Results 21 - 40 of 449
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Jesusman Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
21 | Why is Enoch not at the Trasnfiguration? | Bible general Archive 3 | Jesusman | 192835 | ||
Ok .. now for the silly question out of no where in particular for no reason other than curiosity. If it is Enoch and Elijah who ascended into heaven without seeing death, and Jesus being the third one to also Ascend into heaven, why is it that Enoch is not present at the Transfiguration in Matthew 17:1-8? In that moment, two out of the three seen there ascended, or would ascend. Moses didn't, so why is he there? Jesusman |
||||||
22 | Why is Enoch not at the Trasnfiguration? | Bible general Archive 3 | Jesusman | 192880 | ||
Could be. It's just a random question I came up with. | ||||||
23 | We can trust in the bible? | Bible general Archive 3 | Jesusman | 193167 | ||
Yes, we can. | ||||||
24 | what does it mean that it says solomon d | Bible general Archive 3 | Jesusman | 193201 | ||
Not sure what you are referring to, but 1 kings 11 does reveal that Solomon, in his later days, greatly angered God. Solomon had married many foreign women and began to raise altars to the gods they worshipped as well as worshipping them also. It doesn't say that Solomon died an evil death, but God did say he would take the throne away from Solomon's line, which happened twice. First, there was the split of the kingdom under the reign of his son, Rehaboam. Later on, the Kingdom of Judah, which was ruled by Jeconiah a decendant of Solomon, was captured by the Babylonians. Jesusman |
||||||
25 | final round of "contradictions" | Bible general Archive 2 | Jesusman | 102915 | ||
Hello, I'm sorry, but I couldn't resist this one. About King Zedekiah. Did you read Jeremiah 34:2-4 along with verse 5? And did you read how he died? King Zedekiah didn't die by the Sword. He died in prison. 34:2-4 says that King Zedekiah would be taken to Babylon to see the king, and verse 5 says that he wouldn't die by the sword. King Neb. sieged Jerusalem, took Zedekiah prisoner, and put him in prison. There, Zedekiah died, possibly of old age. Thus fulfilling Jeremiah's prophecy. About Egypt and Jeremiah Jeremiah is talking to Judah, the southern kingdom. Judah made a peace treaty with Egypt in a vain attempt that Egypt would protect them from Babylon. However, Babylon marched all the way to Egypt and conquered them as well. Thus fulfilling Jeremiah's Prophecy stated in Jeremiah 42: 13-22 About Babylon Are there people living in Babylon, the city where Nabuchdnezzar had his capital? Nope! It's nothing more than ruins. In fact, there's no longer a nation called Babylon. Babylon died at tha Hands of the Medo-persian empire. About Bethlehem Actually, The ancient name for Bethlehem was Ephrath. Genesis 35:19 So, Micah is referring to the city, and the coming Messiah. About the immortal generation in Matthew 23. Actually, this passage is referring to the Destruction of the Temple in 70 ad. Such a destruction would be the end of the world to a devout jew. About Matthew 16. Jesus says that they will not "taste death". Now, Is Jesus referring to physical death, which he once referred to as sleep, or spiritual death? I would say that Jesus is referring to spiritual death. About Hebrews First off, Are you sure that the author is Paul? Because the name of the author is never given, and no one knows for sure who wrote Hebrews. Second, They didn't receive the promise in their lifetime. That doesn't mean that it was never fulfilled. About mystakenly believing that they were in the end times. Peter never says in the verses you state that he believed that he was living in the last times. He does tell us what to expect when the Last times come about. As for verse 4:7, being "at hand" means that it could some at anytime. He's telling the audience to be alert because Jesus could return at anytime. John's epistle is about being alert and staying aware of the dangers around you. Like Peter, John is warning his readers to stay alert. In closing, I must insist that if you desire to put more apparent contradictions up, that you read the whole context, not just what you desire to read. Many of these contradictions were easily explained by looking at the surrounding verses. Jesusman |
||||||
26 | final round of "contradictions" | Bible general Archive 2 | Jesusman | 102923 | ||
hey Hank, Yeah, it has been a while. It's good to see people still remember me here. Anyways, thanks for your comments, and inspiration. Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
27 | Should Christians remarry? | Bible general Archive 2 | Jesusman | 104498 | ||
Since Jesus and Paul both say no, then we shouldn't remarry after divorce. Why? Because it is concidered to be the same as adultry. Now, why do we? I don't know. Jesusman |
||||||
28 | 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 |
||||||
29 | How did Nephilims come into existance? | Bible general Archive 1 | Jesusman | 27001 | ||
