Results 61 - 80 of 93
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: Jalek Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
61 | bible verse as church in male venacular | NT general | Jalek | 239089 | ||
Greetings, Actually, there aren't any. The Church is described as a woman for two very good reasons. First, the church is referred to as "The Bride of Christ", and the relationship between Jesus and the Church is to be as close as a married couple should be, meaning they should be as one entity if you will. The second, and most important, reason why the Church is referred to as a female is due to the language. Unlike English, Greek and Hebrew words also have gender in addition to number, person, and so forth. This is a strange concept for people who only speak English, but if you've studied other foreign languages, then it's not as strange. There are many modern day languages that have a gender component to their terms as well. The term for church in the greek is ekklessia, which is feminine in the greek. Jalek |
||||||
62 | Mark 14:33 | Mark 14:33 | Jalek | 239078 | ||
Greetings, Peter, James, and John were known as the Inner Circle. They were basically his best friends. His time in the garden was a very personal and deeply troubling time for him. He asked them along for added support, and to keep watch. After all, people were out to get him. So, that is my take on why he brought only them. Basically, he wanted the added company, and so he brought his three best friends. Jalek |
||||||
63 | how many brothers and sisters did Jesus | OT general | Jalek | 239074 | ||
Greetings, We're not sure, but since there is mentioned "Brothers" and "Sisters" plural, then we can assume he had at least two half-brothers and two half-sisters. We do know that the New Testament authors James and Jude were his half-brothers. Jalek |
||||||
64 | explain Genesis 6:2-4 | 2 Pet 2:4 | Jalek | 239043 | ||
Greetings, As Doc mentioned before, there are a lot of posts on this topic. However, understanding this passage is a lot simpler than you might imagine. First off, forget the idea of angels coming down and doing the dirty with humans. That's straight out of mythology and doesn't have any support Biblically. In fact, the Bible in other places teaches against this theory. The strongest is in Mark 12:25. Jesus says that Angels "neither marry nor are given in marriage." Now, Genesis 6:2 specifically says that the "Sons of God" took "wives" from among the "Daughters of Men". Now, another place is in Hebrews 1:5. The writer asks a rhetorical question "To which of the angels did He ever say 'You are my son, today I have begotten you'?" The answer is obvious. None of them. In fact, no where in the Bible do you read that Angels are the Sons of God. Now, some will bring up Job 1:6 and Job 38:7 where the term "Sons of God" is used and seems to imply "angels". However, there is another interpretation that also fits in the context, and one that very few seem to suggest. The phrase "sons of God" comes from two Hebrew words: "Bene" for "Sons" and "Elohim" for "God". Now, "Bene" does mean a biological male offspring, but it can also mean "a member of or one who is loyal to a group or an organization". "Elohim" is plural in Hebrew, which means "three or more". There's a separate number for two called "Dual". The singular form is "El" or "Elah". Also, Elohim takes most of it's verbs and modifiers in the singular and is often treated as singular instead of plural. Now, put those two together in the context of Job, and you have people who are members of a group called "God", and the group is composed of at least three members, but treated as one entity. What does that sound like? To me, it's almost a text book definition of the Trinity, and it's found in the Old Testament. So, now that the passages in Job are explained, what does "Sons of God" mean in Genesis? There's another definition for the phrase. Jesus is called the Son of God, but so are human believers. 1 John 3:1 comes right out and says it, as does Romans 8:14. Now, remember this. "bene" has an implied meaning of loyalty as well as "offspring". With that perspective, and given that the context is actually speaking about males and females coming together, then the strongest support is that the "Sons of God" in Genesis are humans believers who have up until that point been obedient to God, which would point to Seth's lineage given how one of Seth's descendants is described as having "walked with God". Conversely, "Daughters of Men" would be those women who followed the footsteps of man, or Adam, and were disobedient. This points, obviously, to Cain's line. That explains both the "Sons of God" and the "Daughters of Men". So, how about the Nephilim or Giants? For that, pay close attention to how verse 4 begins. It's so obvious, that everyone seems to miss it. "The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterwards, when the Sons of God came in to the daughters of Men ...". Did you catch it? When the Sons and the Daughters came together, the Nephilim were already in existence!!! How can the Nephilim be the offspring if they were already living when the sons and daughters