Results 141 - 160 of 449
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Jesusman Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
141 | Genesis 1:26-27 | Genesis | Jesusman | 28481 | ||
You are what? | ||||||
142 | God's anger at Babel tower, why? | Genesis | Jesusman | 29215 | ||
They had the audacity to attempt to try and reach God on their own accord. Not only that, but they were trying to act without God. Basically, it all boils down to pride and selfishness. As a result of their pride and selfishness, God confused the langauges. This resulted in future college and high school students needing to fulfill a language requirement in order to graduate. :) Jesusman |
||||||
143 | The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 | Genesis | Jesusman | 29493 | ||
Ok? About the Niphillim or Giants, as they are also known as, there is no relationship between them and the Sons and Daughters. They are merely mentioned that they were in the land in those days. The term Niphillim is only used three times in the Bible in only two passages: Genesis 6:4 and Numbers 13:33. Now, It is impossible for the Niphillim in Genesis to be the same or ancestors of the Niphillim in Numbers. Why? There is a giant, global, and wet event that takes place between the two: the Great Flood. The Bible records that all life, aside from those on the ark, was destroyed. Therefore, the two groups cannot be linked in any other way than just termanology. That leads me to believe that "Niphillim" is a descriptive term given to those who are giant in stature, fierce in attitude, and has a tendancy to stomp on their enemies and prey. This is what "niphillim" means in it's basic sense. Also, given the descriptions in Numbers of the Anakim, it just follows that "Niphillim" is used to give them a name which the other Israelites could relate to. It's as if a little 5 year-old girl sees a roaring Lion at the Zoo and calls it a "kitty!" The Lion is not a "kitty". It's a Lion. It may be related to a "kitty" in physical appearance, but it is still different than a "kitty". You get my point. Another point that I should make clear, is that the Niphillim are not the offspring. The Language does not support that in any way. The mighty men of old and men of renown are the offspring of the Sons and the Daughters. The offspring and the Niphillim are two different groups. All I am saying about the Niphillim in genesis is that they cannot be the offspring. There isn't any support for it. The only support that can be given is that they are point of reference, which I explain in my original post. Also, I don't think that the Genesis Niphillim are human. Scientifically speaking. If they were humans, then why hasn't science uncovered any giant human fossils? The only giant fossils that have been uncovered are dinosaurs. Now, I leave you to put the rest together. As for Job, notice that the Sons of God "came to present themselves before the Lord". Now, what is it that every Christian does for morning Worship? They present themselves before God. Correct? Not only that, but Job immediately becomes the topic of conversation. Which gives support for them being humans and Job being among them. Then there is Satan being there. Satan was kicked out of heaven. If these are angels before God in heaven, why is Satan there? All of those together point to a time of worship among the human believers of God on earth at the time that Job was written, which is believed to have been during the early parts of Genesis. Then you have the reoccurance in Job chapter two. Not only that, but never, no where in the Bible are angels called specifically the sons of God. With all of those factors together, the Sons in Job 1 and 2 are possibly human believers who are annually worshipping God. As for Sodom and the Angels, true, Angels have appeared as flesh. Even God appeared as flesh before the coming of Jesus. That doesn't support anything. Further more, you have Jesus' statement that angels are not given into marriage nor do they marry. Mostly, this is due to God's will. Now, even if angels are called "Sons of God", which they never are, if they came and married human females, they would be in violation of God's will, and no longer be called his "sons", but would be demons. Psalms 104 is merely describing the awsome power that God has. It doesn't support the idea that angels are his "sons", which is the true point to all of this. As for Hebrews chapter one, read it in detail. The whole chapter is devoted to Christ being more than an angel and also comparing us to angels as well. In hebrews 1:7, the author comes right out and asks "To which of the angels did He ever say, 'you are My son, today I have begotten you'?" The answer is obvious. None of them. Then you have verse 14 saying that angels are nothing more than ministering spirits, sent out to render service for those who will inherit salvation. The definition of a "son of God" is simple. It is one who is obedient to the will of the Father. Now, we have three groups clearly identified as "Sons of God". 1) Jesus Christ: Matthew 16:16 2) Israel: Hosea 1:10; 11:1 3) Christians: Romans 8:12-17 I give you this challenge. Find a verse which clearly identifies Angels as being the "Sons of God". By that I mean, a verse that has angels and "sons of God" in the same verse referring to each other. Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
