Results 381 - 400 of 4325
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Hank Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
381 | Where should I turn?????? | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 154440 | ||
Mark and Forum-At-Large: Shirley Ujest has indeed been on the Forum before, first as bstudent, then as Sister Maria, and now as Shirley Ujest. Lockman has revoked this user's account three times, yet she continues to deceive this Forum. Please, let no one respond further to this imposter's unscriptural posts. I feel sure that Lockman is now investigating this situation and will take whatever additional steps are necessary to rid the Forum of this pest. --Hank | ||||||
382 | Where should I turn?????? | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 154442 | ||
Shirley Ujest: You are practicing on this Forum what you and your ilk, the Jehovah's Witnesses and the infamous Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, have practiced since their inception: lies, deceit, translation fraud, and heresy. You have registered on this Forum under various names, have been kicked off three times, and yet you persist in your efforts to infest this Forum with your theological garbage. Pray tell us how you could possibily expect to win anyone but an utter fool to your persuasion? Have you no respect at all for God, for your fellow human beings, or even for yourself? You are a disgrace to this Forum. --Hank | ||||||
383 | I need to know others opinions about bap | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 154665 | ||
What then is your conclusion on water baptism, may I ask? Do you view it as being in any way salvific? --Hank | ||||||
384 | I need to know others opinions about bap | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 154715 | ||
Shema, thanks so much for your response. I believe your views on baptism are orthodox, that is to say, scriptural. Regarding the Forum, some of the posts are scripturally solid and hence reliable, but some are not. Thus this caveat: approach them all in the Berean spirit: search the Scriptures to see whether those things being posted are so (See Acts 17:10-12). Welcome, and I pray that you will be blessed as you join in with the rest of us here who ourselves are 'searching the Scriptures.' --Hank | ||||||
385 | NEED HELP PLEASE. | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 154743 | ||
Certainly it is easy enough to understand your deep concern for your son and I can assure you that the Christians of this Forum who read your plea will join me in prayer for both you and your son. It might not be a bad idea to solicit the help of your pastor; chances are he may be able to help in some person-to-person counselling. God be with you and with your son. In Christ, Hank. | ||||||
386 | I am confussed on what to believe. | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 155146 | ||
Dear Confuzzled: Your concern over why Christians -- at least some Christians, those who know much about the faith -- spend a great deal of time on points of doctrine, doctrine being simply another word for teaching and, in the context of what I'm talking about, it means searching the Scriptures diligently in order to learn what they teach about matters of faith and practice as they pertain to the Christian's calling and mission in the world. ...... Examples often make excellent didactic tools, so I'm going to cite for your consideration two examples, one from our Lord and one from the medical profession. ....... Jesus lived some 33 years on this earth, give or take a little. But how many years did He spend in His public ministry? It was 3 or so according to the best reckonings. Now Jesus spent about 30 years in preparation for 3 years of public ministry -- a ratio of approximately 10 to 1. We don't know much detail about how Jesus spent his first 30 years, but we do know that He knew the Law, so is it any stretch to surmise that He studied diligently? All the while He was at home in Nazareth, people were being exposed to false teachers and led astray, people were sick and dying, people were lost and knew not God. Should Jesus have begun His ministry a decade or so before He did? Have you ever heard anyone suggest that Jesus wasted the first 30 years of His life, and that He should have been out there teaching and healing and raising the dead long before He actually appeared on the public scene? I haven't. And who are we anyway to question Jesus' timetable? ..... Now let's consider physicians. The typical medical doctor will spend 20 or 25 year in study and preparation for his chosen profession from the time he enters school as a child until he begins his medical practice. All the while he's in school, there are people out there dying every day of some illness that he might be able to treat successfully. Should he abandon his studies along about the eighth grade and start operating on people's hearts or brains? Would you trust an eighth grade lad with the care of your body? ...... Why, then, would you trust the words of anyone who would propose to teach you the truth of Scripture who was himself ignorant of it, one who had never bothered to learn what Scripture teaches, one who had not applied himself to the task? And it is a task, friend. It never comes easily or by waving a magic wand. The Bible says, "Be diligent..." Let's stop right there for a moment and look at that word 'diligent.' What does it mean? Webster's Collegiate Dictionary says it means, "characterized by steady, earnest, and energetic application and effort." Does that sound like a lot of work? You bet your bippy it does! So, the Bible says, "Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth" (2 Timothy 2:15). Do Christians who know how to read have any reason to be ashamed if they don't know much about Scripture? I believe that 2 Timothy 2:15 answers that question. ...... I taught adult Sunday school for a quarter century. People would come to me and say something like this: "I can't understand the Bible. It's way over my head." I liked to tell them to move the Bible from over their heads down to eye level and start reading it! --Hank | ||||||
387 | Mat. 24:36 | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 155453 | ||
