Results 701 - 720 of 4232
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: kalos Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
701 | Is astrology forbidden? | Bible general Archive 1 | kalos | 113611 | ||
Rowdy: Thank you for the kind words. We are blessed in that we have several regular contributors to the Forum who consistently do diligent research and share their findings with us. --kalos |
||||||
702 | Masturbation used to expel sexual urge? | Bible general Archive 1 | kalos | 138830 | ||
Is Masturbation Wrong? The fact that the Bible doesn't specifically mention masturbation implies that we should approach this topic with sensitivity and caution. Most teenagers and single adults face an enormous struggle coming to terms with their sexual longings. Often the individuals who are most conscientious about their sexual feelings are the ones most likely to be tormented by unrealistic guilt. If we add to Scripture and weigh them down with even more unwarranted guilt, we become like the Pharisees and their legal experts. To protect holy principles, they added their own laws to Moses -- like fences around fences -- and in the process they heaped on others burdens that they themselves were not willing or able to bear (Luke 11:46). If we are honest, each of us will acknowledge the difficulty of keeping sexually pure in a permissive and sexually obsessed culture. We struggle to avoid either of two extremes. We must not surrender to the hedonistic spirit of the age, but we also want to avoid the spirit of asceticism and proud self-denial that has often marred the history of Christianity. Any belief that our sexual desires and feelings are evil in themselves is based in the Gnostic 1 denial of the goodness of the body and the natural world, not in the teachings of Scripture (1 Timothy 3:1-3). On the other hand, we can't entirely discount the significance of habitual masturbation as a moral issue simply because it isn't mentioned in Scripture. One doesn't speak of "habitual" eating or "habitual" sleeping unless someone is eating or sleeping much more than they should. The fact that you realize you are caught up in a cycle of habitual behavior implies that you know that something is wrong. All of life's pleasures have an appropriate context. When we eat entirely for pleasure, we become flabby and unhealthy. When we sleep much more than is needed for rest and bodily health, we become mentally and physically ill. Any misuse of legitimate pleasure has bad consequences. The purpose of sexual pleasure is to nurture intimacy and unity between a husband and wife (Genesis 2:24; Mark 10:6-8; Ephesians 5:28-32). Sexual desire is related to our deepest longings, our profoundest potential for intimacy and joy. It is like a fire. In the right circumstances a fire provides warmth, light, and food. In the wrong place it has enormous capacity for destruction. The Bible doesn't provide a detailed discussion of human sexual issues. It tends to refer to sexual matters indirectly and with considerable delicacy. For example, even the term sex isn't used in the Bible, and the male and female sexual organs are referred to only indirectly, as is the act of intercourse. Even such a serious issue as pedophilia isn't mentioned specifically. It's likely, therefore, that although it isn't mentioned specifically in Scripture, habitual masturbation would be included under the categories of "lasciviousness," "impurity," and "uncleanness" (e.g. Leviticus 15:16-17; Mark 7:20-22; 2 Corinthians 12:21; Galatians 5:19; Ephesians 5:3,5; Colossians 3:5). 2 What are some of the illegitimate uses of sexual pleasure that we should be on guard against? Sexual pleasure shouldn't serve merely as a "pressure valve" for the release of physical and emotional tension. There are more constructive, loving ways to release -- and even to harness -- our physical and emotional tension. Sexual pleasure shouldn't be fed by sinful fantasy. Jesus made it clear that sexual sin isn't limited to physical act. Sin occurs equally in fantasy and imagination. There is a healthy imagination that leads to actions that honor one another, and a self-absorbed imagination that inclines us to use others for our own pleasure (Matthew 5:27-30; 15:19). Sexual fantasy can be a destructive expression of rage, revenge, or lust. Such unhealthy fantasies can scar and harden our hearts even if they aren't carried out in the real world. Sexual pleasure should never be a way we demand that God satisfy us immediately, on our terms. We should never expect sexual pleasure to compensate for our loneliness, disappointment, powerlessness, or sense of rejection. If we use it for these reasons, it is illegitimate. Followers of Christ have been given freedom and forgiveness to love and honor one another, but not to be enslaved again to the flesh (Romans 6:16). We have been given God's Spirit and wisdom so that we can understand that our bodies make good servants -- and cruel masters. ____________________ The above is a direct quotation of an article written by: Dan Vander Lugt To read this article, including footnotes, go to: (www.gospelcom.net/rbc/questions/). Then click on "Personal Struggles" for the link to "Masturbation." |
