Results 1661 - 1680 of 2277
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: Hank Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1661 | diffe | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 62957 | ||
Duplicate question, previously answered. --Hank | ||||||
1662 | diff of each letter IHS as on cross | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 62953 | ||
IHS is an abbreviation of the Latin "Iesus Hominum Salvator" and means "Jesus Savior of Men." Another familiar abbreviation is INRI, from the Latin "Iesus Nazarenus, Rex Iudaeorum" which translates "Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews." This was, of course, the title that Pilate wrote and put on Jesus' cross. (John 19:19). --Hank | ||||||
1663 | Quoting equals judging? | Matt 7:1 | Hank | 62890 | ||
Charis, greetings. It depends on the circumstances, I'd say. "Scriptural curses" can be hurled at someone in a mean, accusatory spirit, that's for sure. I've seen it happen on this very forum. I recall that in the case of a certain former registrant -- his user account was revoked some while ago I believe -- he, upon being challenged by his peers, would respond to them with some of the most dreadful prophecies and "woe be unto you" verses in the Bible. Jesus had the authority to use the harsh words "generation of vipers" but I don't believe Hank does! --Hank | ||||||
1664 | Why should we not be embarassed? | Rom 1:16 | Hank | 62877 | ||
Paul the Apostle said: "For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek." [Romans 1:16] ....... Jesus said, "Therefore whoever confesses Me before men, him I will confess before My Father who is in heaven. But whoever denies Me before men, him I will also deny before My Father who is in heaven. [Matthew 10:32,33] --Hank | ||||||
1665 | Was Noah's flood world-wide? | 1 Pet 3:21 | Hank | 62870 | ||
The flood world-wide or local? Arguments have been advanced favoring both possibilities; however, in my view the argument is far stronger that it was world-wide. You might want to read some good on-line stuff about Noah's flood from a Christian-oriented scientific perspective. Go to www.icr.org. --Hank | ||||||
1666 | number of persons in Noah's ark | 1 Pet 3:21 | Hank | 62865 | ||
In the ark were Noah and his wife, his three sons, Shem, Ham and Japeth and their wives. The story of Noah's flood is recorded in Genesis 6-9. --Hank | ||||||
1667 | Book of Jasher? Any input on this verse. | Josh 10:13 | Hank | 62814 | ||
Kayla, this book of Jasher, so scholars believe, probably consisted of poems on important events in Israel's history that were collected during the time of David or Solomon. Not only is it quoted in Joshua's poetic address to the sun and moon, but David also quotes from it in his lament for Saul and Jonathan. See 2 Samuel 1:17-27. We know three things about the book of Jasher: (1) It did exist; (2) it is not a part of the Old Testament canon; and (3) there are no reliable manuscripts of it extant today..... By the way, Kayla, in your reading of Scripture you will come upon references to various other non-canonical books, particularly in the books of Chronicles, about which little is known. --Hank | ||||||
1668 | Was Jesus Christ, Son of God from start? | John 3:1 | Hank | 62813 | ||
The triune God is eternal -- God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. The Advent of Jesus Christ on earth -- the Incarnation when God became fully man yet remained fully God is a divine mystery which, like the Trinity, the finite mind cannot fully comprehend. The Triunity is transcendent and there exists no basis for comparison in all the universe. --Hank | ||||||
1669 | looking for Biblical chat room | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 62795 | ||
There is no chat room linked to this web site. This is neither a chat room nor a discusssion group, but a forum for general Bible study. --Hank | ||||||
1670 | predestined or free will | Rom 8:29 | Hank | 62548 | ||
Buffjock52, welcome, and I am disturbed and deeply troubled to read that you feel your firm foundation is "being washed by acid rain." ....... I hold the position and believe with all my heart that God so loved the world that He gave His one and only, unique Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life. (See John 3:16) That inludes you, Buffjock. .... The subject of which you speak is one that has been debated for years, and no other subject that I can think of has been more greatly misunderstood by so many. In view of the "acid rain" description you have given to your dilemma, and its implicit urgency to you to find understanding, I strongly suggest that you schedule a conference with your pastor and seek his counsel before striking out on your own to solve your problem by yourself -- or asking this forum -- to do it. The reason I say that is this: This is a complex issue. On this forum's archives you will read an enormous number of posts that debate the issue that you are grappling with and if you are not a seasoned student of God's word, as I would venture to surmise, you are far more likely to become even more confused rather than enlightened, for there are literally hundreds of posts on this very issue that are stored in this forum's archives, and they are not all by any means in harmony with each other. Some of my colleagues on the forum may disagree sharply with my advice to you, but I am speaking from my experience and from what little wisdom God may have bestowed upon me during the more than 50 years that I have been a Christian and an avid student of His precious word. May the Spirit lead you, beloved, into all truth. --Hank | ||||||
