Biblical Q & A

I had thought that Paul was once married, before his ministry. where does he talk of this in the New Testament?
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

ANSWER:

We do not know whether Paul was ever married. There is no evidence which is conclusive. There is no where in the New Testament that Paul talks about him being married
1 Corinthians 9:5 (Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?) If you read the context you can not conclude that Paul is married.

All answers are nothing but conjectures. It has been said that Paul was a Rabbi and
Rabbi's had to be married. Jesus was called Rabbi but he wasn't married.
Another argument for Paul being married was that Paul was a Pharisee, and Pharisee's had to be married. There are other scriptures that one would conclude that Paul was married. An example of a scripture that is used to support the premise that Paul was married is 1 Corinthians 7:7-9. But when all is said and done the bible doesn't say conclusively that Paul was married

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
QUESTION:

The bible states that if a man won’t work then he should not eat. Christians are not to support a man in his laziness (or Woman). Basically, the scripture is instructing us not to support a man or woman that won’t work. Of course, this is not to say that if a person does not have a job that he or she is lazy. But if a person does not have a work ethic, or refuses to work and lives at the expense of others he is not to be supported.

2 Thessalonians 3:9-12 Not because we have not power, but to make ourselves an ensample unto you to follow us. ¹⁰ For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat. ¹¹ For we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busybodies. 12 Now them that are such we command and exhort by our Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread.

Proverbs 10:26 Like vinegar to the teeth and smoke to the eyes, So is the lazy one to those who send him.

QUESTION: "What does the bible say about living with someone but not having sex with them. Is it ok?

The term "Godhead," is the same as the trinity. It refers to the three-in-one: God the father, God the son, and God the Holy Ghost. My explanation of the "Trinity" will also explain the "Godhead."

Acts 17:29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.

Colossians 2:8-9 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.⁹ For in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
ANSWER :

One of the most difficult ideas to explain in the bible is the Trinity. The term "Trinity" is not a Biblical term, which means that you will not find the term Trinity in the Bible. The definition of Trinity is what is expressed by scripture. Trinity is the belief that there is only one true God that exist in three distinct persons manifested as God the father, God the son, and God the Holy Ghost (Spirit).

The difficulty in understanding the Trinity is trying to explain divinity with natural language, which is inadequate. God is unique, there is nothing in the universe to compare him, or that can help us comprehend even the concept. We make every attempt to comprehend the one God with our finite minds, which is impossible. The truth is that we have to accept the fact that there is only one God.

The complete revelation of the Trinity could not have been revealed until after the redemptive process was complete. It was revealed in the incarnation of God the Son, and the outpouring of God the Holy Ghost. Thus: the New Testament account of Jesus coming in the flesh and dying on the cross, being raised by God from the dead, and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit became the documentation for the Trinity. Yet the New Testament recognizes the father as God, the Son as God, and the Spirit as God, all as three distinct persons, but one God. If we say that there is only one God, that the Father, the Son, and the Spirit is each God, and the Father, the Son, and the Spirit is each a distinct person; this is the doctrine of the Trinity.

The Bible teaches that there is only one God and not three Gods. You can't be equal with God and not be God. The scripture teaches that there is one God who has revealed himself in three persons, the Father, the Son, the and Holy Ghost, and these three persons are one God.

Deuteronomy 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:
Genesis 1:26 - And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

John 1:1- In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Acts 5:3-4 But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land? Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.

John 5:18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the Sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

John 10:29-30 ²⁹ My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.³⁰ I and my Father are one

1.) "How did we get blacks, whites, Chinese, and so forth from two people? Adam and eve? 2.) Also What does the bible say about dinosaurs and how long ago where they actually on the earth?
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

The theory of adaptability is simply the belief that whatever racial characteristics we possess, or have possessed came from the original gene pool of Adam and Eve. After the flood God commanded man to be fruitful, multiple, and inhabit the earth. This command was basically telling man to move horizontal, but instead man decided to selfishly move vertical. He decided to build a tower upward, and not move horizontal as God had commanded. Man set himself against God and refused to inhabit the earth. As a consequence of man's disobedience God mixed up their language and scattered the people all over the earth.

