Comments for Bible Q

Comment on How is “soul” used in the Bible? by Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 08 Feb 2012 03:08:00 +0000

I love your website. Good, honest interpretation of God’s Word.

Comment on Why did God send a lying spirit? (1 Kings 22:22) by Jonathan Morgan

Jonathan Morgan — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 12:22:00 +0000

Firstly, I wouldn’t guarantee that “spirit” is the same as “angel” (though it could be – I’ve just never imagined it that way). However, my first point about taking it literally would be to say that literally it wasn’t an angel giving a message to the prophets to pass on, but a spirit actually in the mouths of the prophets making (?) them say the message whether they wanted to or not. To me this raises very severe questions like:
1. Do these prophets have no choice?
2. How come Zedekiah seems so confident in his message if it is really not him who is really saying it, but a spirit inside his mouth?

It was thinking about these kinds of questions (prompted by your comments) that made me conclude that the key to the whole question was that these prophets *wanted* to prophecy whatever the king wanted to hear to get money, power and importance. If you conclude this, then it is not hard work to make people do what they already want to do.

Comment on Why did God send a lying spirit? (1 Kings 22:22) by Whane The Whip

Whane The Whip — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 01:01:00 +0000

I think perhaps we are looking at the story differently. I think you see it is a figurative representation. I see it as a story that was intended to be taken literally. So for example when you say “Nor, even if you accept the vision as literal, does it say … an angel delivering a message from God.” I do take it as a literal representation and as such it does say exactly that in:

“21 Then a spirit came forward and stood before the Lord, saying, ‘I will entice him.’22 And the Lord said to him, ‘By what means?’And the spirit said, ‘I will go out, and will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’**And the Lord said, ‘You are to entice him, and you shall succeed; go out and do so.**’”

Comment on Where in the Old Testament does it say Jesus will be called a Nazarene? (Matthew 2:23) by Ninos Oshaana

Ninos Oshaana — Sat, 04 Feb 2012 21:58:00 +0000

For a closer approximation of the original Aramaic of Matthew, the Peshitta has ‘Nazrat” with a sadeh and “Nazraya.” Also, the syntax suggest that Matthew is picking up on an oral tradition about the Messiah that may or may not have been influenced in part by Judges 13:5.
Wa-ata amar b-mdinta d-matgrya Nazrat aikh d-natemla medm d-atamar b-nweya d-Nasraya natgra.

And he came and dwelled in the city that is called Nazrat so that it might be fulfilled the thing which was spoken by the prophet that a Nasraya he will be called.

The Greek does not have “the thing” but simply the article τὸ (“to rithen” – that having been spoken). I think the use of the word “medm” (the thing) in the Aramaic indicates a certain vagueness regarding the OT prophecy which Matthew is alluding to. It seems to point more to the prophecy being fulfilled by Joseph and Mary moving to the town rather than him actually being a Nazarite – although that he lived an ascetical life influenced by the Nazarine tradition can also not be entirely ruled out.

Comment on Why did God send a lying spirit? (1 Kings 22:22) by Jonathan Morgan

Jonathan Morgan — Sat, 04 Feb 2012 13:39:00 +0000

What they were prophesying was false. That alone would make them false prophets. Nor, even if you accept the vision as literal, does it say anything about the spirit speaking with the prophets, or it being an angel delivering a message from God. Nor in that case would God be limited to speaking only to true prophets. However, I see this example as similar to the example of God hardening Pharaoh’s heart. This only happened after Pharaoh had hardened his own heart, and was an example of God working with a choice and a character that Pharaoh had already chosen and showed to make his plan work. In the same way here, these prophets seem highly representative of the group of false prophets spoken against in the books of the prophets. They wanted to make pleasant prophecies so they would be rewarded for it. To be known as official prophets in such a large group must have meant that they had done this before (while the true prophet of God had a reputation for giving unpleasant prophecies because he was actually God’s prophet and God was not happy with Ahab). It then seems reasonable to me that God works with the choices they have already made.

