Results 461 - 480 of 2277
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: Hank Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
461 | Any good Christian Apologetic Discussion | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 32774 | ||
Van, try icr.org. Good stuff on creationism v. the nutty alternative. --Hank | ||||||
462 | Mythology and the bible? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 34954 | ||
Katagious2, the stuff you posted isn't new by any means, and it is but a pale and slight sample of all the mythological and fanciful tales that have been around for centuries, beginning at about the time when mankind first transcribed and left behind his thoughts and beliefs in writing. If you feel it would help you to examine God's word and its total accuracy and reliability from a Christian perspective, I commend a book by Josh McDowell called "The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict" published by Thomas Nelson, Nashville. But apart from having any other source at your disposal but the Bible itself, take it, read it, study it, compare the prophecies of the Old Testament with their fulfillment by Jesus Christ in the New Testament, and consider the moral and theological teachings of the Bible. Then compare the Bible to mythology, to pagan religions and their claims about their deity, about salvation, about good and evil, about the orgin of the universe, about eschatology, et cetera. See which makes sense and which makes little or none. --Hank | ||||||
463 | Study the Word, Calvin, or Aminian??? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 35203 | ||
Dear Child of the King -- Amen to your post! As a newcomer you show a degree of wisdom and discretion that seems to have lost its way on this forum. As it was originally conceived, the forum was to be a medium devoted to study of the Scriptures and not a soap-box free-for-all in which devotees of this or that denominational bias were to air their own particular doctrine as being the last word in theology. It was never meant to be turned into a never-ending debate about Calvinism, Arminianism or any other ism. You certainly don't have to agree with TULIP to be a Christian. Calvin was a man. He had no more authority to tell you what to believe than I do, and I have absolutely none. His words are no more binding on you as a Christian than any other human being's words. I am a Christian. I am neither Calvinist nor Arminian; I accept what precepts of each school as I see as being consistent with the word of God and reject others that do not seem to be. I see it as far more important to read and study the Scriptures humbly and prayerfully, asking for divine guidance of the Spirit as I do; to strive to grow and mature in my Christian walk as God helps me to do so; to set the best example that I can to be more like Jesus in my daily living, and by doing so to be an instrument to lead others to the Lord Jesus. I consider endless debates over various isms to be virtually worthless, serving more to alienate Christians from each other than to unite them; and, even more, in creating a spirit and environment of divisiveness, to dissuade unbelievers to seek entry into the fold of the Shepherd. Believe me, dear new user, no part of your question offends me; on the contrary, what you have stated in your post should be read, studied, marked, learned and remembered by those members of this forum who persist, day after day, to engage in endless debates, no matter what the topic or how trivial or important they may appear to be. The Bible is clear on all matters that are truly essential. If there be more than one point of view on what are mainly secondary issues, it is enough to state the various points of view as succinctly as one can and move on. It is unneccesary and counter-productive to dwell infinitely on a small point and to insist on having the last word on any issue. No one but God has a last word on anything; no one's view is the universal, eternal, definitive word of truth on any spiritual issue. In general, the only one who considers an opinion to be of vital interest and importance is the one who renders the opinion. That goes for what I have said in this post; but I do urge the users of this forum to consider what I have herein opined, and to be mindful also of what this new user to whom I am responding has said so well. I am not so naive nor my vision of utopia so simple that I should believe that the content of this forum will take an abrupt turn in a moment; I do pray, however, that some of the more influential members here will consider joining in to bring the quality of this forum up to serve a higher, more noble purpose than being by and large a sounding-board for Calvinism, Arminianism, and other assorted denominational biases, doctrines, and wild speculations on issues about which the Bible speaks not a word. If that is all the purpose this forum is to serve and if that is all the good that this forum can do, how can its continuance be justified? --Hank | ||||||
464 | How to win sex battle? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 35273 | ||
Stay out of the war! --Hank | ||||||
465 | Why did God create time? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 35279 | ||
