Results 161 - 180 of 300
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Truthfinder Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
161 | What was Jesus doing in the earth 3 days | Matthew | Truthfinder | 93647 | ||
Pastor Genn, I don't recall saying Jesus' spirit did nor would cease to exist. I wouldn’t say that (intentionally). :) Please show me, and I'll clarify it. Also, certainly Jesus existed before being sent to the earth by God, as John 4:34 says, "Jesus said to them: “My food is for me to do the will of him that sent me and to finish his work." Gen. 1:26, "Let us make man in our image." Col. 1:15 also tells me that Jesus is the image of the invisible God and through him (Jesus) all the universe was created billions of years ago. So indeed Jesus existed before he came to the earth and I am sorry if I left that impression. Truthfinder |
||||||
162 | What was Jesus doing in the earth 3 days | Matthew | Truthfinder | 93650 | ||
Hi Gracefull, Please show me were I am wrong. The text you site says,"18 Why, even Christ died once for all time concerning sins, a righteous [person] for unrighteous ones, that he might lead YOU to God, he being put to death in the flesh, but being made alive in the spirit. 19 In this [state] also he went his way and preached to the spirits in prison, 20 who had once been disobedient when the patience of God was waiting in Noah’s days, while the ark was being constructed, in which a few people, that is, eight souls, were carried safely through the water." "Being made alive in the spirit" was his resurrection 3 days after his death! The reason why those that personally knew him from sight while alive did not recognize him because he materialized (after his resurrection for 40 days) in various human forms and appeared to many. Spirit creatures are invisible to humans unless they materialize. While in his "spirit state" though, "preached or proclaimed" condemnation to the fallen spirt angels sometime later. Truthfinder |
||||||
163 | What was Jesus doing in the earth 3 days | Matthew | Truthfinder | 93699 | ||
Hi Hank, You ask me two questions. In addressing the second, we are in agreement in concluding that the Bible is not a science book. It teaches us about our God and his only-begotten-Son, Jesus. I have yet to come across the phrase you use, "God the Son" though. When I think of Jesus' godship and his relatonship as taught in the Holy Scriptures with his Father, I most certainly disagree with you. I thought this was established months ago. So I wonder why you ask that of me? But if I am mistaken and it was with another then I apologise and would be more than happy to share the scriptural basis for my conclusion. If not, then have a nice day. The Genesis account of creation allows for the earth to be billions of years old and does not limit each creative day to 24 hours. (Genesis 1:1, 5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31; 2:3, 4) An honest appraisal of the Bible shows that while it is not a science textbook, it certainly is not “sheer nonsense.” It is, in fact, in complete harmony with proven science. There are about forty known quasars (the active nucleus of a galaxy also known as quasi-stellar objects), the discovery of the most distant one of which was announced on May 17, 1965, and which is known as 3C-9. It is stated that this celestial object is so far away that it seems to be close to the beginning of universal time. “The light is so far away that the light from it began to journey to earth soon after the postulated birth of the universe.” The life of those quasars probably ended during the billions of years that were required for their light to reach our earth. Says the report: “The observed rate at which the universe is expanding suggests that it was born in a single point some thirteen billion years ago—roughly three times the age of the earth.”—New York Times, May 18, 1965, pages one and two. Since light of some stars is many billions of light-years from earth and their light is currently seen, then of course they were in existance billions of years ago. Truthfinder |
||||||
164 | What was Jesus doing in the earth 3 days | Matthew | Truthfinder | 94713 | ||
Hi Hank, As I already stated, "the Bible is not a science workbook", thus science questions are addressed from conclusions drawn from observation of creation. In reagards to the length of God's creative days, what conclusion have you drawn? Truthfinder |
||||||
165 | What was Jesus doing in the earth 3 days | Matthew | Truthfinder | 94739 | ||
Hi Hank, Great thoughts. I like them and hope you do not think that I am guilty of doing those things. I too, have no problem with God's ability to have accomplished what he did in a literal 24 hour period. Let's give him credit for that. I desire to know from all evidence(his creation and scripture) what he has actually done. Truthfinder |
||||||
166 | Is Jesus Gods son? | Matt 3:17 | Truthfinder | 71023 | ||
