At Ask Me Help Desk you can ask questions in any topic and have them
answered for free by our experts. To ask questions or participate in
answering them you must register for a free account. By registering you
will be able to:
Get free answers from experts in any of our 300+
topics.
As a gay man and Christian I was told by alot of people that homosexuals will not go to heaven but will go to hell instead. I know that alot of older people believe this and I think that is not true because god love everyone. He would not make homosexuals unless there is a chance of them going to heaven. My question is where (book and chapters) does it say that homosexuals will go to hell or where (book and chapter again) does it said that they will not or does it not say neither?
No, the two genealogies are one from Mary and the other one from Joseph,
I have heard this before, and it cannot be. For 1 if it were Mary's why have Joseph in it??
2. If it were Mary's it still doesnt explain why they couldn't agree on the name of Joseph's father which in my opinion still makes it a bit shady.
First of course these genealogy are abridged, there are abridged with many of the early names omitted In Luke after David the lines seperate to touch on both Shealtiel and Zerubbabel.
The accepted view is that Matthew gives Joseph line, and Luke Marys line.
Joseph line was needed to how jesus the legal heir to the promises of Abraham and David Amd Mary lins showing the blood line.
Mary's line was written according to Jewish usage was in her husbands name, Joseph was the "son of Heil" or son in law to Heil
Since we know Josephs father name was really Jacob (Mat 1:16)
I have a couple books on the linage but it is too late to dig them out, I am sure of course there will be PRO and NEG points on this on the web.
This is the "MOST" accepted opinin but again some scholars do not agree, but then some do not agree on any issue
First of course these genealogy are abridged, there are abridged with many of the early names omitted In Luke after David the lines seperate to touch on both Shealtiel and Zerubbabel.
The accepted view is that Matthew gives Joseph line, and Luke Marys line.
Joseph line was needed to how jesus the legal heir to the promises of Abraham and David Amd Mary lins showing the blood line.
Mary's line was written according to Jewish usage was in her husbands name, Joseph was the "son of Heil" or son in law to Heil
Since we know Josephs father name was really Jacob (Mat 1:16)
I have a couple books on the linage but it is too late to dig them out, I am sure of course there will be PRO and NEG points on this on the web.
This is the "MOST" accepted opinin but again some scholars do not agree, but then some do not agree on any issue
I have read articles by both sides and I really do think they both have interesting ideas. The problem is, this is just a small part of the big problem I have with the whole story. I didn't want to list everthing because once again I am taking something away from the question asked. I guess my point is, if God had anything to do with the writing of the Bible this is an erea I would have expected him to make sure nothing was left open for debate. I mean this is supposed to be an all knowing, powerful God right. Is this really that hard of a task??
I have read articles by both sides and I really do think they both have interesting ideas. The problem is, this is just a small part of the big problem I have with the whole story. I didn't want to list everthing because once again I am taking something away from the question asked. I guess my point is, if God had anything to do with the writing of the Bible this is an erea I would have expected him to make sure nothing was left open for debate. I mean this is supposed to be an all knowing, powerful God right. Is this really that hard of a task??
This has nothing to do with the original question, but - - -
Rev 5:5
5 And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.
(KJV)
Jesus is referred to as the "root" of David. One of the descendent kings of David's line was so evil that God said no one of his descendents would ever reign as king, thus cutting off the royal line. The root of David refers to another of David's sons, Nathan by name, who was in Mary's lineage. God kept His word to David about his greater Son reigning while cutting off the royal line. Fr. Chuch has already explained the difference about Joseph's lineage.
2 kings
2:23 And he(Elisha) went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head.
2:24 And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.
I have often wondered what this story is supposed to mean. Every time I have almost thought of a great meaning for this story I just couldn't help but think about those poor parents who lost their kids. Of course we know this story isn't true. No loving, caring God would ever do something like that. Which means there probably isn't much of a chance he had anything to do with the writing of this story either.
THE MEANING OF 2 KINGS 2:23 -
Elisha was the successor of Elijah the prophet, and when he was walking past these boys, they mocked and ridiculed him, not because he was bald but because they knew he was a representative of God as he was wearing Elijah's recognisable garment, and they didn't want a successor of Elijah around, so they were basically telling him in a smart-alec way to go up to heaven the same way Elijah did. This was a test of Elisha's prophetship not to mention the great disrespect shown to him as a representative of God, so in showing his approval of Elisha, when called upon, he answered by way of the two bears. This was a lesson for parents to teach their children proper respect.
