Results 241 - 260 of 325
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: MJH Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
241 | Will there be a partial rapture? | 1 Thess 4:17 | MJH | 153492 | ||
Revelations 20:4-5 is not a "rapture" but rather a "resurrection." Therefore it does not apply to what most view the rapture to be. Also, it still does not answer my question in post #153491 of who will be raptured. MJH |
||||||
242 | If all sacrafices ended, then why Acts 2 | Heb 9:1 | MJH | 152367 | ||
Doc, True, the sacrifices were for the defilement, BUT verses 13-21 tell of the sacrifices that end the Nazirite vow when completed without defilement. So any Nazirite vow would have to end with the sacrifices. Since during this time the Temple was still run by the Sadducees, they would have followed Num 6 to the letter. Most commentators acknowledge that a sacrifice would have been made here. Again, in context, there are 1000's of Jewish believers who have it in mind that Paul teaches Jews who live among the Gentiles to not follow the Law or customs of the Jews. This whole episode is meant to disprove that accusation. If Paul and the Christian leaders felt sacrifices were done away with totally, they could have proved Paul's adherence to the Law of Moses in another way, but they choose this -- probably because it was so public. Hebrews 10:18 says, "And where these [sins] have been forgiven, there is no longer any sacrifice for sin." Re-reading Hebrews 10 I am stuck by the absence of any statement that says, "All sacrifices have ended." Actually most of Heb. 10 is referring to the Day of Atonement and once mentions the daily sacrifices. Side note: It is interesting to note that in Jewish Rabbinic literature written some time in the second century (I believe) they admit that for one full generation before the destruction of the Temple, the "Day of Atonement" cord did not turn white, which to them meant the sacrifice was not accepted. On generation being about 40 years, this would mean that we have a Jewish source that admits that after the death of Jesus (or near that time) the Atonement Day sacrifices were not accepted. It seems to me that the Believing Jews participated in at least some sacrificial events either personally or corporately after the death of Jesus. We also know that they celebrated the three main festivals, Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles (Booths). Am I right or am I still missing some thing? MJH (Thanks for following this with me.) |
||||||
243 | If all sacrafices ended, then why Acts 2 | Heb 9:1 | MJH | 152363 | ||
Kalos, No. At least not a "clear" verse. However, it would seem that in Acts 21, Paul participates in the scarifices (or intends to) associated with the Nazarite vow in Num. 6. So again, no clear verse. A question for you then is, what is going on in Acts 21? MJH |
||||||
244 | If all sacrafices ended, then why Acts 2 | Heb 9:1 | MJH | 152336 | ||
Doc, Thanks for the reply... As for those who thought Paul was "anti-Mosaic-Law", I am referring to the first century Jews who ended up setting him up and tried to kill him. You said, "The problem arises if one does [Mosaic Law] in order to obtain some sort of merit with God." I completely agree and feel that some on the forum misuse the term “Judaizers" against those who advocate following more of the Mosaic Law as Gentile Christians. One might disagree with how much of the Mosaic Law applies to Gentile Christians, but I have yet to read anyone uphold the view that salvation is dependant on your observance or lack of. In fact, I hear (not on this forum yet) some say the opposite -- that if you follow some or all of the Mosaic Law, you can not be saved. Sorry for tangent . . . Back to the passage at hand… If we assume for a moment that Paul participated so that he would provide the animals and/or the money for the animals to be sacrificed, then what does this have to say about our view that every and all sacrifices were done away with? I harp on this point, because it has perplexed me for some time. One commentator said that Christians didn’t have a full understanding of the end of the sacrificial system yet when this event occurred. I feel that such a statement is a cop-out. This commentator may have done better to say, “I don’t know why Paul did this” than to use his argument. I, obviously, have read Hebrews, and I know what it says, which is why this Acts passage causes me to scratch my head. MJH |
||||||
245 | If all sacrafices ended, then why Acts 2 | Heb 9:1 | MJH | 152333 | ||
