doing what they wanted. Believing that *\u201ctheir gods had human desires\u201d* (Packer and Tenney), they did whatever they believed might satisfy those desires in the hopes that the god receiving their sacrifices might be grateful enough to them to grant them whatever worldly blessing they sought. In other words, they thought they could put their gods in their debt, such that they would be **owed** that god\u0027s favor. Because of this, they were not particularly loyal to any single god, but readily exchanged one for another if they deemed it to be more able to supply what they wanted.\n\nBy contrast, the Israelites had no illusions that they could bribe their God into doing what they wanted. Rather, their sacrifices were geared toward **gratitude for what he had already done**, and toward **maintaining their ceremonial cleanness** so as to preserve his presence among them. Their God told them how he expected them to worship him, and in such a way as he might teach them about their greatest need\u2014forgiveness of sin by means of a substitute\u2014instead of the pagan practice of making demands of their gods in accordance with their own perceived needs. \n\n## The Foreshadowing of God\u2019s Plan\nThe way God taught his Old Testament people, time and again, was through pictures. God did not ordain any practice for his people without infusing it with meaning. We see this even in the way that marriage was ordained as a portrait of God\u2019s relationship with his people ([Ephesians 5:22-33](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/eph\/5\/22-33\/s_1102022)), and the sacrificial system was likewise a portrait of Christ as the perfect sacrifice to not merely make his people **ceremonially clean**, but **morally clean**.\n\nThis can be seen first through the substitutionary aspect of the sacrifice. The Israelites were instructed by God to place their hands upon the head of the sacrificial animal, which Raymond Dillard and Tremper Longman III point out was *\u201can act of identification between the worshiper and the victim before the latter is slaughtered.\u201d* The Israelites were taught to place their sins upon a substitute to highlight *\u201cthat salvation comes to the sinner who turns for forgiveness from his own efforts, who approaches God through the sacrificial death of a perfect substitute,\u201d* namely the coming Messiah.\n\nSecond, the manner of the sacrifice emphasized that the the substitute for their sins **had to die in their place, suffering the penalty due for their sins**. Because sin against God required the death of the offender ([Genesis 2:16-17](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/gen\/2\/16-17\/s_2016); [Ezekiel 18:20](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/eze\/18\/20\/s_820020); [Romans 6:23](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/rom\/6\/23\/s_1052023)), the only route to mercy was through a substitute bearing the punishment of death in the sinner\u2019s place. Or as Frank G\u00e6belein puts it:\n\n\u003E *\u201cGod provided this substitutionary way of dealing with sin to show humanity that they owed their lives as a forfeit for their sins against God.\u201d*\n\nThis principle is seen most clearly in the burnt, peace, sin, and trespass offerings, highlighting the theme of death by the sprinkling or pouring of the blood of the sacrifice around the altar ([Leviticus 1:5](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/lev\/1\/5\/s_91005); [3:2](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/lev\/3\/2\/s_93002); [4:6](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/lev\/4\/6\/s_94006); [5:9](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/lev\/5\/9\/s_95009)). This pointed directly to the manner in which the Messiah would redeem his people.\n\nFinally, the purpose of sacrifice was tied to maintaining, or else reconciling, the relationship between God and his people. The sacrifices required of the people of Israel upon the occasion of sin were, as noted by Andrew Hill and John Walton, *\u201cpurifying sacrifices [that] led to reconciliation with Yahweh and restored the penitent sinner to fellowship with other persons and God.\u201d* All of this pointing to Christ, who would reconcile his people to God, not merely ceremonially, but really, fully, and permanently. For this reason the author of the epistle to the Hebrews tells us that the Messiah fulfilled the things that the sacrifices were pointing to, *\u201cnot with the blood of goats and calves, but with his own blood\u2026 once for all, having obtained eternal redemption\u201d* ([Hebrews 9:12](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/heb\/9\/12\/s_1142012)).\n\nIt is because this perfect sacrifice has come that the sacrificial system of the Old Testament was done away with once and for all, with the very temple where those sacrifices had taken place being torn down in A.D. 70. Once Christ Jesus became the perfect substitute, imperfect ones were no longer needed.\n\n\u003E *He has no need, like those high priests, to offer sacrifices daily, first for his own sins and then for those of the people, since he did this once for all when he offered up himself. ([Hebrews 7:27](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/heb\/7\/27\/s_1140027))*","image":"https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/d5688412af72718803e1fc1538c057e1efc9a2145c40929ba3bd3e48ee87d0b6.webp","pubkey":"b7274d28e3e983bf720db4b4a12a31f5c7ef262320d05c25ec90489ac99628cb","kind":30023,"createdAt":"2025-11-09T22:58:12+00:00","publishedAt":"2025-11-08T00:37:13+00:00","topics":["longform","christian","reformed","catholic","seminary","leviticus","paganism","idolatry","sacrifice"],"url":"https:\/\/chat.decentnewsroom.com\/mag\/dikaios1517-s-blog-0252d3\/cat\/seminary-papers-dfc924\/d\/You-Shall-Not-Do-As-They-Do-980cp6"},{"title":"Jephthah\u0027s Vow","slug":"Jephthah-s-Vow-fo8867","summary":"Did Jephthah really commit such a heinous deed as literally sacrificing his daughter as a burnt offering? If he did, how then is he included in the heroes of the faith in Hebrews 11? Is there another biblically faithful interpretation, and does it get Jephthah off the hook? This paper explores the arguments put forward by scholars who hold to the figurative interpretation of this passage from Judges 11:29-40 and considers whether they are convincing.","content":"# **Introduction**  \nThe book of Judges contains many troubling examples of men, such as Samson, Gideon, and Barak, who were used by God for his purposes, yet simultaneously displayed deep character flaws and carried out grievous sins. Perhaps the judge in whom this pattern is displayed most vividly is Jephthah, who made his infamous vow to offer whatever or whomever came out from his door to greet him as a burnt offering when he returned home victorious over the Ammonites. *\u201cPerhaps\u201d* is a particularly appropriate word in this case, as there remains some amount of debate concerning the exact nature of his vow and how he followed through on it. While a surface-level reading of the text seems to indicate that he offered his daughter as a burnt offering to God, especially in certain English Bible versions, there are strong arguments made for an alternative view that he instead dedicated her to God, and therefore to life-long celibacy. This paper will examine the arguments made for both interpretations of the text of [Judges 11:29\u201340](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/jdg\/11\/29-40\/s_222029), and come to a conclusion concerning which one is faithful to the original author\u2019s intent.  \n\nOne might be inclined to ask, *\u201cCould there be a third option that is actually what the author meant?\u201d* It is highly improbable that a biblically faithful third option exists. The text does not leave any room for it. Keil and Delitzch mention that a third option has been put forward, namely that Jephthah *\u201cput his daughter to death in honour of the Lord according to the law of the ban, because human beings were not allowed to be offered up as burnt-sacrifices.\u201d*[^1]\u00a0However, this is referring to when something is set apart as *\u1e25\u0113rem* (\u05d7\u05b5\u05e8\u05b6\u05dd), often translated as *\u201cdevoted to destruction\u201d* ([Lev\u00a027:29](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/lev\/27\/29\/s_117029); [Deut\u00a07:26](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/deu\/7\/26\/s_160026); [Josh\u00a06:17\u201318](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/jos\/6\/17-18\/s_193017); [1\u00a0Sam\u00a015:21](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/1sa\/15\/21\/s_251021)), and when it is used in reference to a human being, it is applied only to enemies, criminals, and idolaters who ***must*** be put to death. This being the case, Keil and Delitzsch quickly dismiss this view as having no foundation in the text, since verse 39 states that *\u201che did to her his vow which he vowed,\u201d* which *\u201ccannot be understood in any other way than that he offered her as \u05e2\u05d5\u05dc\u05d4, i.e., as a burnt-offering\u201d* either in a literal or figurative sense, rather than as a thing *\u201cdevoted to destruction.\u201d*[^2]\u00a0  \n\n# **Burden of Proof**  \nAnother question arises regarding who has the burden of proof and therefore the obligation to provide convincing evidence for their understanding of the text. Should it be those who would charge one of God\u2019s chosen judges with pedicide, or those who would introduce a figurative sense into the text in order to clear his name?  \n\nIn my estimation, the burden of proof belongs to those who promote the figurative interpretation, since both sides of the debate agree that the plain reading of the text would support the literal interpretation,[^3] and since it was the universally accepted view of both Jewish and Christian scholars until the Middle Ages.[^4] As a principle, the most novel interpretation should always bear the burden of proof against the long established and generally held interpretation.  \n\nWith this in mind, the bulk of this paper will present the arguments commonly put forward in favor of the figurative interpretation and consider whether they are strong enough to justify abandoning the literal view, especially in light of the latter\u2019s counter-arguments.  \n\n# **The Expected Sacrifice**  \nThe first argument I want to explore is occasionally made by both sides of the debate, though for different reasons, indicating that it is not a deciding factor for either. This is the argument that Jephthah likely expected it would be an animal that came to meet him upon his victorious return, thus explaining his distress when it was his daughter instead.  \n\nThose holding to the figurative view will make this case when noting that the *waw* conjunction in verse 31 could be translated as \u201cshall be the LORD\u2019s, ***or*** I will offer it up for a burnt offering,\u201d instead of \u201c***and*** I will offer it up.\u201d This would make the vow have two possible outcomes based on whether it was an animal or a human who came to meet him: If a human, he or she would be dedicated to the Lord, and if an animal, it would be offered as a burnt offering.  \n\nThose holding to the literal interpretation will make this argument in an attempt to preserve Jephthah\u2019s good name, by explaining that he did not expect his vow bind him to make his daughter a human sacrifice. Instead, he expected it to be a goat, or some other clean animal, but the vow once made could not be broken, and so he was bound against his will to sacrifice his daughter.  \n\nNone of the commentators I reviewed held to this argument. They all agreed, though on opposite sides of the debate, that Jephthah expected to be met by a human member of his household, though perhaps by a servant rather than his daughter. Archer notes, *\u201cThe Hebrew text excludes the possibility of any animal serving as a candidate for this burnt offering since the phrase rendered \u2018whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house\u2019 is never used of an animal.\u201d*[^5] Howard, though holding the opposite view, agrees, *\u201cthe phrase \u2018to meet me\u2019 refers more appropriately to a human than to an animal.