Results 121 - 140 of 465
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Parable Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
121 | guiding principles? | Num 31:17 | Parable | 175258 | ||
The content of your post is not consistent with the guidelines prescribed by the owners of this forum. | ||||||
122 | guiding principles? | Num 31:17 | Parable | 175251 | ||
So, are you suggesting this is an example of "situational ethics" based on "cultural relativity"? | ||||||
123 | scriptural evidence? | Num 31:17 | Parable | 175248 | ||
That's a good working hypothesis. What scriptural evidence might you suggest to support this idea? |
||||||
124 | 2 Tim 3:16 | Num 31:17 | Parable | 175241 | ||
In science and law, it is recognized that the evidence we consider often is shaped by the questions we ask. I am mindful that hermaneutics is not exempt from this. It is possible that the distinction I see is more about how I think and less about how God thinks. | ||||||
125 | 2 Tim 3:16 | Num 31:17 | Parable | 175231 | ||
God's unwillingness to answer is not the point. My question relates to what the Word says about what was done in His name. While your commentaries are insightful, they are not scripture, which is what I am trying to understand. And, you suggest all the commentaries you provided answered my orginal question. I disagree. Here are the relevant excerpts, with my observations (in parens): Matthew Henry -- "The female children were spared, who, being brought up among the Israelites, would not tempt them to idolatry." (this explains why they were spared, but not why the boys were killed) Your paraphrase -- "John Gill comments on the women killed ...." (this explains why the women were killed, but does not address why the virgin females were spared nor why the boys were killed) Robert Jamieson, et al, -- "No order had been given for the slaughter of the women, and in ancient war they were commonly reserved for slaves." (this explains why the officer brought them back from war) "...the Midianitish women had forfeited all claims to mild or merciful treatment; and the sacred character, the avowed object of the war (Numbers 31:2-3), made their slaughter necessary without any special order." (this explains why the women were killed) "But why 'kill every male among the little ones'? It was designed to be a war of extermination, such as God Himself had ordered against the people of Canaan, whom the Midianites equalled in the enormity of their wickedness." (if a war of extermination, then killing the boys is consistent with that, but sparing the virgin females is not) Adam Clarke -- "The little ones were safely lodged; they were taken to heaven and saved from the evil to come." (so, killing the boys was essentially an act of mercy. if so, then this mercy was denied to the virgin females. why?) John Wesley -- "Every woman - Partly for punishment, because the guilt was general, and though some of them only did prostitute themselves to the Israelites, yet the rest made themselves accessary by their consent or approbation; and partly, for prevention of the like mischief from such an adulterous generation." (this explains the killing of the women, and perhaps the boys, but does not speak to why the virgin females were spared) Finally, while I appreciate your encouragement to explore this topic elsewhere and report my findings, to be honest it feels more like I am being dismissed, now that you have answered my question yet I have somehow not understood your meaning. My question remains best stated in two parts: 1. What purpose is served by eliminating the boys that would not have also been served by eliminating the virgin females? 2. Conversely, what purpose is served by sparing the virgin females that would not have also been served by sparing the boys? If anyone has any scriptural references that speak to the distinction between the boys and virgin females that I have articulated, please advise. Otherwise, it seems God's purpose with this distiction, if it is indeed real, is not to be revealed in His Word. |
||||||
126 | 2 Tim 3:16 | Num 31:17 | Parable | 175216 | ||
Thank you for sharing your opinions about the purpose of this scripture and the interesting commentaries along those lines. My only concern, though, with the ideas that 1) its none of our business, 2) we're not smart enough to understand or 3) we're not interested and just want to complain, comes in light of 2 Tim 3:16 "Every Scripture is God-breathed and profitable for instruction, for reproof and conviction of sin, for correction of error and discipline in obedience, for training in righteousness" If the purpose of this scripture is not to be explained in the terms I have put the question, and that is certainly possible, then what purpose does Numbers 31:17-18 serve, among those listed by Paul to Timothy? |
||||||
127 | what purpose served by this distinction? | Num 31:17 | Parable | 175215 | ||
Thanks, the link is good, except it fails to address the killing of the boys. | ||||||
128 | why the distinction btw girls and boys? | Num 31:17 | Parable | 175214 | ||
Actually, this is the original. | ||||||
129 | what purpose served by this distinction? | Num 31:17 | Parable | 175200 | ||
Respectfully, I don't see how v15 addresses the question of distinction. Perhaps my question can be reformulated....was what happened full and correct obedience to God? If yes, what is God trying to do by having the boys (who by definition are not of the age of responsibility) killed, while having the virgin females spared and given to the officers? What purpose is served by eliminating the boys that would not have also been served by eliminating the virgin females? And conversely, what purpose is served by sparing the virgin females that would not have also been served by sparing the boys? Peace, Parable |
||||||
130 | why kill boys yet spare girls? | Num 31:17 | Parable | 175172 | ||
Your commment about progressive revelation is on point. As for justification from God, that too is on point, yet its not clear to me where God instructed Moses to kill male children, yet spare virgin females for the purpose of having them as slaves. Boys can just as easily be taken as slaves, no? I'm interested in the reason why boys were distinguished from girls in this instance. Was it because sexual congress with the girls and/or procreation with them was implied, but this could not be the case with boys? |
||||||