mated?? It is so blatantly obvious that it sticks out like a sore thumb, but a lot of people miss it for some reason. So, if the Nephilim aren't the offspring, then who are they? That is also a given. It's a time reference. This took place at a time when this group of "creatures", for lack of a better term, walked the earth. The term of Nephilim is used in only one other place, and that's in Numbers to describe how big the canaanites were. The Nephilim in Numbers cannot be the descendants of the ones in Genesis. Why? Because there's a big "WET" event that separates the two called "The Great Flood". That changes the meaning of Nephilim from identifying a race of people to being a term to describe stature. Now, put that into perspective and what do you get? Here's a hint. What group has science proven that existed, but the Bible seems suspiciously silent about? Perhaps Dinosaurs? Could "nephilim" be a term to describe the size of a dinosaur and that the use in Genesis 6 is telling us that this happened when they still walked the earth while the use in Numbers is saying that the people the spies encountered where as big as dinosaurs? It fits. The simplest explanation is the one I just described. The context doesn't support "Angels" being the "Sons of God". All you have in the chapter's prior and following are God dealing with humans and hardly any serious mention of Angels until much later when you get into the stories of Abraham. Jalek |
||||||
65 | evanglical hermeneutical approach mean | Bible general Archive 4 | Jalek | 238995 | ||
Greetings, Basically, hermeneutics is the field of proper interpretation of the Bible. This includes exegesis, or getting the meaning out of the passage. It's a big and complicated series of terms that basically mean to study in context. I had a class at bible college where I got my religion degree called "Religious Authority and Biblical Interpretation", or "RABI" for short. It was all about hermeneutics. Hermeneutics basically gives principles on identifying the parts of the context, how to study the context, applying the context, and organizing the information in a workable outline. The context basically includes two primary parts: Greater and Immediate. Others might have different terms for them, but the basic definition is that the Greater Context is the background information. This includes the locations mentioned in the passage, the author of the passage, the people focused on in the passage, as well as the culture of the people in the passage. It also refers to the intended audience. The Greater Context also includes the passages immediately before and after the focus passage. The immediate context is the passage itself, and what it says. It also includes the grammar, language, theology taught, and literary style. Having a basic understanding of Hebrew and Greek is often helpful in hermeneutics. Now, apart from getting a degree from a major university in the field, you can accomplish much of the same thing by keeping in mind four simple phrases, which also coincide with the basic tenants of Hermeneutics. 1) Context is king! Basically, don't take a passage out of context. It's like reading the verse that says "Judas went out and hanged himself" and believing that suicide by hanging is permissible. Many false religions/denominations/teachings have come about because people didn't pay attention to the context, and yanked a verse out to apply their own meaning to it. Read the series of verses before and after the focus verse. Read the entire chapter if you have to, or even the entire book if you need to in order to get a proper understanding of that verse. 2) Scripture interprets Scripture! Are you confused about the meaning of a certain phrase or word? Look it up in the concordance, and read how it is used elsewhere in the Bible. More often than not, a similar meaning for the word or phrase is carried throughout the Bible. 3) The Simplest explanation is usually correct! As Paul said in 1 Corinthians 14, God is not the author of confusion. When you have multiple options for what a passage means, and you'll have that come up quite often, lay them out as it were and approach from which is the simplest to wrap your mind around. Nine times out of ten, the simplest explanation will be on the mark. 4) You're studying History, not mythology! This is a major mistake done by most secular readers. They approach the Bible from the belief that it's just like Homer's Illiad or the stories of Hercules's trials. The Bible is the recorded history of Israel and the Early Church, not a collection of myths and legends like some secular skeptics like to claim. As for why it matters, well, it should be obvious. It's important to study the Bible properly. It's our guide into the will of God. Many people have been led astray by false teachers who ignored the basic guidelines of proper biblical interpretation, and warped the Bible into supporting their own weird ideas. Many of those false teachings are listed as heresies. Proper interpretation helps steer you away from them. Jalek |
||||||
66 | does someone know what it means. | 2 John | Jalek | 238993 | ||
