Reputation
2,639
Top tag
Next privilege 3,500 Rep.
Protect questions
Badges
5 28
Newest
 Custodian
Impact
~93k people reached

May
16
comment Hosea 6.7: “like men”, “like Adam”, or “at Adam”?
This answer doesn't address the translator's speculation on the Hebrew wording, but it DOES answer the question(+1). Sometimes the answer lies within the 'context' rather than the morphology of the words, and this answer makes perfect sense within the context of Hosea's message.
May
8
comment Would it have mattered if God cursed Adam and Eve if they had eaten from the tree of life?
@JoshuaBigbee Redemption had been prophesied to the man through 1) the woman's seed crushing the head of the serpent, 2) the fact that God made skins-a sacrifice involving who's blood was shed to cover man's nakedness. But he would have to live under the dominion of the enemy, who's allegiance he gave when he disobeyed God's commandment. The 'curse' was only covered by the blood of animals-it wasn't removed until the finished work of Christ gave him redemption from it. Also, 'work' was given before the Fall, "toil" and opposition came after it.
May
7
comment Was the Revelation written in code to hide it from the Romans?
@JoshuaBigbee Those are the 4 commonly accepted hermeneutics for evaluating the Book of Revelations: they are taught at most Bible courses and they give a framework for understanding, as well as gauge for reconciling the various interpretations. Futurism and Dispensationalism both hold to a 'literal' hermeneutic, the difference being one's eschatology concerning Israel. The others take a widely divergent viewpoint and would be remiss not to mention them.
Apr
30
comment What are the many Sabbaths referred to in scripture?
(cont.) This is far from true-in fact if the 4th commandment is made void, what is to prevent the other 9 from being considered nulified. The truth is modern man has negated the Sabbath's, and paid the penalty for it, in premature aging, disease, poverty, stress, as well as infertility, drought, soil errosion. What day one celebrates it is under grace, as well as what one does or doesn't do(for the Christian). But the principle is part of the eternal Word of God, and the world will pass away before His Word does.
Apr
30
comment What are the many Sabbaths referred to in scripture?
I have to go with your answer over Caleb's as it encompasses "rest" instead of day. While Caleb may be 95% accurate, the 'Shabat' encompasses the rest of God-consistant throughout Scripture, from Genesis to Revelations. Because "The word sabbath is from the Hebrew word SHABÀT, meaning ‘cessation,’ or ‘time of rest.’ it means more than a particular day, it indicates completion and sessation from one's activity to enter into "God's rest". Many misinterpret Jesus's saying "the Father works and I work"(Jn. 5:17) to mean there is no more "day of rest"-it has all been fulfilled.
Apr
30
comment What are the many Sabbaths referred to in scripture?
@Caleb The 2 Chron.36:21 passage refers to the 7th year Sabbaths, in which the land was to lie fallow(Lev. 25:4),"But in the seventh year shall be a sabbath of rest unto the land, a sabbath for the LORD." Therefore, saying 'Sabbath' as merely the 7th day fails to include the principle of rest that all Sabbaths include-especially the Sabbath of the land.
Apr
29
comment Why was all of Jerusalem troubled at Jesus birth?
@e.s.kohen Here is the Wikipedia site-although the Idumeans(in this case Herod) passed themselves off as Jews, there is considerable controversy from both Jewish and other sources as to whether he was. His willingness to collect taxes for Rome put him outside of traditional Jewish observance-as well as his murdering of those who stood in his way.
Apr
29
comment Why was all of Jerusalem troubled at Jesus birth?
You will notice in John 11:48,"If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation". The Romans were ruthless in quelling insurrection, furthermore anyone having anything to do with it would be deposed. After the Quirinian taxation and revolt, a Roman prefect was appointed-Pilate was one in a succession of them. The Herodian Dynasty ruled, yet the 'procurator' could summons the Roman legions, making any attempt to rule meaningless. Therefore it was 'necessary' to 'keep the status quo' .
Apr
29
comment Why was all of Jerusalem troubled at Jesus birth?
Yes, it is a fair assessment. "The Jewish" leadership, distinct from the rest of the whole Israeli/Palestinian population is accurate. Many were awaiting the consolation of Israel,(Simeon and Anna) vs the Herodian kings(those that Rome allowed after the Hasmoneans were deposed in 62BC) which created jealousy with the Hasmonean priesthood. Also, Herod was an Edomite-(his wife was Jewish), and he was trying to curry favor with the Jews(building them a Temple helped) yet remain a "vassal/king" which meant exacting taxes for Rome-which was anathema to the Pharisee/Zealots..
