Did Joseph practice fortune telling or divination?

Are we to understand from Genesis 45:5," TARGET="_blank">Genesis 45:5,18 that Joseph actually used divination?

Though divination was common in Egypt, it is hard to suppose that a pious believer in the true God like Joseph should use such practices. Moreover, as one in close touch with God and an interpreter of dreams, etc., what drawing could he have to descend to such heathenish customs?

The cup may very well have been similar to those used for this purpose, but it is noticeable that Joseph only says to his brethren, “wot ye not that such a man as I can certainly divine?” (v. 15), without affirming that he did. It must be admitted that his word through his steward does seem to go further. The true explanation may be that in order to keep up his character before his brethren, as an orthodox Egyptian, so as the more effectually to carry out his deliberate plan for their conviction and restoration, he might feel justified in conveying this momentary impression that he divined. If he did so, it is not commended nor is it specifically blamed. We are aware in reading the Old Testament that even men of God had not the same standards of truthfulness, that are binding on us to-day. The word here for “divine” (nihesh) is translated, “I have learned by experience” (Genesis 30:27)," TARGET="_blank">Genesis 30:27), and “did diligently observe” (1 Kings 20:33)," TARGET="_blank">1 Kings 20:33), but generally, “to use enchantments” (2 Kings 17" TARGET="_blank">2 Kings 17: I7 2 Kings 21:6)." TARGET="_blank">2 Kings 21:6). Such divination is strictly forbidden later in the Word of God (see Levticus 19:26; Deuteronomy 19:10)." TARGET="_blank">Deuteronomy 19:10).
W.H.

Other pages in this section

About this site

How involved should a believer be in the political process?

How involved should a believer be in the political process? Should I give money to the religious right if it espouses my values?

Although God still overrules in government (Daniel 4:17,25, 32; 5:21;" TARGET="_blank">Daniel 4:17,25, 32; 5:21; Proverbs 21:1)" TARGET="_blank">Proverbs 21:1) and those who govern are accountable to God who has ordained their office for the good of man (Romans 13:1, 2, 4, 6)," TARGET="_blank">Romans 13:1, 2, 4, 6), the powers of darkness control world governments (Ephesians 6:12)." TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 6:12). Whether regenerate or unregenerate, those who govern serve in a government controlled by the god of this world (2 Corinthians 4:4;" TARGET="_blank">2 Corinthians 4:4; 1 John 5:19," TARGET="_blank">1 John 5:19, "in the wicked one," Darby). Governments are inevitably moving to conform to God's purpose for Israel, yet the only means that God will use to overthrow and effectively redirect their power is based on redemption, for Judah's Lion is the Redeemer-Lamb (Revelation 5:5,6,9)." TARGET="_blank">Revelation 5:5,6,9). Neither protest against, participation in, nor power with-in government will arrest the tide of the mystery of lawlessness (2 Thessalonians 2:7," TARGET="_blank">2 Thessalonians 2:7, Darby). Are believers to be unconcerned about the course of evil in the world? The Bible clearly teaches our responsibility to evangelize the world and to pray for those who govern and for their impact (1 Timothy 2:2)." TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 2:2). Our testimony, both through what we are (salt, Matthew 5:13)" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 5:13) and what we do (light by good works, Matthew 5:14-16)," TARGET="_blank">Matthew 5:14-16), lends weight to the gospel (1 Peter 2:12)," TARGET="_blank">1 Peter 2:12), God's only message of deliverance for man (John 8:36;" TARGET="_blank">John 8:36; Acts 26:18)." TARGET="_blank">Acts 26:18). The "responsibility" of citizens to vote or gain power in government is a human expedient, not a divine principle.

