Results 21 - 40 of 77
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: jonp Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
21 | How does one eat wihout a face? | Ex 33:23 | jonp | 184182 | ||
Hi The elders ate in the presence of God. There is no suggestion that God ate with them. They would probably see God in the form of the appearance of fire (compare Ezekiel 1.26-27). Best wishes Jonp | ||||||
22 | How does one eat wihout a face? | Ex 33:23 | jonp | 184183 | ||
Hi The elders ate in the presence of God. There is no suggestion that God ate with them. They would probably see God in the form of the appearance of fire (compare Ezekiel 1.26-27). Best wishes Jonp | ||||||
23 | scriptural basis for loving self | Lev 19:18 | jonp | 183634 | ||
Hi The Bible does not tell us to love ourselves, it assumes that we do so. What it does seek to do is make us look outward from loving ourselves, to loving other to an equal extent. It is paralleled by Jesus words about doing to others what we would want them to do to us (Matthew 7.12). Of course Jesus took this one step further and pointed out that we had to deny ourselves, take up the cross and follow Him (Mark 8.34 and parallels). In other words we must die to ourselves and live for Him, and thus for others (Romans 6.10-11). | ||||||
24 | who was moses mother and dad | Num 26:59 | jonp | 184488 | ||
Hi The father and mother of Moses may well have been Amram and Jochebed (Exodus 6.20; Numbers 26.59) although it is just possible that if Jochebed was the actual daughter of Levi these were the tribal ancestors from whom Aaron and Moses sprang. (It was common practise in asncient times to speak of people being 'born' of their ancestors) Best wishes Jonp | ||||||
25 | Rapid conquest??? | Joshua | jonp | 184168 | ||
Hi Sarah, What you have to consider is the difficulty of conquering and then settling a country when the inhabitants are more familiar with the terrain than you are and there are many great forests to hide in, (Canaan was covered with forests), to say nothing of mountains in which to find shelter. Joshua undoubtedly swept victoriously through the land, aided by the fact that during his first movements the Philistines had not yet arrived from the Aegean. But what he did was capture cities and kill kings, persuading them to leave Israel alone, and then move on, and we should note that killing a king and defeating an army was not the same thing as capturing the city. Furthermore he did not have sufficient force to settle all the cities and hold them against the return of the inhabitants. That is why he had to capture some cities more than once. As soon as his forces moved on the inhabitants would creep back and resettle a city. Meanhwile what his conquests did was enable the Israelites to settle in various places and establish themselves in places where they would be left alone. Their opponents did not want to attract Joshua's attention. The cities in the plains of Esdraelon, Jezreel etc (e.g. Megiddo) were very powerful, and with their chariots were more difficult to deal with. And they were well populated. Thus their conquest was more gradual. Then the Philistines arrived and carved out lands for themselves along the Coastal Plain. Thus when Joshua died Israel were settled in conclaves throughout the land alongside Canaanites and as they grew stronger were able to weed out the Canaanites. But unfortunately for them instead of driving out the Canaanites they took advantage of them for forced labour. The arrival of the powerful Philistines in waves around 1200 BC caused a new problem to which Saul had no answer. It was left to David to subdue the Philistines. But that was roughly 200-400 years or so later (dating depends on a number of questions and is hotly disputed in this period). The actual period of the conquest would have been very complicated. It is one thing to defeat an army (of which many escape) it is quite another to make the country safe (especially when there is a tendency to be disobedient). Best wishes Jonp | ||||||
26 | Amalekites show up in 1st sam 30:1..???? | 1 Sam 30:1 | jonp | 184486 | ||
Hi, The Amalekites were roving tribespeople (similar on the whole to Bedouin) split up into many smaller groups who had little contact with each other, although some apparently settled in Canaan as there was a Mountain of the Amalekites (Judges 12.15; see also Numbers 14.25, 43). Thus the Amalekite tribe defeated by Saul was a different one from that which invaded from the Negev (see Genesis 14.7; Numbers 13.29). In Judges 3, and 6-7 Amalekites also invaded from the east. They were spread over many places. Best wishes Jonp | ||||||
27 | Prayer for death | 1 Kin 19:4 | jonp | 183689 | ||
Hi The short answer is that no Elijah was not right to want his life to end. It was just that he was despairing because he felt that he had failed and was therefore no longer of any use. What he should have done of course, is what we should do in such circumstances, cast ourselves on God. But most of us have felt somewhat like he did. We are all sinners. | ||||||