Comment on What is the meaning of: “It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God”? by Jonathan Morgan

Jonathan Morgan — Sat, 04 Feb 2012 13:23:00 +0000

It is true that a camel going through the eye of the needle is impossible. However, I don’t see that it means we
need to make it into a metaphor. As said in the answer, all
it shows is that it is impossible to enter the kingdom without God’s
help (and, by implication, that riches can get in your way).

As for your comment about Americans being rich (and those in other “developed” countries) this is quite true. What that means is not that we should dismiss Jesus’ message as inapplicable to us, but that we should think carefully whether our riches are affecting our ability to serve God. Think about the message of 1 Corinthians 10:12.

Comment on Why did God send a lying spirit? (1 Kings 22:22) by Whane The Whip

Whane The Whip — Sat, 04 Feb 2012 06:48:00 +0000

Sorry, no. According to the story, the prophets correctly heard the lie of god delivered to them. That makes them true prophets since they correctly corroborated what was said to them by the angel. It would be the reliability of the prophets to correctly identify and deliver the message that made them ideal targets of the lying spirit sent by god. I.E., the lying spirit could only deliver the prophecy to real prophets because they alone would be able to hear. However one prophet saw the lie of god and explained in great detail of how it was all some elaborate scam to send the king to his death, he however was inclined to believe that the story was made up… and according to the story it was not made since in the end, he was killed.

Even if you find none of that agreeable, it still does not explain away the fact that god sent an angel to lie, therefore god is a liar, regardless of what the prophets did. If I lied to you, and you didn’t catch it… I would still be a liar.

Comment on Why did God send a lying spirit? (1 Kings 22:22) by Jonathan Morgan

Jonathan Morgan — Sat, 04 Feb 2012 06:32:00 +0000

The prophets were false prophets. They were already used to prophesying what the king wanted to hear. They were doing what they wanted to do: God was just making sure it would happen.

Comment on Does it say anywhere in the Bible that we have guardian angels? by Jonathan Morgan

Jonathan Morgan — Sat, 04 Feb 2012 06:28:00 +0000

I don’t understand the relevance of this comment to individual guardian angels. If God sent multiple angels to Jesus (as he did in Matthew 4:11), that would suggest that it wasn’t Jesus’ particular guardian angel.

Comment on Will the religious go to heaven? by Jonathan Morgan

Jonathan Morgan — Sat, 04 Feb 2012 05:50:00 +0000

With respect to John 14:1 – 6, it says that Jesus is preparing a place for us, which you assume is in heaven, and that we will be with him. However, remember Jesus said this just before leaving for his crucifixion. After his crucifixion he returned to them and spoke with them before he ascended to heaven 40 days later. When we talk about God’s house, we are not necessarily talking about heaven. In fact, God’s house is used to talk about believers right now in Ephesians 2:19 – 22 and 1 Peter 2:5. I suggest that until Christ’s death the believers were not able to approach God in the same way as they were after he was raised and they could approach God through him. After his death, they had a place as part of God’s house, with Jesus as chief cornerstone and head of the house.

Ephesians 2 is talking about the war between a spiritual (“heavenly”) way of life and a fleshly way of life, and it is talking about our current life right now as believers (not life after death). In that context, it is clear that we are with Christ because we are working with Christ and living a way of life that follows Christ.

Philippians 3 says that right now we are to act as citizens of heaven, because we are showing heavenly values. It also says that we are expecting Christ to return from heaven to earth, not for us to join him in heaven.

1 Thessalonians 4 does not talk about the final state of where people are, otherwise it would have us after we’ve met Jesus staying in the air between heaven and earth. It also talks about resurrection, not about going to heaven immediately on death.

Hebrews 10 talks again about the difference between heavenly values and earthly values. God is in heaven, and so when he keeps track of what we have done and whether there is a reward, that track is kept in heaven. It doesn’t mean that the final reward will be in heaven. Compare also what Jesus says about treasure in heaven in Matthew 6.

Also consider that Revelation 21 talks about coming from heaven to earth, and then about God dwelling with people (on earth).