Results 261 - 280 of 7732
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: kalos Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
261 | how do i love my neighbor as myself? | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 176000 | ||
Where does the Bible say we must hang out with those people who degrade us? I'm not sure that it does. Regarding those who mistreat us, the Bible teaches us to love them, pray for them, do good to them, etc. But does it say we have to hang out with them, i.e. spend a lot of time being around them? It may, but offhand I can't think of any place where it does. |
||||||
262 | what can God do against man's free will? | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 176109 | ||
The Bible is not FULL of references to man's freewill. [] In the NIV the words elect, election, choose, chosen and chose appear 250 times. In all cases they mean, simply, "chosen," or "to choose". While not always referring to election for salvation, the majority of the occurences of the words choose or chosen is speaking of God's choosing, not man's. [] "Freewill" is not the term the Bible uses when it talks about human choice. [] The word "freewill" appears a mere 22 times in the entire Bible and ALWAYS in connection with the word "offering(s)". [] 'Many people misunderstand the concept of "free will," which is not a biblical term. The reality is that while we have the ability to make truly significant choices, we don't have truly "free" will. You cannot, for example, choose to wake up tomorrow morning in China when you go to bed in Chicago. Or wake up speaking Chinese when all you know is English. You cannot choose to be a different gender than what God made you. (Yes, I'm aware of sex-change operations and know people who've had them--we're not even going there! [smile]) But we can make choices that make a difference: for example, in our attitudes, in who we marry and most importantly, which God we serve. We have limited freedom in our choices, and God does not force us to choose things His way; He respects our choices. But we do not have totally free will.' ____________________ Source: www.probe.org/docs/e-freewill.html |
||||||
263 | where did God come from? | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 176151 | ||
You will find the teachings of Pastor David Assherick, as well as those of Ellen G. White (SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST Church), at the same website. | ||||||
264 | Testimony of hearing the Word of God | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 176247 | ||
"Do not allow yourselves to be condemned by anyone who claims to be superior because of special visions . . . For no reason at all, such people are all puffed up by their human way of thinking." Colossians 2:18 Today's English Version Like virtually all cults and false religions, the Colossian false teachers based their teaching on visions and revelations they had supposedly received. Their claims were false, since Jesus Christ is God's final and complete revelation to mankind (Heb. 1:1,2). |
||||||
265 | Elders not a pastor should lead church | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 176425 | ||
"I am the church." No, you're not. Red flags don't go up for you when you call yourself the church? "You don't have to be concerned about my being driven away from the church. I don't go to church...I am the church." The church is never a lone individual. Neither is a lone individual an assembly. The church is always an assembly -- believers (plural) assembling themselves together in His name. (All Scripture quotes are from the Amplified Bible.) 1Co 1:2 To the church (assembly) of God which is in Corinth, to those consecrated and purified and made holy in Christ Jesus, [who are] selected and called to be saints (God's people), together with all those who in any place call upon and give honor to the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, both their Lord and ours: 2Co 1:1 PAUL, AN apostle (a special messenger) of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Timothy [our] brother, to the church (assembly) of God which is at Corinth, and to all the saints (the people of God) throughout Achaia (most of Greece): Php 4:15 And you Philippians yourselves well know that in the early days of the Gospel ministry, when I left Macedonia, no church (assembly) entered into partnership with me and opened up [a debit and credit] account in giving and receiving except you only. Col 4:15 Give my greetings to the brethren at Laodicea, and to Nympha and the assembly (the church) which meets in her house. Grace to you, Kalos |
||||||
266 | Elders not a pastor should lead church | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 176428 | ||
