Results 181 - 200 of 516
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: ebrain Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
181 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | ebrain | 178656 | ||
Hi Mark. Thank you for your post. What is important here is not so much the Greek translation of what Jesus said, but rather His Teaching, what He wished to convey. It is clear to me that He is saying that from the Divine point of view, thinking about it is just the same as actually doing it. The word translated "Lust", used in this verse indicates what is in a man's mind when he is looking at a woman, Which state of mind God judges as being the same as if the man had in fact commited adultery with her. It makes no difference how you interpret the Greek word used, it's meaning in this passage of Scripture is exactly as I have indicated above. To suggest that Jesus did not use the right word, is an insult to Him. To say that the Holy Spirit translated the word used by Jesus with the wrong Greek word, is to insult the Holy Spirit. If as you say the Greek NT, is inspired by the Holy Soirit, then please explain the following At Matthew 26:64 Jesus's words are given as "You have said so", at Mark 14:64, as "I AM", and at Luke 22:70, as "You say that I am". Has the Holy Spirt made a mistake, or is it human error ?. At Matthew 20:20, it is the Mother that asks, whereas at Mark 10:35, it is the Sons that ask. Al four Gospels have different versions of , "the inscription above His head", see Matt27:37. Mark 15:26, Luke 23:38, and John 19:19. Every blessing. Edwin. |
||||||
182 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | ebrain | 178660 | ||
Dear John. You said You're the one who implied that Jesus used a word that did not really mean what He had in mind. I have never at any time as far as I am aware either said, or implied that Jesus used an incorrect word. Such a suggestion would be to insult Him, and rest assured, I have no intention of doing that. What is important here is not so much the Greek translation of what Jesus said, but rather His Teaching, what He wished to convey. It is clear to me that He is saying that from the Divine point of view, thinking about it is just the same as actually doing it. The word translated "Lust", used in this verse indicates what is in a man's mind when he is looking at a woman, Which state of mind God judges as being the same as if the man had in fact commited adultery with her. It makes no difference how you interpret the Greek word used, it's meaning in this passage of Scripture is exactly as I have indicated above. To suggest that Jesus did not use the right word, is an insult to Him. To say that the Holy Spirit translated the word used by Jesus with the wrong Greek word, is to insult the Holy Spirit. If as you say the Greek NT, is inspired by the Holy Soirit, then please explain the following At Matthew 26:64 Jesus's words are given as "You have said so", at Mark 14:64, as "I AM", and at Luke 22:70, as "You say that I am". Has the Holy Spirt made a mistake, or is it human error ?. At Matthew 20:20, it is the Mother that asks, whereas at Mark 10:35, it is the Sons that ask. Al four Gospels have different versions of , "the inscription above His head", see Matt27:37. Mark 15:26, Luke 23:38, and John 19:19. Your last line reads. Saying that it doesn't matter what the word means, it only matters what Jesus had in mind doesn't even make any sense. I experience no difficulty in understanding what Jesus is saying (had in mind), in the verse in question, I am sorry that it does not make sense to you. If I can be of nay help, then please ask. May the Lord bless you, and keep you safe. ebrain. |
||||||
183 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | ebrain | 178661 | ||
Sorry for the error, the last but one line should have read. If I can be of any help please ask. ebrain. |
||||||
184 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | ebrain | 178677 | ||
Hi Steve. I am well aware of the meaning of the Greek word which has been translated "Lust", there was no need for you to repeat it. The verse you want is 16, not 26, and it refers to the autographs, and not to copies, or translations. I have more to say in answer to your post, but later on due to time restraints. The Lord bless you. Edwin. |
||||||
185 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | ebrain | 178720 | ||
Hi Mark. Thank you for your post, asking if I believe that the Greek New Testament was inspired by the Holy Spirit. I believe that there is what I would describe as both Primary, and Secondary Inspiration. Primary Inspiration is responsible for the "Autographs", only, and not the copies, or the translations, and that Secondary Inspiration is applicablt to all three groups. As the autographs are no longer available for study, secondary only needs to be considered here. In my lifetime more that fifty different versions of the English Bible have been published, although a number were only of the NT. Non of these are exact word for word translations, as we do not have the originals, and in any case they are in a different language, I am not however saying that the translators did not have Divine assistance in producing their version. Any Reference Bible, will have marginal notes, and footnotes indicating such things as "Meaning of word unknown", or "The earliest manuscripts do not include", or "can also be translated as", ect, ect. Take for example Mark 16:9-20, which is considered as a later addition. Now have a look at v18, and tell me do you realy think that the Holy Spirit wants christians to put the Lord to the test by drinking deadly poison in order to prove that thay are the real thing, when Jesus who was asked the same question, said "Thou shall not put the Lord thy God to the test".? Now let me explain what I mean by "Secondary Inspiration". The Holy Scriptures whether autographs, copies, or translations are like no other writings in the universe, they are Supernatural, spiritual. and spiritual things have to be spiritually dscerened, the natural man is just not able to understand The Bible, and this is where the Holy Spirit comes in, He causes the man to be "Born again", then the man will say, "now I understand it, now it all makes sense, it's a different book alltogether", oh no it is not, the book is just the same as it has allways been, it's you the reader who havs been changed, and thereby been enabled to understand it. I may say something more on this subject at a later date, but for the time being, I hope the above will help to answer your question. The Lord bless you brother. Edwin. |
