Results 221 - 240 of 657
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: stjones Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
221 | Two, Three of Forensic Evidence | Deut 17:6 | stjones | 64976 | ||
Hi, Lionstrong; It should be the standard if we be ruled by Judges or a King of God's choosing. Of course, we would have to throw out our legislatures too. :-) IOW, I don't think the political and judicial forms instituted by God for his chosen people prior to the advent of Jesus are commanded for civil government today. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
222 | Two, Three, or Forensic Evidence | Deut 17:6 | stjones | 65068 | ||
Hi, Lionstrong; I did indeed notice and I don't disregard the OT. But I don't see any reason to believe that the judicial and legistlative standards for Israel are normative for any civil government including ours (USA, many others). If they are, then I would expect God to appoint a king for us as he did for Israel. But the fact is that if those standards are normative, then every government other than ancient (not contemporary) Israel is hopelessly lost. Ancient Israel was the only nation created by God with him as its king. No nation created by men (the only kind on Earth just now) can conform to that standard. So I'll ask you a question. Since God did not ordain elected legislatures for ancient Israel, is representative democracy an abomination in God's eyes? Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
223 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | stjones | 68320 | ||
Nice try, kalos. We know what you meant. ;-) Indy (married 28 years to one woman) |
||||||
224 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | stjones | 68321 | ||
You said "... the use of the verses dealing with a man multiplying wives to himself is also a common blunder made by many. The same context deals with a man multiplying horses and chariots to himself. Are we then to assume that it is wrong for a man to own more than one horse, or more than one car chariot)? Not so. The idea of multiplying women, horses and chariots had to do with pride in one's wealth" IMHO, this statement invalidates your entire argument. If you actually believe that a wife is a woman owned by a man to show off his wealth, then you clearly have no idea of what Biblical marriage actually is. You said "It is my thought that we would do better to abstain from pitting God's word against itself and read it for what it says. ... Any of us can weave a doctrinal tapestry by pulling verses out of context. The REAL challenge is keeping that tapestry from unraveling when pulling on the many wild threads hanging loose." I agree; you have demonstrated the difficulty. Please cite a passage that represents "God's clear teaching" that the perfect relationship ordained in the Garden was not normative. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
225 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | stjones | 68520 | ||
Hi, Don; You said: "What exactly, may I ask, is your point in twisting my statement into something that I was not saying? I am simply perplexed about your motives, that's all" It was you who compared "multiplying women" to "multiplying horses" and you who mentioned pride in wealth in the context of having multiple wives. I don't blame you for backing off somewhat. You said "As to your statement that I claimed to know of a declaration made by God that polygamy was His perfect ideal for marriage is a fabrication" I made no such statement; I challenged you to find Scripture rather than speculation to back your assertion that Adam just got short-changed when he was only given one wife. As for your comments about David, it is foolishness to assume that David's example is normative. When Jesus taught about marriage, he didn't point to David as his example, he pointed to Adam and Eve (one man, one woman). I'm afraid that being "well schooled in philosophy" has blinded you to God's word. Understanding the Bible is less dependent on the ability to "lay out the facts and rationally paint a picture by what is given" than on the ability to discern the character of God. I suggest that is the meaning Proverbs 3:5-6: "Trust in the LORD with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding; in all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make your paths straight" Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
226 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | stjones | 68574 | ||
Hi, Don; If I am anti-intellectual by your standards, I will be happy to stand with 2,000 years of other anti-intellectuals who, like me, have failed to find in the Bible the same novel view of marriage that you have uncovered. You string words together well, but it will take more than cleverly worded speculation to overthrow two millenia of orthodox Christian thought. Incidentally, I suggested the passage in Proverbs because, having studied philosophy in both undergraduate and graduate school, I have learned some of the shortcomings of approaching the Bible as if it were just another text. Sometimes it's necessary to set the intellectualizing aside and simply listen to the Holy Spirit. The Bible isn't a philosophical work, it's the revealed wisdom of the God. Its goal is not to develop a system of metaphysics and ethics; its goal is to reveal the character of God and to bring people to faith in Jesus. Its purpose is spiritual, not intellectual. Its deepest meaning cannot be apprehended by mere human reason. See 1 Corinthians 2:6-16. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
