I hope to do some more definitive work on this in the future. As you can see, it is a very large subject. I touched on the theme, though, in a couple of other essays. See these links.

Capital punishment, a Christian Dilemma

A Hard Look at Vengeance.

This comes from Isaiah 14:12  "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!" From the context, this is said to be Satan. But the Hebrew word translated "Lucifer" is Heylel.

We are at a disadvantage in reading the New Testament for two reasons. One, the NT was written in Greek and copied. Two, there are customs that the first readers understood well enough, but that we don't quickly grasp. Jewish custom called for removal of leaven from the house at the end of the 13th. This made the 14th a de facto day of unleavened bread even though the law didn't call for it until the 15th. The disciples often write in terms of common usage which confuse us until we look a little deeper. Got a new book coming this summer which goes much deeper into the subject. Watch for it. Working title is "The Thread, God's Appointments with history. Early drafts of various chapters can be read at this link.

(Exodus 33:11)  And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend. And he turned again into the camp: but his servant Joshua, the son of Nun, a young man, departed not out of the tabernacle.

(Genesis 32:30)  And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.

(Deuteronomy 5:4)  The LORD talked with you face to face in the mount out of the midst of the fire,

There are more examples. Just check a concordance.

This speech is on the night of the last supper, and by the time we get to John 15, the only persons present are the eleven disciples, Judas having already departed. So Jesus is speaking to that set of believers. But the message is written for men and women in all ages and times.

The reason this question arises is because of a short passage at the end of Zechariah 14. The chapter is plainly about the return of the Messiah as King and the establishment of his rule on the earth -- even to the extent of requiring the Egyptians to keep the Feast of Tabernacles. The verses at the end (vv. 20-21) are often taken to suggest animal sacrifice. However, the passage could also be taken to mean that holiness is no longer confined to the temple area, but that the whole place is holy. "Sacrifice" may refer more to the killing and preparation of food than to the former rites of the priesthood. But please put special empasis on the word "may." Interpretation of prophecy is often problematic.

It is helpful when discussing a question such as yours to first define terms. The word "cult" has taken on many different meanings in recent decades. To some it means "a dangerous religious group where the leader might convince people to kill themselves," such as the Jonestown situation in 1978 where over 900 people died in a mass suicide. To others it means "any group that claims to be Christian but doesn't believe all the same doctrines as the group I belong to." You can read an overview of the various ways the word can be used in the article "Cult, Occult, New Age--What's the Difference?" on my Field Guide to the Wild World of Religion website.

I believe what you are probably really wanting to know about the Mormons is whether or not their doctrines are compatible with the Bible. Is their religion based solidly on the Old and New Testaments, with perhaps just a few idiosyncratic beliefs tacked on, or is it based on doctrines that are totally contrary to the revelation we find in the Bible? Mormon missionaries will emphasize to new people the aspects of their faith that line up with the Bible. But  if you continued studying with them, they would eventually introduce you to the many other documents that form the basis of the belief system of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

And within those documents are many strange and fanciful ideas that are totally contrary to the teachings found in the Bible. In fact, although those missionaries will not tell you about the real Mormon view of the relative value of the Bible compared to Mormon writings, here is a quote from one of their early leaders: "The Book of Mormon claims to be a divinely inspired record.... If false, it is one of the most cunning, wicked, bold, deep-laid impositions ever palmed upon the world, calculated to deceive and ruin millions ...if true, no one can possibly be saved and reject it: if false, no one can possibly be saved and receive it...." And more recently, in 1978, their "Apostle" Ezra Taft Benson had this to say: "There will be more people saved in the kingdom of God--ten thousand times over--because of the Book of Mormon than there will be because of the Bible." You can read many more quotes like these, along with a detailed overview of the history and teachings of the LDS Church in the profile of Mormonism  on the Field Guide website. 

I read an interesting book on the idea of codes in the text of the Old Testament, and the more you learn about it, the less promising the idea becomes. For one thing, everything depends on which text you are using. The truth in the Bible doesn't depend on that, but a technical detail on the codes does. Change one letter and the code no longer fits.

It has been rather a long time since I read the book, but I was completely convinced there is nothing hidden in the text of the Bible. The truth is right there for us to see and obey.

God's call, his invitation, is not merely to ministry. It is a call to him. And within that broader call, each of us is called to use his unique talents and gifts in service to God's people. Ephesians 4 and 1 Corinthians 12 make this fairly clear.

I don't know who you mean by "they" but some theologians think that what the law means is that one assesses the value of an eye for an eye lost. It is tort law, as the ancient world understood it.  I am unfamiliar with the history of the application of this particular law.

Now that is an interesting question. The obvious answer is that we can't know for sure, but we do have clues. In all their narratives, they never suggest that they addressed him by his name. They gave us his name (in Greek) when they were talking about him, but when they addressed him, it was Lord or Master.

And when Jesus tells his disiples how to pray, he does not suggest addressing the Father by his name, but by his relationship:  Father.

Jesus' name in Greek transliterates as Iesous. The J is pronounced as I or Y in nearly every language except English.

Lord in the Greek is Kurios. Master is Didaskolos, "Teacher." The people also addressed Jesus as Rhabbi, Rabbi, and I amused in the face of Jesus stern warnings not to call men Rabbi, that some Christian teachers do precisely that. Jesus never rebuked anyone who called Him, "Rabbi," but there is this caution:

(Matthew 23:8 KJV)  But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.

(Matthew 16:18-19 NIV) And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. {19} I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

This is a contentious passage because of Roman Catholic insistence on the Primacy of Peter and apostolic succession. The protest approach is to fiddle with the translation, as you have noted. But in reality, the standard translations are as good as it gets here. It is a plain statement that whatever the apostles bound on earth would be backed up in heaven.

But there is a problem here. In the first place, there is not a hint elsewhere in the New Testament that the church was built on Peter. It has been correctly noted that the Greek word for Peter is masculine, while the word for "Rock" is feminine. This is not the way the Greek should be used to designate Peter as the rock on which the church was built. Several explanations have been offered, but the bottom line is that Jesus was not building his church on Peter. If he had, it would have been evident all through the New Testament and it is not.

What is happening in the passage above is the transfer of judicial authority for the church from the Sanhedrin to the Apostles. There would be many doubtful issues that would face the church in years to come (See Acts 15 for an example) and they did not need to be bound by the decisions of the Pharisees, which had previously been the case. (See Matthew 23:1 ff.)

The authority in the Old Testament had rested with priests and judges (See Deuteronomy 17:8 ff.) Now it would rest with the leadership of the church.

Anytime you want a cassette tape of a current radio program, you can call our toll free number and request it. Call, 1-888-BIBLE44. You can also download programs from the audio portion of our site. All you have to do is register.

We are looking for the right software and hope to be operational before year's end, but you can download MP3 programs right now from the Audio link on this Website.

It doesn't say quite that. I think the passage you are looking for is this one:
"No temptation has seized you except what is common to man. And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so that you can stand up under it." (1 Corinthians 10:13 NIV) 
So, you can't say, "The Devil made me do it." You always have a choice.

No, sorry, I don't.

Carolyn is asking about the Feast of Tabernacles which we observe in the autumn of each year. For information click here.

My take on Capital punishment can be read here: http://www.borntowin.net/essays.aspx?eid=27

Neither, but I have been accused of being less a Democrat than a Republican. The Democrats in recent years have made it a little easier to be "not a Democrat. But a person in my position needs to stay above party politics. I am not a Republican, a Democrat, a Libertarian, a liberal, a conservative, or even a moderate. What you see and hear is what you get. You can read my Blog here.