At Isaiah 9:6 Jesus Christ is prophetically called ´El Gib·bohr', "Mighty God". When applying to Jehovah, ´Elo·him' is used as a plural of majesty, dignity, or excellence. (Ge 1:1) Regarding this, Aaron Ember wrote: "That the language of the O[ld] T[estament] has entirely given up the idea of plurality in . . . [´Elo·him'] (as applied to the God of Israel) is especially shown by the fact that it is almost invariably construed with a singular verbal predicate, and takes a singular adjectival attribute. . . . [´Elo·him'] must rather be explained as an intensive plural, denoting greatness and majesty, being equal to The Great God."-The American Journal of Semitic Languages and Literatures, Vol. XXI, 1905, p. 208. Also at John 1:1 Ha Logos "the Word" (Jesus) is referred to as "theos" and indeed Jesus deserves to be called "theos" (note there is no indifinite article in Greek) but in English we place "a" for a divine one in this case for a proper translation of the Greek. Note too that John did Not use Ha (the definite article when referencing the Word, thus making it clear that the Word was distinct from "ha theos" "the GOD", Jesus' Father and his God. Truthfinder |
||||||
167 | JESUS CHRIST | Matt 13:55 | Truthfinder | 79964 | ||
Hi I am going to jump in here and add that if Mary intended to remain a virgin forever, why did she get engaged? Well, “It may be presumed,” answers Pope John Paul II, “that at the time of their betrothal there was an understanding between Joseph and Mary about the plan to live as a virgin.” However, the Bible presents the matter differently. Matthew’s account says that Joseph “had no relations with her until she bore a son.” (Matthew 1:25, Catholic New American Bible, italics ours.) Notice again the words "until she bore a son." After the birth of Jesus, the marital union of Joseph and Mary was by no means virginal. One proof of this is that later in the Gospel account, Jesus is shown to have brothers and sisters.—Matthew 13:55, 56. Were these merely cousins? Well these words were originally recorded in Greek. Hence, the question arises, How would Greek-speaking people have understood the original terms here rendered “brother” and “sisters”? The New Catholic Encyclopedia (Vol. 9, p. 337) admits: “The Greek words . . . that are used to designate the relationship between Jesus and these relatives have the meaning of full blood brother and sister in the Greek-speaking world of the Evangelist’s time and would naturally be taken by his Greek reader in this sense.” Thus, while the Bible states that Mary was a virgin when she gave birth to Jesus, there is no basis for claiming that she lived as a virgin for the rest of her life with Joseph. Truthfinder |
||||||
168 | JESUS CHRIST | Matt 13:55 | Truthfinder | 79969 | ||
Hi Emmaus, Same difference said differently. Jewish custom for marriage was to have children. But let us assume differently. To determine whether Mary had perhaps decided to remain a virgin before the angel Gabriel visited her, we must look at matters from the standpoint of the time in which she was living. For a married woman to be childless in that time was viewed as a reproach. Hence, when Elizabeth became pregnant with her first and only child, John, she said: “In these days the Lord is acting on my behalf; he has seen fit to remove my reproach among men.”—Luke 1:25, New American Bible. So, for Mary to have gotten engaged to Joseph with the intent of remaining a virgin would have meant making herself an object of reproach. How could Joseph have consented to an arrangement whereby his wife would come under the reproach of barrenness? Why would he deliberately want to forfeit the opportunity to have an heir to carry on his name? The Hebrew Scriptures with which he and Mary were acquainted in no way recommended such a thing. They pointed to parenthood as something desirable. For example, at Psalm 127:3 we read: “Sons are a gift from the Lord; the fruit of the womb is a reward.” (New American Bible) The only arrangement known to the Israelites whereby a man or a woman might remain a virgin was by continuing in the single state. Perplexed! Yes, the angel told her she was pregnant with a son and she knew she was a virgin. She understood Gabriel’s revelation as already pregnant. Truthfinder |
||||||
169 | What is a cult? | Matt 16:15 | Truthfinder | 90720 | ||
What is a cult? Some here on this forum have tried to answer this question. The term “cult” is used loosely by many who may not be fully aware of its connotations. To prevent confusion, some theologians actually avoid using the term. The World Book Encyclopedia explains that “traditionally, the term cult referred to any form of worship or ritual observance.” By that criterion, all religious organizations could be classified as cults. However, in general usage today, the word “cult” has a different meaning. The same encyclopedia notes that “since the mid-1900’s, publicity about cults has altered the meaning of the term. Today, the term is applied to groups that follow a living leader who promotes new and unorthodox doctrines and practices.” Endorsing the popular usage of the term, Newsweek