Results 481 - 500 of 568
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: MJH Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
481 | Who are: Freeman, God Fearers, Proselyt? | Col 3:11 | MJH | 139236 | ||
Thanks very much for the back ground. This is what I was looking for. This is another example of how historical knowledge can aide in ones understanding in scripture. I appreciate the time and effort to answer the question. MJH |
||||||
482 | Will there be a partial rapture? | 1 Thess 4:17 | MJH | 153491 | ||
Kalos, Who says that the believer will be raptured rather than the non-believer. No where in scripture does it say which will go and which will stay. Jesus' parable states that two women will be in a field and one will be gone, but He does not say which. First century Judaism (at least that I am aware of...) does not show any picture of the faithful leaving to be with God, but God coming to be with His people. 1 Thess. has the best evidence that the rapture is a picture of believers "going to be with the Lord" but the picture is of a King coming to the people. In the first century, the people would leave their town, village, or city to meet the King (Emperor) on the way, and then all go back to the city with the King. (Trumpets announcing the Kings arrival were all apart of the production.) So, before one can answer the question about 1 or 2 raptures, one needs to know who is being raptured. Also, the rest of scripture is ALWAYS showing a picture of God making his dwelling among mankind, not the reverse. ... MJH |
||||||
483 | 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 |
||||||
484 | Will there be a partial rapture? | 1 Thess 4:17 | MJH | 153601 | ||
I do not know what MOST people view the rapture to be... a poll might help clear that up. I have always seen the rapture as the dead AND living being taken from Earth while non-believers are left on Earth wondering what just happend to these "Christians." So resurrection was always a part of it, but not equal to a rapture. (How many people were resurrected when Jesus was? Was that a rapture? I assume no... but the rapture would include resurrections.) This is NOT necessarily my belief of the end times, but my understanding of the term in answer to your question. MJH |
||||||
485 | Will there be a partial rapture? | 1 Thess 4:17 | MJH | 153603 | ||
To be honest, I do not know. I think that God is up in Heaven looking at all of the End Times charts with His hand around His Son's shoulder and saying, "You know, I'm going to send you back down there just as soon as I can figure these things out." It's a little joke to lighten the mood, but to drive home a point that some quite intellegent people seem to come to different conclusions on the matter. I believe it is an important subject, but have not developed my own strong set of beliefs at this point. I can be dogmatic (too much so) on many Biblical and Theological points, but not this one. I would like suggestions of good books. And by "good books", I mean by people who really dug into the textual issue AND the historical context of these writtings. MJH |
||||||
486 | Will there be a partial rapture? | 1 Thess 4:17 | MJH | 153604 | ||
Thank you for jumping in… I do understand the importance of approaching a scripture both in the immediate context and in the context of the whole of scripture. I also believe that one should attemp as best as one can to understand what the original author meant when he wrote. To do this, an historical understanding is important. Paul was writing to a certain people at a certain time who had a certain religion, and he had a particular message he wanted to communicate to them. If we understand their world we better understand the letter. Also, Paul was a Pharisee, raised as a Jew in the capital of the Jewish religious world, and trained by the eminent Jewish Rabbi of the time (Gamaliel grandson of Hillel). Also, neither Paul nor any of the first Jewish Believers renounced Judaism, but rather remained Jews and practiced their Jewish faith, and remained observant to the Torah (or Law of Moses). So what the first century Jewish thought about the End Times, does make at least some difference in how we understand Paul's writings. Paul differed with Judaism in one way, that being how the LORD relates to Gentiles. (He also differed from non-believing Jews on the Person of the Messiah--obviously.) Also, the whole of scripture only shows one direction when it comes to people being with the Lord, and that is always the LORD coming to dwell with mankind, not the reverse. With the exception of 1 Thess 4:17, I challenge you to find scriptures that show otherwise. (Not individual's, but believers or people groups as a whole.) Since 1 Thess is the only scripture that does not fit the common pattern (unless anyone knows of another), one asks why? And the historical context -- of which the Thessalonians would be very much aware -- explains this: That being that these verses mirror the events of an Emperor entering a city or town. The trumpet would blast, the people would coming out to meet the Emperor, and they would return to the city (not Rome). My contention is that a believer in Thessalonica would have understood these verses to mean: that the Lord would return, that they would either literally, or figuratively meet Him in the air, (the dead rising first) and then return to Earth or their town to worship Him (and not worship the Emperor as would happen in the historical version.) I may very well be wrong, I have been before, but I'd like to be shown to be wrong, since I think I have a pretty good case for my position. MJH |