Is a home church a true Biblical church? 'Answer: Churches in the New Testament era were indeed small assemblies that met in homes. So, the practice is certainly biblically allowable. There also seem to be some good reasons to have house churches as opposed to large gatherings: greater intimacy, stronger relationships, more comfortable worship, single mindedness, etc. The fact that large churches usually have their own home groups speaks to this fact. Several considerations should be made, however, concerning the reason for doing so. 'First, the fact that first century Christians did something does not establish it as a pattern for all generations to follow (unless there is also a clear command to do so elsewhere). Simply because Scripture records an event or practice that does not, of itself, establish a command (nor, in some cases, even approval!). So, for example, the fact that early Christians often sold all they owned and shared the profits among other believers does not mean that we must do so today (although it certainly would be acceptable). So we should not think that home churches are any more "biblical" in this sense. 'Second, there was a perfectly practical reason for meeting in homes. Where else would they meet? There were no church buildings, YMCA's, grammar schools, or even movie theaters that could hold large groups. Further, even if there was room somewhere, in a time of persecution a public gathering of hundreds or thousands of people would simply not be safe. Thus, it might not have been by design that the early church met in small groups. It is even possible that they would have preferred large meetings (as Jews would have been accustomed to), but they simply could not pull it off. So we should also not think that home churches are any more "spiritual" than large churches either. 'Third, home churches that are started in an effort to counter "the institutional church" are rather suspicious. While often listing the above reasons to appear more biblical, the real reason often seems to be displeasure with large church movements. While these complaints are often valid, it can lead to an egalitarian "us vs. them" mentality that should be avoided. 'In addition to the above considerations regarding motive, one final caution concerns the issue of accountability. For Protestant churches the Bible alone is the final court of decision in matters of faith and practice. This is fine, but the fact is that few people have the time to gain the skills and knowledge to accurately handle the word of God (2 Tim. 3:14-16). In classical education theology was taught last - for it builds on many other disciplines that cannot be learned from the Bible alone. Therefore, some degree of higher education was usually sought before one becomes a teacher of the word (James 3:1). The popular view today, however, is that the Holy Spirit teaches believers directly through the Bible. This idea might lead people to believe that whatever the group teaches is from God and is therefore safe from error. But the Bible does not teach that this is the case, and it is clear that most believers disagree on at least some issues, and most simply end up "interpreting" the Bible according to their churches' teaching anyway. 'The answer to the interpretation issue requires another article, but the problem it creates becomes more ominous when dealing with home churches. The New Testament is full of warnings against heresies coming from within the church. Since it was written in the first century, these would actually be warnings regarding house churches. While this problem is certainly not limited to house churches, there is clearly no guarantee of protection from false teaching simply because the church changes its meeting format. Further, because home churches function as independent small groups, they need have no accountability to anyone but themselves. This makes it much more difficult to judge their teachings (in fact, the Jehovah's Witnesses cult began in exactly this manner). 'In conclusion, there is nothing unbiblical about Christians gathering together regularly in houses, or large buildings, or any other appropriate venue. The Bible does not, in fact, give any guidelines as to the proper gathering size or location. What it does do is explain what is to take place at those meetings (Heb. 10; Col. 3; etc.). So long as biblical teachings (orthodoxy) and practices (orthopraxy) are undertaken by those in assembly, it really does not matter what meeting format one chooses.' Source: www.gotquestions.org/home-church.html |
||||||
267 | Elders not a pastor should lead church | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 176472 | ||
Bereaniam, "We don't go to church...We are the church". I agree with that 100 percent. Just as you stated it. I wouldn't change a word. "WE are the church." Amen and Amen! I meant what I said in a previous post. I appreciate you and was blessed when I read your user profile. Keep up the good work. Thanks for your reply. Grace and peace, Kalos |
||||||
268 | when are kids adults | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 176615 | ||
