Results 21 - 37 of 37
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Holmes Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
21 | How long is a Biblical Generation ? | Gen 15:16 | Holmes | 229198 | ||
Hi biblicalman, - You wrote, “I don't remember mentioning Passover? You must have misread what I said.” You cited the 400 years that ended in Egypt and in the next line you cited the 40 years in the wilderness. In the former you said a generation was 100 years and in the latter 40 years. These two periods of time were separated only by the Passover. Then you cited the genealogy of Joshua as representing 40 years as a generation. This genealogy includes both the 400 years that ended in Egypt and the 40 years in the wilderness. Your interpretation of these verses is contradictory and confusing. You are reading a definition of “generation” into the scriptures that simply does not exist. - You wrote: “I fail to see where I am misquoting Scripture. It says 'strangers in a land (singular) which is not theirs where they would serve them and would be afflicted for four hundred years, and also THAT NATION whom they serve will I judge, and afterward they will come out with great substance '. Clearly one nation was in mind.” I will agree with you that “on the face of Genesis 15:13” it appears that the Israelites were strangers in Egypt on land not their own and were enslaved and oppressed for 400 years. However, other scriptures contradict this interpretation. It seems that you recognize this because you understand that the generations of Moses, as written in Ex. 6:16-20 could not extend over 400 years. Therefore, you came to the conclusion that the genealogy of Moses and Aaron was shortened. It is also contradicted by Paul in Gal. 3:16-17 where it confirms that from God’s covenant with Abraham, made at the time of his offer of Isaac, till the time of the Passover was 430 years. Also, see Ex. 12:41. The Israelites were not strangers (sojourners) nor did they travel from place to place in Egypt. They came to Egypt as the invited guest of the Pharaoh himself and were given the best land on which to live. They did not fall into oppression until after the death of Joseph at the age of 110 years (Ex 1). How then can Genesis 15:13 be interpreted to be consistent with the other scriptures? The Bible does this itself in Ex 6: 4-5. Read these scripture together: - Genesis 15:13 “God said to Abram, ‘know for certain that your descendants will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, where they will be enslaved and oppressed four hundred years’. “ - Exodus 6:4 “I also established My covenant with them, to give them the land of Canaan, the land in which they sojourned.” - Exodus 6:5 “Furthermore I have heard the groaning of the sons of Israel, because the Egyptians are holding them in bondage, and I have remembered My covenant. See also: - Genesis 17:8 “the land of your sojourning, all the land of Canaan” - Genesis 23:4 “I am a stranger and a sojourner among you” - Genesis 28:4 “the land of your sojournings, which God gave to Abraham - Genesis 37:1 “where his father had sojourned, in the land of Canaan. For your consideration, Holmes |
||||||
22 | How long is a Biblical Generation ? | Gen 15:16 | Holmes | 229139 | ||
Biblicalman, You stated, “It is not easy to answer your question because the concept changed over the centuries.” That’s is not what you state next. You change the meaning of Generation from meaning 100 years before Passover to 40 years after Passover. That’s one day, not over the centuries. You stated, “We know this because they would be strangers in the land of Egypt for 400 years, and would return in the fourth generation (Gen 15.13, 16). You are misquoting scripture here. It does not say Egypt, it says “strangers in a land not theirs.” This includes Canaan and Egypt. You stated, “So from Joseph to Joshua there were 11 generations inclusive. At 40 years per generation that would give us 400 years, agreeing with Genesis 15.” Here you are using 100 years and 40 years during the same time period! You stated, “Moses and Aaron's genealogy was clearly foreshortened.” Clearly you are in error. Holmes |
||||||
23 | Dose the bible note angels by gender? | Bible general Archive 4 | Holmes | 228926 | ||
Matthew 5:9 “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God. Luke 20:36 for they cannot even die anymore, because they are like angels, and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection. Romans 8:14 For all who are being led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. Romans 8:19 For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God. Galatians 3:26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. There is nothing to support your contention that "sons of God" as used in Job 1.6 and 2.1 are referring to demons. Even when "sons of God" makes reference to angels in Job 38.7 it is not referring to fallen angels. Fallen angels or demons would never be referred to as "sons of God." It is not in harmony with scripture. The "Godly" were not destroyed in the flood. The Godly line was destroyed when it became corrupted by intermarriage with the corrupt. All except for Noah and his family. Holmes |