||||||
487 | Will there be a partial rapture? | 1 Thess 4:17 | MJH | 153667 | ||
Woops. Did I do that? Contridict myself in the same thread? Wow! I suppose that I always assumed that "most people" viewed the rapture as I did, but I do not actually know what "most people" think in a scientific sense. As for the discussion on Paul and his attitude toward the Jewish faith in our other discussion, I will get back to you when I have more than just a few minutes.... looking forward to more thoughtfull dialogue. MJH |
||||||
488 | Will there be a partial rapture? | 1 Thess 4:17 | MJH | 153873 | ||
Paul the Torah observant Jew. It’s hard to post on this subject in such a short space, but I shall try. The primary place in scripture to find proof that Paul always saw himself as obedient to the Law of Moses is by reading Acts 21 – 22. (Acts 21:24,26) Here we find Paul just arriving in Jerusalem and James says there are thousands of Jewish believers in Jesus as Messiah who are all zealous for the law [of Moses] and they think Paul is not zealous for the Law and is teaching “JEWS” to ignore the Law [of Moses]. Paul sets out to PROVE to them that he is Torah observant by participating in the Nazarite Vows that some poor members of the community had taken. Paul could have “said” he was observant, but much better he can “show” it by his actions. (see post 152288 and replies for more on this) Paul always held the Torah up in high regard. The argument among the first century Jewish Christians was concerning what the Gentiles had to do. Paul again and again says the Gentiles do not need to convert to Judaism to be saved. There were two types of Gentile believers BEFORE Jesus came. 1) A “God fearer” who believed in the One true God and His word revealed in the Old Testament but who did NOT get circumcised nor follow all of the Mosaic Law. They were expected to follow the Noah Covenant (see post 150100) (which is what Acts 15 mentions as well). 2) A proselytite was a Gentile who became circumcised and became Jewish, following the whole Mosaic Law. The first group came to the temple and had to stay in the “court of the Gentiles” (which was filled with Jews trading and selling so the “God fearers” did not have anyplace to go, thus Jesus and his whip and his “house of prayer for ALL nations” quote.) The second group, the converts, could go into the Jewish sections, they were ritually clean. All this is important to understanding Paul’s view of Gentile Christians. He said they could basically be “God Fearers” who accept Jesus as the Messiah to be saved and be a complete member of the community (not divided by the dividing wall). To Paul there was no longer any difference between Jew and Gentile in the eyes of God in relation to salvation. The book of Ezekiel also predicts the wall of separation would be taken away in the days of the Messiah. Paul did not tell Jews to stop following the Law of Moses (he circumcised Timothy after all). He DID preach against legalism among Jews as did Jesus. Legalism is the idea that salvation is by following commandments (so a person following commandments is not a legalist unless he believes that his ability to do so earns him salvation.) The Old Testament NEVER teaches this idea (even if many 1st century Jewish Rabbis did.) The Old Testament is a grace based religion. God did not change. The Passover is a celebration of this grace based salvation which came before the commandments. So Paul did not require Gentiles to follow the “Law of Moses” to be saved, but he did not tell Jews to stop following the Law of Moses (Acts 21:20-21). Paul followed all of the Law according to both his and Jesus interpretation. He did not follow the law according to the interpretation of some rabbis of his time which was a legalistic or works based faith that was contrary to the Law itself. I really had to cut this short….I had an outline that was simply too long for a forum. I assume that this simple post will not be enough to make my point, but I’ll see what you think of this first. It’s a real joy to discuss…. MJH |
||||||
489 | Will there be a partial rapture? | 1 Thess 4:17 | MJH | 153874 | ||
A couple things about your post separate from my other reply. Rev. 11:12 refers to the two witnesses going to be with the Lord, not the rapture as we usually think of it. This is not unlike Enoch, Elijah, and Jesus. These cases do show people “going up to be with the Lord.” But this is for a time until Jesus returns. I was just thinking, depending on your view of the way the end times will occur, you might see the rapture as very similar to Enoch, Elijah, and the two witnesses. Next: Paul had “certain people” in mind…. It is true that the Holy Spirit knew that this letter would be read by all generations in all places, but Paul didn’t know this, nor, I am quite certain, did he even contemplate the possibility. However, good interpretation, if I can go back to my college classes for a moment, says that you need to know what a text meant in the “then and there” before you can know what it means in the “hear and now.” Or even better, “The text can never mean what it never meant.” So if 1 Thess 4:17 meant to the original hearers that Jesus would return and stay, then it can’t mean that Jesus would return and then go back to heaven with the righteous to