Results 8401 - 8420 of 8433
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: EdB Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
8401 | Who is going into the Millennium? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 4561 | ||
Let's not split hairs, Heb 9:27 is a general rule, and I think it was to counter any teaching on reincarnation. Obviously everyone didn’t die I can think of two Enoch and Elijah and there are many that died twice, all those raised from the dead either by Jesus or a servant of God’s. However I also think it is safe to assume that it applies in this situation. I can not believe God would allow a group of people to experience heaven (even in very limited basis) and then bring them back to earth to live a length of time. Talk about cruel and unusual punishment! I know Jesus did just that but isn't that what makes what Jesus did even more amazing? Jesus laid down the glory of Heaven to come to this earth because of love for us. Let’s assume it isn’t the tribulation saints that were martyred and brought back to life, is there anybody else left to go through the Millennium? Is it possible we have the wrong idea about the millennium? |
||||||
8402 | Do you mean some people will live twice? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 4512 | ||
Are you saying the tribulation saints are going to live twice? I think the scenario you suggest is that people would become believers during the tribulation, be killed for their belief and go to heaven but then they will return with Christ to live and die during the Millennium. I don't think so, if we look at Hebrews 9:27 "And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment,". While I know Hebrews 9:27 was written to cast down the belief in reincarnation I think it is still very applicable to this situation. |
||||||
8403 | Who is going into the millennium? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 4408 | ||
How could that be? Aren't all of those saints going to have immortal bodies? Why would they rebel at the end of the thousand years? Also IF Isaiah chapter 65 is talking about the Millennium, and I think it is, it mentions death. I believe the Saint you are referring to will be here ruling and reigning with Christ. I'm asking who will they rule and reign over? | ||||||
8404 | Who is going into the millenium? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 4343 | ||
Who is going into the millennium? The saints are raptured so they are in heaven. Tribulation saints will be martyred so they too are in heaven. Everyone else took the mark of the beast so they could eat. Who is left? |
||||||
8405 | Wow! Where did that come from? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 4338 | ||
Where did that come from? I don't think for a moment anyone bought anything the Jehovah Witnesses are selling. They can't even get God's name right. Jehovah is a made up word by William Tyndale in the 1500's. He took the constants in the Tetragram YHWH and added the vowels from the Latin Adonai and using common laws of speech came up with Jehovah. But thanks for the thought. |
||||||
8406 | Should the Bible be taken literally? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 4227 | ||
Thank you for being more than gracious in your answer. How do we explain the phenomena in the Soviet Ukraine? Bibles were smuggled in behind the iron curtain and for the most part readers became healthy Christians without any additional teaching. Where problems did arise, in isolated cases, it was found the problem occurred because the group only had fragmented sections of the Bible. They had based their doctrine not on the whole Bible but rather the sections they had. Similar stories are starting to emerge from the main land of China. I think your example of the watch tower is what I’m questioning, didn’t they take God’s word and reduce it down to human reasoning? They took the sections they liked and kept them, the sections they couldn’t explain they rewrote so they could. |
||||||
8407 | Should the Bible be taken literally? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 4198 | ||
I'm not talking about what God has changed or the perceived differences between the OT and NT. I'm talking about a precept, statue, or command that is minimized by man as being nothing more than the writer addressing a social situation of the time. My question is why would an all knowing, all seeing God allow something to be included into the Bible, a book given to us for life’s direction, knowing that it would cause confusion in later generations that had no direct knowledge of the existing situation? If I lived on the make believe island of Jabuck. And I had no religious training or knowledge of Bible times and was given a Bible in my language. If I read and studied it with purity of heart and with the guidance of the Holy Spirit would I ever conclude, “this” precept, ordinance, statue, or commandment, while it doesn’t say so, was in fact addressing a social situation that doesn’t exist today, therefore I should discount it? |
||||||
8408 | Should the Bible be taken literally? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 4148 | ||
Your forcing me into a corner I didn't want to go into, but that's okay. Let's take the Book of First and Second Corinthians, we know Paul was trying to correct problems within the church of Corinth. In some cases it is clear there was a unique problem with a specific solution. In other cases the specific problem, is not spelled out yet there is a specific precept or statute given. Many men rationalize what the problem or custom was and then say this precept or statute applies only in that situation. Should this be done? Should we look as some parts of the Bible as merely history and unless we are repeating that history they do not apply to us? | ||||||
