Results 81 - 100 of 325
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: MJH Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
81 | Book of Exodus | Ex 1:1 | MJH | 213961 | ||
Good job in this answer. MJH |
||||||
82 | Actual bodies in heaven? | 1 John 3:2 | MJH | 213960 | ||
John, I have to admit that I am a bit stupefied as to why you would ask this question. I'm struggling to understand it. "our mobility for Earth to Heaven..."? "gates of Heaven will be closed..."? I am not sure what you’re really even asking. I'll still try to sum up, but forgive me if I am not answering what you are asking. Rev. 21 is a good place to start, although the teaching in Rev. 21 runs through the Bible. God's dwelling will be with mankind. If by Heaven you mean some place "up" in the sky, then no, people will not be there in the End Times (or the World to Come.) We were created to live on Earth (or if you will, a New Earth.) God comes down to dwell with us here. If by Heaven you mean the "holy city Jerusalem coming down out of heaven from God" (Rev 21:10) where "its temple is the Lord God the Almighty and the Lamb." (Rev 21:22) Then yes, the gates of that city will be open to all who are "written in the Lamb's book of life." (Rev 21:27) But again, I am not sure if I am interpreting your question correctly. I know that many of the other religions and particularly the Greek religions of the 1st-3rd century believed that after death, peoples’ spirits would travel to the heavens with the gods, but they also didn’t believe in the resurrection of the dead. They did believed the body to be the jail house of the soul. Once the soul was released, it would never wish to be confined to the flesh again. That is contrary to everything in Scriptures which teaches a physical resurrection of the body and a reuniting of the body and soul. I know that many Christians adopt this sort of “pagan” view of living in heaven as an Angel or spirit for eternity, but that’s because they lack any good teaching. Plus pastors are always using phrases such as “living with God in heaven for eternity” which given the general publics understanding of what heaven is, a place out in space somewhere, it propagates a misunderstanding and even a false idea. We will not live in that idea of heaven for eternity. We will live in a physical body on a physical Earth. Gravity still holds us in place…no floating around with harps on clouds. I’m not trying to be condescending. I must be reading you wrong because based on your posts here; I would not expect a question like this from you. MJH |
||||||
83 | Reason 4 "6" Cities of Refuge? | Num 35:6 | MJH | 213949 | ||
Angela, I used to be a children's pastor and I loved Ms. Pattycake. I met her at a conference once and got to know the person behind the character some. Anyway.... A good book would be "Life in Biblical Israel" by Philip King and Lawrence Stager. It's a bit more like a text book, but great to reference. Beyond that, you can search books with similar titles or get a Bible Encyclopedia. As far as the wives are concerned. The only known disciple to be married was Peter who was the only one to be over the age of 20 at Jesus' death (most likely). It would have been common for men in their teen years to become a disciple. In would be rather improbable for them to have been married with children already. It simply was not the custom to become a traveling disciple of a Rabbi that late in life. Peter's wife most likely stayed with his family. A wife typically lived within the household of her husband. They would have added on to the husband's father's house and shared a courtyard and chores as an extended family. This was more often true in the north in Galilee where Peter was from. There is quite a bit of interesting information about Jesus' world and the first century. A good teacher might be Ray VanderLaan with "In The Dust of the Rabbi" and "That the World May Know." He did some work with Focus on the Family a few years back and has been a blessing to me personally. MJH |
||||||
84 | Blessing or Judgment | Ps 144:15 | MJH | 213845 | ||
Wonderful quote! Awesome. | ||||||
85 | Greek use of koinos and akathartos | Acts 10:15 | MJH | 213811 | ||
Thanks for the kind comments. Certainly my post isn't the end of the discussion. I made some statements that ought to be backed up with more evidence and sources. What I posted here is more accurately my hypothesis based on the bit of research I did do, but could change after deeper digging. Your questions are exactly the questions needing more clarification. The time needed to go further will mean I won't be adding much for a while. I do hope to get a couple books from some universities (our library is connected to the colleges now...Yeah!)that have done some of this research already. Finding out if the Jews, who wrote Hebrew or Aramaic mostly in their first century writings, used 'koinos' in this way when speaking Greek may be impossible to proove. There are some Greek texts, but that's pretty much out of my league. MJH |
||||||
86 | Greek use of koinos and akathartos | Acts 10:15 | MJH | 213795 | ||
