Did Aaron and Japeth ever meet in the bible?
918575
No...... Aaron was Moses' older brother.... and Japheth didn't come until after the flood....\n\n\nYour sister,\nGinger
231680
Rom 9:21  Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor? \n\nYou can read the chapter for more details.\n\nRemember, the Jews are His own. God gave them honor even though they did not give honor to Him\n\nIsa 43:4  Since thou wast precious in my sight, thou hast been honorable, and I have loved thee: therefore will I give men for thee, and people for thy life.
453816
Yes.  God is not a book, nor is He confined to a book.\n\nThink about this:\n\nIn the time of Isaiah the prophet, the "Bible" as we know it had not been written fully.  But the Torah did exist, that is, the Books of the Law of Moses.  God spoke to Isaiah things which were not contradictory to the Torah, but yet were not in there either exactly.  \n\nAlso, most of history, most people have actually been illiterate.  And yet, God communicates with all of us, if we listen.
682
Yes, it seems so, as long as this question stipulates to the Jehovah's Witness understanding. \n\nRussell seems to have been part of 'the faithful and discreet servant' class mentioned at Matthew 24:45; for decades Russell wrote much of the Witnesses' spiritual 'food at the proper time'. Since Jehovah's Witnesses understand that 'faithful slave' class to represent all anointed Christians on the earth as a group, Russell must have been anointed, and thus among the 144,000 resurrected to heaven.
649301
None, Moses never took any on the ark, Noah did. Thus the title, Noah's Ark!
298204
The Covenant with Adam and Eve:\n\nAnd the name of the third river is Hiddekel: that is it which goeth toward the east of Assyria. And the fourth river is Euphrates. And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it. And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. (Gen 2:14-24 KJV) \n\nThe Covenant with Noah:\nAnd the LORD smelled a sweet savour; and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done. While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease. And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth. And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered. Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things. But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat. And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man's brother will I require the life of man. Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man. And you, be ye fruitful, and multiply; bring forth abundantly in the earth, and multiply therein. And God spake unto Noah, and to his sons with him, saying, And I, behold, I establish my covenant with you, and with your seed after you; And with every living creature that is with you, of the fowl, of the cattle, and of every beast of the earth with you; from all that go out of the ark, to every beast of the earth. And I will establish my covenant with you; neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of a flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth. And God said, This is the token of the covenant which I make between me and you and every living creature that is with you, for perpetual generations I do set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a covenant between me and the earth. And it shall come to pass, when I bring a cloud over the earth, that the bow shall be seen in the cloud: And I will remember my covenant, which is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and the waters shall no more become a flood to destroy all flesh. And the bow shall be in the cloud; and I will look upon it, that I may remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is upon the
286986
Didn't one of them take a wife from some other "people" living nearby? Neanderthals perhaps?\n\nThe bible is full of contradictions and plot holes. That's why considering it literally true is a sign of a logical defect in the mind. As a metaphor or allegory, it may have merit, though I'm not buying it personally.
482432
I don't see why it wouldn't be.  According to the Bible, Saul met with the ghost of Samuel, and Jesus met with the ghosts of Moses and Elijah.
782841
No to your first question. The idea of formal same-sex marriage is very recent. It certainly did not exist in Biblical times.\n\nYes to your second question. It demonstrates the depth of love that is possible between two people of the same sex. However, we have no way of knowing whether this love took on a physical dimension as would occur between two gay men today. David later had many wives and concubines and lusted after Bathsheba, so he must have been either heterosexual or bi-sexual in today's terms.