131 | why the distinction btw girls and boys? | Num 31:17 | Parable | 175143 | ||
Some verses in the bible are hard to accept because we don't understand them, while others are hard to accept precisely because we do. If I may put your response into my own words.... While justified in terms of past experience at the hands of the Midianites, the executions were pre-emptive self-defense in order to preserve the line that would later produce the Messiah. Do you concur? Also, you quote Walvoord as saying "The virgins were spared because they obviously had had no role in the Baal of Peor incident nor could they by themselves perpetuate the Midianite peoples." The young boys likely were also not responsible, and they too could not perpetuate the Midianite people BY THEMSELVES. Why is there a distiction between young virgin girls and young boys, who likely are virgins also, regarding their ability to procreate? Finally, its still not clear to me how the young virgin girls were to be "taken". Does the bible give details on this practice? |
||||||
132 | kill all the boys and take the virgins? | Num 31:17 | Parable | 175114 | ||
In this verse (and the next) Moses is speaking to his military officers after they returned from war with the Midianites. He was angry that they had not killed ALL the Midianites, but instead had brought back the boys, girls and women, along with all the other spoils of war. I have two questions: 1. how is Moses justified in ordering the murder of innocent male children and encouraging the officers to take the young virgin women for themselves? 2. in what capacity are the officers to "take" the young virgins "for themselves"? As wives, as mistresses, as concubines, what? |
||||||
133 | Prophets of to day | 1 John 4:1 | Parable | 143971 | ||
it is also god's standard that we speak the truth in love, with gentleness and respect. kindly explain to me how your public condemnation ministers god's grace and mercy to the person you reduced to tears. Parable |
||||||
134 | Prophets of to day | 1 John 4:1 | Parable | 143869 | ||
By your standard, all of us should remain silent. Parable |
||||||
135 | prescription for living, rephrased? | Ps 14:1 | Parable | 142594 | ||
Yes, of course. I agree that respect for God is the beginning of wisdom. But the existence of God is not the question, but rather it concerns the manner of living that is demanded by the requirement that it not matter if a God exists or not. That is (for the sake of communicating with my secular friend) if a God exists, how we live would be acceptable to that God, and if not, that also would be acceptable to everyone else. Or, another way to phrase it, is there any way of living that meets this requirement and would this in fact be compatible with how the bible says we should live? Does the biblical approach to life meet this requirement? I hope this clarifies my question. |
||||||
136 | Prescription for living? | Not Specified | Parable | 142590 | ||
A secular friend has suggested that the world would be a better place if we would just live such that it doesn't matter if there is a God or not. What does the bible say about this approach to life, pro or con? I'm interested to know if this principle for living is compatible with a biblical worldview or not. Thanks |
||||||
137 | Prescription for living? | Ps 14:1 | Parable | 142592 | ||
A secular friend has suggested that the world would be a better place if we would just live such that it doesn't matter if there is a God or not. What does the bible say about this approach to life, pro or con? I'm interested to know if this principle for living is compatible with a biblical worldview or not. Thanks |
||||||
138 | why does God allow evil to exsit | Bible general Archive 2 | Parable | 138989 | ||
My summary of his conclusions does not do justice to his derivation from scripture and his application to real world evil. For example, one of his most compelling examples is the case of Nazi concentration camp guards who gang rape a young girl, then gouge out her eyes. Hardly "strictly verbal means". Boyd's ideas speak directly to the unlimited depravity that evil can manifest. His explanation is gut-wrenching, not noble, and accounts for all manner of real evil, not the abstract concept some people have who have not seen it personally. As for meeting evil, no explanation or system of thought is adequate, rather the only defense is Jesus Christ, his love and goodness. We are called to overcome evil with His goodness. Peace |
||||||
139 | why does God allow evil to exsit | Bible general Archive 2 | Parable | 138911 | ||
According to Dr. Gregory Boyd, in his book, "Satan and the problem of evil", evil is a necessary possibility in a world in which the following realities make love possible: 1. Love entails freedom. (freedom to choose otherwise is what makes choosing love so special) 2. Freedom entails risk. (the risk is that someone may actually choose not to love) 3. Risk entails moral responsibility. (people are responsible for their choices because of the consequences they bring. Sometimes those consequences are evil) 4. Moral responsibility is proportionate to the power to influence others. (if you are powerful, you have more responsibility that someone who is inconsequential. Satan was the most powerful, so he carries the most responsibility for rebelling against God) 5. The power to influence is irrevocable. (God's gifts are genuine, not taken back if abused.) 6. The power to influence is finite. (God has established boundaries within which we operate, so the consequences of our poor decisions are not infinitely bad for everyone everywhere.) If you experience evil, it is because someone, including possibly yourself, chose to follow something other than God, and that choice was close enough to you that the consequences were within your sphere of influence. Boyd derives his point from scripture. A good summary of his ideas are available in "God of the Possible" and at his website www.gregboyd.org/gbfront/ |
||||||
140 | why does God allow evil to exsit | Bible general Archive 2 | Parable | 138097 | ||
Dr. Gregory Boyd addresses this question in his book "Satan and the problem of evil". He defends his thesis on scriptural grounds and has answered this question to my satisfaction. I will summarize his argument in my next post. (I'm out of town and I don't have those notes with me.) Peace, Parable |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ] Next > Last [24] >> |