||||||
186 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | ebrain | 178766 | ||
Hi Hank. You say. "Of course, no one in the New Testament is reported to have handled snakes". Might I with respect draw your attention to Acts 28:3-5, I will refer to these verses again when dealing with the last part of Mark's Gospel. Thank you for what you have said about "Snake Handling", I have heard of this before in respect of a group of pentecostals operating in the area of the Catskill Mountains. I believe that verses 9 through 20 of Mark Ch 16 are human additions, but allowed to be there with Divine permission in order to give believers yet another opportunity to exercise that faith without wich it is impossible to please God, see Hebrews 11:6. Let me explain. False teaching is allways introduced, and disguised by being liberally surrounded with plenty of good sound teaching, I have no problem whatsoever with eleven of these twelve verses, but v 18, is where the "Deadly Poison" is introduced, and see with what subtly the first part of this verse is used to introduce you to it, some readers will say, "Why yes, Paul handled a deadly snake, and it did not do him any harm, therefore the rest of this verse must be ok. It has been said that the Holy Spirit will not tempt people to put God to the test, and this is of course true. It was not the Holy Spirit that tempted Jesus, but the Devil, although it was in fact the Holy Spirit who wrote Psalm 91:11-12. It will not be the Holy Spirit who will ask you to drink deadly poison, but a servant of the enemy of God, who will say something like "If you really are a christian, then do this for it is written, ect, ect". Need I say any more, no doubt I will. but for the time being this will have to do. ebrain. |
||||||
187 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | ebrain | 178767 | ||
Hi Mark. You said. "Do you believe that the Greek New Testament was inspired by the Holy Spirit, and as such, is an accurate record of what happened, and what Jesus said, and taught?" With the possible exception of Luke and Acts, I believe that all the other NT, autographs were, as I have allready said written in Aramaic, and that the Greek version of these is a translation. I have several versions of the Bible, some of them I consider to be better than others in rendering into English what God wrote in Hebrew, and Aramic, however, I would without hesitation say that all the different versions that I posses including the Watchtower one to be the Word of God. I have been told that there are thoes who have been converted as a result of what the Holy Spirit has said to them when that person has only had the JW version, or should I say perversion to hand. Our God is in no way limited, and is able to use any version in any language of His Word to bring about Salvation. I feel that this topic has just about been exausted, If you wish to discuss it any further, then I suggest you let me have your phone number, as I am able to phone you 24/7 at no cost for up to 70 mins. The Lord bless you Steve. Edwin. |
||||||
188 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | ebrain | 178768 | ||
Thank you Jeff. Please refer to my reply to Hank of 7.25 am to-day 10/24/06. Every blessing. Edwin. |
||||||
189 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | ebrain | 178776 | ||
Hi Mark. You said. "Concerning Mark 16:9-20, were you aware that one of these “early manuscripts”, the Vaticanus, while it does not contain this passage, does leave a blank space where that text would fit? But this really isn’t a problem either way I look at it. Its addition doesn’t conflict with any other teachings, and it omission doesn’t remove anything that’s not taught elsewhere. And nowhere, including in Mark 16, are we told that we should test the Lord, with the one exception that the Jews under the Old Covenant were to prove God concerning His promised blessing in their tithes - at least to the best of my knowledge! :-)". My answer to this is to be found in my reply to Hank posted at 7.25 am to-day 10/24/06. The other matters to which you refer will be delt with later on. Every blessing. Edwin. |
||||||
190 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | ebrain | 178780 | ||
Hi Steve. You say. "The only manuscript I know of that has been disputed concerning original language is Matthew. Your position is well outside the norm. I cannot understand why you would consider Paul's epistles to be written in Aramaic. The receiving churches and individuals would have been Gentile or mixed. Greek would have been the normal method of communication in order to be easily understood." My reply. Of all the writers of the NT, the only one who was not a native Jew was Luke, his native language would have been Greek. The others would have written in their own language Aramaic. As this language was only spoken by a small minority of the world's population at that time, it was most important that it be translated into Greek for publication, so that a majority of people would be able te read it, or have it read to them. New Testament Greek is not the same as the classical Greek of Plato and Homer, nor it is the same as "market place Greek" spoken by most people at that time. I will give you three examples, the conjunction "and", is used with far more ferequency that is the case in Greek, the expression "truly truly" is not normal in Greek. "Jesus answered and said", is not normal in Greek. it would have been, Jesus said, or He said, or He answered, or He said. You can see this even in the English translation never mind going back to the Greek. Anyone reading the Greek NT, would be able to see straight away that it was a very literal word for word translaion of onother language, in this case the Aramic autographs where this type of usage is the norm. Edwin. |
