Results 381 - 400 of 2277
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: Hank Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
381 | why is there a comma after "people"? | Matt 21:43 | Hank | 176315 | ||
Kevin, good question! I have before me as I post this response four copies of the NASB 1995 Update. One of them is the Ryrie Study Bible, published by Moody, and Matthew 21:43 reads, in part, "...and given to a nation producing the fruit of it." Note that "people" with the comma after it has been replaced by "nation" without a comma. The other three, two by Foundation (Lockman) Publications and one, "The NASB Study Bible, published by Zondervan, all contain the same wording as well as that stubborn comma: "...and given to a people, producing the fruit of it." And, as you know, the on-line reference on this web site has the "people," rendering. I also checked with the English Standard Version (ESV), which has nearly identical wording, and it does not have a comma after people. ...... Here's what I suggest you do. Write an e-mail to the Lockman Foundation and ask them to explain themselves. I feel sure that they will respond to your inquiry. And if it's handy for you, let us know how you came out with them on this little problem. ..... By the way, I agree with you. I see no earthly reason for tacking a comma on behind the word "people" in this passage. Maybe the printers had an extra comma on hand and needed a place to put it. --Hank | ||||||
382 | Did Jesus have a tatoo on his thigh? | Rev 19:16 | Hank | 176288 | ||
m8mida - Verse 11 of this 19th chapter of Revelation begins an account of our Lord's Second Advent, i.e., His second coming to earth. Therefore, the events are all cast in the future tense. I believe it is too great a stretch to say that our Lord will return wearing a tattoo; that hardly appears to be the meaning of the passage. Perhaps Dr. John MacArthur says it as accurately and succinctly as anyone when he writes of the phrase "on His thigh" that "Jesus will wear a banner across His robe and down His thigh with a title emblazoned on it that emphasizes His absolute sovereignty over all human rulers." ..... And that title, as we know from the text, is KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS. ..... The verses that follow (Rev. 19:17-21) depict a mighty event unparalleled in human history, the Battle of Armageddon, in which Christ will be the victor and in which all who oppose Him will be slain. ..... A note concerning commentary on a single verse of Scripture: It's risky to attempt to exegete a single verse of Scripture and much better to view it in its natural setting, that is, its context. It's better to get a feel of the depth and overall appearance of the forest before one begins a minute examination of the individual trees. .... Thanks for your question, and I do hope this attempt at a response will help you in some measure. --Hank | ||||||
383 | What happen Genesis 1:1-2 | Gen 1:1 | Hank | 176283 | ||
Dear Joe - I've read Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 many, many times in the last half century, and I've yet to "see" anything at all happening between these two verses of Scripture. Mighty things happen in Genesis 1:1 and in Genesis 1:2, but there is no action nor even a hint of action taking place BETWEEN these two initial verses of God's word. There is a period at the end of verse 1 and a capital letter at the beginning of verse 2, and all that is between them is a space, but even these conventions of modern English usage were not in the original Hebrew. ..... My dear Joe, your question sounds as though you may suspect that something mysterious is going on between the lines, as it were. This is what the proponents of the so-called Gap Theory would have us believe, but they can offer no cogent reason to believe their fanciful theory. It is in some measure a paltry attempt to effect a compromise with another preposterous theory, the atheistic Darwinian theory of evolution. But how can two theories, one ostensibly theistic (gap) and the other patently atheistic (evolution) ever be joined in wedded bliss? The truth is that never the twain shall meet. It takes a great deal more faith to believe the flawed reasoning and wild speculations necessary to make even a lick of sense out of the gap theory than it does simply to take God at His word and, as Brad has posted, to believe that the opening words of Genesis mean exactly what they say and say exactly what they mean. And, to take this credibility thing a giant leap forward, it takes far more faith than I've ever been able to muster to believe, as the Darwinians say they do, that man evolved from a microscopic single-celled