\u201d*[^6] In addition to this, Barrett notes that, *\u201cIf he had in mind that a sacrificial goat or lamb would be the first to greet him, the vow would be rather empty and void of gravity.\u201d*[^7] His counterparts, Davis and Whitcomb, agree, *\u201cIt is also extremely doubtful that Jephthah had an animal sacrifice in mind at all, for such a formal vow was quite unnecessary to bring an animal sacrifice after a great victory.\u201d*[^8]  \n\nGiven this consensus among opposing views, and the strength of their arguments, I conclude that neither interpretation would be bolstered by any presumption that Jephthah had an animal in mind. The figurative interpretation must therefore wrestle with Jephthah\u2019s intentional use of the term *\u201cburnt offering\u201d* in relation to a human being, and the literal interpretation must wrestle with what this implies about Jephthah\u2019s character, that he would knowingly vow to make a human sacrifice.  \n\n# **Jephthah\u2019s Character**  \nThe appeal to Jephthah\u2019s character, and to the fact that he was counted among the heroes of the faith in [Hebrews 11:32](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/heb\/11\/32\/s_1144032), is one of the strongest arguments the figurative view has in its favor. It is difficult to imagine that anyone who could follow through on so heinous as a deed slaying his own daughter, could ever have been included in a list of paragons of the faith; a point that is made with some force by both Barrett[^9] and Archer.[^10]  \n\nAdditional grounds are often listed to support the claim that Jephthah was a man of high moral character, including that he was obviously well acquainted with the Pentateuch, and *\u201chuman sacrifice was sternly and repeatedly forbidden by God in his law (see [Lev. 18:21](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/lev\/18\/21\/s_108021); [20:2\u20135](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/lev\/20\/2-5\/s_110002); [Deut. 12:31](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/deu\/12\/31\/s_165031); [18:10](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/deu\/18\/10\/s_171010)).\u201d*[^11] The evidence of Jephthah\u2019s knowledge of God\u2019s law is found earlier in the narrative, when he makes the history of Israel known to the king of the Ammonites ([Jdg 11:14\u201327](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/jdg\/11\/14-27\/s_222014)). The detail with which he rehearses how the tribes of Israel came to possess the land is suggestive of a competent knowledge of the writings of Moses, at least covering that period.  \n\nKeil and Delitzch also commend Jephthah for his attempt at a diplomatic resolution, saying, *\u201cHe does not take to the sword at once, but waits till his negotiations with the king of the Ammonites have been without effect.\u201d*[^12] This would be inconsistent with the idea that Jephthah was prone to making rash decisions, such as a vow to sacrifice *\u201cwhatever comes out from the doors of my house,\u201d* without due consideration of the consequences. This makes Howard\u2019s argument that Jephthah *\u201cwas rash, foolish, and sinned in doing this,\u201d*[^13] fall somewhat flat in the face of the same judge\u2019s prior restraint.  \n\nThere are at least four counter-arguments that may account for this incongruity:\n\n1. Even if Jephthah had a competent knowledge of God\u2019s law, it does not preclude him from disobeying it. While affirming that *\u201cJephthah was acquainted with the Pentateuch,\u201d* Davis and Whitcomb rightly separate knowledge from obedience, saying, *\u201cthat would by no means guarantee that he would not violate the law.\u201d*[^14]\n2. It is quite possible that Jephthah was not as acquainted with the law as might be supposed. The narrative attributes the messages sent to the Ammonite king to Jephthah because he had been made the leader of the Gileadites, and certainly must have approved the content of said messages. Yet, it is probable that they were not composed by Jephthah alone, but with the help of advisors. Additionally, if Jephthah had been so well acquainted with the law, he would have known that he could redeem his daughter from his vow under the terms of [Leviticus 27:1\u20138](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/lev\/27\/1-8\/s_117001). \n3. We know that heinous sin is not a bar from inclusion in the list of the faithful in Hebrews 11, which also includes David, though he committed adultery and murder, and Samson, though he broke every prohibition of his Nazarite vow and whose lust for foreign women was his downfall. As Daniel Block notes, *\u201cAlthough the view of the persons named is uncompromisingly favorable, strictly speaking the author of Hebrews makes no comment on their character.\u201d*[^15] Howard concurs, *\u201cIf the Scriptures were to withhold commendation of people because of some sinful aspects to their lives, no commendations would ever have been issued, except in the case of Jesus.\u201d*[^16]\n4. Jephthah\u2019s character may not have been as upright as some ascribe to him. According to verse 3, after being driven out of his home, Jephthah attracted to himself a band of *\u201cworthless men,\u201d* which many interpret as indicating he became the leader of a group of brigands or freebooters, as even Archer acknowledges to have been the case.[^17] He had apparently developed a reputation as a *\u201cmighty warrior\u201d* ([Jdg 11:1](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/jdg\/11\/1\/s_222001)) in this vocation, as that is the reason the Gileadites sought him out; not due to any high moral character he had displayed. Indeed, when they first approached Jephthah, he was unwilling to help them ([Jdg 11:6\u20137](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/jdg\/11\/6-7\/s_222006)), and only agreed after they offered to make him their leader ([Jdg 11:8\u20139](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/jdg\/11\/8-9\/s_222008)).  \n\nThe nature of Jephthah\u2019s vow, regardless of whether he intended it to be figurative or literal, also calls his character into question. It cannot be contested that Jephthah framed his vow as a *quid pro quo* to secure God\u2019s assistance in battle against the Ammonites by means of promising some form of sacrifice. Manipulation of a deity for one\u2019s benefit by means of sacrifice was ***entirely foreign*** to the sacrificial system established by God in Leviticus, but sacrifice used to purchase a deity\u2019s favor was a regular feature in the heathen religions of Jephthah\u2019s day, which we know had corrupted the worship of God\u2019s people ([Jdg 10:6](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/jdg\/10\/6\/s_221006)). For this reason, Block concludes that in his vow, *\u201cJephthah was neither rash nor pious (in the orthodox Yahwistic sense)\u2014he was outrightly pagan. Rather than a sign of spiritual immaturity and folly, like Gideon\u0027s ephod, his vow arose from a syncretistic religious environment.\u201d*[^18] \n\n# **God\u2019s Respect for the Vow**  \nAnother strong argument in favor of the figurative interpretation is the assertion that God apparently respected the terms of Jephthah\u2019s vow by giving him decisive victory over the Ammonites ([Jdg 11:32\u201333](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/jdg\/11\/32-33\/s_222032)), something he certainly would not have done if he knew it would result in Jephthah killing his daughter. Archer makes this case forcefully, saying, *\u201cThe [literal] understanding of the event involves an intolerable theological difficulty, for it hopelessly compromises the integrity of God Himself.\u201d*[^19]\u00a0Indeed, the commentators I reviewed made no counter-argument against this point, and though Davis and Whitcomb acknowledged the argument, they did not answer it, saying, *\u201cSpace will not permit a discussion of this particular problem, but it is one which the student should consider.\u201d*[^20]  \n\nI will here endeavor to offer a counter-argument without the benefit of wiser men who have gone before me. It is not clear that God was specifically honoring Jephthah\u2019s vow when he gave the judge victory over the Ammonites. The narrative suggests that Jephthah ***already had God\u2019s support*** before he made the vow in verses 30\u201331, as evidenced by God placing his Spirit upon Jephthah in verse 29. Indeed, following the pattern of apostasy, judgment, repentance, and rescue in the rest of the book of Judges, God had already determined to deliver his covenant people from the hand of the Ammonites when they cried out to him ([Jdg 10:10](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/jdg\/10\/10\/s_221010)), and then repented and *\u201cput away the foreign gods from among them\u201d* ([Jdg 10:16](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/jdg\/10\/16\/s_221016)). From that point through the end of chapter 11, the narrative is simply explaining how God providentially accomplished their deliverance. Thus, Jephthah\u2019s vow was not only sinful, but superfluous. God was not honoring Jephthah\u2019s vow when he gave victory over the Ammonites, but honoring his covenant with Israel. The question should not be, *\u201cWhy would God honor a sinful vow to offer a human sacrifice?\u201d* but rather, *\u201cWould God have been right withhold deliverance from his covenant people who had cried out to him and repented, just to keep Jephthah from following through on his sinful vow?\u201d*  \n\n# **Emphasis on Virginity**  \nThe proponents of the figurative view consistently make the argument that the emphasis of the text is on Jephthah\u2019s daughter\u2019s virginity, and not on her impending death. Archer notes this emphasis appearing in both verses 37\u201338 and verse 39, and he argues that this indicates she was not literally sacrificed as a burnt offering, but was instead *\u201cset apart for tabernacle service\u201d* where *\u201cshe would never become a mother\u201d* due to the requirement she remain a virgin.[^21] Barrett makes a similar case, saying, *\u201cIt is a bit odd that if the daughter was sentenced to a sacrificial death, her virginity was the reason for her mourning rather than the loss of life that loomed over her.\u201d*[^22] This would explain why her period of mourning was conducted in seclusion in the mountains ([Jdg\u00a011:37](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/jdg\/11\/37\/s_222037)), rather than spending her final days with her family, as would have been more fitting if she was anticipating her death.  \n\nThere are two significant difficulties with this argument. First, service at the tabernacle, or service to God of any other kind, is never mentioned in the text surrounding Jephthah\u2019s vow or its fulfillment. It appears the entire idea that Jephthah\u2019s daughter was dedicated to this form of service is based ***solely*** upon the repeated mention of her virginity, which is then connected with the passing mention of women serving at the tabernacle in [Exodus 38:8](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/exo\/38\/8\/s_88008) and [1\u00a0Samuel\u00a02:22](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/1sa\/2\/22\/s_238022). There is a distinct lack of detail given in those passages concerning the nature of this tabernacle service. As Davis and Whitcomb point out, *\u201cThe women referred to in [1\u00a0Samuel\u00a02:22](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/1sa\/2\/22\/s_238022) and [Exodus 38:8](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/exo\/38\/8\/s_88008) are not clearly associated with the tabernacle as permanent residents. Also, there is no evidence in this text, or any other text in the Old Testament, of an ancient equivalent of the modern-day nun.\u201d*[^23] In fact, the women serving at the tabernacle in [1\u00a0Samuel\u00a02:22](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/1sa\/2\/22\/s_238022) certainly were ***not*** virgins, because Eli was there rebuking his sons for fornicating with them. Matthew Henry goes further in his criticism of this argument, saying, *\u201cWe do not find any law or custom in all the Old Testament which suggests in the slightest that being unmarried was a religious act, or that any man or woman was looked on as more holy, more of the Lord\u2019s, or more dedicated to him for being unmarried. It was not a part of the Law either of the priests or of the Nazarites.