us. Not only that, but it contradicts what Revelations 21:1-3 says and the basic picture of God dwelling with mankind from Gen. 2 – Revelations 22. Galatians 4:9-11 I am going to quote David Stern here because he says it better than I could. “…But when Gentiles observe these Jewish holidays neither out of joy in sharing what God has given the Jewish people nor out of spiritual identification with them, but out of fear induced by Judaizers who have convinced them that unless they do these things, God will not accept them, then they are not obeying the Torah but subjugating themselves to legalism; and legalism is just another species of those weak and miserable elemental demonic spirits, no better than the idols left behind. (An alternative interpretation, however, is that the “days, months, seasons, and years” of this passage …refer…to pagan Gentile feasts, naturally and directly reflecting “those weak and miserable elemental spirits.”)” ---end David Stern quote. One way we can know that Paul was not telling the Galatians (and Jews like himself in particular) to not celebrate the Jewish holidays, is because they kept doing so themselves. Even the Gentiles celebrated Passover as can be seen in Eusebius’s Church History. Book 5 # 23 from Paul Maier’s translation, “At that time (180’s AD), no small controversy erupted because all of the Asian dioceses thought the savior’s paschal (Passover) festival should be observed, according to ancient tradition, on the 14th day of the moon, on which the Jews had been commanded to sacrifice the lamb.” The story goes on to say that two groups, both celebrating the Passover as Gentile Christians, thought the fast should end on a different day. However, they all celebrated the Passover. Also by Eusebius, Book 6 #22, “…Hippolytus…wrote “The Paschal Festival”, a chronology offering a sixteen year cycle of dates for the Passover . . .” Those Historians out there may feel free to dispute my understanding of this, since my only source here is a translation of Eusebius. Also the following texts show Paul celebrating the feasts after he wrote Galatians: Act 18:21 But bade them farewell, saying, I must by all means keep this feast that cometh in Jerusalem: but I will return again unto you, if God will. And he sailed from Ephesus. Act 20:16 For Paul had decided to sail past Ephesus, so that he might not have to spend time in Asia, for he was hastening to be at Jerusalem, if possible, on the day of Pentecost. 1Co 5:8 Let us therefore celebrate the festival . . . Here in 1 Cor 5:8, David Stern says, “I question [the common thought that this is figurative language]. I see no compelling reason in the context to excise the plain sense (p’shat) from the phrase, ‘Let us celebrate the Seder.’ Instead, it seems that the early believers, Gentiles included, observed the Jewish feast Pesach (Passover). As we will see, their service combined traditional Jewish Passover symbolism with the new symbolism relating to Jesus the Messiah’s central role in Jewish and world history. Evidently the Corinthian congregation observed Passover without supposing that, as many of today’s Christians might think, they were “going back under the law.” End quote. MJH |
||||||
490 | Will there be a partial rapture? | 1 Thess 4:17 | MJH | 153996 | ||
Thanks for the reply. Phil 3:3-7 is a good verse to use. Paul found no righteousness of his own in following the Law, which was legalism, but he did remain observant to the Law (Torah), but it was the Messiah who brought him salvation. His attempts at salvation through the law were worthless (not the Law) Rom 7. But it was because of Jesus' faithfullness that he too could be declaired righteous. And yes, those were my words. I spent some time developing an outline of which only a part is written in the post, but I want to know if I am correct in my understanding. Thanks again for the reply. MJH |
||||||
491 | Will there be a partial rapture? | 1 Thess 4:17 | MJH | 154013 | ||
Are you saying then, that Paul intentionally misleads the Jerusalem believers in Acts 21-22 to save his own skin? Did James know this? It was he who came up with the idea. It is obvious that their plan was to show that Paul was following the Law and not teaching Jews to stop following it. If Paul's actions in Acts 21-22 are contrary to what he taught, then how could he speak boldly against Peter when Peter did the same thing? (Gal 2:11) I personally can not come to the conclusion of your Bible professor in this regard. Being all things to all people does not mean lying to them or deceiving them. In Acts 15, Paul did not shrink back in the face of controversy in Jerusalem. Even James was a part of the Acts 15 statement about what the Gentiles were to do, so why would he participate in trying to convince Jewish Believers in Jerusalem that Paul was following the Law? I do appreciate your reply, however, and hope to continue the conversation. MJH |
||||||
492 | HOW DO WE HELP THOSE IN NEED? | 1 Tim 2:3 | MJH | 214517 | ||
