Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

13

The very next chapter indicates that Ahimelek had a son named Abiathar. Priestly duties were typically within a given family at one time (eg Aaron and his sons). The title of "high priest", while alone at any given time, does not preclude there being other priests (otherwise Aaron and his sons would have all been "high priests" - whereas "high priest" ...


12

This potential discrepancy is addressed at http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=6&article=768 Possible resolutions to the discrepancies between the accounts: Possibility #1: Initially, both thieves reviled Christ, but then one of them repented. After hearing Jesus’ words on the cross, and seeing His forgiving attitude, the ...


9

Short answer, no. Not at all. It would count as plausible deniability to the straw-man definition of "the inspired and infallible word of God", but only to the false straw-man understanding. The problem is that, almost no denomination believes that inspiration and infallibility are attributed to modern versions/translations of Scripture. Inspiration ...


9

Let's go back and re-read the incident that prompted Jesus' teaching: And as he was setting out on his journey, a man ran up and knelt before him and asked him, “Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone. You know the commandments: ‘Do not murder, Do not commit ...


6

These two different accounts in Luke 23:39 on one side and Mark 15:32 and Mathew 27:44 on other side can be reconciled. by supposing that, at first, both of them reviled the Saviour, and that it is of this fact that Matthew and Mark speaks. Afterwards one of them relented, and became penitent-- perhaps from witnessing the patient sufferings of Christ. It is ...


5

Perhaps your mind will be eased by considering the origin of the phrase, the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. In Matthew 12:22, Jesus performed several miracles. The people were amazed. But the jealous Pharisees said, "This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils." This is the remark that prompted Jesus to talk about the ...


5

I believe so. Popular thought on the subject agree that Bartholomew and Nathanael are the same person. While there is no passage in the Bible that directly says "Bartholomew is Nathanael," circumstantial evidence points in that direction. Arguments can be made either way; church tradition points toward them being one and the same. Arguments for: First, ...


5

Hmm, how do you get from "it is hard for the rich to enter Heaven" to "a Christian shouldn't buy any luxuries"? I think you need to present some logical argument why that follows. In practical terms, what do you define as "luxury"? You could survive with some basic food and shelter from the elements. Everything beyond that could be considered "luxuries". ...


4

The danger with this is that there may be teachings in there that don't correspond with other parts of the New Testament. If there are new doctrines introduced in text that is not found in all versions of the original manuscripts, then we have to be careful about completely basing our faith off of these doctrines. In regard to this specific passage, ...


3

You get the sense of literal fulfillment by reading the verses before and after. Jesus is not switching back and forth between the two in the chapter when He talks about what will happen in the last days. When Jesus told His disciples that the temple will be torn down (13:1-2), the disciples wanted to know when that would happen, and what the sign will be ...


3

As you rightly say, the sisters are not named in the Bible which means we have to look to other sources for this information. I think it's fair to say that overall we don't know for certain, but different churches have developed different teachings and traditions on this subject. The Roman Catholic Church teach that the word "sisters" is used purely ...


3

We are commanded to be generous--not impoverished. The Question Your assumption seems tenuous. "Since it's hard for the rich to enter the kingdom of God, but it's not impossible since nothing is impossible with God, how can any Christian ever buy anything that benefits only themselves? Jesus never said "Don't buy anything unless it benefits someone ...


3

This is a good quesiton. However, the point here is that it is important to notice that Mark says he went to the house of God "in the days of Abiathar the high priest." Ahimelek was the priest who was present at the House of God. As Warren has answered, there are multiple priests at the time. When Saul learned that Ahimelech helped David, he commanded to ...


3

At the risk of sounding sexist, a young person would probably have been quite happy to have multiple mothers (they dote on you, they feed you), but to replace your father would be to replace your own identity. Having a new father means you are totally different person, and to include the father would be to confuse the point that Jesus is trying to make - ...


2

wouldn't God rather have us take that money and buy a pallet of food for the local food pantry? Not neccessarily. I think it helps to be mindful of the Chinese proverb: Give a man a fish, he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish, he eats for a lifetime. And in this respect, many Christians are employed as social workers and at food panties and ...


2

The Goethe quotation is part of an ensemble of beliefs around the activities of evil spirits, and the ability of humans to control or confuse them by symbolic (ie, magical) practices. You may have heard of the idea that vampires have to be invited in to your home in the first instance, but thereafter can return as they please. This is similar, saying that ...


2

Jesus knew the general effects wealth has on people. Many will do evil to retain or avoid material loss as it cuts down their status. Many business owners will find invisible ways of deliberately causing problems to tarnish the image of their competitors, they say that is how the game is played. They will create world wars just to profit from sale of ...


2

No, absolutely not at all It is well-known that the Bible was not written down as a single chunk, intended from the start to be taken as infallible. The process by which those writings were declared to be Scripture took hundreds of years, and the addition of the last twelve verses of Mark certainly predate that. So at the point where the canon of scripture ...


2

Since there is nothing in the scriptures to answer this question, any answer affirming or rejecting your premise would be pure conjecture. In fact there were many other disciples who followed Jesus around who were not one of the twelve Apostles, one well known person is Mary Magdalene. Also in the following Scriptures where the Apostles were selecting a ...


1

Since Mark presents the Savior as a Slave, he does not tell His genealogy and status, as the ancestry of a slave is not worthy of note. Mark also does not intend to impress us with the Slave’s wonderful words (as Matthew does with His marvelous teachings and parables concerning the heavenly kingdom, and John with His profound revelations of divine truths), ...


1

It is important to know a bit of the Jews history and Hebrew language in order to interpretate these sentences. The word 'brother' in Hebrew does not mean 'the brother' in common understanding. It could also refer to cousins and other relatives. The similar understanding of "brother" and "sister" is in antient Greek and Aramaic. If Jesus was not the only ...


1

This is a very intriguing question. It appears that these particular conversations (Matthew 19 and Mark 10) are between Jesus and the 12 disciples. So, they were all specifically men. In the Matthew passage, he specifically precedes this teaching with a reference to the twelve disciples. In both passages, this is in direct response to Peter's statement ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible