Results 21 - 40 of 74
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: Truthfinder Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
21 | Jesus | John 1:1 | Truthfinder | 90982 | ||
Hi Elder, I notice you wrote this back in December, nonetheless, I will simply say that Matthew 4:10 are Jesus' own words that answer your question. Note he is quoting Deut 6:13 which uses "Jehovah". But many Bibles have changed the original to say "Lord". This leads to confusion. But many other Bibles do use Jehovah and in them they say,‘It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service." Hope this answers your question. Truthfinder |
||||||
22 | Truthfinder: Is Jesus God? | John 1:1 | Truthfinder | 90981 | ||
Hi Hank, No. Truthfinder |
||||||
23 | Should we use Religious titles here? | Luke 18:18 | Truthfinder | 90971 | ||
Hi Justme, I for one agree with you. I also think if Jesus were here, he too would agree since he said in Luke 18:18, "Jesus replied: “Why do you call me good? Nobody is good, except one, God." Jesus here recognized that his God was "good" in the ultimate since. We know of course, that he was still "good" but in a lesser yet still perfect since. His life of humility was an example for us all. That's why I like your name, "justme". Truthfinder |
||||||
24 | origanal pronunciation for Jesus Christ | Acts 7:45 | Truthfinder | 90885 | ||
Hi Yoda, Hope this helps. Jesus is the Latinized form of the Gr. I·e·sous´, which corresponds to the Heb. Ye·shu a or Yehoh·shu a and means “Jehovah Is Salvation”. In Greek it is pronounced Hee ay soos. The name I·e·sous´ appears in the Greek text of Acts 7:45 and Hebrews 4:8 Truthfinder |
||||||
25 | What is the difference between a | John 1:1 | Truthfinder | 90708 | ||
Hi Lady lkh, If I wanted to know, (really know) what a Baptist believed, how wise would it be for me to go and ask a Muslim? Hmmm, you're exactly right. A biased response, at least. Tell you what, if you believe all this hog wash that responded to your question, then the truth of the matter is, that is what you "wanted" to hear anyway. I read these comments that run other religions down (without legitimate reason) and just shake my head, concluding; "we must be living in the DARK AGES all over again." Sorry, but the truth is simple, logical, and straight from the Bible. I have a couple of questions for you: 1) In the first century, for the most part, what kind of people accepted Jesus' teaching? a) The highly educated people of the time, b) the proud religious leaders, or c) the unlettered, humble, ordinary people? Please read for yourself from your own Bible these short verses. . (Acts 4:13; Luke 10:21) The one thing that stands out in my mind after years of serious religious study is that through the centuries "higher education" has done nothing but corrupt, yes shipwrecked untold millions' faith into atheism by teaching evolution. Mistranslation of the Holy Scriptures by the "higher educated" likewise has mislead millions into taking the honor and glory due our heavenly Father and Creator and giving it to his "firstborn" Son. If you are serious in wanting to know what the "original" Bible said about a matter, read my posts of the past. The hard fact is that today's Bible translations have changed the "original" in thousands of places and many on this forum know it and try and make us believe totally, unforgivable "lies" as to what it truthfully said. I will tell you what Jehovah's Witnesses believe the Bible teaches and why. You can then decide for yourself if that is what the Bible really says. Truthfinder |
||||||
26 | how/when was BC/AD initiated? | Is 61:2 | Truthfinder | 88218 | ||
Hi Reilly, You are exactly right. Early in the sixth century C.E. ( or A.D.; Common Era), Pope John I commissioned a monk, who also was a scholarly Roman abbot of the 6th century, and too an accomplished mathematician, named Dionysius Exiguus to develop a system of computation that would allow the churches to set an official date for Easter. Dionysius set to work. He calculated back in time, past Jesus’ death, to what he thought (notice I said what he thought) was the year of Jesus’ birth; then he numbered each year forward from that point. Dionysius designated the period from Jesus’ birth “A.D.” (for Anno Domini—“in the year of our Lord.”) While intending only to devise a reliable way of calculating Easter each year, Dionysius inadvertently introduced the concept of numbering the years from the birth of Christ forward, but missed it by a little over a year. Most scholars agree with what I showed you earlier, that Jesus was not born in the year Dionysius used as a basis for his calculations. Truthfinder |