magazine explains that cults “are normally small, fringe groups whose members derive their identity and purpose from a single, charismatic individual.” Similarly, Asiaweek magazine notes that “the term [cult] itself is vague, but it usually denotes a new religious creed built around a charismatic leader, who often proclaims himself to be the personification of God.” The language used in a joint resolution of the 100th Congress of the State of Maryland, U.S.A., also conveys the derogatory connotation of the term cult. The resolution states that “a cult is a group or movement exhibiting excessive devotion to a person or idea and employing unethically manipulative techniques of persuasion and control to advance the goals of its leaders.” Clearly, cults are generally understood to be religious groups with radical views and practices that clash with what is accepted today as normal social behavior. Usually they conduct their religious activities in secrecy. Many of these cultic groups actually isolate themselves in communes. Their devotion to a self-proclaimed human leader is likely to be unconditional and exclusive. Often these leaders boast of having been divinely chosen or even of being themselves divine in nature. Many here on this forum reference Jehovah’s Witnesses as a cult. A number of recent newspaper articles lump the Witnesses with religious groups known for their questionable practices. But would it be accurate to refer to Jehovah’s Witnesses as a small fringe religious group? Cult members often isolate themselves from friends, family, and even society in general. Is that the case with Jehovah’s Witnesses? Are the Witnesses using deceptive and unethical techniques to recruit members? Cult leaders are known to use manipulative methods to control the minds of their followers. Is there any evidence that Jehovah’s Witnesses do this? Is their worship cloaked in secrecy? Are they following and venerating a human leader? Truthfinder |
||||||
170 | What is a cult? | Matt 16:15 | Truthfinder | 90763 | ||
Hi Mommapbs, well said. After reading and understanding what the word “cult” has come to mean in recent years, the JW cannot be accurately classified as one. Stop and think what the situation was like in Jesus’ day for a moment. Would you “accurately” classify the first century Christians as “cult members”. Something to think about it. I would have to answer in the affirmative. But to me today a cult is a religion that is said to be unorthodox or that emphasizes devotion according to prescribed ritual. And many cults follow a living human leader, and often their adherents live in groups apart from the rest of society. Remember in the recent past what happened in Waco Texas? For 50 days, hundreds of government agents laid siege to a compound with enough guns to wage a small war. The standoff ended in a showdown that left 86 dead, including at least 17 children. But who was the enemy? An army of drug-dealing mobsters? A guerrilla faction? No. As you may know, the “enemy” was a group of religious devotees, members of a cult. Their tragedy made an inconspicuous community the focus of international attention. The news media flooded the airwaves and the printed page with a barrage of reports, analyses, and comments on the dangers of fanatical cults. We were reminded of previous instances in which cult members were led to death by their leaders: the 1969 Manson murders in California; the 1978 mass suicide of cult members in Jonestown, Guyana; the 1987 murder-suicide pact engineered by cult leader Park Soon-ja of Korea, which resulted in the death of 32 members. The standard for what is orthodox, however, should be God’s Word, and Jehovah’s Witnesses strictly adhere to the Bible. Their worship is a way of life, not a ritual devotion. They neither follow a human nor isolate themselves from the rest of society. They live and work in the midst of other people. Jesus himself identified the true religion by saying, “by their fruits” you would recognize them. From God’s standpoint, a religion’s acceptability is not based on just one factor. For a religion to be acceptable to him, its teachings and activities must conform to his written Word of truth, the Bible. (Psalm 119:160; John 17:17) The fruitage of God-approved worship must conform to Jehovah God’s standards. He further identified them as ones that “have love among themselves”. John 13:34, 35 Do they put themselves out by going from door to door to help ones understand Bible truths? I would have to say that that is an expression of love of neighbor. Do they “kill”, in wars or abortions? No, again love would move a true Christian not to kill fellow humans. Truthfinder (continued) |
||||||
171 | What is a cult? | Matt 16:15 | Truthfinder | 90764 | ||
