Results 321 - 340 of 1275
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: srbaegon Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
321 | Did God create Life? | Gen 1:1 | srbaegon | 161295 | ||
Hello abccan, You misunderstand what is being taught in Genesis. There we have a description of the physical universe. The terms used pertain to the physical. Whilie life always existed in God, life did not exist in the physical realm before he created it. Steve |
||||||
322 | Did God create Life? | Gen 1:1 | srbaegon | 161296 | ||
Or panentheism. I'm not sure which. Steve |
||||||
323 | Did God create Life? | Gen 1:1 | srbaegon | 161298 | ||
Hello abccan, The belief in many gods is polytheism. Steve |
||||||
324 | Did God create Life? | Gen 1:1 | srbaegon | 161303 | ||
Hello abccan, Again you are wrong. New life is being created from the source of life. What was created is of a different nature than that of the Creator. What was created had not always existed--it was created new. Steve |
||||||
325 | ... | Gen 1:1 | srbaegon | 222975 | ||
... | ||||||
326 | Is Genesis 1:2 the fall of satan? | Gen 1:2 | srbaegon | 47149 | ||
Hello G ZAZ Your allegorical approach to the passage makes little sense to me. I prefer a literal approach where God created the earth in its most elemental state (like a ball of clay but not formed--"without form and void"). The remainder of Gen 1 explains in simple terms how God shaped and added to that. Steve |
||||||
327 | Is Genesis 1:2 the fall of satan? | Gen 1:2 | srbaegon | 47328 | ||
Hello G zaz Let me put it this way. If I have a lump of clay, it's formless and void. There are no distinguishing characteristics or defining marks. It's a blob. Then I start to form something by adding shape, design, even color. At each stage I call it good because it's what I want done and is a step toward the completed product. Incrementally, something with purpose is formed. In the end it is complete, and I say it's very good. That's how I see Genesis 1. God started out with a mass or blob, and day-by-day He shaped and added to it with increasing complexity, with the pinnacle of that creatorial work being mankind. Each step demonstrated an additional facet of God's glory so that His eternal power and divine nature are evident (Rom 1:20). Steve |
||||||
328 | In Gen 1.26, God refers to us and our.. | Gen 1:26 | srbaegon | 65508 | ||
Hello zerotheory Hebrews 1:3a (ESV) He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. Here we have the uniqueness of who Jesus is. Nobody has the exact imprint of God's nature, yet He does. The writer of Hebrews speaks of the relationship of God and Jesus. Hebrews 1:5 (ESV) For to which of the angels did God ever say, "You are my Son, today I have begotten you"? Or again, "I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son"? But then the writer brings the two together as one. Hebrews 1:8-12 (ESV) But of the Son he says, "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom. [9] You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness; therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness beyond your companions." [10] And, "You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the work of your hands; [11] they will perish, but you remain; they will all wear out like a garment, [12] like a robe you will roll them up, like a garment they will be changed. But you are the same, and your years will have no end." Jesus, the Son, is identified with God and as God. There is no mistaking the correlation. Steve |
||||||
329 | Can we Prophesy? | Gen 1:27 | srbaegon | 36514 | ||
Hello Leftwich, God is not a deceiver. You said: "I ask God,to show me were did the three men come from. I heard God speaking to me,I rise them from the dead. Vision of the book EZEKIEL can in my mine." I am saying this is not true. These were not men risen from the dead. They were angels. Gen 18:1 tells us that God appeared to Abraham. Gen 18:2-33 tells us how God appeared to Abraham, how many were with Him, and what He said. Gen 19:1 identifies the two "men" who were with God as angels. Steve |
||||||
330 | Do you believe that God was a man | Gen 1:27 | srbaegon | 36518 | ||
Hello Love Fountain, There is no contradiction to John 3:16. Several places in the OT, God appeared in human form to men. The technical term is "theophany." We believe these to be preincarnate appearances of the Lord Jesus Christ. Steve |
||||||
331 | Can we Prophesy? | Gen 1:27 | srbaegon | 36649 | ||
Hello Leftwich, The natural flow of the story indicates the two men that left were the angels that went into Sodom. The King James version makes this a little more difficult, but when you read chapters 18 and 19 together, it all fits. Steve |
||||||
332 | Can we Prophesy? | Gen 1:27 | srbaegon | 36652 | ||