When I worked at a church I became acutely aware of the people who went from church to church either through the phone book or down the street. How does a church determine who to help with their limited resources? I have pushed for an area wide church coop system to deal with non-church members/attendees. The local churches collectively support a central aid organization and any time someone from outside their influence seeks aid, they are directed to the same organization as every other church in the region or city. This organization could help those in need and follow-up with them so they no longer need help. After all, true compassion is measured by how many people no longer need our help, not on how many are currently receiving it. Individual churches, regardless of the above, should know how to effectively help their own people and be ready to do so, and they should do that long before they help those who do not attend. If aid is a witness, than what witness is it when we neglect those who are in our family to help those who are not? The true witness would be for neighbors of those in true need seeing their local church community coming along side them through that time. Aside from all of that: It’s important for the church to teach what the Bible says about consumer debt. How you are not able to help others and be the blessing God wants you to be for others if your “cup isn’t over flowing.” The church should encourage and respect people who are successful and able to help rather than immune them as less than righteous; as if they became a success on the backs of others. Imagine if everyone in our church was debt free except maybe their home. Who could we help then? (note: I am not suggestion prosperity preaching here.) I think maybe this is a raw nerve for me. I shall digress. MJH |
||||||
493 | Help with depression | 2 Tim 1:7 | MJH | 144177 | ||
- I agree with the great one, Doc. who already answered this post. - But on a personal note: Depression is a modern issue mostly. Also, it is rare in underdeveloped nations. For this reason, many believe that the foods we east may be one of the biggest causes of depression. (Food is dealt with in the Bible but we often ignore it. A GREAT book on the subject is "What the Bible Says About Healthy Living." by Dr. Rex Russell (see review below). My wife struggled for years with depression. When she finally decided to eat NO sugar in any form, her depression left within days and she said a cloud lifted from her head that she did not even realize was there because it has been so many years she assumed that was what life was. Her whole attitude and look on life changed dramatically. She went back to a sugar addiction a few months later and for a YEAR she was mildly depressed again. She just quit sugar again and life is much nicer around here. (I had to pay her to quite. This time it will cost me 625 dollars to help her last 10 weeks. After that we are hoping it will be easier for her. It is the best money I could spend.) Sugar alone may not be enough. She already identified food insensitivities and we eat whole foods (much of it organic) and no food coloring or non-food stuff like preservatives and nitrates and MSG and on, and on. (The book noted above helped us in this.) Basically it is a TOTAL lifestyle change when it comes to what we put in our mouths. It has changed our lives (my daughter had a chronic immune deficiency and she is now very healthy. When we were concerned that she wasn’t 100 percent, our Doctor said, "most kids like here are always sick and sickly looking. Your daughter may not be has healthy as you want, but she is much much better than most kids in her situation." When asked why, he said it was the food. We do not give her any medications. Most kids with her issues are on 3 - 5 medications at the same time. (She is 5 years old now.) Some people like to say all depression is one thing or another. I do not intend to say that all depression is food related (although eating healthy will always help every time it is tried). It is also not always spiritual, though it may be I suppose. Being a Christian does not prevent you from getting depressed any more than being a Christian prevents you from getting the flu. To see if you are addicted to sugar (or any substance or thing) try going without it for 90 days. If you can’t, you are addicted. (Maybe not medically speaking, but emotionally, or physically. You GOT to have it. Then “it” becomes a god.) Review of the book mentioned above by Amazon.com: “Why do we get sick? If God says we are "fearfully and wonderfully made" (Psalm 139:14), why do we always seem to be hampered with health problems? While a perfect, pain-free existence won't happen on this side of heaven, there are tangible, successful ways you can improve your health and overall quality of life. The answers, says Dr. Rex Russell, ... lie in God's Word. Through year's of searching for answers to his own struggle with diabetes, Dr. Rex Russell finally discovered a successful plan for healthy living: don't eat anything God didn't intend for food (e.g. avoid scavenger meats ..., [non-food additives]); don't become addicted to anything (i.e. do not make food your god); and ingest food before it is changed into nutrient deficient or harmful products.” MJH |
||||||
494 | The Hell questions. | 2 Tim 2:15 | MJH | 162930 | ||
After several years of avoiding the question, I have taken it upon myself to finally address the "HELL" issue in the Christian faith. Since I am only at the start of answering this question (or maybe only finding more questions), I'd like to have some suggestions of resources (books, articles, etc..) that would help me explore all sides of this. My upbringing was from an "exclusivist" view, so anything from opposing views would be most helpful. THANKS, MJH |
||||||
495 | Is NASB better than other translations? | 2 Tim 2:15 | MJH | 212002 | ||