144 | The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 | Genesis | Jesusman | 30125 | ||
Hello tuli, I don't think you clearly understand what I am trying to say. Yes, the Anakim in Numbers and Deuteronomy are humans. That is beyond refuting. However, they are called "niphillim" due to their great size. In the post-flood passages, these giants are called men. However, the pre-flood giants, cannot be the same men due to the flood itself. The only people that survived the flood was Noah, his three sons, and their wives. The only animals to survive were those on the ark. All other life before the flood was destroyed. So, the anakim cannot be the Niphillim of Genesis 6. It is not only biblically impossible, but scientifically impossible as well. Therefore, the Niphillim of Genesis 6, must be either a different group of giant humans or something inhuman that is giant in stature. Now, Genesis 6 does not hint in anyway that the Niphillim are human or not, just that they are there. Also, we must adhere to the science pertaining to this area. Archeology has yet to uncover giant human remains dating back to the period of the Flood. The only remains that are giant in stature that can be found are dinosaurs. Therefore, the Niphillim of Genesis 6 is a totally different group than those of Numbers 13. As a result, Niphillim goes from being a name of a tribe, nationality, or species, to being a term of description, which is the only explaination that fully fits with both usages of "niphillim". As for the usage of Science, Science in it's truest sense is not to contradict the Scripture, but should be used to explain Scripture. Science should not be feared nor shunned but should be used to aid in the study of Scripture. As for Job, again, I'm not sure if you understand what it is that I am trying to convey. Notice in both Job chapter 1 and 2, that the "sons of God" are gathered before God. This can be taken two ways. 1) they are physically in front of God. 2) they are Spiritually in front of God. The most common meaning is the former of the two. However, I believe it is the latter of the two. Just because they are gathered before God in Spirit does not neccessarily conclude that they are there physically as well. Now, if the "sons" are angels, then it is that they are gathered physically before God. However, since angels are never called "sons" directly, then the explaination then turns to those who are directly called "sons", namely human believers. As a result of this shift, the gathering changes from being a physical gathering to being a spiritual gathering, as in worship. We, Christians, do the same thing every sunday morning. We gather ourselves before the Lord to present ourselves before him. So, this is a gathering for Worship. Now, we turn to Job, God, and Satan. Job immediately becomes the topic of the conversation between God and Satan, as if Job is among the worshippers. Now, Satan is physically before God, because they are talking to one another. Job and the other "sons" are spiritually before God. Let me explain this through the use of an analogy. Two high school baseball coaches are talking about the coming game between them. The team of the home team coach is currently practicing on the field. Now, which is more likely? That the home team coach is going to start talking and bragging about his star pitcher with the 95 mph fast ball? Or is the home team coach going to start talking about the pitcher of another team all together? He is going to start talking about his own pitcher who is already in the field showing his stuff. Correct? Well, I think the same thing, or similar at least, is happening in Job 1 and 2. As for Job 38:7, I believe that "morning stars" is in reference to angels. Angels are called stars in other passages throughout the Bible. However, I believe that "sons of God" is still in reference to human believers. For instance, why would the writer say, putting it into meaning, "When the angels sang together, and all the angels shouted for Joy ..."? Sounds repeative, right? Also, there really isn't any precidence in Job for such a repeation in meaning to happen. It doesn't entirely make sense. However, if it were to mean, "when the angels sang together, and all the believers shouted for joy ...", then there would be a clear understanding and less confusion. Also, it would bring emphasis upon the true meaning of the book of Job, that God is supreme over all creation. I hope this clarifies things. Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
