Results 1 - 20 of 174
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: following him Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | God can't die or look on sin! | Matt 27:46 | following him | 225418 | ||
Hello CDBJ; It's been years since I have posted, and have recently started looking in again and saw your posting here. In response to your question, I think it may be important to look at whose sin it was. The sin He became was not His it was ours. On the cross while dieing for our sins and taking them on Himself He was still Holy, blameless and without sin of His own. He has never committed sin and therefore is uncontaminated by carring and suffering for ours. Does this sound reasonable? God Bless Aaron Erberich |
||||||
2 | origin of the devil | Ezek 28:13 | following him | 184321 | ||
Hello jonp: It has been a while since I’ve had the chance to participate on this forum. But I have been able to at times take a quick look into a few of the discussions going on and have decided that I would like to weigh in on this one “briefly” if no one objects. I think you are forgetting some scriptural references here that should shed some light on this subject. Your foundational scripture Gen 1:26 is dealing first of all primarily with the creation of mankind within the context of the rest of creation. If you examine Gen 1;1-2 “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters.” (Gen 1:1-2 NASB) You will see that the whole of creation is centered around God who was doing it without the help or counsel of angels yet the key point I would like you to see is that in verse 2 a different member of the trinity is spoken of as having intimate involvement with the creation. That would be the Spirit of God or as we call Him the Holy Spirit. We have now two members of the Godhead involved in creation. But what about the third? Well in Colossians we have the answer. “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities--all things have been created through Him and for Him. He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.” (Col 1:15-17 NASB) And since all three members of the Godhead were present and active participants in the creation of the world, I would assume when God said let us make man in our own image He was not talking to angles but to the other members of the Godhead who were present and involved. Following Him |
||||||
3 | Do the stars really PROCLAIM His work? | Ps 19:1 | following him | 145040 | ||
One of the purposes God created the stars for was "for signs". Gen 1:14 Then God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night, and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years; Gen 1:15 and let them be for lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth"; and it was so. There are two books that I know of (read only one of them though) that may interest you. "Testamony of the stars" and "Witness of the stars". I dont have them in front of me right so I cant tell you who the authors are. Blessing to you Aaron |
||||||
4 | The Bible written in code ? | Bible general Archive 2 | following him | 144928 | ||
Good morning Hank: You are so right about this. The word of God was given and inspire by God to reveal Jesus not hide Him. I've read both the original "Bible Code" and "Bible Code II" the first I found very interesting but I was sceptical. The second basicaly was geared to show that God was some exterestial alian who computer was the source of the Bible and its space craft was buried near the Dead sea in the west bank in Israel where no one can get to because of territorial desputes. What a crock. Blessing to you Aaron |
||||||
5 | These things say He who is holy | Is 22:22 | following him | 134321 | ||
Hello Ray; Forgive me for taking so long in getting back to you. "The problem that I am presenting is whether the repetition of "(h)He who is true, "(h)He who has the key of David", "(h)He who opens and no one shuts, and shuts and no one opens" are to be included." In this case (refering to the NASB) I dont believe it matters since "He" is at the beginning of the list and all those attributes listed relate back to the first He. "My question is related to the idea of whether we can think of Jesus as just a man like David or Eliakim or not. How important is it to think of Him as a Man and to give Him glory in capitalization?" It is essential that we think of Him as a man. If it wasn't important for God to become man why did He do it. But neither are we to think lightly of His Diety. I can see it is rather a fine line of distinction. We must see Christ both as a man and as God yet the two are somehow inseperable. I can give you scriptural reasons to think of Him as man and I can give you scriptural reasons to think of Him as God. How to divide the two concepts I dont know if it can be done or if it should. I am aware that my answers to you are nothing new to you so they probably didn't help except to muddy it a bit. Sorry :-) Blessing to you Aaron |
||||||
6 | Does the many include Israel? | Dan 9:27 | following him | 134316 | ||
Hello all; In dan 9:27 the "Beast" makes a covenant with "The many". My understanding is that the many refer to the nations of the world. But does that include Isreal? I know that we assume that it does but in most places I am aware of when God speak of all nations it does not always include Isreal but only gentile nations (see Joel ch 3). Could it be possible that someone in Israel makes the covenant with the many i.e. the nations of the world? Blsessing to you Aaron |
||||||
7 | These things say He who is holy | Is 22:22 | following him | 133764 | ||
Good morning Ray: I would go with the NASB. But this is only because I like it better. To me the passages are saying the same thing and refereing to to same One. The only difference is the repetition of the word He and the placement of "These things says(KJV)/says this(NASB). In my opinion this difference in of little importance. It is important though as to who Is the one speaking and in both cases I believe it to be correctly capitalized. Blessing to you Aaron |