Angels? Sorry, doesn't fit. Look at my note on Genesis 6:1-4 about the identity of the Sons of God. It will explain most of this for you. As for the Niphillim being the children of the Sons of God and Daughters of Men, you need to read the passage again. It clearly says that the Niphillim were on the earth when the Sons of God came to the Daughters of Men, and that the Niphillim continued to exist after that. So, the Niphillim weren't the offspring, they are given as a time reference so that you may know when this even took place. The original audience for Genesis would have clearly understood the reference. The offspring were the Mighty men of Old and Men of Renown, Not the Niphillim. Jesusman |
||||||
30 | 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 |
||||||
31 | Knowledge of the Second Coming | Bible general Archive 1 | Jesusman | 27024 | ||
Hello all, Here's a question that I came up with a while back that I love asking because I love the variety of answers that I often get. Here we go. In Christian Doctrine, it is taught that Jesus is the Son member in the Tri-une Godhead. We are also taught that the all of the members of the Tri-une Godhead share the same knowledge, attributes, and etc. With that in mind, turn to Matthew 24:36. "But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone." Ok, with that verse in mind as well as the doctrine of the tri-une God, answer this for me. How can God keep knowledge away from himself? Jesusman |
||||||
32 | 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 |
||||||
33 | 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 |
||||||
34 | 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 |
||||||
35 | May I ask, why, Lord? | Bible general Archive 1 | Jesusman | 28940 | ||
Hello, I remember something my dad told me when I was a boy. He said, "Ask anything you want to ask. Just be respectful in doing so." This comes to mind when looking over the passages you gave. Notice that in everyone of the passages, the people asking "why?" were all respectful of God's authority. They all acknowledged God's authority and sovreignty before asking the question. So, it then becomes a request of information and/or insight than a question about God's ability. One of the many central themes running through Romans is that mankind often tells God, "You don't have a right to do such things." and God answers back, "Yes I do.". This is one such example. I hope this helps. Jesusman |
||||||
36 | How important is your Church? | Bible general Archive 1 | Jesusman | 29110 | ||
9 - While going to church and being a member of a particular doesn't save you, the aspects about going to church is extremely important. Going to Church has three primary purposes. 1) Worshipping God. God deserves our worship. True, worship can be done privately, as it should be done, but it should also be done with other believers. 2) Fellowship with other believers. True, you can fellowship with other christians without going to a church building, but being with other Christians automatically becomes a Church, because what is a CHurch, but a grouping of believers? 3) Teaching and learning God's word. While fellowship and worship can be effectively achieved in private, knowledge of God's word comes easier and better when in groups with other believers. In fact, it seem that nowdays the only place to get true, hard-core bible teaching is at a Bible college or seminary. That should not be the case. It should be the church and the home where believers should recieve a majority of their biblical knowledge. The colleges and seminaries should be where pastors and teachers learn how to teach, not learn what to teach. Jesus Loves You! Jesusman |
||||||
37 | How important is your Church? | Bible general Archive 1 | Jesusman | 29192 | ||
Is not the entire collection of believers called "Church"? "Church" is the term given to the people as a whole, not the building or the small sect that you currently migrate with. It should not be a factor as to which group of believers you are with as long as they are being true the Word of God. Jesusman |
||||||
38 | INVITATION TO SATISFACTION | Bible general Archive 1 | Jesusman | 30225 | ||
Do a search on this passage. You'll find that it has been talked about before. Jesusman |
||||||
39 | Info about the NET Bible in hardcopy | Bible general Archive 1 | Jesusman | 30227 | ||
The NEV is a good bible. Thus far, I have seen it in hardback and bonded leather. The quality is good. However, the looks are unimportant compaired to what's inside. As far as tranlastion goes, it does a good job. It's on a similar basis as the NASB, meaning it goes for literal accuracy. I use it quite frequently, but I doubt it will ever replace the NASB in my mind for most accurate. It's one of the better ones out there. Jesusman |
||||||
40 | does soul have feeling? | Bible general Archive 1 | Jesusman | 30229 | ||
Does the soul have feeling? Well, do you feel? After all, the soul is you. As for where the Christian goes, Heaven and Paradise are the same thing. So to answer your second question, "Yes!" Jesusman |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [23] >> |