145 | The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 | Genesis | Jesusman | 30222 | ||
Hello Steve, As a point of clarity, I use the NASB as my primary translation, unless otherwise noted. I use the NASB due to it's literal accuracy. You brought up Psalms 8 and the idea that angels are superior than man. However, in Hebrews 1:14, we have the statement that angels are to minister the saved. With that in mind, it is important to remember that Jesus is higher in authority than the angels, and that we too will carry the title of "Sons of God" as Jesus carries. As a result, Man is of higher authority than the angles, especially the Saved. I don't remember where it is, and I've been looking all night, but I remember reading a verse that specifically teaches that Man is higher than the angels. Also, in the NASB, man is listed as being below "God" in this passage, not the angels or heavenly beings, which corrosponds to the rest of Scripture. As for Job 1 and 2, and the possibility it being angels, the primary reason why it says "angels of God" in these passages is because one of the copies of the Septuagint has it in there in place of "sons". Still, even if the original text placed "angels" in the text rather than "sons", it still would support the notion that Angels are the "Sons of God", which is the true matter throughout this whole thread. As for the challenge between God and Satan, remember, it was Satan who made the Challenge, not God. God merely permitted it to happen. As for the meeting of God and Satan, and being infront of angels, I have a few questions about that. Satan was kicked out of Heaven and from among the angels. He lost his place in the heavens. If so, then why is he there with them, before God? Besides, the passage says that Satan was among the group, and that he was roaming around upon the earth. Then we have Job becoming the topic of the discussion between them, as if he was right in their line of sight, which would place him with in the gathered group, specifically in chapter one. So, I ask again, if these are angels that are gathered, then why is Job and Satan there? The only explaination is that the group is that of human believers who are worshipping God, and Satan just happens to come near when he is summoned by God. Do you see my point? Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
146 | Who is the meaning of the name Adam? | Genesis | Jesusman | 30432 | ||
"Adam" in hebrew means "man". Jesusman |
||||||
147 | The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 | Genesis | Jesusman | 30443 | ||
As I said in my original post, they could've been mentioned merely to give a time of reference. All it says is that they were there at that time. I could be talking about American history and say something like, "The Dodgers were playing in Brooklyn at the time." From that reference, you would know that I am talking about something that happened during the 1960's. Whether or not it is about baseball would have nothing to do about the discussion at hand. As for Job, A believer isn't only one who confesses Christ. During the Old Testament periods, a believer was one who was obedient to the Law and to God. That is why Abraham is refered to as believer in many places in the New Testament. Besides, there is enough evidence in early Genesis and throughout Job to deduce that there were some who believed and were obedient to God. Noah, Enoch, Seth, Job, and others all existed before the flood during this "wicked time". Besides, the historical sections (Genesis - Esther) of the Bible is arranged in chronological order. As for Science, Why do you fear it? Science is as much of a tool to use in our studies as a Bible dictionary or commentary. Not only that, But the Bible is worthless if it contradicts the facts. On a further related note, do you honestly expect me to believe in something that contradicts the facts? Let me lay down the theory about the angels in Genesis 6. Angels, who are not supposed to be able to marry, came to earth against God's commands, had Sex with humans, had children, who turned out to be superhuman giants, and then disappeared off the face of the earth. That's a bigger fantasy than Evolution. You expect me to take that on faith? Get real! You brought up Paul. Tell me, did he ever tell anyone to believe what he said upon faith alone? No. In fact, he praised the Barean Church when they researched his teachings according to the Scriptures of the day, and told them to keep it up. John tells us in his first epistle to "test". You will not find it said anywhere in the Bible that you are to believe something without a few facts supporting why you should believe it. Jesusman |