The main question I have is for those who say that Jesus death and resurrection did away with the need for any and all sacrafices. If this is true, and I do not argue eitherway, but simply ask why did Paul apparently participate in a sacrafice near the end of his ministry? Obviously the non-Jesus-believing Jews would have done sacrafices up until the destruction of the Temple, but why would Jesus believing Jews do them, such as Paul? MJH |
||||||
246 | If all sacrafices ended, then why Acts 2 | Heb 9:1 | MJH | 152288 | ||
Hey Doc, Acts 21:26 says, "Then Paul took the men, and the next day he purified himself along with them and went into the temple, giving notice when the days of purification would be fulfilled and the offering presented for each one of them." The preceding verses indicate that the vow was a Nazirite vow. See Numbers 6. It seems obvious that the Jerusalem leaders of the Jewish Christians wanted to prove to the rest of the believing Jewish population that Paul was loyal to the Torah (or law of Moses). This situation provided a good opportunity to show this by action and not just words. If Paul was anti-Mosaic-law, then he would not participate in a ceremonial sacrifice such as a Nazirite Vow requires. Since Paul did so, it raises questions concerning the post I replied to. MJH |
||||||
247 | What was first sacrifice and by whom? | Gen 3:21 | MJH | 151575 | ||
Correct, smarty pants. | ||||||
248 | What was first sacrifice and by whom? | Gen 3:21 | MJH | 151574 | ||
Correct, smarty pants. | ||||||
249 | Take Him for His Word | Matt 24:2 | MJH | 150215 | ||
Ray, I am not speaking of Ezekiel 36:26, I am wondering about the detailed description of the Temple which Ezekeil lays out. Ezekiel 40:1 and on.... It seems that he is prophecying that a new Temple will be built in the future unlike the old. Ez 40:38-47 mention sacrafices, and Ez 42 mention Priests. I have always wondered about this... Thanks, MJH |
||||||
250 | Does God have wings? | Bible general Archive 2 | MJH | 150199 | ||
The Hebrew word for wing is kaw-naf'. This word can mean either "wing" in Hebrew, or "corner". The Hebrews were told in Numbers 15:38 to tie tassels on the kaw-naf' of their robes (so we say corner). This was to remind them of the Laws of God which were to protect them. When the priest blessed the people, when lifting the robe with the tassels tied to it, he appeared to have wings. So the visual wings were seen when the corners were lifted to bless. (kaw-naf' was seen when the kaw-naf' was lifted). They equated these tassels as a symbol of God's protection. When David cut off the kaw-naf' (corner) of Saul's robe in the cave, David was saying by doing this that God's protection was no longer on Saul. Saul says this same thing when he learns of it. The Hebrews were very visual, and when they heard the psalmist say God had kaw-naf' (wings), they connected this to Num. 15:38, and saw the protection from God found in the symbol of the Tassels which represented the Law. NOW FOR A REALLY COOL TIDBIT WE OFTEN MISS... Malachi 4:2 "But for you who fear my name, the sun of righteousness shall rise with healing in His (kaw-naf') wings. You shall go out leaping like calves from the stall." Mattew 9:20-21 " And behold, a woman who had suffered from a discharge of blood for twelve years came up behind him and touched the fringe of his garment, for she said to herself, "If I only touch his garment, I will be made well." Jesus turned, and seeing her he said, "Take heart, daughter; your faith has made you well." And instantly the woman was made well.” Remember that the "fringe" or "tassel" was tied to the corner of the robes of all Jews. She didn't just touch him, she reached out and grabbed the tassel which was on the kaw-naf'(corner OR wing) of Jesus robe. We do not see Malachi's powerful prophesy and Jesus’ fulfillment, because we do not know that in Malachi, the word is kaw-naf'. Does God have wings? Yes, as it relates to the word kaw-naf'. It makes very perfect sense that the Hebrews would have pictured God with a robe and tassels held out to bless His people. Of course it's much easier to say, God covers me with His kaw-naf'. What was God's wing to the Hebrew? His wing was the Torah, or the Law given to Israel. What is God's wing to us now? The Salvation from sin and death through the Messiah Jesus, but more than that… MJH |
||||||
251 | denominations. | Eph 4:3 | MJH | 148830 | ||
But was John the "Immerser" :-), the only one in his day immersing? Was he the first person “baptizing”? MJH |
||||||
252 | MJH, Why limit it to adding abuse only? | Matt 19:9 | MJH | 144412 | ||
