Results 1641 - 1660 of 2277
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: Hank Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1641 | Evolution | John 14:6 | Hank | 162140 | ||
Your question assumes facts which are not evidential. As for me, I'm infinitely more inclined to believe and accept God's account of creation in Genesis than the weak theories of evolution promulgated by Charles Darwin, an avowed atheist. What about you? --Hank | ||||||
1642 | explaining to middle school youth | John 14:6 | Hank | 182799 | ||
Dear Gluasdi - Thanks for your question and welcome to SBF. This is a beautiful verse of Scripture, this John 14:6, and it's wonderful that you plan to expose a group of middle school students to its riches. You teach perhaps in a Christian school? I wouldn't strive for a simple way to present it to these kids but rather for a clear and dynamic way -- a way that will arrest their attention and grab them with its mighty truth. I would expect that you may get hit with some tough questions from these young students no matter how you present the verse, so I'm highly recommending a sermon to you as part of your preparation. The sermon is by a man who has been called "The Prince of Preachers," Charles Spurgeon, and if you aren't familiar with Spurgeon, I believe after reading his sermon on John 14:6, you will begin to see why he has been called a prince. The sermon, based on John 14:6, is called "The Way to God" and it addresses some of the same questions that are still being asked today, such as "can't people of other religions be saved as long as they're sincere?" You can read the sermon on this link: http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/0245.htm ...... I honestly believe that you will find many riches in this powerful sermon that will inspire you and make you eager to share them with your kids. --Hank | ||||||
1643 | What does Jesus mean in John 14:12? | John 14:12 | Hank | 74787 | ||
Jesus could not have meant greater works of power, for who has more power than God or the Son of God? Thus we would exegete the passage to mean greater works in their scope and their extent, in accordance with Jesus' promise to send the Holy Spirit to His disciples: "But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth." This promise, recorded in Acts 2, was kept on the day of Pentecost; and the remaining pages of the book of Acts attest to the beginning of the fulfillment of Jesus' prophetic words that the gospel would be spread "to the end of the earth." The focus here is on spiritual rather than physical miracles. When Jesus said "because I go to My Father" at the end of this verse (John 14:12), He was telling His disciples that the only way they would be able to be used to do these greater works was through the power of the Holy Spirit, and that the Father would not send the Spirit until the Son's glorious return to the Father. [See John 14:26 and 7:39]. --Hank | ||||||
1644 | "What I have done you can do even more." | John 14:12 | Hank | 122032 | ||
This is probably the verse you are looking for. ... "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I do, he will do also, and greater works than these he will do; because I go to the Father." John 14:12. --Hank | ||||||
1645 | Jn 14:14 Why "ask Me," instead of "ask" | John 14:14 | Hank | 171867 | ||
InHisLove: Our resident Greek scholar, Tim Moran, attests that the pronoun 'me' is in the Greek text of John 14:14, and so it is in the Greek text that Tim consulted. But I have every reason to think that Tim is using a text similar to, if not identical with, the Greek text (usually referred to as the Alexandrian Text) on which most contemporary translations of the New Testament have relied for more than a century. A notable exception among modern translations that has stayed closely to the manuscript tradition that supported the translation of the King James Bible is the New King James Version. This is the Byzantine Text, the tradition which by and large supports the Textus Receptus, and it was the Textus Receptus (Latin for "received text") that formed the basis for the translation of the King James Bible. ...... I must confess that I have never been comfortable with the Alexandrian Text. To cite in the briefest way possible some of my reasons, I quote from a segment of the "Preface" to the NKJV, as follows: "Since the 1880's most contemporary translations of the New Testament have relied upon a relatively few manuscripts discovered chiefly in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. SUCH TRANSLATIONS DEPEND PRIMARILY ON TWO MANUSCRIPTS, [emphasis mine] Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus, because of their greater age. The Greek text obtained by using these sources