Hello Leftwich, Yes, there are 4--God in appearance as a man, 2 angels who appeared to be men, and Abraham. I don't judge you. I judge the deceiving spirit who lied to you. These men were not raised from the dead. These "men" were God and 2 angels appearing as men. Steve |
||||||
333 | Is It Human to Sin? | Gen 1:27 | srbaegon | 188381 | ||
Hello Lookn... If God designed and made us with the ability to sin, then we are acting according to design; therefore we act as humans whether or not we sin. Of course sinners can do according to God's purposes. Read your Bible, and notice what was done with Pharoah, Sennecharib, Nebuchadnezzar, and Cyrus (just to name a few). These sinners were used by God to fulfill his purposes. Steve |
||||||
334 | The fruit and leaves of the tree of life | Gen 2:9 | srbaegon | 184517 | ||
Hello jonp, I'm sure you know that the historic premillenialism was common (see Tertullian, et al), so I would take care to call millenialism "an intertestamental Jewish teaching" unless you have documentation to support it. Steve |
||||||
335 | The fruit and leaves of the tree of life | Gen 2:9 | srbaegon | 184543 | ||
Hello Jonp, Thank you for the references. I have learned something new. However one cannot state that these works were the source material for millenialism in the early church since Revelation states it explicitly and would be the predominant source. Before you go the route of a cultural argument, I will acknowledge the influence. One need only look at the similarities between Essences and Christians to find that like thoughts were prevalent. Some have mistakenly see Christianity as an Essene sect. This same incorrect assumption is being used here to assume the Jewish cultural basis of an explicit biblical statement. Steve |
||||||
336 | The fruit and leaves of the tree of life | Gen 2:9 | srbaegon | 184556 | ||
Hello Jonp, That Jesus and Paul did not mention it is highly inconclusive being an argument from silence. Jesus said there were many things the apostles needed to be taught, but they were not ready (John 16:12). You and I do not know why Paul did not mention it in what was recorded. Elementary exegesis tells me not to equate the use of the thousand years in 2 Peter 3:8 with that in Revelation 20. The former is making a statement of the eternality of God, so that time is inconsequential to him. Revelation 20 is a different matter. Your comparison of the gospels with Revelation is based on generalities. I would expect that. Your argument breaks down when comparing the details. Sorry, my friend, your interpretation simply does not stand the test. Steve |
||||||
337 | Is Gen 2:17 a prophecy? | Gen 2:17 | srbaegon | 176956 | ||
Hello Brother Paul, This is nonsensical. Tracking an English word through a translation does not work since the original was in a different language. You simply cannot make all these occurances fit together. And might I add, you would have to consider ALL uses of the word "door" to ensure you got it correct. I certainly do not see that here. Steve |
||||||
338 | Is Gen 2:17 a prophecy? | Gen 2:17 | srbaegon | 176976 | ||
Hello Paul, Thank you for filling in those details of your search of the word "pethach". I understand the right use of typology, and there is no question of many types of our precious Lord Jesus. Those shown in the New Testament help us to see others not mentioned. But I have a genuine concern of seeing a type in every instance of a particular word or occasion as it is used in Scripture. For instance, you mention Three Taverns (or Three Inns). This is the name of a town. Paul was glad to see the brethren, not the town--the verse says this. Your speculation is leading you far afield. Steve |
||||||
339 | Why did God allow Polygamy? | Gen 2:21 | srbaegon | 236033 | ||
Hello fmp, You seem to have veered away from the apostle Paul's use of "falling from grace" in Gal 5:4. There he is not speaking of committing certain types or a quantity of sin which puts us over the limit. Rather he is saying that those who take circumcision are actually moving from belief to disbelief, are therefore utterly cut off from Christ and unable to repent (see Heb 6:4-6). Steve |
||||||
340 | Can a single man commit adultery? | Gen 2:24 | srbaegon | 57900 | ||
Hello JuanMas Let's try to clear up the confusion. :-) First, I need to apologize. I looked up the Greek for fornication and discovered it means any sexual union between a person and someone other the the spouse. Genesis 2:24 (ESV) Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. This verse establishes God's view of marriage. The husband and wife are one flesh--a lasting covenant between two people to be as one. Even in a divorce God views the two as one flesh. So to remarry is to commit adultery against the first spouse. The innocent party that marries the divorced spouse also commits adultery because (again in God's eyes) that spouse is still joined to the first. Does this help? Steve |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ] Next > Last [64] >> |