227 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | stjones | 68580 | ||
LOL! Hank, you are incorrigible - or incurable - or incorruptible - or something. Indy |
||||||
228 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | stjones | 68684 | ||
Thanks, Makarios; In the end, we always measure the words posted here against what the Bible says, not what the poster claims the Bible says. When my intellect gets beyond what the Bible teaches, there's always someone here to humble me. The ones most likely to make me reconsider are those who, over time, have demonstrated, first, wisdom concerning the character of God, and second, Biblical knowledge. (Agreement on doctrine is a distant third.) It's interesting that nearly all of that group (including you, brother) have chimed in on this thread. One can only hope that Don would recognize and avail himself of the collective wisdom in this discussion. Or at least the humor. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
229 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | stjones | 68903 | ||
No. ;-) |
||||||
230 | Does God endorse polygamy? | 1 Kin 11:3 | stjones | 68943 | ||
Joe; Nice catch. Indy |
||||||
231 | Double portion is really only two-thirds | 2 Kin 2:9 | stjones | 33942 | ||
Hi, charis; Without intending to be critical of either of you or Searcher, this, um, discussion illustrates a pet peeve of mine. I get a little nervous when folks who don't read ancient Hebrew (or Greek) start to interpret the meaning of a specific word in a specific passage. Strong's proves both of you right (which I've noticed is often the case in this kind of discussion). The real meaning of the word only becomes clear in the context of the original ancient Hebrew (or Greek) and maybe not even then. The English word "anoint" (which no Biblical writer ever heard of) clearly has multiple meanings. Which shade of meaning applies in this passage or that is better left up to the translators. Which is why having only one translation of the Bible is like archery with one hand tied behind your back. At any rate, I can't imagine what could possibly be the theological significance of whether or not "anoint" applies in this passage. BTW, I belong to a mainstream denomination and, trust me, the meaning of "anoint" isn't even on the radar screen. Our leadership is busy tring to figure out what we mean when we say ministers, elders, and deacons are supposed to be in faithful, heterosexual marriage or chaste. You folks go ahead and split hairs over "anoint"; we're busy splitting atoms over "chaste". Sigh. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
232 | Double portion is really only two-thirds | 2 Kin 2:9 | stjones | 34063 | ||
Hi, charis; Too much time on our hands - our Korean and African brothers and sisters have told our denominational leaders as much. The absence of theologians is probably a good thing. Most of the modern variety seem to approach the Bible with an attitude of "what can I find in here to back up my position?". Oh, well. I'm a panmillenialist - it'll all pan out in the end (old joke, but true). Our church supports a missionary in the vicinity of Tokyo. She teaches music at a Christian school and pastors a small house church. Just so you'll know you're not the only former Hoosier in Japan. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
233 | Double portion is really only two-thirds | 2 Kin 2:9 | stjones | 34064 | ||
Hi, Curt; I'm happy to say our church joined the CCM several months ago. You may recall a pastor named Walt Ungerer who ran for Moderator a few years ago - a staunch evangelical. He was our senior pastor until he retired last year. Many congregations and presbyteries do remain faithful but the bureaucracy and the seminaries it supports seem beyond redemption. About a quarter of the "people in the pews" support the current pro-gay initiative while half of the ordained ministers do. Support is even greater among ministers who do not pastor a church. Come to think of it, I guess that's a good thing - the most misguided ones are not in a position to mislead a congregation week in and week out with their screwball theology. ;-) Still, the Covenant Network has promised to bring this up every year until they succeed. After a while, you'd think charges would be brought for willful disruption of the "peace, unity, and purity of the church" (a de-frockable offense, I believe). I'm not holding my breath. :-( Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
234 | When were we a Christian Nation? | 2 Chr 7:14 | stjones | 107865 | ||