\u201d*[^24] Rather, the Nazarite vows only required abstaining from the fruit of the vine, from touching a dead body, and from cutting one\u2019s hair ([Num\u00a06:1\u20135](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/num\/6\/1-5\/s_123001)). There is no mention anywhere that celibacy was required for service at the tabernacle, even for the priests, who were expected to marry ([Lev 21:7, 13\u201315](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/lev\/21\/7-15\/s_111007)). This leaves the figurative view with no warrant whatsoever for supposing that the emphasis on her virginity indicates she was specially dedicated to the Lord.  \n\nHow then is this emphasis on her virginity to be explained? The chief problem for Jephthah, when his daughter was the one who came to meet him upon his return, is that she was his *\u201conly child; beside her he had neither son nor daughter\u201d* ([Jdg\u00a011:34](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/jdg\/11\/34\/s_222034)). Dying a virgin would mean Jephthah\u2019s line would be extinguished. Moreover, she would never know the joy of marital love, of childbearing, or the hope of all Israelite women: the possibility of bearing the promised seed of the woman who would crush the serpent\u2019s head ([Gen 3:15](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/gen\/3\/15\/s_3015)). The concept of mourning one\u2019s virginity when facing certain death is not uncommon, but spans across both time and culture. For instance, the Trojan princess Polyxena of Greek mythology is said to have lamented her virginity when she was to be sacrificed to the ghost of Achilles with these words: *\u201cNo bridegroom, no wedding song for me.\u201d*[^25]\u00a0This desire to fulfill the purpose of being a help-meet too a husband ([Gen 2:18](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/gen\/2\/18\/s_2018)), paired with the end of the family line, is ample reason for Jephthah\u2019s daughter to have been more concerned about her virginity than about her death.  \n\n# **Other Arguments**  \nThere are various lesser arguments brought to bear in support of the figurative interpretation. While they should not be considered decisive in determining the biblically faithful view, they also should not be left unstated or unanswered.  \n\nKeil and Delitzsch argue that Jephthah could not have literally offered his daughter as a burnt offering, because such sacrifices *\u201ccould only be offered upon the lawful altar at the tabernacle, or before the ark, through the medium of the Levitical priests.\u201d*[^26] However, if Jephthah was willing to violate the prohibition against human sacrifice, it should not surprise us that he was willing to violate the regulations concerning where and by whom such burnt offerings were permitted, particularly since he lived so far from the tabernacle in the land of Tob ([Jdg 11:3](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/jdg\/11\/3\/s_222003)).  \n\nBarrett contends that the daughters of Israel did not go out year-by-year to *\u201clament\u201d* Jephthah\u2019s daughter\u2019s death, as many English versions translate it, but to *\u201crehearse the situation.\u201d*[^27] The Hebrew word here is *tanah* (\u05ea\u05bc\u05b8\u05e0\u05b8\u05d4) which is found only in [Judges 11:40](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/jdg\/11\/40\/s_222040) and [Judges 5:11](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/jdg\/5\/11\/s_216011), where it is translated *\u201crepeat\u201d* in the ESV. Other English versions, such as the NASB, translate the word in [Judges 11:40](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/jdg\/11\/40\/s_222040) as *\u201ccommemorate\u201d* rather than *\u201clament,\u201d* which also fits with [Judges 5:11](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/jdg\/5\/11\/s_216011) and is probably closer to its meaning. This in no way settles the case, though, as it leaves room for either a celebratory or mournful commemoration of Jephthah\u2019s daughter by the daughters of Israel. Even so, the *\u201cyear by year\u201d* aspect of this commemoration is more fitting of a mourning motif.  \n\nBarrett also makes much of Jephthah\u2019s vow being *\u201chis first act immediately following his being empowered by the Holy Spirit.\u201d*[^28] However, Davis and Whitcomb push back, saying, *\u201cIt is true that the Spirit of the Lord came upon Jephthah, but we cannot be sure that this event immediately preceded the vow which he made unto the Lord, for it appears in verse 29 that there was a considerable amount of travel between that event and the time when he made a vow unto the Lord.\u201d*[^29] Jephthah\u2019s first act upon being empowered by the Holy Spirit was not his vow, but his passing through Gilead, Manasseh, Mizpah, and finally to the Ammonites ([Jdg\u00a011:29](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/jdg\/11\/29\/s_222029)). Block notes that this appears to parallel Gideon\u2019s sounding of the trumpet to rally troops to the cause in [Judges 6:34-35](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/jdg\/6\/34-35\/s_217034), which also immediately followed God placing his Spirit upon Gideon.[^30]  \n\nFinally, Keil and Delitzsch argue that, unlike the incident of Gideon making himself a golden ephod ([Jdg 8:22\u201327](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/jdg\/8\/22-27\/s_219022)), *\u201cwhich was only a very small offense in comparison,\u201d* but which the narrator of Judges clearly denounces as *\u201ca snare to Gideon and to his family\u201d* (Jdg 8:27), he never makes a similar denunciation of Jephthah\u2019s vow, but rather *\u201cdescribes the fulfilment of the vow in the words \u2018he did to her according to his vow,\u2019 in such a manner as to lead to the conclusion that he regarded the act itself as laudable and good.\u201d*[^31]\u00a0Yet, Block sees an implied denouncement of Jephthah\u2019s actions in the structure of the narrative itself, saying, *\u201cThe narrator\u0027s disposition is explicitly expressed by the location of the Jephthah cycle within the \u2018Book of Deliverers,\u2019\u201d* since it is placed *\u201cimmediately after the story of Abimelech [which] invites a negative comparison with this man.\u201d*[^32]  Moreover, the book of Judges as a whole depicts this period as a downward spiral of further and further Canaanization of both the people and their judges, of which Jephthah is among the last.\n\n# **Conclusion**  \nAfter examining the strongest arguments offered by those promoting the figurative interpretation of Jephthah\u2019s vow, it must be acknowledged that they are not entirely without merit. Neither is there any doubt that those holding to this view have a desire to be faithful to the biblical text. Nevertheless, the view is heavily reliant upon the assumption that virginity was a necessary aspect of dedication to the Lord, support for which can be found nowhere in Scripture. Additionally, there is no indication that *\u02bf\u014dl\u00e2* (\u05e2\u05b8\u05dc\u05b8\u05d4), *\u201cwhole burnt offering,\u201d* is ever used in anything but a literal sense. Barrett suggests precedent can be built upon other sacrificial language that  ***is*** used in a figurative sense,[^33] but examples of this are predominantly found in poetic and prophetic literature, where figurative language is expected ([Ps 50:14](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/psa\/50\/14\/s_528014), [51:17](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/psa\/51\/17\/s_529017), [141:2](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/psa\/141\/2\/s_619002); [Isa 66:20](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/isa\/66\/20\/s_745020)), and the example he gives of the Levites, set apart as a wave offering ([Num 8:13, 15\u201316](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/num\/8\/13-16\/s_125013)), makes sense given they were substitutes for the first-born of every tribe and their service would be *\u201cwaving\u201d* before the face of God at his tabernacle. A case can therefore be made that they were a ***literal*** wave offering, and not a figurative one.  \n\nFinally, Block points out that the Jephthah narrative has strong comparative connections to the account of Abraham, who was commanded by God to sacrifice his son Isaac ([Gen 22:1\u201319](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/gen\/22\/1-19\/s_22001)), and which lose their force if Jephthah\u2019s offering of his daughter was merely figurative.[^34] Just as Abraham was commanded to sacrifice his *\u201conly child,\u201d* Jephthah\u2019s daughter was also his *\u201conly child,\u201d* but he bound himself to offer her ***against*** the explicit command of God. In both cases their children were to be made *\u201cburnt offerings,\u201d* but in Abraham\u2019s case God intervened to provide a substitute, while in Jephthah\u2019s case God remained silent. The purpose of God\u2019s command was to prove Abraham\u2019s faith, while the purpose of Jephthah\u2019s vow was to purchase God\u2019s support; where God tested Abraham, Jephthah tested God. Abraham was called out of his home by God ([Gen 12:1](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/gen\/12\/1\/s_12001)), while Jephthah was cast out of his home by his brothers ([Jdg 11:2](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/jdg\/11\/2\/s_222002)). Isaac was Abraham\u2019s divinely named offspring ([Gen 17:19](https:\/\/www.blueletterbible.org\/esv\/gen\/17\/19\/s_17019)), while Jephthah\u2019s daughter remains nameless. These and other comparative parallels pointed out by Block offer significant support for the literal view.  \n\nIn summary, the arguments for the figurative view are not compelling enough to abandon the literal interpretation that Jephthah sinfully sacrificed his daughter as a burnt offering.  While Jephthah is counted as a man of faith, it is not on account of having made this sinful vow. He had faith that God alone could give him victory, but had been so influenced by the idolatrous practices of the pagans around him that he thought God\u0027s favor could be bought with promises of sacrifice. That\u0027s not how God operates. He is faithful to his covenant people because of the promises he made to them and to their fathers.\n  \n---  \n[^1]:\u00a0C.F. Keil and Franz Delitzsch, *Commentary on Judges*, (Montana: Kessinger Publishing Company, 2010), EPUB 14.61.  \n[^2]:\u00a0Keil and Delitzsch, *Commentary on Judges*, 14.61.  \n[^3]: Keil and Delitzsch admit that the surface reading of the text \u201c[appears] to favor the actual sacrifice so strongly, that Luther\u2019s marginal note, \u2018some affirm that he did not sacrifice her, but the text is clear enough,\u2019 is perpetually repeated with peculiar emphasis.\u201d (Keil and Delitzsch, *Commentary on Judges*, 14.61)  \n    Howard agrees, saying, \u201cThe plain meaning of the words is that Jephthah did exactly what he had vowed to do, namely, he offered his daughter as a burnt offering.\u201d See David M. Howard Jr., *An Introduction to the Old Testament Historical Books*, (Chicago: Moody Press, 1993), 134.  \n[^4]:\u00a0Keil and Delitzsch note that the view that Jephthah put his daughter to death \u201cwhich generally prevailed in the earlier times among both Rabbins and fathers of the church.\u201d (Keil and Delitzsch, *Commentary on Judges*, EPUB 14.61)  \n    Davis and Whitcomb agree, saying, \u201cUntil the Middle Ages the interpretation of this vow seems to have been fairly consistent. It was generally regarded as involving human sacrifice.\u201d See John J. Davis and John C. Whitcomb, *Israel: From Conquest to Exile*, (Winona Lake: Brethren Missionary Herald, 1989), 124.  \n[^5]: Gleason Archer Jr, *New International Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties*, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1982), EPUB 15.5.  \n[^6]: Howard, *Introduction to the Historical Books*, 134.  \n[^7]:\u00a0Michael P.V. Barrett, *Old Testament Introduction: Back to Basics*, (Grand Rapids: Reformation Heritage, 2025), EPUB 32.77.  \n[^8]:\u00a0Davis and Whitcomb, *Israel*, 126\u2013127.  \n[^9]: Barrett, *OT Introduction*, EPUB 32.76.  \n[^10]: Archer, *Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties*, EPUB 15.11.  \n[^11]:\u00a0Archer, *Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties*, EPUB 15.6.  \n[^12]:\u00a0Keil and Delitzsch, *Commentary on Judges*, EPUB 14.63.  \n[^13]:\u00a0Howard, *Introduction*\u00a0 *to the Historical Books*, 134\u2013135.  \n[^14]:\u00a0Davis and Whitcomb, *Israel*, 126.  \n[^15]:\u00a0Daniel I. Block, *The New American Commentary: Judges, Ruth*, Vol. 6, (Brentwood: B\u0026H Publishing, 1999), EPUB 12.465.  \n[^16]:\u00a0Howard, *Introduction*\u00a0 *to the Historical Books*, 134\u2013135.  \n[^17]:\u00a0Archer, *Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties*, EPUB 9.265.  \n[^18]:\u00a0Block, *Judges, Ruth*, EPUB 21.144.  \n[^19]:\u00a0Archer, Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, EPUB 15.9.  \n[^20]:\u00a0Davis and Whitcomb, *Israel*, 128.  \n[^21]:\u00a0Archer, *Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties*, EPUB 15.10.  \n[^22]:\u00a0Barrett, *OT Introduction*, EPUB 32.78.  \n[^23]:\u00a0Davis and Whitcomb, *Israel*, 126.  \n[^24]:\u00a0Matthew Henry, *The New Matthew Henry Commentary*, ed. Martin H. Manser, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), EPUB 2.23.1.1.2.  \n[^25]:\u00a0Euripides, *Hecuba*, ed. W. Arrowsmith and H. Golder, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1991), 42.  \n[^26]:\u00a0Keil and Delitzsch, *Commentary on Judges*, EPUB 14.65.  \n[^27]:\u00a0Barrett, *OT Introduction*, EPUB 32.78.  \n[^28]:\u00a0Barrett, *OT Introduction*, EPUB 32.76.  \n[^29]:\u00a0Davis and Whitcomb, Israel, 126.  \n[^30]:\u00a0Block, *Judges, Ruth*, EPUB 21.140.  \n[^31]:\u00a0Keil and Delitzsch, *Commentary on Judges*, EPUB 14.65.  \n[^32]:\u00a0Block, *Judges, Ruth*, EPUB 22.92.  \n[^33]:\u00a0Barrett, *OT Introduction*, EPUB 32.77.  \n[^34]:\u00a0Block, *Judges, Ruth*, EPUB 22.32\u201322.73.  ","image":"https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/18d42620afae1c3bf36754b8e3800e96946e2c74a04036307e9f104aea95217a.png","pubkey":"b7274d28e3e983bf720db4b4a12a31f5c7ef262320d05c25ec90489ac99628cb","kind":30023,"createdAt":"2026-05-07T02:56:07+00:00","publishedAt":"2026-05-06T17:41:31+00:00","topics":["longform","christian","reformed","catholic","seminary","judges","jephthah"],"url":"https:\/\/chat.decentnewsroom.com\/mag\/dikaios1517-s-blog-0252d3\/cat\/seminary-papers-dfc924\/d\/Jephthah-s-Vow-fo8867"}]},{"slug":"nostr-guides-9c9347","title":"Nostr Guides","summary":"Guides to help others use Nostr more effectively.","image":null,"url":"https:\/\/chat.decentnewsroom.com\/mag\/dikaios1517-s-blog-0252d3\/cat\/nostr-guides-9c9347","articleCount":4,"articles":[{"title":"The Android Elite Setup - Part 1","slug":"1747347381030","summary":"Android users are fortunate to have some of the best Nostr applications and tools at their disposal that simply aren\u0027t available to those on iOS, and which synergize well with each other to create a whole experience that is greater than the sum of its parts.\n\nThis tutorial series will cover installation and setup of six such applications, four of which were dubbed by Derek Ross as \u0022The Grand Slam of Excellence\u0022 on Android.","content":"A few months ago, a nostrich was switching from iOS to Android and asked for suggestions for #Nostr apps to try out. nostr:npub18ams6ewn5aj2n3wt2qawzglx9mr4nzksxhvrdc4gzrecw7n5tvjqctp424 offered the following as his response:\n\nnostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzq0mhp4ja8fmy48zuk5p6uy37vtk8tx9dqdwcxm32sy8nsaa8gkeyqydhwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnwdaehgunsd3jkyuewvdhk6tcpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerpd46hxtnfduhszythwden5te0dehhxarj9emkjmn99uqzpwwts6n28eyvjpcwvu5akkwu85eg92dpvgw7cgmpe4czdadqvnv984rl0z\n\nYes. #Android users are fortunate to have some powerful Nostr apps and tools at our disposal that simply have no comparison over on the iOS side. However, a tool is only as good as the knowledge of the user, who must have an understanding of how best to wield it for maximum effect. This fact was immediately evidenced by replies to Derek asking, \u0022What is the use case for Citrine?\u0022 and \u0022This is the first time I\u0027m hearing about Citrine and Pokey. Can you give me links for those?\u0022\n\nWell, consider this tutorial your Nostr starter-kit for Android. We\u0027ll go over installing and setting up Amber, Amethyst, Citrine, and Pokey, and as a bonus we\u0027ll be throwing in the Zapstore and Coinos to boot. We will assume no previous experience with any of the above, so if you already know all about one or more of these apps, you can feel free to skip that tutorial.\n\n## So many apps...\nYou may be wondering, \u0022Why do I need so many apps to use Nostr?\u0022 That\u0027s perfectly valid, and the honest answer is, you don\u0027t. You can absolutely just install a Nostr client from the Play Store, have it generate your Nostr identity for you, and stick with the default relays already set up in that app. You don\u0027t even need to connect a wallet, if you don\u0027t want to. However, you won\u0027t experience all that Nostr has to offer if that is as far as you go, any more than you would experience all that Italian cuisine has to offer if you only ever try spaghetti.\n\nNostr is not just one app that does one thing, like Facebook, Twitter, or TikTok. It is an entire ecosystem of applications that are all built on top of a protocol that allows them to be interoperable. This set of tools will help you make the most out of that interoperability, which you will never get from any of the big-tech social platforms. It will provide a solid foundation for you to build upon as you explore more and more of what Nostr has to offer.\n\nSo what do these apps do?\n\n![Amber Signer](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/173a606bd91594402d4b91da7765e9d6787858cdc990f4e638b206d504138cd6.png)\n\nFundamental to everything you do on Nostr is the need to cryptographically sign with your private key. If you aren\u0027t sure what that means, just imagine that you had to enter your password every time you hit the \u0022like\u0022 button on Facebook, or every time you commented on the latest dank meme. That would get old really fast, right? That\u0027s effectively what Nostr requires, but on steroids.\n\nTo keep this from being something you manually have to do every 5 seconds when you post a note, react to someone else\u0027s note, or add a comment, Nostr apps can store your private key and use it to sign behind the scenes for you. This is very convenient, but it means you are trusting that app to not do anything with your private key that you don\u0027t want it to. You are also trusting it to not leak your private key, because anyone who gets their hands on it will be able to post as you, see your private messages, and effectively ***be you*** on Nostr. The more apps you give your private key to, the greater your risk that it will eventually be compromised.\n\nEnter #Amber, an application that will store your private key in only ***one*** app, and all other compatible Nostr apps can communicate with it to request a signature, without giving any of those other apps access to your private key.\n\nMost Nostr apps for Android now support logging in and signing with Amber, and you can even use it to log into apps on other devices, such as some of the web apps you use on your PC. It\u0027s an incredible tool given to us by nostr:npub1w4uswmv6lu9yel005l3qgheysmr7tk9uvwluddznju3nuxalevvs2d0jr5, and only available for Android users. Those on iPhone are incredibly jealous that they don\u0027t have anything comparable, yet.\n\n![Citrine Relay](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/cce4feee8325893f38acca417b369f14bd946243769c2bfbae2be2e1a8bdbfbb.png)\n\nSpeaking of nostr:npub1w4uswmv6lu9yel005l3qgheysmr7tk9uvwluddznju3nuxalevvs2d0jr5, the next app is also one of his making.\n\nAll Nostr data is stored on relays, which are very simple servers that Nostr apps read notes from and write notes to. In most forms of social media, it can be a pain to get your own data out to keep a backup. That\u0027s not the case on Nostr. Anyone can run their own relay, either for the sake of backing up their personal notes, or for others to post their notes to, as well.\n\nSince Nostr notes take up very little space, you can actually run a relay on your phone. I have been on Nostr for almost 2 and a half years, and I have 25,000+ notes of various kinds on my relay, and a backup of that full database is just 24MB on my phone\u0027s storage.\n\nHaving that backup can save your bacon if you try out a new Nostr client and it doesn\u0027t find your existing follow list for some reason, so it writes a new one and you suddenly lose all of the people you were following. Just pop into your #Citrine relay, confirm it still has your correct follow list or import it from a recent backup, then have Citrine restore it. Done.\n\nAdditionally, there are things you may want to only save to a relay you control, such as draft messages that you aren\u0027t ready to post publicly, or eCash tokens, which can actually be saved to Nostr relays now. Citrine can also be used with Amber for signing into certain Nostr applications that use a relay to communicate with Amber.\n\nIf you are really adventurous, you can also expose Citrine over Tor to be used as an outbox relay, or used for peer-to-peer private messaging, but that is far more involved than the scope of this tutorial series.\n\n![Amethyst Client](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/81bc29cfc09fdef70f3a93fedc8c28e6a0ff2810617161d3d8257ec6c5ee494a.png)\n\nYou can\u0027t get far in Nostr without a solid and reliable client to interact with. #Amethyst is the client we will be using for this tutorial because there simply isn\u0027t another Android client that comes close, so far. Moreover, it can be a great client for new users to get started on, and yet it has a ton of features for power-users to take advantage of as well.\n\nThere are plenty of other good clients to check out over time, such as Coracle, YakiHonne, Voyage, Olas, Flotilla and others, but I keep coming back to Amethyst, and by the time you finish this tutorial, I think you\u0027ll see why. nostr:npub1gcxzte5zlkncx26j68ez60fzkvtkm9e0vrwdcvsjakxf9mu9qewqlfnj5z and others who have contributed to Amethyst have really built something special in this client, and it just keeps improving with every update that\u0027s shipped.\n\n![Pokey Notifications](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/b1dd0a590f8a4ca4cd8c12babbe43352c35fbdc8989f3bc0ef40be6585360a77.png)\n\nMost social media apps have some form of push notifications, and some Nostr apps do, too. Where the issue comes in is that Nostr apps are all interoperable. If you have more than one application, you\u0027re going to have both of them notifying you. Nostr users are known for having five or more Nostr apps that they use regularly. If all of them had notifications turned on, it would be a nightmare. So maybe you limit it to only one of your Nostr apps having notifications turned on, but then you are pretty well locked-in to opening that particular app when you tap on the notification.\n\n#Pokey, by nostr:npub1v3tgrwwsv7c6xckyhm5dmluc05jxd4yeqhpxew87chn0kua0tjzqc6yvjh, solves this issue, allowing you to turn notifications off for all of your Nostr apps, and have Pokey handle them all for you. Then, when you tap on a Pokey notification, you can choose which Nostr app to open it in.\n\nPokey also gives you control over the types of things you want to be notified about. Maybe you don\u0027t care about reactions, and you just want to know about zaps, comments, and direct messages. Pokey has you covered. It even supports multiple accounts, so you can get notifications for all the npubs you control.