As man began to migrate into different geographic locations and different climates, men began to adapt to that specific climate. It is believed that one of the main sources of adapting to these different climates was increases and decreases in skin pigmentation. The color of a person's skin is the result of the amount of melanin pigment in the skin. The more melanin the darker the skin, and the less melanin the lighter the skin.

I can't, nor can anyone else tell you that they fully understand how God brought about the races, but we can definitely say that all humanity is of one race and that is from Adam and Eve.

Acts 17:26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;

Genesis 8:15-17 - ¹⁵ And God spake unto Noah, saying, ¹⁶ Go forth of the ark, thou, and thy wife, and thy sons, and thy sons' wives with thee. ¹⁷ Bring forth with thee every living thing that is with thee, of all flesh, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth; that they may breed abundantly in the earth, and be fruitful, and multiply upon the earth.

⁴Genesis 11:4-9 And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth. ⁵ And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men built. ⁶ And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. ⁷ Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech. ⁸ So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city. ⁹ Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.

Answer: 2 The Bible says absolutely nothing about dinosaurs and how long ago they were on the earth.

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

QUESTION: What is your view of salvation?

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

Answer:

As a result of the sin of Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden, (original sin), God's justice was violated and God's righteousness was offended. From that moment Adam and Eve became sinners and all of their offspring's, which is the whole human race.

Salvation is the plan of God to satisfy God's justice and bring sinful man, or humanity back in right standing with a holy God. The act of God forgiving our sin so that we can have relationship with Him forever! Salvation is the act of accepting the death of Jesus Christ as a full payment for our sins and accepting his life in the spirit to give us power over sin.

Romans 5:12 - "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:"

Romans 10:8-11 - ⁸ But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; ⁹ That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. ¹⁰ For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. ¹¹ For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

Acts 4:12 - ¹⁰ Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. ¹¹ This is the stone which was set at naught of you builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

"Were musical instruments used in the early church? If so where can I find it in the HOLY BIBLE?
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

We can not say that musical instruments were used, or were not used in the early church. We have no specific mention of musical instruments being used. However, if we look at Ephesians 5:19 at the words "Making melody" which is from the Greek word psallo, which at its root means "to pluck." The English word psalm comes from this Greek word and includes the idea of plucking on a stringed instrument, particularly a harp. Psallo came to represent the making of any instrumental music. I think that one would agree that the Spirit-filled heart can express itself in any sort of vocal or instrumental music. I believe apostle Paul is saying there are two ways to praise God in song--with the voice and with instruments.

No scripture in the New Testament directly forbids the use of instruments in worship. Some say because the Bible doesn't say that instruments should be used in worship then it is forbidden, and others say because it didn't forbid the use of musical instruments that it is not forbidden.

It is evident from scripture that God expects our worship to be heart felt and having as its object to glorify our Lord Jesus Christ. It is an act of worship when someone sings from their heart to the Lord; whether it is with voice or instrument.

Eph 5:18 And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit; (19) Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord; (20) Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ; (21) Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God.

Col 3:16 Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.

"I really need to know if the years mentioned in the bible correspond to the years (12 months )
period that we know of currently.

Thank you in advance
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

Yes the years mentioned in the bible correspond to the 12 month period that we know today. However there is some explanation needed.

Modern science show that the number of days in a year is 365.2422. This is called a solar year. All calendars either use a leap day, (extra day), or a leap month, (extra month) to bring the year in line with the number of solar days in a year. If this leap day or leap month was not added after a period of time the seasons would be out of line.

Today in our modern calendar (Gregorian) a year has 365 days, with every 4th year having 366 days (leap year). In the modern Hebrew calendar (the lunar-solar calendar) a normal year has 354 days, but every 2 or 3 years a leap month of thirty days is added, which would equal 384 days in that leap year. The bottom line is there are 365.2422 days in a year and anything less than the referenced days have to be accounted for by a leap day or by a leap month or the seasons would eventually be out of line.

All calendars basically corresponds to the time it takes the earth to orbit around the sun (solar) and, or, the moon to orbit around the earth (lunar).