28 | Ezra | Ezra 1:1 | jonp | 184420 | ||
Hi The four main concerns for the returning exiles were the lack of a Temple, the lack of security, the danger of becoming involved with heretics and the marrying of foreign wives. Positively what they had to do, as we have to do also, was to look to the Lord, avoid all appearance of evil and involvement with those who misrepresent the Lord, marry only those who were true to the Lord, and build a true Temple, in our case this represents the building up of the body of Christ which is His Temple. Best wishes. Jonp, | ||||||
29 | What did Mordecai mean when he told Esth | Esth 4:14 | jonp | 184634 | ||
Hi Mordecai's point was that if Esther did not stand up for the truth then she and her family would suffer the consequences. However it was not to be thought that God depended on Esther. God could always do His delivering in another way, and would in fact do so. However what Esther had to consider was whether God had not put her in the right place at the right time precisely so that she could serve God in this way. |
||||||
30 | What is Glory of the Lord? | Ps 19:11 | jonp | 184291 | ||
Hi Something of the meaning of this is brought out by the glory Psalm (29). In that Psalm the glory of the Lord is depicted in terms of a huge, violent and memorable storm that shook the whole of Palestine and its surrounds. It was so powerful that it reminded the Psalmist of both creation ('the voice of the Lord' repeated seven times, compare 'and God said') and the Flood (the Lord sat enthroned over the Flood). He opens by calling on the angelic court to witness it and through it proclaim the glory of the Lord (verses 1-2), and that glory is then revealed in awesome fashion. And the idea is that it reveals that the Lord of glory still reigns in the heavens. But it is the final verse that is especially relevant. For this mighty storm was not to be seen as a judgment (lthough it no doubt was that), so much as an indication that God would strengthen His people and would (paradoxically) give them peace (verse 11), while they in the Temple cried 'glory!' (verse 9). This was the glory of the Lord falling on them indeed. But for us the glory of the Lord falls on us in another way, for in 2 Corinthians 3.18 we, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being changed into His likeness from glory into glory, even as by the Lord, the Spirit. Best wishes Jonp | ||||||
31 | bible verses for a suicidal teen! | Prov 3:5 | jonp | 184092 | ||
Hi In such circumstance we all have to bow our heads and be silent. But if he is a Christian or ready to become a Christian there is One Who can speak. He too was laid on His back in critical condition, His body wrecked by the activities of man, and in His critical condition, having seemingly gone through the depths of despair (My God, My God why have you forsaken Me?) He cried Father into Your hands I commend My Spirit. He can reach out to help your friend. Perhaps without being glib you can also give him as from the Lord Himself the words of Proverbs 3.5. 'Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding, in all your ways acknowledge Him and He will direct your paths'. For that is what your friend needs right now, to know that the One Who has been through what he is going through, and worse, will direct His paths and lead him slowly along it. It will need much grace on your part to help him, for he will feel that you do not understand. And of course he is right. But Jesus Christ will be with you and He understands exactly. So take courage from Him. You might also consider the word, 'I will never fail you nor forsake you' (Hebrews 13.5). But they will have to be spoken after much prayer and with gentle understanding. I know it sounds so inadequate but our eyes are on Him not ourselves. For with Him behind them the words are not inadequate. Best wishes Jonp | ||||||
32 | Isaiah 7:14 | Is 7:14 | jonp | 183886 | ||
Hi. The problem with the words bethulah (Hebrew)and parthenos (Greek) is that they are both used of 'virgins' who were very far from being virgins. Thus Anath the sister of Baal in the Baal myths was called a bethulah and she was the goddess of reproduction!! The Greek temple prostitutes were called 'virgins'. When the word bethulah is used of a virgin in Genesis 24.16 the words have to be added that she had also not 'known' a man,suggesting that a bethulah was not necessarily a virgin. There was in fact only one Hebrew word in which meant virgin and that was 'alma which meant 'a young woman of marriagable age who was not yet married' (and was therefore assumed to be a virgin. In Greek the nearest was parthenos, even though it was not perfect Best wishes jonp. | ||||||
33 | origin of the devil | Ezek 28:13 | jonp | 184133 | ||
