Posts by CYLLON

5

A challenge of souls

by Rev BII in

you who believe that the bible teaches of an immortal soul, would you be so kind to post something on this issue?

CYLLON

just wondering what you think of rev 6:9,10

109

the 1 chronicles author lists the descendents of david; some of these, in order, are jehoshaphat, jehoram, ahaziah, joash, amaziah, azariah, jotham, ahaz, hezekiah, manasseh (1 chronicles 3:10-13 niv).

the matthew author contradicts this genealogy; he leaves out the four consecutive descendents underlined above, and in their place puts uzziah, who he says is jehorams son.

(matthew 1:8-10 niv).

CYLLON

i got a question.
the title said Mathew makes another error.

What error.If you say he intended to leave them out for what ever reason,then how is he in error for doing just what he intended.Maybe a little slopy but an error?

8

Another Bible Oddity

by Yerusalyim in

joseph et al,.

what's the deal with jesus in mark 2:26 saying abiathar was high priest yet in 1 samuel 21:1 it's ahimelech who gives jesus the bread.

was jesus wrong, or is 1 samuel wrong?.

CYLLON

Actually i did not ignore them.I simply addressed the original post.

And the literal translation of the verse is:
How He entered the house of God on Abiathar the high priest,and the loaves of the presentation ate,which not is lawful to eat..etc.

The KJV says in the days of.And the NIV is as stated.

NASB says in the time of.
The NASB is the closest.{see W.F. Arndt and F.W. Gingrich, 'A greek-English Lexicon of the New testament".}
It wood be akin to saying,"Now When king David was a shephered boy".
Even though he was not a king at the time,he was a shepherd boy.

As to Ahimelech saying David was alone.At that moment he was because the others were directed to another place.However,not v.3.David not only ask for something to eat for himself,but obviously intends to feed at least some of the others later.He asked for 5 loaves or whatever can be found.Unless David had a huge belly.He is not going to eat 5 loaves and what ever can be found by himself.

I have used the same phrasing as "those with Him" in a general sense myself.I beleive our generals have with bin ladin and some of his followers as to there where abouts.They do not necessarily mean within site of the man.Could be a few miles away but with him in mission,general area and at times within site.The term is not as precise as you are making it out to be I think.

As for Davids lie.Yes He did.The Bible simply records the deed here.It is not indorsed in any way and lying is condemed elsewhere.Shame on David.How is that a Biblical error?its davids error.

I will see about the rest later.Real busy at the moment.

have a good evening.

8

Another Bible Oddity

by Yerusalyim in

joseph et al,.

what's the deal with jesus in mark 2:26 saying abiathar was high priest yet in 1 samuel 21:1 it's ahimelech who gives jesus the bread.

was jesus wrong, or is 1 samuel wrong?.

CYLLON

Samuel is correct When he said the high priest was Ahimelech.Jesus however was also correct.If you look close at the wordingJesus said "in the days of Abiathar"{v.26}.This Need not be taken to imply that Abiathar was high priest at the tTIME david ate the bread.After eating the bread and meeting Ahimelech ,King Saul had Ahiemelech killed{1sam.22:17-19}.Abiathar went to david after escapping{v.20}and took the place of high priest later.So even though Abiathar was made high priest after David ate the bread the phrasing used is still correct because Abiathar was alive when david did this and became high priest soon there after
So it was during the TIME of Abiathar but not durring hid office tenure.