## Background: It has been a Christian belief that Jesus would return to Earth since the earliest days of the religion. The 1st century Pauline epistle to the Thessalonians says: > For the Lord himself **will descend from heaven** with a cry of command, with the voice of an archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God *- 1 Thessalonians 4:16–17* The 4th century Nicene Creed contains the second coming as a creed of belief: > **He will come again in glory** to judge the living and the dead, > and his kingdom will have no end. Christians have also taught that this second coming will be when several as of yet unfulfilled messianic prophecies will be fulfilled by Jesus. Justin Martyr makes this point in the 2nd century *Dialogue with Trypho*: > And it was prophesied by Jacob the patriarch that there would be **two advents** of Christ, and that in the first He would suffer, and that after He came there would be neither prophet nor king in your nation (I proceeded), and that the nations who believed in the suffering Christ would look for His future appearance ... (*- Ch. 52 Dialog with Trypho*, emphasis added) > But I and others, who are right-minded Christians on all points, are assured that there **will be a resurrection of the dead, and a thousand years in Jerusalem, which will then be built, adorned, and enlarged, [as] the prophets Ezekiel and Isaiah and others declare** ... (*- Ch. 80 Dialog with Trypho*, emphasis added) ## Unfulfilled prophecies: *Dialogue* cites one of these. These unfulfilled messianic prophecies generally (since not all Christians agree that these will occur in the future, but breezing through Christian literature indicates most believe one or more of these will occur post second-coming) include: - Building the Third Temple, restoration of temple services (Ezekiel 37:26–28, Ezekiel 46) - Ingathering of the Jews to Israel (Isaiah 43:5–6) - World peace and end of war (Isaiah 2:4) - Universal knowledge of the God of Israel, cessation of religious teaching (Zechariah 14:9, Jeremiah 31:34) ## Second coming? What are the indicators in the unfulfilled prophecies that they will occur in a 'second coming'? How do second coming believers (specifically those who believe some messianic prophecies will be fulfilled in the second coming) differentiate the second coming from a failure to fulfill these prophecies?

My father passed away this week after a long illness. His faith would be described from a distance as a Sedevacanist which you would describe some of my siblings as as well. However up close I believe there to be quite a divergence in their beliefs. For example the church where my siblings pray, my father refused to even walk into it and has not attended any of his grandchildrens' Christenings or Confirmations. My father prayed by himself and had a altar in his room. I dont think he attended a Mass (apart from weddings, funerals) this century. Then the grave that he bought a few years ago is in a humanist graveyard - it's a field, there is no consecrated ground. His funeral wishes are a small service which he said could be at the funeral home, followed by prayers read by a friend as he is buried. My siblings have said that this is an absolute no to all of his wishes and that he has to have a Catholic funeral with Mass (probably at the church he refused to even step foot in) and buried in consecrated ground. They are saying because he received the last rites from their siblings' priest, that was his way at the end of ripping up his prior plans. So here is the question: **Is there a branch of Sedevacanists that would reject the need for the low Mass funeral and consecrated ground?** Was he dying with a clear conscience in regards to his funeral arrangements? I ask this as an agnostic who just wants to follow his father's wishes. Even though I don't believe them myself I want to respect his beliefs.

Until now I have found the following end times Bible passages: - Daniel 7,8,10,11,12 - Joel 2:28-32 - Matthew 24 - Mark 13 - Luke 21:5-36 - 2 Peter 3:1-13 - 1 Corinthians 15:12-58 - 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 - 1 Thessalonians 5:1-11 - 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12 - 1 Timothy 4:1-5 - 2 Timothy 3:1-9 - Revelation 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 Are there any others?

### Introduction In the Hebrew Bible, the prophet Elijah is described as being taken bodily into heaven: 2 Kings 2:11: > “As they continued walking and talking, suddenly a chariot of fire appeared with horses of fire, and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.” Later prophecy anticipates his return before the coming of the day of the LORD: Malachi 3:23–24 (Hebrew numbering; 4:5–6 in most English translations): > “Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and dreadful day of the LORD comes. He will turn the hearts of fathers to their children, and the hearts of children to their fathers, lest I come and strike the land with a curse.” In Jewish tradition, this verse gave rise to the belief that Elijah would return as a forerunner of the Messiah. This is reflected in classical sources such as *Mishnah Eduyot* 8:7 (“Elijah will come to make peace in the world”) and *Pirkei de-Rabbi Eliezer* 43, which depicts Elijah announcing the coming redemption. The New Testament also seems to contain this expectation. Jesus identifies John the Baptist as one who “is Elijah who was to come” (Matthew 11:14; cf. 17:10–13), though John himself denies being Elijah (John 1:21). Christian traditions have variously interpreted this tension. ### Question How do Protestant theological traditions understand the prophecy of Elijah’s return in Malachi 4:5–6? Specifically: - Do mainstream Protestant interpretations hold that the prophecy was fulfilled in John the Baptist (a typological or spiritual fulfillment)? - Do some view it as partially fulfilled, expecting a future literal return of Elijah before the Second Coming of Christ? - Is it regarded as entirely future, awaiting a physical reappearance of Elijah in eschatological events (e.g., linked to the “two witnesses” of Revelation 11)? - Or something else?