Hi It is not strictly true to say that the majority of scholars see Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 as referring to Satan. The majority opinion among leading scholars is actually that those Scriptures refer to ancient kings who made grandiose claims for themselves, claims which the prophets derided. That Satan was a created spiritual being is necessarily so. But he appears from 'nowhere' in the Fruitful Plain of Eden where he is seen to be in opposition to God (just as the angelic court are assumed in God's words 'Let us make man in OUR image' (Genesis 1.26). We are given a recognition that such spiritual beings exist but not given the details. They came before the creation of heaven (sky) and earth. (Although some would see them as included in Genesis 1.1). His minions crop up in Genesis 6.1-4 and he suddenly appears in Job 1-2, as an angelic being, a son of the elohim, and having to submit to God's authority. In 1 Chronicles 21 he leads David astray. In Zechariah 3 he is once again seen as in opposition to God. In Daniel 10 we again see something of his minions. It is in the New Testament that his opposition to God's ways comes out more emphatically. But his origin is never explained. Jesus tells us that he 'fell from Heaven' and Revelation 12 indicates that he dragged others with him. We must beware of seeing him as almost on a par with God. Powerful though he is he is no match for God and he knows it. Why does God allow Satan to continue in action? As well ask why God allows us still to be in action. It is all within His overall plan. But when Jesus came he was in a sense bound because the Kingly Rule of God had come (Mark 3.27; Matthew 12.28-29 compare Luke 11.22). This binding of Satan is also referred to in Revelation 20.1-3. For his release for a little while compare Revelation 9.1-13. We must recognise that when speaking of details dealing with Satan they cannot be taken too literally. Satan is a spiritual being. He cannot be bound with a chain, be put in prison, or indeed be affected by a literal lake of fire. These are all pictures illustrating how God deals with him in His own way. Job makes clear that he is under God's authority. He cannot do just what he wants. But he is exceedingly powerful (Jude 9). Jesus claims a putting of him under further restraint. He has him under restraint even now. If he had not had him under restraint the church would not have survived for five minutes. And yet his influence is continually felt by the church (1 Peter 5.8). That is why we need to be clothed in the armour of God for our weapons against him are faith, the word of God, a knowledge of the truth, And prayer. Best wishes Jonp | ||||||
34 | When you allot the land as an inheritanc | Ezek 45:1 | jonp | 184351 | ||
Hi This is an important Old Testament chapter with an idealistic background, the background of a heavenly Temple established on a mountain outside Jerusalem (Ezekiel 40.1 etc). There was never any suggestion that it be built. It was a heavenly Temple (compare the heavenly army in 2 Kings 6.17). The only item to be built was the earthly altar through which the heavenly Temple would be accessed (Ezekiel 43.18). This prophecy in chapter 45 is thus concerning the New Temple of God to be established in Heaven (Galatians 4.28; Hebrews 12.23; and compare Ezekiel 47.1 onwards). Note its idealistic surroundings. This will be in connection with the coming of its glorious Prince. You will notice that it is to be established outside Jerusalem in an idealistic surround, just as the heavenly Temple in 40.1 was to be established on a high mountain outside Jerusalem, and in Revelation the heavenly Temple is to be established in Heaven. It will provide spiritual provision for the new idealistic 'city' the new people of God (see also Revelation 20.9, and compare also the idealistic Temple in Revelation 11 which again is totally impractical, but is,as as an idealistic picture, very valuable). The major point is that the earthly Jerusalem was now to be seen as unfitted to house the Temple of the Lord. Ezekiel never suggests that the heavenly Temple be built. It was purely heavenly. This was the only way in which a prophet of Israel could present such an idea in those days. Thus in 47.1 it produces waters that will provide the water of life for the people of God (compare John 4.10-14) in a description which if interpreted literally is clearly totally physically impossible. It is quite clear that none of these pictures can be intended literally. They were idealistic presentations. (You will no doubt however shortly be presented with any number of views :-))). Best wishes Jonp | ||||||
35 | Give someone a Second chance | Matthew | jonp | 184631 | ||
Hi Does God give people a second chance? See Matthew 18.21-22. Do you think God requires men and women to be more forgiving than He is? | ||||||
36 | What resource identifys Gospl chronolgy | Matt 1:1 | jonp | 184136 | ||