and the related payyri (our most ancient manuscripts) is known as the Alexandrian Text. However, some scholars have grounds for doubting the faithfulness of Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, since they often disagree with one another, and Sinaiticus exhibits excessive omission." ...... My question, to which my several years of research have led me to no definitive answer, is this: Why should I rely on a translation that is based largely on two manuscripts, Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus, which often disagree with one another, in preference to the traditional Byzantine Text of which there are many manuscripts extant? ....... So, InHisLove, the answer to your question lies, I believe, in this very thing: manuscript traditions. In the Byzantine Text family the prounoun 'me' does not appear in John 14:14; in the Alexandrian it does. So, going with the text that says, "If you ask anything in My name, I will do it" (which is the way KJV and NKJV render John 14:14), it ties in perfectly with the phrase of John 15:16 that says, "...whatever you ask the Father in My name, He may give you" and with John 16:23, "...whatever you ask the Father in My name He will give you." ...... You expressed apparent concern about the exegesis of the phrase 'in that day' that Jesus used in John 16:23. Jesus' disciples had been able to come to Him, look Him in the eye, and ask their questions and express their cares and concerns. "In that day" more than likely refers to the age that was ushered in by the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost -- a time when the Lord Jesus would no longer be with His disciples bodily, and they would no longer be able to ask Him questions as before. But were they left with no one to turn to? No! "Most assuredly," the Master told them, "Most assuredly, I say to you, whatever you ask the Father in my name He will give you." In that day, as in our day, it would be their privilege, as it is ours, to ask the Father. The Father would grant their requests for Jesus' sake. Not because they were worthy then and not because we are worthy now, but because the Lord Jesus was worthy then, and He is worthy still. InHisLove, I pray that I've not muddied the water too much for you but have, instead, added a little here and there that may help you in some small way. Blessings to you and agape. --Hank | ||||||
1646 | Knowing God | John 15:16 | Hank | 160152 | ||
NightJay: Goodness knows that much of modern "theology" has become more of a "me-ology" in which we are told that we, like in Herrick's poem "Invictus", are masters of our fate. But this isn't what our Lord taught. In John 15:16 He said, "You did not choose Me, but I chose you." And in John 6:44, Jesus said, "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him." So lest we get carried away with the man-centered idea of the power of man's "free will," let us these words of our Lord in mind. ...... With no disrespect for Rick Warren intended, I'd much prefer a "Christ-driven life" to a "Purpose-driven life" any day. --Hank | ||||||
1647 | Does God choose us, or do we choose Him? | John 15:16 | Hank | 195066 | ||
Grace460 :: "You did not choose Me but I chose you" (see John 15:16,19). --Hank | ||||||
1648 | Does God use guilt in our lives? | John 16:8 | Hank | 201547 | ||
Dear deakduck2 :: David's prayer which constitutes Psalm 51 is ample evidence that the answer to your question is a definite yes. ..... Not only do I bid you welcome to SBF but observe that your user name is quite imaginative. There just has to be a story behind a name like that. :-) --Hank | ||||||
1649 | hope and holy spirit, explanation | John 16:13 | Hank | 107019 | ||
Princess: From the content of your post, I must conclude that you have your work cut out for you if you expect to deliver a message on the Holy Spirit to your church on Sunday. ...... You refer to the Holy Spirit as "it." The Holy Spirit is a Person, a member of the Triunity. A person is not properly referred to as an "it." .... You say, "I don't know how to explain how the Holy Spirit gives hope and what exactly the Holy Spirit is. I know for myself what it is, but I need to be able to explain it well. Any suggestions, comments?" ..... Yes, I do have a suggestion. Since it is axiomatic that one who has mastered his material usually has little or no difficulty in explaining it and, conversely, one whose knowledge of his material is scanty has enormous difficulties in trying to explain to others something he himself does not really understand, I would submit for your consideration to forego your message on the Holy Spirit in favor of another topic of which you may feel you have a firmer grasp. I think it unlikely that a crash course on the Holy Spirit undertaken between now and Sunday will equip you to deliver a meaningful message. Postpone it until you have given yourself sufficient time to study this complex subject and gain a measure of competence in it. ...... You may wish to avail yourself of a good Bible dictionary for an overall treatment of the nature and role of the Holy Spirit. And here are a few Bible verses that may help you: Gen. 1:2; Gen. 41:38; Exodus 31:2-5; Judges 3:9,10; 1 Sam. 19:20-23; Micah 3:8; Ezek. 36:25-29; Titus 3:5; 2 Thess. 