Results 1 - 20 of 568
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: MJH Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Has the church replaced Israel? | Not Specified | MJH | 139098 | ||
Has the church replaced Israel? | ||||||
2 | Scripture - more than one meaning? | Not Specified | MJH | 139812 | ||
Is it ever possible for scripture to have more than one meaning? I have heard the Sages of old said, "There are 70 layers to every Bible passage." I am not one to subscribe to 70 layers to every passage, but can there be more than one meaning? For example: Joseph is sold into slavery by his brothers, rejected. There is an obvious plane meaning to this. Joseph was sold into slavery. But, does this narrative foretell the Messiah being sold by his brothers, rejected, only to save them in the end like Joseph saved his brothers? Is this a Messiah picture, besides the plane obvious story? I was just curious what others thought about this. I think the above example is a Torah picture of the Messiah (kind of like the snake is seen as more than a snake in Gen 2). But . . . what do you all think? MJH |
||||||
3 | Numbers in Hebrew letters/words? | Not Specified | MJH | 140378 | ||
Does anyone see any value in the “numbering” in the scripture? Or more specifically, with the numbers associated with the Hebrew letters? For example: The word “truth” in Hebrew is Aleph Mem Tav (First, middle, last letter of Hebrew). Aleph equals 1, Mem equals 40 and Tav equals 400. “I am the Aleph and the Tav; I am the Alpha and Omega” 40 is always associated in the Bible as a time of testing. 400 is the time the Israelites were enslaved in Egypt. 1 is the Messiah. (this one is far to long to express completely here any further) Another I’ve heard lately is that the word covenant in Hebrew equals 612. That is 1 less than the 613 laws in the Torah. When the Messiah came, he completed the Torah by being the one law that was lacking. That being, “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, just like I have loved you; that you also love one another.” John 13:34 Not that the Torah was missing this law (see Lev. 19:18), but that it was not elevated to its proper place, at the top both in theology and actions. Ultimately Jesus was “love” in the flesh, and loved us so much to be the end (purpose) of the Law. Any way, I have never bought into the numbering game, but some things I’ve read recently are quite interesting at the least. Also, this was done even before the time of Jesus. (not that this adds credence.) Anyone study this more in depth, enough to answer? MJH |
||||||
4 | Why celebrate Ash Wednesday? | Not Specified | MJH | 144179 | ||
Why celebrate Ash Wednesday? Can anyone provide me with reasons to observe this holiday other than "The church says so?" I know it isn't in the Bible and I believe it started around 900 AD. But, if someone can give me healthy reasons for it, I'd love to hear them. Also, any background you want to provide would be nice. And, what do you (you personally) do on Ash Wednesday? (I'm not "against" it. But I would like to hear reasons for being "for" it.) Thanks. MJH |
||||||
5 | Blessed Passover tonight | Not Specified | MJH | 148824 | ||
Blessed Passover tonight. Anyone celebrating? Baruch atah Adonai Eloheinu Melech Haolam |
||||||
6 | What was first sacrifice and by whom? | Not Specified | MJH | 151560 | ||
Trivia question... Good luck.... Prize yet to be disclosed for winner. What was the first sacrifice recorded in the Bible, and who performed it? Not too tricky, but most scholars get it wrong on their first stab. MJH |
||||||
7 | Paul the Torah observant Jew? | Not Specified | MJH | 153989 | ||
Doc, Kalos, Wild Olive Shoot, Anyone . . . Seeking comments on two notes I posted to Jeff, but have not recevied a reply to. I am eager to get feed back on these two posts if possible. They are things I am disdussing in real life at a Bible study.... Post # 153873 and #153874 Thanks, MJH |
||||||
8 | The Hell questions. | Not Specified | MJH | 162925 | ||
After several years of avoiding the question, I have taken it upon myself to finally address the "HELL" issue in the Christian faith. Since I am only at the start of answering this question (or maybe only finding more questions), I'd like to have some suggestions of resources (books, articles, etc..) that would help me explore all sides of this. My upbringing was from an "exclusivist" view, so anything from opposing views would be most helpful. THANKS, MJH |
||||||
9 | Most confusing book of Bible? | Not Specified | MJH | 173938 | ||
Just out of curiosity . . . what book of the Bible is the most confusing to you? The book that makes you scratch your head in wonderment? MJH |
||||||
10 | Emergent Church question | Not Specified | MJH | 177164 | ||