||||||
24 | I would like an explination of Geneis 6. | Gen 6:1 | Holmes | 228444 | ||
(Genesis 6:1-4) Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose. And the Lord said, "My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years." There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown. You wrote: - “What has to be recognized is that there was no 'godly line of Seth'. Seth's descendants were as ungodly as Cain's.” Please note the Godly line of Seth: Genesis 4:26 To Seth, to him also a son was born; and he called his name Enosh. Then men began to call upon the name of the LORD. Luke 3:38 . . . the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God. You wrote: - “Why on earth should a line which was to be largely destroyed for sin be called 'sons of God'? And why should their subsequent offspring have been so unique as to be 'men of renown'?” Does it make more sense that demons should be called “Sons of God?” You wrote: - “The only way to remove the effects of these unions was total destruction.” Ever heard of Goliath? Guess that destruction was not total! Read the verses carefully. It says there were giants in those days and also afterward, mighty men, men of renown. It does not say they were the result of the sons of God being united with the daughters of men, but actually existed before that time. The LORD said, “My Spirit shall not strive with MAN forever,” not Man-Demons. Women are human and angels are spirit beings, angels cannot cohabit or reproduce with women. Each kind is to produce after it’s own kind. Do angels reproduce? For your consideration, Holmes |
||||||
25 | Don't understand Revelation and 1 Cor 15 | 1 Cor 15:28 | Holmes | 228342 | ||
Hi biblicalman You wrote: -“So you are now telling God how He should have written the Scriptures? You are a brave man indeed.” Nope, just pointing out what was not written! You wrote: -“ And on that note I suggest that we draw this correspondence to an end.” Finally we agree. Thank you for the exchange. Holmes |
||||||
26 | Don't understand Revelation and 1 Cor 15 | 1 Cor 15:28 | Holmes | 228325 | ||
Hi biblicalman You wrote: You are assuming that ‘there’ means the city. But in fact it means the high mountain. It is a repetitive phrase typical of the Old Testament. ‘So he brought me there’ is referring back to ‘he brought me into the land of Israel and set me on a very high mountain’. See Ezekiel 40:3 “So He brought me there: and behold, there was a man whose appearance was like the appearance of bronze, with a line of flax and a measuring rod in his hand; and he was standing in the gateway.” What was he standing in the “gateway” of? It was the east gate of the temple. See verse 6. The east gate was also the eastern border of the city. Holmes |
||||||
27 | Don't understand Revelation and 1 Cor 15 | 1 Cor 15:28 | Holmes | 228324 | ||
Hi biblicalman You wrote: You cite Zechariah as though you could simply apply these verses to the coming king because of the word Branch. But as we have already seen Zechariah 6.12-16 applies to Joshua the High Priest “ See Zechariah 6:13 “Yes, it is He who will build the temple of the LORD, and He who will bear the honor and sit and rule on His throne. Thus, He will be a priest on His throne, and the counsel of peace will be between the two offices.” Joshua the High Priest never sat or ruled from a throne. He is not the “Prince of Peace,” nor did he ever serve as High Priest and King, “the two offices.” Where in scripture is the fulfillment of this prophesy that Joshua the High Priest is sitting on and ruling from his throne? Holmes |
||||||
28 | Don't understand Revelation and 1 Cor 15 | 1 Cor 15:28 | Holmes | 228323 | ||
Hi biblicalman You wrote: “But all that is by the way because Haggai was not referring to Solomon’s Temple at all. He was comparing the Second Temple to the one that was coming, that is, to Herod’s Temple. Solomon’s Temple had nothing to do with it.” See Haggai 2:3 “Who is left among you who saw this temple in its former glory? There was only one “former temple.” If God had been referring to the 2nd temple He would have said, “The latter glory of this house will be greater than the present (the one you are currently working on).” You wrote: I am interested to know how you know what was in Herod’s mind. From Unger’s Bible Dictionary: “Herod was not only an Idumaean in race and a Jew in religion, but he was a heathen in practice and a monster in character. During his administration as king he proved himself to be exceedingly crafty, jealous, cruel, and revengeful. He exercised his kingly power with the disposition of a very despot.” And those are just his good features! Holmes |
||||||
29 | Don't understand Revelation and 1 Cor 15 | 1 Cor 15:28 | Holmes | 228311 | ||