Part 2 of 2 To backtrack, we see in Acts 10, our Lord Jesus teaching Peter that Gentiles are not to be considered as unclean or as common. They, like he, could also be in the covenant family of God. While the Law states very clearly that the Gentile who sojourns with Israel, is not only allowed covenant fellowship, but also the Temple worship (Lev 17:8), in the days of the Apostles, all Gentiles were considered common. Jesus says, “What God has made clean, do not call common.” Pre Exile Years: During the years of the Judges and Prophets the people adulterated themselves after false gods and were sent into exile. This idolatry was mainly due to contact with pagan Gentiles. The remnant who returned eventually set up laws to separate themselves from ALL Gentiles, pagan or not, in order to prevent a repeat of the sins of their fathers. Around the year 20 B.C. a counsel convened that wrote Eighteen Measures that cemented the dividing wall between Jews and any Gentile. This was a period of high Gentile interest in the faith of Israel (see Josephus, et. al.) Certain strict Pharisees, who determined to build this wall between Jews and Gentiles, ended up killing dozens of the followers of the more lenient school and enacted the measures despite them. Many years latter, this event was considered by some as more grievous than the day of the Golden Calf. Either way, by the mid first century A.D. these measures were well entrenched into the Jewish life. The word common is littered throughout these measures. Back to Romans 14:14 While this may seem a bit of a rabbit trail, how this connects to Romans 14:14 is important. These measures made food bought from a Gentile Market “common.” Pius Jews would not eat such meat. Since the ruling Paul gives in this chapter is about “disputable matters” it would seem unlikely that he would be referring to Lev. 11, since that passage is quite clear. It’s hard to dispute plain language. But, this issue of what meat could be eaten being a disputable matter fits the historical events. Paul has no problem eating this meat (which might even have been used in the pagan Temple) because he will not add to what the Law says (Deut 4:1-2; 12:32). Yet, if some have strong convictions that eating such meat would be a transgression of the Law, they ought to follow their convictions. As for Paul, he has no issue with eating “common” meat. There is no such thing as “common” for Paul, primarily because the Hebrew Scriptures (the only Scriptures he has) say nothing about it. Furthermore, we see in Ephesians 2:14 that Paul has declared the dividing wall between Jews and Gentiles to be destroyed. Paul, being the Apostle to the Gentiles, fought hard against the 20 BC ruling – the Eighteen Measures – as well as other things. So what is the best word to use to translate koinos in Romans 14:14? The most obvious choice would be to use “common” each time koinos is used. We are not helping the average English reader by using the wrong English word regardless of its connection to another. While I understand the need to “interpret” at times when doing a translation, my view is that the translator should do more translating and less interpreting. By translating what the author meant to convey instead of what the author said, we cheapen the Text and assume an ignorant audience. This verse, as translated in English wrong, prevents the English reader from asking the question, “What is meant by ‘common’?” Without the question the reader can not find the answer. MJH |
||||||
87 | Greek use of koinos and akathartos | Acts 10:15 | MJH | 213794 | ||
Part 1 of 2 Sorry for the length. Also, this is mainly about the final two paragraphs, not the interpretation I take, but you can respond to whatever. Tim, this is what I found. I wrote it as an essay and copied it here, so excuse the more formal approach. In Romans 14:14 we read, “I know and am convinced in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself; but to him who thinks anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean.” The word translated into English as “unclean” is koinos (Strong’s 839). However, the word koinos literally means “common.” Why then do the translators use “unclean” and is that the best word to use? The use of “unclean” is chosen for two main reasons. 1) the obvious connection to impermissible foods which links it to Lev. 11; 2) the connection that common (koinos) has to unclean (akathartos Strong’s 169) found in Acts 10 and Mark 7. It is quite certain that “common” and “unclean” have a connection in the New Testament Scriptures. In Acts 10:14, after Peter sees all kinds of animals (we assume clean and unclean) descend in a sheet he hears a voice say, “Kill and eat.” Peter replies, "By no means, Lord, for I have never eaten anything common (koinos) or unclean (akathartos)” Here Peter insists that he has never eaten anything common or unclean. Therefore, we must assume there is some connection to the two words; yet, they are distinct. Unless we assume Peter to be redundant, there must be something different between something that is common (koinos) and unclean (akathartos). Another example from the New Testament is Mark 7:2, “…and had seen that some of His disciples were eating their bread with impure hands, that is, unwashed.” Here koinos is translated as impure, and impure due to unwashed hands. Now we know for a fact that the Old Testament has nothing to say about the common Israelite needing to wash his hands for them to be pure for eating. Yet, the Pharisaic rules of the day found a way to render unwashed hands, not as unclean (akathartos), but as common