Greetings, This is a standard greeting used by John, Jude, Paul, and Peter at the start of most of their writings. The promotion of Grace, Mercy, and Peace is unique in the New Testament, and it is a mainstay of Christian Theology. While the Old Testament does speak of a coming peace, most of the prophecies it contains are about judgment. So, this teaching that Grace, Mercy, and Peace comes from God through Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit was a radical teaching at the time. There's also something else to consider as well when it comes to John's addition of "in truth and love". Most of his writings, especially his epistles, was written to counter a heretical movement within the early church called Gnosticism. Gnosticism basically taught that Man's body was evil and that only the spirit is good. They also taught that salvation was in the form separation from the physical body. They also denied that Jesus the man was God and denied that God could come in the flesh. Rather, they believed that Jesus was a man who was possessed by the spirit of God. Because of their views on the body being evil, they treated the body harshly as well. When you read John's epistles in light of what Gnosticism taught, much of it makes a lot of sense. Jesus's teachings "I am the way, the truth, and the life ..." was directly opposite of gnostic teachings, as was his teachings on love. John, in his first epistle, places a heavy emphasis on Christian love. In fact, he goes so far to say that a person who does not love is not saved. Again, this counters how Gnosticism viewed the physical world. They didn't act out of love, but hatred because they viewed matter as evil and spirit as good. So, this message of grace, mercy, and peace is intended to remind people the basic beliefs and behavior of Christianity, and to remind people that it was brought to us in love and in truth by God and Jesus Christ. Jalek |
||||||
67 | where Jesus take away the sting of death | 1 Pet 3:19 | Jalek | 238958 | ||
Greetings, The belief that Jesus went to hell after he died during the three days before he resurrected comes from an interpretation of 1 Peter 3:19. However, you also have Jesus's words to the thief on he cross that contradicts it, "Today, you will be with me in paradise." One thing to point out is that the passage in Peter doesn't specify that this happened during the three days before the resurrection. Jalek |
||||||
68 | Creation days | Genesis | Jalek | 238938 | ||
Greetings, Let me ask this, what was the first thing created? Answer: Time The Sun, moons, stars later became a means by which we could calculate time. Time was already in existence. When you look at it from that perspective, everything makes sense. God didn't need the sun, moon, and stars to calculate time, because he is beyond and before time. He created the means to calculate time for us in the days before Man was created. Jalek |
||||||
69 | Creation of a race on the 6th day | Genesis | Jalek | 238936 | ||
Greetings, First off, where does it say that man was created on the Seventh Day? Genesis 2:2-3 specifically say that he rested and sanctified the seventh day as a day of rest. Second, Genesis 2:4 specifically states that this is "the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made Earth and Heaven". The rest of chapter two specifically deals with the Garden of Eden, which wasn't created on the third day like the vegetation around the world, but afterwards on the sixth day when God created man to give man a home. Third, the laws against incest didn't come around until centuries later during the time Moses. In fact, genetic diversity probably didn't really become a factor until the Tower of Babel after the Great Flood. So, the idea of incest wouldn't have been much of a taboo during the early days of Genesis as it would be later. Jalek |
||||||
70 | Why are Matthew and Mark similar ? | NT general | Jalek | 238899 | ||
Greetings, Matthew, Mark, and Luke are called the Synoptic Gospels because their content mirrors each other. Now, Matthew was an eyewitness to most of the events he speaks about. Mark was a pupil of Peter, as well as cousin to Barnabas, and a travelling companion to Paul. So he would have had ample access to information. Dr. Luke states at the start of his gospel that he investigated everything from the beginning, and that his sources were eyewitnesses. As a result, it's easy to see why they would be similar if they used similar sources. Jalek |
||||||
71 | does God hear the prayers of unbeleivers | Bible general Archive 4 | Jalek | 238898 | ||
Greetings, If he didn't, there would be no such thing as a saved person. Jalek |
||||||
72 | can sex be casual and just fun | Gen 2:23 | Jalek | 235654 | ||
Greetings, When you study the biblical definition of sex, you find one term that follows it: knowledge. Sex is defined, biblically, as "knowing" each other. Also, it is a knowledge that only the husband should experience, and vice versa. It's described in places as sacred, and should be treated as such. There's also the flip side to sex when used for "fun". Most of the Biblical writers touch on the subject of Sexual immorality. The Mosaic law speaks at length on this very topic, and describes casual sex as a part of Sexual immorality along with other similar acts. According to Moses, casual sex is attoned for by marrying each other. Also, so called "casual sex" with a married person is adultry, which is viewed as on par with Idolatry according to Hosea. Paul even warns about there being other consequences to sexually immoral acts other than that of sin, hinting to what we now know as STDs. Jalek |