Hi Biblicalman, You wrote: - “If you think that the Ezekiel Temple will be located in Jerusalem then you have not read Ezekiel 40-48 through. You simply pick out verses that suit your case. Ezekiel 40-48 specifically cites his Temple as being outside Jerusalem. I suggest you reread it for yourself. See Ezekiel 40.2 where it was on a high mountain with the city to the south.” Ezekiel 40:2 – 3 “In the visions of God He brought me into the land of Israel and set me on a very high mountain, and on it to the south there was a structure like a city. So He brought me there; and behold, there was a man whose appearance was like the appearance of bronze, with a line of flax and a measuring rod in his hand; and he was standing in the gateway.” Please note: The earth will undergo tremendous changes prior to Christ return. Revelation 16: 18-20 And there were flashes of lightning and sounds and peals of thunder; and there was a great earthquake, such as there had not been since man came to be upon the earth, so great an earthquake was it, and so mighty. 19 The great city was split into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell. Babylon the great was remembered before God, to give her the cup of the wine of His fierce wrath. And every island fled away, and the mountains were not found. Ezekiel 38:19 In My zeal and in My blazing wrath I declare that on that day there will surely be a great earthquake in the land of Israel. Isaiah 40:9 Get yourself up on a high mountain, O Zion, bearer of good news, Lift up your voice mightily, O Jerusalem, bearer of good news; Lift it up, do not fear. Say to the cities of Judah, “ Here is your God!” You wrote: - “Zechariah 6.12 must be read in context. We are actually TOLD who the Branch is there. It is Joshua the High Priest.” Note: That is incorrect, it does NOT say Branch is Joshua the High Priest. Branch is a Messianic name. Joshua the High Priest was never King, and being a Levi, was not of the House of David. The Branch is Christ, a priest forever According to the order of Melchizedek. Jeremiah 23:5 “Behold, the days are coming,” declares the LORD, “When I will raise up for David a righteous Branch; And He will reign as king and act wisely And do justice and righteousness in the land. Jeremiah 33:15 In those days and at that time I will cause a righteous Branch of David to spring forth; and He shall execute justice and righteousness on the earth. Zechariah 3:8 [ The Branch ] Now listen, Joshua the high priest, you and your friends who are sitting in front of you—indeed they are men who are a symbol, for behold, I am going to bring in My servant the Branch. Zechariah 6:12-16 Then say to him, ‘Thus says the LORD of hosts, “Behold, a man whose name is Branch, for He will branch out from where He is; and He will build the temple of the LORD. Yes, it is He who will build the temple of the LORD, and He who will bear the honor and sit and rule on His throne. Thus, He will be a priest on His throne, and the counsel of peace will be between the two offices.” You wrote: - “Haggai 2.7, 9, ‘I will shake all nations, and the desirable things of all nations shall come, and I will fill this house with glory -- the latter glory of this house will be greater than the former --- and in this place will I give peace. - With regard to the desirable things of the nations coming see my previous post on Isaiah 60.14 re the riches that poured in to Jerusalem. They specifically came to the Temple of which Haggai was speaking. And the latter house was greater than the former when Herod built his magnificent structure, which was the admiration of the world. People gasped when they saw its beauty.” God would not allow King David to build His Temple because David was a man of war. So the Temple was built by King Solomon, chosen by God Himself. This Temple contained God’s Shekinah, the Ark of the Covenant and contents, and the Urim and Thummim. Herod’s Temple was built by a non-Hebrew for his own purposes. It lacked the Shekinah, the Ark, and the Tablets of the Law. How can it be possible that Herod’s Temple is greater than Solomon’s? How did Jesus give peace in Herod’s Temple? For your consideration, Holmes |
||||||
30 | Don't understand Revelation and 1 Cor 15 | 1 Cor 15:28 | Holmes | 228287 | ||
Hi Biblicalman, You wrote: “I know of no Scripture which says that the Messiah will build a Temple. Perhaps you can enlighten me.” The Messiah said that He will build His temple and rule from His throne. He also said that this temple will be greater than Solomon’s temple. Zechariah 6:12-13 Then say to him, Thus says the LORD of hosts, “Behold, a man whose name is Branch, for He will branch out from where He is; and He will build the temple of the LORD. Yes, it is He who will build the temple of the LORD, and He who will bear the honor and sit and rule on His throne. Thus, He will be a priest on His throne, and the counsel of peace will be between the two offices.” Haggai 2: 6-9 For thus says the LORD of hosts, “Once more in a little while, I am going to shake the heavens and the earth, the sea also and the dry land. I will shake all the nations; and they will come with the wealth of all