The only place where God's government is recognized is the assembly, the house of God (1 Timothy 3:15" TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 3:15 with Genesis 28:17)." TARGET="_blank">Genesis 28:17). To participate in a government other than God's, even by voluntary financial contributions, seems to question the sufficiency of God's government.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Parallel Bible

gen 1:1-5" TARGET="_blank">gen 1:1-5&search=&ver1=kjv&ver2=bbe">Click here to see an example of Genesis 1:1-5" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 1:1-5 in the online parallel Bible showing two versions (KJV - King James Version and the BBE - the Bible in Basic English). The purpose of the parallel Bible is to allow you compare one translation to another. Often the familiar KJV carries the traditional wording that many christians or churches have used for centuries, but another version, in parallel, may help in the understanding of the meaning of the text.

Instructions for using the Parallel Bible

1. Select the link gen 1:1-5" TARGET="_blank">gen 1:1-5&search=&ver1=kjv&ver2=bbe">Parallel Bible .

2. Type in a passage Bible reference such as John 3:1-5" TARGET="_blank">John 3:1-5 as pictured.

3. Choose the first Bible version to form the first version of the parallel (ASV -American Standard Version, BBE - Bible in Basic English, DBY - Darby "New Translation", GFR - God's Word for Readers, KJV - King James Version, WEB - World English Bible, YLT - Young's Literal Translation, or the ESV - English Standard Version)

4. Select the second Bible version to complete the parallel. The second, optional parallel, choice is not required to make a search.

5. Click Search to launch the parallel bible view.

If you enter a search word or phrase, the results of your parallel bible search will be different with each Bible version since the language in each Bible version is slightly different.

About the Bible Versions

KJV

The King James or Authorised Version of the Bible is an English translation of the Christian Bible first published in 1611. The New Testament was translated from the Textus Receptus (Received Text) edition of the Greek texts, so called because most extant texts of the time were in agreement with it. The Old Testament was translated from the Masoretic Hebrew text.

(Modern English Bibles such as the New American Standard Bible and the English Standard Version decline to use the Textus Receptus, opting instead for what many modern scholars feel are more reliable critical editions.)

The King James Version has had a profound effect on English literature. The works of famous authors such as John Milton, Herman Melville, John Dryden, and William Wordsworth are deeply inspired by it.

BBE

The Bible In Basic English (also known as BBE) is a translation of the Bible into Basic English. The BBE was translated by Professor S. H. Hooke using the standard 850 Basic English words. 100 words that were helpful to understand poetry were added along with 50 "Bible" words. The New Testament was released in 1941 and the Old Testament was released in 1949.

ASV

The American Standard Version (ASV) of the Holy Bible was first published in 1901. It has earned the reputation of being the Rock of Biblical Honesty. Although the English used in the ASV is somewhat archaic, it isn't nearly as hard to understand as some passages of the King James Version of nearly 3 centuries earlier. This translation of the Holy Bible is in the public domain, since its copyright has expired. You are encouraged to download, copy, publish, and use this translation freely.

Darby

First published in 1890 by John Nelson Darby, an Anglo-Irish Bible teacher associated with the early years of the Plymouth Brethren. Darby also published translations of the Bible in French and German.

ESV

The English Standard Version (ESV) was Published in 2003 as a translation to bridge the gap between the accuracy of the NASB and the readability of the NIV.

The ESV is an “essentially literal” translation that seeks as far as possible to capture the precise wording of the original text and the personal style of each Bible writer. As such, its emphasis is on “word-for-word” correspondence, at the same time taking into account differences of grammar, syntax, and idiom between current literary English and the original languages. Thus it seeks to be transparent to the original text, letting the reader see as directly as possible the structure and meaning of the original.

In contrast to the ESV, some Bible versions have followed a “thought-for-thought” rather than “word-for-word” translation philosophy, emphasizing “dynamic equivalence” rather than the “essentially literal” meaning of the original. A “thought-for-thought” translation is of necessity more inclined to reflect the interpretive opinions of the translator and the influences of contemporary culture.

Other pages in this section

About this site

Does the believer have two natures?

Why do some question the use of the expression, the believers two natures?

Sometimes defining terms helps resolve differences. At issue is what constitutes a nature? If we accept that a nature is the essential characteristics and qualities of a person or thing, we can suggest three possible objections.