*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Question:

What does the day of Atonement mean?
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

In order to understand what atonement means it is important to understand that God is holy and righteous. When Adam sinned both he and all of his off springs became guilty before God. The sin of man offended the holiness of God and caused a breach in the relationship between God and man. The problem was, how could that relationship be restored? The answer certainly didn’t lie in sinful man; because he was now a sinner, it was nothing he could offer up to a holy and sinless God. In order to put man back in relationship and right standing with God a perfect and sinless sacrifice was required. Since man was guilty and all of his off springs would be born guilty it was impossible for him to offer up a sinless sacrifice. God, himself required that blood from a sinless sacrifice must be shed. There was no such thing, since sin had contaminated the whole of creation. This is where the word atonement became important. Atonement meant that there had to be a substitutionary sacrifice and man couldn’t provide it. God came up with a solution; he would provide the spotless sacrifice himself. Something had to die, and something had to take our place – namely Christ. The plan was that Jesus Christ would become the divine substitution for man and by man having faith in him God would provide a way that man could become righteous and be put in right standing with God. Of course, when I say that man could become righteous I’m speaking of imputed righteousness. God would see him as being righteous as a result of his acceptance of Jesus Christ, the sacrifice that he provided for us. If we accept Jesus as our Lord and Savior, and God’s solution to the breach between he and man our trespasses would no longer be counted against us.

Colossians 1:14, 19-22 ¹⁴ In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:¹⁹ For it pleased the Father that in him should all fullness dwell; ²⁰ And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. ²¹ And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled ²² In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unbelievable and unreproveable in his sight.

2 Corinthians 5:21 ²¹ For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

Hebrews 9:15-22 ¹⁵ And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. ¹⁶ For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. ¹⁷ For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth. ¹⁸ Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood. ¹⁹ For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people, ²⁰ Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you. ²¹ Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry. ²² And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission

.Romans 5:11 ¹¹ And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement

Jesus' actual sufferings and death points at Satan's bruising his heel. The church's sufferings, temptations, and all the things that Satan does to the body of Christ, (which is now the church), is a continuation of the bruising of the heel of Jesus. His suffering and our suffering compared to the gift of God that we received is merely a bruise of the heel to Jesus and the church.

The death and resurrection of Jesus, which took Satan's authority, bruised his head. His victory over Satan rescued the souls of men out of the hands and authority of Satan. The death and resurrection of Jesus gave a fatal blow to the devil's kingdom, a wound to the head of the serpent that cannot be healed. The Bible let's us know that Satan or his Kingdom will never recover from the blow he received from Jesus.

Because of the sin of man we were alienated from God with no earthly way to reconcile; but by the death of Christ we were reconciled to God; and we are, and shall be, saved by his life.

Genesis 3:15 - And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

Mark 14:64 - Ye have heard the blasphemy: what think ye? And they all condemned him to be guilty of death.
Romans 5 -⁶ For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.⁷ For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die.⁸ But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.⁹ Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.¹⁰ For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.¹¹ And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement.¹² Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:¹³ (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.¹⁴ Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.¹⁵ But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.¹⁶ And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification.¹⁷ For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)

Has Jesus Christ always existed since the beginning of time or beginning of the world? Has it
always been the trinity?

Answer: Yes, Jesus Christ has always existed and there has always been a trinity since the beginning of time. Christ's participation in the creation of the world necessitates two things: that he is God, and that he was present at the creation of the world. The Bible teaches that there are three distinct persons called God, known as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. So, basically, what we are saying the three persons - Father, Son, and Holy Spirit - are the one God. For clarity sake, if you take any one of the persons away it doesn’t equal God. God must be all three to be God.

John 1:1-4

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ² The same was in the beginning with God. ³ All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. ⁴ In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

John 1:14

And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Colossians 1:16

For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him

what was the reason God changed the languages pertaining to the tower of Babel?

*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

In the book of Genesis God had commanded man to scatter throughout the world and replenish the earth (this was after the flood), but man refused to scatter as God had commanded, and concentrated instead in the vicinity of the original Babylon. They decided to build a tower and make a name for themselves. The men were in unity; they all spoke the same language, and had a common goal and the faith and unity to achieve whatever they set their minds to accomplish. God said that if they were not stopped they would achieve their goal; so he confounded their language and scattered them all over the earth. Scattering them and replenishing the earth was God’s plan all the time.

