Results 1 - 20 of 380
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: biblicalman Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | What was avg life span for Joshuas time | Bible general Archive 4 | biblicalman | 227546 | ||
all the males who were of fighting age died thus all under 60. life expectancy on the whole was much less. there is no reason for thinking israelites had a shorter life span | ||||||
2 | jewish priests dying behind tabernacle | Bible general Archive 4 | biblicalman | 227639 | ||
This is a late Jewish tradition. The idea behind it is that because when the High Priest entered the Holy of Holies on the Day of Atonement there would be no way of recovering his body if he died while in the Holy of Holies (no one else was allowed to enter), a way had to be provided to solve the problem. We do not know if it was ever carried out in practise. It was into the Holy of Holies behind the Veil not behind the Tabernacle, and it was when the bell ceased ringing that they would know that he was dead. | ||||||
3 | what is ark | Bible general Archive 4 | biblicalman | 228014 | ||
the angels who watched over the ark were called cherubim compare Ezek 1. if u mean an archangel then that means a leading angel Michael was an archangel see Jude 9. |
||||||
4 | Herod and Pilate Letters non-canonical? | Bible general Archive 4 | biblicalman | 228383 | ||
Hi The so-called letters of Herod and Pilate were unknown to the early church for over 500 years. The British Museum has a copy in Syriac dated 7th century AD. Their accuracy can be assessed by the fact that according to the letters Herod thought that his daughter's name was Herodias. Herodias was in fact the name of his wife. Best wishes |
||||||
5 | Take up another's offense or not? | Bible general Archive 4 | biblicalman | 228489 | ||
I am not sure if this has been answered, so if not, try Matthew 5.23-25; 18.15-17 for both sides of the picture with regard to putting right sin. As you will see the second verses specifically indicate a way in which we should take up another's offence. If we love one another we will certianly be concerned for their hurt. I am not aware of a verse which says what you say. Best wishes |
||||||
6 | ... | Bible general Archive 4 | biblicalman | 228524 | ||
Jehovah is not God's Name. It is impossible Hebrew. God's Name was YHWH. And we are not sure how it was pronounced. In order that people reading the text might not pronounce the sacred Name the vowels of adonai (Lord) were added to the four consonant. It was pronouncing this in ignorance that produced the corrupt name Jehovah which is impossible in Hebrew. As no one knows how the Name of God should be pronounced, and as Jesus chose not to enlighten us (demonstrating that He did not see it as important) it would clearly not be possible for us to use it today because we would not be sure that what we were pronouncing was His Name. |
||||||
7 | Question about upcoming projects? | Bible general Archive 4 | biblicalman | 228700 | ||
While it is not for me to tell Lockman's what to do I suspect that they will not produce such a Bible based on inferior texts. There are continuing discoveries of early papyrus texts which underline quite definitely that the Byzantine text is a late text. There is not reslly a debate about that. You should read an up to date book on textual criticism written by genuine textual scholars, not by people seeking to sustain an unsustainable theory who do not actually study the texts concerned. Best wishes |
||||||
8 | were old testiments years same as today | Bible general Archive 4 | biblicalman | 228842 | ||
hi welcome to the forum the ancients tended to see time in periods of the moon from new moon to new moon (28-29 days). 12 moon periods made up a year. but every three years or so they would add in an intercalary moon period so as to keep the seasons in sync. often when making calculations they would see a moon period as being 30 days. But this was only a covenience. Thus forty two moon periods would be seen as 1260 days even though in fact being somewhat less. There is, however, slight evidence of a 365 day year in Palestine. But it was not common. Most people stuck to the method I have outlined above, and that was the basis on which life went on. (Most people could not calculate, or count beyond ten) Best wishes |
||||||
9 | Dose the bible note angels by gender? | Bible general Archive 4 | biblicalman | 228871 | ||
Hi Etta, Welcome to the forum. The Bible actually says nothing about gender in angels, but always speaks of them as 'he'. What we do know is that they neither marry nor are given in marriage (Matt 22.30). But as they are spirit beings that is not surprising. It does, however, suggest that they do not spcifically split up into couples (except when acting as witnesses). However, we would be unwise to dogmatise over what they can do when they come in the form of men. Clearly good angels would be true to their status. But some believe that the 'angels who kept not their first estate' (Jude 6) were fallen angels who consorted with women in the time of Noah. That is not impossible, for in the Old Testament 'sons of the elohim (God)' always refers to angels. They may even have been cases of demonic intercourse. This woud explain why God had to destroy all of mankind because their women had become tainted. Best wishes |
