Results 981 - 1000 of 1309
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Radioman2 Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
981 | Debate Arminian/Calvinist views? | 2 Pet 3:9 | Radioman2 | 81288 | ||
Searcher56: You write: "DON'T debate Arminian / Calvinist views..." I ask you: Who is debating Arminian/Calvinist views? Am I? You write: "Radioman2 and others ... just answer the question of how you see God's wish(es) apart from your Arminian or Calvinist view." I ask: Which view do I hold -- Arminian or Calvinist? If you tell me which I am (Arminian or Calvinist), then we'll both know. What makes you assume I am either Arminian or Calvinist? Radioman2 |
||||||
982 | WHAT WERE CHERUBIMS ? | Gen 3:24 | Radioman2 | 81243 | ||
So He drove the man out; and at the east of the garden of Eden He stationed the cherubim and the flaming sword which turned every direction to guard the way to the tree of life. Genesis 3:24 (NASB) The cherubim were not bats; they were angelic beings. cherubim (Strong's Number: 03742) Definition '1. cherub, cherubim (pl) 'a. an angelic being '1. as guardians of Eden '2. as flanking God's throne '3. as an image form hovering over the Ark of the Covenant '4. as the chariot of Jehovah (fig.) 'King James Word Usage - Total: 91 cherubims 64, cherub 27' - - - - - - - - - - - - - "The NAS New Testament Greek Lexicon" (Emphasis added.) (http://www.biblestudytools.net/Lexicons/Greek) |
||||||
983 | Did Magi first com from Media or Persia? | NT general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 81241 | ||
Magos (Strong's# 3097) Definition '1. a magus 'a. the name given by the Babylonians (Chaldeans), MEDES, PERSIANS, and others, to the wise men, teachers, priests, physicians, astrologers, seers, interpreters of dreams, augers, soothsayers, sorcerers etc. 'b. the oriental wise men (astrologers) who, having discovered by the rising of a remarkable star that the Messiah had just been born, came to Jerusalem to worship him 'c. a false prophet and sorcerer' - - - - - - - - - - - - - "The NAS New Testament Greek Lexicon" (Emphasis added.) (http://www.biblestudytools.net/Lexicons/Greek) |
||||||
984 | He does not wish for any to perish... | 2 Pet 3:9 | Radioman2 | 81238 | ||
You write: "DON'T debate Arminian / Calvinist views..." I ask you: Who is debating Arminian/Calvinist views? Am I? You write: "Radioman2 and others ... just answer the question of how you see God's wish(es) apart from your Arminian or Calvinist view." I ask: Which view do I hold -- Arminian or Calvinist? If you tell me which I am (Arminian or Calvinist), then we'll both know. What makes you assume I am either Arminian or Calvinist? Radioman2 |
||||||
985 | Do Jesus and Paul agree on salv by faith | NT general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 81216 | ||
Stephanie: Thank you for the kind words. If I can be of any assistance or if you have any questions, I would be happy to do what I can to help. Just let me know. Grow in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ, Radioman2 |
||||||
986 | Do Jesus and Paul agree on salv by faith | NT general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 81213 | ||
In the NT belief means "adherence to, committal to, faith in, reliance upon, trust in a person or an object." reilly1041: To help answer your questions, it would be helpful to define what belief actually means. "Belief in the N.T. denotes more than intellectual assent to a fact. The word (Gk. pistis, noun; pisteuo, verb) means *adherence to, committal to, faith in, reliance upon, trust in* a person or an object, and this involves not only the consent of the mind, but an act of the heart and will of the subject. "Whosoever believeth in him" is equivalent to "whosoever trusts in or commits himself to him [Christ]." Belief, then is synonymous with faith, which in the N.T. consists of believing and receiving what God has revealed" (New Scofield Reference Bible, Oxford, 1967). Grace and peace, Radioman2 |
||||||
987 | Do Jesus and Paul agree on salv by faith | NT general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 81211 | ||
"The Condition [for salvation]. Salvation is conditioned solely on faith in Jesus Christ. Nearly 200 times faith, or belief, is stated as the single condition in the N.T. (John 1:12; Acts 16:31). That faith must be placed in Christ as one's substitute for and Saviour from sin" (p. 1882, Ryrie Study Bible, Moody Press, 1976, 1978). reilly1041: Welcome to the forum. I appreciate that you are trying to get at the truth of this quesion to clear up your confusion. I encourage you to be a Berean. NASB Acts 17:11 Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so. AMPLIFIED...searching and examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so. No matter who is preaching or teaching, whether it be me, others on this forum, a preacher in your church or on TV or the Internet, YOU examine the Scriptures daily to see if the things you hear are so. Grace and peace, Radioman2 |
||||||
988 | Do Jesus and Paul agree on salv by faith | NT general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 81208 | ||