||||||
8 | Why is life expectancy for Americans low | Gen 6:3 | following him | 133613 | ||
Hello Edd: The scriptures do not say how old Noah was when he started to build the ark. Also Gen 6 is not chronilogically after Gen 5. Gen 5 is only a listing of the geneology up to the time of the flood. Gen 6 takes place somewhere during Gen 5. Gen 6:1 is the only time indicator when it says when men began to multiply on the face of the earth. This could be anytime before Noah. So God's command for Noah to build the ark could have taken place prior to Noah's sons being born; 20 years for that matter. |
||||||
9 | Why is life expectancy for Americans low | Gen 6:3 | following him | 133609 | ||
If God limited the life span of men to 120 years, and this restiction came before the flood, how is it that those after the flood lived to well over 120 years. Shem - 602 Arpachshad - 438 Selah - 433 Eber - 464 Peleg - 239 Reu - 239 Serug - 230 Nahor - 148 Terah - 205 Abraham - 175 Issac - 180 Jacob - 140 All of these men except Shem were born after the flood. So it appears that perhaps God was not talking about the life span of man when He mantioned the 120 years. If He did, then why did these all live so much longer. |
||||||
10 | The (s)Shepherd's value? | Zech 11:13 | following him | 133605 | ||
Hello Ray: I would say that God was speaking of Himself. It seems to me that the context of the passage is all about God's relationship with the leaders of Israel and the value they put on it and His ways. It may be that they saw things differently concerning their faithfulness to God yet the context is concerning the truth that those leaders cared very little about God. Zech. was only the middle man relaying God's message to them. How they responded to Zech., God considered it their response to Him. |
||||||
11 | The (s)Shepherd's value? | Zech 11:13 | following him | 133585 | ||
Hello Ray: I would capitalize it. It seems to me that it is God speaking to Zech in the first person and refering to Himself. Blessing to you Aaron |
||||||
12 | Isn't 24 more than one? | Acts 2:38 | following him | 133482 | ||
Hello Steve: You are absolutley right about circumcision being the sign of the covenant. What's more is that it was a sign of God's faithful to Abraham not Abraham's faithfulness to God. Gen 17:7 "I will establish My covenant between Me and you and your descendants after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your descendants after you." Circumcision was what God gave Abraham to do as acknowledgement of God's covenant with him. Gen 17:11 "And you shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskin, and it shall be the sign of the covenant between Me and you." But Abraham's righteousness was established long before this and it was based off his faith in God not the circumcision. See Gen 15:1-6 Blessing to you Aaron |
||||||
13 | Why did the Savior Dread the Cup? | Matt 26:38 | following him | 133125 | ||
Good Morning Doc; I think anyone with even just an incling of the horror of that type of death. Would at least have some desire to avoid it. Physical pain and suffering are, well...... painful. I wonder if I was in the same boat would I be able to say "Not my will but Yours be done" or would they take me screaming and yelling NO No No? But there is another thing that Jesus may have been suffering here as well. He knew that He had come to die on the cross and take the sins of mankind upon HImself. Did He know that in doing so it would seperate Him from the Father. "Father, why have You forsaken Me." It seems to me that this may have also been added to the weight of the physical torment that He was willing to suffer for us. All through the gosples we hear Him teach that He and the Father are one. And now that relationship was going to be severed for a little while. Good question Blessing to you Aaron |
||||||
14 | why was the thief saved without baptism? | Luke 23:43 | following him | 132778 | ||
Good afternoon Country Girl; "Today's world" - This world is a very big place; how do know know miracles are not taking place by believers in places other than where you are familiar with? You are even confident enough to say that it is a fact; are you sure? Blessing to you Aaron |
||||||
15 | Was Paul married and to a Sanhedrin woma | NT general Archive 1 | following him | 132511 | ||
Good Evening Angel Although I know of no scripture specifically mentioning he was a member of the Sanhedrin there are a couple of interesting passages that indicate he may have been. 1. Acts 4:15-16 "But when they had ordered them to leave the Council, they began to confer with one another, saying, "What shall we do with these men? For the fact that a noteworthy miracle has taken place through them is apparent to all who live in Jerusalem, and we cannot deny it. But so that it will not spread any further among the people, let us warn them to speak no longer to any man in this name." This is the part of the trial the the apostles found themselves in before the Sanhedren. The question here is if all the disciples were put out of the counsel how does this part of the discussion come to be written here. It is possible that Paul was there and related this part of the story to Luke. Of course Gameliel could have told it to Paul as well. 2. Paul or should I say Saul was also intimate with those of the Sanhedrin that stoned Stephen in Ch 7. This is off the subject but an interesting thing here is that Paul being of Tarsus was a Hellenistic Jew ( a non Israel native Jew) and the synagog? of the freedmen was a hellenistic Jewish Synagoge. these were the guys that brought Stephen before the Sanhedrin and the stoned him with Saul's support. Later after Paul is converted and is defending the faith in Jerusalem (Acts 9:28-31), he is seen arguing (and winning) with the hellenistic Jews. Who also began to try and kill him. There are a lot of parallels between Stephen's preaching to the hellenistic Jews and Paul doing the same thing. I wonder if the ones Paul was preaching to were the same ones he at one time had stood with when stephen was stoned. But now the shoe is on the other foot and they are trying to kill Him. Is this an instance of Divine justice? What goes around comes around, you reap what you sow etc. It seems Paul has come full circle. another interesting thing is that The persecution started with Paul at Stephens stoning and it ended with Paul when the disciples sent him away to Tarsus. Acts 9:30-31. Just some rambling thoughts. Blessing to you Aaron |