speck of protoplasm taking a solitary swim in the ooze of a primordial swamp. ..... "In the beginning" who? "God." Did what? "created." Created what? "the heavens and the earth." This majestic verse is a summary statement of all that God did in His six days of creation. If one will truly digest this verse, accept it and all the other "creation" verses that follow it, and believe with all his heart that God is telling the truth about His creation of the universe, he will have no difficulty believing the Bible all the way to the end of the Revelation. If, on the other hand, he reads one verse, i.e., Genesis 1:1, and immediately feels the need to superimpose his half-baked theories on the eternal word of the living God, he will find snags and difficulties at every turn of his journey through the Bible. He will find a thousand other places in Scripture where he feels compelled to insert various and sundry of his pet theories, and he will end up having opinions about everything in Scripture but without really knowing anything about it. --Hank | ||||||
384 | Augustine's influence -good or bad? | Luke 14:23 | Hank | 176268 | ||
Lemont - If the Jews of ancient Berea questioned the teachings of a missionary of the authority and stature of Paul the apostle (and they did, you know; see Acts 17:10,11), and compared what they were taught with Scripture, and were called noble because of it, much more should we question and compare with Scripture the things we are taught today. So, in answer to your question, yes, it is proper to apply the Berean method to Augustinian teaching and not to his only, but to every teacher we sit under, regardless of his stripe, and no matter what his credentials are, even if he has more degrees than a thermometer. The plumb line of sound doctrine and spiritual truth is reckoned by the word of God and nothing else. If all who profess to be followers of Jesus Christ would covenant with themselves to search the Scriptures for themselves and make it their business to be diligent to study and learn what the Scriptures teach (cf. 2 Timothy 2:15), the false teachers who flourish (and make big bucks, many of them) in an alarming number of modern churches would find themselves looking for another job. ...... I don't presume to be a student of Augustine, so I confess that I'd never before been exposed to any information about his alleged role in condoning "forced conversion." Is this a matter of historical record? --Hank | ||||||
385 | tithing | NT general Archive 1 | Hank | 176267 | ||
Holland - The tithing system laid down in the Old Testament pertained to the Israelites. The New Testament does not command Christians to follow the Old Testament system of tithing. Please use Search to gain access to my Post # 175875 --Hank | ||||||
386 | Three will, two or just one? | Luke 22:42 | Hank | 176264 | ||
Lemont - Here's a brief statement concerning the Triunity of God (Trinity) that possibly may help: .... The doctrine of the Triunity is the distinctive and essential Christian teaching 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; thus, the personal pronoun He (or Him) is used in reference to the Holy Spirit, but never It. (Adapted from the Glossary of "The Believer's Study Bible" published by Thomas Nelson.) --Hank | ||||||
387 | Mystery of Gods Purpose | 2 Tim 3:16 | Hank | 176180 | ||
Steven - Having been able to form no clear idea in my head of what you are asking, I am hard pressed to do much of anything from your hints but guess at what you may mean. So, being able to do nothing more than guess at possible meanings, and from the possibilites choose one which appears to me the most likely, I offer you this: If someone claims that he heard the word of God, and if by that he means he was made privy to a private or special revelation from God, the proper Bible-sanctioned response to that claim is "Nay, not so." Read Hebrews 1:1,2. Our sole source of faith and practice is Scripture (sola scriptura), which is God-breathed and profitable for teaching, reproof, correction, and training in righteousness so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work. See 2 Timothy 3:16,17. Moreover, he who looks for extra-biblical revelation will not find it and is wasting his time. He should instead devote himself "to contend earnestly for the faith which was once and for all handed down to the saints" (see Jude 3). The Canon is closed. The word of God is complete. It's fatuous and inane, not to mention highly presumptuous, to look for a "sign" such as a private revelation or the unveiling of a "mystery" of some sort. That's what the scribes and Pharisees sought from Jesus. "We want to see a sign from You" they said. And