Julie: Fact: No, I do not know of any reference in the Bible to an age that children should be encouraged to live on their own. Opinion: However, I do not think that in Bible times children were still single and living with their parents when, for example, they were 21 years old. I don't think they were living off their parents while working a part-time job, spending their money on a new chariot, taking no responsibility, sleeping till noon, etc. Grace to you, John P.S. How’s that for labeling my opinion AS opinion? |
||||||
269 | How many people will go to heaven? | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 176807 | ||
There must have been a serious misconception in the church in Paul's day, too. The Apostle John and the Apostle Paul, among others, also believed in the believer's security. Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you WILL perform it until the day of Jesus Christ. Philippians 1:6 (Emphasis added.) NASB Hebrews 7:25 Therefore He is able also to save forever those who draw near to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them. AMPLIFIED Hebrews 7:25 Therefore He is able also to save to the uttermost (completely, perfectly, finally, and for all time and eternity) those who come to God through Him, since He is always living to make petition to God and intercede with Him and intervene for them. In what version of the Bible does John 10:28-29 say: 'And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. [29] My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand, BUT WE CAN TAKE OURSELVES OUT OF GOD'S HAND (or we can jump)'? Where in the Bible does it say that we can jump? If it is true that we can take ourselves out of God's hand, then according to verse 29, we are greater than God. In what version of the Bible does Romans 8:39 say: 'nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God, BUT WE CAN SEPARATE OURSELVES FROM HIS LOVE'? In verse 39, if man can separate himself from God's love, then man was not created. It says: "nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God." |
||||||
270 | was the new testament translated into Gr | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 176814 | ||
Jesus spoke in Aramaic 'It is almost universally accepted that Jesus and His disciples spoke in Aramaic. The theory that the New Testament was written in Hebrew is without basis, though I believe that I have heard some suggest that some of the sources may have been in Aramaic. The simple fact is that the Jews lost their facility in Hebrew. That is why the Old Testament had to be translated into the Greek language (this translation is known as the Septuagint). 'You will remember that when Jesus cried out from the cross, "Eli, Eli, LAMA, SABACHTHANI"(Matthew 27:46-47), He was citing the Hebrew text of Psalm 22:1, and no one there seemed to understand it. They thought Jesus was calling for Elijah. How could this fellow’s (Norman Willis') theory* hold up if no one at the cross could understand the Hebrew words Jesus spoke? (Hebrew and Aramaic are related languages, but not the same.)' ____________________ *Norman Willis' theory. Norman Willis claims that the NT may have been written in Hebrew instead of Greek. (http://www.bible.org/docs/qa/) |
||||||
271 | was the new testament translated into Gr | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 176815 | ||
'Most of the Old Testament quotations in the New Testament are taken from the Greek Bible (the Septuagint)' (page 198 Nelson's New Illustrated Bible Dictionary, Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1995). ____________________ 'Jesus and His Apostles quoted the Greek Septuagint - of this there can be no question. In order to quote the Greek Septuagint, one must speak Greek. (...) 'Thus, we can say with certainty, in the light of over 5000 Greek witnesses to the New Testament, and based upon historical evidence, that it is an absolute impossibility that the New Testament was written in any language other than Greek.' Source: www.christianseparatist.org/ast/hist/aramaic.htm |
||||||
272 | was the new testament translated into Gr | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 176816 | ||
"The people of first century Palestine, including Jesus, spoke the Aramaic language. However, early Christian writings were written entirely in Greek, the universal language of the Roman Empire." (www.twopaths.com/faq_kjv.htm) ____________________ Tim Moran wrote: ‘The entire argument against the primacy of the Greek manuscripts seems to be: ‘We have no hard evidence, but the Hebrew COULD have been written first! :-) ‘I know there is some historical evidence that Matthew may have written something in Hebrew, but we simply don't have any documentary evidence to back up this theory.’ ____________________ (Source for the following: www.angelfire.com/la/jlush/dangersHRM.html) 'Some of the errors in the HRM [Hebrew Roots Movement], or ANY, for that matter, who classify themselves Messianic Jews today are: '1. They call for Christians to recognize extra-biblical Jewish books, which are supposed to give fuller understanding of the Greek New Testament. In fact some go so far as to proclaim the Hebrew Scriptures are the authentic scriptures, not the Greek text of the KJV Bible. 