||||||
148 | The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 | Genesis | Jesusman | 30445 | ||
Hello Steve, Well, I speak from experience when I talk about the NASB being the most literally accurate translation to date. Not only do I have a BA in Biblical Languages in which I spent four plus years examining and translating the original texts into english, then comparing them to the existing english translations, but I sold Bibles for over a year. On top of that, I am persuing a Masters in Exegesis and Hermaneutics. NO, I don't think God was suprised. I think he new exactly what Satan wanted. As for Satan's ability to attack Job, I think he needed God's permission first, which strengthens God's authority. Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
149 | The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 | Genesis | Jesusman | 30447 | ||
Hello, Welcome to the free for all! :) Just kidding! Anyway, to get on to the topic at hand. To answer your questions about the Niphillim of Genesis 6 and of Numbers 13, they cannot be of the ancestry. Why? The Flood. The flood separates the Two. The Niphillim of Genesis 6 is pre-flood. It isn'e safe to assume that this was post-flood, because the events leading up to the flood and God's reasons for the flood isn't explained until AFTER the Niphillim are mentioned. This proves that the Niphillim and the events of Genesis 6:1-4 are pre-flood. As for the "After what", this is in reference to the "Sons" marrying the "Daughters". The Niphillim were already in existance before this took place, and existed after this happened. As for Job 1 and 2, yes, it is possible that it is a heavenly meeting. However, you must deal with the following questions. 1) If it is heaven, then why is Satan there, since he was kicked out of heaven? 2) If these are angels, then why does Job become the immediate topic? Why not one of the angels? 3) If these are angels, why is there no reference calling angels "sons of God"? Especially when Hebrews 1:5 says otherwise? As of the "mighty men of Old and Men of renown", they were obviously the offspring of the "Sons" and "Daughters". I clarified much of this in my original post. Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
150 | The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 | Genesis | Jesusman | 30454 | ||
Thanks for the comments, Nolan. This is a real problem for me. I am one who cannot accept anything without solid proof behind it. I even put John Calvin and Calvinism to the test once. I came to the conclusion that if Calvin had the Alexandrian texts, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and other recently found manuscripts, his doctrinal teachings would've been different. But that's another topic I wish not to go into further discussion about. Jesusman |
||||||
151 | The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 | Genesis | Jesusman | 30467 | ||
Amen, Brother. Amen! Jesusman |
||||||
152 | Who is the meaning of the name Adam? | Genesis | Jesusman | 30468 | ||
Actually, "Messiahadam" would mean "Anointed one of God man". Sort of. :) "Yeshoaadam" would be more accurate, in hebrew. I think ... :) In Greek, it would be "Iesusanthropos" or "Iesusaner". Depending of course if you wanted to go with the Second declension Noun form of "Man" of the Third Declension Noun form of "Man". Then again you could write it as "anthropos Iesou" or "aner Iesou" both meaning "Man of Jesus", and of course depending upon which declension you preferred for "Man". I'd better stop. I could go on and on. Jesus Loves You! Jesusman/ Messiahadam / Yeshoaadam/ Iesusanthropos/ Iesusaner/ anthropos Iesou/ aner Iesou/ or whatever! :-) |
||||||
153 | The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 | Genesis | Jesusman | 30700 | ||
Ok? Look at the context again. Beginning with Verse 1, you have the author talking about men, the Lineage of Cain, multiplying on the earth, and that they had daughters. The Sons of God (the Line of Seth) saw that the Daughters of the Line of Cain were beautiful and married them. Because God didn't like this union, he limited the life span to 120 years. Now, to give a time reference, the niphillim are mentioned as being in existance during this time, when the lines of Cain and Seth fused into one line. The children of this union became Mighty men of old and Men of renown. The Niphillim have nothing to do with being the offspring of this union. Angels have nothing to do with it either. Now for the verses you cited. 