Now, Doc, playing the age card is a lame excuse for making a boo-boo. -:) I'm older 'n you, and I don't get names mixed up like that. It wasn't Thomas Owen, it was Owen Wister. Not Thomas Watson but Thomas Ed's Son, and not John Owen but John Bunion. With a little practice, you'll get them right the next time. I read a book on memory training that did wonders for me, although off-hand I can't recall the name of the book or who wrote it. --Hank | ||||||
388 | Mat. 24:36 | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 155457 | ||
Please pardon my pestiferous pedantry, but "filioque" in Latin means "and (the) son." In Latin, "que" (meaning "and") is commonly prefixed to a noun, viz., filio, son; filioque, and (the) son). --Hank | ||||||
389 | Mat. 24:36 | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 155500 | ||
Doc, in regard to your plea for forgiveness when you "mess up like this," the only honest response I can counter with is this: When I am at my best, I am not nearly as good as you are when you "mess up." So keep on messing up, brother! --Hank | ||||||
390 | clean body natural and spiritual | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 155502 | ||
I find no proof in Scripture that either man or hippopotamus is trichotomous! --Hank | ||||||
391 | clean body natural and spiritual | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 155600 | ||
Well, Mark, I can shed no further light on Doc's "white on rice" symbolism, because my wife feeds me only whole-grain, unprocessed brown rice. She says brown rice is good for Septuagenarians although she knows perfectly well that I'm a Baptist. ...... Now let's look at that superb verse of Scripture, Hebrews 4:12. The writer says that "the Word of God is living and powerful...." What an apt description! The Bible is alive because it is God-breathed! Moreover, it is powerful because He wrote it! It is His eternal word, not the ephemeral works of man. It is the good news, the gospel of Christ, which is God's power to salvation for everyone who believes (Romans 1:16). ..... Moreover, the word of God is "sharper than any two-edged sword..." What an analogy! A two-edged sword doesn't have any dull sides; its thrust cuts both ways; it doesn't miss a thing; it probes all the way down, piercing everything with which it comes in contact, "piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart." ...... There are two Greek words, _psuche_ and _pneuma_ which underlie the two English words _soul_ and _spirit_, respectively, in this passage. But these two terms do not describe two separate entities any more than "thoughts and intents of the heart" do in the same passage. They are used in much the same way as, say, "heart and soul" are used in such an expression as "I love you with my heart and soul" when we are expressing fullness. A lawyer in referring to the provisions of Levitical law used a similar expression to denote fullness in Luke 10:27. In answer to Jesus' question, "What is written in the law? What is your reading of it?" the lawyer answered, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength, and will all your mind..." Elsewhere in Scripture, as Doc has already pointed out, these two terms, _soul_ and _spirit_ are used interchangeably to describe man's immaterial self, his eternal inner person, different and distinct from his flesh, that is, his body. Mark, please critique me. Have I helped to clear the water or merely stirred up more mud? --Hank | ||||||
392 | clean body natural and spiritual | Bible general Archive 2 | Hank | 155736 | ||
C.S.M. :: Most of us folks down here in the Ozarks ain't real impressed by middle-of-the-roaders. In the first place, a feller that walks down the middle of the road has got to be touched in the head, on account of it's a mighty dangerous place to walk, considering as how he's apt to get his block knocked off by some crazy driver. And second, if you're speaking of them folks that don't take no stand on nothing much, but kinda straddle in the middle of the road on ever question that comes along, too afeared to take a stand fer or agin something, well they ain't our kind of folks down here. They ain't got no backbone, and us folks down here in the hills looks up to a man whose got grit, but we shore don't have a heap of respect for what we call them spineless jellyfishes. So we don't think Jesus did any walking in the middle of the roads back there in Pallystein. He had a heap more sense than to get out there and get Hisself hit by a speeding chariot drove by the president of Jersusalem Bank and Trust Co. who was trying to make it to work on time. And Jesus warn't no middle-of-the-roader when it come to taking a stand on things either. A body always knows for sure where the Lord stands on things. He ain't no wishy-washy middle-of-the-roader, and that's the truth. So a body wanting to walk with Jesus has got to take a stand. He ain't gonna find Jesus out there in the middle of the road. --Hank | ||||||
393 | What is the best version of the Bible? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 2358 | ||
By and large I incline to agree with the subjective dictum that the best version of the Bible is the one the reader understands and trusts, but with a caveat. What George Orwell said in "Animal Farm" -- "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others" -- might well be said of today's bumper crop of Bible translations. The translator bug continues to go around still and it appears no one has found an antidote for the urge to translate. This is both good and bad. It is good in the sense that the Bible is still deemed to be of vital importance in the lives of human beings. It is good in the sense that new translations, armed with fresh up-to-date language and new knowledge about Bible languages and Bible times, remove a great deal of the shroud of obscurity about God's word in which the older versions unwittingly encased us. It is bad in the sense that the vast sea of translations virtually threatens to drown us. We are most of us utterly bewildered from time to time about which translation from the many choices available to us will be "our" Bible -- the one we carry to church, read from, study, meditate upon, memorize, hide in our hearts. The choice is not always easy. Concerning the caveat I mentioned, I submit a few questions that