Does anyone have an opinion on the so called, "Emergent Church?" I ask because I happen to attend a church that when I join was simply another church which happened to grow very fast, had a gifted teacher, etc... But nothing spectacular. Since then, over the past few years, the gifted teacher has become very well know, almost an icon in the so called "Emergent Church" movement, although he has never claimed that our church was an "Emergent Church." Needless to say (unfortunately) he has been attacked by several Pastors around the country. My stance among those I meet is that I am not responsible for defending my pastor or church against comments. I will talk and listen, but I am not ever going to get "defensive" and try to argue for a point. I will clarify and ask why they think what they think, but I won't get drawn into an argument. It has bothered me, however, to see that so far every critic I have read or heard has gone to the level of revering to my pastor as "Satan’s agent" or "a clear Heretic" etc... Not one critic I have read so far has refrained from using such vitriolic statements which I interpret as meaning they are so afraid that their critic isn't strong enough on content that they have to use stupid statements to try and reinforce their ideas. One pastor even stated that since my pastor's following was so large, he obviously was not of God and used the same argument to refute Rev. Billy Graham. I’d love to discuss this topic with some of you, since I have anonymity here, and I would like to know what gifted people like you all think. MJH |
||||||
11 | Help Bible study to accept differences? | Not Specified | MJH | 185299 | ||
I am a facilitator for a new Bible study group called "Torah Club." My job was to make sure the group melded well and not to be the answer man. I left them in early January and everything seemed to be going well. Now the group has a problem. The question is about the Sabbath and when it is. One member insists the Sabbath is on Saturday and the others are unsure (apparently). Now, I know that the Sabbath is Saturday, that isn't really a debate. The seventh day has always been the seventh day. But the question is which day ought we to observe as the (or a) Sabbath. I have my own beliefs in this area, but how might I guide the group so that they can continue to function as a community equally striving to learn God's Word. And to do this while accepting others who either are not as far along as them, or maybe have a different understanding of God's Word? My own study group, we do not all agree on a lot of things, but it just doesn't seem to be a problem. Some times its fun to poke at each other based on our differences. I'd like this group to have that same acceptance of each other and Monday night I will be meeting with them to help them achieve this. Any suggestions? MJH |
||||||
12 | What of the Law applies to me a believe? | Not Specified | MJH | 200826 | ||
What of the Mosaic Law applies to me a Gentile Christian? I have been seeking an answer to this question for the last six years and have often been frustrated at the slow pace in finding good answers from people who have different views. I could use some help. While I have come a long way in my search and have ended up where I never expected when I started, I felt that it would have been more effective for me to have had quality articles written in support of each view. I have been surprised by the fact that it is very difficult to find any article written to answer this specific question. The best I could do was find mentions of it in passing, or in bullet point form. Maybe even a short 1-2 page paper giving the overall points of a theological viewpoint, but as of yet, I have not found one excellently written article which covers the topic thoroughly, and uses primary sources when applicable. In fact, most positions are so poorly written, that when confronted, the author is at a loss. Therefore, I am collecting the best of the best theological scholarly papers on this question from every main view point that has substance. If anyone here knows of good articles supporting any view well, I’d love to know of them. I have found none so far…only mediocre articles. MJH |
||||||
13 | Stumped and stupefied. Bewildered.... | Not Specified | MJH | 213250 | ||
Deut 12:13-14 “Take care that you do not offer your burnt offerings at any place that you see, but at the place that the LORD will choose in one of your tribes, there you shall offer your burnt offerings, and there you shall do all that I am commanding you.” ESV Here (and in the surrounding verses) the Text, the command of God, tells the Israelites that they are to only offer sacrifices at “the place” where he chooses. Every single commentary that I consulted repeated the same idea. Israel could not offer sacrifices at any other place than the Tabernacle/Temple. None of them motioned any exceptions. Yet, we see Gideon, Samson’s parents, and Samuel just to name three (and several more) doing just that. They not only offer a sacrifice outside and away from the place, the sacrifice is obviously accepted. To what answer is there to this riddle? MJH |
||||||
14 | Song of Moses the first passage written? | Not Specified | MJH | 213265 | ||
Exodus 15 begins with the song that Moses taught the people after God rescued them from Egypt. It struck me while going over this again, that this was likely the first passage that we have in our Bible that was actually written. Moses wouldn't have written the rest of the “Books of Moses” until after his time on the mountain. A quick glance at the commentaries I have don’t mention this, while only one states it was absolutely written down the same day it was sung. Can anyone confirm this, or just as good, show this to not be true? MJH |