NASB John 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life." NASB John 5:24 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life." You can't find anywhere where Jesus Himself talked about faith alone getting one to the Kingdom of Heaven?* Try John 1:7; 1:12; 3:15; 3:16; 3:18, 3:36; 5:24; 6:29; 6:35; 6:40; 6:47; 7:38-39; 8:24; 11:25-26; 12:46. Note that in the above cited verses from the Gospel of John, it is true that Jesus didn't use the words "faith alone" or "believe alone." Neither did he say anything about belief PLUS commandment keeping, PLUS good works, PLUS works of the law, PLUS holding on and holding out, PLUS church membership, etc. In the above passages in John, JESUS DID NOT SAY WE ARE SAVED BY BELIEF plus SOMETHING ELSE**. ------------- *I'm not sure I find anywhere where Jesus Himself talked about "getting one to" the Kingdom of Heaven? I am familiar with the concept of "entering" the kingdom and "seeing" the kingdom. But "getting to" the kingdom of heaven? This is one I am not familiar with. **JESUS DID NOT SAY WE ARE SAVED BY BELIEF plus SOMETHING ELSE. I know he said "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved" in a disputed passage in Mark -- a passage that does not appear in the earliest manuscripts (Mark 16:9-20). "The external evidence strongly suggests these verses were not originally part of Mark's gospel. While the majority of Gr. manuscripts contain these verses, the earliest and most reliable do not" (MacArthur Study Bible, Word Publishing, 1997). |
||||||
989 | What are the greater works in John 14:12 | John 14:12 | Radioman2 | 81128 | ||
What are the greater deeds (works) that Jesus speaks of in John 14:12, and how is this related to his going to the Father? NASB John 14:12 "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." |
||||||
990 | How do we get our Bible? | Bible general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 81088 | ||
No major revisions of KJV Tom: You write: 'Most of those who stand by KJV, rather than “modern revisions” don’t realize that 1611’s underwent major revisions in 1629 and in 1638. In 1762, Thomas Paris corrected many errors, and in 1769, Benjamin Blayney revised it again." Tom, I appreciate your participation in the forum. I have nothing against you. Please know that this post is not meant in any way to criticize you personally. Nor is it an attack upon you or what you posted. However, it is not true that the King James version underwent four (or any) major revisions. My intent here is merely to set the record straight. I want all to know that I am definitely not a KJV-Only advocate. No way. Grace and peace, Radioman2 - - - - - - - - - - "The King James Bible of 1611 has not undergone four (or any) major revisions. "Just as the first two so-called revisions were actually two stages of one process--the purification of early printing errors--so the last two [1762 and 1769] so-called revisions were two stages in another process--the standardization of the spelling. . .The thousands of alleged changes are spelling changes made to match the established correct forms. ... Suffice it to say at this time that the tale of four major revisions is truly a fraud and a myth." (From The King James Bible Page). Read the entire article at (http://staggs.pair.com/kjbp/) |
||||||
991 | Hold fast the Scriptures- then memorize? | NT general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 80950 | ||
Sayonara! | ||||||
992 | Interesting Rendering | Gen 22:5 | Radioman2 | 80949 | ||
CHICK PUBLICATIONS? "Chick Publications has, since its inception, been a bit sensationalistic at times. We do not believe that their approach is the best to use in presenting the gospel. For example, in a number of their volumes in The Crusaders comic series, they use John Todd as an authority on witchcraft and related subjects, and Todd has been proved to be a “teller of tales” (to put it mildly). "Also, the volume entitled Sabotage, where the King James Version is purported to be the only accurate translation -- all others being Roman Catholic perversions -- is also inaccurate and unreliable. "Furthermore, the two issues entitled Alberto and Double Cross are historically inaccurate, unreliable in content, and unchristian in approach. "So, we do not endorse or promote Chick Publications. ...based on the above observations as well as on the whole, we do not feel they are a reliable tool." (http://www.equip.org/search/) Christian Research Institute, P.O. Box 7000, Rancho Santa Margarita, CA 92688 |
||||||
993 | Predetermined or Free Will | Luke 8:13 | Radioman2 | 80948 | ||
Jeanne1: I'm sorry that I misunderstood your previous posts. I did not realize these were not your questions, that instead they are someone else's. As for the paragraph I quoted from your post, you did not enclose it with quotation marks. Nor did you say in the post that these were someone elses's questions. So I didn't know that you were quoting someone else. So if I have misinterpreted your post or your position on these issues, I am truly sorry. I would not knowingly misquote or misrepresent another person's writings. In the post to which I am now replying it says: '..we don't have to go around "testing" people.' I couldn't agree with you more. You are exactly right. Neither I nor the writer of the article is saying that we should test others as to whether they are saved. I've never advocated such a thing. The intent of the article I quoted was not to teach us how to test other people. It is to help us examine ourselves, according to 2 Cor 13:5, which says in part: "Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves..." Examine and test yourselves -- not other people. That's what the verse says and that is what I was referring to. Regardless of any misunderstanding over that one post, I still say your writing is good, helpful and worth reading. I appreciate you and your participation in this forum. Grace and peace, Radioman2 |
||||||