\n\n![Coinos Wallet](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/baf1fdac7463748d213153f7fb05543913b49551d70054c7bb5a6c0226c2ec53.png)\n\nOne of the most unique and incredibly fun aspects of Nostr is the ability to send and receive #zaps. Instead of merely giving someone a \ud83d\udc4d\ufe0f when you like something they said, you can actually send them real value in the form of sats, small portions of a Bitcoin. There is nothing quite like the experience of receiving your first zap and realizing that someone valued what you said enough to send you a small amount (and sometimes not so small) of #Bitcoin, the best money mankind has ever known.\n\nTo be able to have that experience, though, you are going to need a wallet that can send and receive zaps, and preferably one that is easy to connect to Nostr applications. My current preference for that is Alby Hub, but not everyone wants to deal with all that comes along with running a #Lightning node. That being the case, I have opted to use nostr:npub1h2qfjpnxau9k7ja9qkf50043xfpfy8j5v60xsqryef64y44puwnq28w8ch for this tutorial, because they offer one of the easiest wallets to set up, and it connects to most Nostr apps by just copy\/pasting a connection string from the settings in the wallet into the settings in your Nostr app of choice.\n\nAdditionally, even though #Coinos is a custodial wallet, you ***can*** have it automatically transfer any #sats over a specified threshold to a separate wallet, allowing you to mitigate the custodial risk without needing to keep an eye on your balance and make the transfer manually.\n\n![The Zapstore](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/04f23d89e90689637f32919df754e3be6c2d43ddb3b280268d01b604b6e10cd6.png)\n\nMost of us on Android are used to getting all of our mobile apps from one souce: the Google Play Store. That\u0027s not possible for this tutorial series. Only one of the apps mentioned above is available in Google\u0027s permissioned playground. However, on Android we have the advantage of being able to install whatever we want on our device, just by popping into our settings and flipping a toggle. Indeed, thumbing our noses at big-tech is at the heart of the Nostr ethos, so why would we make ourselves beholden to Google for installing Nostr apps?\n\nThe nostr:npub10r8xl2njyepcw2zwv3a6dyufj4e4ajx86hz6v4ehu4gnpupxxp7stjt2p8 is an alternative app store made by nostr:npub1wf4pufsucer5va8g9p0rj5dnhvfeh6d8w0g6eayaep5dhps6rsgs43dgh9 as a resource for all sorts of open-source apps, but especially Nostr apps. What is more, you can log in with Amber, connect a wallet like Coinos, and support the developers of your favorite Nostr apps directly within the #Zapstore by zapping their app releases.\n\nOne of the biggest features of the Zapstore is the fact that developers can cryptographically sign their app releases using their Nostr keys, so you know that the app you are downloading is the one they actually released and hasn\u0027t been altered in any way. The Zapstore will warn you and won\u0027t let you install the app if the signature is invalid.\n\n## Getting Started\n\nSince the Zapstore will be the source we use for installing most of the other apps mentioned, we will start with installing the Zapstore.\n\nWe will then use the Zapstore to install Amber and set it up with our Nostr account, either by creating a new private key, or by importing one we already have. We\u0027ll also use it to log into the Zapstore.\n\nNext, we will install Amethyst from the Zapstore and log into it via Amber.\n\nAfter this, we will install Citrine from the Zapstore and add it as a local relay on Amethyst.\n\nBecause we want to be able to send and receive zaps, we will set up a wallet with CoinOS and connect it to Amethyst and the Zapstore using Nostr Wallet Connect.\n\nFinally, we will install Pokey using the Zapstore, log into it using Amber, and set up the notifications we want to receive.\n\nBy the time you are done with this series, you will have a great head-start on your Nostr journey compared to muddling through it all on your own. Moreover, you will have developed a familiarity with how things generally work on Nostr that can be applied to other apps you try out in the future.\n\nContinue to [Part 2: The Zapstore](https:\/\/dikaios1517.npub.pro\/post\/1747347813710\/). Nostr Link: nostr:naddr1qvzqqqr4gupzpde8f55w86vrhaeqmd955y4rraw8aunzxgxstsj7eyzgntyev2xtqydhwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnzwf5kw6r5vfhkcapwdejhgtcqp5cnwdphxv6rwwp3xvmnzvqgty5au","image":"https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/9edb8954cb5b14e2b3d03031e8f4783e02138686774d3aa97e0c68dba7fe66b6.jpg","pubkey":"b7274d28e3e983bf720db4b4a12a31f5c7ef262320d05c25ec90489ac99628cb","kind":30023,"createdAt":"2025-05-27T07:07:33+00:00","publishedAt":"2025-05-15T22:21:16+00:00","topics":["nostr","android","amber","citrine","amethyst","pokey","zaps","bitcoin","lightning","coinos","sats","zapstore"],"url":"https:\/\/chat.decentnewsroom.com\/mag\/dikaios1517-s-blog-0252d3\/cat\/nostr-guides-9c9347\/d\/1747347381030"},{"title":"The Android Elite Setup - Part 3: Amber Signer","slug":"1747347967629","summary":"Amber is one of the most important tools for Nostr users on Android. This tutorial covers setup for both new and existing nostriches, and logging into Nostr apps that have Amber sign-in support. It does not cover remote signing\/bunker login, as this will be covered in a separate, stand-alone tutorial.","content":"Your identity is important to you, right? While impersonation can be seen in some senses as a form of flattery, we all would prefer to be the only person capable of representing ourselves online, unless we intentionally delegate that privilege to someone else and maintain the ability to revoke it.\n\n#Amber does all of that for you in the context of #Nostr. It minimizes the possibility of your private key being compromized by acting as the only app with access to it, while all other Nostr apps send requests to Amber when they need something signed. This even allows you to give someone temporary authority to post as you without giving them your private key, and you retain the authority to revoke their permissions at any time.\n\nnostr:npub1w4uswmv6lu9yel005l3qgheysmr7tk9uvwluddznju3nuxalevvs2d0jr5 has provided Android users with an incredibly powerful tool in Amber, and he continues to improve its functionality and ease of use. Indeed, there is not currently a comparative app available for iOS users. For the time being, this superpower is exclusive to Android.\n\n## Installation\nOpen up the Zapstore app that you installed in the previous stage of this tutorial series.\n\nVery likely, Amber will be listed in the app collection section of the home page. If it is not, just search for \u0022Amber\u0022 in the search bar.\n\n![Amber Search](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/9921cb37aaca16dee8aba0b2c36d8c8090fefd9b7a9e04b410ec8afc572d42b1.jpg)\n\nOpening the app\u0027s page in the Zapstore shows that the release is signed by the developer. You can also see who has added this app to one of their collections and who has supported this app with sats by zapping the release.\n\n![Amber App Page](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/da590a443389ab7df661d59777a2f04114b4eba0e327de8e690f36425c14b151.jpg)\n\nTap \u0022Install\u0022 and you will be prompted to confirm you are sure you want to install Amber.\n\n![Install Confirmation](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/eaccded2676009fcb1f47d0bcf8d3f624fc1a1b1f010cc0cd775518e4e1efca0.jpg)\n\nHelpfully, you are informed that several other users follow this developer on Nostr. If you have been on Nostr a while, you will likely recognize these gentlemen as other Nostr developers, one of them being the original creator of the protocol.\n\nYou can choose to never have Zapstore ask for confirmation again with apps developed by nostr:npub1w4uswmv6lu9yel005l3qgheysmr7tk9uvwluddznju3nuxalevvs2d0jr5, and since we have another of his apps to install later in this tutorial series, I recommend you toggle this on. Then tap on \u0022Trust greenart7c3 and install app.\u0022\n\nJust like when you installed the Zapstore from their GitHub, you will be prompted to allow the Zapstore to install apps, since Android considers it an \u0022unknown source.\u0022\n\n![Allow Zapstore Install](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/36907b42e51f0dfc47df8e4e19078391ae4438b855b1e8b6fdfacf24ea0e0d21.jpg)\n\nOnce you toggle this on and use the back button to get back to the Zapstore, Amber will begin downloading and then present a prompt to install the app. Once installed, you will see a prompt that installation was a success and you can now open the app.\n\n![Installed Successfully](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/4162b4a31cb4490f5f8fdb2ca037230e9b94ad87060838c70719585c7b77deec.jpg)\n\nFrom here, how you proceed will depend on whether you need to set up a new Nostr identity or use Amber with an existing private key you already have set up. The next section will cover setting up a new Nostr identity with Amber. Skip to the section titled \u0022Existing Nostrich\u0022 if you already have an nsec that you would like to use with Amber.\n\n## New Nostrich\nUpon opening the application, you will be presented with the option to use an existing private key or create a new Nostr account. Nostr doesn\u0027t really have \u0022accounts\u0022 in the traditional sense of the term. Accounts are a relic of permissioned systems. What you have on Nostr are keys, but Amber uses the \u0022account\u0022 term because it is a more familiar concept, though it is technically inaccurate.\n\n![Amber Add Account](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/097d6f5235508a54d67559cf086b45750e56453ec7ce33e0c4b400856ee2989e.jpg)\n\nChoose \u0022Create a new Nostr account\u0022 and you will be presented with a screen telling you that your Nostr account is ready. Yes, it was really that easy. No email, no real name, no date of birth, and no annoying capcha. Just \u0022Create a new account\u0022 and you\u0027re done.\n\n![New Account Ready](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/40dc91bdc832b1549bed5cec33a00fd89dcf57a880ca7a2305f26ebdc4b19e3e.jpg)\n\nThe app presents you with your public key. This is like an address that can be used to find your posts on Nostr. It is 100% unique to you, and no one else can post a note that lists this npub as the author, because they won\u0027t have the corresponding private key. You don\u0027t need to remember your npub, though. You\u0027ll be able to readily copy it from any Nostr app you use whenever you need it.\n\nYou will also be prompted to add a nickname. This is just for use within Amber, since you can set up multiple profiles within the app. You can use anything you want here, as it is just so you can tell which profile is which when switching between them in Amber.\n\nOnce you\u0027ve set your nickname, tap on \u0022Continue.\u0022\n\nThe next screen will ask you what Amber\u0027s default signing policy should be.\n\n![Permissions](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/069f72b177da2fef6f18d1ac3f8126d36b72bde4fa530780036b863f50389935.jpg)\n\nThe default is to approve basic actions, referring to things that are common for Nostr clients to request a signature for, like following another user, liking a post, making a new post, or replying. If you are more concerned about what Amber might be signing for on your behalf, you can tell it to require manual approval for each app.\n\nOnce you\u0027ve made your decision, tap \u0022Finish.\u0022 You will also be able to change this selection in the app settings at any time.\n\nWith this setup out of the way, you are now presented with the main \u0022Applications\u0022 page of the app.\n\n![Applications Screen New](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/33fa15e28444f1774a71c51418a6c1a944a5a605416e58a23aae482380f50bb9.jpg)\n\nAt the top, you have a notification encouraging you to create a backup. Let\u0027s get that taken care of now by tapping on the notification and skipping down to the heading titled \u0022Backing Up Your Identity\u0022 in this tutorial.\n\n## Existing Nostrich\nUpon opening the application, you will be presented with the option to use your private key or create a new Nostr account. Choose the former.