(2nd part) What religious group today has earned for itself the reputation of faithfulness to Christian principles and separateness from this world, with its members being hated and persecuted? Well, what worldwide Christian organization of well over 6,000,000 corresponds in every respect to historical descriptions of the early Christians? Regarding these, the New Catholic Encyclopedia states: “The primitive Christian community, although considered at first but another sect within the Jewish milieu, proved unique in its theological teaching, and more particularly in the zeal of its members, who served as witnesses to Christ ‘in all Judea and Samaria and even to the ends of the earth’ (Acts 1.8).”—Volume 3, page 694. Notice the expressions “considered . . . but another sect,” “unique in its . . . teaching,” “zeal . . . as witnesses.” And now observe how that same encyclopedia describes Jehovah’s Witnesses: “A sect . . . Witnesses are deeply convinced that the end of the world will come within a very few years. This vivid belief appears to be the strongest driving force behind their indefatigable zeal. . . . The fundamental obligation of each member of the sect is to give witness to Jehovah by announcing His approaching Kingdom. . . . They regard the Bible as their only source of belief and rule of conduct . . . To be a true Witness one must preach effectively in one way or another.”—Volume 7, pages 864-5. 5 In what respects are the teachings of Jehovah’s Witnesses unique? The New Catholic Encyclopedia mentions a few: “They [Jehovah’s Witnesses] condemn the Trinity as pagan idolatry . . . They consider Jesus as the greatest of Jehovah’s Witnesses, ‘a god’ (so they translate John 1.1), inferior to no one but to Jehovah. . . . He died as a man and was raised as an immortal spirit Son. His Passion and death were the price he paid to regain for mankind the right to live eternally on earth. Indeed, the ‘great multitude’ (Ap 7.9) of true Witnesses hope in an earthly Paradise; only 144,000 faithful (Ap 7.4; 14.1, 4) may enjoy heavenly glory with Christ. The wicked will undergo complete destruction. . . . Baptism—which Witnesses practice by immersion . . . [is] the exterior symbol of their dedication to the service of Jehovah God. . . . Jehovah’s Witnesses have attracted publicity by refusing blood transfusions . . . Their conjugal and sexual morality is quite rigid.” Jehovah’s Witnesses may be unique in these respects, but their position on all these points is solidly based on the Bible Truthfinder |
||||||
172 | What is a cult? | Matt 16:15 | Truthfinder | 90769 | ||
Hi again Mommapbs, You asked me “Who do I say Jesus is”. I understand the Bible clearly teaches through and through that Jesus is the “Son of God”. I believe Bible translations today confuse millions by “changing the original” into thinking Jesus is himself Almighty God. Through the centuries scribes substituted the word Lord or God for what the original had in it. If this was not done then one can easily see that Jesus is the Son of God and not Almighty God himself. The apostle John in Revelation 22:18 warned of this. I have posted in the past well over 150 different Bible translations that have restored the name of Jehovah in the New Testament alone. My only question is how and why would anyone continue to use a Bible translation that admits to its own errors? Are you a truth finder or do you want to believe a non-truth. Popular tradition has it that the fall of an apple started Sir Isaac Newton on the way to discovering the universal law of gravitation. Whatever may be the truth of this tradition, there is no question about Newton’s remarkable powers of reason. Concerning his renowned scientific work the Principia, we are told: “The whole development of modern science begins with this great book. For more than 200 years it reigned supreme.” Celebrated as were Newton’s scientific discoveries, he himself humbly acknowledged his human limitations. He was modest. Shortly before his death in 1727 he said of himself: “I do not know what I may appear to the world, but to myself I seem to have been only like a boy playing on the seashore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me.”2 Newton appreciated that God is the Source of all truth, and in line with the deep reverence he had for his Creator, he appears to have spent even more time searching after the true God than he did in searching out scientific truths. An analysis of all that Newton wrote reveals that out of some 3,600,000 words only 1,000,000 were devoted to the sciences, whereas some 1,400,000 were on religious topics. Would you like to read what he discovered and see why he believed that same as I do about who Jesus is? Truthfinder |
||||||
173 | What is a cult? | Matt 16:15 | Truthfinder | 90875 | ||
Hi Mommapbs, I was not implying that you care what Newton believed, I thought you might be interested in what he discovered. He proved that the manuscripts from which many modern translations base their translations on were tampered with. Tampered with to make Jesus appear to be one and the same as his God. Is that not confusing? Jesus' referring so many times to his God, if he himself were God? And John 1:1 the Logos (word) Jesus was "with" God. How can you be God if you are "with" God? Again modern translations try and mislead us by mis-translating John 1:1. I come to realize that so many times a person will believe what he "wants" to believe, but that just simply doesn't make it so. Yes, Jesus is GOD and should be worshipped as GOD, but GOD does not equal Almighty God. God means "mighty one" Jesus is Almighty God's Son. Jesus was the beginning of the creation of Almighty God. He had a beginning. Almighty GOD desirves to be worshipped as the Almighty GOD and his name is Jehovah. Ps 83:18 King James Version Truthfinder |