2 Peter 2:4 just says that Angels left heaven. Which is already known. According to one of the prophets. Satan rebelled, took a third of the angels with him, and God kicked them out. This passage never says anything about angels taking human form and having sex with humans. Jude 1:6-7 I've been waiting for someone to bring this one up. Again, the context isn't looked at closely. The whole context of Jude is about those who have disobeyed God. Verse 7 points out NOT that angels went after strange flesh, but the point is that the angels who disobeyed are going to made examples of just like Sodom and Gamorrah were made examples of. The phrase referring to indulging in strange flesh and gross immorality is talking about Sodom and Gamorrah, NOT the Angels. The reference was only given to remind the readers why Sodom and Gamorrah were destroyed. All that is pertinant to the Angels who rebelled is that they left heaven, and will be punished and made examples of, which is already known in the prophetic passages. It doesn't say anything about angels having sex with humans. John 8:44 merely presents to us who Satan truly is. Genesis 3:24 This talks about the Cherubim who was sent to protect the tree of Life. According to the context, this could be the only Cherubim ever known. On top of that, CHerubims aren't referenced to until the creation of the Ark of the Covenant and Until Daniel. Job 1:6 Again, Angels are mentioned by name. In fact, if you read verses 1-5 of Job 1, you get a totally different picture. That passage talks about feasts, festivals, and worship gatherings. That seems to support my suggestion that the "Sons of God" in verse 6 are humans engaging in the worship of God. I'm sorry, but when you look at these passages in their proper context, the idea that Angels married human females not only sounds rediculous, but is unscriptural as well. Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
154 | The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 | Genesis | Jesusman | 30704 | ||
We believe in Jesus Christ because he actually lived. We have proof of his life, death, burial, and ressurrection. We may have faith that he is the Messiah, but that faith is not based upon a feeling, but based upon actual, physical proof. Angels are believed in because they are referenced in a book that has never been proven wrong in any capacity. People like me scare you? Well, that must mean that you are also scared of Paul, Moses, and the majority of the Biblical characters as well. Tell me, Did paul believe in God and Jesus Christ for nothing? No, he believed in Jesus because he saw a great light, was blinded, heard Jesus speaking to him, and was healed by one of Jesus' followers. Moses believed in God and followed God out of what God showed him physically. My point is this, our faith is not based upon mystical worthless feelings and whimsical goosebumps. Our Faith is based upon facts and proof. Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
155 | The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 | Genesis | Jesusman | 30971 | ||
Job was among those who were gathered before God. Not neccessarily among God and Satan as they talked about him. I say that Job was among those who were gathered because first he becomes the immediate topic of the conversation between God and Satan. That supports the idea that he was within eyeshot of both God and Satan. The only place mentioned in the context is the group gathered. I also think that the group is made of human believers due to verses 1-5 of Job chapter 1. The context of these verses say that Job often had fellowships, feasts, and such for his sons. This supports the idea that human believers were gathered in worship before God. As for Jesus being higher than the angels, I know that. What's your point? Jesusman |
||||||
156 | The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 | Genesis | Jesusman | 30975 | ||
Hello, I appologize for waiting so long to reply. I have been going over the text in the greek. The context doesn't support your claims entirely. Let me clarify. First there is a pattern to the text of Jude 1:5-7. You have the comment in verse 5 stating that the reader should remember the following events and pay attention to them. Also in verse 5, you have the people of egypt mentioned, their unbelief, and the punishment given. Then we turn to verse 6. IN verse 6, you have the angels, their sin, which was leaving the natural domain, and the punishment, which is that they were chained up for the final judgement. Then you go to verse 7. You have sodom and gamorrah, then the cities surrounding them all listed. the sinful act was that of sexual immorality. The punishment was that of being destroyed. As you can see, there are three separate examples given. Now, for the phrase, "they in the same manner as these ...". If you were to follow the rules of greek grammer strictly, as you should, then it doesn't follow that this phrase is referring to the cities in relation to the angels. Here's why. First, the pattern I mentioned above. The pattern is that a