Results 81 - 100 of 130
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Unanswered Bible Questions Author: EdB Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
81 | 3 days and 3 nights and Sabbaths | Matt 12:40 | EdB | 2320 | ||
There is still a minor problem. Lev. 23:5 defines the Passover. It also defines Sabbaths or other Holy Convocations. From reading this we can see that the Passover is called a Holy Convocation or day of rest. Also note the day after the Passover which is the Feast of Unleaven bread is also a Holy convocation or day of rest. For Jesus to be crucified on Friday and buried and have the women go to the grave on Sunday would mean that Jesus was crucified on a Holy Convocation Day or Jewish Day of rest. Could the Sabbath talked about in the scriptures really be the Feast of the Unleaven Bread a Holy Convocation? Jesus is a fullfillment of OT designs. I believe Jesus' trimphal entry into Jerusalem was on the 10th of Nisan, or the day of the "Selection of the Passover Lamb". I believe his death was on 14th of Nisan, the day the Passover Lamb is killed. At twilight of that day begins Passover. Jewish days run from 6pm to 6pm. Let's place Jesus' trimphal entry on 10th of Nisan or our Sunday (Palm Sunday). Then the 14th of Nisan would span our Wed and Thru. I submit Jesus was really crucified on Thrusday right before the begining of Passover, the following day was a Holy Convocation or Sabbath the "Feast of Unleaven Bread", the next day would be the weekly Sabbath. Therefore the first day the Women could get to the tomb was the first day of the week Sunday. (You really need to plot this out on paper overlaying our days over the Jewish days) Placing Jesus' death on Thursday would eliminate the problem of the 3 days and three nights. Also the fulfillment of the feast would be accomplished. But one problem remains the scriptures say Jesus celebrated the Passover with His disciples. There is two explainations for this none of which I can document. The first, I'm told there was conflict between the Jews as to when months started. Some would go up on to high places to see the new moon others would wait in front of the temple. I'm told the ones that used the high places were a day ahead of the ones that didn't. The second, I'm told there is a Jewish provision for travelers to celebrate Passover on the eve before passover so that they could arrive at their distination before the Holy convocation of Passover and Unleaven bread came into effect. While I admit both of these are reaching I still have to believe Jesus' death coincided with the killing of the "Passover Lamb" and that was right before twilight on the 14th of Nisan. And since all of these days are Holy Convocations or Sabbaths, I maintain we are confused by the term Sabbath Day in the crucifixion story. Looking for your thoughts. |
||||||
82 | Did I offend you? | Matt 12:40 | EdB | 2618 | ||
Gospelmidi, in your response I sense some issues, if I in any way offended you please accept my most sincere and humblest apology. Please excuse my tardiness to respond to the points raised, but I needed time to verify what I believe to be correct was in fact correct. The theory I presented was not my own, but I was first lead to it by a Messianic Jewish Rabbi. I was unable to contact him to verify my conjecture so I went to another very reliable Messianic Jew. That person then referred me to still another Jewish scholar and both agree that the Passover is called a Sabbath. Therefore I feel fairly comfortable in making that connection. Jews do call the Holy convocation of Passover a Sabbath. It is called Shabbat Gadol or High Sabbath or Shabbaton. Also the day before the Passover is called the day of preparation. Now as far as crucifixion taking place on Friday, let us reason together using your original premise or “Hebrew Idioms”. First let us establish some facts and then proceed from there. First we know Jesus died on the cross in the ninth hour Matthew 27:45-50. Secondly we know the on the morning of the “First day of the Week” the tomb was empty Matthew 28:1-6. Thirdly we know that Jesus said that just as Jonah was in the belly of a whale for three days and three nights so would the Son of Man be. Matthew 12:40. Now those are the facts and I think we all agree to those. Now examine the popular teaching that Jesus was crucified on Friday. The Bible places time of death as some time after 3 PM and before the next day which starts at 6PM. Let’s figure Joseph and his servants was able to place Jesus in the grave within an hour of His death. We then have from 4Pm to 6Pm or one partial day. Starting at 6PM and going through 6Pm would be the Jewish Saturday or the Sabbath. So we have 1 full night and 1 full day. Then at 6PM Saturday we now begin the Jewish Sunday so we have another full night and since the Tomb was empty on the Sunday morning sometime after 6AM we will count another partial day. Lets add