Jesus' response was blunt and to the point. "An evil and adulterous generation craves for a sign" He said. Read the whole discourse beginning at Matthew 12:38. ...... A sign was what the scribes and Pharisees of old craved for. And in spite of having God's precious, complete and inerrant word in front of us, staring us in the face as it were, we many of us still crave a sign, just like the scribes and Pharisees. And we pay our money and pledge our allegiance to false teachers who promise to give us our golden calf, the "sign" we insist on having. My friendly recommendation to you, Steven, is to come out from under the shadows of these dreamy speculations and into the light of the Scriptures. You will find God revealed no where else. --Hank | ||||||
388 | was Jesus beaten unrecognizable? | Matt 27:26 | Hank | 176176 | ||
Ronald - The accounts of our Lord's passion that the writers of the Gospels lay down leave no doubt that our Lord endured great suffering even before He was crucified. Matthew 27:26, Mark 15:15 and John 19:1 all use the word that in English is rendered "scourge." To scourge means to flog by means of a leather whip that had pieces of bone or metal embedded in its thongs. An especially brutal punishment that brought excruciating pain to its victims, scourging was used by the Romans only on murderers and traitors. ..... They gave Him a reed, a mock scepter, and they spat upon Him, and took the reed and beat Him on the head with it. A reed long enough to make a mock scepter would be firm enough to inflict severe pain, about like hitting someone over the head with a broom handle. And Mark says that "they kept beating His head with a reed and spitting on Him" (Mark 15:19). The term "kept beating" denotes repeated action, not merely one or two whacks, but hitting Him over the head again and again. ...... John 19:2: "And the soldiers twisted together a crown of thorns and put it on His head." And John 19:3 says they hit Jesus with their fists as well. ...... So, my friend, was our Lord beaten beyond recognition? He was scourged, He was beaten over the head with a reed about the size of a broom handle, He was punched by the fists of the governor's soldiers, His flesh was pierced by a crown of thorns placed upon His head -- this sinless Son of God suffered on the cross and suffered before He got to the cross. Of that there can be no doubt. But is the crucial issue whether He was beaten beyond recognition? Or, as I would suggest, isn't the crucial issue the fact that our blessed Lord endured unspeakable suffering and an agonizing death on the tree for the sins of the world? What a source of comfort, what amazing grace to behold, that "God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us" (Romans 5:8). ..... The great reformer, Martin Luther, sat alone in a church pew looking at a cross that hung on the wall behind the chancel when on a sudden came to him the realization that were he, Martin Luther, the only person on earth, Christ loved him so much that He would have endured the suffering and willingly died on the cross just for his sake alone. The great reformer arose from the pew and knelt before the cross. With tears streaming down his face, he said, "Fur mich, fur mich!" .... For me, for me .... meaning, of course, that not only did Christ die for Luther, but He would have died for him if he had been the only person on earth. ...... We must not dare to take our eyes off the cross of Christ, nor be ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, for in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith. See Romans 1:16,l7. In these two verses Paul sets down the very essence of his theology: Believe in Christ, and you will be saved. --Hank | ||||||
389 | How long was Noah in the ark | OT general | Hank | 176089 | ||
DUPLICATE QUESTION :: domanda duplicata :: kopierte Frage :: question reproduite :: pregenta duplicata :: | ||||||
390 | Bread of life verses Bread of Heaven | John 6:35 | Hank | 176053 | ||
Santee01 - The pronouncement of John 6:51 reiterates our Lord's statements in vss. 33, 35, 47, and 48. In vs. 51 Jesus adds the prophetic statement, "the bread that I shall give is My flesh, which I shall give for the life of the world," which refers to His impending sacrifice upon the cross. In all these verses, Jesus' reference is to Himself, e.g. the bread of life, the bread of God, the bread of heaven. ..... By the way, this is the first of the seven great "I AM" statements recorded in John's gospel. Here are all seven of them, followed by the chapter and verse where they may be found in the fourth gospel. I AM [1] the bread of life (6:35); [2] the light of the world (8:12); [3] the gate (10:7,9); [4] the good shepherd (10:11,14; [5] the resurrection and the life (11:25; [6] the way, the truth, and the life (14:6); [7] the true vine (15:1,5). --Hank | ||||||
