Results 321 - 340 of 1659
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: Morant61 Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
321 | state vs God | Matt 19:5 | Morant61 | 181992 | ||
Greetings RT! I would say 'Amen' to what Jeff wrote to you my friend! To state it again, Scripture commands us to obey man's laws. The only exceptions would be when man's laws violate God's laws. So, marriage is both a spiritual covenant and a legal covenant. Your friends are thus married from either perspective regardless of their intentions. :-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
322 | When is divorce recognized? On paper? | Matthew | Morant61 | 181982 | ||
Greetings RT! Like your previous question, if the person has not filed for and received a divorce, they are still married in both the law's and God's eyes. :-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
323 | sexual intercourse makes one married? | Matt 19:5 | Morant61 | 181981 | ||
Greetings RT! Since the situation you are asking about is a modern one, allow me to address the modern issues. 1) Whether they were in love or not means nothing! If there was a valid marriage license signed and turned into the state, then the couple is married. 2) What Kalos was asking concerns the fact that in some states, a marriage that has not been consummated, can be annulled. If the marriage is annulled, it legally never happened. Each state has it's own guidelines and restrictions. I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
324 | Spirtual Musice | Bible general Archive 3 | Morant61 | 181957 | ||
Correction... The group is called 'Hillsong United'. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
325 | Spirtual Musice | Bible general Archive 3 | Morant61 | 181956 | ||
Greetings Coltonjunior! If you type in "all I need is you" and Christian lyrics into a Search engine you will find that it is a song by a group called 'Hillsong'. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
326 | The meaning of Rev.17:10 | Rev 17:10 | Morant61 | 181741 | ||
Greetings Shing! Here is what the Bible Knowledge Commentary says about this verse: ****** 17:9-11. The angel informed John, This calls for a mind with wisdom (cf. 13:18). The truth that is being presented here symbolically requires spiritual insight to be understood, and the difficulty of correct interpretation is illustrated by the various ways it has been interpreted in the history of the church. The angel informed John that the beast’s heads are seven hills on which the woman sits. Many ancient writers, such as Victorinus, who wrote one of the first commentaries on the Book of Revelation, identified the seven hills as Rome, often described as “the city of seven hills.” This identification has led to the conclusion this passage teaches that Rome will be the capital of the coming world empire. Originally Rome included seven small mountains along the Tiber River, and the hills were given the names Palatine, Aventine, Caelian, Equiline, Viminal, Quirimal, and Capitoline. Later, however, the city expanded to include the hill Janiculum and also a hill to the north called Pincian. While Rome is often referred to as having seven hills or mountains, different writers do not necessarily name the same seven mountains. A close study of the passage does not support the conclusion that this refers to the city of Rome. Seiss, for instance, offers extensive evidence that the reference is to rulers rather than to physical mountains (The Apocalypse, pp. 391-94). This is supported by the text which explains, They are also seven kings (lit., “the seven heads are seven kings”). If the mountains represent kings, then obviously they are not literal mountains and refer not to a literal Rome but to persons. This view is also supported by verse 10, Five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come; but when he does come, he must remain for a little while. John was writing from his point of view in which five prominent kings of the Roman Empire had already come and gone, and one was then on the throne (probably Domitian, who caused the persecution which put John on the island of Patmos). The identity of the seventh king, the one to come after John’s time, is unknown. Verse 11 adds that the final world empire will be headed by an eighth king. . . . The beast who once was, and now is not. . . . belongs to the seven and is going to his destruction. The eighth king is obviously identical to the final world ruler, the man who heads up the final world empire destroyed by Christ at His second coming. One possible explanation of the difference between the seventh and eighth beast is that the seventh beast itself is the Roman Empire marvelously revived in the end time, and the eighth beast is its final ruler. These verses show that in the end time, particularly during the first half of the last seven years, there will be an alliance between the Middle East ruler (the Antichrist) and the apostate world church of that time. This will come to a head, however, at the midpoint of the seven years, when that political power becomes worldwide. ***** I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