What does the Bible teach about lying to protect people's feelings? If a loved one asks you a question and you know the truth would hurt him/her, what does the Bible say you should do in this situation? The truth, said cruelly, cuts just as deeply as a lie. When does the truth stop being an ideal worth striving for and just become an excuse to be mean?

Full disclosure: I am not a Christian. It occurred to me that one of the symbols used to represent Christian belief is that of Jesus depicted suffocating to death on a cross. I suspect that Bible does not describe Jesus explaining that the apparatus of execution by suffocation in Rome should be used by his followers as an idol to represent belief in Jesus. When, where, why, how, and who came up with the practice of Christians adopting and wearing the symbol of death by suffocation on a cross as a banner or jewelry or images to represent belief in Christianity? Did Jesus ever instruct people to wear a symbol of death by suffocation to represent belief in Jesus?

How long were East and West united after the Council of Florence (1439)?

1. [Anastasis • Resurrection](https://dzen.ru/a/ZXNFALUrMW9CfeYc) https://www.pravenc.ru/text/2459015.html 2. I am not really sure if this is Christian. Some say it is. https://herculaneum.uk/Ins%205/Herculaneum%205%2015%20p4.htm 3. https://www.livescience.com/42761-ancient-church-mosaics-uncovered-israel.html 3. https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Croix_(christianisme) 4. https://www.pravenc.ru/text/2459015.html 5. [Mosaics of the Basilica, mid-6th century CE, inside the Memorial Church of Moses, Mount Nebo, Jordan](https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mosaics_of_the_Basilica,_mid-6th_century_CE,_inside_the_Memorial_Church_of_Moses,_Mount_Nebo,_Jordan.jpg) Why are there so many cross variants, and are there ancient writers that describes them? Why do we see so rare in the early time the standard latin cross without enlarged ends? But instead we see with enlarged ends. Thanks in advance.

Both men prayed together (not separately) in a public service of worship in the Sistine Chapel. Buckingham Palace said this is "a significant moment" in relations between the Catholic Church and the Church of England, of which Charles is Supreme Governor. My question is, **“In what way(s) will this event be significant for both religious groups?”** This question is about how this one-off event, where two world leaders of two religious groups pray together in a public service of worship might mark something “significant”, either with respect to the past, or looking to the future.

Is **Hebron** referred to **Hebrew**? In **Genesis 39:17** → *The Hebrew Servant* → Here Joseph is called as a Hebrew. So this is my understanding that → Joseph's great grandfather Abraham was from Hebron → referred to Hebrews → often used with Israelites. It's usually refers to the descents of Abraham. **Hebrew** is → geographical reference whereas **Israelite** is → lineage reference Please correct me if I am wrong.

Some people believe the King James Version of the Bible is the only version English-speakers should be using, as it is the only inspired translation. (This is referred to as "KJV-onlyism.") Basically, the KJV-only position is that: - The Bible is God's word - God promises to preserve His word * E.G., [Psalm 12:7 (read this article)](http://www.kjvtoday.com/home/does-the-second-them-in-psalm-127-refer-to-gods-words) - This preservation is accomplished via a perfect translation (one per language) - The KJV is His perfect, preserved translation in the English language - The reason other English Bibles differ from the KJV is because those other Bibles have been tainted by sin and error **What are the main counterarguments to this view?** I am specifically looking for answers which would be convincing to an English-speaking Protestant with a high view of Scripture.

Rather than assuming Wikipedia is accurate, I thought I'd as for a better sourced answer to the question. Wikipedia's article on the Word of Faith movement lists various controversies regarding Word of Faith teachings. Among them is the "Little gods controversy" > Many Word of Faith teachers have sought to emphasize the full meaning > of the believer's status as a child of God (through Christ) by using > phrases such as "little gods" to describe them, a practice that has > garnered some criticism from some other segments of the Christian > community. And later on... > Suffer the Children, a documentary highlighting some of the teachings > of the Word of Faith movement, has a video clip of Creflo Dollar > teaching the "little gods" doctrine to his congregation based on the > notion that "everything reproduces after its own kind": > > - Dollar: "If horses get together, they produce what?" > - Congregation: "Horses!" > - Dollar: "If dogs get together, they produce what?" > - Congregation: "Dogs!" > - Dollar: "If cats get together, they produce what?" > - Congregation: "Cats!" > - Dollar: "So if the Godhead says 'Let us make man in our image', and everything produces after its own kind, then they produce what?" > - Congregation: "gods!" > - Dollar: "gods. Little "g" gods. You're not human. Only human part of you is this flesh you're wearing." So what is the teaching? Do they teach that people are truly divine? (Compared to, for example, the mainstream or the LDS definition of divinity ) I want to be very clear that I'm not interested in hearing criticisms and comparisons from the other segments of the Christian community. I'm not interested in whether the "little gods" teaching is true. I'm operating under the assumption that what the Word of faith movement teaching is simply misunderstood by the other segments of Christianity. I'm just wondering what the actual teaching ***is***, not whether it's true or heretical. That said, it is perfectly reasonable for someone to explain why the Word of Faith adherents believe this to be true. (In other words, inclusion of apologetic reasoning explaining the merit behind the teaching is allowed.)

