When we come to Exodus 33:12-16, all efforts at atonement for the sin of the golden calf have failed in renewing God's covenant with His people. Here Moses seems truly at a loss: he has burned the calf and made the people consume its ashes from the water; he has had the sons of Levi put 3,000 men to the sword; he has tried to atone for their sins by offering his own life; the Lord has sent a plague; the Lord has made them rid themselves of ornaments; yet even in this last instance it is obvious that the question remains even now with Moses in this encounter if Israel is restored by God to the covenant He had made with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph. The last word on the subject was God declaring, “if for a single moment I should go up among you [Israel], I would consume you. So now take off your ornaments, that I may know what to do with you,” (Exodus 33:5). So, we have Moses in the tent interceding for the people, and we read: “And [the Lord] said, ‘My presence will go with you, and I will give you rest,” (Exodus 33:14). It is hard to see if perhaps there is ambiguity in “you” here, whether the Lord is speaking uniquely of Moses, or of Moses and the people. It is in the second person masculine singular, but that is also the case elsewhere when it is obvious that all Israel is understood. For example, where God says “for you are a stiff-necked people,” (Exodus 33:3), He is addressing them in second person masculine singular. Yet, when God repeats the phrase as direct speech that Moses is to convey to the people, “Say to the people of Israel, ‘You are a stiff-necked people,’” (Exodus 33:5), He uses the second person masculine plural. Then, in the same direct speech, referring still to the people Israel, God says “among you,” “consume you,” “your ornaments,” “with you,” all in the singular. Yet, it seems to be something of the point that Moses is turning on as he intercedes for the people, where he adds that, while he has found favor with God, “Consider too that this nation is your people,” (Exodus 33:13), and again, “I and your people,” (v 16). Does Moses remain unsure of the standing of Israel and God's covenant with them in part because God is addressing Moses uniquely? Sorry for the length.

In Revelation 7:4–8, John mentions 144,000 people sealed from the twelve tribes of Israel. Jehovah’s Witnesses interpret this number literally as the total number of anointed Christians who will go to heaven and rule with Christ. Immediately afterward, Revelation 7:9–10 describes “a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and before the Lamb.” How do Jehovah’s Witnesses reconcile the idea of a fixed number of 144,000 heavenly Christians with the depiction of innumerable “multitudes” standing before God’s throne? Do official Watch Tower publications clarify the relationship between the 144,000 and the great crowd?

Searching from different bible translations, I had looked deeply into Douay-Rheims version. > "And she entered into the house of Zachary, and saluted Elizabeth." - Luke 1:40 From this passage, we can see that it ends with a period. This event is finished. A casual greetings can be inferred on this passage and nothing much, it's like Mary saying "Hi! or Hello!" to Her cousin Elizabeth, who knew nothing, about what happened to Mary in the annunciation and Her, having conceived the Messiah. Moving on to next verse... > And it came to pass, that when Elizabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the infant leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost: And she cried out with a loud voice, and said: Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? - Luke1:41-43 The word ***"and it came to pass"***, meaning, this event is separated from v.40, where the casual greetings occured. This salutation is much different, it delivered a profound effect on the child in the very womb of Elizabeth, who never knew the Blessed Virgin Mary. The greeting in v. 40 compare to v. 41 can be seen as two separate events. Luke described that it was Elizabeth who heard the salutation and not the infant in her womb. Elizabeth was overjoyed, cried out in a loud voice...this unexplainable feelings was then felt by the child in her womb, that made the infant leaped, as if he shared in the joy that Elizabeth her mother was experiencing at that very moment, that made him leaped. Could it be, that the ***"greetings or salutation"*** that Elizabeth heard at that moment from Mary while praying, is the **Magnificat**. Hearing the words from the Magnificat, was the cause, and the instrument that made her filled with the Holy Spirit. Because Mary's Magnificat was uttered, having overshadowed by the Holy Spirit, the very words of Mary are inspired by the Holy Spirit, to praise the Father in spirit and truth. Elizabeth heard Mary's Canticle, and had realized that Mary was pregnant with the Messiah, and hearing Mary saying, ***"All generations shall call me blessed..."***, Elizabeth reacted,and she is the first one who praised Mary, saying ***"blessed are you among women..."***, and also the first one who proclaimed ***"Jesus is Lord"*** by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, recognizing, the child as her Lord, the way she knew the Lord as the chosen People of God, addressed God in the Old Testament. John the Baptist in Luke1:15 had been prophesied to be filled with the Holy Spirit in the womb of his Mother, and Luke's gospel described the moment, how it happened in v.44 > *For behold as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in my ears, the infant in my womb leaped for joy.* - Luke 1:44 From the discernment above, we can see that the *"greetings"* in Luke 1:40 is different from the *"greetings"* in Luke1:41, the two greetings are a separate event. The other is obviously a casual greeting and the other is a mysterious greetings. In view of the above, I am looking for a commentary or writings from Catholic sources or Christian sources,biblical even extra-biblical showing that the "greetings" in Luke 1:40 and Luke 1:41 is a separate event and different from each other. Elizabeth didn't need to hear Mary's Magnificat to know that she was pregnant with the Lord. Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit, who was perfectly capable of conveying that knowledge. Elizabeth's intuition was very manifest here.

In [this video](https://youtu.be/NYXZQ9BRiGw?si=Aho7ezGrcCPKuvC0&t=616) , former KKK Grand Imperial Wizard Bill Wilkinson says that "we believe that God has commanded us to separate ourselves from the other races. Not because we hate the other races or because we feel we are better or worse, but because it's God's commandment". According to the KKK interpretation of Christian law, where, in the scriptures or in other sources of Christian religious law, does God command the whites to separate themselves from other races?

Many Christians believe that the Archangel Michael is actually Jesus, most notably the Jehovah's Witnesses and Baptist preacher [Charles H. Spurgeon](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/63123/6071) . We have a question asking [for the Biblical basis for this belief](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/26253/6071) . This question asks: what is the Biblical basis **against** this belief, that Michael is not Jesus, but a separate angelic being?

Congregations such as the Jehovah's Witnesses and Seventh-day Adventists believe that Jesus is Michael. What is the Biblical basis for the belief that Jesus is Michael? **Jehovah's Witnesses** >...it is logical to conclude that Michael is none other than Jesus Christ in his heavenly role. [Source](http://www.jw.org/en/publications/books/bible-teach/who-is-michael-the-archangel/) **Seventh-day Adventists** >Moses passed through death, but Michael came down and gave him life before his body had seen corruption. Satan tried to hold the body, claiming it as his; but Michael resurrected Moses and took him to heaven. Satan railed bitterly against God, denouncing Him as unjust in permitting his prey to be taken from him; but Christ did not rebuke His adversary, though it was through his temptation that the servant of God had fallen. He meekly referred him to His Father, saying, "The Lord rebuke thee." Early Writings, p. 164.

There are many holidays/feasts that end in -mas, like: 1. [Christmas](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christmas) 2. [Marymas](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nativity_of_Mary#cite_note-A-2) 3. [Michaelmas](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michaelmas) 4. [Roodmas](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roodmas) 5. [Candlemas](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candlemas) How many other -mas's are there?

So I've been thinking of visiting other churches to see how they do their worship, and so on. And I kind of came across the question that if I go to a church such as a Catholic parish that doesn't recognize me as being able to take communion but I still need to take my communion, how do I go about that? Shall I bring my own bread or what? I want to respect what they believe but also want to stay true to what I believe.

The Bible records many accounts of angels physically manifesting themselves to people, whether for the purpose of delivering a message, or to get them out of trouble, etc. [It also appears that most Christians believe these kinds of manifestations probably still happen today, although in extremely rare circumstances](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/a/86132/50422) . But when it comes to demons, besides Satan's taking the form of a serpent to tempt Eve, I'm not aware of any other cases where a demonic entity materialized in a bodily form in the physical. Of course, there are demon possessions, but those technically speaking belong to a different category, as demons do not manifest their own bodies -- they just usurp someone else's. By the way, as I say this, I notice that I'm making the assumption that demons must have some sort of spiritual body they can physically manifest at will in the first place, but I don't think this is an unreasonable assumption to make, considering that angels can do it, and also what 1 Corinthians 15:40 says: *There are **heavenly bodies** and earthly bodies, but the glory of the heavenly is of one kind, and the glory of the earthly is of another*. Do any denominations believe these kinds of physical demonic manifestations are possible and do happen from time to time?

### Background Protestants across the ages have criticized and prohibited icons and worship of icons of Jesus: John Calvin, *Institutes of the Christian Religion*: > God’s glory is corrupted by an impious falsehood whenever any form is attached to Him R. Scott Clark: > To picture His manhood, when we cannot picture His Godhead, is a sin, because we make Him to be but half Christ; we separate what God has joined ### Incarnation Protestants also believe in the incarnation: that God took on a physical form of a man named Jesus, and that Jesus retains a physical form of a human man today and into eternity, see the *Westminster Shorter Catechism* as an example of this belief: > Christ, the Son of God, became man, by taking to himself a true body, and a reasonable soul, being conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost, in the womb of the virgin Mary, and born of her, yet without sin ### Premises The premise of the question is as follows: Protestants believe **p1**. God (the son) took on physical form **p2**. Humans saw this physical form in the 1st Century CE **p3**. Some of those people worshiped Jesus while he was in the physical form Then reasonable logical inferences: **i1**. Those followers of Jesus continued to remember what Jesus physically looked like **i2**. When praying to Jesus, those people had a mental image of Jesus's face and prayed to that in their minds ### Question - Are any of the premises or inferences wrong according to Protestants? - Were the first followers of Jesus/Christians prohibited from making illustrations of Jesus? - Were the first Christians sinning when imagining Jesus's physical form when praying? - Why would putting an image of the incarnate Jesus to paper be a sin if people saw him and knew what he looked like? - Why would praying to an image of Jesus be wrong if praying to his physical form was not wrong?

What Bible passages affirm that God determines, prior to their birth, whether each person will end up in the New Jerusalem or in the lake of fire? The Bible is clear that some people were predestined to spend eternity in the New Jerusalem. But the Bible is not clear that the fate of everyone else is also predetermined. I expected to find this question asked and answered multiple times in the past, but I was unable to find this. Ephesians 1:4-5 ESV >Even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, Ephesians 1:5 ESV >He predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, Romans 8:29 ESV >For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. Romans 8:28-30 ESV >And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose. For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

Why are the 3 distinct Masses on Christmas (Dec. 25): 1. Mass at Midnight 2. Mass at Dawn 3. Mass at Daytime ?

I was reading this question, [What were the main doctrinal disagreements between Luther and Calvin?](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/6050/21576) , and one of the differences between the two was Calvin believed in double predestination, while Luther believed in single predestination. So according to my understanding: * Double Predestination – God mandates who goes to Heaven AND Hell * Single Predestination – God mandates ONLY who goes to Heaven Could somebody give a Calvinist support for double predestination? Related Question: https://christianity.stackexchange.com/q/53984/

>For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God - Ephesians 2:8. >No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day - John 6:44. There are other passages that say that we are saved through faith and other passages that say that God calls us to salvation, but I've found no passage that mentions both. So is it reasonable that the way God calls/draws to salvation is by giving faith? I look for answers from the point of view of those who believe that both Bible verses are talking about salvation. I am very pleased that I have received answers from a number of different perspectives. If I have to choose one, I will choose the recommended *sola fide*, especially since I already have excellent answers for Reformed Theology. **Conclusion:** God's saving call is the Gospel message we'd probably already heard. The difference is that God opens our spiritual ears to accept that call. The Gospel message heard through spiritual ears produces Faith. This is the relationship between God's call and Faith, and this is the way that Faith is the gift of God. My thanks to you all for reopening this question.

