texts: What is the basis for saying rock music is sinful?

texts:
It has been suggested to me that some Christians believe that rock music is inherently immoral, and as a result they believe that Christians would do well to avoid the entire genre.

For example, several older Christians have told me that statements about the immorality of rock were more common back in the 60s and 70s. Apparently, American evangelist Bob Larson was against rock music, and that he was lampooned for these view by Larry Norman, a musician who wrote rock music with a gospel theme. If this perspective is widespread, are there denominations that are opposed to rock music? Is there a cross-denominational movement that objects to rock music on the grounds that the genre is in some way unholy?

I met someone in my previous church who held this view, but I was never able to get a straight answer from her as to why. Was this just a personal perspective, or is this a widespread perspective amongst Christians?

If there is an anti-rock music movement amongst Christians, where did it originate? What is the basis for the belief? Are there particular Bible verses or doctrinal stances that underpin the anti-rock stance?

In answering the question, note that I'm not interested in debating whether or not rock music is actually immoral. I just want to know if / why groups of Christians believe it to be so.


texts: Does any Church currently incorporate exorcism, three dunkings, and anointing in their baptism rite?

texts:
Hippolytus of Rome, in relating the rites and liturgies in use in Rome in the 3rd Century AD in his work called Apostolic Tradition, describes a process of exorcism first to expel evil spirits whereby the baptismal candidate verbally renounces Satan and service to him, is anointed by Oil of Exorcism, and then passed on to another Elder for a 3 time baptism; once each for confession of each Trinity member.

  At the time determined for baptism, the bishop shall give thanks over
  some oil, which he puts in a vessel. It is called the Oil of
  Thanksgiving. He shall take some more oil and exorcise it. It is
  called the Oil of Exorcism. A deacon shall hold the Oil of Exorcism
  and stand on the left. Another deacon shall hold the Oil of
  Thanksgiving and stand on the right. When the elder takes hold of each
  of them who are to receive baptism, he shall tell each of them to
  renounce, saying, "I renounce you Satan, all your service, and all
  your works." After he has said this, he shall anoint each with the Oil
  of Exorcism, saying, "Let every evil spirit depart from you." Then,
  after these things, the bishop passes each of them on nude to the
  elder who stands at the water. They shall stand in the water naked. A
  deacon,likewise, will go down with them into the water. When each of
  them to be baptized has gone down into the water, the one baptizing
  shall lay hands on each of them, asking, "Do you believe in God the
  Father Almighty?" And the one being baptized shall answer, "I
  believe." He shall then baptize each of them once, laying his hand
  upon each of their heads. Then he shall ask, "Do you believe in Jesus
  Christ, the Son of God, who was born of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin
  Mary, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and died, and rose on
  the third day living from the dead, and ascended into heaven, and sat
  down at the right hand of the Father, the one coming to judge the
  living and the dead?"When each has answered, "I believe," he shall
  baptize a second time. Then he shall ask, "Do you believe in the Holy
  Spirit and the Holy Church and the resurrection of the flesh?" Then
  each being baptized shall answer, "I believe." And thus let him
  baptize the third time. Afterward, when they have come up out of the
  water, they shall be anointed by the elder with the Oil of
  Thanksgiving, saying, "I anoint you with holy oil in the name of Jesus
  Christ." Then, drying themselves, they shall dress and afterwards
  gather in the church.

After this they would anoint the newly baptized with the Oil of Thanksgiving.

Are there any traditions who currently baptize in this way (with or without the nudity)?  If not, when and why was this ritual changed?


texts: Who was the Christian missionary who helped reform English Missions?

texts:
I recall reading a biography of a Christian missionary who(after some difficulty, to be sure) arrived in the country he was preparing to serve. Upon arrival, however, he was appalled by the missionaries already there. they lived in a fenced and gated community and basically played the days away, remaining quite English and even owning slaves, I think I recall. The missionary in question rebuked them and left their gated community. He was one of the first missionaries to dress like the people and preach in their language. He lived like them and was a good missionary.

Who was this reforming missionary?
I do not know the exact country, but I'm fairly sure a sea-bordering country in Asia, such as Burma, or Thailand, etc.


texts:
From Luke 17:1-3, NIV:

  Jesus said to his disciples: "Things that cause people to stumble are bound to come, but woe to anyone through whom they come. It would be better for them to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around their neck than to cause one of these little ones to stumble. So watch yourselves."

One common interpretation of this passage is that the "little ones" refers to children. However, that is not obvious in the context, and there are many other possibilities, including sinners, doubters, everyone, and so on. Indeed, its meaning may also hinge on what "to stumble" means here: whether it is to doubt their faith, to tempt to sin, or something else.

Is there a common agreement on who the "little ones" are in Luke 17:2?


texts: Carrying the cross: a profane act or religious act?

texts:
Recently, in Brazil, a transsexual performed the crucifixion of Jesus. As one would guess, this event had a very strong response from Christians around the country.

I wonder, however, if the feelings of outrage are just feelings, or if the claim of disrespect of the religion(s) is well supported? After all, the controversy seems much more related to the context— the fact that it was performed during the gay parade by a transsexual— than to the act itself. It's not clear to me in which sense a performance (religious in intention, rather than mockery) is considered profane according to Christianity.

I understand the attitude towards religious symbols (and specifically of the crucifixion) and performing the passion might differ across many Christian groups. In that case, I'd be more interested in the Catholic view and an overview of the Baptist (and perhaps Presbyterian) positions on this matter.


texts: What is the biblical meaning of "believe"?

texts: I know that the bible say that we should believe in the lord Jesus but I need someone to help me understand more about the original meaning of the word believe so I can fully believe in a proper way.


texts: Is one who is "least in the kingdom of heaven" still in heaven?

texts:
Recently I read something that quoted this verse from the bible:

  Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches
  others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven,
  but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great
  in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5:19, NIV)

It got me wondering, when Jesus says things like "will be called least in the kingdom of heaven", does this give evidence that there are different positions in heaven, or was Jesus implying the least position in heaven is not going to heaven at all?


texts: Why do literalist Protestants reject transubstantiation?

texts:
In both Orthodox Christianity and Catholicism, the words of Jesus, "This is My body" and "This is My blood" referring to communion bread and wine, respectively, are taken literally, and transubstantiation is believed to occur.  I know that many Protestants do not believe this.  For non-literalist Protestants, this is not surprising.  However, there are many Protestants, of course, who regard the Bible as the literal word of God.  One might think that all of the literalist Protestants accept transubstantiation.  But I think that is not true.

So my questions are:

Do all literalist Protestants accept transubstantiation?  Do most of them?  Do any of them?
For the ones who don't, how do they explain what appears to be the plain words of Jesus on this?


texts:
As part of a theology course I've been asked to look at covenants, so I looked on Amazon for a book or two and was surprised to see many book titles including "reformed" or books written by reformed theologians, like for example, J I Packer.

I have more of an Arminian outlook as does the church I attend and have never heard teaching there related to the covenants.

The covenants are part of the history of God and His people – aren't they, therefore, important to all Christian outlooks?

What is it about the covenants that are appealing to Calvinists and maybe less appealing to Arminians?


texts:
Genesis 6

  14 So make yourself an ark of cypress[c] wood; make rooms in it and coat it with pitch inside and out. 15 This is how you are to build it: The ark is to be three hundred cubits long, fifty cubits wide and thirty cubits high.[d] 16 Make a roof for it, leaving below the roof an opening one cubit[e] high all around.[f] Put a door in the side of the ark and make lower, middle and upper decks.

Based on the specs, Noah's ark is around 2/3 of the size of  Titanic.

How can he possibly fit all the animals (assuming land and air) including all their sub species in that ark? Assuming around 2 Million different species exist (This is supposedly the lowest estimate). Considering also their food supply and water supply for almost a month. How is this possible? Is there any divine intervention(God's magic) on how all of these become plausible? And if there is, then why bother making a boat with a specification and go all the trouble doing all of the gathering and food allocation if God could had simply snap his fingers and all is in order again, is it because of God's limited powers that he needs Noah's help? But hes was able to build everything in the universe from scratch in 7 days.

Is there any references that explains if he did intervene or like shrink the animals inside the ark? Or was the ark like a trick boat which has almost unlimited space inside? Please provide biblical reference to this.

Thanks!


texts: Jehovah's Witnesses Memorial of Christ's Death

texts: Why did Jehovah's Witnesses not use the Passover this year to celebrate the memorial, as has been their tradition since Jesus instituted this to celebrate his death ?


texts: Whose is the 'grace of God that bringeth salvation' ? (Titus 2:11)

texts:
This question is in the context of Protestant Trinitarianism.
There are two schools of thought within Protestant Trinitarianism : one, founded mainly in the Westminster Confession (or Savoy Declaration) which accepts that 'the Law is a rule of life for the Christian' and looks to the commandments (whether an expansion of ten, or whether two or whether one) as the 'Law' by which the Christian is to live.
This school of thought can be seen set forth in the Westminster Confession
The other school of thought accepts that salvation is by grace and that the Christian is 'freed from law' (that is to say, not just 'ceremonial law' but all law). The 'rule of the Spirit' is just that, they say - a governance of the Holy Spirit who brings the things of Christ and ministers them to the soul, whereby the believer receives the 'shedding abroad of the love of God' and is kept, in Spirit, walking in holiness by means of faith in Christ.
This school of thought can be seen set forth in the pages of The Gospel Standard.
I am interested in what the former school of thought teach, regarding Titus 2: 11-14 :

For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, (12) Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world; (13) Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; (14) Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.

