Results 21 - 40 of 48
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: ischus Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
21 | Divorce - which one Old or New? | Deut 24:1 | ischus | 115376 | ||
I would have to disagree with everyone so far. There are not only two verses in the bible on this subject. This has already been discussed in detail if you would like to search under divorce in the quick search box. ischus |
||||||
22 | Missing tribe at Jabesh Gilead? | Judg 21:5 | ischus | 115863 | ||
What draws your interest to this particular question...? | ||||||
23 | Who wrote II Samuel? | 2 Samuel | ischus | 115862 | ||
Hello KABBAK, Originally, 1st and 2nd Samuel were one book. Jewish tradition says that the author of this book is Samuel, but as you have pointed out, this is not possible. Samuel has some part in the authorship (1 Sam. 8:1ff) but the majority of the book(s) can be attributed to sources such as the book of Jasher, Nathan, and Gad. The completion of the book is at least 400 years after Samuel lived (1 Sam. 14:18). Samuel did have a part in this book(s), but it was minimal. ischus |
||||||
24 | Intermarriage | Ezra 9:2 | ischus | 115317 | ||
Paulie, There is no verse in the bible where God is against interracial marriage. There are some verses in Ezra ch.9, but Ezra was incorrect in his views. God has always been ok with marriage between any male and female. ischus |
||||||
25 | Intermarriage | Ezra 9:2 | ischus | 115333 | ||
Paul, I don't mean to scare you off...It is great to meet you and welcome to the forum! That passage in Ezra is one of my most passionate issues, and I wish that it wasn't so easy to misinterpret. Steve will say that the issue in Ezra's day was also religious, since the "Caananites" were pagans, but this is not easily proven, nor was it the focus of Ezra 9 and 10. They were being racist. They didn't care who the people were. Plus, I don't think they would just jump back into idolatry right out of exile. I trust their judgement in the Gentile wives they took. I think my argument is very solid, with very little, if any conjecture. I just want you to know that God would never say anything like that, and it is perfectly fine to marry someone from a different race. God creates and loves all different kinds of people, and wants all of them to love one another in every way. ischus |
||||||
26 | Intermarriage | Ezra 9:2 | ischus | 115569 | ||
Paulie, Before you make up your mind, please read my post #115564 by entering this number in the quick search box. ischus |
||||||
27 | How is the Bible the Word of God? | Ezra 9:2 | ischus | 115712 | ||
Tim, First of all, as you know,there are not only two choices as far as inspriration goes; verb. plen. or not at all. I believe that the bible is God's word, in that it contains spritual truths, as well as historical facts, which lead us to faith in God. I do not believe that the words of the bible were given orally or verbally or that they were dictated to the writers. I think that it is very much a human work, but that it is all God's will. This is especially true for the original autographs. I think there is sufficient evidence to make valid conclusions that what we read today is basically what was written back then... but there are variants, additions, changes, etc. As someone has already said, these do not effect the theology or other doctrines of the bible, but they are there nonetheless. Verbal inspriration is just not logical when you seriously look at how the bible was put together. There is no doubt in my mind that God was completely involved... I just don't think that he gave the words or thoughts to the writers orally or internally in every case. Now, there are many many places in the bible where a word of the Lord comes to a prophet,etc. There are also many places where the words do not find their origin in God. Much of the Old Testament that we have today is the result of thousands of years of copyists and editors. Even the NT has gone through many changes, but this is beside the point. I think that what we have is very close to what was originally written. Now, inspiration is simply beyond human comprehension, and when we try to explain it, we fail. But, I think that some of the best insights into how the bible was written and inspired can be seen in Jeremiah and Luke. I can't see how you can reconcile their means of obtaining the material that they wrote with verbal inspiration. Plenary is another issue. I can not truly say that what we have is all from God. You know the verses that should not be there, and to say that the whole work of the bible should be called His word is simply not true. However. I do beilieve in the plenary inspiration of the original autographs. ischus |
||||||
28 | How is the Bible the Word of God? | Ezra 9:2 | ischus | 115713 | ||
Tim, First of all, as you know,there are not only two choices as far as inspriration goes; verb. plen. or not at all. I believe that the bible is God's word, in that it contains spritual truths, as well as historical facts, which lead us to faith in God. I do not believe that the words of the bible were given orally or verbally or that they were dictated to the writers. I think that it is very much a human work, but that it is all God's will. This is especially true for the original autographs. I think there is sufficient evidence to make valid conclusions that what we read today is basically what was written back then... but there are variants, additions, changes, etc. As someone has already said, these do not effect the theology or other doctrines of the bible, but they are there nonetheless. Verbal inspriration is just not logical when you seriously look at how the bible was put together. There is no doubt in my mind that God was completely involved... I just don't think that he gave the words or thoughts to the writers orally or internally in every case. Now, there are many many places in the bible where a word of the Lord comes to a prophet,etc. There are also many places where the words do not find their origin in God. Much of the Old Testament that we have today is the result of thousands of years of copyists and editors. Even the NT has gone through many changes, but this is beside the point. I think that what we have is very close to what was originally written. Now, inspiration is simply beyond human comprehension, and when we try to explain it, we fail. But, I think that some of the best insights into how the bible was written and inspired can be seen in Jeremiah and Luke. I can't see how you can reconcile their means of obtaining the material that they wrote with verbal inspiration. Plenary is another issue. I can not truly say that what we have is all from God. You know the verses that should not be there, and to say that the whole work of the bible should be called His word is simply not true. However. I do beilieve in the plenary inspiration of the original autographs. ischus |