327 | translation of Matt 18:18 | Matt 18:18 | Morant61 | 181290 | ||
Greetings Stephanus! Let me try to answer your question. It is a bit tricky in that Greek is different than English. The phrase translated as 'shall have been bound' is actually a translation of two Greek words, both verbs. The first word is the Future, Middle, Indicative, 3rd person, singular form of the Greek word 'to be'. The second word is the Perfect, Passive, Participle, Nominative, Neuter, Plural for of the Greek verb 'to bind'. These two words together form what is called a Periphrastic Future Perfect verb. So, simply put, the translators have correctly translated the two verbs as 'shall have been bound'. I hope this helps! p.s. - I am not sure where you got your statistics from. 'to be' is used 2,462 times in the NT, while 'to bind' is used 49 times in the NT. However, it is important to note the the 'tense' of a verb is a matter of form. In other words, the form of the words tells us what tense a verb is in, so how many times a verb is used doesn't really tell us how it should be translated since the form could be one of several tenses in Greek (each of which would be translated differently). Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
328 | heap burning coals means what? | Rom 12:20 | Morant61 | 181163 | ||
Greetings CCT! Paul is quoting from Prov. 25:21-22. Here is what the Bible Knowledge Commentary says about Prov. 25:21-22: ************ Kindness to one’s enemy-giving him food and water-is like heaping burning coals on his head (quoted by Paul in Rom. 12:20). Sometimes a person’s fire went out and he needed to borrow some live coals to restart his fire. Giving a person coals in a pan to carry home “on his head” was a neighborly, kind act; it made friends, not enemies. Also the kindness shown in giving someone food and water makes him ashamed of being an enemy, and brings God’s blessing on the benefactor. Compassion, not revenge, should characterize believers (cf. Prov. 24:29). Alternately, light on this passage may come from an Egyptian expiation ritual, in which a person guilty of some wrongdoing would carry a pan of burning coals on his head as a sign of his repentance. Thus treating one’s enemy kindly may cause him to repent. *********** I have heard some argue that the phrase means that being nice to an enemy heaps judgment upon him. I would lean more toward the first view. Whatever the phrase means, we have an obligation to be kind even to our enemies. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
329 | Christ Jesus didnt have a wife, did he?? | Bible general Archive 3 | Morant61 | 181148 | ||
Greetings BabyBear! The short answer is that some people will believe anything. :) Seriously though, there is no Scripture or historical evidence that Jesus was married or had a mistress. Some French mystic in the 14th century supposedly (if I remember correctly) had a vision that the book 'Da Vinci Code' claimed as historical evidence. But simply put, there is no evidence. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
330 | why is d bible inconcstent?! | NT general Archive 1 | Morant61 | 180959 | ||
Greetings JD! First of all, it is only a theory that Matthew and Luke used Mark as a source. So, evaluating the differences might be interesting, but ultimately it won't mean much of anything. :-) Secondly, the Gospel are not comprehensive accounts. Each Gospel focuses on certain aspects of the historical events in accordance with the author's intentions. Sometimes they deal with the same details, while sometimes they don't. However, they are not inconsistent. :-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
331 | why is d bible inconcstent?! | NT general Archive 1 | Morant61 | 180957 | ||
Greetings JD! First of all, it is only a theory that Matthew and Luke used Mark as a source. So, evaluating the differences might be interesting, but ultimately it won't mean much of anything. :-) Secondly, the Gospel are not comprehensive accounts. Each Gospel focuses on certain aspects of the historical events in accordance with the author's intentions. Sometimes they deal with the same details, while sometimes they don't. However, they are not inconsistent. :-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
332 | Should women lead and teach in ministry? | NT general Archive 1 | Morant61 | 180798 | ||
Greetings Cuddles! This is a question for which you will get many different responses. :-) The topic has been discussed many times on the forum before. May I suggest that you use the search feature first to read what others have said about this issue in the past. Then, if you have an specific questions, you can attach them to the appropriate post. Happy Hunting! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
333 | How old was Adam when Cain was born? | Genesis | Morant61 | 180792 | ||