994 | Hold fast the Scriptures- then memorize? | NT general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 80937 | ||
I, too, have a book I'd like to point out. I do not recommend it; I merely point it out. New Age Bible Versions G. A. Riplinger (A. V. Publications, 1993) 'Riplinger's book 'goes beyond previous works, however, by developing a conspiracy theory for the KJV-only view. Author G. A. Riplinger believes that lying behind modern versions (especially the NASB and NIV, apparently) is New Age influence.' (...) 'Riplinger rejects [the] earlier manuscripts and urges us to return to the Bible of the precritical era. 'If there is anything good to say about Riplinger’s New Age Bible Versions (hereafter NABV), it is that the book is not any longer than it is and that the foolishness of its various claims are transparent when one takes the time to study them... 'NABV is replete with logical, philosophical, theological, biblical, and technical errors. Riplinger lacks the proper training to write this book (her MA. and M.F.A. in “Home Economics” notwithstanding). Many of her errors arise from a lack of understanding of Old and New Testament textual criticism as well as biblical and theological studies...She hesitatingly admitted that she really could not read Greek. '...Simply comparing the KJV with the NIV and NASB through endless charts does not prove a thing. She needs to demonstrate that the specific translations she accepts are really better textual renditions than the alternatives she rejects, rather than merely assuming the superiority of the majority text type or the KJV. (...) 'The bottom line in Riplinger’s mind is that the King James Version of 1611 is alone the Word of God. Anything prior to or after that specific translation is in some measure not really the Word of God. We are back to the absurd view that the KJV is the Bible of Paul and the apostles. 'A volume the size of NABV would be required to point out Riplinger’s misunderstanding of theology, translation technique, and her fascination with New Age conspiracy and its association with modern versions. This book will cause a temporary stir. Hopefully, however, most Christians will recognize NABV as an ill-begotten book and will turn back to a study of the Word of God in the language of the people today. In so doing they will fulfill the prayers of godly translators of centuries past, including the very ones who translated the King James Version of the Bible.' [This article has been edited to fit here. To read the entire article, see (www.equip.org/free/DB015.htm)] |
||||||
995 | Predetermined or Free Will | Luke 8:13 | Radioman2 | 80930 | ||
Jeanne1: In the following quote from your post you ask a good question and then proceed to give an excellent answer, one with which I agree. Good work. I would like to reply to what you have written with a quotation in support of your answer. You write: "But what about those people that walked and talked the path to God thru Jesus, accepted Him fully, was baptized, attended church and church funtions, witnessed to others, etc... but later because of maybe a loss of children or spouse or maybe over time because he though that he could not lose his salvation became stagnant and fell into the ways of the world and forgot about God over time and then died. Are they still saved?" The following quote, in support of your answer, is excerpted from an article on The Evidences of Genuine Saving Faith found at the Grace to You website. 'Conditions that do not prove or disprove genuine saving faith. '1. Visible Morality There are some people who just seem to be good people. They can be religious, moral, honest, and forthright [trustworthy] in their dealings with people. They may seem to be grateful, loving, kind and tenderhearted toward others. They have visible virtues and an external morality. The Pharisees of Jesus day rested on visible morality for their hope and yet some of Christ's harshest words were directed at them for this very thing. 'Many who possess visible morality know nothing of sincere love for God. Whatever good works they appear to possess, they know nothing of serving the true God and living for His glory. Whatever the person does or leaves undone does not involve God. They're honest in their dealings with everyone-but God. They won't rob anyone-but God. They're thankful and loyal to everyone-but God. They speak contemptuously and reproachfully of no one-but God. They have good relationships with everyone-but God. They are like the rich young ruler who said, "All these things [conditions] have I kept, what do I lack?" Their focus is on visible morality, but that visible morality doesn't necessarily mean salvation. Jesus told one of the Pharisees "you must be born again" (John 3:6), not "you must put on an external morality." People can "clean up their act" by reformation rather than regeneration-so reformation in itself is not a mark of saving faith. '2. Intellectual Knowledge Another condition that can be misleading is intellectual knowledge. People can possess an intellectual understanding and knowledge of the truth and yet not be saved. While the knowledge of the truth is necessary for salvation, and visible morality is a fruit of salvation, neither of these conditions by themselves translate into true saving faith. People can know all about God, all about Jesus, who He was, that He came into the world, that He died on the cross, that He rose again, that He's coming again, and even many details about the life of Christ-and still turn their backs on Him. 