||||||
27 | how were years started? | Is 61:2 | Truthfinder | 88150 | ||
Hi Reilly, Well, the Julian calendar was introduced by Julius Caesar in 46 B.C.E., to give the Roman people a solar-year time arrangement in place of the lunar year. The Julian calendar consists of 365 days in a year, with the exception that on each fourth year (leap year), one day is added, to make it 366 days. However, in the course of time, it was found that the Julian calendar year is actually a little more than 11 minutes longer than the true solar year. By the 16th century C.E., a discrepancy of ten full days had accumulated. Thus, in 1582, Pope Gregory XIII introduced a slight revision, instituting what is now known as the Gregorian calendar. By papal bull ten days were omitted from the year 1582, so that the day after October 4 became October 15. The Gregorian calendar provides that centuries not divisible by 400 are not to be considered leap years. For example, unlike the year 2000, the year 1900 was not made a leap year because the number 1,900 is not divisible by 400. The Gregorian calendar is now the one in general use in most parts of the world. Truthfinder |
||||||
28 | What yr was Jesus born? | Is 61:2 | Truthfinder | 87945 | ||
1) The Bible does not tell us the exact date of Jesus’ birth. It does say, however, that he was born “in the days of Herod the king.” (Matthew 2:1) Many Bible scholars believe that Herod died in the year 4 B.C.E. and that Jesus was born before then—perhaps as early as 5 or 6 B.C.E. They base their conclusions about Herod’s death on statements by the first-century Jewish historian Flavius Josephus. 2) According to Josephus, shortly before King Herod died, there was an eclipse of the moon. Bible scholars point to a partial lunar eclipse on March 11, 4 B.C.E., as proof that Herod must have died in that year. However, in the year 1 B.C.E., there was a total lunar eclipse on January 8 and a partial eclipse on December 27. No one can say whether Josephus was referring to one of the eclipses in 1 B.C.E. or to the one in 4 B.C.E. So, we cannot use Josephus’ words to pinpoint the precise year of Herod’s death. Even if we could, without more information we still could not determine when Jesus was born. 3) The strongest evidence we have of the date of Jesus’ birth comes from the Bible. The inspired record states that Jesus’ cousin John the Baptizer began his career as a prophet in the 15th year of Roman Emperor Tiberius Caesar. (Luke 3:1, 2) Secular history confirms that Tiberius was named emperor on September 15, 14 C.E., so his 15th year would run from the latter part of 28 C.E. to the latter part of 29 C.E. John began his ministry during that time, and Jesus evidently started his ministry six months later. (Luke 1:24-31) This, combined with other evidence, would place the beginning of Jesus’ ministry in the fall of 29 C.E. The Bible states that Jesus was “about thirty years old” when he began his ministry. (Luke 3:23) If he was 30 years old in the fall of 29 C.E., he must have been born in the fall of 2 B.C.E. Truthfinder |
||||||
29 | John 1:1---"a god"? !?!? | NT general Archive 1 | Truthfinder | 87691 | ||
Hi Jibbs, Yes, I would be glad to explain the translation of the Greek of John 1:1. Since the apostle John purposly refrained from using the definite article "ho" in this instance, he had to have meant something else other than "ho theos". Also the context states that the Word was with "ho theos" indicating that it(the Word) was not the one and the same as the God. If I were with Mary then it would most certainly be nonsensical to conclude that I was Mary. Notice the list of Greek scholars' translations of this verse that agree with me: Joh 1:1—“and the Word was a god (godlike; divine)” Gr.(kai the·os' en ho lo'gos) 1808 “and the word was a god” The New Testament, in An Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Archbishop Newcome’s New Translation: With a Corrected Text, London. 1864 “and a god was the Word” The Emphatic Diaglott (J21, interlinear reading), by Benjamin Wilson, New York and London. 1935 “and the Word was divine” The Bible—An American Translation, by J. M. P. Smith and E. J. Goodspeed, Chicago. 1950 “and the Word was a god” New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures, Brooklyn. 1975 “and a god (or, of a divine Das Evangelium nach kind) was the Word” Johannes, by Siegfried Schulz,Göttingen, Germany. 1978 “and godlike sort was Das Evangelium nach the Logos” Johannes,by Johannes Schneider,Berlin. 1979 “and a god was the Logos” Das Evangelium nach Johannes,by Jürgen Becker, Würzburg, Germany. If you have any other questions please don't hesitate to ask. Truthfinder |
