Results 201 - 217 of 217
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: Jesusman Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
201 | What happen to Joseph? | Bible general Archive 1 | Jesusman | 28571 | ||
Obviously, He died. But between the birth of Jesus and Joseph's death, we are given clues as to what happened. First, Joseph and Mary take Jesus to the templ to make Jesus legal under the Law. Also, they take Jesus to egypt to escape Harod's wrath. We have Mary and Jesus' brothers and sisters visiting Jesus during his ministry. Therefore, Joseph and Mary had other children. We have Joseph and Mary taking Jesus to the passover celebration when Jesus is twelve. Joseph and Mary stayed married for at least that long. We have Jesus being called Joesph's son and the son of the carpenter. From that we know that Joseph had a trade and that he adopted Jesus as according to customs. Given that Jesus used carpentry terms in many of his messages, and also that Joseph was a carpenter, we can assume that He taught Jesus to be a carptenter. From Jesus' comments to John the Beloved while on the cross, we can assume that Joseph possibly died before Jesus was crucified. We can support that further from tradition and history. According to tradition, John the Beloved took care of Mary from the time Jesus was crucified until she died. If I remember correctly, Mary died and was buried in Ephesus where John the Beloved was preaching. Also, because Joseph never appears during the three years of Jesus' ministry, it can be safe to assume that Joseph died prior or shortly after Jesus starting his minstry. So, as you can see, we can know quite a bit about Joseph with a little deductive thinking. Jesusman |
||||||
202 | Mary isn't mentioned | Bible general Archive 1 | Jesusman | 28570 | ||
While I think that this subject has been beaten around the bush enough, I did find your questions interesting and decided to give it a try. As stated all through out the strand, there are two geneologies given: one in Matthew and one in Luke. One gives Joseph's geneology and the other gives Mary's geneology. Now, Matthew uses different language in his version than Dr. Luke. Notice that Matthew says "begat" (KJV) and "was born" (NASB), thus presenting the lineage in the form of physical birth and physical descendants. Also notice in Matthew 1:16 that he changes the wording slightly. He says that Joseph was the husband of Mary and that Jesus was born to Mary. He doesn't say that Jesus was born to Joseph like he does with the others. Thus, Matthew clarifies that Joseph was given charge to raising the young messiah, but was not his direct Father. Later on, with Joseph's conversation with the angel, we find that the angel was giving Joseph the responsibility to raise Jesus as his son. So, according to Jewish Law, Joseph would adopt Jesus as his son and Jesus, through adoption law, would be entitled to the throne that Joseph a was descendant of. Now, as for Dr. Luke's geneology. Keep in mind that Joseph was given the responsibility to raise Jesus. Now, here Dr. Luke uses different terms than Matthew. Dr. Luke says, "the son of" all throughout the geneology list. Now, there are a few interesting things about this list. First, Dr. Luke gives the age of Jesus when he began his ministry at the start of the geneology. Jesus is 30 years old. Why is this significant? Well, it establishes that Jesus was officially the age of adulthood and was legally able to go out on his own. The second thing I find interesting is that Dr. Luke goes through Nathan, the brother of Solomon, to establish the line to the throne. Remember that Jeconiah, descendant of Solomon and last king of Judah, was removed from the throne by God and the line of Solomon was denied access to the throne of David. Therefore, Jesus had to be a descendant of David through a different child of David than Solomon. Dr. Luke establishes this. The final part I find interesting is at the close of the geneology. Notice that Dr. Luke records the line all the way back to God, through Seth, the son of Adam. By doing this, Dr. Luke confirms that Jesus fulfilled the messianic prophecy of Genesis 3. Now for why Dr. Luke's geneology is that of Mary. We have already established that Matthew talks about birth parents. Dr. Luke is talking in different terms. With that in mind, and that Joseph was given charge over Jesus' up-bringing, and that Joseph married Mary, this lineage must be establishing a line through Mary, but using Joseph as the legal start. Through marriage, Joseph was the son of Mary's father. Joseph would recieve everything that Mary would recieve in her inheritance through legal marriage. Jesus would also benefit through Joseph legally adopting Jesus, as was custom in those days, and through being birth decendant of Mary's father. So, Dr. Luke's account must be about Mary. Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
203 | Genesis 1:26-27 | Genesis | Jesusman | 28481 | ||
You are what? | ||||||
204 | Injury to the Shunammite's son? | 2 Kin 4:19 | Jesusman | 28477 | ||