1049863
Someone posted a question trying to justify incest with his daughters using the OT example of Lot as an example. I spent quite a time answering this, only to find the next morning that the question had been removed. Just in case anybody else has problems with the passage, here's my answer anyway.\n\nLot and his Daughters\n\nThank you for raising this question, it's caused me to get my Bible out and read the story again for myself. If anybody is actually interested in understanding it properly, they need to go back to Genesis 11 and start from the beginning.\n\nAn old pagan called Abram is worshipping one day at the local ziggurat in Ur of the Chaldees and Yahweh comes and reveals Himself to him. The Bible doesn't tell us that Abram did anything special to earn or merit this revelation, just that God, for His own reasons, chose to reveal Himself to him. This really upset the religious locals, who followed a mixture of astrology and Babylonian mystery religions. Abram was rejecting their pantheon of Gods and going round telling people there was only one true God. Talk about upsetting the neighbours. And you should have heard the gossip!\n\nAbram leaves Ur with his father Terah, his nephew Lot and their households. They passed through the Euphrates (a type of baptism) and arrived at Harran, where they got too comfortable and stayed until Terah dies. At this point Yahweh gives Abram a kick up the backside and points him towards the Promised Land.\n\nSome time after they arrive in Caanan there is a famine, and what happens next has a direct bearing on Genesis 19 as cited.\n\nAbram, taking Sarai his wife and Lot with him, goes down into Egypt (always a type for the world). Here they encounter all the corruption of Pharaoh’s court and the fleshpots of the most advanced nation on earth. After moving back to Caanan, Lot sits round the campfire and dreams of the forbidden things he has seen. If you carefully read the start of chapter 13, you will see that when Lot separated from Abram, he looked to the east, towards Sodom, and chose that because it reminded him of Egypt and the forbidden pleasures that he had been dreaming of.\n\nFast forward now to chapter 19 and Lot has given up farming on the plains outside of Sodom and has allowed the lure of sin to draw him inside the city. Lot had abandoned his God to the extent that he was prepared to allow his daughters to marry those that God called detestable, but even so, God did not abandon him.\n\nWe know what happened next, but if you really think that God condoned the sin you have to be crazy. The offspring of those illicit unions went on to form the Moabites and the Ammonites, two of the most cursed tribes in history.\n\nThis is a classic morality tale of reaping that which you have sown and is recorded not only as historical truth, but as an admonition to all of us. Genuine queries on any of this are welcome.
542804
THE POOR RAISED UP OUT OF THE DUST, AND THE BEGGAR LIFTED UP FROM THE DUNGHILL (Part 1)\nPreached at Eden Street Chapel, Hampstead Road, on Lord’s Day Morning, August 20, 1843.\n"He raiseth up the poor out of the dust, and lifteth up the beggar from the dunghill, to set them among princes, and to make them inherit the throne of glory: for the pillars of the earth are the Lord’s and he hath set the world upon them."- 1Sa 2:8\nMOST of you are probably familiar, not only with the name of the person who uttered these words, but also with the circumstances under which they were spoken by her. But lest any should not immediately recollect the passage, I will just observe that they are the words of Hannah, the mother of the prophet Samuel, and that the circumstances under which they were spoken, were when she brought her infant son, and presented him before the Lord, that he might be his for ever. Her heart, it appears, was then so enlarged, and her soul so comforted and strengthened by beholding her infant son as the manifested answer to her prayers, that she burst forth into that song of thanksgiving of which the text forms a portion.\n\nBut before I enter into the experimental meaning of the text, it may be desirable, with God’s blessing, to trace out a few leading particulars of Hannah’s case.\n\nI believe, that, in Scripture, there are typical characters, as well as what are more properly called "types", or typical things; and Hannah appears to me to have been one of these typical characters. By typical characters, in this sense, I mean, not in the same way as Aaron, or Solomon, were types of Christ, but certain persons whose history and experience are typical or representative of God’s dealings with his people, or of characters that should arise in the church. The history of Hannah affords us more than one instance of these typical characters. We read, for instance, 1Sa 1:1,2 that "Elkanah had two wives; the name of the one was Hannah, and the name of the other Peninnah; and Peninnah had children, but Hannah had no children." Elkanah seems to me to typify the Lord Jesus-I think we may fairly assume this without doing violence to the figure; and his two wives seem to represent the church, Peninnah the professing, and Hannah the possessing church. Let us see if the figure will bear us out in this interpretation. Peninnah, in type, represents the professing church. As having a form of godliness, and a name to live, she had a vast superiority outwardly over her rival, for she was fruitful, whilst Hannah was barren. This points out the superiority, in outward fruit, which many professors have over God’s spiritually-taught children. But we may observe that in Peninnah’s fruitfullness there was nothing manifested of a supernatural character. She had children in the common course of nature, as other married women have them; there was nothing peculiarly providential, nothing eminently striking, nothing miraculous; but all took place in the usual course.