||||||
30 | Is antichrist a man or a spirit? | 1 John 4:3 | Truthfinder | 87511 | ||
Hi Prazn, Although there has been much effort in the past to identify “the antichrist” with an individual, such as Pompey, Nero, or Muhammad (this latter person being suggested by Pope Innocent III in 1213 C.E.), or with a specific organization, as in the Protestant view of “the antichrist” as applying to the papacy, John’s inspired statements show the term to be broad in its application, embracing all those who deny that “Jesus is the Christ,” and who deny that Jesus is the Son of God who came “in the flesh.”—1Jo 2:22; 4:2, 3; 2Jo 7, NE, NIV; compare Joh 8:42, 48, 49; 9:22. Denial of Jesus as the Christ and as the Son of God of necessity embraces the denial of any or all of the Scriptural teachings concerning him: his origin, his place in God’s arrangement, his fulfillment of the prophecies in the Hebrew Scriptures as the promised Messiah, his ministry and teachings and prophecies, as well as any opposition to or efforts to replace him in his position as God’s appointed High Priest and King. This is evident from other texts, which, while not using the term “antichrist,” express essentially the same idea. Thus, Jesus stated: “He that is not on my side is against me, and he that does not gather with me scatters.” (Lu 11:23) Second John 7 shows that such ones might act as deceivers, and hence the “antichrist” would include those who are “false Christs” and “false prophets,” as well as those who perform powerful works in Jesus’ name and yet are classed by him as “workers of lawlessness.”—Mt 24:24; 7:15, 22, 23. In view of Jesus’ rule that what is done to his true followers is done to him (Mt 25:40, 45; Ac 9:5), the term must include those who persecute such ones, which means it would include the symbolic “Babylon the Great” and those described as the “evil slave” in Jesus’ parable.—Lu 21:12; Re 17:5, 6; Mt 24:48-51. John specifically mentions apostates as among those of the antichrist by referring to those who “went out from us,” abandoning the Christian congregation. (1Jo 2:18, 19) It therefore includes “the man of lawlessness” or “son of destruction” described by Paul, as well as the “false teachers” Peter denounces for forming destructive sects and who “disown even the owner that bought them.”—2Th 2:3-5; 2Pe 2:1 Kingdoms, nations, and organizations are similarly shown to be part of the antichrist in the symbolic description at Revelation 17:8-15; 19:19-21.—Compare Ps 2:1, 2. In all the above cases those composing the antichrist are shown to be headed for eventual destruction as a recompense for their opposing course. Truthfinder |
||||||
31 | Does anyone have a good way to explain t | Bible general Archive 1 | Truthfinder | 87509 | ||
The Encyclopedia Americana notes that the doctrine of the Trinity is considered to be “beyond the grasp of human reason.” Many who accept the Trinity view it that same way. Monsignor Eugene Clark says: “God is one, and God is three. Since there is nothing like this in creation, we cannot understand it, but only accept it.” Cardinal John O’Connor states: “We know that it is a very profound mystery, which we don’t begin to understand.” And Pope John Paul II speaks of “the inscrutable mystery of God the Trinity.” Thus, A Dictionary of Religious Knowledge says: “Precisely what that doctrine is, or rather precisely how it is to be explained, Trinitarians are not agreed among themselves.” We can understand, then, why the New Catholic Encyclopedia observes: “There are few teachers of Trinitarian theology in Roman Catholic seminaries who have not been badgered at one time or another by the question, ‘But how does one preach the Trinity?’ And if the question is symptomatic of confusion on the part of the students, perhaps it is no less symptomatic of similar confusion on the part of their professors.” The truth of that observation can be verified by going to a library and examining books that support the Trinity. Countless pages have been written attempting to explain it. Yet, after struggling through the labyrinth of confusing theological terms and explanations, investigators still come away unsatisfied. In this regard, Jesuit Joseph Bracken observes in his book What Are They Saying About the Trinity?: “Priests who with considerable effort learned . . . the Trinity during their seminary years naturally hesitated to present it to their people from the pulpit, even on Trinity Sunday. . . . Why should one bore people with something that in the end they wouldn’t properly understand anyway?” He also says: “The Trinity is a matter of formal belief, but it has little or no [effect] in day-to-day Christian life and worship.” Yet, it is “the central doctrine” of the churches! Catholic theologian Hans Küng observes in his book Christianity and the World Religions that the Trinity is one reason why the churches have been unable to make any significant headway with non-Christian peoples. He states: “Even well-informed Muslims simply cannot follow, as the Jews thus far have likewise failed to grasp, the idea of the Trinity. . . . The distinctions made by the doctrine of the Trinity between one God and three hypostases do not satisfy Muslims, who are confused, rather than enlightened, by theological terms derived from Syriac, Greek, and Latin. Muslims find it all a word game. . . . Why should anyone want to add anything to the notion of God’s oneness and uniqueness that can only dilute or nullify that oneness and uniqueness?” How could such a confusing doctrine originate? The Catholic Encyclopedia claims: “A dogma so mysterious presupposes a Divine revelation.” Catholic scholars Karl Rahner and Herbert Vorgrimler state in their Theological Dictionary: “The Trinity is a mystery . . . in the strict sense . . . , which could not be known without revelation, and even after revelation cannot become wholly intelligible.” However, contending that since the Trinity is such a confusing mystery, it must have come from divine revelation creates another major problem. Why? Because divine revelation itself does not allow for such a view of God: “God is not a God of confusion.”—1 Corinthians 14:33, Revised Standard Version (RS). In view of that statement, would God be responsible for a doctrine about himself that is so confusing that even Hebrew, Greek, and Latin scholars cannot really explain it? Furthermore, do people have to be theologians ‘to know the only true God and Jesus Christ whom he has sent’? (John 17:3, JB) If that were the case, why did so few of the educated Jewish religious leaders recognize Jesus as the Messiah? His faithful disciples were, instead, humble farmers, fishermen, tax collectors, housewives. Those common people were so certain of what Jesus taught about God that they could teach it to others and were even willing to die for their belief.—Matthew 15:1-9; 21:23-32, 43; 23:13-36; John 7:45-49; Acts 4:13. Needless to say, the trinity doctrine is not a Bible teaching. Truthfinder |
||||||
32 | Was Jesus' spirit abandoned? | 2 Cor 5:21 | Truthfinder | 83420 | ||
“E´li, E´li, la´ma sa·bach·tha´ni?” (“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”) (Mt 27:46; Mr 15:34) Hi Dan58, You write: I still don't understand in what sense Jesus was abandoned by God. I don't see whether or not Jesus' spirit was separated from God. I haven't checked the discussion on other verses that has already been posted. Would someone summarize the issues raised in other threads?Jesus’ question was a quotation from a psalm of David. (Ps. 22:1) If we look at David’s case, the question related to a momentary condition of abandonment. Surrounded by enemies, David found himself in a situation that made it appear that he was completely forsaken by his God, Jehovah. The tremendous strain resulting therefrom moved David to ask why it had happened despite his being unaware of any guilt. But David had not lost faith, for in the same psalm he prayed: “Do make haste to my assistance.” Ps. 22:16-19.So, in the same sence, when uttering the words of Psalm 22:1, Jesus keenly sensed that his Father had momentarily withdrawn his protection and “forsaken” or released him into the hands of his enemies, to die as an accursed criminal on a stake. (Gal. 3:13) In asking “why,” Jesus did not imply that he did not know the reason for this abandonment nor was he expecting an answer from his Father. The situation is comparable to that of a Christian who knows the reason for human suffering but is moved, under the weight of intense difficulties, to ask “why” either silently or audibly. The questioner thereby reveals that he has no reason to think that the suffering is due to his transgressions. Thus, besides fulfilling Psalm 22:1, Jesus’ outcry evidently served to confirm his innocence and focused on the real purpose for his suffering. (Matt. 27:46) compare also John 12:27, 28, 33. Truthfinder |