||||||
703 | Anything wrong with dating? | Bible general Archive 1 | kalos | 155923 | ||
Bows44: Thank you for your excellent reply. You are one of very, very few people that understood what I was getting at. I admire you for providing your son with good counsel and guidance on the subject of dating. Thanks also for recommending the CD by Dr. Davis that you and your son listened to. Dating (the dating culture and customs), I think, is one of those elements of worldly culture that creeps into the thinking of believers without their even being aware of the risks involved. God bless you, Kalos |
||||||
704 | So then, what is Hades? | Bible general Archive 1 | kalos | 176446 | ||
"Hell is a real place. It is not mere unconsciousness. It is not temporal. It is eternal torment." ____________________ If anyone reading this is a Jehovah's Witness, please understand that I am not against you as an individual. 'The Dead are Conscious After Death 'The wicked descend alive into Sheol ' Num. 16:30, "But if the Lord brings about an entirely new thing and the ground opens its mouth and swallows them up with all that is theirs, and they descend alive into Sheol, then you will understand that these men have spurned the Lord . . . 33So they and all that belonged to them went down alive to Sheol; and the earth closed over them, and they perished from the midst of the assembly." 'Cast to outer darkness with weeping and gnashing of teeth ' Matt. 8:12, "but the sons of the kingdom shall be cast out into the outer darkness; in that place there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” 'Those cast into the fire suffer consciously ' Matt. 13:41-42, "The Son of Man will send forth His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all stumbling blocks, and those who commit lawlessness, 42and will cast them into the furnace of fire; in that place there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” See also Matt. 13:50. 'Cast into a tormenting fire ' Rev. 14:9-11, "And another angel, a third one, followed them, saying with a loud voice, "If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives a mark on his forehead or upon his hand, 10he also will drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is mixed in full strength in the cup of His anger; and he will be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. 11"And the smoke of their torment goes up forever and ever; and they have no rest day and night, those who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name."” See also, Rev. 21:8. 'Hell is a place of eternal fire and punishment 'Unquenchable Fire Matt. 3:12 "And His winnowing fork is in His hand, and He will thoroughly clear His threshing floor; and He will gather His wheat into the barn, but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire." 'Fiery Hell Matt. 5:22, "whoever shall say, 'You fool,' shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell." See also, Matt. 5:29,30. 'Fiery Hell Matt. 18:8-9, "And if your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; it is better for you to enter life crippled or lame, than having two hands or two feet, to be cast into the eternal fire. 9"And if your eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out, and throw it from you. It is better for you to enter life with one eye, than having two eyes, to be cast into the fiery hell." 'Eternal Fire Matt. 25:41, "Then He will also say to those on His left, 'Depart from Me, accursed ones, into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels. 'Eternal Punishment ' Matt. 25:46, "And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life." ' The word 'eternal' in both places is "aionios" which means 1)without beginning and end, that which always has been and always will be; 2)without beginning; 3)without end, never to cease, everlasting. The word 'punishment' is the word kolasis and it means "to punish, with the implication of resulting severe suffering - 'to punish, punishment.'"(5) 'Eternal Fire ' Jude 7, "Just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, since they in the same way as these indulged in gross immorality and went after strange flesh, are exhibited as an example, in undergoing the punishment of eternal fire." 'Lake of Fire ' Rev. 20:15, "And if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire." 'Conclusion ' Hell is a real place. It is not mere unconsciousness. It is not temporal. It is eternal torment. Perhaps that is why Jesus spoke more of hell than heaven and spent so much time warning people not to go there. After all, if people just stopped existing, why warn them? If it was temporal, they'd get out in a while. But if it were eternal and conscious, then the warning is strong. 'Jesus said, "And if your right eye makes you stumble, tear it out, and throw it from you; for it is better for you that one of the parts of your body perish, than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30"And if your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off, and throw it from you; for it is better for you that one of the parts of your body perish, than for your whole body to go into hell," (Matt. 5:29-30).' ____________________ Source: www.carm.org/doctrine/hell.htm |