There is no mention in these few verses of the Law being administered in order to achieve either holiness or preparation for the last day. The latter school of thought hold that the 'grace of God' refers to the Holy Spirit and that his ministrations result in sanctification.
What, I would like to know, is the teaching of those who suggest that Christians are 'under the Law' (and the Westminster Confession states that this is as 'advice') in regard to these verses. Whose, exactly, is the 'grace' referred to ? And why, would they say, is Law completely missing from these exhortatory verses ?


texts: Is there no salvation among any Christ-professing faiths, apart from the restored gospel of the Latter Day Saints? (LDS perspective)

texts:
In the words of 13th LDS President Ezra Taft Benson,

  “This is not just another Church. This is not just one of a family of Christian churches. This is the Church and kingdom of God, the only true Church upon the face of the earth…” (Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, pp. 164-165).

I will not beleaguer the question. I want it to be as simple, and direct as possible. I would also like to receive answers and comments in the same manner.
No requirement of sources, other than LDS canon, or sentiments of LDS prophets, presidents or original founders, if there is a difference.

Edit:

  Dan 12:1-3  And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

  (2)  And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

  (3)  And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.

There is a great divide between those who have everlasting life, and those who receive everlasting shame and contempt; damnation.

  Joh 5:24  Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

Or whatever you interpret these words to mean.

  "Believers in the doctrines of modern Christendom will reap damnation to their souls."

Apostle Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, see pp. 45-46

If there is a way to make it clearer, it eludes me.

  "Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the Church of the Lamb of God and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore whoso belongeth not to the church of the lamb of God belongeth to that great church; which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth." (The Book of Mormon, 1 Nephi 14:10)

Ok now, if there is a way to make it clearer, it eludes me.


texts:
On one occasion, I heard someone prayer, "To God, our Father and Mother." In The Shack, the Trinity is represented as three persons, where God the Father is a woman.

Is there any biblical justification for referring to God as Mother?

Are there any denominations or movements which do call the first person of the trinity 'Mother'?


texts: Are there Christians that try to change the date of Second Coming through their actions?

texts:
I have always assumed that the date of Parousia (the Second Coming of Jesus) is fixed and that humans cannot change it. The wish that it would be soon is one of longing and fulfilment, not one of trying to influence God. Recently I heard the president of a country asking Christian leaders to ask Jesus to change his mind and come soon to remove the sinners as the police are having problems coping. (Who this is, is irrelevant to the question - he plans to rule till the Second Coming in any case so he might have ulterior motives for asking.) I then wondered if he belonged to a grouping or church (he has many wives so I am not sure about this) that believes that Christians can influence the date as some of Judaism does.

In another question on this site, the question was more about what God was waiting for before the Second Coming took place. Another question asked about the affect of prayer on God's plan. To these there are a couple of answers but this is not relevant to my question either as I want to know if there are religious groups that actively strive to bring the date forward and who they might be. Which Christian leaders feel that they can heed his call in a meaningful way and what would they do?

An example would be groups that concentrate intensely on missionary work to speed up the coming of Jesus through the promise that if the whole world have heard the message, 'then the end will come'. (Matthew 24: 14). Or a group that pray for an earlier date. Or do good works. Etc etc.


texts: To the Lutherans ELCA, how is the Bible the word of God?

texts:
A. The Bible is the Word of God.
(means, all the words we read are the Words of God)

B. The Bible contains the Word of God.
(means, not all the words we read are the Words of God)

C. other than A and B.

Example :

  I decided that while I was with you I would forget everything except
  Jesus Christ, the one who was crucified

The speaker is human, the Apostle.
The question is : are those words above the words of God ?

To me, the answer is no. Those words are the words of human not the words of God.

If I say that those words are the words of God, --->

then (X) the "I" in those words means God himself ---->

Then (Y) it become : through the mouth of the Apostle, God tell the hearers/readers that He (capital H) decided while He was with them, He would forget everything except His Second Person of His Trinity, the one who was crucified.

Because X and Y to me feel awkward, I conclude [not all the words we read in the Bible are the Words of God]. Then it's B. But this is only my own logic.

That's why I would like to know :
according to the ELCA is it A ? B ? or C?
If C, what is it ?

Thank you.


texts:
I am not Hebrew expert, but I have been interested in the Hebrew meaning of my name, Caleb. There are many places that say that Caleb translates as dog, but has the meaning of the loyalty of a dog.

From a tiny bit of Hebrew knowledge I have from a YouTube channel The Bible Project, they explain the Hebrew word 'lev' (לֵב) meaning heart (video). Some websites will say Caleb as more to the Hebrew pronunciation: Kalev.

I was curious if there was any connection between 'Kalev' and 'lev' within the Hebrew language or in the Bible. I don't know much about Hebrew as a language, but would definitely like to learn!


texts: At the greater emergence of democracy in Europe during the 'Enlightenment' did the papacy support democracy?

texts:
I was just wondering how did the papacy respond to democracy when it first arose in Europe?  On one hand, in a country that was, according to its sovereign, a Catholic country, democracy would be very dangerous as it might replace the sovereign due to the popular religion recently affected by the reformation. However, another country that had a populace largely Catholic  but it's sovereign recently aligned  as Protestant, democracy would be a great way to maintain papal control. Then again democracy was related to real separation of church and state, at least as established in the American Constitution, so this makes a papal response to democracy even more unpredictable.

So how did the papacy respond to the emergence of democracy? Was it in favor, opposition or some mixture of both? Did a succession of popes have the same response or was their a lot of flip-flops among succeeding popes over the subject of democracy?


texts: Are Catholic Bishops the successors of the Apostles alone or the Elders too?

texts: In researching my answer for this question I started to think about the doctrine that the Bishops are the successors of the Apostles as being a bit unfair to the other folks. For instance, if St. James who wrote the epistle wasn't the brother of John or Jude, but actually a third James or a fourth James who was the Bishop of Jerusalem, would his Episcopacy necessarily have been conferred on him by the Apostles or just by virtue of who he was. Or were the elders the first successors of the 12 apostles regardless of their functions as presbyters?


texts: Why didn't the KJV translators transliterate יהוה?

texts: Did the translators of the KJV make any comments or notes that explained the basis for their decision not to transliterate each occurrence of the Tetragrammaton into English, rather than translating it as all-caps "LORD"?


texts:
In the book of Acts, chapter 16, verse 31, reads as follows:

  They replied, "Believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved, you and your household." (NET)
  They replied, "Believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved, along with everyone in your household." (NLT)

Some say that this verse is a promise. If a relative is saved, the whole family will also be in some future. How true is this?


texts: Who believe that innocent children will also go to Hell?

texts:
But Jesus called the children to him and said, "Let the little
  children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God
  belongs to such as these. (Luke 18:16, NIV)

To those Christians who believe in Original Sin, what did Jesus mean by saying that the kingdom of God belongs to children?

Do they believe that innocent* children will also go to Hell?

(* Innocent in the sense that they have not started the first act of sin.)


texts: If I steal money, what does the forgiveness of Jesus cover?

texts:
I steal money from someone. I ask for Jesus for forgiveness. I receive forgiveness (yet keep the money).

What happens to the person I took the money from?

Do I make out with forgiveness from God, and money from the other person? Are they just out some money?


texts: How is the amazement of the Jews explained by those who believe that "Render Unto Caesar" affirmed the paying of taxes?

texts:
In Matthew 22:15–22, Luke 20:20–26, and Mark 12:13–17, the question "is it right to pay taxes to Caesar?" is perceived as a "trap" by both Jesus and the Pharisees who are putting the question forth.
Jesus answers this trap question with the reply: "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's".
All three Gospels then record the Jews as being "amazed" at this answer.

If "Render Unto Caesar" is the equivalent of "yes, it is right to pay taxes to Caesar", I fail to see how this answer would be "amazing" to the Jews at all (i.e. there's nothing "amazing" about saying you should pay your taxes).

So my question is: what arguments are used to explain the amazement of the Jews in this passage, by those denominations of Christians who interpret the words "Render Undo Caesar" as Jesus answering in the affirmative to the question of whether it is right to pay taxes?


texts: Why, according to the Catholic Church, did the Reformation happen?

texts:
Has the Catholic church ever put forth a theological theory or statement as to why the Reformation happened?

Please note....

I'm not asking about how the Reformation happened.

History is what it is.

I want to know whether or not the Roman Catholic Church teaches that the Reformation has any theological significance (i.e. some kind of "Great Apostasy" or prophetic fulfillment) in the grand scheme of salvation history.

Surely the doctrine of Divine Providence can nail down some sort of idea as to why this gigantic occurrence has happened.


texts: Do cases of scientific foreknowledge in the Bible come from Exegesis or Eisegesis?

texts:
There are many apologists who say that scientific knowledge can be found in the Scriptures, although they are not really explicit. [The only fact I can see clearly stated is that the Universe had a beginning (Genesis 1:1; John 1:3, 17:24; Romans 1:20).] Here are a few examples of scientific foreknowledge in the Bible:

The universe is expanding (Isaiah 45:12, 40:22, 42:5; Job 9:8; Psalms 104:2)
The correct description of the stars (Job 38:31-32)
The water cycle (Genesis 8:22; Job 36:27-28; Psalms 135:7; Ecclesiastes 1:7; Amos 9:6)
The Earth is round (Job 26:7; Isaiah 40:22)
Ocean currents (Psalms 8:8)
First law of thermodynamics (Genesis 2:1)
Second law of thermodynamics (Psalms 102:25-26)
And many more

Are theses intances of a later development to accommodate Scripture to modern science or were they understood like that by Christians in different eras?


texts: Is confessing to a priest the only way to be forgiven?

texts:
We first confess in our first communion and the priests say that we should always confess our sins, but is it the only way to be forgiven by God ?

Can't we pray and ask for forgiveness? I've heard of people confessing to a priest before dying.