391 | Can I apply Psalms 86:13 to my life? | Ps 66:13 | Hank | 175995 | ||
l'homme humble - Your question is, "Can I apply Psalm 66:13 to my life?" Since 'can' suggests ability and 'may' suggests possibility, allow me to answer in this manner: Yes, the Christian may be able to apply the burnt-offering concept -- and indeed he should -- to his life in the worship of God. Here's an explanation: The burnt offering referred to in Psalm 66:13 (see also Leviticus 1:3) typified the Lord Jesus' offering of Himself unto death (see Hebrews 10:5-7). Moreover, the Christian similarly should offer himself as a sacrifice to God, as Romans 12:1,2 says. ..... Having attempted to connect the dots as best I could, I trust that you will be able from a study of these passages and how they are related to gain added insight into God's precious word. You asked a good question! --Hank | ||||||
392 | the differestrait gate and straight gate | Matt 7:13 | Hank | 175989 | ||
Renee: There is no "straight" gate mentioned in Matthew 7:13,14. The contrast is not therefore between a "straight" and a "strait" gate, but between a strait (meaning narrow) gate and a broad one. ...... Language note: "Strait" used as an adjective meaning narrow, as it is in this passage from the King James Bible, is now archaic. --Hank | ||||||
393 | Was Ham showing homosexual tendencies? | Gen 9:22 | Hank | 175986 | ||
There is no reason in this or in any other passage of Scripture to venture beyond what the text says. Interpolation fueled by presupposition almost always leads to bad interpretation. --Hank | ||||||
394 | I need someone to explain Hebrews 6:4-6 | Heb 6:4 | Hank | 175985 | ||
Harvester: This passage has been addressed many times on the Forum. Please use Search. Enter Heb. 6:4 in the box. --Hank | ||||||
395 | tithe,Jews,or Gentiles? | Gen 9:21 | Hank | 175875 | ||
Keyshun - Tithing falls under Old Testament law and pertains to the Israelites, who were required to tithe, i.e., to give 10 per cent of their crops or earnings to the Tabernacle or Temple. Please see Leviticus 27:30; Numbers 18:26; and 2 Chronicles 31:4-6. ...... The New Testament neither commands nor recommends Christians to submit to the OT tithing system. It does not specify a certain percentage of the Christian's income. Instead it teaches the follower of Christ to "put aside and save as he may prosper." (See 1 Corinthians 16:1,2). Thus to teach (or require) that the Christian must tithe lacks scriptural support and constitutes false doctrine. --Hank | ||||||
396 | Questions about Psalm 38. | Ps 38:1 | Hank | 175709 | ||
Steven - In early Christian liturgical tradition, Psalm 38 is one of seven penitential Psalms, the others being Ps. 6, 32, 51, 102, 130, and 143. The specifics of David's illness and of the sin mentioned in this Psalm are not known. There has been some debate on whether the details of the illness of verses 1-8 should be taken literally as a reference to a physcial ailment, or figuratively in reference to moral or psychological distress. But the detail and intensity of David's description would appear to point more to a definite physcial illness. Whatever the case may be, David concludes the Psalm with the prayer from a penitent heart, "Forsake me not, O Lord: O my God, be not far from me. Make haste to help me, O Lord my salvation." How often we, God's people, face times in our lives when we need to pray David's prayer! --Hank | ||||||
397 | Is kissing wrong in GODS eyes? | Rom 16:16 | Hank | 175687 | ||
Thank you, l'homme humble, for your question, which is "Is kissing wrong in God's eyes? ..... Of course not, under proper circumstances. Of Romans 16:16, "Greet one another with a holy kiss" John MacArthur says this: "Kissing of friends on the forehead, cheek, or beard was common in the Old Testament. The Jews in the New Testament carried on the practice, and it became especially precious to new believers who were often outcasts from their own families because of their faith, because of the spiritual kinship it signified." ..... And for a husband and wife to embrace, kiss and engage in other physcial intimacies is by no means wrong: "Marriage is honorable among all, and the bed undefiled" (see Hebrews 13:4). ..... I suspect that your question may involve broader areas than which I have addressed in this answer, and if it doesn't speak to your question, try to be more specific and resubmit. Someone on the Forum will almost certainly be willing to expand on my answer. Welcome! --Hank | ||||||
398 | Was this baptiziam of the holy spirit | Acts 2:2 | Hank | 175650 | ||