A first objection is that this expression is not biblical. Some point out that we have become "partakers of the divine nature" (2 Peter 1:4)." TARGET="_blank">2 Peter 1:4). This cannot mean we have been made to share in the "essential characteristics" of deity, because those characteristics are non-transferable. If this referred to a "new nature," we would hardly have expected the word "partakers." Peter would more likely state that we received it or that God imparted it, since "nature" seems to imply something that has now become native to a believer. The suggested meaning is that, as possessors of new life - eternal life, we share the quality of life possessed by God.

A second objection is that it is difficult to define any "entity" or nature imparted at salvation. What was imparted to us at salvation is a new principle and power. We have been made alive spiritually and have received eternal life. Our quickened spirit or mind now has a relationship with God and delights in righteousness (Romans 7:22, 23)." TARGET="_blank">Romans 7:22, 23). Because of this relationship, a new law or principle is now active in the believer.

In addition, the Spirit of God now resides within us. He empowers the believer to live righteously. This is a more intimate and effective provision than Old Testament believers enjoyed, yet they lived righteously as a result of having been made spiritually alive. Our minds have always been able to make moral choices, but when made alive spiritually our mind functions properly by responding to God and to righteousness.

A third objection is that "the essential characteristics and qualities of a person7 define that person. Is a believer, then, "defined" by "our old man" (Romans 6:6)," TARGET="_blank">Romans 6:6), his old standing in Adam, or by "the new man" (Colossians 3:10)," TARGET="_blank">Colossians 3:10), his new standing in Christ? The essential characteristics of a believer in Christ are "righteousness and true holiness" (Ephesians 4:24)." TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 4:24). Every believer is a new creation (2 Corinthians 5:17)" TARGET="_blank">2 Corinthians 5:17) and this defines his characteristics.

Many able teachers and commentators refer to the believer's two natures, so it is best not to crusade on this point.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Should I forgive my brother if he refuses to repent?

In light of Matthew 18:21-22" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 18:21-22 and Luke 17:3, 4," TARGET="_blank">Luke 17:3, 4, is a Christian bound to forgive another Christian only if he repents?

Every offended Christian ought to be willing to forgive another Christian whether or not the offender repents. God loves to forgive. Being followers of God (Ephesians 5:1)," TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 5:1), we ought to be ready to forgive, too. Psalm 86:5" TARGET="_blank">Psalm 86:5 states, "For Thou, Lord, art good, and ready to forgive."

An unforgiving spirit produces bitterness and ruins Christian life. The apostle Paul exhorted, "Let all bitterness ... be put away from you...: And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you" (Ephesians 4:31, 32)." TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 4:31, 32).

When a believer recognizes that he has offended another, he should attempt to restore the enjoyment of fellowship with his offended brother. Sometimes, however, a Christian may not even be aware or feel - that he has offended another. In such a case, a spirit of forgiveness on the part of the Christian who has been hurt will enable him to lay aside the hurt without ever raising the matter. Love "thinketh no evil" (1 Corinthians 13:5)" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 13:5) means love keeps no record of evil; thus, Christian love will lay a matter to rest - and forget it - without raising the issue or demanding repentance (1 Peter 4:8)." TARGET="_blank">1 Peter 4:8).

J. Beattie

Other pages in this section

About this site

Sunday School Projects

Each week, you can get Sunday School Projects or a Sunday school game mailed to you for free. Save yourself hours of Sunday School Projects preparation and planning and instead, invest your prepration time in the Bible.

Click here to subscribe to the weekly Sunday school projects .

For an example of what kind of Sunday School Projects you will get, check out the 3D Tabernacle model and other teaching materials at Sunday School Activities
Other pages in this section

About this site

How can we deal with in-law problems?

It is important always to remember that you and your in-laws are all children of God and loved by Him so much that He gave His Son for each of you. We are commanded in 1 John 4:11," TARGET="_blank">1 John 4:11,12 to love one another, thus proving the reality of our salvation. If problems have developed between believers, the Lord Jesus taught in Matthew 18:15" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 18:15 that we should discuss and clear up the problems privately. If that doesn't work (verse 16), then one or two brethren with spiritual wisdom and experience should be invited to give unbiased advice. Every effort should be made to avoid involving others in the assembly.

Sometimes the problem is that parents have been so accustomed to the subjection of their children in the home that they forget that their married "child" is now a member of a new family with the husband as the head. The situation should never be left to fester and become worse, or it can develop into strife not only within the family but also in the assembly

A. Joyce

Other pages in this section

About this site

What shape was Jesus' cross?

Was the Cross on which our Lord was crucified the cross as shaped to-day?

Is the word used that for a stake and not a cross, a word only implying that which stands up?

It is true that the first meaning of “stauros,” the word translated, “cross,” in the New Testament, is a “stake” (from “histëmi,” to st nd), and this was occasionally used in executions, the victim being sometimes impaled on it. But this stake, called “the simple cross,” was not the Latin cross, which was in the shape of a T, and had an upright above the crossbar, on which the title of accusation was displayed. This was the form of cross the Romans used, and, on which there seems no room to doubt, our Lord was crucified. Because the cross is found in Babylonian cults is no good reason for denying that the Romans crucified Him on the ordinary Latin cross. We are certainly not to wear a cross or display it on “religious buildings,” but to learn the meaning of Christ’s Cross, and bear our own. W.H.

Other pages in this section

About this site

Should a Christian voluntarily vote?

Should a Christian voluntarily vote?

This has probably never been more relevant than now. Evangelical leaders are insisting that Christians vote. They purport to teach this from the Bible. This is different from assembly teaching in the past, so respect and wisdom ask, "What has changed?"

Two suggestions may help us regain our perspective. First, the history of democracy in North America has roots in Christian principles, thus the designation, "Christian countries." A "mixed multitude" formed without a clear gospel has produced a constituency that makes the political world appear friendly to God. Pluralism and humanism, however, now threaten this "Christian government." Evangelicals see a "good world" becoming corrupted. More biblically, the world is removing its mask. Christian principles had weight in the past because of the gospel’s spiritual impact on society, not because the world had changed. Being "the salt of the earth" does not require Christian involvement in the world. The Christian preserves the culture by the truth he represents and presents. The world needs the gospel that grants life, rather than laws that guide living.

Second, evangelicalism’s present emphasis on political involvement appears to result from a shift of understanding and emphasis regarding future events. A growing part of evangelicalism no longer understands that the Lord’s coming precedes the tribulation and the millennium. This places a greater emphasis on improving the present world. It also blurs the distinction between God’s dealings in the past with an earthly people Israel and in the present with a heavenly people. The citation of Old Testament passages to support political involvement witnesses to this. Even evangelicals who believe in a pre-tribulation Rapture have been unduly influenced by those with wrong views of future events. Added to this is the danger that prosperity has historically made Christians more at home in this world. Rather than looking for the imminent coming of Christ, we become increasingly involved in the world.

The past teaching that Christians should not voluntarily vote is based on sound biblical principles. Christians are separate from a world system which is opposed to God and is not redeemable apart from the coming of Christ. Christians are not directed to improve the world, but to proclaim the gospel that condemns it and offers salvation from it.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Will believers reign on the earth in the Millennium?

To whom does "us" and "we" refer in Revelation 5:10," TARGET="_blank">Revelation 5:10, "And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth"?

The manuscripts used in Darby’s translation, for instance, change "we" to "them" and omit "us." The sense of the passage, therefore, is that the Lamb has made those He redeemed with His blood (verse 9) kings and priests to God; those redeemed ones will reign on the earth. We need not be upset to learn that, in subsequent years, scholars found more reliable manuscripts than those used for our beloved Authorized Version. God’s truth stands immutable: "For ever, 0 Lord, Thy word is settled in heaven" (Psalm 119:89)." TARGET="_blank">Psalm 119:89). The manuscript changes are very minor and, as in this passage, affect no doctrine, but only our understanding of the passage.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Main Menu

Parallel Bible