||||||
33 | What did Jesus do under the earth | NT general Archive 1 | Truthfinder | 83417 | ||
Nothing, he was dead. For esurrection means a raising up from the lifeless condition of death or out of the grave for those there. Truthfinder |
||||||
34 | # of Apostles? 12 and Paul? or more? | NT general Archive 1 | Truthfinder | 83416 | ||
I find 17 all total. 12) Original 12.Matthias was selected and was thereafter “reckoned along with the eleven apostles.” (Ac 1:23-26) He is thus included among “the twelve” who settled the problem concerning the Greek-speaking disciples (Ac 6:1, 2), and evidently Paul includes him in referring to “the twelve” when speaking of Jesus’ postresurrection appearances at 1 Corinthians 15:4-8. 13) “A slave is not greater than his master, nor is one that is sent forth [a·po´sto·los] greater than the one that sent him.” (Joh 13:16) In this sense the word also applies to Christ Jesus as “the apostle and high priest whom we confess.” Heb 3:1 14) Matthias was selected to replace Judas Iscariot and was thereafter “reckoned along with the eleven apostles.” (Ac 1:23-26) 15) The apostle Paul and 16) Paul speaks of Epaphroditus as “your envoy [a·po´sto·lon] (same Greek word for apostle) and private servant for my need.” -Php 2:25 17) Galatians 1:19, Paul states that he visited with Peter and adds: “But I saw no one else of the apostles, only James the brother of the Lord.” James (not the original apostle James the son of Zebedee nor James the son of Alphaeus, but the half brother of Jesus) was evidently viewed as an “apostle” in the wider sense, namely, as “one sent forth” by the Jerusalem congregation Truthfinder |
||||||
35 | Where is eden located? | Bible general Archive 1 | Truthfinder | 83415 | ||
The traditional site is in eastern Turkey, about 140 miles (225 kilometers) southwest of Mount Ararat and a few miles south of Lake Van. Truthfinder |
||||||
36 | Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 not Satan! | Bible general Archive 1 | Truthfinder | 83414 | ||
Well said again, Student7300, but allow me to elaborate a bit. Human sin and imperfection were, of course, preceded by sin and imperfection in the spirit realm, as Jesus' words at John 8:44 and the account in chapter 3 of Genesis reveal. The dirge recorded at Ezekiel 28:12-19, though directed to the human "king of Tyre," evidently parallels the course taken by the spirit son of God who first sinned. The pride of "the king of Tyre," his making himself 'a god,' his being called a "cherub," and the reference to "Eden, the garden of God," certainly correspond to Biblical information concerning Satan the Devil, who became puffed up with pride, is linked to the serpent in Eden, and is called "the god of this system of things." see 1Ti 3:6; Ge 3:1-5, 14, 15; Re 12:9; 2Co 4:4. Truthfinder |
||||||
37 | Where did the Holy Spirit go? | 2 Cor 5:21 | Truthfinder | 83325 | ||
Hi Graceful, Was God’s son Jesus, a spirit person like his Father, before coming to earth? (Php 2:5-8), but later “became flesh,” residing among mankind as the man Jesus. (Joh 1:14) Completing his earthly course, was he “put to death in the flesh, but [was] made alive in the spirit.” (1Pe 3:18) His Father resurrected him, granted his Son’s request to be glorified alongside the Father with the glory he had had in his prehuman state (Joh 17:4, 5), and God made him “a life-giving spirit.” (1Co 15:45)?? Did Jesus thus became again invisible to human sight, dwelling “in unapproachable light, whom not one of men has seen or can see.” that 1Ti 6:14-16 speaks of? Truthfinder |
||||||
38 | revelation 13 | Revelation | Truthfinder | 83323 | ||
Hi, Nunbers in the Bible. One. This number, when used figuratively, conveys the thought of singleness, uniqueness, as well as unity and agreement in purpose and action. Two. The number two frequently appears in a legal setting. Agreement in the accounts of two witnesses adds to the force of the testimony. Two witnesses, or even three, were required to establish a matter before the judges. Three. While the testifying of two witnesses to the same matter established proof sufficient for legal action, three made the testimony even stronger. The number three, therefore, is used at times to represent intensity, emphasis, or added strength. One of many examples: “A threefold cord cannot quickly be torn in two.” (Ec 4:12) Four. Four is a number sometimes expressing universalness or foursquareness in symmetry and form. It is found three times at Revelation 7:1. Six. This number at times represents imperfection. The number of “the wild beast” is 666 and is called “a man’s number,” indicating that it has to do with imperfect, fallen man, and it seems to symbolize the imperfection of that which is represented by “the wild beast.” The number six being emphasized to a third degree (the six appearing in the position of units, tens, and hundreds) therefore highlights the imperfection and deficiency of that which the beast represents, or pictures.