'The New Testament was given in its original, inspired from the Hand of God, in GREEK, not Hebrew. Most of the extra-biblical Hebrew "scriptures" that the HRM is seeking to foist onto the Christian Church are ancient writings, often with occult and mystical sources, traditional material which are NOT Scripture at all. They are extra-biblical sources of knowledge. 'The Bible was written in 3 languages: '1. Hebrew was the Language of the Old Testament. '2. Aramaic was the language of the far east until the time of Alexander the Great. '3. Greek was the New Testament language and the International language at the time of Christ. 'But yet the Hebrew Roots Movement claims falsely that the original Gospels were written in Hebrew, or possibly Aramaic, and that the Greek New Testament is a mere translation and in some cases a mis-translation of the Hebrew or Aramaic originals. They have even gone so far (some of them) to conclude that Paul's writings where he addressed the heresy they teach, were re-written by Rome and are not authentic. Of course they cannot prove this, but it is enough to cast doubt in their adherents and justify themselves in their error.' (www.angelfire.com/la/jlush/dangersHRM.html) ____________________ (See also ID# 130632.) |
||||||
273 | was the new testament translated into Gr | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 176817 | ||
A Hebrew Gospel of Matthew? 'Jehovah’s Witnesses falsely claim the gospel of Matthew was originally written in Hebrew. In doing so, JW’s openly trash the reliability of the Bible. 'YHWH "Yahweh" (The Tetragrammaton) Jehovah’s Witnesses are guilty of adding to the word of God by adding the divine name YHWH in the New Testament where it is never found in the original Greek manuscripts, and blamed the Bible as being corrupted. Rather than trashing their false doctrine, they trash the Bible! Their central premise is that Matthew was written in Hebrew but this is entirely false. 'The Wycliffe Bible commentary: Matthew, Pfeiffer, C. F. 'Composition and Date. The great frequency of citations and allusions to Matthew found in the Didache, Epistle of Barnabas, Ignatius, Justin Martyr, and others attests its early composition and widespread use. The literary connections of this Gospel must be considered in its relations to the other Synoptics, and also to the statement of Papias that "Matthew wrote the words in the Hebrew dialect, and each one interpreted as he could" (Eusebius Ecclesiastical History 3.39). Many have explained Papias’ statement as referring to an Aramaic original from which our Greek Gospel is a translation. Yet our Greek text does not bear the marks of a translation, and the absence of any trace of an Aramaic original casts grave doubts upon this hypothesis.' 'The fathers, from Papias to Eusebius, who perpetuated the old tradition regarding the Hebrew Gospel, themselves rest their assertion on tradition, i. e., on reports that they had heard. And none of these fathers, not even Papias himself, was able to name a single person who had seen - not to say handled - this alleged Hebrew Matthew. The reports of the fathers regarding a Hebrew "Gospel" must be considered as hearsay, unsupported by a tangible fact. and contradicted by all the probabilities involved as well as by several uncontested facts.' ____________________ To read more go to: www.bible.ca/jw-YHWH-hebrew-matthew.htm |
||||||
274 | How many people will go to heaven? | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 176861 | ||
Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. Phil 2:12 Indeed Phil 2:12 does say "work OUT your own salvation". It does not say "work FOR your own salvation". "We have to keep ourselves"? Salvation is of the LORD. The LORD does the saving. The LORD does the keeping. We cannot and do not keep ourselves. |
||||||
275 | How many people will go to heaven? | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 176882 | ||
Didn't you know, Hank? God sits at a desk up in heaven all day with a pencil and a big eraser. Whenever a believer sins, He erases their name. When they confess, He pencils it back in. Sin, delete. Confess, add. Isn't this a ludicrous picture? Yet that's what some would have us believe. "The good news is God's pencil has no eraser. Before you breathed your first word, God knew how you would respond to His offer of grace. According to His foreknowledge, He wrote your name in the book of life." (www.intouch.org/myintouch/exploring/ bible_says/eternal_security/erase_149096.html) Grace to you, John ******************** But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant. 1 Cor. 14:38 (KJV) |
||||||
276 | is there a concordance for nasb? | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 177324 | ||