Since the teaching on this may vary depending on the perspective of the answerer, please limit answers to those that specify the denominational view of the answerer, and make them good, supported answers.  A survey of the answer from various perspectives would be even better, as it will give information from the perspectives of a wider audience.


texts: Why is baptism by the Holy Spirit called a "baptism"?

texts:
Somewhat relating to this question.

Many times I have been asked by members of some protestant denominations (especially by Baptists and Pentecostals) whether I've been baptized, followed by the question of whether I've been baptized by the Holy Spirit? After they ask me or others this question, they stress the utter neccessity of this kind of baptism.

This question is very confusing for many christians, leading them to doubts about their baptism.

Upon asking the enquirer about what they mean by "baptism by the Holy Spirit" they describe experiences of being filled with the Holy Spirit (yes, I've had such experiences). Some say that baptism by the Holy Spirit may happen before being formally baptized, some say it may happen after, but all stress the importance of it, as if without such an experience one had no hope of salvation. When I ask them whether each such experience constitutes a baptism, they usually get confused and answer that only the first of such experiences constitutes a baptism.

Why do they make such confusing distinctions and call these experiences baptism? Do they consider the traditional baptisms administered by priests (in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit; with water and together with the laying on of hands and prayers for the Holy Spirit, etc) invalid or incomplete? Do they consider the traditional forms of christian baptism to be baptism by water only? What are the roots of this semantical error or false teaching? Where does it come from?


texts:
“And on the morrow, when they had come out of Bethany, he [Jesus]
  hungered. And seeing a fig tree afar off having leaves, he came, if
  perhaps he might find anything thereon: and when he came to it, he
  found nothing but leaves; for it was not the season of figs. And he
  answered and said unto it, ‘No man [will] eat fruit from you from now
  on — for ever.’ And his disciples heard it. Mark 11:12-14

Several pastors interpret this event mentioned in Mark 11:12-14, as God will abolish those who do not yield like this fig tree. However, on the way back when the disciples saw the fig tree   withered away from the roots, Jesus uses this incident to explain faith.

Why did Jesus cursed the tree, when it was not the time or season to bear fruits?

  22 “Have faith in God,” Jesus answered. 23 “Truly[f] I tell you, if
  anyone says to this mountain, ‘Go, throw yourself into the sea,’ and
  does not doubt in their heart but believes that what they say will
  happen, it will be done for them. 24 Therefore I tell you, whatever
  you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will
  be yours.

If Jesus used this incident to explain faith why do preachers use this incident to explain it as a warning to the sinners who didn't turn back to our Lord like this unyielding fig tree?


texts: What is a Scapular, and what theology is tied to it?

texts: I ran across this question, and I'm wondering if someone can give me more information on what a Scapular is, and what, exactly, the significance and/or theology goes along with it?


texts:
Every Christian knows the saying that "With God all things are possible." But is this actually a fact?

I listened recently to a speaker, who said, that God cannot come in contact with anything unclean, or commit any sin.

Also, everyone knows the question asked by Believers and non-believers alike, "Since God can do everything, can he make a rock that he can't lift?" Obviously, this is a little bit hard to answer, for Yes or No, will both conclude that God cannot do everything.

So my question is, are all things possible with God, and what reasons do you have if they are/are not? As a little supplement, maybe you could tell me how we are supposed to answer that one question?


texts: Does being a "state church" give the Church of Scotland any doctrinal distinctive?

texts: Does it's status as a "state church" have any affect the beliefs or practices of the Church of Scotland? Are there any doctrinal distinctives that make it unique (particularly among Presbyterian churches) that can be traced to it's unique relationship with the state?


texts: Bland white rice and tea in Chinese-American Christian Churches

texts:
I am not a Christian, and have never been one. But there were times in my childhood when my family and I visited a Chinese-American Christian Church upon the request of a friend (usually my mother's). I was so young that I couldn't remember the denomination, and if it were printed out, I probably couldn't read it. But basically, the first thing was a liturgical service, but I almost never attended that and instead went to the basement, where the children's classroom was. After the liturgy, an evening meal was served. It was always a bowl of bland white rice and hot tea. No meat, no vegetables. This is not your typical Chinese dinner, which always serves meat and vegetables. There was one time in my memory when they served juice (that ran out when I thought I could go up for seconds), but most of the time, it was only bland and soft white rice and hot tea.

Is serving white rice and hot tea after a liturgical service common practice in Chinese-American Christianity? If so, what is the justification? If not, then it may indicate that it's a practice within that church.


texts: In Oriental Orthodox sacramental theology can a mixed marriage be valid?

texts: The Armenians and Syriac allow mixed marriages with trinitarian christians. But generally only the orthodox can take sacraments . How is such a mixed marriage valid then?


texts: What belief system would combine both elements from Calvinism and Arminianism?

texts:
I've often heard some people describe themselves as a "Calminianist" in an attempt to say through a portmanteau that they ascribe to both Calvinism and Arminianism.

Is/Are there some universally acknowledged belief system(s) that combines the overlapping elements in Calvinism and Arminianism? Perhaps some system(s) that accept all points of both or 2 points of one and 2 points of the other, for example?


texts: Many of the old churches including Anglican, Catholic and Orthodox ones face east. My question is: Was the tradition of construction of churches facing east, a product of certain beliefs, or was it based on scriptures? Are there any references in scriptures that one would like to quote in support of the tradition? Inputs from any denomination are welcome.


texts: How do theistic evolutionists explain moral reasoning?

texts:
If you are a theistic evolutionist, then I see two possible explanations for the existence of human moral reasoning.

1) That at some point in the evolution of primates (or even a more distant common ancestor), God bestowed the capability for moral reasoning.

2) That moral reasoning evolved in a sociobiological way just like every other cognitive faculty.

(There may be other explanations, but I suspect they would generally fall under these two broad possibilities).

If 1) is true, then this seems inconsistent with the general view that God used evolutionary processes to produce life, in the way that secular science would suggest. This would place it in contrast to the majority of scientific consensus (which seems to be the primary motivation for theistic evolution)

If 2) then this would seem to undermine the special place that moral reasoning has in relation to humans being made in the image of God.

How have published theistic evolutionists addressed this issue before?


texts: What is the significance of changing the names of Abram to Abraham and Sarai to Sarah?

texts:
I would briefly reconstruct from Genesis, the circumstances leading to this change in names.

In the very beginning of His conversation with Abram, God says to Abram:

Gen: 12:2  (NET)

  Then I will make you into a great nation, and I will bless you, and I will make your name great, so that you will exemplify divine blessing.

At this time he was 75 years old and God tells him that his descendent would be numerous (Gen.13:16).  But because of his advancing age, Abram asks God that how this can be, when he continues to be childless and whether He means that Eliezer of Damascus would the heir for this to come true. (Gen.15:2-3).  In verse Gen. 15:4 God tells Abram that a son born from his own body would be the heir.

But then possibly due to lack of faith in God’s promise, Sarai did not have patience to remain trusted in God and gave their salve girl Hagar to Abram(Gen. 16:2). We can figure out that Ishmael was born because Abraham and Sarah did not trust God to fulfil his promise that their descendants would be from both of them.

Abram was 86 years of old when Hagar gave birth to Ishmael. (Gen.16.16). Thereafter there  is no record in the Bible concerning the 13 years of Abram’s life following the birth of Ishmael. After 13 years, when Abraham reaches 99 years of age God instructs Abraham to walk blameless before Him:

Gen. 17:1-2  (NET)

  When Abram was 99 years old, the Lord appeared to him and said, “I am the sovereign God. Walk before me and be blameless.Then I will confirm my covenant between me and you, and I will give you a multitude of descendants.”

Here God’s rebuke appears to indicate that during these 13 years, Abram did not walk before God, and as a result, his life was full of blame. Also notice that God re-introduces himself as “God almighty.” God puts a condition to Abram, saying walk before me blameless and only then He will “confirm” His covenant between Him and Abram. Here we see that earlier covenant was not valid for those 13 years and God wants to reconfirm the same again. So God again renews His covenant with Abram:

Gen. 17:4-6  (NET)

  “As for me, this is my covenant with you: You will be the father of a multitude of nations. No longer will your name be Abram. Instead, your name will be Abraham because I will make you the father of a multitude of nations. I will make you extremely fruitful. I will make nations of you, and kings will descend from you.

Note here that in Gen. 12:2 it is only one great nation, whereas in Gen 17.4-5 God talks about multitude of nations. Here, God changes the name of Abram to Abraham and Sarai to Sarah. So Abram (Noble Father) becomes Abraham (Father of many) and Sarai, (Princess) becomes Sarah(Mother of Nations).

What is the significance of changing their names? What does it symbolize? Is there any relation of this change to the future coming of messiah and consequently to Multitude of nations (Christianity)?


texts: 3 Nep 20:24 - Why does Jesus Christ mention Samuel specifically?

texts:
In 3 Nephi 20:24 Jesus Christ teaches the inhabitants of America about the covenant that God made with their fathers which will be fulfilled. He teaches that he is the prophet of whom Moses and all the prophets since Samuel testified of.

  3 Nephi 20

  23 Behold, I am he of whom Moses spake, saying: A prophet shall the
  Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him
  shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. And it
  shall come to pass that every soul who will not hear that prophet
  shall be cut off from among the people.

  24 Verily I say unto you, yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and
  those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have testified of me.

Why does he mention Samuel specifically?


texts:
Judges 6:31 NIV

  But Joash replied to the hostile crowd around him, “Are you going to
  plead Baal’s cause? Are you trying to save him? Whoever fights for him
  shall be put to death by morning! If Baal really is a god, he can
  defend himself when someone breaks down his altar.

and

1 Kings 18:21 NIV

  Elijah went before the people and said, “How long will you waver
  between two opinions? If the LORD is God, follow him; but if Baal is
  God, follow him.” But the people said nothing.