it up 2 partial days (going with the idiom factor we count them as 2 days), 1 full day and 2 nights. The results would be 3 days and two nights. We are short 1 night either full or partial. Since Jesus clearly said he would be in the heart of the earth 3 days and 3 nights something must be wrong, we need at least one more night. I submit the only way we can get that night is move the crucifixion back to Thursday instead of Friday. To further emphasize my point I made the statement that if Jesus was crucified on the Friday the Jews would be violating a Holy Convocation Sabbath. The point was brought up that while that was true, however the Romans held no respect for the Sabbath and the they were the ones that crucified Jesus. Scripture is very clear here, the Jews were active participants in the Crucifixion. Furthermore just walking from Anna’s house to the Temple to Pilate Quarters then to Herod’s Palace then back to Pilate and finally to Golgotha would have more than violated the allotted Sabbath steps. To say nothing of holding a trial on a Sabbath or to stage what I think we can all agree to be a demonstration. Finally a point was made that we have to study and understand the culture of the people at the time a book is written to get the full understanding of the message the book is trying to convey to it’s reader. I think this is exactly what happened. Early church scholars with little or no knowledge of Jewish tradition read that the Jews were anxious to get the men down from the crosses because of the forthcoming Sabbath. Not being aware that Passover and Feast of Unleaven Bread were Sabbaths they assumed it was the weekly Sabbath that was being referred to. Hence we have church tradition. I realize this issue has been a topic of many ongoing debates and will probably not be settled until Jesus Himself sets the record clear. Men far wiser and more learned than I have taken both sides of the discussion and it truly doesn’t effect our salvation one way or the other. I presented my thoughts on the subject so that others could, if they so decided, use it as an answer to the question about what appears to be a conflict in the Bible’s account of the Crucifixion and Resurrection story. I certainly did not to do it to challenge you or to use it as an occasion to attack you. Again if I have caused you any offense please accept my apology. |
||||||
83 | Spiritual | Matt 18:18 | EdB | 10202 | ||
If we can bind Satan can someone please tell me who keeps untying him? | ||||||
84 | Tell me who unties them? | Matt 18:18 | EdB | 10276 | ||
Appleseed If we can in fact bind Satan and the demons tell me who keeps untying them? I have heard people bind the spirit of darkness over a situation, yet nothing changes. Until the next personn comes and says we have to bind whatever. The word says nothing about binding Satan but rather it says James 4:7 Submit therefore to God. Resist the devil and he will flee from you. |
||||||
85 | Are you talking exorcism or binding? | Matt 18:18 | EdB | 10312 | ||
Appleseed are you talking about freeing someone that wants free from a demon, or are you talking about binding Satan from a situation? Then yes we have the power of attorney to use the Name of Jesus Christ and by that name demons must flee. If your talking about binding Satan from some situation your talking the foolishness of the yell at Satan and make him afraid crowd. . |
||||||
86 | Why was the man speechless? | Matt 22:11 | EdB | 29187 | ||
The man in Matthew 22:11 was speechless in verse 12 does that imply he had no idea he wasn't dressed correctly? Or simply that he had no excuse? Remember he was brought in. EdB |
||||||
87 | Explain this to me | Matt 27:3 | EdB | 74527 | ||
Can someone explain this? When Joe or John responds on this subject it is done in manner to attack the character, integrity or spirituality of the person holding the opposite view. They never supply evidence that refutes what was said they only tear down who said it. Why this behavior is tolerated is beyond my understanding. |
||||||
88 | Steve explain worship more? | John 4:24 | EdB | 7742 | ||
JVH0212 why all the hostility? Steve made a point that to him worship is the act of prostrating oneself or at least bowing to the floor in submission. He further said that he sees the words commonly translated as worship to really mean worship through service. Now let me ask everyone that says he is wrong, do you believe many people in the church today worship in humble submission to God? Or do most worship only if they feel okay, the music is just right, this is a song they like, and etc. I will say that Steve’s idea could get dangerously close to works but I think we all understand the difference between that and what Steve is describing. JVH0212 you keep using the argument that to challenge a particular translation we must show or prove to have a superior education. Again I submit there are over 100 Translations of the New Testament and each feels they provide a better translation than they one that preceded them. Language is not cut and dried. I have a friend who is a Greek Orthodox priest that speaks fluent Greek and only uses an original language Bible. We get into many discussions. He would be the first to tell you there are passages where he is not sure what the writer was exactly saying. Body language, inflection, facial expressions are all used to clarify what the user of Greek really means. Now my question to Steve is what exactly do you see as needed for true worship to occur in the church today? |