Of course we would naturally feel sorry for anyone who loses their child but the same happened to the Egyptians when the 10th plague hit - another lesson for the unrighteous. All lessons. Something we can look back to and learn that by our actions we will be judged accordingly, not with bears popping out of nowhere or by us turning to a pillar of salt, but when armageddon finally arrives. God does not perform miracles now because we now have the complete bible which contains all miracles, signs, examples etc that pertain to any questions or thoughts we have about life, spirituality, death etc.
This has nothing to do with the original question, but - - -
Rev 5:5
5 And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.
(KJV)
Jesus is referred to as the "root" of David. One of the descendent kings of David's line was so evil that God said no one of his descendents would ever reign as king, thus cutting off the royal line. The root of David refers to another of David's sons, Nathan by name, who was in Mary's lineage. God kept His word to David about his greater Son reigning while cutting off the royal line. Fr. Chuch has already explained the difference about Joseph's lineage.
Yes I understand what you guys are saying, and I would love to continue because I have a lot to say on this subject, but I would rather wait until a question came up that was more suitable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moparbyfar
This was a test of Elisha's prophetship not to mention the great disrespect shown to him as a representative of God, so in showing his approval of Elisha, when called upon, he answered by way of the two bears. This was a lesson for parents to teach their children proper respect.
I understand what the lesson is. I don't understand the murder. To me the mass murder overshadows anything the writer was trying to teach. The Bible is filled with these kinds of stories of mass murder and I find it hard to believe that an all knowing God didn't have a better way of teaching people. I don't mean to keep repeating myself but this is a story that wasn't even good for people back then let alone for us today. It's just a flat out horrible story. I know it didn't really happen but that makes no difference to me. It's not a nice story and one I wouldn't even let my kids read. Hell I won't even let my kids pick up a Bible because of it's content. Yet we have people like falwell(sp) complain about the Harry Potter books. You can't help but laugh sometimes.
I understand what the lesson is. I don't understand the murder. To me the mass murder overshadows anything the writer was trying to teach. The Bible is filled with these kinds of stories of mass murder and I find it hard to believe that an all knowing God didn't have a better way of teaching people.
Lack of 'accurate knowledge' will always confuse people, because they don't have a full understanding of God and who he really is. It's nothing to simply read something and use our own understanding in the place of Gods but it takes a lot of deep deep studying and comparing and genuine prayer - something maybe you see as a timewaster since God could not have possibly used the writers of the bible to pen his own thoughts - to get the full meaning of what God is really trying to get across.
Lack of 'accurate knowledge' will always confuse people, because they don't have a full understanding of God and who he really is. It's nothing to simply read something and use our own understanding in the place of Gods but it takes a lot of deep deep studying and comparing and genuine prayer - something maybe you see as a timewaster since God could not have possibly used the writers of the bible to pen his own thoughts - to get the full meaning of what God is really trying to get across.
Peace out.
Murder is murder, and it doesn't take a rocket scientist or 'accurate knowledge' to understand that. I don't care if it's God doing it or not. Murder is wrong according to God(even though he had a hard time throughout the Bible keeping his own commandment) and humans. If prayer makes me see that any differently then I would commit myself because murder is murder. I would not follow a man who thinks murder is OK, so why should I follow a God who does?? I find it hard to believe anyone would condone or make excuses for this kind of behavior. It kind of contradicts that God is loving and caring, don't you think??
Murder is murder, and it doesn't take a rocket scientist or 'accurate knowledge' to understand that. I don't care if it's God doing it or not. Murder is wrong according to God(even though he had a hard time throughout the Bible keeping his own commandment) and humans. If prayer makes me see that any differently then I would commit myself because murder is murder. I would not follow a man who thinks murder is OK, so why should I follow a God who does?? I find it hard to believe anyone would condone or make excuses for this kind of behavior. It kind of contradicts that God is loving and caring, don't you think??
For a GOD who is eternal, this life on earth is nothing but a vapour. From an eternity perspective, the 70-95 years we have on this earth is nothing, zip, zero, nada, zilch!
Even though the body dies, the spirit is eternal. God gave everyone life on earth and He has the Power to take it away. So what?
For a GOD who is eternal, this life on earth is nothing but a vapour. From an eternity perspective, the 70-95 years we have on this earth is nothing, zip, zero, nada, zilch!
Actually that view makes a lot of sense, even though it is based on belief!
.
But what happened to the topic "Will a gay person go to heaven?" ....
.
Linear Mode