In summary God changed their language to take away their ability to communicate to keep them from building the tower of Babel. He scattered them in order to replenish the earth after the flood.

Genesis 9:1

¹ And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.

Genesis 11:1-9

. ⁴ And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.

⁵ And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded. ⁶ And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. ⁷ Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech. ⁸ So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city. ⁹ Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.

Question:
In dating, what does the Word says about kissing, or should it be treat the same as not having
sex until you're married
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

The Bible does not give us specific scriptures on dating or courting. If kissing does occur it will most likely be done in the context of either dating or courting. Kissing will do no harm if it is done with all discretion and control, but touching each other in indiscrete places will often lead to sin and harm your relationship with God. When kissing becomes foreplay it then is forbidden by Godly principles because foreplay gets you ready for sex; and sex outside of the marriage is sin. So the answer is yes and no. If it is done with all discretion and control in the context of courting it’s is allowed. Because dating actually demands no real commitment kissing will be a risky business and only a tease since there is no commitment. If it is taken to far in a courtship it can lead to sin also. Therefore whenever kissing occurs the Christians have a responsibility to not allow it to get out of control.

1Corinthians 10:31

Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.

Matthews 10:37

He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me

²² Flee also youthful lusts: but follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart.

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

I have not been able to find anywhere in the Bible on which side Jesus was pierced with the Roman spear.

Does the Bible actually identify exactly which side Jesus was pierced with the spear? I always thought it was the left side, however, most crucifixes I see (except my own that I painted) depict the right side ... is there a definitive answer with written proof in the Bible or otherwise? Which side was pierced?

Thanks,
Bob

There is no where in the bible that gives us information of what side Jesus was pierced. Those that have dared to discuss such specifics have concluded that Jesus was pierced on the right side.

The real focus of the piercing of the side of Jesus is primarily, the fulfillment of prophesy: Psalms 34:20 "He keepeth all his bones, not one of them is broken." The piercing of his side also showed that he was dead so that there would be no doubt that he had been resurrected.

Below is a website that can give you some idea of the discussion that took place concerning the number of nails that were used and what side was Jesus pierced. There is also a list of scripture that gives you the bible position.

Matthew 27:50 Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost [Fenton: But another taking a spear pierced His side, when blood and water came out. Jesus, however, having again called out with a loud voice, resigned His spirit].

John 19:31 The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the Sabbath day, (for that Sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

32 Then came the soldiers, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him.

33 But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs:

34 But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced [Greek aorist verb tense: had pierced] his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water.

35 And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe.

36 For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken.

John 20:24 But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came.

25 The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.

26 And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.

27 Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.

29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

Revelation 1:4 John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before his throne;

5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindred's of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen

Question: Please tell me is it okay with God if I am cremated my daughter is afraid as a Christian it is wrong to do like a sin.. I know it is less of a burden and money. I just can't seem find a answer. I want to do the right thing! Thank you
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

Answer: The Bible actually does not give any specific teaching about cremation. Cremation was practiced in Biblical times, but it was not commonly practiced by the Hebrews or by New Testament believers. Some believers object to the practice of cremation on the basis that it does not recognize that one day God will resurrect our bodies and re-unite them with our soul and spirit (1 Corinthians 15:35-58; 1 Thessalonians 4:16). However, the fact that a body has been cremated does not make it any more difficult for God to resurrect a body.

The bodies of Christians who died thousands years ago is now nothing but dust but that will not stop God from raising their bodies. Therefore Cremation is neither right or wrong; the Christian has the liberty to decide whether they want their body cremated or not. God is equally able to raise a person’s remains that have been cremated as He is the remains of a person who was not cremated.
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Question:

What does God say about helping others who will not help themselves? My sister is a Christian. But she won't work, she expects everyone in the family to give her money all the time, and take care of her. Don't we hinder people if we help them to much and don't make them take responsibilities for their own life. Please give me some scriptures to read regarding this issue? Thank you!"

Robert I'm going to refer you to an article written by Don Closson. I think that this article will address your question as best as It can be addressed. Just as always the conservative theologians have a different view then the liberal and the moderate theologians.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Question:

Did Moses Write the Pentateuch?
Don Closson
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Answer:

Introduction
Most Christians have been taught in Sunday school that Moses wrote the first five books of the Bible. These books: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, are often referred to as the Pentateuch or Torah. However, outside of the more conservative seminaries and churches, it is commonly held that Moses did not write these books, that they are a compilation of works by numerous writers over an extended period of time.

Religious studies courses at most universities teach that the Pentateuch is a composite work consisting of four literary strands. The four strands have been assigned the letters J, E, D, and P; each representing a different document or source that was woven into the fabric of the Bible. This set of assumptions has gone by a number of names including the documentary theory and the Graf-Wellhausen theory. According to this view, the letter "J" stands for the Yahwist ("J" from the German Jahweh) narrative, coming from the period of the early Jewish monarchy, about 950 B.C. "E" stands for the Elohist narrative from the region of the Northern Kingdom dating from about 750 B.C. "D" is best represented by the book of Deuteronomy and is said to have originated in the Southern Kingdom about 650 B.C. or later. And finally, "P" is the priestly document that comes from the period after the fall of Israel in 587 B.C. According to the theory, the Pentateuch reached its current form around the time of Ezra or about 400 B.C.

Why is the issue of Mosaic authority an important one? Those who accept the documentary or Graf-Wellhausen theory argue that the content of these books should be seen as a mixture of credible historical events and religious poetry sparked by man's religious imagination. For example, regarding Moses and God on Mount Sinai, one author of an Old Testament survey writes that, "It would be foolish, for instance, to rationalize the burning bush, as though this vision were something that could have been seen with the objective eye of a camera."{1} Holders of this view reject the notion of supernatural revelation and regard much of the Pentateuch as folklore and Hebrew storytelling.

On the other hand, the conservative view holds to Mosaic authorship and treats the books as a literary unit. This does not mean that Moses didn't use other documents to write his books. He obviously did. But since other Old Testament authors affirm Mosaic authorship, as do numerous New Testament writers and the early church fathers, the veracity of the Bible as a whole begins to crumble if Moses is not the author of the Pentateuch.

In this article we will take a closer look at the source of the documentary theory regarding Mosaic authorship and offer a response that argues for the integrity of the Bible.

Origins Of The Documentary Hypothesis
For almost two thousand years Christians accepted Mosaic authorship of the first five books of the Bible. That's not to say that some didn't acknowledge problems with the text. Many had noted what seemed to be two separate creation stories in Genesis, as well as the problem of Moses recording his own death in Deuteronomy 34.

In 1753, a French physician named Jean Astruc began the modern study of source or literary analysis by writing a commentary on the book of Genesis.{2} He noted that the first chapter of Genesis refers to God as Elohim, while the second chapter uses mostly Jehovah or Yahweh. Astruc believed that Moses must have used two different sources in writing Genesis, each having different names for God, and that the Elohim source was the older. This established the first principle of what would become known as the documentary hypothesis, the assumption that different divine names must mean different authors or sources. In 1780 Johann Eichhorn took this theory and ran with it. He applied the idea of two sources to the rest of Genesis, Exodus, and finally to most of the Pentateuch. He eventually gave up on the view of Mosaic authorship as well.

The next step came in 1805, when Wilhem De Wette argued that none of the Pentateuch was written before David. He established the "D" document standing for Deuteronomy, which he believed was written as propaganda to support political and religious unification in Jerusalem during the reign of king Josiah around 621 B.C. We now have three source documents: J, E, and D. Although others in the late 1700's and early 1800's found as many as thirty-nine fragments in Genesis alone, the final, "P" or Priestly document of the current theory was added by Hermann Hupfeld in 1853. He believed that the E source should be split in two, the later becoming the new P document.

The name most associated with the documentary hypothesis is Julius Wellhausen. His publications in the late 1870's didn't add much new information to the theory, but rather argued for it from a Darwinistic perspective. Wellhausen claimed that the J, E, D, P sequence followed the development from primitive animism towards the more sophisticated monotheism that would be expected as the Jewish culture and religion evolved. The impact of this connection was immediate and powerful.