\n\nNow this strikingly represents the way in which mere professors of religion bring forth their good works. The fruits they produce are not wrought in them by miracle; they do not spring out of a supernatural operation upon their consciences; but they are brought forth, from time to time, in the mere course of nature, without any galling disappointment on account of previous barrenness, without any earnest cry that the Lord would work powerfully in their soul, without any manifested answer to the prayer that he would make them fruitful in every good word and work. But these good works and religious performances, on which they pride themselves so highly, are brought forth by them in the usual course of nature, by the mere exertion of the creature, utterly independent of any work of the Holy Ghost upon their heart.\n\nBut this fruitfullness of Peninnah much galled and pained her barren rival, as the zeal, devotedness, piety and amiability, evide
1097090
God still talks to anyone who will listen. He loves everyone of every race, nationality, religion... In fact, Revelation 14:6 says that just before Jesus comes an angel (messenger) flies in the midst of heaven with the everlasting gospel (good news) to preach to every nation, tribe, language, and people. That doesn't leave ANYONE out!\n\nNow, to your question about the Jewish nation and the tapestry...\n\nGod had chosen the Jews to be His special people, and they were to be a representation to the world of His character. They didn't exactly fill His desires for them throughout the ages. In fact, tthey came to be quite an embarrasement, yet He still loved them. While they were in captivity in Babylon, God gave the prophet Daniel a vision telling him what would happen with the Jewish people.\n\nDaniel 9:24 says that there would be 70 weeks determined (the Greek word means "cut off") for the Jewish people. Verse 25 gives the start date for this time period - the command to restore and rebuild Jerusalem. There were 3 commands given saying the Jews could go back to Jerusalem (you can read about these in the book of Ezra), but only one authorized the rebuilding of the city, and that was given in 457 BC. \n\nVerse 25 says that from that command to restore and build Jerusalem unto Messiah ("Anointed One") the Prince would be 69 weeks, and then verse 26 says that in the middle of that 70th week, the Messiah would be "cut off" and put an end to the sacrifice and oblation.\n\nBefore going any farther, read Numbers 14:34 and Ezekiel 4:6, where you see that in prophecy a day equals a year. So, these weeks that we are talking about can be multiplied by seven to give us the days, and then those days are actually years. So, 70 weeks would equal 490 years (70 x 7). And the 69 weeks equal 483 years.\n\nSure enough, if you go to that start date of 457 BC when the command was given to rebuild Jerusalem and go forward 483 years, you land on 27 AD, the exact year that Jesus was baptized and anointed by the Holy Spirit for His ministry. Then, it says that in the middle of that next week Jesus would be "cut off", or killed, but not for Himself. If a week equals 7 years, then the middle of that week would be 3 1/2 years. Sure enough, exactly 3 1/2 years after his fall baptism in 27 AD, Jesus was crucified in the spring of 31 AD. \n\nThis is where the TAPESTRY comes in. At Jesus' death, the curtain, a 4" tapestry, that divided the rooms in the sanctuary was torn top to bottom (Mark 15:37,38). This made it clear to everyone that the sanctuary services pointing forward to the Messiah were no longer necessary, as Jesus had just died and fulfilled every service that happened there. He was the Lamb killed for the sins of the world, and there was no longer a need for sacrifices.\n\nHowever, the Jewish nation as a whole didn't accept that Jesus was the Messiah. Individuals believed on Him, but the leadership rejected Him. 3 1/2 years after Jesus' death, Stephen was preaching to the Jewish leaders about Jesus, and they took him and stoned him to death, making him the first Christian martyr. This happened in 34 AD, exactly 70 weeks, or 490 years, after the command to rebuild Jerusalem. Those 70 weeks given to the Jewish nation to accept Jesus and be God's chosen people had run out, and from that time on the gospel was preached to the Gentile world.\n\nToday, anyone who accepts Jesus becomes a part of spiritual Israel. Paul says that if we are Christs, then we are Abraham's seed (Galatians 3:29). That means Jews as well as us.