Searcher, I am still waiting to hear why you feel that a woman should stay married to a husband who is grossly abusive. This is the whole bases of our discussion of which I have provided much to think about, but which you have said nothing other than that you don't agree. Ex. 21 forbids gross abuse of SLAVES, but I am to assume that a married woman is lower than a slave and should not be defended in such a case? The scripture also forbids that a man allow another man's animal to be abused or put under a load that is too heavy. And, oh yeah, it was an ENEMIES animal that was under the heavy load, fell down, or fell into a hole. Yet, we are to treat our enemy’s animal with more respect than a man's wife? Is that what Jesus taught? To be literal in the very strictest way, as you suggest would be impossible at times. Let me show. The Sabbath laws forbid work on the Sabbath. The laws about property require that a man helps another man's donkey if it falls into a pit. What happens if the donkey falls into a pit on the Sabbath. Which law do you break? The rabbis in Jesus time said you break the Sabbath laws and help the donkey. Even they, those strict den of vipers, cared enough for an animal to break their beloved Sabbath. But I am to understand that Jesus was more of a viper by allowing women to be abused? Please, please provide an argument for your case. I am afraid that I may be getting sarcastic and I certainly do not wish to break the rules of the forum. MJH |
||||||
253 | WHO is Hebrews 6:4-11 refering to? | Heb 6:4 | MJH | 144348 | ||
I too have looked this one over and found at this time the safest place to be is that of Paul's who said the following after spending 3 chapters of the subject. Rom 11:33 Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and[i] knowledge of God! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out! 34“Who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been his counselor?”[j] 35“Who has ever given to God, that God should repay him?”[k] 36For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be the glory forever! Amen." MJH |
||||||
254 | Genesis 3:22 Who is God referring to"us" | Gen 1:26 | MJH | 144346 | ||
I understand that Gen. 1:26 refers (so it is thought) to the Trinity, but does 3:22 also do this? Or not? | ||||||
255 | Why do they prey for the deads salvation | 1 Cor 3:15 | MJH | 143394 | ||
Regarding your statement that "removing them (the Apocrypha) was a sin:" I would say that if they were never even added no sin was committed. Considering their source, adding them, however, WAS and is a sin (Proverbs 30:5-6, Matthew 15:7-9, 1 Timothy 6:3-5, Revelation 22:18). I know, you had a fever; but it bugs me when people use scripture to make a point that the scripture they are quoting doesn’t make. Taking them 1 at a time. Proverbs 30:5-6 This is speaking about the Torah, or the first 5 books of the Bible. Some might argue (wrongly) that this statement also refers to prophetic words spoken by God to prophets after Moses but before Solomon. Then others have the strange idea to apply this to post Solomon times. The statement can not apply to post Solomon for several reasons the most important being that if it did, then all post Solomon books would be non-Biblical (“do not add to his words”). (The words: “Every word of God proofs true” is universal of course.) Matt 15:7-9: This statement is clearly speaking about the Oral Torah (Law). Here Jesus is stating that these so called Oral Laws were not from the Torah as the teachers of the Torah taught, but actually from men. Jesus spent much of His time teaching the correct interpretation of the Torah and the rest of the Hebrew Scriptures. Again, these can not make your point about the Apocrypha books which were before Jesus time. He isn’t even speaking of written texts, but of oral laws. 1 Timothy 6:3-4: This one is obviously not a refutation of the Apocrypha books. Rev 22:18-19: Here we have two things: 1) is this statement about the book of Revelation? or the whole Bible? If just Revelation, then why is the word translated into English as “book” and not “letter?”; if he means whole Bible, then why does he mention this in a letter to the churches. I assume he wasn’t attaching the whole Bible to the letter. The best understanding is to say the words apply to the book or letter of Revelation. However; other Bible passages make it clear that God’s Word isn’t to be changed (texts that usually refer to the Torah (first 5 books) but can be extrapolated to the whole accepted Bible, but still doesn’t answer the Apocrypha question.) 