Results 101 - 120 of 138
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: There Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
101 | Is inter-racial marriage wrong? | Bible general Archive 1 | There | 15714 | ||
Another point too, is that using archealogy and history, one can realize that (Noah's sons) Shem is the father of the olive or brown skinned people, Japheth is the father of the white or light skinned people, and Ham is the father of the dark or black skinned people. And there are many colors in between because of inter-racial marriages in the past, and the many faceted gene pool. We're all cousins, a few times removed! |
||||||
102 | Is inter-racial marriage wrong? | Bible general Archive 1 | There | 15713 | ||
There were at least two different "kinds" of birds on the ark. A raven and a dove. The encyclopedia says "according to structure, the class of birds is divided into groups called orders. These are divided into families, and familes into genera, each of which is made up of very closely similar species." And I'm not positive, but I think most cats "could" breed with one another (just like dogs) because they are the same "kind", although they tend to be a bit prejudiced and seem to like only those who travel in their own special circles. :) |
||||||
103 | Was Peter denied before the Father? | Matt 10:33 | There | 15687 | ||
Well said Nolan. The word "confess" in the previous verse means to "covenant" or "acknowledge"... hence: "Covenant" means a binding agreement, and "Acknowledge" means: 1.to admit to be true, 2.to recognize the authority or claims of, 3.to recognize and answer (a greeting or introduction, 4.to express thanks for, 5.to state that one has received (gift etc) Those things are all incorporated in the word "confess". And the opposite of confess would be "deny", meaning to "reject" or "contradict" those things (Greek "arneomai" - deny). But Jesus used a different word with a slightly different meaning when stating that "Peter would deny me thrice". That word is "aparneomai" with more of the meaning to "disown". |
||||||
104 | Curious of your perspective. | Bible general Archive 1 | There | 14887 | ||
Just a comment :) I hope I do not offend you if I make light of the subject of Noah and his wine? Since I have drank grape juice and have also tasted grape "wine", I find it hard to believe that Noah wouldn't have known the difference between a pre-Flood grape juice and after-Flood wine. I think it more probable that "wine" was also produced pre-Flood and Noah knew what he was raising those grapes for. And it wasn't just to make raisins! :) The "wine" Noah made comes from "yayin", an unused root meaning to effervesce; wine (as fermented). I suggest that he knew what would happen when he "stored" the grape juice in wineskins (?) long enough to have it smell funny. Seriously though, it's possible from a Biblical standpoint to think bacteria was not around pre-Flood because the Bible doesn't mention it. But bacteria would have needed to be present pre-Flood just as it is today. Some bacteria causes diseases, but others are necessary for fermentation, nitrogen fixation, etc. Using that last example, all life requires nitrogen, but most forms can't use it in its gaseous form. It is converted to nitrate compounds before certain plants use it to make protein. Unless I have forgotten my biology, that is called nitrogen fixation -- the conversion of atmospheric nitrogen into nitrates by soil bacteria. It would also take bacteria to "decay" fallen leaves, over-ripe fruit, etc. for their nutrients to go back into the soil, and to decompose other types of waste, etc. Pre-Flood, the earth would have been a disaster without certain bacteria present. The soil would have been dead, and there would be a carpet of un-decayed vegetation I'm afraid. There |
||||||
105 | what is the defination of pentecost | Bible general Archive 1 | There | 14833 | ||
I'd just like to add that the Feast of Firstfruits is always on the SABBATH (Saturday, 7th day of the week) [also stated in Lev. 23:11], which means the Feast of Weeks (or Pentecost) was always 50 days later on a Sunday (1st day of the week). | ||||||
106 | How can Christ return be imminent? | Bible general Archive 1 | There | 14829 | ||