||||||
705 | You shall not Murder, then told too?? | OT general | kalos | 3782 | ||
You have done well in providing a Scripture reference that, under the Old Testament period of the Law (the period in which Jesus had his earthly ministry), indeed condoned carrying a lethal weapon. As much as I do appreciate your answer, I'm not sure it is the definitive answer that applies to the NT era of Grace as opposed to Law. For example, after the resurrection and ascension of Christ into heaven, is there a clear verse of Scripture to indicate that any or all the Apostles carried or used lethal weapons? | ||||||
706 | Is anything above God's name? | OT general | kalos | 4696 | ||
wdc: Congratulations! You are correct. The one and only Biblical answer is "thy word above all thy name." I asked the question merely to stimulate a reply. I sort of like the question because it is one that can be answered with a simple yes or no. The answer is either in the Bible or it isn't. For this particular question, the answer IS yes and it IS found in the Bible. How refreshing for a change! Thanks again for a refreshingly correct answer to a refreshingly simple question. Neither of us had to write a 5000-word essay to ask or answer the question. --JVH0212 |
||||||
707 | Did Adam and Eve have belly buttons? | OT general | kalos | 24858 | ||
Yours is an interesting theory. However, I believe you will find that neither Adam nor Eve were ever in a mother's womb. Man being made in the image of God has nothing in the world to do with our physical bodies. God does not have a body. God is Spirit. Genesis 1:26 "*Our image.* This defined man's unique relation to God. Man is a living being capable of embodying God's communicable attributes. In his rational life, he was like God in that he could reason and had intellect, will, and emotion. In the moral sense, he was like God because he was good and sinless" (note at Gen. 1:26, MacArthur Study Bible, Word Publishing, 1997). John 4:24 (NKJV) "*God is Spirit.* This verse represents the classical statement on the nature of God as Spirit. The phrase means that God is invisible as opposed to the physical or material nature of man. The word order of this phrase puts an emphasis on 'Spirit,' and the statement is essentially emphatic" (note at John 4:24, MacArthur Study Bible, Word Publishing, 1997). |
||||||
708 | Did Adam and Eve have belly buttons? | OT general | kalos | 24889 | ||
Nolan: I agree. Actually it's hard to take the belly buttons question seriously. This question is a standard joke among college sophomore philosophy students. Or it's like the questions we used to ask as seventh graders, e.g. Can God make an object so big that he cannot move it? All my life they have been saying there's no such thing as a stupid question. Now I know -- "they" were wrong. :-) I had hoped the forum would never sink to the level of such questions. Alas, another hope for the forum dashed to pieces. :-) kalos |
||||||
709 | The Massorah? | OT general | kalos | 30793 | ||
You write: "the amplified, and the NIV,and so on and so forth that I feel are straying Christians from the true word. Just my opinion." My reply: It is so nice to hear from you, but I feel that Your opinion is not worthy unless you can prove it. You have no evidence, statistical or otherwise, to prove your opinion in this matter. And you do a disservice when you bash these two translations on a public forum. Again I ask, what is with all this translation bashing? |
||||||
710 | The Massorah? | OT general | kalos | 30823 | ||
Hank: Thank you. Yours is the voice of reason and sanity. By the way, I don't know one word of Russian. But in my spare time, I think I'll purchase a Russian-English dictionary. Then I will be fully qualified to check our English translations of Tolstoy to make sure they are accurate. If there is any discrepancy between the original and the translations, I need only consult somone who has read a chapter or two of WAR AND PEACE. Between the two of us we will surely have more knowledge and authority than the original transators. If anyone believes that, I have a bridge I'd like to sell them. kalos |
||||||
711 | The Massorah? | OT general | kalos | 30847 | ||