> Pescetarianism is the practice of following a diet that includes fish > or other seafood, but not the flesh of other animals. ([Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pescetarianism)) Any insights would be really helpful, thanks. To specify, I'm asking from a Methodist point of view.

This question is addressed to people of trinitarian sects. If Jesus is part of a trinity, why are there so many examples of Him referring to Himself as something distinct from God? Some examples are Him on the cross saying "My God, my God, why have You forsaken Me?" and when He refers to God as greater than Himself when speaking to the twelve prior to being taken into custody. There are more that I've noticed but these two come to mind first. Furthermore, Jesus is repeatedly said to sit at the right hand of the Father. Doesn't the phrase "sit at the right hand" imply that the Son is not equal to the Father? I'm aware of there being counter-examples such as Him saying that He and the Father are one and of course, chapter one of John ("the Word was God"). Admitting these counter-examples support trinitarianism, how do Trinitarians explain the way Jesus speaks of God as if He is something distinct from God? Am I the only one who gets the impression that He speaks in this way? The way I see it right now is that Jesus is the Father's proxy. All authority was given to Him to execute the Father's will. He was created by the Father (I've heard some say that He was "begotten, not made", but He is referred to as Firstborn of Creation) as God's self-expression or image (Col. 1:15). In this sense, He is a functional equivalent to the Father, but in another sense, He is not essentially equivalent because He came from the Father. Is this the same way Trinitarians see it?

Genesis 4 discusses the descendants of Cain: >"Cain knew his wife, and she conceived and bore Enoch. When he built a city, he called the name of the city after the name of his son, Enoch. To Enoch was born Irad, and Irad fathered Mehujael, and Mehujael fathered Methushael, and Methushael fathered Lamech. And Lamech took two wives. The name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah. Adah bore Jabal; he was the **father of those who dwell in tents and have livestock**. His brother's name was Jubal; he was the **father of all those who play the lyre and pipe**. Zillah also bore Tubal-cain; he was **the forger of all instruments of bronze and iron**. The sister of Tubal-cain was Naamah." Genesis 4:17-22 Why are we given details about what the descendants of Cain did? Is there some special significance to these details?

In the story of Gideon (Judges 6-8), near the end it talks about Gideon building an ephod out of the gold earrings from the spoils of the battle against the Midianites. What is an ephod, and why did gideon build one. Is it significant?

I have been encountering more and more often news about charismatic churches, which I understand are part of the Pentecostal movement, and their connection with the supernatural and modern politics. Is there a good book about the history of these churches and the alleged miracles? On Amazon, for instance, there are several books, but they appear to have been self-published by these churches; thus, I won't rely on them for an objective evaluation of their work. Thank you

> 3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, 4 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. > > Ephesians 1:3-4 In the above verse the Apostle Paul writing to the believers at the church in Ephesus is declaring that God the Father chose 'us' i.e. the believers, before the foundation of the world. If that were the case all the believers whoever was and is and will be believing in Jesus and thus become believers only those people were chosen to become believers much before their creation. That's basically predestination of certain individuals to become believers. However, that effectively leaves out all those who are not chosen by God to go to hell. In other words, it is God who creates certain individuals meant to go to heaven and others to hell. If the above statements were to be true, then, God will be unjust and unloving. Furthermore, it will be unfair for God to command his people to preach the gospel to all creation. In the light of the above conundrum how to understand "God chose us before the foundation of the world?"

In all the different Bibles that I've looked at, except the New World Translation, they all declare with relative simplicity that Jesus Christ is God, mostly indirectly or by proxy but also directly. The NWT is so heavily edited that there are only a few ways in which it infers that Jesus is God. In Isaiah God says that he is the only Savior and beside him there is no Savior, but the New Testament, even the NWT, declares that Jesus Christ is the Savior. The NWT also states that all things were made FOR Jesus, making God a respecter of persons (partial), if Jesus isn't God. Jesus calls men and women sons and daughters. Jesus said He who sees him sees the One who sent him, John 12:45. Do they think all other linguists are in error?

Job 26:10 (KJV) says: >"He hath compassed the waters with bounds, until the day and night come to an end." This verse has also been translated as: >"He hath set a compass upon the face of the waters, until the day and night come to an end." (alternative rendering from some KJV printings) The phrase "compassed the waters with bounds" or “set a compass” seems to describe God establishing a limit or boundary over the waters. I’m trying to understand what this means. What is the Hebrew word translated as “bounds” or “limit” in this verse, and what are its possible interpretations?