'That's what the writer of Hebrews was warning against in Hebrews 6:4-6. There were people in the church who knew all about God and understood gospel truths. They even had a measure of experience with gospel truth. They'd seen the ministry of the Holy Spirit at work in people's lives-and yet knowing all of that, they stood in grave danger of turning away and rejecting Christ. 'In Hebrews 10 the writer warns this kind of man that he is treading underfoot the blood of Christ by not believing what he knows to be true. There are many people who know the Scriptures but are on their way to hell! A man cannot be saved without the knowledge of the truth, but possessing that knowledge alone does not save. '3. Religious Involvement Religious involvement is not necessarily a proof of true faith. According to Paul there are people who possess an outward form (a mere external appearance) of godliness but who have denied the power of it. They have an empty form of religion. Jesus illustrated this when He told of the virgins in Matthew 25. They waited and waited and waited for the coming of the bridegroom, who is Christ. And even though they waited a long time, when He came they didn't go in. They had everything together except the oil in their lamps. That which was most necessary was missing. The oil is probably emblematic of the new life; the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. They weren't regenerate. They had religious involvement but were not regenerate. A person can be visibly moral, know the truth, be religiously involved, and yet not possess genuine saving faith.' (From an article by John MacArthur)(www.gty.org/IssuesandAnswers/archive/genuinefaith.htm) - - - - - - - - - - Grace and peace, Radioman2 |
||||||
996 | Are we back to the absurd view...? | 2 Timothy | Radioman2 | 80921 | ||
justme: Thank you for replying to my question. It's always good to hear from you. Yours is an excellent post in which you make a number of good points -- points that all of us would do well to heed. In my opinion, everyone, regardless of which translation they prefer, would profit from reading and considering what you have posted here. Grace and peace to you. Radioman2 |
||||||
997 | Ps109:1 | Matt 6:1 | Radioman2 | 80888 | ||
fast (Greek: nesteuo, Strong's# 3522) Definition: to abstain as a religious exercise from FOOD AND DRINK: either entirely, if the fast lasted but a single day, or from customary and choice nourishment, if it continued several days (Thayer and Smith. "Greek Lexicon entry for Nesteuo". "The KJV New Testament Greek Lexicon". Emphasis added.) (www.biblestudytools.net/Lexicons/) - - - - - - - - - - fast 1 : to abstain from FOOD 2 : to eat sparingly or abstain from some FOODS (http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary) (Emphasis added.) |
||||||
998 | Is Easter mentioned in the Bible? | NT general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 80883 | ||
The word translated "Easter" in the KJV is the Greek word that literally means "the Passover." The word "Easter" is not mentioned in many places in the Bible. In fact, it's mentioned only once and only in one translation that I've seen. And even there it is the word that literally means "the Passover." |
||||||
999 | Are we back to the absurd view...? | Not Specified | Radioman2 | 80850 | ||
Are we back to the absurd view that the KJV is the Bible of Paul and the apostles? Many people, such as the KJV-Only advocates, are scared to death that someone might get hold of a so-called corrupt Bible translation that will somehow deceive them into committing apostasy or heresy. The inspiration of the Bible, the deity of Christ, the incarnation, the atonement, God's plan of salvation, the Second Coming of Christ, etc. can be proven using the KJV, NKJV, NIV, ASV, RSV, NASB, or any number of other translations. The idea that the same passage in one version will be translated to have an opposite meaning in another verison is pure nonsense. I see no need for people to become hysterical in their fierce opposition to this translation or their fanatical defense of that translation. Moreover, the differences in the wording of various translations is due more to the aim of the translators (to produce a word-for-word or thought-for thought translation) than to differences in the underlying Greek texts, which are minor. |
||||||
1000 | Are we back to the absurd view...? | 2 Timothy | Radioman2 | 80908 | ||
Are we back to the absurd view that the KJV is the Bible of Paul and the apostles? Many people, such as the KJV-Only advocates, are scared to death that someone might get hold of a so-called corrupt Bible translation that will somehow deceive them into committing apostasy or heresy. The inspiration of the Bible, the deity of Christ, the incarnation, the atonement, God's plan of salvation, the Second Coming of Christ, etc. can be proven using the KJV, NKJV, NIV, ASV, RSV, NASB, or any number of other translations. The idea that the same passage in one version will be translated to have an opposite meaning in another verison is pure nonsense. I see no need for people to become hysterical in their fierce opposition to this translation or their fanatical defense of that translation. Moreover, the differences in the wording of various translations is due more to the aim of the translators (to produce a word-for-word or thought-for thought translation) than to differences in the underlying Greek texts, which are minor. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 ] Next > Last [66] >> |