||||||
174 | What is a cult? | Matt 16:15 | Truthfinder | 90883 | ||
Hi Flinkywood, Did I quote something you disagree with? I quote what I feel is truth and then comment on it to make a point. With so many differing ideas, proper logical reasoning should help us all to come to an accurate understanding of a particular idea. Tradition, miss-translation and philosophy, and yes propaganda are a snare, but I assure you my friend I am not the culprit. Yes, perhaps possessing differing interpretation of many here but I can base my logic and reasoning on what God in the Bible, originally said. Paul tell me at Eph 5:6, Let no man deceive YOU with empty words, for because of the aforesaid things the wrath of God is coming upon the sons of disobedience. 7 Therefore do not become partakers with them; 8 for YOU were once darkness, but YOU are now light in connection with [the] Lord. Go on walking as children of light, 9 for the fruitage of the light consists of every sort of goodness and righteousness and truth. 10 Keep on making sure of what is acceptable to the Lord; 11 and quit sharing with [them] in the unfruitful works that belong to the darkness, but, rather, even be reproving [them], 12 for the things that take place in secret by them it is shameful even to relate. 13 Now all the things that are being reproved are made manifest by the light, for everything that is being made manifest is light.” For me I do not want to be deceived. I do not want to be in the darkness. I keep on making sure of what is acceptable to the Lord. Sorry I offended you. Please accept my apology. Truthfinder |
||||||
175 | What is a cult? | Matt 18:6 | Truthfinder | 90717 | ||
What is a cult? Some here on this forum have tried to answer this question. The term “cult” is used loosely by many who may not be fully aware of its connotations. To prevent confusion, some theologians actually avoid using the term. The World Book Encyclopedia explains that “traditionally, the term cult referred to any form of worship or ritual observance.” By that criterion, all religious organizations could be classified as cults. However, in general usage today, the word “cult” has a different meaning. The same encyclopedia notes that “since the mid-1900’s, publicity about cults has altered the meaning of the term. Today, the term is applied to groups that follow a living leader who promotes new and unorthodox doctrines and practices.” Endorsing the popular usage of the term, Newsweek magazine explains that cults “are normally small, fringe groups whose members derive their identity and purpose from a single, charismatic individual.” Similarly, Asiaweek magazine notes that “the term [cult] itself is vague, but it usually denotes a new religious creed built around a charismatic leader, who often proclaims himself to be the personification of God.” The language used in a joint resolution of the 100th Congress of the State of Maryland, U.S.A., also conveys the derogatory connotation of the term cult. The resolution states that “a cult is a group or movement exhibiting excessive devotion to a person or idea and employing unethically manipulative techniques of persuasion and control to advance the goals of its leaders.” Clearly, cults are generally understood to be religious groups with radical views and practices that clash with what is accepted today as normal social behavior. Usually they conduct their religious activities in secrecy. Many of these cultic groups actually isolate themselves in communes. Their devotion to a self-proclaimed human leader is likely to be unconditional and exclusive. Often these leaders boast of having been divinely chosen or even of being themselves divine in nature. Many here on this forum reference Jehovah’s Witnesses as a cult. A number of recent newspaper articles lump the Witnesses with religious groups known for their questionable practices. But would it be accurate to refer to Jehovah’s Witnesses as a small fringe religious group? Cult members often isolate themselves from friends, family, and even society in general. Is that the case with Jehovah’s Witnesses? Are the Witnesses using deceptive and unethical techniques to recruit members? Cult leaders are known to use manipulative methods to control the minds of their followers. Is there any evidence that Jehovah’s Witnesses do this? Is their worship cloaked in secrecy? Are they following and venerating a human leader? Truthfinder |
||||||
176 | Do Angels have Genders? Male and Female? | Matt 22:30 | Truthfinder | 94375 | ||