or impure (koinos.) So here again the word common is obviously connected to, but different from unclean. In the LXX translation of the Old Testament, unclean animals and other items found unclean are always translated with akathartos, and never with koinos. And again, koinos literally means common, not impure in classical Greek. So, why is it connected to impurity and things unclean? What are we to make of this? Hebrew Scriptures: There was an offering for the Temple that only the Levites and there families could eat. It is often referred to as the heave offering, but the Hebrew word is terumah. This basically was something that was “clean” – but because it was reserved for only the priestly caste, it was forbidden to the common man. Hence, terumah that was outside of the Temple environs became “common” and inedible – and the reverse is true as well – those things “common” were not permitted in the sanctified areas of the Temple. Also, the priests were required to wash their hands when performing in the Temple. (Ex. 30:18) Pharisaic law: These concepts were extended from the Temple environs to the every day life of Pius Jews (by man-made law). If someone “unsanctified” (i.e. Gentile) touched bread, it became “common” or unfit to eat, even though it conformed to the clean/unclean laws of the Torah. Likewise, the person that could render bread “common” was also referred to as “common.” Therefore we see a link between things common and things unclean. continued..... |
||||||
88 | Greek use of koinos and akathartos | Acts 10:15 | MJH | 213721 | ||
Tim, Our approach then to outside sources is the same. I looked up Prov 1:14, 21:9 (good one) and 25:24. I can not figure out which Hebrew word the LXX is translating with koinos. It seems that "unclean" and "common" do not fit at all. Some of my sources did come from the Apocrypha and Pseudographia, but I am having difficulty locating them now. Thanks for the help. I've run across this and while parts make sense, I have learned that doing the looking myself helps me find out if others have made poor leaps of logic or misapplied ideas. I am however highly disabled in both Greek and time. If you do have time to look into it more, great, if not, I shall continue the search more and fill you in if ever I reach a conclusion. God bless you in your understanding of Greek. It is a real gift. MJH |
||||||
89 | Greek use of koinos and akathartos | Acts 10:15 | MJH | 213671 | ||
Thanks Tim. I appreciate the reply. I would like to discuss it more. I do have other uses of the two terms outside of the Biblical Text dating to the first century. I have been a bit gun shy in that area recently, but if from a purely word study understanding it helps, maybe I’ll add them? You are right about Acts 10:15. The two terms are certainly connected. But I have also found that in reference to Gentiles, the term "common" or koinos was most often used (outside of Biblical Texts). Gentiles were defiled, while not "unclean" in and of themselves. They were, by Jews, rendered "common" because of how they lived, primarily their connection to Idolatry. Acts 10:14 also uses both words, but in this statement it would seem that there is a difference. "I have not eaten anything that is common (koinos) or unclean (akathartos)." Why use both words if they were synonyms? Since Jesus repeats only "common", he would be referring to Gentiles. At least in this context since Gentile inclusion was the whole point. I know I am writing as if I am definite, but in truth I am not but seeking to ask the next question. Thanks again for the reply and let me know what you find. MJH Can you list the Proverb passages that have Koinos? I can't do a search with the LXX I have and it doesn't have strong numbers either, so I am at a disadvantage there. |
||||||
90 | Samuel serving where he shouldn | 1 Sam 1:1 | MJH | 213372 | ||
Wow, thanks for replying. I would not have thought to look up Chronicles. I just assumed he was from Levi until I read this week. To see it says he is in Chronicles makes sense. MJH |
||||||
91 | Is it God speaking?? | James 1:5 | MJH | 213342 | ||
You said, "I am not intending to correct..." I would hope you do. Even when I wrote that post I thought..."I may not have worded that just right." Then it occured that on this forum I can expect that someone may refine my wording. I appreciate it...and you are right. MJH |
||||||
92 | Is it God speaking?? | James 1:5 | MJH | 213337 | ||
Lissamz, I did not intend to place judgment on those you know who are saying they hear from God. I don't know them. I used this text to be helpful to you in that it helps you know that you're not deficient if your faith because you do not “hear” God like they say they do.. One of my most respected Bible teachers has said too that he would love to hear from God as others apparently have. He is anything but unspiritual. True spirituality is demonstrated not in esoteric feelings, but in how one lives their life. Do you live your life like you love the LORD your God with your whole being and your neighbor as yourself? Do you see the fruit of the Spirit: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control more readily apparent in your life? These are the measures of true Spirituality, not hearing voices, feeling tingly, or anything else, as nice as those things may be. MJH |
||||||