Dear Jwilcox - In order to do justice to your question, let's expand the text reference to include Acts 2:1-13. The "sound...as of a rushing mighty wind" of v.2, a simile, is Luke's way of describing the mighty act of God in sending the Holy Spirit. In Scripture wind is not infrequently used as a symbol of the Spirit (see Ezek. 37:9,10; John 3:8). Then in v.3 we see another symbol, a visible one, in the "tongues as of fire." Note that these were not literal flames of fire, for the text makes it clear that they were "as of" fire. They were supernatural indicators, a visible phenomenon, that God had sent His Holy Spirit upon each believer who was gathered "with one accord in one place" (v.1). Then in v.4 we read that "they were all filled with the Holy Spirit." This is in contrast to the baptism of the Holy Spirit, which is the one-time act by which God places regenerate believers into His body (see 1 Cor. 12:13). The filling is a repeated process of Spirit-controlled behavior, which God commands believers to maintain (see Ephesians 5:18). Peter and many others in Acts were filled with the Holy Spirit again and again (see, for example, Acts 4:8,31; 6:5; 7:55). ...... Finally, let's consider the phrase from v.4, "and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance." This was known languages (see v. 6), not ecstatic utterances (see also 1 Cor. 14:1-25). The speaking with other tongues described in Acts 2 is decidedly different from the modern practice that is called "speaking in tongues" (glossolalia). --Hank | ||||||
399 | insight on Matthew 20:29-34 | Matt 20:33 | Hank | 175462 | ||
Dear 1vocalblessing - Matthew 20:33 can be understood only in the context of Matthew 20:29-34. It is a straightforward narrative account of Jesus' restoration of sight to two blind men. Parallel passages appear in Mark 10:46-52 and Luke 18:35-43. That's the best I can do, given the severely sparse information in your question. If you would care to elaborate on what you mean by "insight," perhaps someone on the Forum will be able to help you. --Hank | ||||||
400 | Moab who were they? | Gen 19:37 | Hank | 175396 | ||
Hello, Letty - Doc gave you a good background sketch of Moab and the Moabites, and of Naomi and her family and their reasons for sojourning in the land of Moab. Now the purpose of this post is to do all I can to encourage you to read the rest of the story, the beautiful and inspiring story that is the Book of Ruth. I've read this lovely little book many times over and never tire of its message or its compelling charm. The writing itself is a rare masterpiece, having long been established as occupying a well-deserved place as one of the supremely great pieces of writing in the history of letters world-wide. ..... The charm and beauty of the Book of Ruth is well illustrated in an incident involving the American statesman and inventor of Colonial times, Benjamin Franklin. When he was serving Colonial interests in France, he heard some of the high-brow members of the French aristocracy hautily denigrating the Bible as being unworthy of reading. So wise old Ben decided to play a trick on these high-born French bigwigs. He sat down and wrote out the Book of Ruth in longhand, changing all the proper names to French names of his own invention. Then he read his manuscript to the assembled elite of French society. They were charmed and deeply moved by the elegance and simplicity of this tender story. "Charmant! Charmant! (Charming! Charming!) they shouted in unison. "But where did you find this gem of literature, Monsieur Franklin?" And Franklin responded, "It comes from the Book you despise so much, la sainte Bible!" There were, so the report goes, many red faces among the Parisian elite that evening. And there should be red faces today in the biblically illiterate culture of our time. ...... It is I believe worthy of note that of the two books of the Bible named after women, one was a Jewish girl who married a Gentile (Esther and King Ahasuerus or, in the Greek, Xerxes), and the other was a Gentile woman who married a prominent Hebrew (Ruth and Boaz). ...... Dr. John MacArthur has said that at least seven major theological themes emerge in the Book of Ruth. I'm going to stop there, and ask you and our other readers how many can you find? Should you get completely stumped by this question, I'll be happy upon request to list them all at a later date. In the meantime, read and study this beautiful and informative little book. It contains only four chapters having a total of 85 verses and can easily be read at a single sitting. Enjoy! --Hank | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ] Next > Last [114] >> |