However, found here

  The name Ba'al (), apparently as an equivalent for Yhwh, occurs as an
  element in a number of compound proper names, such as Jerubbaal,
  Ishbaal, Meribaal, etc. Some of these names, probably at a time when
  the name of Baal had fallen into disrepute (comp. Hosea ii. 16, 17),
  seem to have been changed by the substitution of El or Bosheth for
  Baal (comp. II Sam. ii. 8, iv. 4, v. 16; I Chron. viii. 33, 34; ix.
  39, 40; xiv. 7).

I've also seen "Baʿal of Tyre".  So is Ba'al a title or an entity?


texts: Was There a '7' Associated With the New Covenant?

texts: I have heard from several places that Covenant making often involves the number 7 in some way. I don't ever recall a mentioning of a 7 associated with Jesus institution of the Eucharist and his death and Resurrection. Is there a '7' to be found somewhere in Jesus sacrifice or is Jesus use of the words 'Covenant' in the institution narrative make a '7' unnecessary?


texts:
Is there any account of how Paul learnt Jesus teachings after he converted? In Galatians 1:11-12 Paul states:

  But I make known to you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ"

Was he saying that Christ revealed gospel to him directly or should we assume that he was mentored by another christian?


texts: What is the "gospel" in OT according to the Calvinist?

texts:
This question is following my question before. At my question there I have a quotation from Reformation Study Bible (2015) :

  Divine illumination and persuasion is necessary for the heart blinded
  by sin to respond to the gospel.

From my question there, the conclusion : "Lydia is not a believer in the sight of God when Paul walk to approach the women there" because Lydia has not hear the Gospel yet (as Paul hasn't even sit there let alone talk to the women).

  Genesis 6:9(NIV) This is the account of Noah and his family. Noah
  was a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he
  walked faithfully with God.

  Job 1:8 (NIV) Then the LORD said to Satan, "Have you considered my
  servant Job? There is no one on earth like him; he is blameless and
  upright, a man who fears God and shuns evil."

When God declare in the verse above, are they a non-believer in the sight of God ?
what is the Good News heard by Noah and Job when they are a non-believer in the sight of God ?

This question appear because in a Christian Forum (in our mother language) I propose that Cornelius (before he met the angel, before he met Peter let alone heard the Gospel from Peter) is a believer in the sight of God, but the Calvinist in that forum say that Cornelius is not a believer in the sight of God before those events, although he worship God. The same with Lydia. Their reason : because they (Cornelius/Lydia) haven't heard the Good News yet... so, God hasn't regenerate them. Besides there is no text read that God already opened Cornelius heart before those events.

When I ask the two questions above, I get the answer which consistent with their reason ---> Noah/Job are a non-believer in the sight of God although they worship God because they haven't heard the Good News, so God hasn't regenerate them yet.

That's why I ask here to confirm.


texts:
I was reading about the Anglican church St Martin-in-the-Fields and was curious about the  in-the-Fields part of the name. It is named after Martin of Tours who was a saint in France during the 4th century.

Saints are sometimes referred to by a significant place (Kevin of Glendalough, Alipy of the Caves) or by a title (Anthony the Great, Pope Cyril I the Pillar of Faith). But here the saint is Martin-in-the-Fields,
stylized as one word as if it is the name of the saint (think Kevin-of-Glendalough). Additionally, I've never seen an in description, going over a list of saints it's mostly ofs and thes. I would expect it to be St Martin of the Fields, if anything.

Why is Martin-in-the-Fields the chosen name what do the "Fields" refer to?

My speculation is that since he was a military saint, in-the-Fields means in the fields of battle, but I found no reference to that.


texts: Was there ever a "Martin Luther" or a reformation in the Eastern Orthodox Church?

texts: The protestant reformation had a large impact on the Catholic Church, but even know much of the reformers concerns apply to the Eastern Orthodox Church as well, it seems that there never was a reformation in this Church. How so?


texts: Why isn't the Book of 1 (Ethiopic) Enoch considered canon for the LDS Church?

texts:
Recently, I have been reading apocryphal and pseudepigraphical texts, and like many before me, I am struck by the extremely specific similarities between 1 Enoch and the LDS's Book of Moses. I flipped to the back of the LDS's Bible Dictionary, and noticed that the LDS Church also agrees that there are many truths in 1 Enoch. I also found a fascinating article by LDS scholar Hugh Nibley pertaining to 1 Enoch.
I understand from this Q&A why other Christians do not canonize 1 Enoch.
I also understand why non-LDS folk would not find the parallels and similarities (in comparison to the Book of Moses) genuine enough for the Books of Enoch to be canonized by the LDS Church, as detailed in length in this Q&A
However, I do not understand why the LDS Church does not choose to canonize this text if they consider it be an inspired work with many truths similar to their own. What are the key aspects that make LDS authorities skeptical of fully embracing 1 Enoch as part of the sacred writ? After all, they have Songs of Solomon in their canon... 1 Enoch seems a lot more relevant and aligned with their doctrine.


texts: Why Does Luther Translate "Alpha and Omega", in the Book of Revelation, as "A und O" (A and O)?

texts:
In Rev. 22:13, "I am the Alpha and the Omega", Alpha being the first Greek letter and Omega the last, thus meaning "I am the first and the last."

I don't understand Greek, but in the Greek version it says "Alpha and Omega".

Luther's Bible, however, translates this as "A und O", (A and O). This is like saying "the First and the Middle." Why doesn't he say "Alpha and Omega", or at least "A and Z"?


texts: Is it Biblical for a Christian to say that God is a tyrant?

texts:
I’m new here and I would to ask something, even though some of may not like this question, I would like to here answers from only Christians. Atheist and such might come to this post and probably start ridiculing me or something and will not understand what’s going on here.

Now, the other day on Quora, I asked about how should a Christian talks about Gods wrath and such without making people think he is a tyrant, and user yesterday(who is obviously a Christian)answered me: “God is a tyrant. Why wouldn’t you want a perfect tyrant ruling over you?

Remember that Jesus tells us the ones who are meant to get it will get it.

  John 10:27-28 King James Version (KJV)

  27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:

  28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish,
  neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand”

I replied to him:“If you are suppose to be a Christian, let Me ask you, so you believe that God is a cruel oppressive ruler? Because that is what the definition of what a tyrant is, and a Christian saying that God is a tyrant, in a “deal with it” kind of way will totally NOT get ANYONE to want to come to him!”

He than replied to me: “Then go away. We can’t change His nature. We can only seek to understand its wisdom.”

What this person has said to me has been kinda bothering me, and I don’t want to see God as a cruel master!


texts: Is there an argument that God, as a self-proving entity, is necessary for logic?

texts:
I recall hearing an argument for God (or, really, that being a non-Christian was equivalent to being a nihilist) that in order for logic to be valid, one could not have circular arguments, but since you can't prove your premises, all arguments had to be unfounded or circular unless you introduced God as some sort of self-proving entity (both premise and proof thereof).

Is anyone familiar with this argument?  I have forgotten the details (e.g. why it is okay for God to effectively be a circular argument but not for anything else to be) and have not yet been able to find it anywhere.  Does this argument have a name, and is it (or at least a summary) written somewhere?


texts: Do any conservative Baptist churches recognize infant baptisms despite not performing them?

texts:
This may seem like an odd question on its face since Baptists are defined by their insistence upon only baptizing people upon profession of faith, but there is a meaningful distinction to be made.

Baptists affirm that infants should not be baptized, but it seems theoretically possible that some Baptists might disagree on what the right course of action would be for people who become Baptists later in life after being baptized as an infant. Most commonly, Baptists will require a new baptism upon profession of faith since they do not recognize the original as a true baptism, but it seems plausible that some Baptists might still recognize the infant baptism as a valid, or true, baptism incorrectly performed.

Is there any significant Baptist body, confessional statement, polity statement, etc. that recognizes infant baptism as incorrect but still "counting" for the sake of baptism?


texts: How does Luke target gentiles in the New Testament?

texts:
It is known that the Gospel of Luke targets directly gentile Christians and Greeks.

Matthew uses references to the Old Testament, Jewish customs and ideologies to target his audience of Jews, but what does Luke do?

How does Luke target specifically gentile Christians?


texts: "How do I get more faith?" - how to understand Jesus' answer?

texts:
The question, "How do I get more faith?" has been posted here. When I read it, my mind went to the time the disciples and Jesus had a similar dialogue:

Luke 17:5-6
The apostles said to the Lord, “Increase our faith!”
He replied, “If you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mulberry tree, ‘Be uprooted and planted in the sea,’ and it will obey you.

It sounds like the disciples are asking Jesus "How do I get more faith?" (or perhaps they are demanding?) but Jesus' answer sounds to me like He is saying, "Yes, it would be great if you had more faith." But His answer doesn't help people with little faith.
So, how should I interpret His answer?


texts: Is it appropriate (as a Catholic) to make the sign of the cross when passing an Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox or Church of the East church?

texts:
It is an old tradition in Catholicism to make the sign of the cross when passing a Catholic church, as a sign of respect to the Eucharist contained in the tabernacle, located within the Church.

I am wondering:

Do Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, and Church of the East also have tabernacles in their churches?
If they do, is it appropriate for a Catholic to make the sign of the cross when passing these churches?


texts:
Question:

According to reformed theology, is there any valid reason to desire to be saved besides it glorifies God?

As a result:

According to reformed theology, is it valid to desire to be saved because Hell is rather unpleasant?
According to reformed theology, should one pray: "God, if it glorifies you to save me, save me; God, if it glorifies you to send me to hell, send me to hell."