1671 | Bibical Christianity | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 62541 | ||
New Creature, you may recall that it was I who made the first stab at answering your question, which was in reality a non-answer, because I had misgiving about being able to come to terms on a definition of what constitutes "biblical Christianity" -- and a truly complete and definitive answer to what the term means is yet to come forth from the responses you have received. I went on record then as saying that you would likely get a dozen or more responses and thus far this post represents response No. 31, but the thread is yet new and will be lenghtened before the end of day, unless I am much mistaken. The thread has already degenerated into a debate of sorts, which comes as no surprise to anyone who has a nodding acquaintance with this forum. I don't castigate you, New Creature, for asking your question but rather invite you to sit back and observe, as I plan to do, whether your question will indeed be dealt with, or whether it will serve merely as a springboard from which other users will be able to vent and debate their theological and denominational differences. So enjoy the show as it unfolds, and if perchance your question is ever truly answered, consider yourself among the fortunate few. --Hank | ||||||
1672 | how is the flesh ignored more than devil | Gal 5:19 | Hank | 62538 | ||
Warrior2, in this passage, Gal. 5:16-26, Paul is making a contrast between the lusts of the flesh and the fruit of the Spirit. He is saying (v.17) that "the flesh lusts against the Spirit and the Spirit against the flesh, and these are contrary to one another." I'm not sure I understand exactly what you mean when you ask, "How is the flesh ignored more than the devil?" Paul's point obviously is this: that since the works of the flesh and the fruit the Spirit are contrary to each other, we have Christian liberty (see Paul's argument in Gal.5:1-15), but even though we have been called to liberty in Christ, we are taught "do not use liberty as an opportunity for the flesh." (v.13). These "works of the flesh" are of the world, of the devil, not of the Spirit. ...... In Romans 6:1, Paul asks "Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound?" to which he supplies the answer in v.2 "Certainly not!" If salvation cannot be forfeited by one who has received God's forgiveness (see Rom.5:10), what is there to prevent the return to the pursuit of the works of the flesh? The answer which Paul gives in Romans 6 is this: Those who have died to sin cannot live in sin any longer. The apostle skillfully avoids suggesting any idea of sinless perfection, a human impossibility whether he is regenerated or not regenerated. He doesn't say that those who are dead to sin never sin again, but he does say that those who are dead to sin do not live in sin as a way of life. They have a new life in Christ Jesus......... I like to think of it this way. The psalmist said "He leads me in the path of righteousness" and I like to compare the Father leading His child along this path of righteousness with a father leading his child along a path in the woods or leading him across a busy street or parking lot. On occasion the little child will loose his grip on the father's guiding hand and stumble and fall, but the father quickly grasps the hand of the child again and perhaps the father will scold the child for letting go of his hand, but the loving father continues to lead his child along a safe path, and the sometimes-errant child, being made aware of his father's unfailing love and of his own inability to direct his path, willingly and even sometimes gratefully, returns to the peace and safety of his father's wing. --Hank | ||||||
1673 | re: return to Bibical Christianity | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 62382 | ||
New Creature, I understand the question all right, really I do :-) But as I said before, if you can come up with a definition of what your anonymous author means by "biblical Christianity" then we can talk. Otherwise, what are we talking about anyway? --Hank | ||||||
1674 | complete return to biblical Christianity | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 62359 | ||