I also think the Lord told us to "watch" because it will stengthen our faith... as we see His prophecies fulfilled. A while back I was involved in a study of the Feast Days of the Lord (given to the Israelites BY GOD). It was very interesting, especially since 4 of those Days have literally been fulfilled during Christ's first coming; each on the exact corresponding Jewish Feast Day. The first time they occurred to protect and save Israel, and were then to be celebrated by the Israelites as a remembrance and also a forshadow of how "God-saves" (complete plan of redemption). Now I don't know what year, and since even the Hebrew calendar has been changed I don't think we can KNOW the actual DAY of those Feasts to come either. But it is interesting that they will/should occur on the actual fall Feast Day in the future. 1. PASSOVER OT. In remembrance of the first Passover, the Israelites were to use two sacrificial goats, one as a blood sacrifice for sin and the other one as the scapegoat. NT. Jesus' death on the cross was a literal fulfillment of Passover, when His blood was shed on the cross for our sins, and He was our scapegoat in taking on the penalty for our sins. 2. FEAST OF UNLEAVENED BREAD. OT. It was celebrated by eating ONLY unleavened bread. (In scripture unleavened bread represents corruption. It is the agent that causes fermentation.) NT. Christ fulfilled this feast day when His body did not decay (corrupt) in the grave. 3. FEAST OF FIRSTFRUITS. OT. The firstfruits (first sheaf of the harvest is cut) and presented to the Lord. The Lord's acceptance of this gift is an "earnest", or a pledge on His part of a full harvest. NT. This was fulfilled in Christ's resurrection from the dead (firstfruit from the dead), when He went to the Father (John 20:17). The Father's acceptance of Christ as the firstfruit, means that there would be a full harvest in season. 4. FEAST OF WEEKS. OT. God gave Moses the Ten Commandments written on stone. It was celebrated by having the people bring 1) firstfruits of the fall harvest, and 2) two loaves of LEAVENED bread. NT. The Holy Spirit was given on the Feast of Weeks (Pentecost) and God began writing His Commandments on men's hearts (Jer. 31:33; Heb. 10:16). The "firstfruits of the fall harvest" represented the apostles in that upper room, and the "two loaves of leavened bread" represented the JEWS and the GENTILES, both still having sin in their midst (not having been perfected yet). 5. FEAST OF TRUMPETS. OT. This feast was celebrated using a "shofar" [special trumpet), which had two separate functions. One was to call a solemn assembly, when Israel was to be summoned to God's presence (Ex. 19:13,17,19; Num. 10:2), and also when under divine direction, Israel was to go to war (Num. 10:9; Jud.7; Jer. 4:19-21). NT. The Feast of Trumpets represents the second coming of the Lord to rapture His church and judge those left on the earth. (The church will be raptured and the Lord's wrath will commence on the earth.) 6. DAY OF ATONEMENT. OT. This is celebrated with the high priest offering sacrifices for himself and the people's sins that were committed in ignorance (Heb. 9:7,8). NT. Jesus mentioned this event in the Olivette discourse, where He speaks of separating (judging) the sheep (those who committed unintentional sin) and the goats (those who committed intentional sin)[Matt. 15:31-34]. Christ's atoning sacrifice will then be made available to the survivors of the great tribulation (Isaiah 24:6) who will physically enter the thousand year reign of Christ on earth. 7. FEAST OF TABERNACLES. OT. This was celebrated by each family erecting a little hut or booth, hanging samples of the fall crop on the structure to acknowledge God's faithfulness in providing for His people. It is an 8 day feast, the 8th being primary. On that day there was a large procession from the Temple Mount to the Pool of Siloam where a pitcher was filled with water. They then proceeded back to the Temple Mount. Since the rains usually stop in March in Israel, there is no rain for almost 7 months. If God does not provide the "early" rains in October and November, there will be no spring crop and famine would be at the doorstep. This ceremony was to invoke God's blessing on the nation by providing life-giving water. NT. This feast represents the gathering of God's children and the rivers of living water that would be available to them continually (John 7:37,38). This feast day represents Christ's millenial kingdom, when Christ will tabernacle with men. The Bible says that Christ was foreordained before the creation of the earth to save those who believe (1Pet. 1:20,21), and I think the Feast Days that God commanded Israel show that His entire plan of salvation was clearly laid out from the very beginning. There |
||||||