||||||
191 | Evidence for Aramaic? | Prov 5:1 | ebrain | 178792 | ||
Hi Tim. Please refer to the answer that I gave to Steve at 1.26 pm to-day 10/24/06. In His service. Edwin. |
||||||
192 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | ebrain | 178816 | ||
Hi KumKum. Leviticus 20:10. And the man that committeth adultery with [another] man's wife, [even he] that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death. There is no way in which Jesus could possibly be refering to a man's own wife, as it is only possible to commit Adultry with another man's wife see above. Regarding the last line of your post, please don't be upset, refer to the following Scripture verses. 1Cr 7:7 I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has his own gift from God, one of one kind and one of another. 1Cr 7:8 To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is good for them to remain single as I am. 1Cr 7:9 But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion. Paul's advice to you is, "If you lust after your friend, then marry her" To "Lust" is here described as "to be aflame with passion". I hope that this is of help to you. ebrain. |
||||||
193 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | ebrain | 178829 | ||
Hi Jeff. Below is an extract from one of yours. "You wrote: "If as you say the Greek NT, is inspired by the Holy Soirit, then please explain the following At Matthew 26:64 Jesus's words are given as "You have said so", at Mark 14:64, as "I AM", and at Luke 22:70, as "You say that I am". Has the Holy Spirt made a mistake, or is it human error ?." Your questions stops short implying that the answer is one or the other; that is, human error or the Holy Spirit making a mistake. Now I know enough about you from the forum to know that you don't believe the Holy Spirit makes mistakes. So the only obvious conclusion is that you are requiring Mark to agree that there are mistakes and/or contradictions between the gospel records, or not answer the question. This is the tactic observed by secular writers and speakers who attempt to discredit Christianity." In reply let me advise you that sometimes my motive in submitting posts is not so much to express a point of view, or explain a doctrine, as to provoke a discussion. I have no problem with the three extracts above, Matthew , Mark, and Luke are all saying the same thing, in that Jesus is saying that He is indeed the Messiah. He could have said "I AM", as Mark indicates, but then we would have missed the real meaning of His response which the other Gospel writers reveal. In other words, what He is telling them is "You know very well who I am, you know that I am the Christ, I know exactly what you have said in private behind closed doors, which is why my reply was spoken in the past tense, "It is as you have said". That's all for now, more later. Bless you brother Jeff. Edwin. |
||||||
194 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | ebrain | 178861 | ||
Hi Jeff. In your post of 2.06pm 10/24/06, you quote me as saying "It will not be the Holy Spirit who will ask you to drink deadly poison" You then go on to ask me "Do you belive that Mark 16:18 is telling Christians to drink deadly poison?" Please explain why you are asking me a question to which you have allready given my answer? Edwin. |
||||||
195 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | ebrain | 178866 | ||
Hi Mark. Here is a response to a part of your post, I hope to deal with the rest another time. In reply let me advise you that sometimes my motive in submitting posts is not so much to express a point of view, or explain a doctrine, as to provoke a discussion. I have no problem with the three extracts above, Matthew , Mark, and Luke are all saying the same thing, in that Jesus is saying that He is indeed the Messiah. He could have said "I AM", as Mark indicates, but then we would have missed the real meaning of His response which the other Gospel writers reveal. In other words, what He is telling them is "You know very well who I am, you know that I am the Christ, I know exactly what you have said in private behind closed doors, which is why my reply was spoken in the past tense, "It is as you have said". The Lord bless you. Edwin. |
||||||
196 | Mat 5:27-28. Adultery. | Prov 5:1 | ebrain | 178912 | ||
Hi Mark. In short yes I do, but it is not that simple. Before I was converted I had read "Pilgrims Progress" but could not make any sense out of it, however, after conversion it was a completely different book, but it was the same book, reading it now was like reading Scripture, but was it "Inspired" in the same way that Scripture is? I agree that Paul was a well educated man, and would most likely speak fluant Greek, and in all probability would have dictated in Greek to the Scribe who took down Paul's words, but what Paul had to say was not allways given to him by the Holy Spirit. Now what about the other Gospel writers, the Galilean Fishermen, for example, do you think that like Paul they also were fluant in Greek ?, or would it be more than likely that they would either have written, or dictated in the language with which they were most familiar, the language they spoke every day, the language in which Jesus preached. Yours because I am His. Edwin. |