Mother-of-nine (really?): This is not intended to be a smarty-pants or flippant answer in any sense. But the only honest and truthful answer that I can see any human being giving to the whole batch of "Why did God....?" questions is, "Because God is sovereign and can do whatever He pleases." At least the answer is honest and guards us against making wild and fruitless speculations. --Hank | ||||||
466 | So what was the 2nd vision??? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 35777 | ||
I dunno. Bifocals I guess :-) --Hank | ||||||
467 | post modernism in the churches thinking | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 36511 | ||
Aussie, postmodernism holds that there are no absolutes -- no absolute truth and no absolute reality. There is a rather exhaustive treatment given to postmodernsm on www.faithmaps.org. It is fairly obvious that postmodernism and Christianity are poles apart. --Hank | ||||||
468 | Raven and John Reformed, Baptism? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 36516 | ||
Cyclist, the criminal on the cross was no more or less excused from salvific water baptism than any one has ever been, because salvific water baptism does not exist. What does exist is regeneration by the Holy Spirit that comes by grace through faith in Jesus Christ. --Hank | ||||||
469 | Why so many denominations out there? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 36792 | ||
ToddN, if you hang around this forum very long, you are likely to find some answers to your question. This forum, among other things, is a laboratory of sorts; it brings together on one web site an ever-changing assortment of people from a number of different folds, both Catholic and Protestant, both liberal and conservative, both pragmatic and highly speculative, both Calvinist and Arminian, both orthodox and heretical, both young and old, both learned and unlearned -- an admixture, a slice of splintered Christianity as it is in 2002. We come together, professing in the main to be Christians, and we disagree. The focus of our disagreement may be weighty or it may be trivial. What User A sees as important, User B sees as nonsense. What User C views as orthodox, User D calls heresy. ..... Here's but a small sampling of the contrasts we see on the forum, and we see them or others very much like them every day: Man has free will; man has little or no free will. Water baptism saves us; water baptism does not save us. Christ died for all men; Christ died only for the elect. The Genesis account of creation is literal; it is figurative. Women should serve as elders, deacons, preachers; these positions are for men only. A believer has eternal security; a believer can lose his salvation by sinning. The list goes on. At the fork of every road, some go left, some go right. Side #1 thinks side #2 is too dense to see the plain truth. Side #2 thinks side #1 just possibly is touched in the head.... So, friend, now is it becoming a little easier to get a pale glimmer of understanding of why there are so many denominations in the world? With so many different and often opposing points of view out there, it's no less than a miracle that we on the forum get along as well as we do. That miracle, I feel, is our common belief that Jesus Christ is Lord. Nothing about which we disagree comes close to being on a par with this belief we, most of us at any rate, share in common. --Hank | ||||||
470 | Text basis for Ryrie NASBU (1995)? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 37216 | ||
Topdogue: HEBREW TEXT In the present translation the latest edition of Rudolf Kittel's Biblia-Hebraica has been employed together with the most recent light from lexicography, cognate languages, and the Dead Sea Scrolls. GREEK TEXT Consideration was given to the latest available manuscripts with a view to determining the best Greek text. In most instances the 26th edition of Eberhard Nestle's Novum Testamentum Graece was followed. --from Foreward to the NASB, page x. --Hank | ||||||
471 | why all the different religions? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 38799 | ||
Hi, pup! Your question covers such a vast segment of religious and secular history that I, in thinking of how it might be possible to give you a reasonably short answer, abandoned the idea as being worthless. Your subject is so enormous in scope that literally thousands of books have been written about it. The best advice I can share with you is to visit your library or bookstore and select from any number of volumes that treat of the history of religions and religious groups. You will find much on the Web also that may help you to learn more on this subject. Perhaps years hence you may become an expert and can help us all better to understand the religious Tower of Babel which we have all of us to some extent helped to construct! --Hank | ||||||
472 | Grossly mistranslated | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 38970 | ||
And did you know, scorelord42, that there are a number of us on this forum who didn't fall off the turnip truck last Monday! What you have posted is pure ballyhoo not worthy of serious consideration by this forum. You can't back up a word of it and you know it. We certainly do. --Hank | ||||||
473 | difference of sex and making love | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 40586 | ||