Since the scripture doesn't give much details, we can only guess. However, the Bible doesn't describe a head injury as if he fell and hurt his head. It merely says that the boy's head started hurting. It's possible, and more likely, that the Boy suffered from a brain tumor or something similar. Jesusman |
||||||
205 | I don't do nothing without pay, looks to | Bible general Archive 1 | Jesusman | 28322 | ||
Hello, In my youth, I was faced with a similar, yet opposite problem. I wanted to work in Chrurch, but no one would let me. It wasn't because I was not capable of doing anything, but that they didn't want me to do anyting. I was positive that I was called into the ministry, but I couldn't convince them of that. I later had to leave and go to another church that would support me in my growth. Now, what does this have to do with your question? Well, first off, at the first church, I got discouraged because no one would encourage me. Also, I really didn't know where exaclty God wanted me to go into the ministry. Was it youth work, missionary, S. S. teacher, pastor, or what. It wasn't until I got to the second church, and got into working in the church, that I found where God wanted me to focus. So, I would suggest patience, first of all. He is possibly where I was in my youth. He possibly isn't sure where exactly God wants him to serve. So, he "experiments" as it were. Secondly, encourage him to keep working in the church. If he does a good job, let him work. Lastly, I don't know about you, but I have yet to get paid for preaching or teaching. I know that there are some who are paid, but I have not. Also, Paul encourages that a pastor not get paid for his services. That a pastor should find another way to support himself in order to be an example to others. He says that it is ok to accept donations, but that being a pastor isn't a career. I hope this helps. Jesusman |
||||||
206 | WHO WROTE THE GOSPLES? THE APOSLES? | NT general Archive 1 | Jesusman | 28316 | ||
The majority of your question has already been answered with the other posts. Two of the Gospels: Matthew and John, are written by eyewitnesses. One of the gospels: Luke, was written based upon careful research and study. In fact, Dr. Luke has been examined, tested, criticized, and etc so many times, and has been proven accurate and true every single time, that both Luke and Acts are concidered two of the most historically reliable documents of that age. The final gospel: Mark, is actually that accounts as Peter taught Mark. Mark recorded them down. When you look at the four gospels, each one has a different focus to it. Matthew presents Jesus as the Promised messiah, the ture King, and the Son of God as prophecied by the Old Testaments prophets. Luke presents the historical Jesus. Dr. luke wrote about the Jesus that history, and people in general, can relate to. Mark reads like a comic book or action novel. Mark gives the active perspective to Jesus' ministry. John simply talks about his best friend, Jesus Christ. After all, Jesus and John were best friends. As for the dating of these gospels, Mark is believed to have been written between 40 - 60 AD. Placing it about 10 - 30 years after the death of Jesus, thus omitting the possibility of legend and myth setting in. Luke and Matthew come next in the dating between 55 - 70 AD. It is theorized that Matthew and Luke used Mark's gospel as a template for writing their gospels. John's gospel was possibly written around 80 - 95 AD, shortly before his death. As for how we know who wrote them, Matthew and Mark are largely through tradition. Also, Matthew refers to himself as "Levi", his hebrew name. With that, and his focus upon Hebrew traditions and a hebrew audience, it is logical to place Matthew as the author of the first gospel. As for Mark, Peter confirms that Mark was his disciple in his epistle, thus confirming the traditional view of Mark's authorship of the second gospel. Luke's gospel has a dedication at the beginning to a man named "Theophilus". Acts is also dedicated to "Theophilus". However, Luke changes the perspective in Acts from third person plural to first person plural right smack in the middle of the book. These two factors provide proof that Luke is the author of Not only Acts, but the third gospel as well. As for the final gospel, John's name is never written in the gospel. He is always called "the disciple whom Jesus loved". This, and the similar writing style of the epistles and Revelation, all point to John as the author. I hope this helps. Jesusman |
||||||
207 | At what age? | John 1:12 | Jesusman | 27144 | ||