Thanks!


texts: Have any Christian theologians discussed whether Jesus resembled Joseph?

texts:
Mainstream Christians believe that Jesus was the son of God the Father and Mary, a virgin. So my question is, have any Christian theologians discussed whether Jesus only resemble his mother Mary, or whether he also resembled his adopted father Joseph?

God could easily have arranged it so that Jesus resembled Joseph, even if Joseph played no role in the conception of Jesus.


texts: What is the relationship between the Book of Mormon and the Bible?

texts: Can someone give me the run down on how the LDS church sees the relationship of the Book of Mormon to the Bible? Does it accept it in full and just continue the story? How does it make the transition?


texts: Since St. Irenaeus was not a Trinitarian was/is he damned?

texts:
These are some of the statements made by St. Irenaeus that I believe put him at odds with the Creed of Athanasius: The Trinity Delusion (St. Irenaenus)

Here are the threats of the Creed: Athanasian Creed

If he was not damned, or even excommunicated for his failure to adhere to the Catholic God/Gospel, why not?


texts: Conscience: Christ's sacrifice vs the blood of bulls and goats?

texts:
While reading through Hebrews I came upon the following Scripture:

  For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. (Heb 10:4 ESV)

However, in my recent studies, I came across the following,

  Thus shall he do with the bull. As he did with the bull of the sin offering, so shall he do with this. And the priest shall make atonement for them, and they shall be forgiven . (Lev 4:20 ESV)

Taken out of context or being unaware of the existence Lev 4:20, it would seem that we as Christians have a better forgiveness than the Jewish OT believer.

“Well, their sins were just covered over but ours are completely removed” I have heard it said more times than I can remember.

But this is quite simply not true as it is abundantly clear that the Jew under the old system of Law and animal sacrifice WAS FORGIVEN according to Lev 4:20.
As a matter of fact there are quite a number of Scriptures in Leviticus that use the words “and they shall be forgiven” in relation to sin and animal or other sacrifice and offering.

I am well aware of the difference between atonement and propitiation so that is not the issue here.
Taken in context I’m sure that this must refer to conscience, so my question is this, in which way does the blood of bulls and goats NOT take away sin from the conscience ?


texts: What is the significance of Noah, after the flood, getting drunk and cursing his son who saw him Naked?

texts:
A strange passage in the beginning of Genesis contains the account of Noah who, after surviving the flood, planted a vineyard and made wine. After he drank the wine and became drunk one of his sons (Ham) sees him naked, tells his two brothers about it and they cover Noah up. After Noah wakes up he figures out what has gone on while he is asleep and curses Ham and his descendants.

Here is the passage: Genesis 9:20-27 (KJV)

  20 And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard: 21 And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent. 22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without. 23 And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness. 24 And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him. 25 And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. 26 And he said, Blessed be the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant. 27 God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.

What is meaning/significance of this passage? I have heard that it was used to justify slavery in the 17th and 18th century. I suspect that the Israelites used it to justify their invasion of Canaan in ancient times.

Is there not a better, more spiritual or redemptive interpretation on this passage?


texts: Does playing Video games affect our relationship to God?

texts: I am asking this question because the question about video games being sin was placed on hold, but I feel so compelled to answer it that I have decided to ask and answer my own question.


texts: How do Christians justify their belief and how do they convince others of their belief?

texts:
First of all, I assume that everybody should have some sort of justification for his beliefs. Secondly, I assume that Christians are interested in convincing others to join them as evangelisation seems to be promoted in the bible. Lastly, I assume that Christians respect the laws of logic and therefore their justifications must also follow these laws.

My question, based on these assumptions, is as follows: How do Christians justify their beliefs to themselves as well as to others and how do they convince others of their belief?

I am aware that this question is very fundamental. I tried to find an answer on the site, however, I couldn't find any. Please point me to any questions with good answers regarding this topic that I couldn't find!


texts: Where did the disciples meet Jesus after the resurrection?

texts:
I was listening to a debate between a Muslim scholar and a Christian scholar, and the Muslim debater raised this and many other questions.  The Christian debater did not address this issue in his reply, so I tried looking for answer but had no luck.  My question is this:

After the resurrection of the Christ, where were the disciples actually?

In the Gospel of Matthew they are in Galilee:

  Matthew 28:7-10 (KJV)
  7 And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him: lo, I have told you.
  8 And they departed quickly from the sepulchre with fear and great joy; and did run to bring his disciples word.
  9 And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him.
  10 Then said Jesus unto them, Be not afraid: go tell my brethren that they go into Galilee, and there shall they see me.

In the Gospel of Luke they are in Jerusalem:

  Luke 24 (KJV)
  13 And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs.
  33 And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them,
  49 And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.

I looked on a map, and Galilee and Jerusalem are quite far apart. What could be the explanation of this?


texts: Is there any evidence to support the authenticity of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs

texts:
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. wrote a paper on the subject: "The Ethics of Late Judaism as Evidenced in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs".

  The writings consist of the last words and exhortations of the twelve sons of Jacob to their Children. Each testament indicates the virtues inculcated or the vices condemned by each of these patriarchs in turn.

However, it seems the main text of the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs was written during the intertestamental period, and then subjected to heavy editing during the first and second centuries.

I would like to know what Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant denominations make of these writings and whether they are considered to be authentic and reliable.

I honestly don't know which tags to apply to this question, so I welcome any helpful suggestions.


texts: Does the Catholic Church oppose universalism?

texts:
I've been reading George MacDonald as of late and have heard in a few places that he argues for universalism. I though that had something to do with unitarianism, but in looking it up a tad more, I guess it means the idea that everyone will be saved.

Is this theology considered a heresy to the Catholic Church? If so, when where and why was it condemned?


texts: How do young earth creationists reconcile the age of the universe with the speed of light, and visible distant objects?

texts:
I am not trying to be argumentative, this is an earnest question, as this question got me in huge trouble when I was growing up attending a southern baptist Christian middle school. This question (and people's reactions to it) is actually one of the things that lead my away from the church as a teenager (which I later came back to).

If the speed of light is constant and we can see distant objects (stars,  galaxies, etc) that are millions or billions of light years away how can we account for a young age of the universe?

My father, at that time, was convinced that the speed of light has been slowing down since the creation of the universe. Although, I have never seen any credible evidence of this, and it would seem that measurements taken at CERN (and elsewhere) would be seriously affected if the speed of light was not a constant.
My 8th grade science teacher said it was because objects used to be closer than they are now, and have moved away from each other over time. However, if the universe was only 10k years old, and two objects started next to each other and traveled away from each other at nearly the speed of light, the most distant objects in the universe would still only appear to be a little less then 10k light years away.
God creating the universe with photons in flight, making the distant universe (and therefore past events) only appear to be taking places (or even existing), is certainly deceptive and I cannot accept it.
Do YEC consider the age of the Universe and the age of the Earth two separate questions?

My question isn't 'how old is the universe?', or 'did the big bang happen?', or 'creation vs evolution'. It is simply this: how do Christians, who are YEC, reconcile this?

Edit

Some have asked, why I cannot accept that God created photons in midflight giving the appearance of age?

In the video series @SeanDowney posted below, the presenter speaking against this argument shows a star that is 150k light years away that we observed blowing up. So, if God created photons in midflight then for 8k years God has been showing us a star that never existed and showed us an event (the start being destroyed) that never took place.
This is a specious argument in general, because I can make the same argument that God created the universe 5 minutes ago and all the evidence to the contrary (physical evidence, our memories of the past, etc.) were all put in place to give the appearance of age.

In both these cases, God making the universe appear to be billions of years old, instead of 5 minutes old, or the universe appearing to be billions of years old instead of 10k years, involves deception on the part of God that I cannot accept God (or my conception of him) would perpetrate.


texts: Why is the Son of God called the Eternal Father in the book of Alma?

texts:
I happened across the following verses in the book of Alma:

  Now Zeezrom saith again unto him: Is the Son of God the very Eternal Father? And Amulek said unto him: Yea, he is the very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth, and all things which in them are; he is the beginning and the end, the first and the last;  Alma 11:38-39

This seems to differ from the Articles of Faith of the LDS Church, where it states the following:

  We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.  Articles of Faith 1:1

So, what did Amulek mean here?  Was he in error or did he have incomplete knowledge at the time?


texts: If the dead are already in heaven, how do they rise at the second coming?

texts:
1 Thessalonians 4:16 says:

  For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

It's my understanding that most people in the Western world believe in Christian immortalism though. If the dead are already in heaven, how are they rising here?


texts: What is an overview of methods used by Christian churches to discipline their members?

texts:
The term discipline conjures up a huge range of actions in most people's minds. A parent disciplining a child could mean time-outs in the corner or a swat on the rear, not getting to hang out with friends, or any number of other things.

Introducing the modifier 'church' probably doesn't do much to clarify. I can imagine the range of things brought to mind by the term church discipline could range from being made to wear a dunce cap during service to 40 lashes.

I have asked about the purpose and Scriptural basis of discipline, but what is an overview of how it is implemented? Is there a common definition for what consequences make up the 'discipline'? What is an overview of methods employed by different traditions?


texts: In Protestant faith is one's old self dying on the cross with Jesus symbolic, or the actual assumption of a new Eternal life?

texts:
Many years ago I accepted Jesus as my savior in a small Baptist church. Up until that time I had never felt any guilt over sinning. Since that day though I have a guilt feeling every time. Years ago in a sermon the preacher said that the old person was crucified with Christ when he died on the cross, because Jesus assumed all sin of everyone who accepted him, and gave their sin burden to him. At the time he quoted a scripture which said that we became a new creature when we accept salvation. I found the scripture some years later; it is:

note: All scripture is quoted from the King James translation.

  2nd Corinthians 5:17  So that if any one is in Christ, that one is a new creature; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.