8409 | Why can't we take the Bible literal? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 4136 | ||
I'm trying to stay away from particulars because I don't want to revisit or rehash old ground. If what you responded is true. Would you tell me why you think God would have allowed such to be included, in the Bible knowing that it would cause confusion and debate in generations of future? | ||||||
8410 | Must all the Bible be taken literally? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 4134 | ||
I thank Prayon for his response to my question as I first stated it. However after rereading what I wrote I feel I need to restate my orignal question in way that will lead to a more open discussion. I have heard many men explain that a particular Biblical doctrine or teaching doesn’t apply today because the writer was responding to “thus and such”. Or "this" isn’t for today because it is addressing a custom of the time that is no longer in effect. In light of the above statement will someone explain to me why God, would allow the inclusion, into the Bible, of doctrine, precepts, statutes, ordinances, or commandments that would become invalid or outmoded because of changing customs or social trends? Or why God would allow the human writer’s bias or prejudices to contaminate the writing? |
||||||
8411 | EVE'S NAME | Gen 2:23 | EdB | 4132 | ||
I’m not sure I know what you mean when you say Eve had another name. Looking in scripture we see Eve called a “helper” from the Hebrew word “ezer” in Genesis 2:18 Then the Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him.” Nelson’s Bible Dictionary definition of “women” gives us more insight ...The man was created before the woman. Because the man needed companionship and a helper, God caused the man to sleep. From him He created a woman, “a helper comparable to him” (Gen. 2:18, 20). Man is incomplete without woman. Because she is called a “helper” does not imply that she is inferior to man. The same Hebrew word translated as helper is used of God in His relationship to Israel... In Gen. 2:23 Eve is called “woman” from the Hebrew word “ishshah”? Genesis 2:23 The man said, “This is now bone of my bones, And flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, Because she was taken out of Man.” The King James Bible Commentary reads :; ,..She shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man is a play on the words for man and woman, for they have a similar sound in Hebrew. Though they are probably from two different roots, the sounds aptly mark the affinity between the man and the woman. This is missed in a translation... In Genesis 3:20 we see Eve called “Eve”, “Now the man called his wife’s name Eve, because she was the mother of all the living.” Which is translated from the Hebrew word “chavvah” which means “life” or “life giver.” In Genesis 3:21 The Lord God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife, and clothed them. We see Eve also called “Wife” which is the Hebrew word “ishshah” which is also translated woman. I hope this answers your question |
||||||
8412 | Should the Bible be taken literally? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 4125 | ||
I asked these two questions in my response to another question, but I think they got lost so I'll ask them again. I have heard many men explain that a particular Biblical doctrine or teaching doesn’t apply today because the writer was responding to “thus and such”. Or "this" isn’t for today because it is addressing a custom of the time that is no longer in effect. Does anyone believe an all knowing, all seeing God, that produced the Bible, the living Word, would be so short sighted He would allow the inclusion of doctrine, precepts, statutes, ordinances, or commandments that are no longer valid or outmoded because of changing customs or social trends? Or that God would allow the human writer’s bias or prejudices to contaminate the writing? |
||||||
8413 | i need a bio on paul the apostle | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 4050 | ||
The Book of Acts is a starting place and for further info go to Paul by E.E. Bruce pub. by Zondervan or A Harmony of the Life of St. Paul by Frank J. Goodwin pub. by Baker | ||||||
8414 | chcking scripture context | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 4006 | ||
Let me add my two cents I have found that God provides two or more witnesses (other scriptures) to any doctrine or precept He would establish for us to follow. I believe this is based on the following scriptures. Deuteronomy 19:15“A single witness shall not rise up against a man on account of any iniquity or any sin which he has committed; on the evidence of two or three witnesses a matter shall be confirmed. Matthew 18:16 “But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every fact may be confirmed. John 8:17 “Even in your law it has been written that the testimony of two men is true. 2 Corinthians 13:1 This is the third time I am coming to you. Every fact is to be confirmed by the testimony of two or three witnesses. Jesus followed this principal in John 5:33-39 by pointing to four witnesses to confirmed He was who He said He was. John the Baptist John 5:33-35, witness of works John 5:36, witness of the Father John 5:37-38 and the witness of scripture John 5:39-47. I can not think of one doctrine, precept, statute, ordinance, or commandment that God gave to man that isn’t confirmed at least one other place in the Scriptures. Furthermore I get very cautious when I hear people say we must understand the traditions and the social customs of the time. I know we must have some understanding of them so we can correctly apply the teaching to our life. However, I also believe the Bible is just as applicable to us today as it was for those of the first century. I have heard many men explain that a particular doctrine or teaching doesn’t apply today because the writer was responding to “thus and such”. Or this isn’t for today because it is addressing a custom that is no longer in effect. Does anyone believe an all knowing, all seeing God that produced the Bible, the living Word, would be so short sighted He would allow the inclusion of doctrine, precepts, statutes, ordinances, or commandments that are no longer valid because of changing customs or social trends? Or that God would allow writer’s bias or prejudices to contaminate the writing? That's my two cents and I hope it helps you. I'll also be interested to see how people answer the two questions I asked. |