||||||
16 | The ransom - God or man? | 1 Cor 15:21 | following him | 132473 | ||
Is this scriptural. According to your New world Translation; yes. According to Divinely inspired scripture; No! I know that it will be a waste of both our time to continue this discussion because neither of us will be swayed by the others opinion. However I do want to make this comment. The theme in the Bible is not the vinidcation of God's rightful sovereignty it is the redemption of creation, man and nature. God in no way needs to prove His sovereinty. You have to prove something only when it is in doubt. There never has been any doubt to His sovereinty. | ||||||
17 | Mark 16:17- interpetation and proof | Matt 4:5 | following him | 132447 | ||
This is similar to the temptation the devil gave to Jesus. He was trying to get Jesus do do something that was written in the scriptures but But look at what Jesus responded with. "You shall not put the lord your God to the test." Matt 4:5 Then the devil *took Him into the holy city and had Him stand on the pinnacle of the temple, Matt 4:6 and *said to Him, "If You are the Son of God, throw Yourself down; for it is written, 'HE WILL COMMAND HIS ANGELS CONCERNING YOU'; and 'ON their HANDS THEY WILL BEAR YOU UP, SO THAT YOU WILL NOT STRIKE YOUR FOOT AGAINST A STONE.'" Matt 4:7 Jesus said to him, "On the other hand, it is written, 'YOU SHALL NOT PUT THE LORD YOUR GOD TO THE TEST.'" Deliberately putting yourself in danger for this reason would be putting the Lord to the test. How do you know the He would not fail it? God is not One to be manipulated by our foolishness. |
||||||
18 | Is the rapture biblically supported? | 1 Thess 4:17 | following him | 132442 | ||
Hello Janae; I too was taught as you were and am now reevaluating my position on this subject. Here is a web site with a commentary that you will find interesting. It takes the "prewrath" position. I believe it was Kalos who turned me on to it. It has given me much to think about. revelationcommentary.org. Blessing to you Aaron |
||||||
19 | The ransom - God or man? | 1 Cor 15:21 | following him | 132435 | ||
This has been an interesting thread, although rather difficult to follow at times and did not intend to join in on it; however I feel the Lord wants me to post this comment. The Messiah had to be a man. However because Adam sinned and thus put all men under the bondage of sin. “There are none righteous…” The only one able to pay the price was God. The purpose of the law was to show mankind that their efforts could in no way redeem them from the curse. The law then points to the need for Christ. The question should not be “Did the Messiah have to be God” it should be “Did God have to become man?” Heb 2:14-17 ”Therefore, since the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise also partook of the same, that through death He might render powerless him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, and might free those who through fear of death were subject to slavery all their lives. For assuredly He does not give help to angels, but He gives help to the descendant of Abraham. Therefore, He had to be made like His brethren in all things, so that He might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people.” Christ is never equated with Adam but instead is contrasted with him i.e. Adam sinned – Christ was sinless, Adam brought death – Christ conquer it. Adam brought bondage to sin – Christ freed us from it. Christ did what Adam did not. But it remains that because death and the lose of authority over the creation came about because of man, man had to restore it. This is the concept of the kinsman redeemer found in the book of Ruth and in areas of the law. Christ became our kinsman redeemer. Christ is indeed fully God for only God could meet the requirements needed and fully man for only man could pay the price. Blessing to you Aaron |
||||||
20 | Is the rapture biblically supported? | 1 Thess 4:17 | following him | 132426 | ||
Good morning Kalos; Although a pretriby for many years I'm at the moment reevaluating my stance on the issue. The scriptures you mention here about the linen white and clean on the armies of heaven can be seen as the bride of Christ especailly since the bride of Christ was specifically mention in Rev 19:7-8 "Let us rejoice and be glad and give the glory to Him, for the marriage of the Lamb has come and His bride has made herself ready. It was given to her to clothe herself in fine linen, bright and clean; for the fine linen is the righteous acts of the saints." Since it is so closely connected in context with the return of Christ in this passage; I do not think it is a "stretch of the imagination" to think that the armies of heaven are the bride. However according to the law brides and wives were not allowed to go to war (i dont know if that would apply in this case though, And is there any other scriptures mentioning that the church is the, a, an, etc. army of the Lord, God, heaven, etc. If not then the idea of these armies being that army may need to be reevaluated because of lack of supporting scriptures that the church even plays such a role. Also in reference to the angels wearing the exact same thing Rev 15:6, the linen white and clean in rev 19 8 is the righteous deeds of the saints. How would that relate to angels if the linens white and clean were the same. |
||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [9] >> |