Sex is intercourse. Making love is sexofcourse. --Hank | ||||||
474 | Why is the NAS the most correct Bible? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 44115 | ||
WillieD, Kalos has directed you to the proper places wherein you may find much material regarding your question. This post is to add the general observation that, widely speaking, there are two basic schools of thought on Bible translations, viz., word-for-word and thought-for-thought. The former approach was made by the translators of the King James Bible in 1611 and by its editors in subsequent revisions, and by the translators of the 1901 American Standard Version (ASV) and its successors, the NASB and the NASB Update. Foremost among the latter approach is the New International Version (NIV). The word-for-word philosophy seeks for the greatest transparency to the biblical manuscripts that is possible in keeping with good, clear English usuage. The thought-for-thought philosophy seeks to render into the receptor tongue essentially the same force and meaning (sometimes called dynamic equivalence or paraphrase) of the biblical manuscripts. While there is an element of interpretation always inherent in any translated piece of writing, conservative scholars argue that the likelihood of interpretation is far greater in thought-for-thought versions than in word-for-word versions. --Hank | ||||||
475 | join a rel. org. Qstns. would hlp. | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 44278 | ||
Gill, could you explain what the cross has to do with your references about bearing false witness and worshiping idols? --Hank | ||||||
476 | WHY GET A BODY GUARD YOU HAVE JESUS | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 45491 | ||
Jenni, having saving faith in Jesus Christ does not exempt us from using common sense in everyday matters, or from taking necessary precautions to protect ourselves from potentially dangerous or threating situations. To your question could be added other questions, such as, Why wear a seat belt in a car? Why use a parachute when jumping from a plane? Why bother to carry aboard a life jacket when boating? The list is virtually endless. God equipped us -- most of us at any rate -- with brains, sensory organs, and a clear instinct for protecting ourselves and our loved ones from danger. It is certainly not out of order for the Christian to pray for God's providential care, but it is neither out of order to use the brains He gave us too. Can you imagine anything sillier than for a human being to ask God, "Lord, protect me while I drink this poison"? --Hank | ||||||
477 | what is the real point to this book? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 45642 | ||
Which? --Hank | ||||||
478 | Weights and Mesurements? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 45831 | ||
A large number of study and reference editions of the Bible include a table of weights and measures, and some provide center- or side-column explanatory references. Generally included also are helps on monetary conversions. Paraphrased Bibles frequently incorporate the modern equivalent into the text, e.g., showing the dimensions of Noah's ark in feet instead of cubits. --Hank | ||||||
479 | Where does Jesus say He is God? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 45902 | ||
John 1:1: _In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God_ Unless one is prepared to argue that John, in his use of 'the Word' (logos) meant someone other than Jesus Christ -- and such an argument would be most difficult to prosecute toward any end that remotely resembled proof -- then this verse attests unimpeachably to the deity of our Lord Jesus Christ. --Hank | ||||||
480 | How are we to understand? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 46312 | ||
SERENTIME: Yours is an excellent question, in my view. There are only two ways that I know of that we can have assurance that the version we're reading is true to the biblical manuscripts. (1) Become scholars ourselves in the biblical languages. (2) Rely on the counsel of conservative scholars. Regarding (1), there are linguistic cowboys who suppose they can drop by a bookstore, pick up a Strong's or other Hebrew-Greek dictionary, stop by MacDonald's on the way home and while they are eating a Big Mac become an expert in the ancient languages. This is a ridiculous thing to do, and a very dangerous one too, because it takes even the brighest student years to become adept in biblical Hebrew and Greek. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Option (2) is the one that most of us must choose. A careful reading of the translators' preface will generally show how they view Scripture, what texts they used, and what translation philosophy they subscribed to. Additionally, we can and should avail ourselves of the reviews that conservative scholars have written about a particular translation. Endorsements by professors of conservative seminaries carry a great deal of weight with me. Among translations that have been found reliable by a great number of conservative scholars are, in addition to the time-honored KJV, the NASB and the NKJV. --Hank | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ] Next > Last [114] >> |