Let me speak from experience. I was saved at the age of six. My mom was saved at the age of five, my dad at seven. My hermaneutics professor from college, mentor, and good friend was saved at four years old. All of us are faithful christians. Three of us are pastors in some form or another. My mom works as an adult sunday school teacher, and has a masters in theology and church history. There is zero doubt in my mind that all four of us are saved and going to heaven to be with the Father, and all of us were saved at very young ages. When I was saved, My parents enouraged it. They were always encouraging me, loving me, and watching over me. Every day, we would gather together and read and study the bible. The lessons started easy at first with the telling of the Bible stories. As I grew in knowledge and understanding, the lessons got harder and more challenging. Today, I am a graduate with a BA in hermaneutics and exegesis, and am persuing a master's degree in the same field. I am hoping to get my doctorite and become a professor in a seminary or college. There has never been any doubt as to whether or not I was saved. Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
208 | WHO ARE THE SONS OF GOD AND THE DAUGHTER | Genesis | Jesusman | 27115 | ||
read my answer below entitled "The Sons of God in Genesis 6:1-4". That will answer your question. If you have any others, please ask them or email me. Jesusman |
||||||
209 | John's Gospel and Epistles? | John | Jesusman | 27022 | ||
Clarify. | ||||||
210 | What was Jesus writing? | John | Jesusman | 27021 | ||
Personally, I think that because they were getting ready to stone the lady for adultry, that Jesus was possibly writing the names of their mistresses and girlfriends. Also, given that they seemed to have left in a big hurry, I think that if it wasn't their mistresses names then it was their own sins. Jesusman |
||||||
211 | Why did God become a Man? | NT general Archive 1 | Jesusman | 27004 | ||
To be the perfect sacrifice, of course. The one to pay the price had to have lived the perfect, sinless, human life in order to be the perfect sacrifice to pay the price of sin. That person was Jesus Christ, who was not only fully divine, but fully human as well. Jesusman |
||||||
212 | Why does Lord has different fonts? | Bible general Archive 1 | Jesusman | 27003 | ||
Each different rendering of "lord" is to express which hebrew term is being used. Most bibles will clarify this in the front where it talks about the basics of that particular translation. Jesusman |
||||||
213 | How did Nephilims come into existance? | Bible general Archive 1 | Jesusman | 26998 | ||
Personally, I think that "Niphillim" is a generic descriptive term like "vehicle", for example. With vehicles, you have suvs, trucks, coupes, cars, sedans, vans, convertables, and so on. While each one is different, they are all "vehicles". I think that the same is true for "Niphillim". In it's original context, "Niphillim" means "giants". However, there is more to it. It also describes someone or something that is vicious, fierce, stomps on his enemies, and is giant in stature and attitude. Now, with this in mind, it is important to remember that there are two places in the Bible that this term is used. Genesis 6:4 and Numbers 13:33. I don't think that these two groups are related in any way other than termanology. In fact, it is impossible for the "niphillim" in Genesis 6 to be the "niphillim" in Numbers 13. Why? There is one massive, global event that separates them, the great flood. Scripture records that the flood destoyed all life except those in the Ark. Therefore, these two references are talking about two different groups and "niphillim" is a generic term of description. Now, look at Numbers 13:33. Notice that the group in question is the Sons of Anak. They are called "niphillim" not because that is who they are, but because of their size. Notice verse 32. The land is described as huge and it's inhabitants are described as huge. Given this description, it is no wonder why the Israelites would use "niphillim" to call the Anakim. This is common, especially in warfare. For example, In world war 2, Nazi German soldiers were called "Jerry". In vietnam, the Viet Con soldiers were called "Charlie". During the American Civil War, Confederate soldiers were called "Johnny". So, there is precedence for this. As for who the "Niphillim" of Genesis 6 are, they could've been Dinosaurs. After all, the description does fit that of dinosaurs. As for Numbers 13,it is beleived that these are the ancestors of Goliath. Their size could easily be explained as being natural for them. After all, genetically speaking, the majority of orientals are small in stature. Many of the African natives can grow to be tall and slender. Many slavic, sacndinavian, and those of Viking descendant are known to be muscular and of large stature. So, the Anakim being giant in stature could easily be a result of their genetic code and could've been normal for them. Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
214 | why did Jesus curse fig tree? | Mark 11:14 | Jesusman | 26990 | ||