93 | Song of Moses the first passage written? | Ex 15:1 | MJH | 213313 | ||
I shall not repeat that error. I only did it so that the question would be placed for all to see again, since I was hoping for someone else to comment on the original question. Sorry. |
||||||
94 | Did God bless the beasts as well | Gen 1:25 | MJH | 213303 | ||
Is is possible that in verse 1:28, the "He blessed them." That this "blessed them" was too all the land creatures including man. And that the second them ... "And God said to them" refers only to mankind? Gen 1:28 "And God blessed them[the land animals and man]. And God said to them[mankind], "Be fruitful and multiply . . ." The English translation would put the pronoun with the closest noun, but that isn’t necessarily how it works in Hebrew. ? Just a thought. I have never noticed this before...it is interesting. Thanks Azure. MJH |
||||||
95 | Hereing from God | 1 John 3:22 | MJH | 213282 | ||
None taken. I thought maybe some might be speaking of one, while the other another. As I said, I am a skeptic first.... MJH |
||||||
96 | Which verse talks about heaven on earth? | Rom 8:21 | MJH | 213281 | ||
Many times wonderful study begins with such questions. If the message sends you on a quest of study, then it did you well. I can't comment on the message because I did not hear it all, but one thing jumped out in your statement: "getting rid of all material things to have true faith." That statement alone is false, but in context there was hopefully more. Material things are not anti-Faith any more than poverty is pro-faith. What matters is where your heart is. Those who have an abundance who are tight fisted and un-charitable have a huge problem. Those who are impoverished and have a heart of envy or bitterness also have a huge problem. That being said, True faith is always loving which encompasses caring for others in need. You can not claim to love your neighbor as yourself, and knowingly leave him in hunger when you have the means to truly help him. MJH |
||||||
97 | Hereing from God | 1 John 3:22 | MJH | 213267 | ||
I've read most of this thread and here is what impression I am getting. Does God speak to people like he spoke to those who penned Scripture still, or not? I'd put my "vote" into the not category. (It’s not really up for vote though.) I believe Scripture to be a closed canon, at least until the return of Jesus. However; does God speak through His Spirit to individuals? I'd say a strong YES to this. The reason why is because of experience. While I have, and would never accept any "new" teaching from some voice, I would accept aide in knowing how to help others. The problem is that these are all anecdotal. There is no empirical evidence, usually, to say if someone heard from God or not. I am skeptical by nature, and even when I hear, I remain a skeptic when maybe I shouldn't. But, when I have listened, I have been truly shocked at how precise the event ended up being. In my own mind, this couldn't have been manufactured by my own psyche. Plus, the positive outcome, when I have been blessed to see it, was truly good. I have also been on the receiving end of this sort of listening. When someone comes to you who knows nothing of your private pain, and tells you what they heard you needed, you first almost fall over; and when you realize what just happened, you find out that God must truly love you! He took the effort to lead one of His children to go to you with encouragement that could have come from no one but Him. So maybe some are approaching this topic from the idea of adding to Scripture or getting new revelation, and others like you are approaching this topic from the idea of God stepping into our lives through the voice of His Spirit. MJH |
||||||
98 | Why God killed boys for teasing Elisha | 2 Kings | MJH | 213262 | ||
Doc, Do you think there is something in the mocking we are not seeing because we don't understand what is truly being conveyed in the mocking, "Go on up" and "baldhead?" For example: I didn't know that when an Arab hit you with his shoe he was degrading you in his strongest terms until I saw them slap the statue of Sadam's head. (And threw a shoe at Pres. Bush.) If someone did that to me, I wouldn't think too much of it because I'm not in the culture. I am wondering, since I read this question, what made the phrase, "Go on up, you baldhead." so degrading and demeaning? Any thoughts? MJH |
||||||
99 | Stumped and stupefied. Bewildered.... | Deut 12:13 | MJH | 213260 | ||
Thanks Doc. I understand that these people were not trespassing the command. It's obvious in context. What I am a bit perplexed about is why the command specifies, so it seems, one specific place ONLY, yet God not only accepts, but at least in Gideon's instance, tells him to do it. (I think Samson's Parents are also told to rather than doing it on there own.) So why have the command to only offer a sacrifice in the place, and then allow it in another place? Honestly, this is one of those, "hmmmmm, what am I missing here." questions. What am I still missing? MJH |
||||||
100 | Love for all, judge not anyone | OT general | MJH | 213228 | ||
"So, Sunday, ham, man-made observances over God-ordained feasts is not really the issue - it's Who dwells within, Who guides you in your decisions." Great statement Cheri. MJH |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [17] >> |