181181
Hannah\n\nThe following is a listing of facts included in Bible stories about Hannah. \n\n My husband's name was Elkanah.  1 Samuel 1:1-2.\n \n My husband gave me a double portion of meat because he loved me and because I was not able to have children.  1 Samuel 1:5.\n \n Peninnah, my rival, made fun of me because I was not able to have children.  1 Samuel 1:5-6.\n \n I promised God that if he would give me a son, I would dedicate my son to the Lord for all the days of his life.  1 Samuel 1:10-11.\n \n I was praying so hard to God that Eli, the priest, thought I was drunk.  1 Samuel 1:13.\n \n After I told Eli that I was praying to the Lord because of my sadness, Eli said, "Go in peace, and may the God of Israel grant you what you have asked of him."  1 Samuel 1:16-17.\n \n God gave me a son and I named him Samuel.  1 Samuel 1:20.\n \n I gave my son to the Lord so my son could serve the Lord for his whole life.  1 Samuel 1:22-28
681995
The Israelites were born into their religion, but others could be proselytized in.  I think they had forgotten that they could be a good influence to other nations.  They were in a time of famine, and Naomi's family went to Moab to live.\n\nNaomi's sons and husband died, leaving her two daughters-in-law, Ruth and Orpah.  Naomi had nothing to offer them and tried to send them back to their families so that they could be cared for.  Orpah went, but Ruth, a Moabitess, took on the role of caring and providing for Naomi and vowed to follow her back to Naomi's native Israel.\n\nShe didn't expect to be taken care of.  She worked to provide for Naomi, who was (understandably) bitter from her losses.  \n\nThrough the providence of God, Ruth ends up working for Boaz, who is the sort of leader Jesus talks about in the NT, he clearly cares for his workers, and they respect and care about him.  He sees this foreign woman gleaning in his fields and instructs his workers to be respectful of her and to leave extra for her to gather.  He is impressed with her for working to support Naomi, whom he is distantly related to.\n\nIn the course of time, Naomi realized Boaz's interest in Ruth and sends her to him.  He vows to go to the nearest of kin - who has a right to redeem the family property and to marry Ruth and raise children in her husband's name - and see if he is willing to provide for her.  The next of kin is not, so Boaz takes on this responsibility and marries Ruth.\n\nIt's a glimpse into their life and culture and customs, but it also shows several important things about love, honor and grief.  Naomi is not so bitter in her loss that she stops looking out for Ruth's interests.  Ruth takes care of Naomi when she could have gone back to her family, remarried and had an easy life.  Boaz is kind to his workers and honorable in his dealings with his kinsman and Ruth.\n\nIt shows how God works in the lives of people in non-miraculous ways.  It also shows part of the lineage of Christ.  There is much that could be learned from the book, but the link to Christ is probably the most significant aspect of the book.
1136017
Wow... you totally blew my mind. I've never thought about the red words in the Bible thing before...\n\nDoes Richard Simmons swing that way? Wouldn't he have a "husband?"
588780
The answer by Temp19 was going well but stumbled.  Please allow me to add to it.  Cain married a sister most likely, but definitely a member of his own family. Once Adam and Eve sinned, they "began to die."  The people who were supposed to live forever now were subject to aging, disease etc.  After many generations this sinfulness deteriorated the bodies to the point that God commanded Moses to instruct family members NOT to marry.  The two creations are not inconsistent with one another.  There is a story of creation of the world (macro version if you will) and the focus of the creation of Adam and Eve (micro version if you will allow).  Hope this helps.
222510
I am not aware of any passage stating that God dealt with Elisha about this incident.\nAs far as I can tell, Elisha cursed them in the Name of the Lord, and God is the one who sent the bears. There is no indication that Elisha called the bears down upon them, merely that He spoke a curse (removal of God's protection and blessing), and God is the one who decided how the curse would be fulfilled.\n\nIn my study of this passage, I have concluded that the "children" refered to here are (by other uses of the same Hebrew word) probably young men, and the phrase "Go up, thou baldy" means that they rejected Elisha's ministry as being from God. I read this as an Old Testament parallel of what Jesus refered to as the unpardonable sin in  Matthew 12:31-32.