||||||
73 | don"t know chapter! | Bible general Archive 4 | Jalek | 235653 | ||
Greetings, Actually, The Bible contains no such teaching about Jesus going to hell to teach to anyone or, as some believe, to battle with Satan. Where this comes from, I have no idea, but it's not in the Bible. I hear it largely mentioned by Dispensationalists such as Scofield. According to the teaching, during the time in the tomb after the Crucifixion, Jesus decended to hell to battle Satan to obtain the supposed "Keys to Hell" or some such. However, when you read the conversation Jesus had with the repentant Thief on the Cross, he says "Truly I say to you, Today you shall be with me in paradise." in Luke 23:43. Jalek |
||||||
74 | Knowing the Old Testament Story | OT general | Jalek | 235652 | ||
Greetings, There is a saying that I heard once from an old preacher: "The Old Testament is the New Testament contained, and the New Testament is the Old Testament explained." Basically, this means that what you find in the New Testament can be found in the Old Testament as well. Also, if you want to properly understand the New Testament, you need to turn to the Old Testement. In the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus, Abraham tells the Rich Man that his family has Moses and the Prophets to lead them to Paradise, and to listen to them. Paul quotes the Old Testament time and time again, as do many of the other New Testament writers. In the New Testament, the term "Scripture" is unanimously referring to the Old Testament. You can even present a basic plan of Salvation, and never leave the Old Testament. The point is simple. Without the Old Testament, the New Testament wouldn't make any sense. Jalek |
||||||
75 | Who went to Rome with an interupeter? | Bible general Archive 4 | Jalek | 232402 | ||
Greetings, Sorry, could you clarify please? Thanks, Jalek |
||||||
76 | Did it start as a legal brief? | Luke | Jalek | 232400 | ||
Greetings, Theophilus was more than likely a roman official, and someone very wealthy. He apparently hired Dr. Luke to provide a history of christianity. I doubt that his works were for a legal brief due to the work and effort he went into writing them. Dr. Luke specifially mentions in one place that he visited the actual places, and spoke to eye witnesses, as well as being an eye witness himself for many of the events in Acts. Jalek |
||||||
77 | If not saved and suicide done Lost??? | Bible general Archive 4 | Jalek | 232397 | ||
Greetings, The Bible is clear on how one goes to heaven. It's through belief in Christ, and the acceptance of Christ as one's savior. John 3:18 says it as clear as any other verse. "He who believes is not condemned. He who believes not is condemned alread, because he has not believed." Jesus also said once "all manner of sin will be forgiven". The only exception to that was blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, not suicide. As to what to tell your friend, I would remind him of John 3:18. If his dad was genuinely saved, regardless of how his life ended, then he will go to heaven. If his dad was not saved, ... well, the Bible is clear on that as well. Jalek |
||||||
78 | Suicide Stop going to Heaven? | Bible general Archive 4 | Jalek | 232390 | ||
Greetings, Suicide is the same as murder in the Bible. In the 10 commandments, it says Do not Kill. However, would a child of God who commits suicide still go to heaven? If they were truly saved, Yes. Think of God as a loving parent. Does a parent stop loving his child just because the child is depressed? Not at all. We wait in hope for the LORD; he is our help and our shield. In him our hearts rejoice, for we trust in his holy name. May your unfailing love rest upon us, O LORD, even as we put our hope in you (Psalms 33:20-22). Jalek |
||||||
79 | Seething a kid in its mother's milk? | Deut 14:21 | Jalek | 232378 | ||
Greetings, Boiling a young goat in the milk of it's mother was a Canaanite Pagen ritual. This is a protest on his part to get the mindset in the Jews to not do as their pagan neighbors do. God is trying to establish his own standard of worship and sacrifice. He wants the best of the first offerings. In other words, he wants his people to think of him first, instead of giving to God what is left over. Jalek |
||||||
80 | Salting ourselves? | Bible general Archive 4 | Jalek | 232375 | ||
Greetings, Actually, it comes from the properties of salt. Before refrigeration and canning methods were developed, Salt was used as a preservative to make food last longer, and prevent it from spoiling. Salt is being used as an analogy to encourage the readers to remain righteous, and untainted by the world's influence. Jalek |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 ] Next > Last [5] >> |