\n\n![Amber Add Account](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/81ef57c63ea75608d26b754a9504db6f0fab256029cad2b8955dbb002ee7dc4e.jpg)\n\nThe next screen will require you to paste your private key.\n\n![Paste Nsec](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/fb24a89f6932e041d7d108ee75ca14709bf88945f7e968e40833e404156d79ea.jpg)\n\nYou will need to obtain this from whatever Nostr app you used to create your profile, or any other Nostr app that you pasted your nsec into in the past. Typically you can find it in the app settings and there will be a section mentioning your keys where you can copy your nsec. For instance, in Primal go to Settings \u003E Keys \u003E Copy private key, and on Amethyst open the side panel by tapping on your profile picture in the top-left, then Backup Keys \u003E Copy my secret key.\n\nAfter pasting your nsec into Amber, tap \u0022Next.\u0022\n\n![Signing Policy](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/069f72b177da2fef6f18d1ac3f8126d36b72bde4fa530780036b863f50389935.jpg)\n\nAmber will give you a couple options for a default signing policy. The default is to approve basic actions, referring to things that are common for Nostr clients to request a signature for, like following another user, liking a post, making a new post, or replying. If you are more concerned about what Amber might be signing for on your behalf, you can tell it to require manual approval for each app.\n\nOnce you\u0027ve made your decision, tap \u0022Finish.\u0022 You will also be able to change this selection in the app settings at any time.\n\n![Applications Screen Existing](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/78199e59da71a548243ba32f0934efa3a233fbedbb32f28d6e1f29b8ee1ac895.jpg)\n\nWith this setup out of the way, you are now presented with the main \u0022Applications\u0022 page of the app. You have nothing here yet, since you haven\u0027t used Amber to log into any Nostr apps, but this will be where all of the apps you have connected with Amber will be listed, in the order of the most recently used at the top.\n\nBefore we go and use Amber to log into an app, though, let\u0027s make sure we\u0027ve created a backup of our private key. You pasted your nsec into Amber, so you could just save that somewhere safe, but Amber gives you a few other options as well. To find them, you\u0027ll need to tap the cog icon at the bottom of the screen to access the settings, then select \u0022Backup Keys.\u0022\n\n![Cog Icon](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/852eabdc0304bdd571a6052f9d6b5a7f6233eb31f1e056ce970846cf7649a93f.jpg)\n\n![Backup Keys](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/9d4a7a139751aeb34275817cc0415e258d8f60854fbc3db5ca5654236675d6e1.jpg)\n\n## Backing Up Your Identity\n\n![Backup Options](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/57449f931041ce6d79be49a6af9d9ff81a1987f6334b11acb247ad8f43aaf36b.jpg)\n\nYou\u0027ll notice that Amber has a few different options for backing up your private key that it can generate.\n\nFirst, it can give you seed words, just like a Bitcoin seed. If you choose that option, you\u0027ll be presented with 12 words you can record somewhere safe. To recover your Nostr private key, you just have to type those words into a compatible application, such as Amber.\n\nThe next option is to just copy the secret\/private key in its standard form as an \u0022nsec.\u0022 This is the least secure way to store it, but is also the most convenient, since it is simple to paste into another signer application. If you want to be able to log in on a desktop web app, the browser extension Nostr signers won\u0027t necessarily support entering your 12 word seed phrase, but they absolutely will support pasting in your nsec.\n\nYou can also display a QR code of your private key. This can be scanned by Amber signer on another device for easily transferring your private key to other devices you want to use it on. Say you have an Android tablet in addition to your phone, for instance. Just make sure you only use this function where you can be certain that no one will be able to get a photograph of that QR code. Once someone else has your nsec, there is no way to recover it. You have to start all over on Nostr. Not a big deal at this point in your journey if you just created a Nostr account, but if you have been using Nostr for a while and have built up a decent amount of reputation, it could be much more costly to start over again.\n\nThe next options are a bit more secure, because they require a password that will be used to encrypt your private key. This has some distinct advantages, and a couple disadvantages to be aware of. Using a password to encrypt your private key will give you what is called an ncryptsec, and if this is leaked somehow, whoever has it will not necessarily have access to post as you on Nostr, the way they would if your nsec had been leaked. At least, not so long as they don\u0027t also have your password. This means you can store your ncryptsec in multiple locations without much fear that it will be compromised, so long as the password you used to encrypt it was a strong and unique one, and it isn\u0027t stored in the same location. Some Nostr apps support an ncryptsec for login directly, meaning that you have the option to paste in your ncryptsec and then just log in with the password you used to encrypt it from there on out. However, now you will need to keep track of both your ncryptsec and your password, storing both of them safely and separately. Additionally, most Nostr clients and signer applications do not support using an ncryptsec, so you will need to convert it back to a standard nsec (or copy the nsec from Amber) to use those apps.\n\nThe QR option using an ncryptsec is actually quite useful, though, and I would go this route when trying to set up Amber on additional devices, since anyone possibly getting a picture of the QR code is still not going to be able to do anything with it, unless they also get the password you used to encrypt it.\n\nAll of the above options will require you to enter the PIN you set up for your device, or biometric authentication, just as an additional precaution before displaying your private key to you.\n\nAs for what \u0022store it in a safe place\u0022 looks like, I highly recommend a self-hosted password manager, such as Vaultwarden+Bitwarden or KeePass. If you really want to get wild, you can store it on a hardware signing device, or on a steel seed plate.\n\n## Additional Settings\n\n![Settings](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/72a1696de0447ff4e86af85d7cd8212fe501f70e089369ca68c996e5ea2950d7.jpg)\n\nAmber has some additional settings you may want to take advantage of. First off, if you don\u0027t want just anyone who has access to your phone to be able to approve signing requests, you can go into the Security settings add a PIN or enable biometrics for signing requests. If you enable the PIN, it will be separate from the PIN you use to access your phone, so you can let someone else use your phone, like your child who is always begging to play a mobile game you have installed, without worrying that they might have access to your Nostr key to post on Amethyst.\n\nAmber also has some relay settings. First are the \u0022Active relays\u0022 which are used for signing requests sent to Amber remotely from Nostr web apps. This is what enables you to use Amber on your phone to log into Nostr applications on your desktop web browser, such as [Jumble.social](https:\/\/jumble.social\/), [Coracle.social](https:\/\/coracle.social\/), or [Nostrudel.ninja](https:\/\/nostrudel.ninja\/), eliminating your need to use any other application to store your nsec whatsoever. You can leave this relay as the default, or you can add other relays you want to use for signing requests. Just be aware, not all relays will accept the notes that are used for Nostr signing requests, so make sure that the relay you want to use does so. In fact, Amber will make sure of this for you when you type in the relay address.\n\nThe next type of relays that you can configure in Amber are the \u0022Default profile relays.\u0022 These are used for reading your profile information. If you already had a Nostr identity that you imported to Amber, you probably noticed it loaded your profile picture and display name, setting the latter as your nickname in Amber. These relays are where Amber got that information from. The defaults are relay.nostr.band and purplepag.es. The reason for this is because they are aggregators that look for Nostr profiles that have been saved to other relays on the network and pull them in. Therefore, no matter what other relay you may save your profile to, Amber will likely be able to find it on one of those two relays as well. If you have a relay you know you will be saving your Nostr profiles to, you may want to add it to this list.\n\nYou can also set up Amber to be paired with Orbot for signing over Tor using relays that are only accessible via the Tor network. That is an advanced feature, though, and well beyond the scope of this tutorial.\n\nFinally, you can update the default signing policy. Maybe after using Amber for a while, you\u0027ve decided that the choice you made before was too strict or too lenient. You can change it to suit your needs.\n\n## Zapstore Login\nNow that you are all set up with Amber, let\u0027s get you signed into your first Nostr app by going back to the Zapstore.\n\n![Zapstore Home](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/d4e14b9da0fff439973f15573656378647fc02a67cc68e5cb065b8fed4c27f2c.jpg)\n\nFrom the app\u0027s home screen, tap on the user icon in the upper left of the screen. This will open a side panel with not much on it except the option to \u0022sign in.\u0022 Go ahead and tap on it.\n\nYou will be presented with the option to either sign in with Amber, or to paste your npub. However, if you do the latter, you will only have read access, meaning you cannot zap any of the app releases. There are other features planned for the Zapstore that may also require you to be signed in with write access, so go ahead and choose to log in with Amber.\n\n![Zapstore Login Options](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/b4884f362c242f9aa16318a99196d22d94522fc23a58fa97070baa7789ebd599.jpg)\n\nYour phone should automatically switch to Amber to approve the sign-in request.\n\n![Login Approval](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/7da6942a5067e550c418b3b336ea1715268883b4365af9731d389fade8c4bf24.jpg)\n\nYou can choose to only approve basic actions for Zapstore, require it to manually approve every time, or you can tell it that you \u0022fully trust this application.\u0022 Only choose the latter option with apps you have used for a while and they have never asked you to sign for anything suspicious. For the time being, I suggest you use the \u0022Approve basic actions\u0022 option and tap \u0022Grant Permissions.\u0022\n\nYour phone will switch back to the Zapstore and will show that you are now signed in. Congratulations! From here on out, logging into most Nostr applications will be as easy as tapping on \u0022Log in with Amber\u0022 and approving the request.\n\n![Zapstore Logged In](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/4901f683b32396d7efddc601fcf59771a97632678e41825db4a6a93a29b41cf3.jpg)\n\nIf you set up a new profile, it will just show a truncated version of your npub rather than the nickname you set up earlier. That\u0027s fine. You\u0027ll have an opportunity to update your Nostr profile in the next tutorial in this series and ensure that it is spread far and wide in the network, so the Zapstore will easily find it.