||||||
197 | Evidence for Aramaic? | Prov 5:1 | ebrain | 178913 | ||
Hi Tim. Please refer to my post to Mark of 7.20am to-day 10/27/06. |
||||||
198 | Is a thought from God or satan ? | Prov 16:3 | ebrain | 188187 | ||
Hi newhall_fred Thank you for your post. I hope that what follows will be of help, It is taken from a letter I sent to a friend who had asked a similar question to yours. Subject: He who indwells you. Hi again David. I hope that what follows will be of help to you in understanding just where I am coming from on this subject. You said. "we all believe in the work of the Holy Spirit in our hearts, but to what extent, and exactly how does He manifest Himself? That seems to be the sticking point, and that's why I believe He works in different ways in different people." To answer this, I will have go back to my conversion, an extract from which is given bellow. "The Lord spoke to me in His still small voice, and said "Why am I doing this, why am I as it were taking time off from running this vast universe to come down into this room to be with you to cause you to open my book just where I want you to open it, to read the very verse that I want you to read that tells you that I know just what your problem is, if as you say your sin is too great for me to forgive?. " Now just what do I mean by, "The Lord spoke to me", well I did not hear anything, nor did I see anything.. It is hard to describe, but I will try, It was as if I had an awareness inserted into my thinking processes.. Thinking, I would describe as a person carrying on a conversation with himself silently inside his own head.. What was done to me might be refereed to by the unconverted as "mental telepathy", It was not speech, but information given, which can only be communicated to others by the use of speech. Does the Bible tell us all that we need to know?, well yes of course it does, and what's more it tells us of the Holy Spirits activity from within us, as the following verses indicate. Rom 8:16 The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God.. Tell me David how does He do this?, I have no doubt that you are a son of God, well in that case, have a look at Rom 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. If you are a son, then you are led by the Spirit, how David?, please tell me,, could it I wonder be like, "your heart glowing within you" ?,, Well that is exactly how I felt in my heart, when the Lord spoke to me at my conversion. Before I close here is a practical example,, suppose I am in a crowd, and want to give someone the "Gospel message".. Who am I going to speak to?, and what am I going to say?, well if I open my Bible, I read, Pro 3:5 Trust in the LORD with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; Pro 3:6 In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct* your paths. and don't forget I know also from the Word, that as I am a son, I can expect the indwelling Holy Spirit to lead me, to the one to whom He wishes to speak. I must however, adopt towards God, the same attitude that Jesus did, and as He explained at John 7:16-17, also John 14:10, then the words that I speak will not be my words, but the words of My Father who dwells inside me, He it is who will be doing the work, and not me trying to do my fleshly best for Him, but He will only work through me if I allow Him to do so, and this is achieved only as a result of, "Not my will but thine be done". I just want to expand a little on my last post. The Scriptures verses quoted bellow are for all believers at all times in history, and not just for the ones to whom Jesus was speaking at the time, and don't let anyone tell you otherwise. Jhn 7:16 Jesus* answered them and said, "My doctrine is not Mine, but His who sent Me. Jhn 7:17 "If anyone wills to do His will, he shall know concerning the doctrine, whether it is from God or whether I speak on My own authority. We are not told here just how this is done, but might I with respect suggest the following. Luk 24:32 And they said to one another, "Did not our heart burn within us while He talked with us on the road, and while He opened the Scriptures to us?" Now, do you see how it's done.. Isn't it great being a Christian. Bless you brother. Edwin. |
||||||
199 | Torah observance in the church?? | Prov 28:9 | ebrain | 161977 | ||
Keeping the Torah is usually understood to mean keeping the law, however, Romans 10:4, tells us that "Christ is the end of the law for righteousness". This in my opinion does not refer to the moral law, but only to the ceremonial law, see also Romans 2:15, 4:13, 4:16, and 8:3. For example, circumcision is no longer required, but, one man with one woman to the exclusion of all others untill death, is still required. You might find it helpfull to read Matt Ch's 5, 6, and 7, where our Lord says at Matt 5:17.(Amplified) that He did not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it, or more precisely to be the fulfillment of it. |
||||||
200 | Yes, I agree. Here's what I understand: | Prov 28:9 | ebrain | 162043 | ||
Thank you Eliyahu for your post, and for your invitation to give my opinion. Without question the biggest single problem that the Church has is an abysmal lack of good quality in depth Bible teaching, the second problem is, if anything even worse, as the majority of Christians are not even aware of this. Fortunatly thank God, there is as allways that small number, that little remnant who do hunger, and thirst after right teaching. I only have the use of one hand, and am a rather slow single finger typist, if you would be kind enough to let me have your e-mail address, then I will be only to happy to forward to you material in connection with your request. May the Lord bless you, and keep you safe. Edwin Brain. pabrain@indent.co.uk |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ] Next > Last [26] >> |