107 | Explain dinosaurs | Job 40:15 | There | 13297 | ||
Hi Steve, I agree with you. I don't think the behemoth is a hippo or an elephant either. Not as we know it today anyway. Animals would have lived much longer pre-Flood just like humans did. And scientifically it has been found that crockodiles (or was it alligators) never stop growing from the time they're born until they die. And their average growth rate would put them at about 100 feet long if they lived to be 500-600 years old. I don't remember where I read about that. So "monsters" would seem fairly probable Pre-Flood and since God didn't say he'd destroy everything in the sea, then some of the large sea creatures surely would have survived the great Flood. On top of that, if Noah had any of the "little ones" in the ark, they may have lived for a few hundred years AFTER the Flood just like men did. So certain land creatures could have become quite large too. And something that comes to mind concerning Job is that it would make no sense for God to use a behemoth or leviathan to explain to Job about HIS power and strength if He was simply talking about something that was not fearsome, nor much bigger than man, nor something "pre-Flood" that Job could not truly comprehend. And Job had to have lived AFTER the Flood because in verse 1 it says "a man in the land of Uz". Uz is from the Hebrew "Uwts" meaning Uts, a son of Abram, also a Seirite, and the regions settled by them. So if God wanted to impress Job with His own power and might, then He surely would have used something that Job recognized. And Job apparently knew what a behemoth and a leviathan (fire-breathing leviathan) were. There is one type of insect that "breathes" fire even today. It has to do with pouches that contain certain chemicals, which when combined in the throat forms fire which shoots out it's mouth. (Sorry, a poor description.) It uses this for protection. Again, I don't remember the name of the "bug". But at least even in today's world it isn't impossible to believe or understand that an animal or sea creature could have "breathed fire". |
||||||
108 | Figurative vrs literal language? | Bible general Archive 1 | There | 13154 | ||
I was reading some other posts and I just realized that "Hank" and you (JVH0212) are not the same person!!! Such a shame too since I thought I could quit using those numbers! :) | ||||||
109 | Where did Jesus get His blood from | Bible general Archive 1 | There | 13153 | ||
Ed, there is no need for an apology and I mean that sincerely. I took no offense. There is enough going on in the world right now that it makes a person want to jump up an down and stomp their feet yelling "that's enough!!". I know what you say about Islam is true, but believe it or not (tongue in cheek) I don't ususally judge people by their religion. I have to look at each as an individual. And I know that Stopoola could turn on me some time (if I knew him/her personally), but so could my neighbor next door that thinks I'm a Jesus freak. I'll still treat them the same way I want to be treated... I agree too that we do need to pray for the unsaved... regardless of their religion actually. (And I know I'm not telling you anything new.) God bless you brother |
||||||
110 | Follow up second time Peter first Pope | Bible general Archive 1 | There | 13118 | ||
Thanks for the welcome. "Hank" will certainly be easier to write than JHV0212. :) I have to stop and look at the numbers when I type. | ||||||
111 | Follow up second time Peter first Pope | Bible general Archive 1 | There | 13117 | ||
No problem. Please do the same for me if you find me in error. My memory isn't perfect either. | ||||||
112 | Figurative vrs literal language? | Bible general Archive 1 | There | 13116 | ||
I wondered if I should have gotten into that point because of remarks I'd made in other notes. I am glad you added it. Yes God gave some to be teachers. But if the Holy Spirit does not give us understanding, even the church teacher's words will have no impact on our hearts. It's the same for us as it was with Peter. Jesus spoke to him for how long, yet he didn't understand. It was when God revealed the truth to Peter that he understood. And the Holy Spirit will also show us which words are true and which are not, even when we are listening to our church teachers. They can be fallible too. |
||||||
113 | Where did Jesus get His blood from | Bible general Archive 1 | There | 13092 | ||