Hi BKB, First Matthew 22:30 tells us that angels are sexless. God did not create angels male nor female nor with a desire for sexual relations with humans. Yet Satan evidently was able to get some of them to think improperly about such matters. Thus within certain angels a desire was cultivated for something that God purposed only humans should enjoy within the proper bounds of marriage. These angelic “sons of the true God” did a wicked thing, leaving their positions in heaven to come to earth to marry women. (Genesis 6:2) According to Jude 6, those spirits were “the angels that did not keep their original position but forsook their own proper dwelling place” in the heavens. They took on fleshly bodies in order to enjoy illicit sex relations with women. When the Deluge compelled those angels to return to the spirit realm, they were thrown into Tartarus, a condition of utter debasement. (2 Peter 2:4) Truthfinder |
||||||
177 | Do Angels have Genders? Male and Female? | Matt 22:30 | Truthfinder | 94506 | ||
Hi Christian24, May I ask you a question? The words “apostles,” “prophets,” “evangelizers,” “shepherds,” and “teachers” are all in the masculine gender (Eph 4:8, 11) does that mean that only men qualify for these positions? Also since God is always refered to in the masculine gender does that mean his sex is male? Truthfinder |
||||||
178 | Do Angels have Genders? Male and Female? | Matt 22:30 | Truthfinder | 94550 | ||
Hi EdB, The phrase "they do not marry" of Matthew 22:30 is commented on by Matthew Henry’s Commentary and concurs with the reasoning I presented. It says, “But, in the resurrection, there is no occasion for marriage; whether in glorified bodies there will be any distinction of sexes.” This is a well thought out conclusion. In it’s entirety the commentary makes explanation. It says, “It is not like the state we are now in upon earth; They neither marry, nor are given in marriage. In our present state marriage is necessary; it was instituted in innocency; whatever intermission or neglect there has been of other institutions, this was never laid aside, nor will be till the end of time. In the old world, they were marrying, and giving in marriage; the Jews in Babylon, when cut off from other ordinances, yet were bid to take them wives, Jer. 29:6. All civilized nations have had a sense of the obligation of the marriage covenant; and it is requisite for the gratifying of the desires, and recruiting the deficiencies, of the human nature. But, in the resurrection, there is no occasion for marriage; whether in glorified bodies there will be any distinction of sexes some too curiously dispute (the ancients are divided in their opinions about it); but, whether there will be a distinction or not, it is certain that there will be no conjunction; where God will be all in all, there needs no other meet-help; the body will be spiritual, and there will be in it no carnal desires to be gratified: when the mystical body is completed, there will be no further occasion to seek a godly seed, which was one end of the institution of marriage,” Here he tells us that there will be no male/female but like the angels. As you know, the purpose of God’s making the two sexes was for producing offspring. Another line of reasoning is the fact that merely referring to God or angels in the masculine gender is a grammar characteristic of that language. Examples found in the Bible and everyday usage today abound where the pronouns and nouns are of a certain gender but not necessarily literally of that gender, Las casas in Spanish is in the feminine gender but certainly does not mean that the houses are female. Likewise angels in English are in the masculine but that does not mean they are males. They are spirit creatures that were created without the privilege of procreating. Before the deluge of Noah’s day, angels had to materialize in order to procreate, to have gender. But as angels, they could not cohabit, procreate, marry nor have gender. Truthfinder |
||||||
179 | Do Angels have Genders? Male and Female? | Matt 22:30 | Truthfinder | 94577 | ||
Hi EdB, I appreciate your conviction and agree with you that we can only arrive at that conclusion by reasoning on the scriptures. It was interesting though in arguing the point. Until next time. Truthfinder |
||||||
180 | Do Angels have Genders? Male and Female? | Matt 22:30 | Truthfinder | 94620 | ||
Hi Christian24, My post answers the question, "Do angels have gender?" Clearly they do not. Please see my posts to Searcher also for Matthew Henry's commentary) Please show me why you think Michael is male. As a spirit being he (notice I used the masculine pronoun "he" for Michael as does the Bible but that does not mean he is male) cannot be male as they have no gender. Different gender is a creation of God for his creatures to procreate. Angels do not procreate unless they materialize as humans then they can and do have gender. Since the flood of Noah's day, they no longer have that privilege. Truthfinder |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ] Next > Last [15] >> |