nations, and I will fill this house with glory,” says the LORD of hosts. “The silver is Mine and the gold is Mine,” declares the LORD of hosts. The latter glory of this house will be greater than the former,” says the Lord of hosts, “and in this place I will give peace,” declares the LORD of hosts. You wrote: “I am unable to find in my Bible where 1 Corinthians 15.25 is 'a specific reference to the millennial rule'. There is nothing specific about it at all. It is an interpretation and many would disagree with that statement. It is reading into Scripture what is not there and then calling it specific.” The answer to this is in the original post. Cuhigher pointed out apparent contradictions in various scriptures. Your explanation does not address those contradictions. All scripture must be in harmony. You wrote: “Revelation 11 cannot be literally interpreted. It is impossible to conceive of a Temple where the Gentiles control in hostility (trample) the courts of the Temple with the sanctuary alone being occupied by God's people, especially as it exists for three and a half years. The Gentiles would take over the whole Temple. The Temple must therefore be the Temple of the Holy Spirit, the body of Christ.” Are the arms of the LORD short? I’m sure it was also impossible to conceive that Judea would be reestablished in 1948 after not existing for nearly 1900 years, or that the Jews would capture control of the ancient city of Jerusalem, including the Temple Mount, as a result of the 6-Day War in 1967. These events had to occur prior to the Messiah's return, just as a third temple must also be built. After His return, He will build His own temple. Anyone who reads Ezekiel 40-48 can quickly discern that the Temple will be a physical structure, located in Jerusalem. For your consideration, Holmes |
||||||
31 | was the sabbath still observed | Acts 13:13 | Holmes | 227314 | ||
Hi Beja, I think we can worship God and our Lord Jesus Christ on any day and at any time. The question was if early Christians observed the Sabbath along with Sunday and did they celebrate Passover. Based solely on scripture, it is apparent the early Christians did met on the Sabbath and did observe the Feast of Unleavened Bread. Scripture also shows they met on other days of the week, including Sunday. I am presently in an international Bible study program which has students from about a 100 different churches or denominations. It is a very mainstream Protestant organization. A recent study concerned the Sabbath. It was from this study I learned of the Sabbath meetings given in Acts. It also presented the two given scriptures to support Sunday worship. It was not my intent to take anything out of context or setup a straw man or an unduly weak argument in favor of Sunday worship. I am glad that you appreciate that the two scriptures offered are a weak argument. I do not find 1 Cor 16:1-2 to be any stronger. When I find scripture that is in disagreement with my beliefs or in conflict with other scripture, then it is I who am wrong. God rested on the seventh day, then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it. There was Adam and Eve at the time, the father and mother of us all, no Hebrews and no Christians. Where does God bless and sanctify the first day? Where does it state that he changed the Sabbath to Sunday? Holmes |
||||||
32 | was the sabbath still observed | Acts 13:13 | Holmes | 227306 | ||
Hi Steve, Thanks for your insights. I think the passages speak for themselves and everyone is free to search the scriptures and for the truth of the matter. We need to guard against either adding or subtracting from what is written. Scripture will interpret scripture. When Paul waited until after the days of Unleavened Bread to leave Philippi (Acts 20:6), we don’t need to speculate that it was “merely a familiar time indicator.” Christ does not merely fulfill the type of the Passover lamb, Paul clearly states that Christ IS our Passover, “therefore let us celebrate the feast. . . “ (1Cor 5:7-8) Holmes |
||||||
33 | was the sabbath still observed | Acts 13:13 | Holmes | 227298 | ||
Beja, After Paul prolonged his message until midnight, Eutychus fell asleep and landed hard on the floor. Paul revived him. The very next thing to happen was Paul got up and “had broken bread and eaten." Then he resumed talking until daybreak. That is not an assumption. It is what the scripture says. Monday began at sunset. No need for anyone to take my word, your word, or John Gill’s word. They can just read Acts 20 and determine the truth for themselves. Holmes |
||||||
34 | was the sabbath still observed | Acts 13:13 | Holmes | 227295 | ||