Hi Ed, Your assertion that stpopoola has no Christian friends may be true or not true. But I know for a fact that in the US there are many Moslems that do have Christian friends, so that is not an impossibility in stpopoola's case either. |
||||||
114 | Follow up second time Peter first Pope | Bible general Archive 1 | There | 13083 | ||
Hi JVH0212, Sorry, but that isn't true. "Pater" and the Greek words for reverence or reverend are not interchangeable. "Pater" is always translated "father", except on occasion when it is translated "parent". Both are accurate according to the meaning of the word "pater". In the original Greek there are three words used that are translated "reverence" in the KJV. They are: "entrepo" meaning to invert, i.e. in a good sense, to respect; or in a bad sense to confound: regard, (give) reverence, shame. "aido" meaning bashfulness, i.e. (towards men) modesty; or (towards God) awe: reverence, shamefacedness. "phobeo" meaning to frighten, i.e. to be alarmed, by analogy to be in awe of, i.e. revere: be afraid, fear (exceedingly), reverence. If any of those three words (entrepo, aidos, or phobeo) were translated "father" in any bible, I would question whether it was translated accurately in other areas too. |
||||||
115 | In context change literal to figurative? | Bible general Archive 1 | There | 13025 | ||
To me Steve, it makes some sense. Usually if someone wants to get an important point across to another, a "picture story" works wonders in getting the other person to understand the main objective. Using something that a person can identify with is usually quite effective. In this case, if there is anything in your life that is causing you to sin, get rid of it so you won't spend eternity in hell. And as you know Jesus did not literally mean cut off your hand or pluck out your eye, but His objective was to have people understand the importance of "putting to death your members which are on the earth: fornication, uncleanness, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry." (Col.3:5) |
||||||
116 | Did Adam die lost? | Genesis | There | 13000 | ||
I suppose I should let this drop since you seem to be a bit bored with the subject, but I want to make a short comment. I heard that too about Seth. But that doesn't seem to be what the Bible says. Genesis 4:25 "And Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son and named him Seth, 'For God has appointed another seed for me instead of Abel, whom Cain killed.'" They didn't name him Seth because they thought he was the Messiah, nor a substitute for sin, but because they saw him as a substitute for Abel. It sounded good to me at the time though too. :) God bless. |
||||||
117 | What do you base your belief on? | Bible general Archive 1 | There | 12998 | ||
Please note in Acts 8:14 that Peter is "sent" by the apostles along with John to Samaria. Peter is not doing the sending; somebody else is. Also note in Acts 15:14-21 that at the Jerusalem conference, after Peter made his speech and Paul and Barnabas made their speeches, it is James who delivers the final verdict. Peter wasn't in "charge" of the church even then. And in 1Peter 5:1, he warns against ANYONE trying to "lord" themselves over the church. And in that verse he also recognizes that he is an elder just as those he's speaking to. Not a "special elder" mind you, just an elder. There is no hint in scripture that the words Jesus spoke to Simon Peter made him ruler and head of the church. I'm going to include some quotes from "The Bones of Peter" by Dr. W.A. Criswell. If there are no quotation marks, then it's my comments. "In the Greek there is a play upon his name --- "Thou art Petros (a stone) and upon thee petra (a stratum of stone) I will build my church." First Peter 2:5 says, "Ye also, as living stones, are built up a spiritual house." First Corinthians 3:11 says, "For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid which is Jesus." The meaning is self-evident. The foundation, "the petra", upon which Christ will build His church is His deity, which Simon Peter has just confessed upon a revelation from the Father. The stones out of which Christ will erect His church are believing disciples, one of whom is Peter himself." As to Peter being IN Rome, "Jerome (d. 240 A.D. declared that Peter, after being first bishop at Antioch, and after laboring in Pontus, Galatia, Asia, Cappadocia, and Bithynia, went to Rome in the second year of Claudius (about 42 A.D.) to oppose Simon Magus, and was bishop of that church for 25 years, finally being crucified head downward in the last year of Nero's reign (67 A.D.) and was buried on the Vatican hill." There is a problem with this account though. 