Ed: I'll take ten shekels for the bridge. Of course, first we'll have to start a thread to find the conversion rate between the shekel and the dollar. As soon as someone gives an answer, especially if it's the right one, we need to have some Internet Lone Ranger self-appointed shekel expert write in and tell the first guy he's wrong. This should be followed by 100 posts over a period of three weeks in which most of the Notes and Answers will come from those who have never in their lives seen a shekel and who don't even know how to pronounce the word. Included in the posts should be a quote or two from current publications in which the conversion rate (shekel to dollar) is accurately given. This will immediately be followed by warning posts cautioning the writer not to believe anything you read in establishment publications as to the value of a shekel. Then someone else will have to look up shekel in Strong's and work backwards into the original language. After the debate becomes more and more heated, bitter and divisive, someone should report it to the Lockman foundation and have it restricted from appearing on the homepage. A month from now someone will bring up the exact same question and we'll go through the entire farce again. In the meantime, another poster will ask how many shekels dowry did Cain's wife's father have to pay. To answer that question it will be debated whether Cain's wife's father was Adam, Cain's first son, a monkey, a Nephilim, or a fallen angel. By then the original bridge will have rusted and it will then be falling down, falling down, falling down. My fair lady. I'm sorry, Ed, what was your original question? In all the craziness we've lost sight of the original purpose of the thread. :-) Bless you, Ed, kalos |
||||||
712 | The Massorah? | OT general | kalos | 31249 | ||
EdB: Amen, Amen, Amen and Amen. You have spoken well. Thank you. In these days common sense is an uncommon virtue. Thank you for your common sense and factual posting. Grace and peace to you, kalos |
||||||
713 | Ack! Evolutionists- -Help?(whimper) | OT general | kalos | 57575 | ||
justme: You know that I think highly of you and regard you as my friend. Therefore, you may be assured nothing in this post is intended to be critical of or negative toward you. :-) When a man (Makarios) has publicly authored 4,290 posts, he reveals quite a bit about himself: what he's like, what he believes and how he thinks. Makarios is among the top 5 people on this forum to consistently post information that is accurate, verifiable and Scripturally sound. Grace to you, my friend, kalos |
||||||
714 | source references | OT general | kalos | 107136 | ||
YHWH is not in the Greek NT, according to the Kingdom Interlinear Translation. 'The most widespread change in the Watchtower Bible is the insertion of the name JEHOVAH 237 times in the New Testament. Of course, it is appropriate for a translator to choose to use the divine name JEHOVAH or YAHWEH in the Old Testament where the Tetragrammator YHWH actually appears in the Hebrew text. However, the Watchtower has gone beyond this by inserting the name JEHOVAH in the New Testament, where it does not appear in Greek manuscripts. One need only look at the word-by-word English that appears under the Greek text in the Society's own Kingdom Interlinear Translation to see that the name JEHOVAH is not there in the Greek.' (http://www.watchman.org/jw/nwt.htm) |
||||||
715 | Is Jesus YHWH? | OT general | kalos | 107208 | ||
Jesus is neither the Father nor the Holy Spirit. There is one God in three Persons -- not one God in one Person. Moreover, it is not true that "In the old testament people did not know God's name." God's name, YHWH, appears nearly 7,000 times in the OT. Thus, to say that people in the OT did not know God's name is just plain silly. |
||||||
716 | Is Jesus YHWH? | OT general | kalos | 107245 | ||
WHEN was the name of God known? American Standard Version (ASV) Genesis 4:26 And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enosh. Then began men to call upon the name of Jehovah. ASV Genesis 12:8 And he (Abram) removed from thence unto the mountain on the east of Beth-el, and pitched his tent, having Beth-el on the west, and Ai on the east: and there he builded an altar unto Jehovah, and called upon the name of Jehovah. For more information see Study Note #45 at Exodus 3:13 in the New English Translation (NET Bible) at (www.netbible.org/). |
||||||
717 | Is Jesus YHWH? | OT general | kalos | 107246 | ||
They did not know his name? 'God Almighty (Hebrew, El Shaddai), the strong or powerful God...The name Yahweh WAS KNOWN TO THE PATRIARCHS (Gen. 13:4), but its SIGNIFICANCE as the One who would redeem Israel from Egyptian bondage was not known until this time' (i.e. the time spoken of in Exodus 6). (Note at Exodus 6:3, Ryrie Study Bible: Expanded Edition. Emphasis added.) |
||||||
718 | Is Jesus YHWH? | OT general | kalos | 107254 | ||