\n\nThat concludes the tutorial for Amber. While we have not covered using Amber to log into Nostr web apps, that is outside the scope of this series, and I will cover it in an upcoming tutorial regarding using Amber\u0027s remote signer options in detail. \n\nSince you\u0027re already hanging out in the Zapstore, you may as well stick around, because we will be using it right out the gate in the next part of this series: Amethyst Installation and Setup. (Coming Soon)","image":"https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/7e427e8cb0359afe9334dfc9f08b265a959f6ac2c0d47864dcc76bf6f6c8286a.jpg","pubkey":"b7274d28e3e983bf720db4b4a12a31f5c7ef262320d05c25ec90489ac99628cb","kind":30023,"createdAt":"2025-05-28T00:59:49+00:00","publishedAt":"2025-05-27T22:27:59+00:00","topics":["nostr","android","amber","citrine","amethyst","pokey","zaps","bitcoin","lightning","coinos","sats","zapstore"],"url":"https:\/\/chat.decentnewsroom.com\/mag\/dikaios1517-s-blog-0252d3\/cat\/nostr-guides-9c9347\/d\/1747347967629"},{"title":"The Android Elite Setup - Part 2: The Zapstore","slug":"1747347813710","summary":"In this second installment of The Android Elite Setup tutorial series, we will cover installing the Zapstore from the GitHub page and browsing for apps you may be interested in trying out.","content":"In this second installment of The Android Elite Setup tutorial series, we will cover installing the nostr:npub10r8xl2njyepcw2zwv3a6dyufj4e4ajx86hz6v4ehu4gnpupxxp7stjt2p8 on your #Android device and browsing for apps you may be interested in trying out.\n\nSince the #Zapstore is a direct competitor to the Google Play Store, you\u0027re not going to be able to find and install it from there like you may be used to with other apps. Instead, you will need to install it directly from the developer\u0027s GitHub page. This is not a complicated process, but it is outside the normal flow of searching on the Play Store, tapping install, and you\u0027re done.\n\n## Installation\nFrom any web browser on your Android phone, navigate to the [Zapstore GitHub Releases page](https:\/\/github.com\/zapstore\/zapstore\/releases) and the most recent version will be listed at the top of the page. The .apk file for you to download and install will be listed in the \u0022Assets.\u0022\n\n![Releases Page](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/3a73c2e5a37fc62ff05e102fedbef7e8a9306d94ff5cd5e8b1a362b0cb47167c.jpg)\n\nTap the .apk to download it, and you should get a notification when the download has completed, with a prompt to open the file.\n\n![Download Notification](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/574257b8d2ba787cd284db7f0f76c8091f8b8c8257a5c24943b277b84fe8787e.jpg)\n\nYou will likely be presented with a prompt warning you that your phone currently isn\u0027t allowed to install applications from \u0022unknown sources.\u0022 Anywhere other than the Play Store is considered an \u0022unknown source\u0022 by default. However, you can manually allow installation from unknown sources in the settings, which the prompt gives you the option to do.\n\nIn the settings page that opens, toggle it to allow installation from this source, and you should be prompted to install the application. If you aren\u0027t, simply go to your web browser\u0027s downloads and tap on the .apk file again, or go into your file browser app and you should find the .apk in your Downloads folder.\n\n![Unknown Source Toggle and Install Prompt](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/802a04271f1b04ef84ce8fe4ede62d828609df51f52b2c76efbe44382a41a230.jpg)\n\nIf the application doesn\u0027t open automatically after install, you will find it in your app drawer.\n\n![App in App Drawer](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/0f38fd36d61446255b9b7eb2c540f02f41c352fe830b5cf47f2b61dc7826a9e2.jpg)\n\n## Home Page\nRight at the top of the home page in the Zapstore is the search bar. You can use it to find a specific app you know is available in the Zapstore.\n\n![Search Bar](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/548407c09e692cfc180010d28341fd38bad4520e71503387f6ea5d90af143aa9.jpg)\n\nThere are quite a lot of open source apps available, and more being added all the time. Most are added by the Zapstore developer, nostr:npub1wf4pufsucer5va8g9p0rj5dnhvfeh6d8w0g6eayaep5dhps6rsgs43dgh9, but some are added by the app developers themselves, especially Nostr apps. All of the applications we will be installing through the Zapstore have been added by their developers and are cryptographically signed, so you know that what you download is what the developer actually released.\n\nThe next section is for app discovery. There are curated app collections to peruse for ideas about what you may want to install. As you can see, all of the other apps we will be installing are listed in nostr:npub1wf4pufsucer5va8g9p0rj5dnhvfeh6d8w0g6eayaep5dhps6rsgs43dgh9\u0027s \u0022Nostr\u0022 collection.\n\n![App Collections](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/2ca2a86bb0291aba81cffff2dd334ab311c676755533a91de9e872b4029ee88a.jpg)\n\nIn future releases of the Zapstore, users will be able to create their own app collections.\n\nThe last section of the home page is a chronological list of the latest releases. This includes both new apps added to the Zapstore and recently updated apps. The list of recent releases on its own can be a great resource for discovering apps you may not have heard of before.\n\n![Latest Releases](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/f8497ab83b1f982e36db51f80266ab1e2061cfca173af89187da23414bf7ec8b.jpg)\n\n## Installed Apps\nThe next page of the app, accessed by the icon in the bottom-center of the screen that looks like a clock with an arrow circling it, shows all apps you have installed that are available in the Zapstore. It\u0027s also where you will find apps you have previously installed that are ready to be updated. This page is pretty sparse on my test profile, since I only have the Zapstore itself installed, so here is a look at it on my main profile:\n\n![Installed Apps](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/1f4ae8b8a14e3b8cbdc005f0595309f186711a0bd4ba7d2f0a12a179662aa3b8.jpg)\n\nThe \u0022Disabled Apps\u0022 at the top are usually applications that were installed via the Play Store or some other means, but are also available in the Zapstore. You may be surprised to see that some of the apps you already have installed on your device are also available on the Zapstore. However, to manage their updates though the Zapstore, you would need to uninstall the app and reinstall it from the Zapstore instead. I only recommend doing this for applications that are added to the Zapstore by their developers, or you may encounter a significant delay between a new update being released for the app and when that update is available on the Zapstore.\n\nTap on one of your apps in the list to see whether the app is added by the developer, or by the Zapstore. This takes you to the application\u0027s page, and you may see a warning at the top if the app was not installed through the Zapstore.\n\n![Different Certificate Warning](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/d456afe80c264f597a9711ad16309d4a653ef99f78e342d56c144085384cf7c0.jpg)\n\nScroll down the page a bit and you will see who signed the release that is available on the Zapstore.\n\n![Primal App Signature](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/a1b835d5670e1fc9eadcda39e902dd8aa8d74781395701656f686807f6a0e4d2.jpg)\n\nIn the case of Primal, even though the developer ***is*** on Nostr, they are not signing their own releases to the Zapstore yet. This means there will likely be a delay between Primal releasing an update and that update being available on the Zapstore.\n\n## Settings\nThe last page of the app is the settings page, found by tapping the cog at the bottom right.\n\n![Settings Page](https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/abc0347a33744f1d888c7b8db9e364c8826f4d38a931509ffdb40c203bfc3ef8.jpg)\n\nHere you can send the Zapstore developer feedback directly (if you are logged in), connect a Lightning wallet using Nostr Wallet Connect, delete your local cache, and view some system information.\n\nWe will be adding a connection to our nostr:npub1h2qfjpnxau9k7ja9qkf50043xfpfy8j5v60xsqryef64y44puwnq28w8ch wallet in part 5 of this tutorial series.\n\nFor the time being, we are all set with the Zapstore and ready for the next stage of our journey.\n\nContinue to [Part 3: Amber Signer](https:\/\/dikaios1517.npub.pro\/post\/1747347967629\/). Nostr link: nostr:naddr1qqxnzde5xuengdeexcmnvv3eqgstwf6d9r37nqalwgxmfd9p9gclt3l0yc3jp5zuyhkfqjy6extz3jcrqsqqqa28qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyv9kh2uewd9hj7qg6waehxw309aex2mrp0yhxyunfva58gcn0d36zumn9wss80nug","image":"https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/5a7361892f2e2c6f5fda2ef9bc4c50e4b59890142f781f3f4d7200ec5905e917.jpg","pubkey":"b7274d28e3e983bf720db4b4a12a31f5c7ef262320d05c25ec90489ac99628cb","kind":30023,"createdAt":"2025-05-28T01:11:43+00:00","publishedAt":"2025-05-15T22:25:50+00:00","topics":["nostr","android","amber","citrine","amethyst","pokey","zaps","bitcoin","lightning","coinos","sats","zapstore"],"url":"https:\/\/chat.decentnewsroom.com\/mag\/dikaios1517-s-blog-0252d3\/cat\/nostr-guides-9c9347\/d\/1747347813710"},{"title":"The No-Spam Relay Setup","slug":"1750204679597","summary":"Tired of seeing spam in your replies? You\u0027re not alone. Here is my recommended relay setup to give spam the boot, both for Haven and non-Haven users.","content":"Tired of dealing with spam? You\u0027re not alone. Here is a guide to picking relays that are good at keeping spam out, without sacrificing your own reach.\n\nIf you just want to skip to the relay suggestions, scroll to the sections titled \u0022The Setup.\u0022 There is one for users of Haven and one for those who aren\u0027t running their own relay at all.\n\n## Client Selection\n\u0022Wait, I thought this was a guide about selecting relays, not clients.\u0022\n\nYes, it is. But what relays you choose doesn\u0027t matter if you are using a client that does not read from your chosen relays, or that hard-codes problematic relays as fallbacks in addition to the relays you selected in an effort to \u0022help you.\u0022\n\nAdditionally, some clients have settings that can help make up for poor relay selection using client-side spam mitigation methods. This includes clients like [Coracle](https:\/\/coracle.social\/), [Damus](https:\/\/damus.io\/), [Amethyst](https:\/\/www.amethyst.social\/), and [Nostur](https:\/\/apps.apple.com\/us\/app\/nostur-nostr-client\/id1672780508). Some may do so via web-of-trust (WoT) filters, so you only see notes and replies from those within your broader social circle, while others will automatically hide notes that those you follow have reported as spam or scams.\n\n[Coracle](https:\/\/coracle.social\/) is a great client for dealing with spam, so long as you have gone into your \u0022Content Settings\u0022 and set the \u0022Minimum WoT Score\u0022 to at least 1. This means you will only see posts from users followed by at least one of the npubs you follow.\n\n[Damus](https:\/\/apps.apple.com\/us\/app\/damus\/id1628663131) also employs WoT, but it appears to be just for notifications, so you only receive notifications for those you follow and those they follow, or \u0022friends of friends,\u0022 as Damus put\u0027s it. This can be accessed by toggling it on in your notification tab at the top right, where you see the icon of the person with a check mark.\n\n[Nostur](https:\/\/apps.apple.com\/us\/app\/nostur-nostr-client\/id1672780508) has WoT filters for downloading media turned on by default and also uses WoT to filter spam by default. Even better, if you use multiple npubs, you can filter using the WoT of your main npub, while logged into your alternate npubs.\n\n[Jumble](https:\/\/jumble.social\/) recently added WoT filtering specifically for interactions. When you load a thread in Jumble, a shield icon will appear near the top right of the page, in line with the tabs for Replies and Quotes. Toggle it on, so the shield is green with a check mark and you will only see replies from those you follow and those your follows follow.\n\n[Amethyst](https:\/\/play.google.com\/store\/apps\/details?id=com.vitorpamplona.amethyst) does not yet have WoT based filtering built into the client, but it can hide notes that have been reported as spam, scams, impersonation, etc, by those you follow. This is not the most effective way to combat spam, though, since most users aren\u0027t often using the report feature. Hopefully we will see WoT filtering as an option in a future update.