Results 1 - 10 of 10
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: drbloor Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Moses appeared from where? | Matt 17:3 | drbloor | 225360 | ||
You will note that in Mat 17:19 Jesus tells his disciples, "Tell the vision to no one", indicating that the appearance of Moses and Elijah was in fact a "vision" and not a reality - hence neither Moses nor Elijah came from anywhere as they were not actually present. | ||||||
2 | Dr. B. Who're the angels (2 Pet 2:10-11) | Eph 4:9 | drbloor | 171660 | ||
Dear Searcher, I'm leaving for today after this post, you'll be glad to hear, so time for a time out. Jude 1:6 is parallel to 2 Peter 2:4. I agree with you, but I've already shown several times how the language here indicates they died, and how that is confirmed in the Genesis account. I won't keep repeating myself. Jude 1:7 is parallel to 2 Peter 2:6. I agree that these people were killed by brimstone, however: Jude 1:7 and 2 Peter 2:9 both tell us that the punishment on the people of Sodom and Gomorrah was exactly the same as on the aggelos. So if the aggelos never died, as you claim, then neither did the people of Sodom and Gomorrah. The Bible however clearly says that the people of Sodom and Gomorrah were killed, so according to both Peter and Jude, so were the aggelos. The men in Jude 1:8 appear to be the same men in Jude 1:4, who are accused of reviling "angelic majesties." That's got nothing to do with Genesis - they were men alive at the time of Peter. Okay. Over and out for a while, Dr. B. |
||||||
3 | Dr. B., Did He inspire Peter and Jude? | Eph 4:9 | drbloor | 171655 | ||
Dear Searcher, I agree 100 percent that the writers of the Bible were inspired by the Holy Spirit, but I can't agree that they did not use or refer to other inspired writings. That would be absurd. The later writers of the gospels clearly referred to the writings of the earlier gospels. And the whole of the New Testament is infused with the Old Testament. A full list of examples would be huge. Why would you claim such a thing? Yrs, Dr. B. |
||||||
4 | Dr. B. Biblical support Angels can't sin | Eph 4:9 | drbloor | 171652 | ||
Dear Searcher, If you were reading my answers to you, you would have already read this: ---------------------------------- "This also comes back to a point I have made before on the angels: Luke 20:36 "Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels." Romans 6:23 "For the wages of sin is death" I hope you see the point. If the wages of sin is death, and angels cannot die, then neither can they sin, or they would die, which they cannot do. At least, not according to Jesus. ---------------------------------- Yrs, Dr. B. |
||||||
5 | Dr. B. What does aggelos mean? | Eph 4:9 | drbloor | 171620 | ||
Dear Searcher, Was John the Baptist an angel? Matthew 11:10 For this is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger [AGGELOS] before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee. Were John the Baptists disciples angels? Luke 7:24 And when the messengers [AGGELOS] of John were departed, he began to speak unto the people concerning John, What went ye out into the wilderness for to see? A reed shaken with the wind? Where the spies sent to Jericho angels? James 2:25 Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers [AGGELOS], and had sent them out another way? The word Aggelos means - a messenger, envoy, one who is sent, an angel, a messenger from God. As you can see, it certainly does not always refer to the angels of heaven, and there is no reason to automatically believe that the angels of 2 Peter 2 were angels of heaven, especially in the context – which is of wicked humans who had abandoned their positions as sons of God, and were killed by the flood. This also comes back to a point I have made before on the angels: Luke 20:36 "Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels." Romans 6:23 "For the wages of sin is death" I hope you see the point. If the wages of sin is death, and angels cannot die, then neither can they sin, or they would die, which they cannot do. At least, not according to Jesus. Therefore the angels of 2 Peter 2 are definitely not spirit angels because they cannot sin. Likewise the sons of God in Genesis 6:2 were not angels because they sinned. Look even for a moment at the context in Genesis to see who the sons of God were. First Genesis 4:26, which chronologically immediately precedes Genesis 6: Gen 4:26 ... then began men to call upon the name of the LORD. Dr. Boothroyd and others translate the passage, "Then began men to be called by the name of Jehovah." How would they do this? They would obviously not all be called "Jehovah". So the descendants of Seth separated themselves from the descendants of Cain by calling themselves the sons of God. Gen 6:2 ... the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. Gen 6:3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, The Lord did not say "My spirit shall not always strive with angels" but with men. God did not repent "that he had made angels on the earth", but that he had made man. This is because the descendants of Seth had become as wicked as the descendants of Cain, and only Noah and his family found grace in the eyes of the Lord. The sons of God were men, and it was those men, not angels, who caused God to bring the flood. Okay, Dr. B. |
||||||
6 | drbloor, where is your Biblical support? | 2 Chr 21:12 | drbloor | 171604 | ||
Dear Searcher, Thankyou for your thoughtful response. Elijah makes his exit in 2 Kings 2, shortly after King Ahaziah of Israels death (Dies in 2 Kings 1) and about the time King Jehoram of Israel took the throne (Begins to reign in 2 Kings 3). Elisha is clearly the primary prophet of God at this time (2 Ki 3:11), and even deals with King Jehoshaphat of Judah - the predeccesor of Jehoram of Judah (the one who receives the letter.) So Elijah was well out of the way before Jehoram of Judah comes to power. Now the Jehoram who received the letter from Elijah was Jehoram King of Judah, and he began to reign in the 5th year of King Jehoram of Israel (2 Ki 8:16). So it was about 5 years after the departure of Elijah that Jehoram of Judah killed his brothers. Now Jehoram of Judah reigned for 8 years (2 Chr 21:20) and the letter from Elijah arrived 2 years before he died (2 Chr 21:19), so Jehoram of Judah had been on the throne 6 years when he received the letter. So you have a gap of about 5 years between Elijah disappearing and Jehorams coming to power and then 6 years of his reign making, well, at least 10 years between the disappearance of Elijah and the arrival of the letter. Now I've got to admit that maths isn't my strong point, and I haven't just copy and pasted that, so you can check it if you want and make sure it's right. As to your other question: How do I know the letter was sent after he was taken? Because the letter addresses events that occurred after Elijahs disappearance, and refers to them in the past tense, and it gives a direct prophecy in the future tense which would begin to happen immediately. It was clearly written at a specific point in time. To claim that Elijah wrote the letter before disappearing and left it around for someone to deliver is a sad attempt to ignore the obvious truth which is in front of you regarding Elijahs destination. There are three different heavens spoken of in the Bible: 1. The heaven where God abides. 