—Re 13:18. Seven. Seven is used frequently in the Scriptures to signify completeness. At times it has reference to bringing a work toward completion. Or it can refer to the complete cycle of things as established or allowed by God. Multiples of seven are used in a similar sense of completeness Eight. The number eight was also used to add emphasis to the completeness of something (one more than seven, the number generally used for completeness), thus sometimes representing abundance. Ten. Ten is a number denoting fullness, entirety, the aggregate, the sum of all that exists of something. It may be noted also that, where the numbers seven and ten are used together, the seven represents that which is higher or superior and ten represents something of a subordinate nature. Example: The Ten Plagues poured upon Egypt fully expressed God’s judgments upon Egypt—all that were needed to humiliate fully the false gods of Egypt and to break the hold of Egypt upon God’s people Israel. The “Ten Words” formed the basic laws of the Law covenant, the approximately 600 other laws merely enlarging on these, elucidating them, and explaining their application. (Ex 20:3-17; 34:28) Jesus used the number ten in several of his illustrations to denote entirety or the full number of something.—Mt 25:1; Lu 15:8; 19:13, 16, 17. Twelve. The patriarch Jacob had 12 sons, who became the foundations of the 12 tribes of Israel. Multiples of 12 are also sometimes significant. David established 24 divisions of the priesthood to serve by turn in the temple later built by Solomon. (1Ch 24:1-18) Forty. In a few instances periods of judgment or punishment seem to be associated with the number 40. (Ge 7:4; Eze 29:11, 12) Nineveh was given 40 days to repent. (Jon 3:4) Another use of the number 40 points out a parallel in the life of Jesus Christ with that of Moses, who typified Christ. Both of these men experienced 40-day periods of fasting.—Ex 24:18; 34:28; De 9:9, 11; Mt 4:1, 2. Truthfinder |
||||||
39 | Jesus is the Lord of Sabbath | Col 2:16 | Truthfinder | 83322 | ||
Hi, Well, while on earth, Jesus Christ referred to himself as “Lord of the sabbath.” (Mt 12:8) The literal Sabbath day, which was meant to bring the Israelites relief from their labors, was “a shadow of the things to come, but the reality belongs to the Christ.” (Col 2:16, 17) In connection with those “things to come,” there is a sabbath of which Jesus is to be the Lord. As Lord of lords, Christ will rule all the earth for a thousand years. (Re 19:16; 20:6) During his earthly ministry, Jesus performed some of his most outstanding miraculous works on the Sabbath. (Lu 13:10-13; Joh 5:5-9; 9:1-14) This to me, shows the kind of relief that he will bring as he raises or resurrects mankind to spiritual and physical perfection during his coming Millennial Rule, which thus will be like a period of sabbath rest for the earth and mankind. (Re 21:1-4). Truthfinder |
||||||
40 | Do Eliphaz' words constitute truth? | Gen 1:1 | Truthfinder | 81381 | ||
Hi Estabon, Job’s critic Eliphaz said: “For man himself is born for trouble.” (Job 5:7) However, to his faithful followers, notice what Jesus said: “Do not let your hearts be troubled. Exercise faith in God, exercise faith also in me.” (John 14:1) So a wise person will say to God: “You are my refuge and my stronghold.” He will seek protection from danger by exercising “faith in God.” Self-righteousness may also promote the view that if a Christian is undergoing many personal difficulties, he must be spiritually deficient. That is precisely what self-righteous Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar thought about faithful Job. They did not have a complete picture of the situation, so it was presumptuous for them to accuse Job of wrongdoing. So my answer would be NO to your question. Truthfinder |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 ] Next > Last [4] >> |