Results 41 - 45 of 45
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Unanswered Bible Questions Author: LuckyCharm Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
41 | "Giving over to the Lord" - destruction? | Bible general Archive 1 | LuckyCharm | 44547 | ||
My NIV commentary says that for the ancient Jews, to "give something over to the Lord" meant to destroy it. Questions: 1. Was this always true? Were there other ways of giving something over to the Lord? 2. Why was destruction necessary? How did it signify giving something to the Lord? 3. In which cases was destruction considered necessary? 4. Is this still practiced in any way today? If so, how? Thanks in advance for any insight.... --Cheryl |
||||||
42 | Hoping for sources to back me up | 2 Tim 3:16 | LuckyCharm | 42813 | ||
Thanks, Kalos. Unfortunately, my correspondent does not share our faith in the inspiration of the Scriptures, and his question is part of the reason why he feels that Christianity as we know it today is a corruption of the faith of the original Christians, who he claims did not believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ. I have encountered this objection from several quarters now, and am really searching for some authoritative sources with which to refute it. (BTW, I liked your closing remark... *grin*) Peace, --Cheryl |
||||||
43 | Jesus according to Paul, vs. the Gospels | 2 Tim 3:16 | LuckyCharm | 42771 | ||
Jesus according to Paul, vs. the Gospels? The following question was posed to me elsewhere, and I was wondering whether anyone here has done any study or knows of any good sources on the subject: "My personal point of view is that the (later-written) Gospels present a version of Jesus that is developed along a certain line from the (earlier written) authentic letters of Paul. The authentic letters of Paul are consistent with a spiritual/non-historic Jesus who is the focus of a mystery religion. The Gnostics, who claim Paul's teaching as one of their primary sources, and for whom other non-canonical Gnostic gospel versions of Jesus exist, may have been the "true" christians and the canonical-gospel-following christians the heretics, but since the canonical-gospel-following christians got to write history, it was the Gnostics who were branded the heretics. Paul's letters could be interpreted to fit both (although I find them more consistent with the Gnostic view). All that said, I wouldn't recommend interpreting the writings of Paul based on the later-written and tangentially developed Gospels." Appreciate any input! --Cheryl |
||||||
44 | Jesus according to Paul, vs. the Gospels | 1 John 1:1 | LuckyCharm | 42768 | ||
Jesus according to Paul, vs. the Gospels? The following question was posed to me elsewhere, and I was wondering whether anyone here has done any study or knows of any good sources on the subject: "My personal point of view is that the (later-written) Gospels present a version of Jesus that is developed along a certain line from the (earlier written) authentic letters of Paul. The authentic letters of Paul are consistent with a spiritual/non-historic Jesus who is the focus of a mystery religion. The Gnostics, who claim Paul's teaching as one of their primary sources, and for whom other non-canonical Gnostic gospel versions of Jesus exist, may have been the "true" christians and the canonical-gospel-following christians the heretics, but since the canonical-gospel-following christians got to write history, it was the Gnostics who were branded the heretics. Paul's letters could be interpreted to fit both (although I find them more consistent with the Gnostic view). All that said, I wouldn't recommend interpreting the writings of Paul based on the later-written and tangentially developed Gospels." Appreciate any input! --Cheryl |
||||||
45 | Reliability of the Bible? | 1 Cor 15:3 | LuckyCharm | 40872 | ||
Regarding Bible tampering: Someone elsewhere has put the following question to me: "The entire book of Joshua, for example, is written to justify Judah's claim to the northern territories during the political vacuum created by the collapse of Assyria. The archaeological record indicates that the various cities of Canaan did not fall at the same times, nor all at Hebrew hands. The entire book of Daniel is also false from start to finish. For a New Testament example, Paul in I Cor. says that Peter was the first to see the risen Jesus, denying that there was any such scene as women at the empty tomb: this is to undercut the Magdalenic faction among early Christians." Does anyone have any information on these objections, or suggestions for further research? Thank you, Cheryl |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 ] |