Simple. Jesus cursed the fig tree to set an example to everyone around him. The tree is a depiction of Israel. Israel was entrusted with God's Law and Message, but they didn't do anything with it. They kept it to themselves, made it unbelieveably difficult to follow, and was jealous of anyone who tried to staighten it out or bring them to the original intention of the Law. Israel wasn't producing any fruit, just as the tree wasn't. Like the tree, Israel seemed alive and prosperous, but their was no produce. A tree that doesn't have any produce when it should have, is a useless tree. At least that was the thinking then. So, by cursing the tree, Jesus was telling Israel that they didn't succeed in what they were supposed to do, and that God is moving on to a group that would do as He commands: the Gentiles. Remember the parable of the talents. Three men were given talents or money. One was given 6, another 4, and the other was given one. The man with 6 talents doubled his amount, as did the man with 4 talents. The man with only one talent buried his and did nothing with it. When they all brought their talents back to their master, he was unhappy with the man who buried his one talent that he took it and gave it to the man with 6 talents. I might have the talent amount wrong, but the jist of the story is there. Both the cursed tree and the parable of the talents share the same basic message. God has given you a purpose and the means to accomplish that purpose. Do nothing, and he will bring someone in who will. Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
215 | How can we understand Genesis 3:15? | Genesis | Jesusman | 26984 | ||
What is there to understand? This is the first Old Testament prophecy about the coming messiah. A seed from the woman, namely the line of Seth, shall eventually produce an offspring who shall be the messiah. Jesusman |
||||||
216 | Is Lamec a descendant of Seth or Cain? | Genesis | Jesusman | 26083 | ||
Ok, Since Lamech is mentioned in both places and also concidering that the Earth is still young and not heavily populated, it is reasonable to assume that both references are about the same person. Therefore, he must be the son of both Cain and Seth. Turn to genesis 6:1-4. Now, get the idea out of your head that angels married humans and produced superhuman giants, like some scholars have suggested. That's obsurd and doesn't follow context at all. Notice in verses 1-2. The population of the earth began to multiply and the "sons of God" saw the "daughters of men" and married them. Now, who are these two groups. 1) Sons of God. There are three possible identities to this phrase. the first is Jesus Christ, who is called the Son of God. However, due to the plural usage in Genesis, this option is cancelled out. The Second is that it is in reference to Angels. This idea stems from the same usage in Job chapter 1. In Job 1:6, 2:1, the "sons of God" are gathered before God, and Satan approaches God and Job becomes the topic of the conversation. Notice that the term "angels" is never used. The only reason that "angels" are given as a possible meaning is because Satan is there and they are gathered before God. In fact, no where in scriptue is "sons of God" clearly attributed to angels. The term "Sons of God" is almost always attributed to those who are in obedience to the will of God the Father. The largest protion is humans. Roman 8:1-17 comes right out and calls those who are saved as God's children. Israel is called the children of God time and time again throughout the Old Testament. Therefore, it is more likely that Genesis 6:1-4 is in reference to the group of human males who are living in obedience to God the Father. Now, as you have pointed out, there is a fusion of Cain's lineage and Seth's lineage. Many of the offspring are listed twice. Clearly, the two lines intermarried. Now, since Cain and his lineage were cursed by God, it is safe to assume that Seth's lineage are the "Sons of God". 2) Daughters of Men As stated above, Since Cain and his lineage was cursed by God, they cannot be the "Sons of God". Therefore, the "daughters of men" must be in reference to Cain's female offspring. Now, to explain the Niphillim, or Giants. No, these aren't the offspring. This is a time reference. As If I were to talk about Baseball history and say, "The Dodgers were playing in Brooklyn at the time,..." From that reference, you would know that I am talking about a time period before the 1960's. Also notice the phrase about the "niphillim". It says that they were in the land at that time when the sons of God came to the daughters of men. How can they be offspring if they were already there? Also, the "mighty men of old" and "men of renown" are the offspring, and these "men of renown" and "mighty men of old" are not the niphillim. So, as you can see the answer to your question is in chapter 6 of Genesis. Jesusman |
||||||
217 | Col 1:24 What is he saying exactly? | 1 Timothy | Jesusman | 26082 | ||
As you have pointed out, Paul is clearly mentioning the things he has suffered through while spreading the gospel. As for a further meaning of the text, I would say that Paul is providing an example of the christian attitude towards serving God. In Philippians 3 and 2 Timothy 1, Paul talks about the losses he has suffered for the Lord. During his discourses, he makes it clear that his losses are meaningless and insignificant next to the rewards of heaven. I believe it is best said, "I count it all Joy that I may serve my lord." That is the attitude we must have as Christians proclaiming the gospel. Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ] |