First, it would be quite remarkable if scripture intended to let us know they had lunch that day. Second, your estimate of that verse disagrees with how the church has always understood it. Hi Beja, The breaking of bread is mentioned as the reason they had gathered together, not that they had lunch that day. This is no different than the early Christians of Acts 2:46: Day by day continuing with one mind in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they were taking their meals together with gladness and sincerity of heart. Were these new Christians having communion every day? No, they were taking their meals together. Also, Paul was planning on leaving the next day. If the purpose was to have communion on Sunday, then why did Paul wait well into Monday to break the bread? Now note the context of verse 11: “When he had gone back up and had broken the bread and eaten, he talked with them a long while until daybreak, and then left.” No mention of it as communion, no mention of wine, only that Paul had “eaten,” on Monday, not Sunday. If “the church” has always understood it to be communion, maybe you could explain why they understand it that way. For your consideration, Holmes |
||||||
35 | United States in Scripture? | Ps 82:8 | Holmes | 227031 | ||
Beja, Of course I believe that the scriptures I posted are relevant to the question. The question is if the United States is mentioned in scripture as a nation. God made an unconditional promise to Abraham that his descendants would be numerous and a “multitude of nations.” Notice that the subject here is nation(s). I then traced that promise of a “multitude of nations” from Abraham to Isaac to Jacob to Joseph to Ephraim. This unconditional promise was one of actual physical nations and was a birthright: • Genesis 25:33 And Jacob said, "First swear to me"; so he swore to him, and sold his birthright to Jacob. • 1 Chronicles 5:1[ Genealogy from Reuben ] Now the sons of Reuben the firstborn of Israel (for he was the firstborn, but because he defiled his father's bed, his birthright was given to the sons of Joseph the son of Israel; so that he is not enrolled in the genealogy according to the birthright. • Jeremiah 31:9 . . . I am a father to Israel, And Ephraim is My firstborn." We are in the Last Days and Jacob, when he blessed his sons told us what Joseph would look like: • Genesis 49:1 1Then Jacob summoned his sons and said, "Assemble yourselves that I may tell you what will befall you in the days to come. • 22 Joseph is a fruitful bough, A fruitful bough by a spring; Its branches run over a wall. 23 The archers bitterly attacked him, And shot at him and harassed him; 24 But his bow remained firm, And his arms were agile, From the hands of the Mighty One of Jacob Where are these nations today? Could the United States be one of them? For your consideration, Holmes |
||||||
36 | United States in Scripture? | Ps 82:8 | Holmes | 227025 | ||
Hi BradK, Justme’s post was “United States in Scripture?” I just offered some scriptures to consider. The USA is, or was, modern Israel’s closest ally. The British and Americans were instrumental in the establishment of the modern nation of Israel. Outside of Israel, most Jews live in the United States. The USA is involved in three Middle East wars and the entire region is on fire. And, as I stated before, the British and Americans have been the preeminent world powers for the last 400 years. I did not make any conclusion, but I do think it is an interesting question. For your consideration, Holmes |
||||||
37 | United States in Scripture? | Ps 82:8 | Holmes | 227024 | ||
Hi Beja, My suggestion was that Justme search the scriptures to determine if the USA is there or not. I then offered some ideas of what he might consider and some scriptures, which he might consider. The scriptures speak for themselves. I included 2 Samuel 7:10 because of the prophesy that the LORD would appoint a place for His people Israel and plant them. This was made at a time when David was King over all Israel. This task of planting Israel appears to have been given to Jeremiah: • Jer. 1:10 "See, I have appointed you this day over the nations and over the kingdoms, To pluck up and to break down, To destroy and to overthrow, To build and to plant." The Jews, those Hebrews of the Southern Kingdom of Judea, are the same ones which returned from Babylon as documented in Ezra and Nehemiah. They did not lose their identity as the Northern Kingdom of Israel did. The modern nation of Israel is Ancient Judea and not Ancient Israel. The Jewish population is about 14 million worldwide. About 42 percent of all Jews live in Israel, followed by the US with about 38 percent. Therefore, they did not fulfill the promises God made to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Joseph. I’m not making any hints about where Israel was planted. However, the “multitude of nations” would need certain characteristics. They would be nations where circumcision is practiced: • Genesis 17: 11 And you shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskin, and it shall be the sign of the covenant between Me and you. • 19 But God said, "No, but Sarah your wife will bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac; and I will establish My covenant with him for an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him. For your consideration, Holmes |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 ] |