1) It was written about the time that Calixtus I first made his claim based on Matthew 16:18, to be the current replacement of Peter; and 2) that account does not agree with scripture. "1. Paul was converted about 37 A.D. He says in the first chapter of Galatians (Gal. 1:13-18) that after his conversion he went into Arabia, "then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him 15 days." This takes us to 40 A.D., and Peter is still in Jerusalem." "2. Sometime during those days he made his missionary journey through the western part of Judea, to Lydda, to Joppa, to Caesarea, and back to Jerusalem (Acts 9, 10, 11). Then came the imprisonment under Herod Agrippa I and the miraculous deliverance by the angel of the Lord (Acts 12). Peter then "went down from Judea to Caesarea and there abode" (Acts 12:19). Herod Agrippa died not long after these events (Acts 12:20-23). Josephus says that the death of Agrippa occurred in the fourth year of the reign of Claudius. This would be about 45 A.D., and Peter is still in Palestine." "3. Paul writes in the second chapter of Galatians that fourteen years after his first visit to Jerusalem to visit Simon Peter he went again to see him. The first journey was 40 A.D.; fourteen years later brings us to 54 A.D., and Peter is still in Palestine." "4. Peter returns the visit and goes to Antioch where Paul is working. This occasioned the famous interview between the two recorded in Galatians 2:11-14. Peter is still in the Orient, not in Rome." "5. After 54 A.D., and after the Antioch visit, the Apostle Peter makes an extensive missionary journey or journeys throughout the Roman provinces of the East. On these missionary tours Peter takes his wife (1Cor. 9:5). They labor in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. So vast a work and so great a territory must have consumed several years. This would take us therefore, to at least 60 A.D., and Peter and his wife are still not in Rome but in the East." "6. In about 58 A.D. Paul wrote a letter to the church at Rome. In the last chapter of that epistle, Paul salutes twenty-seven persons, but he never mentions Simon Peter. If Peter were "governing" the church at Rome, it is most strange that Paul should never refer to him." "Romans 1:13 shows that the church at Rome was a Gentile church. At the Jerusalem conference (Gal. 2:9), it was agreed that Peter should go to the Jews and Paul to the Gentiles." |
||||||
118 | Did Adam die lost? | Genesis | There | 12892 | ||
True Joe, but the seeming question was "was Abraham taught by his parents about the one true God?" I agree with you, he wasn't. |
||||||
119 | How long did they remain after eating. | Genesis | There | 12889 | ||
Genesis 3:21 "Also for Adam and his wife the Lord God made tunics of skin, and clothed them." The first blood sacrifice to cover sin. And God did it. |
||||||
120 | Did Adam die lost? | Genesis | There | 12882 | ||
That's a good point about the name. Do you have a reference that you could show me where you got that information? I ask because I looked up the names of Cain, Abel, and Seth in the original Hebrew. To me, the meanings don't imply what you mentioned. Cain, name of 1st child, (an affinity to "a sense of fixity, lance, spear"). Abel, son of Adam, (same as emptiness, or vanity). Seth, substituted, appoint. I do agree there were many more who were saved by faith in ancient times than just those Paul listed. But I'm not sure we can assume that Adam was saved since the Bible doesn't say he was. I think Adam and Eve definitely told all they knew about the Lord God, and their time in the garden of Eden to their sons and daughters. [Please note that God even spoke with Cain in Genesis 4.] But talking the talk, and walking the walk aren't the same thing. I'm not trying to "judge" Adam, but another thing just crossed my mind. It wasn't until after Seth gave birth to Enosh that it says "then men began to call on the name of the Lord" (4:26). Adam would have been about 235 years old at that time, when men "began" to call upon the name of the Lord. Was Adam among them? I don't know. But I guess I can't assume that he was for two reasons. 1)The Bible doesn't say he was; and 2)after having a walking/talking relationship with God in the garden, he apparently did not "call on His name" after leaving the garden which was AT LEAST the first 150 years they lived outside the garden. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ] Next > Last [7] >> |