2:13; Acts 2:4; John 16:13,14; Acts 1:8; Romans 5:5; Romans 8:26; 1 Cor. 12:4-11; Gal. 5:22;23; Eph. 3:16; 2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Peter 1:21. ...... Princess, believe me, I don't want to discourage you in any way. I'm simply saying that such an enormously complex subject as the Holy Spirit cannot be dealt with adequately by exposure to any crash course between now and Sunday. Both you and your audience will benefit if you stick with a subject you know well. Save the message on the Holy Spirit for another day. --Hank | ||||||
1650 | Knowing God | John 17:3 | Hank | 143628 | ||
Salutations, Canadian brother Robert Nicholson, after so long a time since we have exchanged greetings and broken spiritual bread together on the Forum! Robert, since you cited John 17:3 as the basis for your question about getting to know God and His Son Christ Jesus, it occurs to me that later in his Gospel the apostle John has himself given us at least a strong clue if not in fact the key itself to knowing God and His Christ. Here's what John says in 20:31 of his Gospel: "but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name." And if we add to John's statement Paul's affirmation about Scripture in his second letter to Timothy (3:16), and the powerful statement about the word of God in Hebrews 4:12, we come up with the idea that the way to know God the Father and God the Son is to study and meditate on and pray over what God the Holy Spirit inspired the human writers of Scripture to reveal to us about the Holy and Triune God. Well, such is my convictions on the matter, Robert -- a conviction I've held dear for half a century. I hope you will find it worthy of at least some small consideration. Good to "see" you once again. God bless. --Hank | ||||||
1651 | What does "world" mean? | John 17:11 | Hank | 3178 | ||
I fail to read anything into the meaning of "world" besides just plain "earth". This passage is part of Jesus' high priestly prayer not long before he was led to the cross. He knew he was destined soon to be "no longer in the world." | ||||||
1652 | Describe the unity of the saints of toda | John 17:11 | Hank | 4069 | ||
In the Old Testament the Shema, "Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD is one!" [Deut.6:4] was the central confession of the faith of Israel. Because God is one, one set of laws was to apply to both Israelites and foreigners. The result intended was a unified body of believers. In the New Testament, Jesus prayed that His disciples would enjoy the unity that He had with the Father. [John 17:11] Unity was achieved in the earlist church. The first believers were together in all things, united in one place in one heart and soul. [Acts 2:1, 43; 4:32] As in the Old Testament, sin crept in with all its ugliness and divisiveness and threatened the unity of the church. [Acts 5:1-11; 6:1; 15:1] One of Paul's central and pervasive themes was unity of the believers -- "one body in Christ" [Rom 12:5-8; 1 Cor.12:13,27-30; Gal.3:28; Eph.2:14-15; 3:6] These verses will give you a fair idea of the New Testament ideal of unity as well as some of the consequences of division. Informed people today, both inside and outside the church, are most of them keenly aware that the church is a mess. It is not merely torn by rampant denominationalism and cultism. It is torn by bitter infighting among members in the denominations themselves. A cursory inspection of the decline in the membership and attendance of many of the so-called mainline churches suggests something is wrong, and in some cases, fatally wrong. Church doors are closing. Some churches die. We all of us who call ourselves Christian must, to a certain degree, share the blame. Collectively we have sat idly by (as Saul did when he watched the martyrdom of Stephen) and done little to stem the invasion of secular humanism that has eaten away at the very core and vitals of the integrity of the church. We have seen the eternal word of God supplanted by the ephemeral philosophies and doctrines of men. How can we -- or can we indeed -- fix it? There are no easy answers, but there is a sure answer. Back to the fundamentals. Back to giving the authority of Scripture more than mere lip service. Back to honest, fervent, constant prayer. Back to being an evangelist in the truest sense of the word. In short, back to God through the Door, Jesus Christ our Lord. --Hank | ||||||