||||||
10 | Dose the bible note angels by gender? | Bible general Archive 4 | biblicalman | 228874 | ||
Hi lionheart Not on this forum. I tried to email you but my email account did not 'recognise' your email address. Best wishes. |
||||||
11 | Dose the bible note angels by gender? | Bible general Archive 4 | biblicalman | 228890 | ||
hi John well as i think that Gen 6.1-4 does actually teach that evil angels (demons) did in some way have intercourse with women, something confirmed by Jude 6, I consider that my answer was based on Scripture. Many well accepted commentaries would confirm it. Kidner says, 'the normal meaning of the actual term 'sons of God' (bene elohim) is 'angels' and nothing has prepared the reader to assume that 'men' now means Cainites only.' He then adds 'the craving of demons for a body, evident in the Gospels, offers at least some parallel to this hunger for sexual experience'. He cites in support 1 Peter 3.19-20; 2 Peter 2.4-6; Jude 6; and more clearly Jewish tradition in Enoch 6.2 and Qumran Genesis Apocryphon col.II. I don't think that you can doubt Kidner's credentials as a Consevative Evangelical scholar. We may not be able to fully explain it. But it is there and quite clear. We must not hide from the difficult things in Scripture. Beside the Bible text both your and my opinions are very secondary. In the Old Testament bene elohim (those in the likeness of the elohim i.e. spirits) always refers to angels. I do not avoid diffciulties by trying to explain them away. But I have no wish to prolong the subject. It is not one of the most savoury parts of Scripture. which is why God brought about the Flood. Best wishes. |
||||||
12 | Dose the bible note angels by gender? | Bible general Archive 4 | biblicalman | 228912 | ||
I will only say: There are three general references to 'men' in Genesis 1-10: 'At that time 'men' began to call on the name of YHWH.' (4.25). A general usage but this clearly mainly refers to 'believers' (the godly). 'When 'men' began to multiply on the face of the ground and daughters were born to them --' (6.1). This must signify the generality of men including the above. And it is the daughters of these men who cohabited with the bene elohim (6.2). There are absolutely no grounds for this reference to 'men' as specifically referring to Cainites. If words mean anyhing it refers to the generality of men including believers. The bene elohim (sons of the elohim) are mentioned in Job 1.6; 2.1 where in both cases the reference is to heavenly beings. See also Job 38.7. 'sons of' in Hebrew signifies 'of the same character as, same likeness as ' (compare 'the sons of Belial'). Thus sons of 'the elohim (i.e. of spirit beings - see 1 Samuel 28.13) would be expected to mean 'those of the likeness of spirit beings'. In the light of this it appears to me that rather than being obvious, to make Genesis 6 1-2 refer to a contrast between a so-called godly line who are all destroyed in the Flood (apart from the Noahs), and a godless line (whose names regularly and significantly include God's name) who are destroyed in the same flood is samething like special pleading. |
||||||
13 | Dose the bible note angels by gender? | Bible general Archive 4 | biblicalman | 228927 | ||
Hi Holmes You will note that all your references are to huioi theou (sons of God) not to bene elohim (sons of the elohim), and all refer to the New Testament. They are in a totally different category from references in the Old Testament to bene elohim. You have admitted yourself that all references to bene elohim (which is better translated 'sons of the elohim, spirit world' not 'sons of God') refer to angels. KJV in Psalm 8.5 translates 'elohim' as angels (which is confirmed in Hebrews 2.7). You make the mistake of thinking that elohim always means 'God'. It does not. It is also used of 'false gods' behind which are demons (Deut 32.17; 1 Cor 10.20). And it is used by the witch of Endor of spirits which arise from the earth in necromancy (1 Samuel 28.13). That was what she thought that she saw. When referred to angels bene elohim does not mean 'sons of God' it means 'sone of the nature of the elohim, the spirit world'. Satan was one of the bene elohim (Job 1.6; 2.1). He was hardly a 'son of God'. The witch of Endor thought that she saw 'elohim' arising from the earth. They would certainly not have been good angels. 'Demon' simply equates to 'evil angel' (Deut 32.17). You say the godly were destroyed by inter-marriage? Well in that case it was happening well before Genesis 6.1-4. Descendants of Seth who died in the Flood would have been up to 800 years old or more. Thus in many cases their marriages would have been 700 years before the Flood. To me the narrative reads of a fairly recent occurrence within 120 years of the Flood. And there is no suggestion of widespread polygamy. You are of course entitled to interpret as you wish. What I am saying is that the actual Hebrew usage of both the terms 'men' and 'bene elohim' point to a relationship between humans and fallen angels. Even when I may not understand it I prefer to believe what the Scripture teaches. As Satan was clearly one of the bene elohim (sons of God) are you suggesting that he was not a fallen angel? Best wishes |