you might find reasonable to ask of any translation you consider. Do the translators hold the Bible to be the verbal, plenary, inerrant and infallible Word of God? Is their rendering faithful to the biblical manuscripts? (This answer will have to come from trusted reviewers unless one has a thorough knowledge of the ancient texts). What is their philosophy on translation -- as literal as possible, a loose paraphrase, or somewhere in between, e.g., a "dynamic equivalence" that attempts to cast the ancient languages in a thought pattern that purports to impact the reader of a modern languages in virtually the same way that the original message did to its readers. This philosophy of translation places an incredible responsibility on the translator. Is the translation obviously made by and primarily for adherents to a specific sect or cult? Is the translation rendered in clear, standard English (or whatever the receptor language may be)? Does it give honor to God and affirm the Deity of Jesus Christ? Finally, all things considered, is this a translation that I can live with, learn to feel at home with, and one that I can understand well enough come to a saving knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ, to know Him more clearly, to follow Him more nearly, and to love Him more dearly? | ||||||
394 | What is the best version of the Bible? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 2384 | ||
Thanks, JVH, for your kind remarks. You most assuredly have my permission to quote or use anything I said in the note. I echo your enthusiasm for the NASB and applaud your fine judgment in using the NIV with teenagers. The language of the NIV probably hits to the heart of the young somewhat more poignantly than does the more formal language of the NASB which likely appeals to the more mature mind. At 66, I'm surely ripe for the NASB! In a review for Amazon.com of the NASB single-column reference Bible, I said that if I could have only one Bible, and never again be permitted to have any other, this is the Bible I would choose. | ||||||
395 | What is the best version of the Bible? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 2386 | ||
In reference to your (rhetorical) question, "Did you get the message?" I hasten to add: "Yes I did. I got the message down in the cotton patch, and it nearly scared the living Bible out of me." | ||||||
396 | can we pray for people after they died | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 2397 | ||
Praying for the dead is, unless I am much mistaken, largely a doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church. I know of no Scripture that either espouses the practice or specifically condemns it. (But see Hebrews 9:27) Being a Protestant, I'd never engaged in the practice nor given it a second thought until, in 1989, we lost our youngest son in a car accident. In what may well have been a presumptuous prayer, I asked God to be good to our son and to take care of him. My heart was broken, I was devastated, and I felt then and feel still that somehow God heard and understood. After all, who but He knows better the agony of losing a Son? | ||||||
397 | can we pray for people after they died | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 2408 | ||
Thanks, Hugger. Cyberhugs, after all, are better than no hugs at all! You know, God does indeed work in mysterious ways. At the time our son died, I could see nothing but darkness. Now, some 12 years later, God has not only long since healed the wound but has in countless ways led me to be able to minister to those who have sustained the grievous loss of a child. Before the tragedy the best my wife and I could do was to try to extend our sympathy to those who had experienced a loss of a loved one. Having been there and walked in those shoes, we are able to say with feeling and conviction, "We KNOW how you feel." | ||||||
398 | What is the best version of the Bible? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 2411 | ||
From a wet-eared neophyte to a (assumed) veteran, thank you for the steerings. I'll get around to making a profile. I must make the crucial decision of whether to be literal and dull (nothing to do with Bible versions!) or to gussy it up liberally with flowery paraphrase. | ||||||
399 | Did the Amplified come from Wescott and | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 2609 | ||
I return with egg on my face! The textual base for the Amplified New Testament is indeed Westcott-Hort, which was the standard of the time in which Mrs. Siewert did her work. This fact was not in the introduction to the Amplified, but I did further research on-line and found it. In your question you also raised the issue of Westcott-Hort's reliability. There is ample variety of opinion among Bible scholars on this point. This much appears certain: The Westcott-Hort Greek New Testament of 1881 represented the signal departure from the Textus Receptus (Received Text), which formed the textual base for the Authorized, or King James Version. Understandably this departure creatured quite a stir, particularly among dedicated adherents to the King James Version. This debate is alive and well today, especially in the camp of those who hold that the KJV is the only truly reliable Bible extant. I am emphatically not a bird of this feather, but neither do I wish to engage in any debate on the subject. On the other hand, there are those who are more benign toward Westcott-Hort, among whom is Bruce Metzger, deemed by his peers one of the most influential of modern textual critics. By the way, if you'd like more on the Westcott and Hort subject, go to one of the search engines (I used Yahoo) and type in "Westcott and Hort." You'll probably get more information than you really wanted to know! | ||||||
400 | Use Info Update? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 2785 | ||
Hank's dull statistics are now posted, charis. Chris and JVH twisted my arm! Now let everyone rejoice. God be with all during this special week -- the week so meaningful to believers everywhere -- the week our Lord suffered on the cross and died for our sins -- the week in which He was gloriously resurrected! Glory and honor and praise to His name! | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ] Next > Last [217] >> |