For many years, especially; as a child, and throughout my teens; every time I messed up I always wondered If I was really saved, since I was sinning again just as I had before. I cannot tell you how many times I have asked Jesus to save me again.

Recently I used a new study lesson which has caused me some deep self examination, because of these scriptures:

Rom 7:18 through 20

  For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) dwells no good thing. For to will is present with me, but how to perform that which is good I do not find. For I do not do the good that I desire; but the evil which I do not will, that I do.   But if I do what I do not desire, it is no more I working it out, but sin dwelling in me.

So I went back and restudied this scripture:

  John 17:2  As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.

Then the next verse jumped out at me:

  John 17:3  And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

At the end of the lesson was these  verses:

  Rom 7:24 & 25  O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

Taking both John 17:3 and Romans 7:18 through 23, Did we begin our new eternal life at  salvation, but will not be able to escape the sin nature we got from  Adam and Eve gaining the knowledge of good and evil until physical death?


texts: What was Martin Luther King, Jr.'s understanding of salvation?

texts:
I've been reading A Testament of Hope, which is a compilation of sermons by the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. I also know he's a Baptist. (I even got to stand and preach for a minute in his pulpit last year!)

What I haven't seen in these sermons is an emphasis on the Gospel, but I'm not sure if that was a selection bias (since the book really is there to focus on his Social Gospel), or if that really is indicative of his preaching style.

Is there a good sermon that represents his view of salvation? (An altar call? A good theology? Bueller, Bueller!)


texts:
I have this symbol over the entrance of my apartment. I have been told it is a Catholic symbol, and the owner of the flat is probably Catholic since it is the dominant faith here.

Searching on Google has not brought much information. Any idea what it means?


texts: Which versions of the Bible do contemporary British Pentecostal churches typically use?

texts:
I am writing a novel where one of the characters is a Black British Pentecostal Christian from London.

In the interests of accuracy, I am trying to work out which version of the Bible he would be most likely to read.

I would assume it wouldn't be the KJV, and I doubt it would be the NIV, although I suppose it could be.

I appreciate that the answer to this question may be somewhat subjective/speculative, but I feel it's narrow enough in scope to be a legitimate question.


texts: What is the earliest point in history where the cross icon started showing up on artifacts related to Christianity?

texts:
I can’t imagine the cross would have become an art-piece while the Romans were still killing Christians. The cross symbol during the persecutions must have in some way seemed similar to the Nazi symbol of the swastika during the death concentration camps, but later (unlike the swastika) it became a good symbol of Christ’s atonement and resurrection.  I was wondering when it actually became a Christian icon. Of course I understand from the Bible that the icon was immediately gloried in, but the cross as a doctrine did not necessarily turn into popular art right away, or did it? When did it show up on artifacts?

I do not associate any particular meaning to the cross as an icon myself; this is more of a general curiosity question.


texts: If Genesis is not to be taken literally by the Roman Catholics, what is the basis of the original sin?

texts: According to this answer, Genesis is not to be taken literally by the Roman Catholic church due to the scientific evidence contradicting it. In this view, what is the basis of the original sin?


texts: In protestantism are all mankind equal under God?

texts:
Are there people of higher worth and lower worth? Is everyone deserving of equal respect?

There was some confusion in the comments since my question is short, I think the answers given are of good quality.

To address the comments, I want to know if people are considered equal to Christians. In contemporary society maybe the answer is an obvious yes and thats where the confusion is coming from? But it was not long ago that people had slaves and many of those slaveowners called themselves Christian, no? So I am asking in a very real and basic sense is it a Christian belief that all mankind are equal?
Or maybe some people should be slaves? I don’t know what Christians believe is why I am asking.


texts: How did the Willow Creek church come to allow and encourage women in leadership?

texts:
The Willow Creek Community Church has long had a policy of both men and women in leadership roles - which was (and is still) counter to what many other churches teach. From their site:

  We believe churches should be led by men and women with God-given leadership gifts. This includes the concepts of empowerment, servant leadership, strategic focus, and intentionality (Nehemiah 1–2; Romans 12:8; Acts 6:2–5).

I'd really like to know how they came to this view and especially their Biblical basis for this belief (beyond the verses quoted above which, while they are about leadership, do not mention women specifically).


texts:
This short chapter raised a few extra questions for me lately. The basic premise seems to be some heavenly being speaking to John.  And, grammatically, it appears to be a single one. Verses 13-16 in particular are quite explicitly Jesus talking, as he says "I, Jesus..." And verses 7 and 12 both start "See, I am coming quickly"... which I assume to be Jesus, and it seems to be confirmed in verse 20 where John responds "even so, come, Lord Jesus."

This all seems rather simple and straight forward except immediately after Jesus is talking in verse 7, and in verse 8, John saw these things and heard these things and bowed before the person speaking to him.  Not too much of a problem as people have done this before Jesus in the past.  But verse 9 "And he said to me, see you do it not, I am your brother-servant with you and with your brothers the prophets, and with those who keep the words of this book.  Give worship to God."

And then this goes directly into Jesus speaking again.  So... Did Jesus say this?  Some say that in the middle of Jesus speaking in verse 7, some other unnamed angel just happened by in the middle of the conversation, and although John never thought to bow to Jesus, he immediately started bowing to this angel, who only stopped to tell him not to bow, and Jesus just kept talking without acknowledging this second person in any way.  ... but I'm not seeing any textual justification for this beyond "Seeing Jesus say this doesn't fit my preconception, so it must be someone else that said it."

So... is there any textual justification beyond that?  Or did Jesus, while in heaven deny worship, referring to himself as a "fellow servant," and direct worship to the Father?


texts: Is there a scriptural basis for treating the non-Gospel books of the New Testament as scripture?

texts: Without citing any books of the New Testament besides the Gospels as evidence (since that would be self-referential), is there a scriptural basis (either in the Gospels or in the Old Testament) for treating any book of the New Testament besides the Gospels as scripture rather than as supplemental history/commentary/scholarship in the tradition of the Jewish Talmud?


texts: Where can I find a complete set of Ante-Nicene Writings?

texts: I am a self-learner and am really interested in the writings of the Christian fathers during the Ante-Nicene period.  I found an great e-book for a few dollars titled "The Complete Ante-Nicene Church Fathers Collection [9 volumes]", and I also found a set of books called "The Early Church Fathers, 38 Volumes."  I'm just not sure whether either of these contains all of the writings found during that period or just a selection of them.  What I'd really like to have is a list of all of the writings discovered during this period, but I can't seem to find it.  Are any of you aware of such a list?  I hope this isn't too loaded a question.


texts: Does Christianity give a reason for life experiences, such as in Hinduism?

texts:
In Hinduism, there is a concept of past life karma.

Meaning if someone is born into an unfortunate situation (in a slum, for example) it is because they are paying for sin from a past life.

Does Christianity or the Bible give any insight into why it seems like some people are here on vacation and others full of strife and sorrow (and everything in between)?

Also, did Jesus specifically address this (or did any of His disciples ask about this)?


texts: Why do Premillennialists teach the 1,000 year reign of Christ will take place on Earth?

texts:
Revelation 20 [1] mentions a special 1,000 year period commonly referred to as the Millennial Reign. That chapter also mentions of an angel coming down from heaven. However, the Holy City does not come down until Revelation 21 [2]. It makes me wonder if the Millennial Reign will take place in Heaven. The main reasons are:

There is no mention of Millennial Reign taking place on earth.
Where would the Millennial Reign be on earth if the Holy City has not landed on earth until Revelation 21.

But Premillennialists teach that this Millennial Reign will take place on earth. What is the Biblical or theological basis for their teaching?

[1] Revelation 20:1 - 6 ESV
Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding in his hand
the key to the bottomless pita and a great chain. And he seized the
dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan, and bound
him for a thousand years, and threw him into the pit, and shut it and
sealed it over him, so that he might not deceive the nations any
longer, until the thousand years were ended. After that he must be
released for a little while. Then I saw thrones, and seated on them
were those to whom the authority to judge was committed. Also I saw
the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Yahusha
and for the word of Elohim, and those who had not worshiped the beast
or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their
hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.
The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years
were ended. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is the
one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death
has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they
will reign with Him for a thousand years.

[2] Revelation 21:1 - 3 ESV
Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more. And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from Elohim, prepared as a bride adorned for her Husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Behold, the dwelling place of Elohim is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be His people, and Elohim Himself will be with them as their Elohim


texts: When was Jesus anointed and who did the anointing?

texts: I know that "Christ" or "Messiah" means "anointed or anointed one" and that Jesus commonly has the title of "Christ."  One thing I do not recall is an account of Him being anointed.  To that end, what is the biblical basis for Jesus' title?


texts: In modern times, what would happen to a Roman Catholic monk if he were to violate his monastic vows?

texts:
So, I was watching a documentary about the Codex Gigas, or "Devil's Bible", and it said that the Codex Gigas was written by a single scribe over the course of decades as a way of doing penance of what he did when he was young and stupid. Punishment for breaking monastic vows may involve being walled up alive.

In modern times, what would happen to a monk if he were to violate his monastic vows? Would he have to take on a new calligraphic project of the Bible?


texts: Did John Wesley reject the Athanasian Creed?

texts:
I've seen a few examples online of people claiming that John Wesley objected to the "hell" clauses of the Athanasian Creed, such as on the United Methodist Church website:

United Methodists are not required to believe every word of the affirmations. Church founder, John Wesley himself did not agree with a historic (Athanasian) creed, because he disliked its emphasis on condemning people to hell.

Similarly, on a blog:

Yet later in his life, Wesley became uncomfortable with the damnatory clauses of the Athanasian Creed, which have no parallel in the other two creeds.