1653 | Radical Boycott??? | John 17:15 | Hank | 154812 | ||
brazos: There is no Scripture of which I'm aware that teaches by example or precept that the way to lead the lost to Christ is through the use of boycott. One may easily infer that the apostles and the members of the apostolic church conducted necessary business transactions with non-Christian members of the communities of the first century. ...... Should a Christian who needs to purchase a loaf of bread or a bottle of milk deprive his family of vital nourishment because the baker and the dairyman are non-Christians? Does he sin when he pays the baker and the dairyman for goods received? How effectively does he witness for Christ by boycotting the baker and dairyman? Is he really being salt and light? ...... When Jesus said, "Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's (Matthew 22:21), He was speaking of paying taxes, of course. He laid down a principle in broad strokes, but He did not stipulate that one must necessarily agree to or approve of every expenditure the government makes using his money. There is no earthly reason why this principle that our Lord laid down could not be applied to money that we pay for goods and services. If you buy a product or engage a workman, you are duty bound to pay for the product or service. You are no longer accountable for what use the money you pay is put once you have discharged your duty to pay for what you received. It is no longer your money and you are no longer its steward. ...... Jesus laid it down in His Great Commission to "go therefore and make disciples of all nations." (Matthew 28:19). He said nothing about boycotting their businesses. Paul's charge to Timothy was "Preach the word!" (2 Timothy 4:2). And that remains the duty of the church still, to preach the gospel of Christ. That is our mission. It is not to boycott or coerce. These things don't bring anyone to Christ; they are not the power of God to salvation. But Paul tells us what is in Romans 1:16: "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." ...... When Paul came to Corinth, did he have boycott on his mind? Let's let him answer that question himself: "For I determined not to know anything among you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified." (1 Corinthians 2:2) ...... Yes, brazos, what you say is true, the web is full of petitions to sign pledging boycotts against this or that company or organization -- all of them sponsored by individuals and groups that probably have honorable motives, and all of them in the name of Christianity. But I've endeavored in this post to raise the question of whether this is the scripturally-correct way to spread the message of Christ's church, to lead the lost to Christ, and to glorify God. Is the mission of the corporate church and of the individual Christian to promote boycotts or preach the gospel of Jesus Christ? Boycotts don't have the power to save a single soul. The gospel is God's power to save everyone who believes. --Hank | ||||||
1654 | Can doctrine make us lausy christians? | John 17:17 | Hank | 147502 | ||
Lorenzo : No, doctrine or anything else cannot make anyone a 'lousy' Christian simplly because there is no such entity. One is either a Christian or is he is not. Neither can 'once saved, always saved' make anyone a mediocre Christian: again, one is either a Christian or he is not. No, Christianity is not "the worst thing Satan has done": Satan was not the founder of Christianity. Lorenzo, on this Forum a question is supposed to be a question, not a declaration. Should you intend to participate in the Forum, please acquaint yourself with the rules of Forum usage. --Hank | ||||||
1655 | Who was Barabbas? | John 18:40 | Hank | 187597 | ||
Congo - All that Scripture says of Barabbas is found in Matthew 27:16-26; Mark 15:7-15; Luke 23:17-25; and John 28:38-40. SBF tries to restrict itself to what is revealed in Scripture; hence, this is not a web site that contains a great deal of secular history. You can always visit a library or give Google a shot at it and see what you find. --Hank | ||||||
1656 | Who Carried Jesus' Cross? | John 19:17 | Hank | 128367 | ||