Yes, there is a Strong's Concordance for the NASB. Below is merely one possible source for ordering this book. You can find other online booksellers by doing a Google search. Title: The Strongest NASB Exhaustive Concordance Online Price: 24.99 Hardcover Zondervan 2004 This concordance is based on the New American Standard updated Version of the bible. It contains over 400,000 entries that list every word in the NASB Updated Bible alphabetically, with each book, chapter, and verse where the word appears. Features: [] Every word in the updated NASB listed alphabetically and referenced in order of appearance to every book, chapter, and verse of the Bible. [] Enhanced Strong's numbering system for use with updated NASB [] Hebrew/Aramaic and Greek dictionaries trace words in the NASB text to their equivalents in the original Bible languages for a better understanding of their meaning and application [] Clear instructions for use of the concordance and dictionaries [] Select bibliography For more information go to: www.christianbook.com Or do a Google Search for this book by its ISBN, which is: 0310262844 [Disclaimer: This is not an ad. I am not selling anything. I am merely providing requested information.] |
||||||
277 | educational qualifications | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 177472 | ||
Justme After reading your Note, I think the following will be of interest to you. "Just to illustrate how times have changed, not many years ago all one had to say to affirm his belief in the full inspiration of the Bible was that he believed it was 'the Word of God.' ... Today (i.e., 1972) one has to say 'the plenary, verbally, infallible, inspired, and inerrant-in-the-original-manuscripts Word of God.' And even then, he many not communicate clearly!" (p. 1957, The Ryrie Study Bible, Moody Press, 1976, 1978). Dr. Charles C. Ryrie writes: "My own definition of biblical inspiration is that it is God's superintendence of the human authors so that, using their own individual personalities, they composed and recorded without error His revelation to man in the words of the original autographs. Several features of the definition are worth emphasizing: (1) God superintended but did not dictate the material. (2) He used human authors and their own individual styles. (3) Nevertheless, the product was, in its original manuscripts, without error." (p. 1956, The Ryrie Study Bible, Moody Press, 1976, 1978) Grace to you, John |
||||||
278 | tongues? | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 177481 | ||
‘Glossolalia in other religions ‘Aside from Christians, certain religious groups also have been observed to practice some form of theopneustic glossolalia. ‘Glossolalia (“speaking in tongues”) is evident in the renowned ancient Oracle of Delphi, whereby a priestess of the god Apollo (called a sibyl) speaks in strange utterances, supposedly through the spirit of Apollo in her, but possibly related to high levels of natural gas present in spring waters beneath the temple. ‘Certain Gnostic magical texts from the Roman period have written on them nonsense syllables like "t t t t t t t t n n n n n n n n n d d d d d d d..." etc. It is believed that these may be transliterations of the sorts of sounds made during glossolalia. The Coptic Gospel of the Egyptians also features a hymn of (mostly) nonsense syllables which is thought to be an early example of Christian glossolalia. ‘In the 19th century, Spiritism was developed into a religion of its own thanks to the work of Allan Kardec and the phenomenon was seen as one of the self-evident manifestations of Spirits. Spiritists argued that some cases were actually cases of Xenoglossia (when one speaks in a language unknown to him). However, the importance attributed to it, as well as its frequency, has since decreased significantly. Present-day spiritists regard the phenomenon pointless, as it does not convey any intelligible message to those present. ‘Glossolalia has also been observed in shamanism and the Voodoo religion of Haiti; it can often be brought on by the ingestion of hallucinogenic drugs or entheogens such as Psilocybe mushrooms.’ (Source: See the article Glossolalia at http://en.wikipedia.org) |
||||||
279 | tongues? | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 177499 | ||
"some form of the gift of tongues" Mark, Nothing in my previous post contained the phrase "some form of the gift of tongues." I could be mistaken, but when I searched for the phrase in my post, I couldn't find it. If you find it please let me know where it is. Grace to you, John |
||||||
280 | tongues? | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 177503 | ||
Mark, You write: ‘Kalos posted a Wikipedia article describing what it called “some form of the gift of tongues”, practiced by non-Christians…’ I agree with you 100 percent when you write, ‘…but I strongly disagree with that description. It cannot be any relation to the gift of tongues, because it has no relation to the Holy Spirit. It can only be a cheap imitation.’ Thanks for calling this to my attention. Grace to you, John |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ] Next > Last [387] >> |