2. The heaven where the stars are. 3. The heaven where the birds are. The word for "heaven" in this case is "Shamayim" which is far more frequently and appropriately used to refer not to Heaven where God abides, but to the air above us. In fact in 1 Kings it is translated several times as "Air". But let's try and prove exactly which heaven we are dealing with here. As already discussed, Jesus categorically states that no-one has ever ascended to the Heaven where God abides, so Elijah didn't go there. I very much doubt that God transported Elijah into outer-space to kill him, so we can safely predict he didn't go there. The only option left is that the chariot containing Elijah took off from the ground into the heaven of the sky, until Elisha "saw him no more". This is backed up by the eye-witnesses who went to look for Elijah. (N.B. It is unclear whether the 50 men had seen Elijah leave, but it is possible, and at the very least they had a first hand account of the event from Elisha.) If they had seen him shoot straight up into the sky, or Elisha had told them he'd gone to be with God in Heaven they would not have gone to search for him in the direction they HAD seen him travel. Elisha had faith that God would prevent Elijah from falling from the chariot, but the others feared he may have fallen out part of the way through his journey which, as we've said, was laterally and not vertically. Okay, I had better post this to the board and go home. Searcher, if you disagree with this, please explain why when Jesus said, "No man hath ascended up to heaven," he was actually lying. As I mentioned before, the answer you directed me on the subject was totally inadequate. It referred to a context that simply isn't in any verse in that chapter. And please explain why those sons of prophets went on a long trek to look for Elijah if Elisha had told them he'd just been transported into Heaven. Okay, and thanks for your consideration, Dr. B. (Apologies for the late reply - my internet cut out about 3 hours ago) |
||||||
7 | Jesus decneded into hell. | Eph 4:9 | drbloor | 171504 | ||
Hi Leia, and apologies for the late reply. What I meant by saying "Hell isn't underground" is that scientists know the precise make-up of the crust, core and mantle of this planet, and Hell as you know it simply isn't there. The idea that there is a demon-filled place called Hell physically situated under our feet is about as smart as saying that Heaven is situated on top of the clouds over our heads. What is below us and in the heart of the earth is a place where dead people go, and it is called the Grave. "Hell" the supposed fiery place, is not below us or in the heart of the earth. So either the writers of the Bible got the location of "Hell" wrong, or the location is right and they are just talking about the Grave. And that's what I believe. Jesus "descended into hell" by dying and being placed in a grave. And like it or not, we are all going to the same hell that Jesus went to. Yrs, Dr. B. |
||||||
8 | Show him the truth | Lev 18:22 | drbloor | 168561 | ||
Leviticus 18:22 tells us that homosexuality is an abomination to God. Note that verse 21 tells us not to sacrifice our children by burning them to death, and verse 23 tells us not to have sex with animals. Clearly this chapter is dealing with what God views as the most terrible human perversions. This is why homosexuality is not only prohibited, it is called an 'abomination'. |
||||||
9 | What say you? | Mal 3:10 | drbloor | 166613 | ||
I appreciate that it might sound like a confusion to say that we live in a state of sinlessness, whilst yet sinning, and maybe I have not explained it clearly enough, for which I apologise. Your quote in 1 John 1 explains the dichotomy: "the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin". Jesus died once for ALL our sins, and we are told that if we repent and are baptised then we partake of this forgiveness. We are not told that we will be forgiven on Sunday morning, then again on Tuesday night, and then again next Wednesday - we are told that we are Forgiven. This is not an excuse to continue to sin, or a reason not to continually pray for that forgiveness. The first sacrifice was in Genesis 3, when the Lord God made coats of skins to clothe Adam and Eve - to provide a covering to their nakedness. In like manner, God has provided us a more perfect sacrifice, that we might be clothed with Christ and that only with his covering might we be presented before God as spotless, that "though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow" says Isaiah. This all comes back to the idea of Law, and why it was a curse. It was a curse because with Law came sin, and with sin came death. If God had not given the Law that Adam and Eve should not eat of the fruit of the Tree of The Knowledge of Good and Evil, they would not have sinned by eating it, and would not have been cursed with death. This example holds true with the Law of Moses, and is precisely WHY we needed Christ to remove that curse. If then we now live under Grace and not Law, then we no longer live under the sin which came by Law. This is obviously a complex idea, and one which Paul especially had to reinforce with the Romans, who believed that because they were under Grace, they could "continue in sin," which is not the idea at all! Romans 6 is a great place to examine this teaching in practice, and it contains an abundance of verses to prove the point: Verse 2. "God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?" If we are dead to sin, it is because we are dead to the law which cursed us with sin. Under the law of Grace we are no longer cursed. Verse 7. (Talking of the metaphorical death of baptism) "For he that is dead is freed from sin." Verse 14. "For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace. " I hope that this helps to present this idea - that in Gods eyes we are held as if we were sinless, even though we are not. Yet for the sake of emphasis: "What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid." |
||||||
10 | Who is the ruller of darkness | Is 45:7 | drbloor | 166550 | ||
God. | ||||||