Even though both liberal and conservative scholars removed much of the foundation of the documentary hypothesis in the twentieth century, the idea remains entrenched. As Gleason Archer states, "For want of a better theory . . . most non-conservative institutions continue to teach the Wellhausian theory, at least in its general outlines, as if nothing had happened in Old Testament scholarship since the year 1880."{3}

Problems With The Documentary Hypothesis
Let's now look at the problems with this theory.

First, it should be mentioned that conservative experts did not sit idly by as this theory developed and spread. In the late 1800's Princeton Seminary scholars Joseph Alexander and William Green "subjected the documentarian school to devastating criticism which has never been successfully rebutted by those of liberal persuasion," according to Gleason Archer.{4} In Germany, Ernst Wilhem Hengstenberg ably defended the Mosaic authorship of all five books of the Pentateuch. His 1847 book The Genuineness of the Pentateuch did much to encourage conservative thinking.

It should also be noted that the Wellhausen theory found what it was looking for. The theory grew out of a movement to find rationalistic, natural explanations for the biblical text. Once one assumes that supernatural revelation cannot occur any other explanation must take precedent. The late dates and various authors assigned to the books allow for purely naturalistic sources. This is a textbook case of question begging. The underlying premise, that there can be no such thing as supernatural revelation, resulted in the conclusion that the Bible is not a supernaturally revealed document.{5}

Another problem with the theory is that it assumes that "Hebrew authors differ from any other writers known in the history of literature in that they alone were incapable of using more than one name for God," or for that matter, more than one style of writing.{6} It is interesting that the Qur'an (Koran) uses multiple names for God, but few question that Muhammad was its sole author. Regarding the various writing styles, it would be like arguing that C. S. Lewis could not possibly have written children's stories, literary critiques, science fiction, and allegorical satire; and insisting that numerous sources must have been involved. Educated as an Egyptian prince, Moses would have been exposed to many writing styles that were available during that period.

Another bias is evident in how critics regard the biblical data as unreliable and suspect, despite its old age even by their own dating methods. The tendency is to disregard the biblical content immediately when a non-biblical source disagrees with it, even when the biblical document is older. In the words of one conservative Old Testament scholar:

It makes no difference how many biblical notices, rejected as unhistorical by nineteenth-century pundits, have been confirmed by later archaeological evidence (such as the historicity of Belshazzar, the Hittites, and the Horites), the same attitude of skeptical prejudice toward the Bible has persisted, without any justification.{7}

In the next section we will continue to offer arguments against the documentary hypothesis and for the Mosaic authorship of the first five books of the Bible.

A Conservative Approach
Despite what Gleason Archer calls "The overwhelming contrary evidence from Genesis to Malachi," advocates of the Wellhausen theory cling to its most fundamental principle: that the religion of the Jews evolved from primitive animism to a more sophisticated monotheism.{8}

But their unsupported assumptions don't stop there. Modern scholars assume that Hebrew writers never used the repetition of ideas or occurrences even though authors in other ancient Semitic languages did so. They also assume that they can scientifically date the texts, even though they have no other ancient Hebrew writings to compare them with. Documentary scholars have felt free to amend the text by substituting more common words for rare or unusual words that they do not understand or do not expect to see in a given context.{9} Although it claims to be scientific, the documentary hypothesis is anything but neutral.

What are the arguments for Mosaic authorship? First, there are numerous passages in Exodus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy that point to Moses as author. For instance, Exodus 34:27 says, "Then the LORD said to Moses, 'Write down these words, for in accordance with these words I have made a covenant with you and with Israel.'" In fact, there are references throughout the Old Testament (Joshua, 1 & 2 Kings, Ezra, Nehemiah, Daniel, and Malachi) that claim that Moses wrote the Pentateuch.

New Testament writers assumed that Moses wrote the first five books of the Bible as well. In Matthew 19:8 Jesus refers to laws regarding marriage in Deuteronomy and credits Moses with writing them. In John 7:19 Jesus says, "If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me." In Romans 10:5 Paul states that Moses wrote the law. It would be hard not to attribute either deception or error to Christ and the apostles if Moses did not write the Pentateuch.