||||||
14 | Other Names for Jesus | Bible general Archive 4 | biblicalman | 228951 | ||
hi Aileen Jesus has so many names because He is so great and complex that one name is not sufficient to describe Him. Jesus means 'Yah is salvation'; Immanu-el means 'God is with us'; Christ means God's anointed One; LORD means that He is YHWH (Phil 2.9-11), and Lord over our lives; Son of Man links Him wtih Daniel's prophecy in 7.13-14, and also bring out that He is truly human; Son of God means that He is of the same nature as the Father, and so we could go on. Best wishes. |
||||||
15 | Can a marraige be saved after adultry? | Bible general Archive 4 | biblicalman | 228969 | ||
Ho Kimommy, welcome to the forum. I agree with Ed that you should seek out some spiritual person whom you can trust that you can discuss this with. Are you sure that you are not reading your feeling of guilt into your husband's behaviour? If he was only speaking to another woman that is not necessarily something to get suspicious about. Are you sure that your suspicions are well grounded? Your very feeling of guilt might be bringing strains into your marriage. If your husband specifically forgave you then he should stand by his commitment. It would seem to me that having made the decision not to see your adultery as a grounds for divorce God would see him as bound by that decision. For God forgives us as we forgive. And once He has forgiven He does not change His mind. I am presuming that you are both committed Christians? Presumably you have not discussed this with your husband? Perhaps that is something that you ought to do. At least you would then know where you stood. And he may well be shocked that you still doubt him. May God help you to be wise.. |
||||||
16 | cremation according to the bible? | Bible general Archive 4 | biblicalman | 228973 | ||
Hi floyd, welcome to the forum. The Bible says nothing about cremation, and in Old Testament days many bodies were burned with fire during the destruction of cities. It will not affect their resurrection. But burial was always looked on as the method disposing of dead bodies. It could therefore be argued that this is testimony to the resurrection. In the end it is open to individual choice. Best wishes. |
||||||
17 | OT Parallels | Bible general Archive 4 | biblicalman | 228975 | ||
hi well clearly chronicles can be seen as paralleling kings ezra can be seen as paralleling nehemiah exodus, leviticus and deuteronomy can be seen as parallels best wishes |
||||||
18 | Dreams ... Genesis-Revelation | Bible general Archive 4 | biblicalman | 228988 | ||
... | ||||||
19 | Dreams ... Genesis-Revelation | Bible general Archive 4 | biblicalman | 228993 | ||
Hi Brad Well God does sometimes communicate with people in a general way through dreams. There are a number of dreams in both Old and New Testaments which were significant (e.g. both Josephs, old and new). God spoke to Gideon through the dream of an unbeliever (Judges 7.13-15). And lower level prophets gained knowledge through dreams (Numbers 12.6). 1 Sam 28.6 appears to suggest it was sometimes an acceptable mode of learning God's will. I can therefore warn people not to take dreams too seriously, but if someone believes their dream is of God I do better to help them interpret it in a Scriptural fashion, and I am in no position to dismiss a dream out of hand especially if regularly repeated. If I do not give guidance someone else might do so to worse effect. But what I was rather saying was that she would do well, if she believes the dream to be significant, to gain a Scriptural lesson through her dream rather than seeing it as a vivid sign of the Lord's near return or a special message just for her. If a dream turns someone to considering Scriptural truth it can only be good. What I would be against would be using a dream as an excuse for doing something unusual or giving some unusual interpretation. Best wishes |
||||||
20 | Are we Under Mosiac Law? or Jesus Law? | Bible general Archive 4 | biblicalman | 229004 | ||
We are under the Law of Christ. Basically this is summed up in 'you shall love the Lord your God with heart, soul, mind and strength and your neighbour as yourself' (Galatians 5.14 6.2). Jesus reinterpreted the Mosaic Law in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5-7). We seek to live it out in Christ's strength because we are counted as righteous in God's eyes through the cross and through the blood of Christ. If we are true Christians the Law of Moses can no more condemn us, because it was fulfilled on our behalf by Jesus Christ. Through Him we have been given the gift of righteousnss. His righteusness has been set to our account (Rom 3.24-25). But the whole law (Old and New Testaments) is like a mirror into which we can look and see what kind of people we are, so that we can then let Christ put us right (James 1.22-25) and live it out in order to please Him.. |
||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [19] >> |