||||||
89 | Mark why do you say that? | John 10:27 | EdB | 7996 | ||
Mark why do you say sorry your no fan of CRI? I always found their work especially when Dr Walter Martin was in reins interesting. They tackle some of the stickiest problems in Christianity today and give an in-depth analysis. I feel their conclusions are not reached without merit. I imagine if you stand on an opposite side of an issue from CRI you would probably disagree but I think you would have to say they presented their case fairly and precisely. |
||||||
90 | Mark please more info and no puss :-) | John 10:27 | EdB | 8009 | ||
Please don’t view this as saying I’m right your wrong, or an attempt to defend against the issues you have problems with. I do think most of your problem is with “The Bible Answer Man Program” and probably with Hank Hanegraaff himself rather than CRI itself. I find I can make good use of the resources CRI makes available. Without some of their information I would have no way of knowing what is going on behind the scenes of many ministries. I would rather not learn about it for the first time on 20/20 or 60 Minutes, but rather through a Christian agency presenting it as problem within a ministry rather than ‘look what those crazy Christians are up to now.’ I would have no way of knowing the “rest of the story” of Toronto. Or that other people took exception to a program segment of “West Wing’ like I did. I too have had that small still voice say, “watch out”. And I know we don’t need anything but the Holy Spirit to lead us, but I sometimes find comfort learning there are others that are seeing the same problem I am while the rest of Christianity seems to be in a headlong race toward it. I agree totally that many times differences in education produces buss words that effect the listener completely opposite than the speaker ever intended. I had always believed and still hope that the investigation process that CRI seemingly attempts would eliminate those types of miscommunication. Thanks Mark for letting me know your objections to CRI, I will view their input with yet another filter. Possibly one that will reveal to me the problems you see within the organization. By the way do you have any confirmation on the problems you alluded to. I would be every interested in reading any information. Believe me brother I have no interest in picking your scab I just want to be as informed as I can be. Thanks |
||||||
91 | What is your definition of love? | John 13:34 | EdB | 128258 | ||
Xerxes I have no interest in being inquisitioned here by you or anyone else. My words speak for themselves. If you can't figure them out I'm afraid I don't possess the ability to express them in a manner you could. However I find it hard to imagine you and the one or two others find them so un-comprehension-able while I have so little of a problem explaining myself with others in all my other posts on this forum. As for your other questions perhaps since I’m unable to make myself clear to you it would be better to explain how you see “Love” do you see it as emotion or action? To you see it being motivator to good works or do you see it as completion in and of itself? If you say you love your father, what does that really mean? Does it motivate any action in you, does it establish any standard of performance in you? How do you interpret 1 John 3:18 “My little children, let us not love in word or in tongue, but in deed and in truth.” ? To you does this imply that we need to do more than just have the emotion of loving? I hope you will answer these questions since I unable to effectively convey my thinking to you perhaps your able to convey your thinking to me. EdB |
||||||
92 | Swords and terrorist? | John 18:10 | EdB | 8072 | ||