The Sabbath is mentioned about one hundred and forty-five times in the whole Bible (KJV), in the Old Testament the Sabbath is mentioned about ninety times and in almost all the texts it is an instruction to Israel to keep the Sabbath holy. Exodus 31:12 NASB >12 Now the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 13 “Now as for you, speak to the sons of Israel, saying, ‘You must keep My Sabbaths; for this is a sign between Me and you throughout your generations, so that you may know that I am the Lord who sanctifies you. Exodus 35:1-3 NASB >35 Then Moses assembled all the congregation of the sons of Israel, and said to them, “These are the things that the Lord has commanded you to [a]do: > >2 “For six days work may be done, but on the seventh day you shall have a holy day, a Sabbath of complete rest to the Lord; whoever does any work on it shall be put to death. 3 You shall not kindle a fire in any of your dwellings on the Sabbath day.” But in the New Testament, it is mentioned about fifty-five times and in almost every text it is used as an index or marker of the cycle of the week as well as relative to an event that took place Matthew 12:1 NASB >[a]At that time Jesus went through the grainfields on the Sabbath, and His disciples became hungry and began to pick the heads of grain and eat Luke 6:7 NASB >7 Now the scribes and the Pharisees were watching Him [d]closely to see if He healed on the Sabbath, so that they might find a reason to accuse Him. I picked randomly the above texts but it seems most of them only refer to the Sabbath relative to the events that were taking place. There seems to be no clear instruction to keep the Sabbath in the New Testament. But many churches do teach that Christians are to keep the Sabbath. So what is the Biblical Basis for Christians keeping the Sabbath?

I was wondering which church denominations have a very strong emphasis in the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation since it seems they are linked to one another?

According to Protestantism, can Satan and his demons perform true and genuine miracles? God can perform great wonders and miracles, but can the Devil and his minions perform such wonders and miracles as Almighty God is able to perform. Are satanic miracles permanent and long lasting according to Protestant scholars?

I have often been struck by the various accounts of God hardening a person’s heart. Is this due to prolonged rejection of the Gospel, prolonged sin or to create a situation where God will be glorified?

How are Christians led by the Holy Spirit? How does the Holy Spirit communicate God's will to Christians? What mechanisms does the Holy Spirit employ to this end? Since these are probably controversial questions, I'm interested in an overview of major perspectives and what groups hold each perspective. ___ **Appendix - NT passages about the lead of the Holy Spirit** > *For **all who are led by the Spirit of God** are sons of God.* (Romans 8:14 ESV) > *And Jesus, full of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan **and was led by the Spirit in the wilderness***. (Luke 4:1 ESV) > ***My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me**.* (John 10:27 ESV) > *When the **Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth**, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.* (John 16:13 ESV) > *But **the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you**.* (John 14:26 ESV) > *Then **the Spirit said to Philip**, “Go up and join this chariot.”* (Acts 8:29 ESV) > *While Peter was reflecting on the vision, **the Spirit said to him**, “Behold, three men are looking for you. But get up, go downstairs and accompany them without misgivings, for I have sent them Myself.”* (Acts 10:19-20 ESV) > ***The Spirit told me** to go with them without misgivings. These six brethren also went with me and we entered the man’s house.​* (Acts 11:12 ESV) > *While they were ministering to the Lord and fasting, **the Holy Spirit said**, “Set apart for Me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.”* (Acts 13:2 ESV) > *6 And they went through the region of Phrygia and Galatia, **having been forbidden by the Holy Spirit** to speak the word in Asia. 7 And when they had come up to Mysia, they attempted to go into Bithynia, **but the Spirit of Jesus did not allow them**. 8 So, passing by Mysia, they went down to Troas. 9 **And a vision appeared to Paul in the night**: a man of Macedonia was standing there, urging him and saying, “Come over to Macedonia and help us.” 10 **And when Paul had seen the vision**, immediately we sought to go on into Macedonia, concluding that **God had called us** to preach the gospel to them.* (Acts 16:6-10 ESV) > *9 He had four unmarried daughters, who prophesied. 10 While we were staying for many days, a prophet named Agabus came down from Judea. 11 And coming to us, he took Paul's belt and bound his own feet and hands and said, “**Thus says the Holy Spirit**, ‘This is how the Jews at Jerusalem will bind the man who owns this belt and deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.’”* (Acts 21:9-11 ESV)

### Background *Sola Scriptura* is commonly defined as follows > **The Bible is the sole infallible source of authority for faith** (alternatively doctrine) **and practice.** Protestant discussions about the scriptural basis for *Sola Scriptura* nearly always involve 2 Timothy 3:16 and other NT verses, but I have not seen Protestants argue for for *Sola Scriptura* on the basis of the Hebrew Bible. ### Question Do Protestants believe the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament taught *Sola Scriptura* prior to the advent of Christianity and the writing of the New Testament? If so, which passages teach this? If not, how do they explain this doctrine only being introduced by the New Testament?