The clauses in question appear to be:

Which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled; without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.
they that have done evil, into everlasting fire (WP)

A little bit of research has revealed one place where Wesley discussed the creed, saying:

I, for some time, scrupled subscribing to that creed; till I considered (1.) That these sentences only relate to wilful, not involuntary, unbelievers; to those who, having all the means of knowing the truth, nevertheless obstinately reject it: (2.) that they relate only to the substance of the doctrine there delivered; not the philosophical illustrations of it. (Sermon 55, On the Trinity; emphasis in original)

This seems to indicate that at some point in the past, he was unsure or unsatisfied with the wording of the creed, but later decided that it was acceptable.  I find this weak evidence for the "did not agree" claim.  Furthermore, this sermon was delivered in 1775, when Wesley was 71 years old, making me doubt the "later in his life" claim (though he did live another 16 years).
My question, therefore, is: did John Wesley explicitly reject any clause of the Athanasian Creed in any of his writings?  I am particularly interested in knowing if such a rejection exists in his writings between 1775 and his death in 1791.


texts: How many mortal sins did/does Satan do? Did Satan commit just one mortal sin? Does the number of mortal sins increase as he tempts people to commit sin? I am interested in the Catholic viewpoint.


texts: Who were the Black Canons on the Augustinian Priory of Inchmahome in Scotland?

texts:
Recently, while on holiday in Scotland, I visited the ruins of the Augustinian Priory of Inchmahome on the Lake of Mentieth, near to Aberfoyle and Loch Lomond.  The priory was founded in 1238 by the Earl of Menteith for a small community of Augustinian monks, including the Black Canons. The first Prior (Adam) arrived in 1296.  Source: Inchmahome Priory.

The Augustinian monks communicated by using sign language.  During meals, however, they were able to hear the word of God spoken.  St. Augustine apparently said: “Let not your mouths alone be exercised in receiving food; let your ears be also occupied in receiving the word of God”.

After rising at 02:30 for Nocturns, they would attend Matins at 06:00 where there would be readings and Prime.  Terce prayers and spoken Mass took place at 08:00 after which they would work.  At 12 noon there would be Sext prayers and sung Mass, followed by None prayers at 13:30. Dinner at 14:00 then they went back to work till 16:15. After that came Vespers prayers and Compline prayers.  They went to bed at 18:30.

Hard to imagine rising at 02:30 (especially in the winter) and then going to bed at 18:30, especially during a Scottish summer when the sun does not set till after 10 in the evening. However, I digress.

As busy as the monks were all day, what was the purpose/function of the Black Canons?  Who were they and what did they do? Were the Black Canons founded by St. Columba in Scotland or did they originate with St. Augustine?  See: Canon regular (Wikipedia).

Any information on the Black Canons, their origins and function, would be appreciated. Also, if anyone could source the quote attested to St. Augustine that would be useful. Just curious!


texts: How do Trinitarians deal with imbalances in their relationship with each Person of the Trinity?

texts:
This is a practical question. According to Trinitarianism, three distinct Persons form the Godhead: the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. In principle, they are all just one God, but in practice people might tend to focus / fixate more on one specific Person over the other two.
For example, someone might focus excessively on Jesus, talk all the time about Jesus, but then forget about the Father and the Holy Spirit. Alternatively, another person might develop a very strong and intimate bond toward the Person of the Father by following very strictly the pattern of prayer that Jesus taught: "Father, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come [...]", whereas Jesus is relegated to a secondary plane, only being remembered on Sunday services or transactionally at the end of prayers ("in Jesus' name, Amen"). And likewise, there might be Christians who over fixate on the Person of the Holy Spirit, perhaps those who lean more towards the Charismatic/Pentecostal side of the spectrum, thus relegating the Father and the Son to the background in terms of importance.
Question: How do Trinitarians deal with the issue of over-fixating on one particular Person of the Trinity while relegating the other two to the background? Are there recommended practices within Trinitarian denominations for developing a balanced and equally intimate relationship with each Person of the Trinity, so that no Person is treated "unfairly"?


texts: Should  we be able fast like the fasts described in Bible?

texts:
If you look carefully at the scripture, there are instances were some people fast to pray and/or to express their sorrow. However, the length of the fast seems to be  astronomical; some people like Moses has fasted for about 40 days:

  Exodus 34:28: 28 Moses stayed there with the Lord forty days and forty nights, and during that time he did not eat food or drink water. And Moses wrote the words of the Agreement—the Ten Commandments—on the stone tablets.

And Jesus also fasted for about same length of time:

  Matthew 4:1-2:  1 Then the Spirit led Jesus into the desert to be tempted by the devil. 2 Jesus fasted for forty days and nights. After this, he was very hungry.

Is it physically possible for us to do the same? I sincerely doubt that most people would die before 25 days.


texts: When are lay men and women permitted to proclaim the Gospel in a Catholic church?

texts:
I know that proclaiming the Gospel at Mass is restricted to ordained folks. But, is it permissible for a lay man or woman to lead a word and communion service and read from the Gospel?

Can they lead a different sort of prayer service in a Catholic Church that includes the proclamation of the Gospel?


texts: Refusing to Baptize Illegitimate Infants

texts:
Who started the withholding of baptism from children born out of wedlock in the Catholic Church? Who is responsible for this belief? Was a Church Father, Pope, Priest etc?

I now know that Pope Francis recently said that priests should never refuse baptism to anyone.


texts: Does the text of the 13th Century Vita of St. Dymphna still exist today?

texts:
The 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia says the following about St. Dymphna:

  The earliest historical account of the veneration of St. Dymphna dates from the middle of the thirteenth century. Under Bishop Guy I of Cambrai (1238-47), Pierre, a canon of the church of Saint Aubert at Cambrai, wrote a "Vita" of the saint, from which we learn that she had been venerated for many years in a church at Gheel (province of Antwerp, Belgium), which was devoted to her. The author expressly states that he has drawn his biography from oral tradition.

Does the text of this Vita still exist today?


texts: When did Martin Luther lose his Apostolic succession according to Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churchеs?

texts: As far as I understand Martin Luther according to the Catholic and the Eastern Orthodox Churches possessed the Apostolic succession while he was in the Roman Catholic Church (he was a priest, after all). However, now both Luther and all his followers are considered by both Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Church as those who don't posses the Apostolic succession. So, according to them, at what particular point Martin Luther lost his Apostolic succession?


texts: Why does God forbid Aaron's descendants with "defects" from offering food?

texts:
Leviticus 21:16-23

  16 The Lord said to Moses, 17 “Say to Aaron: ‘For the generations to
  come none of your descendants who has a defect may come near to offer
  the food of his God. 18 No man who has any defect may come near: no
  man who is blind or lame, disfigured or deformed; 19 no man with a
  crippled foot or hand, 20 or who is a hunchback or a dwarf, or who has
  any eye defect, or who has festering or running sores or damaged
  testicles. 21 No descendant of Aaron the priest who has any defect is
  to come near to present the food offerings to the Lord. He has a
  defect; he must not come near to offer the food of his God. 22 He may
  eat the most holy food of his God, as well as the holy food; 23 yet
  because of his defect, he must not go near the curtain or approach the
  altar, and so desecrate my sanctuary. I am the Lord, who makes them
  holy.’”

Why would a loving God, who loves all people equally, seemingly discriminate against Aaron's descendants with these "defects"?


texts: Which denominations use the King James Version?

texts:
Which denominations primarily use the King James Version of the Bible?

I did a search on Google and could not find anything reliable.


texts: Why do most Christians not follow the Talmud?

texts:
If I'm not misunderstanding anything, Jews usually follow the Tanakh (more or less the Old Testament) and the Talmud, but definitely not the New Testament, whereas Christians follow the Old and New Testaments but not the Talmud. So, among those who believe in the Old Testament, people usually follow the Talmud if and only if they do not believe in the New Testament.

Why is this? Are the Talmud and the New Testament incompatible, or is the combination simply unfashionable or something?


texts:
We known the name of Christ through the Bible which is written in κοινή greek. In the original language the name is Ἰησοῦς which transliterated to Latin as Iesus and then to English as Jesus.

Why then do some Christians feel a need to Judaism the name and return it to Modern Hebrew יֵשׁוּעַ (Yeshua)? Taking in consideration that Modern Hebrew is not the same as the Hebrew used at the time of Christ and that Modern Hebrew was invented in the XIX century.

To clarify my concern I will cite from a book of John Owen about the subject

  They said Jesus was anathema, or "one accursed." They looked at him as a person to be detested and abominated as the common odium of their gods and men. Hence, at his mention they used to say, "Jesus anathema." He is, or let him be, "accursed, detested, destroyed." And the Jews continue in this blasphemy to this day, hiding their cursed sentiments under a corrupt pronunciation of his name. For instead of Yeshua, they write and call him
  Yeshu (ישו), the initial letters of yimmach shemo vezikhro — that is, "Let his name and memory be blotted out;" the same as "Jesus anathema." And this
  blasphemy of pronouncing Jesus accursed was what the first persecutors of the
  church tested the faith of Christians with, as Pliny said in his epistle to Trajan;Justin Martyr with other apologists agree. (On the Holy Spirit (Pneumatologia) by John Owen - Book 1 Chapter 1)

Also according to Stanley Porter, in “Did Jesus Ever Teach In Greek?” (Tyndale Bulletin 44, no. 1 [1993]: 199–235) in Israel many Jews including Jesus spoke Greek.

In John 19:20 the name of Ἰησοῦς and Iesus is used in front of the crowd

  [John 19:20] Then many of the Jews read this title, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city; and it was written in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin.


texts: What does it mean that Jesus was tempted in every way like us (yet without sin)?

texts:
Hebrews 4:15 says that Jesus was tempted in every respect as we are.  What does it mean that He was tempted "in every respect" as we are?