There are many other internal evidences that point to Mosaic authorship. The writer of Exodus gives eyewitness details of the event that only a participant would know about. The author of Genesis and Exodus also portrays remarkable knowledge of Egyptian names and places. This knowledge is evident even in the style of writing used. One scholar has noted that the writer used "a large number of idioms and terms of speech, which are characteristically Egyptian in origin, even though translated into Hebrew."{10}

Having received training in the most advanced literate culture of the day as well as having access to the Jewish oral tradition make Moses a remarkably able and likely candidate for God to use in documenting the founding of the Jewish nation.

Summary
Now let's consider the current state of Old Testament studies.

Since 1670, when the Jewish philosopher Baruch Spinoza (1631-1677) suggested that Ezra might have authored the Pentateuch, source criticism has grown to such an extent that it has successfully removed serious consideration of Mosaic authorship for many scholars. However, the twentieth century has seen the pillars supporting the Wellhausen theory, also known as the documentary hypothesis, weakened or removed. The result has been the uncomfortable reliance by many scholars on a system of literary criticism that no longer has a firm foundation. As one Old Testament scholar has written:

Wellhausen's arguments complemented each other nicely, and offered what seemed to be a solid foundation upon which to build the house of biblical criticism. Since then, however, both the evidence and the arguments supporting the structure have been called into question and, to some extent, even rejected. Yet biblical scholarship, while admitting that the grounds have crumbled away, nevertheless continues to adhere to the conclusions.{11}

Beginning at the turn of the century, scholars have challenged the divine-names criterion for determining authorship. W. F. Albright, who remained within the documentary camp, called the minute analysis of the Pentateuch after Wellhausen "absurd" and "irrational."{12} Hermann Gunkel, who introduced a new type of criticism called form criticism, came to the conclusion that "we really know nothing for certain about these hypothetical documents of the Graf-Wellhausen hypothesis."{13} In other words, he refused to accept the numerous authors for the Pentateuch, particularly the J, E, and P sources, that had been speculated about by scholars for decades. There are too many critics to mention by name, but the cumulative effect has been substantial.

Where does this leave us today? In one sense it has left the scholarly community in search for new foundations. But even for those who reject the possibility of supernatural revelation, the evidence from archeology, the Dead Sea scrolls found at Qumran, and information about the languages of the ancient orient are making dependence on the Wellhausen theory inexcusable.

There is a trend among scholars to view the Pentateuch as a literary unit again. Scholars are admitting that the way the books use common words, phrases and motifs, parallel narrative structure, and deliberate theological arrangement of literary units for teaching and memorization support viewing the five books as a literary whole.{14} If this becomes the accepted view, Mosaic authorship can again be entertained.

"Is there scripture stating it is a sin against God to pierce your body. Examples having a lip ring? " "Jessica" "jessicar@futures-unlimited.org

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In the Old Testament, Leviticus 19:28: Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead nor print any marks upon you: I [am] the LORD. Even though believers today are not under the Old Testament law, the fact that there was a command against piercing should cause us to question whether it should be done by us. The New Testament however does not say anything about whether a believer should or should not get piercing.

The question we might ask ourselves is can God use the particular activity to glorify His name. "Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God" (1 Corinthians 10:31). The Bible does not command against piercing, but it also does not give us any reason to believe God would have us get body piercing.

We need to also remember that our bodies, as well as our souls, have been redeemed and both belongs to God. Although 1 Corinthians 6:19-20 does not directly apply to body piercing, it does give us a principle, "What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a price; therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's." This great truth should have a real bearing on what we do and where we go with our bodies. If our bodies belong to God, we should make sure we have His clear "permission" before we "mark it up" with tattoos or body piercing.

Another issue that we may consider: is it modest? The scripture instructs us to dress modest. The Bible instructs us to dress modestly (1 Timothy 2:9). One aspect of dressing modestly is making sure everything that should be covered by clothing is adequately covered. However, the essential meaning of modesty is not drawing attention to yourself. People who dress modestly dress in such a way that they do not draw attention to themselves. Body piercing most definitely draw attention. In this sense body piercing are not modest.

An important Scriptural principle on issues that the Bible does not specifically address is that if there is room for doubt as to whether it pleases God, then it's best to not engage in that activity. "For whatsoever is not of faith is sin" (Romans 14:23).

Bible Questions & Answers