Results 1 - 14 of 14
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Unanswered Bible Questions Author: Robbert Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Same question | John 1:1 | Robbert | 211792 | ||
As noted, I'd like an explanation of the implications of this verse. | ||||||
2 | What are the implications's of this v.? | John 1:1 | Robbert | 211790 | ||
Thanks, I do understand your reply but what does it mean to say that the New Covenant did not go into effect until Christ's death? What are the implications of that remark? Does it mean that the gospels are OT books since they tell the events of Christ's life before His death, etc.? | ||||||
3 | What does Hebrews 9:16 mean? | John 1:1 | Robbert | 211787 | ||
Hebrews 9:16 states that "For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth." How does the panel interpret the meaning of this verse? In a previous question, I noted that I heard a pastor claim that the gospels couldn't be NT books because of a literal interpretation of the above verse. I disagree with the pastor but I still don't know what the verse means. | ||||||
4 | Does Jesus teach OT doctrine? | John 1:1 | Robbert | 211549 | ||
Thanks for your reply kelly. I am aware of the purported dates of the gospel writings and, I'm not sure that simply a date qualifies a text for inclusion in the NT. Even though the gospels were written perhaps long after Jesus died, they still contain material that does not "fit" the overall NT theme of believing in the death of Jesus Christ and the shedding of His Blood for the forgiveness of sins. That's what the pastor I mentioned was noting. Recall that Jesus told one person to keep the commandments and then follow Him in order to gain eternal life. Jesus did not say: Believe in my death and resurrection (which will take place). Thus, Jesus would give an OT response to questions about salvation in the gospels. Why doesn't Jesus talk about His death to everyone who asks about salvation? The pastor I mentioned thinks that's what qualifies the gospels as OT books. It's not until Paul that a clear understanding of salvation is presented. Again, the pastor's view that the gospels are not NT sounds very odd to me. What does the BibleStudyForum community think? | ||||||
5 | Gospels are OT books? | John 1:1 | Robbert | 211546 | ||
I heard a pastor claim that the gospels (Mt, Mk, Lk, and Jn) are actually Old Testament books because Hebrews 9:16 states that "For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth." The point made was that until Christ actually died on the cross everything up to then thus is Old Testament. This doesn't sound right to me. I'd appreciate your comments. Robbert |
||||||
6 | Are faith and works an integral unit? | Romans | Robbert | 194466 | ||
My question concerns the issue of faith vs. works but is not asking exactly that. I heard that during biblical times one's faith and one's actions were considered a whole. That's why faith and works cannot be separated. So when in Deut 6:25 it is stated that doing the law will result in righteousness, it is not works that earns the righteousness but it is assumed the works comes from an intense desire to live the meaning of the law. Also, the faith vs. works issue in The Book of James has not to do with "is works also necessary" but a reflection of the cultural assumption that works follows faith and each exists as an integral part of the person--they cannot exist separate from one another. Am I correct that biblical persons only viewed works and faith as a unit and never understood them as being separate? | ||||||
7 | Are faith and works an integral unit? | Gal 3:7 | Robbert | 194469 | ||
My question concerns the issue of faith vs. works but is not asking exactly that. I heard that during biblical times one's faith and one's actions were considered a whole. That's why faith and works cannot be separated. So when in Deut 6:25 it is stated that doing the law will result in righteousness, it is not works that earns the righteousness but it is assumed the works comes from an intense desire to live the meaning of the law. Also, the faith vs. works issue in The Book of James has not to do with "is works also necessary" but a reflection of the cultural assumption that works follows faith and each exists as an integral part of the person--they cannot exist separate from one another. Am I correct that biblical persons only viewed works and faith as a unit and never understood them as being separate? | ||||||
8 | Kingdom of God vs. Kingdom of Heaven | Matt 5:20 | Robbert | 193302 | ||
How is the Kingdom of God different from the Kingdom of Heaven in Matt? Covenant scholars claim that they are the same thing, while dispensational scholars (Scofield) claim that they are distinctive. So, I'm not sure when I read Matt if I should see them as the same or different. | ||||||
9 | Is there more evidence? | James 1:1 | Robbert | 193288 | ||
Thanks, that helps. Can anyone provide any further extra biblical evidence that Peter was addressing Jewish Christians or Christians in 1 Peter? | ||||||
10 | Any extra biblical support? | James 1:1 | Robbert | 193285 | ||
I agree with your answer but can any early Christian (extra biblical)or secular documents support the view you gave? I ask this because I know of a midacts dispensational view of scripture that states that 1 Peter was written only to Jews during the tribulation. They cite Acts 11:19 as evidence that the disciples preached to Jews only during the dispersion. Thus, Peter could only be preaching to Jews even though he mentions the blood of Christ and His resurrection. They claim that these tribulation Jews will receive salvation only after Christ's second return. Is there any truth to what these "midacts" dispensational people claim? If there is any extra biblical evidence for Peter preaching to Christians then it could be shown that these midacts dispensational people are wrong in this case. | ||||||
11 | Why not Jews only? | James 1:1 | Robbert | 193241 | ||
But what early Christian and other scholarly sources causes you to think that the dispersion that Peter addresses is made up of more than Jews? Couldn't Peter be addressing Jews only? Why think that "dispersion" would include other groups than Jews? | ||||||
12 | Does "Dispersion" refer to Christians? | James 1:1 | Robbert | 193231 | ||
What evidence is there that "dispersion" refers to Christians in this verse? I'm looking for resources that support that 1 Peter was to Jewish Christians and not Jews only. | ||||||
13 | Why "miracles" instead of "wonders" | Ex 3:20 | Robbert | 183500 | ||
I noticed that the NASV uses the word "miracles" instead of "wonders" in Exodus 3:20. Most if not all other translations use "wonder" in that verse. Why did the NASV translators choose "miracles" here? If one uses such interpretative methods as the 'law of first mention' then miracle would start here. | ||||||
14 | Zodhiates and Gen 15:18 | Gen 15:18 | Robbert | 144259 | ||
I use the Zodhiates NASB Key Word Study Bible and noticed that he states in the note concerning Genesis 15:18 (p. 22) that the promise concerning the land to Israel was conditional. Isn't this an unconditional promise to Israel? | ||||||