New Creature, both in respect to your question and to the quotation upon which you base it, I should feel more comfortable with both if the source of the quotation could be given and if the author of it could or would back up his assertion with substantive documentation and some measure of proof. From the quotation dangles the question that I would prefer to ask before venturing a comment of my own, and that is to ask the author what he has in mind when he uses the phrase "return to biblical Christianity." It is a phrase about which it would be difficult to elicit a uniform definition from theologians and even more difficult from users of this forum, I should think. But I wouldn't be at all surprised to see you draw a number of responses, give or take a dozen or more, all of which will be different and few of which will be based on anything more substantial than the quotation itself which, as best as I can tell, is nothing more than the opinion of an author who doesn't bother to back it up with facts, and who at this time, remains nameless. --Hank | ||||||
1675 | Is 1 Thess 4:13-18 a rapture reference? | 1 Thess 4:17 | Hank | 62330 | ||
Chusarcik, you ask whether you are missing something here. Yes, I believe you are. You are missing the definition of the word "rapture" which is the taking up of the church to meet the Lord in the air, as described in 1 Thess. 4:16,17, as Kalos has pointed out..... There are events and doctrines clearly described in the Bible to which the Bible does not assign a specific name, such as the Rapture, the Triunity, the substitutionary death of Christ -- but that does not make them any less true, and I hardly see that we err in any manner whatever when we, for the sake of convenience and clarity in communicating with one another more efficiently, employ these terms. --Hank | ||||||
1676 | What is the Trinity? | Matt 28:19 | Hank | 62308 | ||
Vofori: The doctrine of the Trinity (also known as Triunity) is a theological and biblically-supported concept held by the majority of Christians and can be defined as follows: The distinctive and essential Christian doctrine that there is one God in three Persons. The Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. There is a distinction between the Persons so that the Father is not the Son, the Father is not the Spirit, and the Son is not the Spirit. Each is a Person. The Holy Spirit is not to be envisioned as a mere force or influence and thus should never be referred to as an impersonal "It" but as the personal "He." --Hank | ||||||
1677 | So who is right? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 62134 | ||
New Creature, the only possibilites in your list are A and B. Choice C is the same as saying that a woman is only partially pregnant. And D is not a viable choice either, since a "half truth" is no more than a euphemism for a lie. Of course, I would observe that in your hypothetical, "two sincere believers read the same Bible...prayerfully...studying, meditating and trusting for the Lord's guidance.": I would question by what measure we KNOW with absolute assurance that your characters in your hypothetical actually did this? You see, we can do little more than assume that they were sincere believers who were guided by the Spirit. What I am driving at is that the flaw in the hypothetical lies in the possibility that one or both of these "sincere believers" could, just could, be not so sincere after all. It was a tempting question, even if it was hypothetical and I always view these hypotheticals with misgiving, but in this instance, I fell for it, enjoyed toying with it, and now repent for the "transgression" of answering it, even though it was great fun! :-) --Hank | ||||||
1678 | Is Archangel Michael and Jesus the same | 1 Thess 4:16 | Hank | 61924 | ||
Holymatro: In reference to 1 Thessalonians 4:16 ..... Please study the construction of the statement. If one could conclude from it that Jesus is Michael the archangel, he must conclude also that Jesus is a trumpet. --Hank | ||||||
1679 | Who wrote the truhth? | Matt 7:29 | Hank | 61821 | ||
Consider kenosis as a probable way to account for the issue you are wrestling with. Kenosis, of course, is a reference to the "emptying" of the Son in the incarnation (Phil. 2:7). Kenosis entails the temporary and voluntary surrender of the exercise of certain divine attributes by the Son of God while He was on earth. But I'm likely preaching to the choir: you already knew that, didn't you? --Hank | ||||||
1680 | is a disobedient christian an unbeliever | 1 Cor 7:15 | Hank | 61820 | ||
The briefest, simplest, and in point of fact, the only answer possible to your question is a simple 'no' and for good and cogent reason, which is this: the term "Christian unbeliever" is self-contradictory. There can be no Christian who is not a believer in Christ. Post-salvific disobedience is academic and irrelevant to this issue. --Hank | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 ] Next > Last [114] >> |