2) This text was written WAY after the Apocrypha, so even if it refers to the whole Bible, the Apocrypha was written before, not after John’s letter. There is no way one can use scripture to disprove or prove the Apocrypha EXCEPT when the books in the Apocrypha contradict accepted scripture, which many do. I am not a scholar of the Apocrypha, but I do know that many books add to our understanding of the Jews and the times. They were known by the apostles and Jesus and the general public. The Jews celebrated, the holiday instituted in Maccabees (Festival of Lights or Hanukah) which Jesus also celebrated and called Himself the Light of the World during the festival. All this and still I agree that the Apocrypha are not to be accepted as authoritative God given scripture. Studying for a mid-term? Seems to me after reading your many posts you ought to be giving the mid-term. God Bless MJH |
||||||
256 | Why worship on resurrection day? | Ex 20:10 | MJH | 140469 | ||
Point well taken. I did not spend near enough time on the last post and should have been more careful. I had to shovel snow from 4:30 am until 7 am and then had to wait to do Christmas Eve breakfast with my family. Soooo, I was tired and killing time reading the forum; but no excuse. Anyway, my reason behind the "this" referring to Passover, was when Jesus (not Paul) said, Luk 22:19 And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me." Luk 22:20 And likewise the cup after they had eaten, saying, "This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood. So the “Do this” would refer to what Jesus was actually doing at the time with the Bread and the Wine. And we know that the first church and Apostles also broke bread “in remembrance” on a regular bases, and not just during the Passover. But, I still think that Jesus may have been refereeing to both the “communion” sacrament, as well as the Passover. I will not stand firm on that since I do not have time to spend analyzing the Greek text right now, being that it is only 3 minutes from Christmas day and I will be shoveling snow again at 4:00 am and rushing home to be there before the kids wake up! Thanks for putting me in my place in such a humorous way. I certainly plan to study the liturgical year and have been planning to do so. Any good book or starting point would be appreciated. MJH |
||||||
257 | What is required for Salvation? | John 17:3 | MJH | 140171 | ||
It isn't poor taste to ask someone to sidebar. You are right to have causion. I don't "sidebar" by self. |
||||||
258 | What is required for Salvation? | John 17:3 | MJH | 140170 | ||
You are mistaken about the Jewish view of Repentance. The Hebrew "shooba" or "ta-shooba" means to "turn back." It was seen by the first century Jewish people of returning back to the Torah. Certainly "seeking the face of God" was a part of this, because that was a part of the Torah. Another way to explain their Eastern way of seeing repentance was to return to God and to "take up the yoke of the Kingdom of God." This was done twice a day in Jesus time by reciting the "Shema." which is, "Hear 'O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord Alone. . ." This is a short note about, but I found long posts often don't get read. :-( You are right; however, that looking at the scriptures through the eyes of the original authors would help a lot. MJH |
||||||
259 | Wise Christian spending? | Lev 19:18 | MJH | 140168 | ||
I am not the best person to speak to on these things. But if in China, 50 cents can buy you food for a day, then 50 cents an hour is a lot. If 50 cents can't buy you a gum ball, then it is slave labbor. I am not familur with the economy in China. Simply comparing with American Dollars in a seperate culture and economy doesn't work. For example. My mother-in-law has a home worth about 40,000 dollars in a small town in Upper Penisulla Michigan. The same home in the Chicago Suburbs would cost some 250,000 dollars. (And she has a natural waterfall in her back yard.) She makes less than people in Chicago, but the economy in Upper Michigan is far different. I do not think you will find scriptures to make a political point about Walmart, or any other company in the USA that is successful. MJH |
||||||
260 | How close are we to end times | NT general Archive 1 | MJH | 140119 | ||
Personally I think Jesus' return will be at least 500 years from now. Show me a generation since the 300's AD that has not thought it was living in the days right before Jesus' return. I figure if I choose 500 or more years, I have a better chance of being right. :-) MJH |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ] Next > Last [17] >> |