||||||
8415 | Do we always have to debate? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 3288 | ||
The title of this forum is “StudyBible” by Lockman Foundation. Lockman is a trusted name, with an outstanding reputation. As such, one would expect, if they went to a Lockman sponsored site, they would come away with correct answers about the Bible. You can look all through this forum and see unchallenged answers that are based on opinion, half truths and outright lies. I see that as a problem! If this was a Bible Study Forum hosted on some other website I wouldn’t see a problem, I also wouldn’t bother with it, because I would expect it to be full of junk. To me the Lockman name means we are “studying” the inspired Word of God, not Philosophy, not the opinions of man, but the true word of God. I also see it as a “study” not as a debate or an effort to 'one up' someone else. A study is more than just presenting new ideas and challenging each others thinking. A study should have a beginning and reach a conclusion. If not, aren’t we in danger of falling into the trap Paul talked about in 2 Tim. 3:7 “always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.” Isn’t our action like those spoke about in Acts 17:21 Now all the Athenians and the strangers visiting there used to spend their time in nothing other than telling or hearing something new. While I don’t advocate censoring, would limiting comments to those that have a Biblical basis be all wrong? Would it go to far to append to an entry the disclaimer, "this person's comments are based on opinions", or that "this answer was based on something other than the inspired Word of God"? When discussions enter realms that aren’t soon to be resolved, would it not be fair to state this subject has been a point of disagreement within the church for years? “Side one” make their stand on these Bible verses and “side two” basis their view on these Bible verses. Where answers are just not possible can that not be so stated with the forewarning that any response given will be the opinion of that person and not the inspired word of God? I think this Bible Study has the potential to become a virtual “Home Group” or “Sunday School Class”. In those environments isn’t there always a moderator or teacher? Isn’t that person's function to direct and lead the group or class in a study not to censor thought, and quench learning? Another function is getting the discussion back on track and to help the group come to some kind of conclusion. Again the stated purpose of this forum was “STUDY” not “debate” and all the things debating brings with it. A discussion doesn’t always have to end with someone wrong and someone right, it can end with people walking away having a better understanding of a differing position, new thoughts on subjects and a new hunger to learn more. I also think everyone that appends to this forum has a responsibility to insure what they are saying is based on the Word of God as written in the Bible. I further believe Lockman Foundation, since they have courageously decided to host this forum, has the added responsibility to insure this forum is not disseminating incorrect or misleading information. I really don't want to beat a dead horse, but I'm very concerned that someone could get a really lousy answer from this forum and believe it is true. I would hate to think someone was deceived maybe even to the point of effecting their salvation by a forum in which I participated. |
||||||
8416 | Wise Debate? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 3157 | ||
Here is the problem as I see it. Let's use the case of Cain's wife. Let's further assume the person asking the question does not know the Bible at all. The question is then responded to by three people. The first one responds by saying, “no one knows for sure, but Cain’s wife had to be another offspring of Angels.” The second person says “Cain’s wife was Cain’s daughter and the incestuous relationship was the mark that Cain carried.” The last person that answers says, “she was Miriam the daughter of Ali Baba the Prince of Tarnish a country just north of the Garden of Eden. The people of Tarnish originally came from God's second effort to populate the earth.” Now let’s say there are no other responses, is it not possible for the person to walk away deceived? If people are coming to this forum to ask questions and are expecting to be given answers by someone that “knows" then something must be done to insure that is what happens. |
||||||
8417 | Wise Debate? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 3084 | ||