Hi, justme; Alas, the United States never was a Christian nation. The founding document - the Constitution - makes no mention of God. Some of the colonies were distinctly Christian, but that did not carry over to the United States. The Constitution does reflect some philosophical principles that arose from Christianity but it embodies none of the theology. Perhaps the biggest difference between now and then is that those politicians who were Christians seemed to be a bit more open about it and were more willing to be guided by their Christian values. And people were not horrified to learn that a politician might read the Bible and be guided by Biblical principles. That is not to say that the great promise in this passage is irrelevant. It just means that it is up to individual Christians to apply the Great Commission to our own neighborhoods, cities, and states. If we make this a Christian nation - not politically but one convert at a time - I'm sure God will indeed heal our land. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
235 | Will the Lord let us "catch" Him? | 2 Chr 15:15 | stjones | 27145 | ||
Hi, Nolan, my friend; That was my experience. About eight years before I was saved, the threat of nuclear war was weighing on my mind. Given that man eventually uses just about every weapon he creates, I reasoned that only a being like the God of the Bible (whose existence I doubted) could keep it from happening. So I started praying nightly to a God I was not certain was there, asking him to prevent it. As time passed and it didn't happen, I took a small step of faith and decided that if he was there and listening, he deserved the credit. So I added a word of thanks to my prayer. Then I began to consider that my family's safety, my career, and other good things might also be his doing, so I thanked him for those things as well. I don't think a day passed during those eight years without my silent utterance of that prayer. To make an already long story a little shorter, I found myself being dragged to church occasionaly. There I stood silently during the hymns and Lords's Prayer because I did not wish to voice a faith I did not have. But I listened. I started asking that unseen God to tell me if Jesus' claims about himself were true - claims I had dismissed as nonsense at the ripe old age of 10. God answered. On Christams Eve I had a deep desire to take communion for the first time in 30 years. The grape juice - not even wine! - hit me like pure grain alcohol, weakening my knees and filling me with warmth and a feeling of strength. I prayed and met with the pastor and a couple of months later made a public profession of faith in Christ. As someone once said, God searches for us until we find him. He is indeed willing to be found: '"... For I know the plans I have for you," declares the LORD, "plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future. Then you will call upon me and come and pray to me, and I will listen to you. You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart...."' (Jeremiah 29:11-13) Peace and grace; Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
236 | Who was Elihu? | Job | stjones | 30232 | ||
Hi, Saved; I'm inclined to accept his identity as the bible presents it: a young man of the clan of Ram whose father was Barakel the Buzite. Given some idea of his age and ancestry, I think he's just an ordinary human. God didn't rebuke Job's wife either, despite her suggestion that Job just "curse God and die". Elihu at least tried to do a better job of defending God than Job's other friends did. Absent more compelling evidence (and there may be some; I've never looked), I'd say some commentators have w-a-a-a-y too much time on their hands. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
237 | Explain million year old dinosaurs. | Job | stjones | 30234 | ||
Hi, Hank; You and I disagree on how to interpret Genesis 1 and I don't want to get that started again. But what you say of atheists and most evolutionists is right on. I have engaged in many discussions with atheists and Darwinians and tried to show them that they start with a leap of faith far more breathtaking than mine. Eventually, they are reduced to the meaningless assertion that I can't prove to their staisfaction that God exists. Duh. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
238 | Let's crucify Ezra Brown | Job | stjones | 33213 | ||
SRN: Not to speak for Jensen (who doesn't need my belp) but ... What are you talking about? Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
239 | why was it three days? | Job | stjones | 43458 | ||
Hi, ethan; I doubt anyone on earth knows the answer to your question. God picked the interval and to my knowledge did not explain his reason. Any answer you get will therefore be pure speculation. Some questions just don't have answers. Speaking of speculation, why do you suppose it was three days? Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
240 | When was the book of Job written? | Job | stjones | 49919 | ||
One of my favorites! Tradition holds that it was written by Moses or by Job himself. It may have been written during the time of the Patriarchs (2000-1800 BC); some say Abraham was familiar with the story. It is definitely quite old and is unique in this sense: It is the only book in the Bible that is neither about the Hebrews nor known to be written by a Hebrew (assuming that Solomon wrote the books attributed to him). This suggests to me that it predates Abraham and speaks of a time (like the early chapters of Genesis) when God dealt directly with people or through individual priests like Melchizedek (Genesis 14:18). Indeed Job himself functioned as something of a priest to his children (Job 1) and his friends (Job 42). Hope this is useful. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ] Next > Last [33] >> |