Hi The question of the chronological sequence of the Gospels is a much debated one, moreso now than it was fifty years ago when it was felt that it was almost settled. The large majority, apart mainly from Roman Catholic writers, view Mark as the first Gospel to be written. Some would argue that it was Matthew. The question that is most often asked is whether Matthew and Luke used Mark's Gospel or a draft of it in writing their own Gospels. A good and detailed treatment by an evangelical is Dr Donald Guthrie's New Testament Introduction. It is an expansion of his lecture notes when he used to lecture at London Bible College (now the London School of Theology) Best wishes Jonp | ||||||
37 | What resource sets chronology of Jesus | Matt 1:1 | jonp | 184407 | ||
Hi I don't know if this will help but it is suggestive. (However there is disagreement about the dates which can only be accepted roughly, and about how long Jesus' ministry lasted although it was at least three years.). 4 BC Jesus Born AD 8 Jesus in temple AD 26 Jesus baptized Jesus tempted by Satan Jesus' first miracle AD 27 Jesus and Nicodemus Jesus talks to the Samaritan woman Jesus heals the nobleman's son The fishermen follow Jesus Matthew decides to follow Jesus AD 28 Jesus chooses his 12 disciples Jesus preaches the sermon on the mount Jesus travels through Galilee Jesus tells parables about the kingdom Jairus' daughter returned to life by Jesus Jesus sends his disciples to preach and heal John the Baptist is killed by Herod Spring AD 29 Jesus feeds 5000 men Jesus walks on water Fall AD 29 Jesus feeds 4000 men Jesus predicts His death Jesus is transfigured Jesus pays his temple tax October AD 29 Jesus attends the Feast of the Tabernacles Winter AD 29 Jesus returns Lazarus to life Sunday, AD 30 The triumphal entry Monday, AD 30 Jesus cleanses the temple Tuesday, AD 30 Authority of Jesus questioned Wednesday, AD 30 Plot against Jesus Thursday, AD 30 The Last Supper Gethsemane Friday, AD 30 Jesus' trial Jesus' crucifixion and death The burial of Jesus Sunday, AD 30 Jesus rises from dead Jesus appears to the 10 disciples The next week, AD 30 Jesus appears to all 11 disciples AD 30 Jesus appears to 500 40 days after the resurrection, AD 30 Jesus ascends into heaven Best wishes Jonp |
||||||
38 | sermon on the mound | Matt 5:1 | jonp | 183907 | ||
Hi The Sermon on the Mount is Jesus' detailed instructions on what is required of those who have been blessed by God and are thus His saved ones. For a full and detailed treatment of the Sermon go to http://www.angelfire.com/planet/matthew1/index.html Best wishes jonp |
||||||
39 | What is a demon? | Matt 12:24 | jonp | 184468 | ||
Hi A demon is the same as an 'unclean spirit' and Jesus makes clear that they are under Satan's control and part of his kingdom, that is 'the dominion of darkness' (Matt 12.24-29; Colossians 1.13). Sin is not a demon, nor specifically caused by demons, nor do they ordinarily cause disease, although there are some who do. The Bible also distinguishes those who are demon possessed from 'lunatics' (Matt 4.24). Demons do in fact 'possess' people, but probably only when they open their lives to them in some way by dabbling in the occult. They do not necessarily try to prevent you from getting what you want unless what you want is spiritual truth. It need hardly be said that they are enemies of man and of Jesus. Best wishes Jonp | ||||||
40 | evolving or devolving? | Matt 16:28 | jonp | 183798 | ||
Hi stjohn You can read your Bible because you learned the meaning of words through secular history and because secular history developd writing. You use a dictionary produced by secular history. Without realising it you are using secular history all the time in order to understand the Bible. Archaeology illuminates the Bible. But of course God arranged it all. Thus it becomes spiritual history. The Bible is full of secular history and if you are going to fully understand it then you need to know about secular history, otherwise you can interpret it in your own terms. But the Bible shows how God arranged secular history to make it spiritual history. If you did not have definitions of common words supplied by secular history you could not even begin to understand much of the Bible. Understanding how numbers were used in secular history is important because all the Bible writers emerged from secular history and used numbers in the way that their contemporaries did. Much of your interpretation of the Bible arises from your own secular background. In fact of course no history is in the end secular because God is involved in it all. So I do not understand your problem. If you are saying that I believe that knowing the thought forms of the societies from which the Bible writers came helps me to understand what they meant you will be quite right. They wrote in those thought forms. If I interpret them in the light of my own thought forms then I am likely to distort them (as so many do). Of course the message of salvation can come through even if I interpret some things wrongly. But it is spiritually lazy not to try to understand the Bible against its background. Best wishes jonp May I suggest that email is better for questions like the one you asked. Unlike you I give my email address. | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 ] Next > Last [4] >> |