I think this forum is excellent for general Bible type questions. Like what are the differences in the translations? How was the Bible translated? What Bible Software is available? Is there a passage that says...? Where did this book come from? I don't think this forum as structured does justice to questions on theology. My problem with debating theology in this type of medium is the correct answer many times gets lost by those that just want to say something. I have also noticed that the people I think have something to contribute are no longer contributing. We had one person give an answer saying, to reach a fair conclusion you have to do years of research and he made a 97 page document available for those that wanted to see how he had reached his conclusion. I obtained and read the document and while it disagrees with how I believe the scholarship and research was excellent. I don't see how anyone could just summarily reject the points he made. I personally will ponder on many of things he said. Basically this contributor seemed to drop off the forum when his position was attacked by those with such well reasoned answers as, "no sir 'taint true". I think for this forum to do what Lockman desires it will have to be moderated. Then people that try to win debates by out shouting or attacking people would be forced out. From past experience I will not enter into another theology debate on this forum. I have resolved to stay in the General Bible area and to respond to questions like I outlined above. |
||||||
8418 | Suggest OT Heb and NT Greek study aids? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 3077 | ||
Consider Wordsearch they have "BART" which stands for "Bible Analysis and Research Tool" which to my understanding was developed with or by Wycliffe Bible Translators. Wordsearch's site is www.wordsearchbible.com. If you go to the site and click on products you will also see they have a package called WORDsearch 5 Greek Hebrew Library which includes BART and many other CURRENT reference materials. Read CURRENT to mean not so old it's out of "copyright protection" and therefore costing the supplier nothing. | ||||||
8419 | Bible study software suggestions, please | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 3071 | ||
This question was asked earlier in this forum, however I'll add my two cents again. I have tried just about everything on the market and I think I can give a fair evaluation. If your doing simple concordance type searches (one word or phrase) any of the packages are more than sufficient. If you’re using the program to construct sermons, lessons, or research type papers you need look at how they transfer from themselves to a “word processor”. Some simply use copy and paste which works for most. However for research or term papers you need to be able to include credits such as author, publisher and etc. I feel the LOGOS system is superior for this. For sermons and lessons you would probably want to include book, chapter and verse designations. Here Wordsearch, which is in STEP, does what I feel to be superior job. The next area you want to look at is what books each one has available. Beware it is easy to get caught up in buying more and more. I know many people who have spent thousands buying books for these programs and never use more than a few favorites while hundreds of dollars worth of material sit unused. Most of the online or relativity cheap stuff makes extensive use of free or out of copyright material. In others words old books many of which contain old expressions and often-obsolete words. The more expensive programs include new or current material. The question here is what are you going to use. To me the choice came down to the LOGOS family (Logos, Nelson) and the Wordsearch (navigator, Preachers Outline and Sermon Bible). I feel everything else is not as useful, did not offer a good value versus cost or fell short in ease of operation area. I view LOGOS as more for academia and Wordsearch more practical. By this statement I mean Logos is excellent to use to dissect a passage in one of the original languages, prepare a term paper with footnotes, or do an all inclusive in-depth study of the Bible. Wordsearch on the other hand is so easy to use; you can put together a sermon/lesson or study including all references with minimal effort. Books and Bibles are automatically synchronized and scroll together. It is not as flexible as LOGOS but far more user friendly. Both LOGOS and Wordsearch offer a wide selection of books with LOGOS winning hands down in shear numbers. Here ask yourself a question, does your normal mode of study reference every available book or do you rely on some old favorites? I tend to go with the tried, tested and familiar references so I had to shop which author was publishing in which format. I had some favorite authors that published only in Logos and others only in Wordsearch so I ended up with both. If I had to do over I would not have purchased LOGOS and would have used the money to expand my Wordsearch Library and if I really wanted them to purchase hard copies of authors not published in STEP. One passing thing, Wordsearch has two similar features I love. One is called “Easy For Your To Say” and the other “Strong’s Talking Concordance”. These features pronounce over your computer’s speakers any word that you point and click. “EASY For You To Say” pronounces all the proper names of people, places and objects in the Bible. “Strong’s Talking Concordance” pronounces all the Greek and Hebrew words. To me these two features are worth their weight in gold. I hope this helps. |
||||||
8420 | Please help me find numbers with the mea | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 2745 | ||
Rosemary I think your asking where does it say the number of man is 6. I now there are people that have the numbers all worked out from 1 on. In their scheme 6 is the number of man and 7 is God's perfection. If I had to guess, since man was created on the sixth day they assigned the number 6 to man. God completed creation and rested on the seventh day so they assign God's perfection or completetion the number 7. I was never real impressed with the scheme so I never paid it to much attention. I hope this answers your question. | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 ] Next > Last [422] >> |