group is mentioned, their sin is listed, their punishment, and the author goes on to the next group. Now what is important is that the author doesn't refer to the group of the previous verse specifically. If he did, then the people of egypt would have been referred to in one form or another in verse 6 as well. As we can see, they are not. Then we turn to the grammer itself. As you know, Greek doesn't follow the same rules of grammer as english, especially in matters of punctuation. Between sodom and gammorrah, all you have is "kai" or "and" in english. there is no other punctuation. However, between Sodom and Gammorah, and the "cities around them", there is punctuation, a coma. This is significant because it separates the two groups, and this separation follows throughout the rest of the verse. Then you have the nature of "toutos" or "these" in english, and the usages in contrasts and comparrisons. "Toutos" will usually refer to one of the groups previously identified earlier, and in matters of comparrison and contrast, there will usually be groups identified. This phrase is a comparrison. We also have two groups in the prior phrase being identified, and separated by punctuation. So, the true meaning of the phrase in question reads, "They (the cities around them), in the same manner as these (Sodom and Gammorrah)...". So, as you can see, the grammer doesn't follow. Jesusman |
||||||
157 | The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 | Genesis | Jesusman | 30981 | ||
Hello Tim, As for Job, and the LXX using angels, true, it does say that. This was one of the things I was researching this week. However, according to my sources, only the LXX uses "angels". I haven't been able to find another source that uses it. This leads me to think that the true reading was "sons". Next, and for the book of Enoch being used in Jude, yes, and it is directly referenced in Jude 14. However, I wonder why Enoch wasn't placed among the cannon? As for "toutos", It doesn't refer to the angels in verse 6. I spelled it out in my other post I gave to "Discipled". You might want to check it out. Here's the abridged edition. "Toutos" refers to Sodom and Gammorah, not the angels. First, you have a constistant pattern. To mention the angels in verse 6, in verse 7, would break up that pattern. If not, then verse 6 would also refer to the people of egypt from verse 5 in one form or another. As we can see, it doesn't. So, the pattern includes that the example of one verse is separate from the other examples in the context. Then there is a matter of punctuation. There is a greek coma between "sodom and gammorah" and "the cities around them". There is no such punctuation between "sodom" and "Gammorah". This shows that "Sodom and Gammorah" are to be contrasted or compared to "the cities around them". The following verse shows that comparisson. "They (the cities around them), in the same manner as these (Sodom and Gammorah) ...". Jesusman |
||||||
158 | The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 | Genesis | Jesusman | 30984 | ||
As for faith and proof, proof edifies faith. Take air for example. Air is odorless, tasteless, touchless, it is silent, and invisible. To all your five senses, air doesn't exist. The only proof that air exists is three-fold. First, when it moves, ie: Wind, you can hear it and feel it. Second, you are kept alive by breathing it. Third, when oxidation occures, ie: rust and etc., you can see it's effects. God works in the same manner. With all your five senses, God doesn't exist. However, when he moves, or reveals himself, you can know he exists. Second, you are alive by his creative power. Third, when he works around you, you can see his effects. Now, do we believe that air exists by faith alone? No, we use science and proof to support the existance of Air. Why should we act different with God. God provided us with the tools, the mind, and the capacity to reason, research, and reply on our own accord. Why should abandon our God given talents and abilities? Jesusman |
||||||
159 | The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 | Genesis | Jesusman | 31002 | ||
This reminds me of something my former pastor told me once. "Any dead salmon can float down stream, but it takes a live salmon to swim against the currents." Jesusman |
||||||
160 | The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4 | Genesis | Jesusman | 31003 | ||
Just because something is invisible, does not mean that there is no proof that is exists. History, Science, and common sense go hand in hand with faith. A Scientist has faith in the Scientific Method long before he even begins to theorize. A historian has faith in the research of his predecessors long before he begins to reaches for a book. Jesusman |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ] Next > Last [23] >> |