||||||
15 | Is it cheating? | Not Specified | MJH | 213401 | ||
Is it mid-terms? How many will show up to ask us to answer their test questions? MJH |
||||||
16 | Greek use of koinos and akathartos | Not Specified | MJH | 213662 | ||
I have a question about the Greek word used in Rom. 14:14. Hoping not to cause trouble here, I simply want to get further clarification from someone who knows Greek more than I. I've studied some the word koinos(G839) and akathartos(G169. koinos, from what I can tell, means common. Akathartos means ritually (Levitically) unclean. The LXX uses akathartos in Lev 11 and elsewhere, but uses koinos when describing things that are made common based on their use. To explain further: If I spoke of a Cray fish, I would use akathartos every time, because this is clearly unclean by Lev. 11 standards. There is no disputable issue with that. But if I were to speak of Lamb purchased at the market, I may uses koinos (common) because the Lamb is suspect; it could have been used in Idol worship. If it were known to be used in Idol worship, then it would certainly be koinos, or common. Therefore, if I speak of something that would otherwise be perfectly fine, but something renders it otherwise, it would be koinos. Am I right in that? A search of the words in the NT shows that in each case, koinos is used like I describe above. And akathartos is used as I describe above. Why then do nearly all translations use the word "unclean" in Rom. 14:14 rather than the word "common" as would be more literal? MJH |
||||||
17 | Class on historical background. | Not Specified | MJH | 214246 | ||
I'm putting together an outline for a class on the Historical Background to the New Testament. Are there some issues or events that you feel should be defiantly included in this class? What are some questions you have that a class like this could answer? Thanks for any input. MJH |
||||||
18 | Why did Jesus need to leave first? | Not Specified | MJH | 215781 | ||
Why did Jesus need to depart before the Spirit could come? | ||||||
19 | Deut 22:29, Rapist to marry victim? | Not Specified | MJH | 231789 | ||
This passage according to some translation states that if a man (unmarried) rapes a virgin, he is forced to marry her and pay the bride price. There are HUGE issues with this translation. Rape is a violent crime against the woman. Other laws in the Torah protect the woman from rape. I understood this text, in context of both the chapter and the over all Mosaic Law, to be "forcibly taken from her father" and consensual relations between the man and virgin are in view. Within the culture, the man who take a virgin in this manner is in effect taking from the father, who, if the girl is not wed to this man, is not violated and very unlikely to be wed to any man. This leaves both the father (and later the brothers) responsible for her. It also removes her from being able to bare children who would one day honor her in her old age. It is, to me, obvious that a violent act of rape would not be punished by forcing the victim to marry the criminal. If Jesus is the embodiment of the Law in flesh, then can we see Jesus in this light? NO. We see Jesus as the most woman appreciating and caring person in the scriptures. That, I understand, is because the Law was the same, if applied and understood by adequate and righteous judges (Elders). Please...PLEASE...someone offer something on this passage, as it is quite disturbing as translated in certain English Bibles. MJH |
||||||
20 | Deut 22:29, Rapist to marry victim? | Not Specified | MJH | 231788 | ||
This passage according to some translation states that if a man (unmarried) rapes a virgin, he is forced to marry her and pay the bride price. There are HUGE issues with this translation. Rape is a violent crime against the woman. Other laws in the Torah protect the woman from rape. I understood this text, in context of both the chapter and the over all Mosaic Law, to be "forcibly taken from her father" and consensual relations between the man and virgin are in view. Within the culture, the man who take a virgin in this manner is in effect taking from the father, who, if the girl is not wed to this man, is not violated and very unlikely to be wed to any man. This leaves both the father (and later the brothers) responsible for her. It also removes her from being able to bare children who would one day honor her in her old age. It is, to me, obvious that a violent act of rape would not be punished by forcing the victim to marry the criminal. If Jesus is the embodiment of the Law in flesh, then can we see Jesus in this light? NO. We see Jesus as the most woman appreciating and caring person in the scriptures. That, I understand, is because the Law was the same, if applied and understood by adequate and righteous judges (Elders). Please...PLEASE...someone offer something on this passage, as it is quite disturbing as translated in certain English Bibles. MJH |
||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [29] >> |