Greetings 00123! There is not definitive Scripture stating how old Adam was when Cain was born. If one were to speculate, one could argue that given the command to fill the earth and given that there wasn't any birth control that Adam and Eve probably conceived fairly quickly. But, this is just speculation! :-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
334 | Mary's virginity remained intact | Bible general Archive 3 | Morant61 | 180512 | ||
Greetings Parable! Thanks for the clarification! There is no evidence that the action of the Holy Spirit was illicit or sexual. The Holy Spirit did not have sex with Mary. Scripture simply says that His power would overshadow her. So, I can't see anyway that the Spirit's actions could be construed as adultery. :-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
335 | Adultery? | Bible general Archive 3 | Morant61 | 180500 | ||
Greetings Parable! You ask a very interesting question, but make some huge leaps in logic. :-) You state that: "It is also stated that Joseph was a righteous man, so divorcing Mary would have been righteous, on the grounds that she must have committed adultery." These statements simply do not logically follow from one another. Even though Joseph is a righteous man that does not mean that he is sinless. So, he could certainly be a righteous man and consider doing something sinful. Secondly, Joseph only considered putting her away privately. He did not actually do it. So, even if his considered action would have been sinful, he never actually did it. Finally, we know that Mary did not commit adultery since she knew no man until after the birth of Jesus. While most would have considered her to be either immoral or an adulteress because they did not know what God was doing, the fact remains that she did not commit adultery. I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
336 | Please explain Mark 6:52 for me please. | Mark 6:52 | Morant61 | 180353 | ||
Greetings Tarleton_gal! First of all, Mark 6:52 isn't randomly place where it is! God put it exactly where He wanted it. :-) The point is simply that the miracle of the loaf and fishes should have clued the disciple in concerning the identity of Jesus. However, they did not get it, so they were amazed when He also walked on the water. Mark speaks of the disciples hardness of heart in 6:52 and 8:17. Both times, he uses the phrase in the context of the disciple failing to understand something that they should have. I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
337 | The pronoun "Him" is God or Son? | John 3:16 | Morant61 | 179273 | ||
Greetings MJH! Pronouns, in Greek, must agree with their antecedent in case and number. Given this fact, 'him' must refer to 'the Son' and not to God. I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
338 | At counseling my pastor told me "referen | Bible general Archive 3 | Morant61 | 178984 | ||
Greetings Philipps413! I understand your question, but this is not the place for counseling. Having said that, there is nothing in the Bible that states anything about black clouds over marriages. I would ask your pastor to explain what he means, or seek the advice of another pastor. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
339 | Apologetics Help Please! | Is 7:14 | Morant61 | 178884 | ||
Greetings Mscanlon1! There are several issues that need to be addressed in regards to your question. The first question which must be addressed is the meaning of the terms themselves. Sceptics have long tried to argue that a 'maiden' or 'almah' is not the same as a 'virgin' or 'bethula'. They are partially right, but they are also partially wrong. A maiden would normally be a virgin. :-) Thus, the sharp distinction between the two terms simply doesn't work. Further evidence of this is that the Hebrew speaking translators of the LXX used the Greek word for 'virgin' to translate the Hebrew word 'almah'. Thus, they clearly understood Is. 7:14 as a reference to a virgin. The second issue that must be addressed is the original context of the prophecy. Some prophecies have dual meanings. The orginal prophecies probably only meant that a young woman, who was currently a virgin, would conceive and give birth as a sign to Israel at that time. However, we know from the New Testament that there was an even greater fulfillment where a virgin would conceive without knowing a mn. Which, brings us to the final issue. The doctrine of the Virgin Birth does not stand or fall upon how one translates the term in Is. 7:14. Why? Because, the inspired New Testament specifically tells us that Mary was a virgin. I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
340 | Thanks Brothers!!! | Luke 19:10 | Morant61 | 177919 | ||
No problem! :-) And, welcome to the forum! May I suggest that when you respond to someone's post, that you mark it as a note, not as a question. Your response will still be seen, but it will not be listed in the questions section. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ] Next > Last [83] >> |