  For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our
  weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are,
  yet without sin.  Hebrews 4:15 ESV


texts: What does the phrase " saved as by fire" in 1 Corinthians 3:15 mean?

texts:
What does the phrase "saved as by fire" in 1 Corinthians 3:15 mean?

  If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.


texts: How do those who believe the Son is not Almighty God interpret Revelation 2:23?

texts:
To me, the deity of Christ is seen all throughout Revelation, and for that matter, the Gospels (e.g. John 1:1) and Epistles, and all of Scripture, but for the purposes of the question, how do those who do not believe in the deity of Christ ('that Jesus is God in the flesh') view such passages as Revelation 2:23?

  Revelation 2:18,20-23 ... These things says the Son of God, whose eyes are like a flame of fire, and whose feet are like refined bronze1 ... But I have this against you [i.e. the congregation at Thyatira]: that you put up with that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, and teaches [falsely], and misleads my servants, seducing them into  sexual promiscuity and the eating of things sacrifices to idols. And I have given her time that she might repent, but she was unwilling to repent of her sexual sin. Behold, I will cast her onto a bed of sickness, and those that commit adultery with her into great affliction, if they do not repent of their deeds. And her children I will strike with death; then will all the churches know that I am he  who searches the minds and the hearts, and [that] I render to each of you according to your works.

In light of this being the perogative of YHVH, God Almighty:

  Jeremiah 17:10 I, YHVH, search the heart and examine the mind, to render to each according to his conduct—according to the fruit of his doings.2

IMPORTANT EDIT

As noted by another user 2 Chronicles 6:30 (cf. 1 Kings 8:39) teaches explicitly that YHVH alone knows the hearts of men:

  1 Chronicles 6:14, 30 O YHVH, God of Israel, ... So then, hear from heaven, your dwelling place, and forgive, and render to each one according to all his ways, [you] who know his heart: for you alone know the hearts of the sons of men.

Footnotes

1 Fresh translations throughout for reasons of consistency; largely irrelevant for the purposese of the question. | cf. 1:10-18; 2:8

2 cf. Jer 11:20; 20:12; Wis 1:6-7; Rom 8:27

3 cf. Nahum 1:3; Rev 3:19; Prov 3:12; Heb 12:6


texts: What was Brigham Young's teaching regarding Adam being God?

texts:
I understand that Brigham Young, the second Prophet of the LDS Church, taught what is known as the Adam-God doctrine for much of his tenure as Prophet of the Church.

What are the specifics with regard to this teaching and where is it recorded?  How long was it taught?  Is it still part of Mormon Scripture/teaching/doctrine today?


texts: The Greatest Commandment - Loving God with all our 1) heart, 2) soul, and 3) strength

texts:
Jesus highlights Deuteronomy 6:5 as the greatest commandment in the law.  This commandment highlights three aspects of loving God, specifically with our hearts, our souls, and our strengths.

  Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and
  with all your strength.  Deuteronomy 6:5 NIV

What is distinct about each of these?  Specifically, what does it look like to love God with all our hearts?  What does it mean to love God with all our souls?  What does it mean to love God with all our strengths?


texts: Why Was Jesus Represented as Being Born in a Cave?

texts:
I'm wondering why Jesus's birth/Nativity started being represented as occurring in a cave, as opposed to some structure having a manger in it (Luke) or the family home (Matthew).

This first occurred in the Protoevangelium of James, and the motif then appeared in Justin Martyr (Trypho 78) and Origen (Celsus 1.51). Inevitably a cave in Bethlehem was found, over which the Empress Helena with Constantine then built the Church of the Nativity ca. 327 CE. The cave became the standard Nativity site in Orthodox Christianity, while in the West the cave motif stood alongside Luke's and Matthew's accounts and was often depicted in art.

My question is why did this motif arise in the first place?

The possibilities include: Competition with Mithraism or with other mystery religions in which rites were conducted in cavelike structures, or with other pagan deities/heroes born in caves? Simple reliance on Isaiah 33:15-16 (Septuagint version) as per Justin? Prefiguring Jesus's eventual entombment (also descent to hell)? An allusion to Christians using caves and catacombs? Simple assumption since in Palestine caves were sometimes used as stables and so could contain a manger (but funny that Luke didn't mention the cave, and why overtly contradict Matthew)? Or is it just general symbolism for caves found in myths (dark primordial state where creation including light occurs (here that of the new era), the womb, place of transformation, etc.)? Something else?


texts: Is there any sense in being baptized as an adult after being baptized as an infant?

texts:
Around the time I was born, my parents were going to a Lutheran church. As such, I was baptized as an infant. In most cases in the Bible, baptism is connected with receiving the Holy Spirit. If so, then that may explain why I don't remember when I became a believer. However, there ARE verses such as those in Mark and Luke (below) that make a reference to believing as well, which I couldn't have done as a baby.

Mark 16:16 (NLT)
Anyone who believes and is baptized will be saved. But anyone who refuses to believe will be condemned.
Luke 3:3 (NLT)
Then John went from place to place on both sides of the Jordan River, preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had repented of their sins and turned to God to be forgiven.

(Emphasis mine.)
As such, I am considering being baptized again as an adult. After all, I can now say that I believe and that I have repented, but there is little or nothing in the Bible about being baptized twice. Also, infant baptism doesn't seem to have become widespread until at least a century after Christ (Wikipedia).
I consider myself non-denominational on the side of Wesleyan, but I'll take answers from any viewpoint.


texts: Does the Bible ever say that the Ark of the Covenant flew or levitated?

texts: I've heard several references in History and Discovery channel type TV programs that say that the Bible talks about the Ark of the Covenant miraculously flying. Not to mention there was a line about that in Indiana Jones. I am not aware of any Bible reference that says any such thing. Is there some verse I'm missing? If not, is there some other ancient source -- the Talmud or Josephus or something -- that makes such a statement? Or is this just some crazy idea that came out of nowhere?


texts: What is the Biblical basis for the "penal" in penal substitutionary atonement?

texts:
I have been looking at different models of the atonement and am currently looking at penal substitutionary atonement.  While I can see the substitution, I'm struggling somewhat with the idea of Jesus taking the penalty for our sin.

So, what is the Biblical basis for the "penal" in penal substitutionary atonement?


texts: Was Christmas a replacement of the feast of Hanukkah or of the 'Invincible Sun'?

texts: Was Christmas a replacement of the Jewish festival of Hanukkah that was celebrated by the early Christians or was it to replace the Pagan festival of the 'Invincible Sun' instituted in 274 CE.


texts: Can a marriage proceed if fiancé is unconscious?

texts:
On the morning he was to be married an elderly man is stricken by a massive stroke. His elderly fiancé is devastated.
He lies in a coma unresponsive with no hope of recovery.
Not withstanding the legalities of the concept in various countries, does the Catholic Church permit a marriage to be performed so that his fiancé can fulfill his wish to marry and there by also be given legal status as his wife and eventual heir?


texts: What does the Bible say in regards to technological development?

texts:
With regards to technological advances, the study of technology and continuing to make medical and convenience advancements that prolong life, and the "playing god" complex.

What does the Bible have to say about these, in a literal sense(not interpreted).  There's many nay-says that come about when medical or technological advancements come around that seem to push the boundaries of human civilization and knowledge.  Are there any passages in the Bible that denounce the quest for learning, or for advancement in the sense that we could clone life, stem-cell research, etc?

This has been a hot topic for me for quite some time, when intellectually arguing these I seem to not have any study material ready.  What does the Bible say about "playing god" to sum it up?


texts: What is the earliest use of the phrase "the Lord's law of health" in reference to the LDS Word of Wisdom?

texts:
Background

The modern Church uses the phrase "the Lord's law of health" to describe the Word of Wisdom.  For example, Chapter 29 of Gospel Principles is called "The Lord's Law of Health."  However, the Word of Wisdom itself states that it was given:

  In consequence of evils and designs which do and will exist in the hearts of conspiring men in the last days. (v4)

Suggesting that it has more to do with avoiding addiction (or, perhaps, choosing freedom) than actual health.  There are a great many valiant Church members who suffer from disability, terminal disease, and even chronic disease/pain to easily rationalize the simplicity of "obey the Word of Wisdom to be blessed with good health."1

I don't believe that the Church has ever taught that obedience to the Word of Wisdom guarantees perfect health — or even suggests that physiological tragedy (e.g., cancer, etc.) will be avoided because of said obedience.  The Word of Wisdom itself simply states that the following blessings will come due to obedience (v18-21):

shall receive health in their navel and marrow to their bones;
And shall find wisdom and great treasures of knowledge, even hidden treasures;
And shall run and not be weary, and shall walk and not faint.
And I, the Lord, give unto them a promise, that the destroying angel shall pass by them, as the children of Israel, and not slay them.

I believe (but do not know if it is doctrine) that (1) has the same context as Prov. 3:7-8 in that it's a spiritual blessing, not a physical blessing, (3) has the same context as Isa. 40:28-31 in that it's a blessing of enthusiasm and productivity rather than bodily health, and (4) uses the reference from the story of Moses to describe avoiding the Lord's vengeance during judgement.  (I skipped #2 because it doesn't appear to influence this question.)

Thus, whenever I hear the phrase used, I wonder that it's a bit of an oversimplification.  I am therefore studying the section and its history and would appreciate some help.

Question: What is the earliest use of the phrase "the Lord's law of health" in regard to the Word of Wisdom?

1 An example of the problem at its worst comes from my time as a Branch President when a member asked me why I hadn't excommunicated another member for violating the Word of Wisdom.  She was obese and had been for many years.  It was a long discussion that's summarized as, "the Word of Wisdom doesn't actually work that way."