\n\n[Primal](https:\/\/primal.net\/)\u0027s apps do not read from any of your selected relays, but rather from their caching server alone. That said, they have a spam filter that is turned on by default so you see relatively little spam, regardless of which relays you use.\n\nFor this guide, I recommend using Amethyst for updating your relays, if you possibly can. The reason for this is because Amethyst has the most robust settings for being able to update ***all*** of your various relay lists.\n\n## Relay Lists Explained\nContrary to what you might think, there is not a single relay list for each user that is stored in a single note, because you can have relays that are used for only one purpose, and not for any other. Each of those purposes for which you might use a particular relay has its own list. That way a Nostr client can tell which relays you want to use for each separate purpose.\n\nWhile this can make things less approachable for the user, it also means users don\u0027t have to rely on clients to hard code appropriate relays for each of these use-cases. If your client doesn\u0027t let you edit each of these relay lists, chances are they are using a set of relays for that purpose that the developer chose instead of you.\n\n### Public Outbox\/Inbox Relays\nThis list of relays is found in your kind 10002 note, if you have one. If you don\u0027t have one, there won\u0027t be any relays shown for these categories in Amethyst. Other clients may fallback to showing you relays from a different list.\n\nThis list is intended to be used for Nostr clients to implement the \u0022outbox model\u0022 to fetch notes from whatever relays they were written to, even if they aren\u0027t in the requesting user\u0027s relay list. This solves the issue of needing to share relays with those you follow in order to see their notes, allowing Nostr to remain decentralized.\n\nYour \u0022outbox\u0022 relays are the ones you write to, or at least the ones you want other users to know that you write to. When you add a relay here, it\u0027s like advertising to everyone, \u0022If you want to see my public-facing notes, look for them on these relays.\u0022\n\nYour \u0022inbox\u0022 relays are the ones you read from. On this part of your list you are advertising, \u0022If you want me to see your replies, comments, reactions, and zaps, then send them to these relays.\u0022 These relays are massively important for reducing the amount of spam you see. If you have relays listed here that anyone can post to for free, you will almost certainly see a lot of spam in your replies, unless you have WoT filters turned on in your Nostr client.\n\n### DM Inbox Relays\nThis list is found in your kind 10050 note, if you have one, and is a list of relays where you want others to send you Direct Messages. Ideally, you will use a relay or two here that supports AUTH, so that it will only allow direct messages to be retrieved by the user they are addressed to.\n\nWhat happens if you put a relay in here that doesn\u0027t support AUTH, so it allows anyone to retrieve your DMs? Not much. Anyone who wants to will just be able to see the encrypted content of the message, and depending on the type of DM they will see the identity of the receiver and perhaps also the sender. They will not be able to decrypt what was actually said in the messages. It\u0027s better if they cannot retrieve even that much, though.\n\n### Private Relays\nThis list is found in your 10013 note, if you have one. This is intended for listing a relay that you run yourself and that only you can access, as it will house notes that other users should not be able to see at all, such as eCash tokens and draft notes.\n\n### Search Relays\nThis list is found in your 10007 note, if you have one, and is used to search for notes or users who may not be using the same relays as you. It is good to use relays here that aggregate notes from other relays automatically, and which support NIP-50 for search capability.\n\n### Local Relays\nThis section is for any relays running on the local device, such as Citrine. Because the relays themselves are local, this list is local, as well, and is not saved to any note kind that is saved to your relays like the above lists.\n\n### General Relays\nThis list is found in the \u0022content\u0022 tag of your kind 3 note, which is also where all of the npubs you follow are stored. As such, this note is commonly known as your follow list, rather than as a relay list. However, some clients, such as Amethyst, do make use of this list, and others use it as a fallback if they can\u0027t find a kind 10002.\n\nIf you are an Amethyst user most of the time, then I would recommend using this list to fill in any gaps that you may have from only writing to a few outbox relays, or only reading from a few inbox relays. It\u0027s a good place to put an aggregator relay, for instance, so long as that relay has good spam filtering, or a blastr relay, so those who don\u0027t yet use a client that supports the outbox model will still likely see your notes.\n\nIf you do not generally use Amethyst, then I would recommend you mirror your public inbox\/outbox relays here, in case you use a client that cannot find your 10002 list. Relays that are only for outbox should be added as write only, those only for inbox should be added as read only, and those you use for both outbox and inbox should be both read and write.\n\n## The Setup (Haven Users)\nIf you are running your own set of Haven relays, here is the setup I would recommend:\n\n### Public Outbox (kind 10002) \nMaximum of 4 relays.\n\n- Your Haven outbox relay (Remember to add some public relays to your blastr)\n- A paid relay of your choice (List available in \u0022Paid Relays\u0022 section)\n- A public relay, such as relay.damus.io, relay.primal.net, or nos.lol\n\n### Public Inbox (kind 10002)\nMaximum of 4 relays.\n\n- Your Haven inbox relay: [RelayAddress]\/inbox\n- A paid relay of your choice (can be same as outbox)\n- A WoT relay of your choice (available in \u0022WoT Relays\u0022 section)\n- Optional additional WoT relay\n\n### DM Inbox\nMaximum of 3 relays.\n\n- Your Haven \u0022chat\u0022 relay: [RelayAddress]\/chat\n- An alternate AUTH relay, such as inbox.nostr.wine(paid), nostr.land(paid), or auth.nostr1.com(free).\n\n### Private Relays\nMaximum of 3 relays.\n\n- Your Haven private relay: [RelayAddress]\/private\n\n### Search Relays\nMaximum of 4 relays.\n\n- wss:\/\/nostr.wine (even if you don\u0027t pay to write to it)\n- wss:\/\/relay.nostr.band\n- wss:\/\/relay.noswhere.com\n- wss:\/\/search.nos.today\n\n### Local Relays\n- Your Citrine IP:Port, if you run Citrine.\n\n### General Relays\nAssuming you use Amethyst on a regular basis, I recommend the following:\n\n- A couple additional WoT relays set to read ***only***.\n- An aggregator relay that has good spam filtering, such as wss:\/\/aggr.nostr.land(payment required) and\/or wss:\/\/nostr.wine(paid for write, but can read for free).\n\n## The Setup (Not Running Haven)\nIf you are not running your own set of Haven relays, I would highly recommend you learn how and do so. However, if you decide against it, here is a setup that should suffice:\n\n### Public Outbox (kind 10002) \nMaximum of 4 relays.\n\n- A paid relay of your choice (List available in \u0022Paid Relays\u0022 section)\n- A large public relay, such as relay.damus.io, relay.primal.net, or nos.lol\n- An additional public relay, but a smaller one, or one-time-payment paid relay.\n\n### Public Inbox (kind 10002)\nMaximum of 4 relays.\n\n- A paid relay of your choice (can be same as outbox)\n- wss:\/\/nostr.wine - Even if you don\u0027t pay for it, you can read from it.\n- A WoT relay of your choice (available in \u0022WoT Relays\u0022 section)\n- Optional additional WoT relay\n\n### DM Inbox\nMaximum of 3 relays.\n\n- A paid AUTH relay, such as inbox.nostr.wine or nostr.land.\n- An alternate AUTH relay, such as auth.nostr1.com(free).\n\n### Private Relays\nMaximum of 3 relays.\n\n- A private relay you run on your Umbrel or Start9, or that is hosted for you on [relay.tools](https:\/\/relay.tools\/).\n\n### Search Relays\nMaximum of 4 relays.\n\n- wss:\/\/nostr.wine (even if you don\u0027t pay to write to it)\n- wss:\/\/relay.nostr.band\n- wss:\/\/relay.noswhere.com\n- wss:\/\/search.nos.today\n\n### Local Relays\n- Your Citrine IP:Port, if you run Citrine.\n\n### General Relays\nAssuming you use Amethyst on a regular basis, I recommend the following:\n\n- A couple additional WoT relays set to ***read only***.\n- An aggregator relay that has good spam filtering, such as wss:\/\/aggr.nostr.land(payment required).\n- A blastr relay, such as filter.nostr.wine(paid), or...\n- A few additional public relays set to ***write only***.\n\n## Paid Relays\n\n- wss:\/\/nostr.land - [Details](https:\/\/nostr.land\/).\n- The Nostr.Wine suite of relays.\n    - wss:\/\/nostr.wine - [Details](https:\/\/nostr.wine\/)\n    - wss:\/\/filter.nostr.wine - [Details](https:\/\/docs.nostr.wine\/filter\/readme)\n    - wss:\/\/inbox.nostr.wine -[Details](https:\/\/docs.nostr.wine\/inbox\/readme)\n    - wss:\/\/cellar.nostr.wine - [Details](https:\/\/docs.nostr.wine\/cellar\/readme)\n\t- wss:\/\/creatr.nostr.wine - [Details](https:\/\/creatr.nostr.wine\/)\n- wss:\/\/jellyfish.land - [Details](https:\/\/jellyfish.land\/)\n\nThere are a ***ton*** of other paid relays out there that can be found via [nostr.watch](https:\/\/nostr.watch\/). The above listed options are simply the most popular with the largest feature-sets.\n\n## WoT Relays\nThese relays will only accept notes from npubs that are within the ***relay owner\u0027s*** WoT. I have provided a [Jumble.social](https:\/\/jumble.social\/) address for each relay so you can peruse the feed for yourself to see if you want to use it.\n\n- wss:\/\/wot.utxo.one - [Jumble Feed](https:\/\/jumble.social\/relays\/wss%3A%2F%2Fwot.utxo.one%2F)\n- wss:\/\/nostrelites.org - [Jumble Feed](https:\/\/jumble.social\/relays\/wss%3A%2F%2Fnostrelites.org%2F)\n- wss:\/\/wot.nostr.party - [Jumble Feed](https:\/\/jumble.social\/relays\/wss%3A%2F%2Fwot.nostr.party%2F)\n- wss:\/\/wot.sovbit.host - [Jumble Feed](https:\/\/jumble.social\/relays\/wss%3A%2F%2Fwot.sovbit.host%2F)\n- wss:\/\/wot.girino.org - [Jumble Feed](https:\/\/jumble.social\/relays\/wss%3A%2F%2Fwot.girino.org%2F)\n- wss:\/\/relay.lnau.net - [Jumble Feed](https:\/\/jumble.social\/relays\/wss%3A%2F%2Frelay.lnau.net%2F)\n- wss:\/\/wot.siamstr.com - [Jumble Feed](https:\/\/jumble.social\/relays\/wss%3A%2F%2Fwot.siamstr.com%2F)\n- wss:\/\/relay.lexingtonbitcoin.org - [Jumble Feed](https:\/\/jumble.social\/relays\/wss%3A%2F%2Frelay.lexingtonbitcoin.org%2F)\n- wss:\/\/wot.azzamo.net - [Jumble Feed](https:\/\/jumble.social\/relays\/wss%3A%2F%2Fwot.azzamo.net%2F)\n- wss:\/\/wot.swarmstr.com - [Jumble Feed](https:\/\/jumble.social\/relays\/wss%3A%2F%2Fwot.swarmstr.com%2F)\n- wss:\/\/zap.watch - [Jumble Feed](https:\/\/jumble.social\/relays\/wss%3A%2F%2Fzap.watch%2F)\n- wss:\/\/satsage.xyz - [Jumble Feed](https:\/\/jumble.social\/relays\/wss%3A%2F%2Fsatsage.xyz%2F)\n- wss:\/\/wons.calva.dev - [Jumble Feed](https:\/\/jumble.social\/relays\/wss%3A%2F%2Fwons.calva.dev%2F)\n- wss:\/\/wot.zacoos.com - [Jumble Feed](https:\/\/jumble.social\/relays\/wss%3A%2F%2Fwot.zacoos.com%2F)\n- wss:\/\/wot.shaving.kiwi - [Jumble Feed](https:\/\/jumble.social\/relays\/wss%3A%2F%2Fwot.shaving.kiwi%2F)\n- wss:\/\/wot.tealeaf.dev - [Jumble Feed](https:\/\/jumble.social\/relays\/wss%3A%2F%2Fwot.tealeaf.dev%2F)\n- wss:\/\/wot.nostr.net - [Jumble Feed](https:\/\/jumble.social\/relays\/wss%3A%2F%2Fwot.nostr.net%2F)\n- wss:\/\/relay.goodmorningbitcoin.com - [Jumble Feed](https:\/\/jumble.social\/relays\/wss%3A%2F%2Frelay.goodmorningbitcoin.com%2F)\n- wss:\/\/wot.sudocarlos.com - [Jumble Feed](https:\/\/jumble.social\/relays\/wss%3A%2F%2Fwot.sudocarlos.com%2F)","image":"https:\/\/relay.brightbolt.net\/09cb785a5530958fedfd520295810e5d0b99b72689ad2dc1d9255bde80704a9a.jpg","pubkey":"b7274d28e3e983bf720db4b4a12a31f5c7ef262320d05c25ec90489ac99628cb","kind":30023,"createdAt":"2025-06-18T18:21:04+00:00","publishedAt":"2025-06-18T00:00:59+00:00","topics":["spam","nostr","relays","clients"],"url":"https:\/\/chat.decentnewsroom.com\/mag\/dikaios1517-s-blog-0252d3\/cat\/nostr-guides-9c9347\/d\/1750204679597"}]}],"chapters":[],"stats":{"totalCategories":4,"totalArticles":13,"totalChapters":0}}