Apr
28
comment Why was all of Jerusalem troubled at Jesus birth?
This is an interesting question; the signs of Jesus's birth(The Star of Bethlehem, angelic hosts singing) as well as the visitation from the Magi must have hade a profound effect on the populace. It is important to understand the historical context, which tells us why Herod and the Chief Priests and Scribes were so opposed to His arrival.
Apr
27
comment Rev 9:4: Do not hurt the non-existing grass?
@brilliant The question is answered by, "...only those who have not the seal of God on their forehead." The 'locust' being figurative, are not 'insects' which chew on grass, but demons from Hell sent to torment men. Their assignment is not to destroy physical earth, therefore 'grass' is not part of the picture. The "Real" question I believe you're asking is, 'Why did John make a point of telling us their assignment is not to harm physical earth?' My answer is so that we would understand their true assignment, which is described figuratively.
Apr
23
comment What are “unnatural” relations or relations “use beyond nature”?
@ScottS My concern was that the answer, which was clearly based on the interpreting of the text, would be misconstrued by a discussion of homosexuality at large, which was not indicated in the OP's question and could be considered 'off-topic' by someone who may have an issue with the conclusion(I don't). One can certainly 'editorialize' with latitude in the "Comment" section; albeit Mods have the ability to delete said comments. An answer takes the risk of being closed if it goes beyond the OP's question with unsupported statements; that's what I'm trying to avoid.
Apr
23
comment What are “unnatural” relations or relations “use beyond nature”?
I totally agree with your conclusions; however, I recommend deleting your "Comments" section, as it will be considered 'prescriptive' and therefore outside of Site Directives. Just add it as a "comment", if a Mod wants to delete it, so be it, but you can make 'prescriptive' statements in comments without risking your answer being "closed". Thank you!
Apr
16
comment Who are the “kings of the earth”?
Your answer pretty much sums it up; "Kings of the earth" in each of those contexts means temporal authority over nations. "King" can have a different meaning, however. The "King of Tyre" in Ezekiel 28 represents Satan-no one else can lay claim to be "the anointed cherub that covereth".
Apr
16
comment What about the eggs? (Deuteronomy 22:6-7)
@PaulVargas An interesting question....somewhat similar to 'boiling a kid in it's mother's milk'. They were certainly allowed to eat the mother, when there was no young, yet not when she was with young, assisting them. The admonition against cruelty was reflected in the Law, separating them from the cruelty exercised by the nations around them.
Apr
13
comment Does the Hebrew word “olam“ mean “forever”?
Another answer may also be found here. It is significant when God uses "olam" to compare it to the rainbow(which when I last checked, still exist), yet His Promises to Israel are 'merely over the horizon'. This is an example of theology getting in the way of truth.
Apr
11
comment How could the person in Luke 9:49 cast out demons without Jesus' mandate?
@Schuh The suggestion that "occult" purveyors can 'exorcise' demons directly defies the words of Chirst, "If Satan casts out Satan; he is divided against himself". That they manifested "power" is certain; but it is not the power associated with healings, exorcisms, miracles, etc. Even the Scribes and Pharisees admitted this when Nicodemus said, "We know you are a teacher from God, for no man can do these miracles, except God be with him.".(John 3:2) That 'occult' power was manifested during Biblical times is recorded, but they understood the difference between the devil and God.
Apr
10
comment What is the significance of the honey inside the lion's carcass?
@JonathanChell While Samson is certainly a 'type', the fact that God used His 'supernatural strength' and the 'honeybee nest' along with the riddle to confound the Philistines is allegorical to God's relationship w/Israel. There are no 'accidents' here-it is God's determined will to set up a controversy and provide an alternative to their captivity. Another question: was it an 'accident' that the Philistines got hemorrhoids carrying the Ark of the Covenant?
Apr
9
comment What is the significance of the honey inside the lion's carcass?
@JonathanChell Samson is a picture of the Lord Himself, who destroys His enemies, yet brings the 'sweet' to those who abide in Him. One cannot ignore the allegorical reference, especially when it is hinted at by Samson himself.
Apr
6
comment How are we to understand “נִפְלְגָ֣ה הָאָ֔רֶץ” as it relates to Genesis 10:25?
@JonathanChell The "division" implied grammatically(unless someone proves otherwise) refers to land, but contextually it appears highly improbable that "land"(motion of continents) was divided during Peleg's time. Some have suggested the land bridge opened from Asia-Americas during this time, but even their arguments lack specificity. Most commentators have opted for "division of lands"(ie:people groups) but that happened before Peleg, during the time of Noah. Therefore, how can the "division of lands" be reconciled with the language, and yet be reconciled with physical evidence?