||||||
29 | what is the traditional view of esther | Esther | ischus | 115150 | ||
GP- As searcher mentioned, the author of Esther is unknown. However, some evidence can be used to narrow it down to the time of authorship. Esther contains many Persian-loaded words, and the author shows a great deal of accurate knowledge of Persian palaces and customs. The Hebrew is Esther is more similar to that of Chronicles than any other book in the OT. Therefore, the book can most likely be dated around 400-350 BC, during the Persian empire, which also lends itself to the possiblility of the author of Esther being the same original author(s) of Ezra-Nehemiah (which is a different issue). Hope this Helps! ischus |
||||||
30 | Difference between called and chosen? | Matt 22:14 | ischus | 115212 | ||
Edd, The difference here is one of the heart. Whereas God "calls" everyone to himself, the people must also respond to and live in the proper way, which makes them "chosen." 1 Pet.2:9 sets forth this same principle: the people were called out of darkness by God, and now that they have responded they are chosen people. Col. 3:12-14 illustrates the principle of "chosenness" further, as Paul describes the may in which a chosen one lives in relation to others. God Bless! ischus |
||||||
31 | What is Love?? | Matt 22:37 | ischus | 115880 | ||
have you read 1 Corinthians 13? this is love. | ||||||
32 | What happened to the saints ? | Matt 27:52 | ischus | 115353 | ||
Ken John, These saints lived for a while and later died again, just like Lazarus and the dead girl that Jesus raised. Colossians 1:18 states that Jesus is the fist-"born from the dead;" that is, the first one to rise and not die again. Hope this helps! ischus |
||||||
33 | should we consider baptism as | Luke 3:21 | ischus | 115690 | ||
Slay, I know exactly what you are asking, and I think that you have a valid conclusion. I have always wondered why the perfect Lord chose to be baptized under repentence for forgiveness of sins. The worst answer that I have found was that Jesus was just being an example for us (although I would not go to the extent of kalos' comment), and I think that there really is something to a vicarious baptism, at least for the people of Israel, and maybe for everyone??? The bible does not feature Jesus doing something without a theological purpose in mind. I believe that there is a very unique baptism here- one like no other. Although we can't be conclusive here, I would tend to agree with your initial idea. ischus |
||||||
34 | cups? | Luke 22:17 | ischus | 115903 | ||
The Church of Christ wanted to immitate the passages of everyone sharing the same cup, and therefore partaking in a worthy, biblical manner. Also, the cup in Luke 22:17 is not the same cup that we celebrate in the Lord's supper. The one that we celebrate is the next one, in 22:20, which mentions nothing about dividing it. Obviously, this is a very legalistic approach to the scriptures, although there is nothing wrong with using one cup. If you study the Jewish Passover you will find that each person typically has their own cup. Since Jesus requested that the room be prepared for them to celebrate this feast, it is most likely that each had his own cup (as seen in Lk.22:17) ischus |
||||||
35 | feast | Luke 22:17 | ischus | 115954 | ||
Sure- The best book that I would recommend for an introduction to Jesus and the Passover/Lord's Supper would definitely be "Christ in the Passover" by Ceil and Moishe Rosen. This book will answer all your questions, and give you a deeper meaning to the Lord's Supper. The Rosen's are a husband and wife who are Messianic Jews. Besides doing many church presentations about this topic, they have written a small, yet informative book. Although it is just over 100 pages, it is one of the best books I have ever read on the Lord's Supper or the Passover. I am pretty sure that it is still in print. The copy that I have is from 1978, but one of my friends just bought one recently and so you should be able to find one. If not, let me know and I will help you out- You definitely need to read this book! ischus |
||||||
36 | What is meant by "last day" in John 6:44 | John 6:44 | ischus | 115339 | ||
Hello, Emmy! Although John's emphasis in this verse is the "drawing" and not the last day, you still have a good question. Just for the sake of a different perspective, I believe Jesus is talking about the last, final day of everything old, (and the fist day of everything new)- the day of resurection and judgement of all people at the same time. ischus |
||||||
37 | Is it right to say Judas's heart was har | John 17:12 | ischus | 115858 | ||
TREN'T, Although there was a prophesy for someone to betray Jesus, that does not mean that Judas was born for this purpose. It would be against his free will for God to make him do this. God does not harden peoples' hearts against their own will, and the same is true for Judas. Jesus had several opportunities before Judas' betrayal to be killed, and I'm sure that he would have had plenty of opportunities in the future. He simply chose this betrayal as the time to fulfill his mission. He knew Judas' heart, and despite trying to keep Judas from sinning, Judas went away and betrayed him. Jesus cared for Judas- he didn't want him to harden his heart. He was a chosen disciple, a beloved friend. ischus |
||||||
38 | Were Cornelius and the others saved? | Acts 10:47 | ischus | 115899 | ||
No- they were saved because of their faith and obedience in Jesus Christ. | ||||||
39 | Who cares to discuss this verse? | Rom 8:19 | ischus | 115579 | ||
Make sure you read the entire section in context of the verse. You will find that it is talking about God's natural creation (the earth), and us, his children. ischus |
||||||
40 | Sexual sin in the corithian church | 1 Corinthians | ischus | 115568 | ||
Tren't, basically, it was a part of their culture. Many people in their city were active in fornication and temple prostitution as a way of life and worship. They were struggling with coming out of this lifestle and going against the customs of their people. ischus |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 ] Next > Last [3] >> |