Good note on the translations Hank. I have been looking for a translation of Hebrews that is consistent and accurate with translating the verb tense. Most change some verbs from past to present and other verbs from present to past and then from future to present. Since I do not know Greek, I am at a severe disability when reading that book. Strong doesn't help too much either because it doesn't help with the verb tense. The best I can do is laboriously search out what commentators have said, and some mention what the verb tense actually says. Do you know of a translation that is always right? The ESV was the best I found so far, but I don’t have a copy of the NASB, so I have only checked a couple. MJH Ps- when you post, if you could use paragraphs it would help reading your post a lot. |
||||||
496 | Is NASB better than other translations? | 2 Tim 2:15 | MJH | 212007 | ||
Thanks, I will need to check this out. I think it is similar to www.e-sword.net. Isn't the internet and computers so awesome these days. What did people do back in the days of the reformation? thanks, MJH |
||||||
497 | Is NASB better than other translations? | 2 Tim 2:15 | MJH | 212008 | ||
Thanks, This is awesome. I will bookmark it and use it often. If I have any questions about why they translated differently, maybe I'll ask your opinion, because I understand this isn't as simple as it may seem. MJH |
||||||
498 | How did the atmosphere of persecution af | 2 Tim 2:15 | MJH | 213583 | ||
What school are you attending? Just currious. MJH |
||||||
499 | Mentally incapacitated can be saved? | 2 Tim 3:15 | MJH | 165500 | ||
I notice that two very competent users have responded to your question already. In that light, I will not repeat what they said, but I think a couple of questions are in order. Your question makes two assumptions: 1) You seem to assume that salvation is determined by a cognitive accent to a Biblical belief. In other words, if I understand and say "Yes, I believe that…" then you are covered for your sins and "saved." Is this what the Scriptures teach concerning salvation? Also, the text quoted hear is to Timothy and refers to the Old Testament, not the New (although it also applies to the New Testament now, but when Timothy read it, there was no “New Testament.”) 2) Your question seems to assume that salvation is merely being rescued from hell in the life after. Is that your view of salvation and what Jesus gave His life for, or is it much more than that? MJH |
||||||
500 | What are the limits of salvation? | 2 Tim 3:15 | MJH | 165859 | ||
Sorry for the late reply. 1) Many Christians assume that a mere intellectual accent to the facts of the faith is what “saves” a person from their sins and lead to salvation. Obviously one must have the intellectual accent to the facts of the faith, but that is not the extent of what the Biblical writers speak of. a) Jam 2:19 “You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe--and shudder!” - This section of James letter is his attempt to help Greek thinking Jews among the nations understand a Hebrew concept. Greeks (as can be seen at Athens with Paul) prided themselves on hearing the latest thoughts, and it was common for one to distinguish between what they believed, and what they did. Just listen to some politicians even today, "My being a Catholic will have nothing to do with how I lead as a Senator." This is said as if it's the ideal, as if there can be a separation. - When James was following Jesus this argument would have sounded absurd to him (even though he later is the one who makes it), not because he would have disagreed, but that the argument would need to be made. 2) The first abridged answer to the previous question leads into the second. Is salvation a rescue from hell? Did Jesus or his followers see it that way? - They may have seen it that way as a distant thought, but it most definitely was not the driving force for what moved them nor should it be the driving force for what moves us. This may sound almost heretical, but scripture speaks for itself on this matter so much I’d have to quote nearly half the Bible to site all the examples. We are called to LIVE a certain kind of LIFE. The focus is on how we live our lives hear and now. Are we bringing more of God’s way into the world we live starting with ourselves or are we doing the opposite. Are we helping the orphans and widows? How many times does scripture speak of this? Even the parable about the sheep and goats is about how we live, not simply what we believe. - I am quite disappointed in the continued emphases on what happens when we DIE as if death is what it’s about. As if Jesus LIVED his LIFE to show us how to LIVE ours was only so we would be assured about our DEATH. (Caps are for emphases, not shouting.) I’m sure I’ve raised several red flags amongst the readers, so let me state emphatically…We are saved by faith in Jesus alone for salvation both now and in the world to come. It is not of our own doing, nor by works, but by grace alone. But show me your faith in the One True God, and then show me your life that is like the Accuser and I say you are in grave danger. But show me your life and how it reflects the character, love and mercy of the One True God yet your doctrine is messed up in lots of places, and I believe you are sitting in a good place…and should study and fix your doctrine, but I don’t believe there is a theology test at the pearly gates. MJH |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 ] Next > Last [29] >> |