Bible Questions?

Practically the first thing he says is that John the first chapter says Jesus was born in Nazareth which not true, although John chapter one says Jesus was from Nazareth, it does not say he was born there. Both Matthew and Luke point out that Jesus was born in Bethlehem and later, while still very young, moved to Nazareth where he grew up.

 

And that discredits the rest of what he said?

 

Nope. That question has been looked over multiple times already. We've already established that a day is not literal because of what a day is described as throughout the rest of the Bible.

It was describing stages of development rather than literal days. That's what makes most sense to me at this time.

 

I don't know, but I'll ask you this:

Was Jesus opposed to tradition if it got in the way of doing what he considered to be right?

Was that story trying to convey a message that worshiping tradition can bring about something that goes against the law of the prophets?

What did Jesus/Immanuel (Meaning: God with us) say about tradition and laws? Are laws made for our benefit, or are we made for the benefit of the laws? If a law is no longer providing for us, do we dump the law and replace it with something more beneficial or do we keep it anyway?

 

No but it seemed a bad way to start.

I was also some what disappointed with him, because he kept going on like he was discrediting Christianity because some idiots were trying to turn Nazareth into a religious Disneyland. To me it only again proved that, not everybody who calls themselves "Christian" are actually Christian.

As for the actual Nazareth, the Bible only said Jesus lived there, and seems to indicate that it was a minor city and does not say where it was exactly or how long it was in existence.

Whereas the places mentioned in the Bible may be interesting to Christians, such places are not to be venerated and are not used in true worship.

As for there being no brow of a hill, last time I heard there were two Nazareths, a new and an old one and the old one has a hill with a brow. So one may wonder which Nazareth he's talking about. Also it may be that neither one is the actual Nazareth that Jesus grew up in, that Nazareth may not even exist any more.

 

Who's "we"?

 

My pal Buddha and I. J/king.

Well, I should have said that this was discussed before and when it was discussed the consensus was that the Biblical days are not the same as what we now consider to be a day due to the context given by rest of the Bible and given the context of Genesis itself.

 

So the definition of day is what according to the bible?

 

Here, I borrowed this from the evolution thread where I answered it for you.

 

If it's not referring to a fixed amount of time why does it split it into 7 supposed days or yowm's?

If the word "yowm" was meant figuratively why would the writers of the bible stress that the evening and the morning after each consecutive day?

1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

1:8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
1:13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.


1:18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.
1:19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.


1:22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.
1:23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.

1:31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

 

Please look up what Paul says at Hebrews 4:1-10, all I'm doing is agreeing with what the Bible says about it.

 

And you consider this rambling mess an explanation?

4:1 Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it.

4:2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.

4:3 For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.

4:4 For he spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, And God did rest the seventh day from all his works.

4:5 And in this place again, If they shall enter into my rest.

4:6 Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief:

4:7 Again, he limiteth a certain day, saying in David, To day, after so long a time; as it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts.

4:8 For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.

4:9 There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God.

4:10 For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his.

 

Here try a modern English translation:
4:1 Therefore, since a promise is left of entering into his rest, let us fear that sometime someone of YOU may seem to have fallen short of it.
2 For we have had the good news declared to us also, even as they also had; but the word which was heard did not benefit them, because they were not united by faith with those who did hear.
3 For we who have exercised faith do enter into the rest, just as he has said: “So I swore in my anger, ‘They shall not enter into my rest,’” although his works were finished from the founding of the world.
4 For in one place he has said of the seventh day as follows: “And God rested on the seventh day from all his works,”
5 and again in this place: “They shall not enter into my rest.”

6 Since, therefore, it remains for some to enter into it, and those to whom the good news was first declared did not enter in because of disobedience,
7 he again marks off a certain day by saying after so long a time in David’s [psalm] “Today”; just as it has been said above: “Today if YOU people listen to his own voice, do not harden YOUR hearts.”
8 For if Joshua had led them into a place of rest, [God] would not afterward have spoken of another day.
9 So there remains a sabbath resting for the people of God.
10 For the man that has entered into [God’s] rest has also himself rested from his own works, just as God did from his own.

If you’ll notice this is talking about God’s seventh day of rest and having the chance to enter into that rest day, this shows that the seventh day of rest is still going in Paul’s day some 4000 years after it started and that rest day has still not ended, thus that seventh day is at least 6000 years long and there is no reason to believe the other days were any shorter.

 

Why did they not choose a more suitable translation for the term "yowm"?

Isn't the word "day" a bit misleading, why not era or better yet the actual amount of time that had supposedly passed?

 

Good question but I haven't a clue what the answer is.

 

Would you say that is a substantial flaw in the text?

 

I wouldn't say so but you know me I'd fall for anything if God says so.

 

Obviously!

 

his going to....its in Revelations and daniel.