The name of Yahweh...from the beginning "We are told from the very beginning that people were making proclamation of the name of Yahweh..." Then Moses said to God, "Behold, I am going to the sons of Israel, and I will say to them, 'The God of your fathers has sent me to you.' Now they may say to me, 'What is His name?' What shall I say to them?" NASB Exodus 3:13 'There has been considerable debate about the name of Yahweh in the Pentateuch, primarily because of the source critical approach that tried to argue that the name Yahweh was not known in antiquity. The argument of this whole section nullifies that view. The idea that God's name was revealed only here raises the question of what he was called earlier. The word "God" is not a name. "El Shaddai" is used only a few times in Genesis. But Israel would not have had a nameless deity-especially since we are told from the very beginning that people were making proclamation of the name of Yahweh (Gen 4:26; 12:8). 'It is possible that they did not always need a name if they were convinced that only he existed and there was no other God. But probably what Moses was anticipating was the Israelites wanting to be sure that Moses came from their God, and that some sign could prove it. They would have known his name (Yahweh), and they would have known the ways that he had manifested himself. It would do no good for Moses to come with a new name for God, for that would be like introducing them to a new God. That would in no way authenticate his call to them, only confuse; after all, they would not be expecting a new name-they had been praying to their covenant God all along. They would want to be sure that their covenant God actually had sent Moses. 'To satisfy the Israelites Moses would have had to have been familiar with the name Yahweh-as they were-and know that he appeared to individuals. They would also want to know if Yahweh had sent Moses, how this was going to work in their deliverance, because they had been crying to him for deliverance. As it turned out, the Israelites had less problem with this than Moses anticipated-they were delighted when he came. It is likely that much of this concern was Moses' own need for assurance that this was indeed the God of the fathers and that the promised deliverance was now to take place. See the discussions of this passage in the commentaries on Exodus by Benno Jacob and Umberto Cassuto. ' (Study note at Exodus 3:13, The Net Bible, (www.netbible.com)) *************************** "Never read a Bible verse. That's right, never read a Bible VERSE. Instead, always read a paragraph - at least." (www.str.org/free/studies/neverrea.htm) |
||||||
719 | source references | OT general | kalos | 107363 | ||
Here is a list of online resources that expose the error of Watchtower teachings, resources that I have used and found to be very informative and helpful. www.carm.org/witnesses.htm (Highly recommended. This may be the best resource for answering JWs.) www.equip.org/search/ (Highly recommended.) www.soulright.com/nwt.html www.namb.net/root/resources/beliefbulletins/cults/new_world_translation.asp ____________________ When dealing with JWs, focus your witness on the deity of Jesus Christ. This is the main issue. Do not be sidetracked by such issues as blood transfusions, saluting the flag, and the like. Denial of the deity of Christ is the foundation upon which JW doctrine is built. After the deity of Christ, all else is secondary where JWs are concerned. As was said recently by another poster, a well-trained JW will tie the average Christian into a theological pretzel in about five minutes. You must be prepared. There are several websites that will help you to prepare to witness to JWs, some of which are listed above. 'The first thing you say to a JW before you study with them is that you [do] not accept anything from the NWT as authoritative. But they won't accept any other Bible in their heart, even though they might allow you to use one. 'The NWT is so extremely biased and perverted, it is questionable if any Hebrew or Greek scholars worked on it. It is nothing more than a sectarian paraphrase, not a translation. 'No one uses the NWT except the JW's. 'JW's on the other hand will use nothing else! 'It has undergone many revisions. 'It is not a translation, but a corrupt sectarian paraphrase' (www.bible.ca/Jw-NWT.htm). |
||||||
720 | why don't people study the old testmant | OT general | kalos | 115175 | ||
Anyone who says that they "don't see any more outstanding doctrine in the OT" is in need of eye salve, "that you may see" (Revelation 3:18). To say that the OT, the Word of God, is legalistic is absurd. To say that the Law is legalistic is to display a lack of knowledge and understanding of both the Law and legalism (two different things). Legalism is not obeying the written Law of God; it is the attempt to keep man-made rules and regulations, man-made interpretations of the Law. Jesus illustrated the difference in the Sermon on the Mount. According to Paul, "All Scripture...is profitable for doctrine." To claim that the OT is NOT profitable for doctrine is to claim that it is not inspired Scripture. Suede, I am not against you. What I write is not intended as a personal attack. Grace to you, kalos |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 ] Next > Last [212] >> |