Cephas, believe me when I say this I’m not trying to start a war here or anything, but I fail to see how you can connect Oklahoma and the cowardly, monstrous, inane action of McViegh’s with “side arms”. Are we going to start saying if we did away with "side arms" we would eliminate the terrorist car bombs in Israel? Terrorism is the lowest form of cowardly action taken by a so called ‘man’. I really don’t think it has anything to do with is thread. Now to address the point, does anyone think Jesus did not know about Peter and his sword? Do we every see Jesus telling Peter or any disciple stop carrying their sword? In Luke 22:49 “When those who were around Him saw what was going to happen, they said, "Lord, shall we strike with the sword?" I see an implication that more than just Peter had swords. I was raised with side arms (guns) we used them to keep weasels away from the chicken house. Rabbits out the garden, and snakes as far away as I could see them. I had my first 22 at the age of 6. My Dad taught me how to use it, respect it and to the best of my knowledge I never abuses or misused it. A loaded 22 sat by our back door all my childhood and I never touched it, played with it, or aimed at any of my friends. I was taught what it was and what it was for and it never entered my mind to use it for anything other than those purposes. I was taught! What I’m trying to say is to the disciples a sword was a tool that same as shovel or hoe. What Jesus said was those that live by the sword would died by the sword. Matthew 26:51-52 “And behold, one of those who were with Jesus reached and drew out his sword, and struck the slave of the high priest and cut off his ear. 52Then Jesus said to him, "Put your sword back into its place; for all those who take up the sword shall perish by the sword.” Jesus taught them the problem wasn’t the sword. The problem was it was wrong to use it on another person. |
||||||
93 | How can Christians listen to this? | Acts 5:34 | EdB | 7529 | ||
I have a question or concern that goes with this thread. Why do people so easily accept the false as truth? As I have said I have seen men teach heresy but use the name of Jesus frequently and have people accept them as men of God. I have asked a listener that was enthralled with such a speaker about what he said and even after showing them the error that he taught, I had them defend and deny that it was so. They either say, “Well I didn’t hear him say that.” Or they say, “He really didn’t mean it that way, you took what he said wrong.” I know genuine Christians that can listen to junk and never hear it. How does that happen? If you question them as to whether they believe a particular falsehood they will instantly say no, yet they just listened to a speaker preach it and they love him. How can that be? |
||||||
94 | Interesting answer any other thoughts? | Acts 5:34 | EdB | 7551 | ||
Interesting answer any other thoughts? | ||||||
95 | Is it just charisma? | Acts 5:34 | EdB | 7582 | ||
I guess what I was hoping for was a response that would focus on the charisma of man. It seems lately people are taken with the charm of the man rather than what he really says or does. We have elevated pastors and evangelist to celebrity status and therefore put them above common scrutiny. Could this be the reason we so readily accept their theatrics and never challenge their teachings? | ||||||
96 | Any deceptions stories out there? | Acts 5:34 | EdB | 7590 | ||
Jim you absolutely right we must check out everything we hear. I'm interested in hearing from people that have experience this deception first hand. I want to know what tried to deceived them, how they realized they had been deceived and what they are now doing to prevent it from happening again. |
||||||
97 | Is there anyone else who has input? | Acts 5:34 | EdB | 7597 | ||
Jim thanks for responding your input is important but I kind of figured that you would not have been deceived. I was interested in possibly getting somebody else's responses. |
||||||
98 | What drew him to the group? | Acts 5:34 | EdB | 7598 | ||
Excellent example, did you find out what drew the man to this group in the first place? Was it relationship? charm of the leaders? desire to be accepted? I would love to know what made him join and stick with them. | ||||||
99 | Nolan were these new converts? | Acts 5:34 | EdB | 7677 | ||
Were these other people new converts? Or were they drop outs from some other church? If they were new converts I would love to know more. Did they have a desire for more of God or did the false teacher fill that need? Did they ever question their teaching? | ||||||
100 | Nolan where was the leader in all of thi | Acts 5:34 | EdB | 7701 | ||
Nolan if I can paraphrase what you said, in the case of these two nominal Christians their need for acceptance overrode the warning signs they sometimes saw. How did the leader play into this, would he soothe their concerns or was he unapproachable and therefore intimidating, or did he control and manipulate them into submission? What I’m looking for the role of the leader in all of this. You already said he was teaching junk, was that all? Many times people think to be a false teacher as spoken about various places in the Bible you have to be teaching heresy, I submit you can also be a false teacher by how you influence people. Some false teachers intimidate, control, manipulate, and exploit people to accomplish their desires. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ] Next > Last [7] >> |