I have a friend who has begun the study of Revelation with her husband and she asked if I had any material to help them understand it better. I printed out your complete study on the book. It’s the best that I have read.

As a result of my friends interest it has prompted me to “re-study” it and I do have a question concerning Chapter 17 where the woman on the beast is revealed, it says the beast was scarlet. What is the implication of it being this color?

An issue which bothers me is this, I know Jesus was conceived by a virgin. How then is he being linked in genealogy to Abraham and David if Joseph is not his father. Joseph, husband to Mary is also listed in this genealogy as giving legitimacy to the fact that Jesus as a man is a descendant of Abraham. It does not challenge my faith but it keeps on popping up as a question in my mind. Probably the devil trying to twist me around to doubt my faith. What can you say about it.

How do you answer the statement that Satan would have to have fallen after the creation since “everything He had made was good”?

If Damascus is destroyed and there is a retaliation against Israel, will the Jews that do not believe in Jesus but believe in the G-d Head Father, go to Heaven, if they are killed?

I am sure you must know about some churches which do not permit wearing gold or ornaments. Can you please explain this belief to me as to where it came from and if its actually true or not…..Can you give me some scriptural references along with it too.

Thank you ever so much for all the help.

Thank you so much for being a continued source of reference.

I was in a conversation today with a gnostic and asked him what his point of view was on scripture. After some discussion he tried to tell me that there are inaccuracies in scripture. One of the things he brought up was that the “cast the first stone” story from John 8 wasn’t in the original mms and was added by the Catholic church as part of a conspiracy later. I told him that I was aware that it wasn’t in the older copies of John, but was in the older copies of Luke (which is how I understand it) He didn’t seem to believe that. I then told him that 2 Timothy 3:16 says that scripture is God breathed and that God would not allow His word to be corrupted to which he just replied “yeah, but it was.” Can you offer any more ammunition other than just knowing that he’s clinging to his a prior mind set regardless of the evidence presented?

I am a little confused about this bit of the commentary on the fourth chapter of Revelation:

In the center, around the throne, were four living creatures, and they were covered with eyes, in front and in back. The first living creature was like a lion, the second was like an ox, the third had a face like a man, the fourth was like a flying eagle. Each of the four living creatures had six wings and was covered with eyes all around, even under his wings. Day and night they never stop saying: “Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God Almighty, who was, and is, and is to come.” (Rev. 4:6-8) These are the four cherubim who guard the throne of God.

In the beginning there were five, but their leader betrayed both them and his trust, rebelling against God and causing the introduction of a second will in the universe. We call him by his primary activity, Satan, (it means accuser in Hebrew) but in Ezekiel 28:14 he’s called “the anointed cherub.”

Where did you get your information for this statement? I have looked in the word and I haven’t seen anything, I might be looking in the wrong place. Could you help?

I was wondering if you could explain to me if Gog and Magog mean “George and More George”. I was told that by a friend of mine. I don’t believe it though. It was supposed to be translated from the Hebrew. She also said no one could understand the interpretation of the bible if you didn’t know Hebrew. I also disagree with that statement. Thank you for your time.

Can you please explain the following verse regarding God’s prophesy about Eve in Genesis 3:15 to me please?

“And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; he shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.”

My question is in relation to the Exodus. There is talk that the Bible translators mistranslated Red Sea and it should read the Reed Sea. Is this true, and if so why was that? Why didn’t the translators say Reed Sea? I know of course that the translation (or mistranslation) does not change the fact that God’s hand was at work and that through that miracle his glory was shown to all.