Agent Archer: I'm glad you asked this question, because a first reading of John's account in 19:17 of the fourth Gospel seems to pit it against the accounts of all three of the Synoptics, i.e., Matthew 27:32, Mark 15:21, and Luke 23:26. But the resolution of this prima facie conflict is easy. Notice what Matthew says (I'm quoting excerpts from the Amplified Bible) in 27:31b,32: "...and led Him away to be crucified. As they were marching forth, they came upon a man of Cyrene named Simon; this man they forced to carry the cross of Jesus." Note that Matthew does not say that Jesus never began to carry His cross. On the contrary, they encountered Simon as they were marching forth and compelled him to carry the cross. The implication is strong indeed that up to that time Jesus bore His own cross. And bear in mind also that the cross in this instance was the cross-member, the horizontal bar only, as was the custom at that time. ...... Now let's examine the Marcan account. Says Mark in 15:20b,21: "And they led Him out [of the city] to crucify Him. And they forced a passerby, Simon of Cyrene...who was coming in from the field [country] to carry His cross." Again, we may ask, "Who then carried it before they met Simon?" and again the strong implication is that Jesus did. .... Now for the Lucan account. In Luke 23:26 we read, "And as they led Him away, they seized one Simon of Cyrene, who was coming in from the country, and laid on him the cross and made him carry it behind Jesus." Again, the strong implication that Jesus began carrying His cross but for some reason needed to be relieved of the task? But why? Jesus had suffered a most brutal beating that certainly had taken its toll on His bruised body. He bore His cross as far as His physical strength would permit. Remember that Jesus was fully God and fully human, and His humanity was beset with all human weaknesses except sin. ..... Finally then, let's look at John's account in John 19:16a,17: "And they took Jesus and led [Him] away. So he went out, bearing His own cross, to the spot called [Place of a] Skull; in Hebrew it is called Golgotha." So John stated outright what the Synoptics clearly implied, that is, that Jesus began His journey to Golgotha carrying His own cross. But John never says that Jesus had no assistance along the way. The Synoptics relate, while John does not, that Simon eventually assumed the burden of carrying Jesus' cross to the site of execution. But the exclusion by John of the detail about Simon does not constitute any conflict in the facts. The statements in the Synoptics and the statements in John's Gospel are therefore all true. Some details are mentioned while some are omitted, but there is no disharmony among the accounts. --Hank | ||||||
1657 | Why must people be 18 to share ideas? | John 19:17 | Hank | 128431 | ||
Sir Pent, the age stipulation has something to do with legal stuff, most of which I, not being a lawyer, have never been able to understand. The Lockman Foundation might be willing to answer your question, or you could ask a lawyer friend, or...ask Jeeves! -:) --Hank | ||||||
1658 | What does "I N R I" mean? | John 19:19 | Hank | 15056 | ||
Nolan, INRI is a Latin abbreviation for "Iesus Nazarenus Rex Iudaeorum" and means "Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews." There was no "J" in the Latin alphabet; an "I" was used instead. Similiarly, IHS is also a Latin abbreviation and means "Jesus, Savior of Mankind" not "In His Steps" as is commonly and erroneously believed. --Hank | ||||||
1659 | who was the deciple whom Jesus loved | John 19:26 | Hank | 95212 | ||
ruby -- It is widely accepted that "the disciple whom Jesus loved" was John the apostle, who wrote the fourth gospel, three brief epistles bearing his name, and the last book of the Bible, the Revelation of Jesus Christ. --Hank | ||||||
1660 | accepted | John 19:26 | Hank | 95286 | ||
Angel-1 -- The fourth gospel never states explictly that the apostle John was "the disciple whom Jesus loved" nor even that it was John who wrote this Gospel. The traditional view, however, has been held since early in the church's history that the Apostle John was the author and that he was the disciple whom Jesus loved. ...... Here is a brief note from Layman's Bible Commentary, vol. 19, p. 15 (Broadman Press): "The Gospel of John is actually anonymous. But many attempts have been made to identify the author of this popular Gospel account. The traditional understanding has been that John the Apostle, the son of Zebedee, was the author of the Gospel of John. Part of that reasoning goes back to the statement of Irenaeus, an early church father (about AD 200) who identified John as the apostle who leaned on Jesus' breast at the Last Supper. He indicated that John had written the Gospel. Added to this is the identification of John as the beloved disciple which many see (although not all interpreters think it was John) as the touch of an eyewitness. Also the author's use of 'I' and 'we' contribute to the thinking that John the Apostle was the author." --Hank | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 ] Next > Last [114] >> |