Results 1 - 19 of 19
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Unanswered Bible Questions Author: flinkywood Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | To turn, or not to turn? | Rom 13:4 | flinkywood | 193567 | ||
Dear Forumites, Dietrich Bonhoeffer was hanged by the Nazis for plotting to kill Hitler. In light of verses like Luke 6:29: "To one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also," and Matt 5:39, is there scriptural justification for a Christian to murder a tyrant? |
||||||
2 | Adieu, Forumites. | Prov 3:5 | flinkywood | 143775 | ||
Dearest Forumites, It's been a good four years amongst you. I've learned loads within these digital walls. I'll be logging off, now. Thanks, adieu. Colin |
||||||
3 | Who saved James, Hebrews and Revelation? | Bible general Archive 2 | flinkywood | 143771 | ||
Hi, Tim, Kalos, Doc, EdB, the thread I prepared this study for has been restricted. I don’t know why, so I’m placing it here so it won’t go to waste. My question comes at the end. I thank Kalos for his excellent link to “The OT Testament Apocrypha Controversy”, by Don Closson. Tim You make 4 strong arguments (id #143427) against including the Apocryphal books in the “Inspired” OT canon. 1-2) I don’t think a “lack of agreement” among those few early LXX manuscripts impugns their inspired status any more than it does our current “Protestant” canon which, after all, derives from myriad extant and often dissimilar manuscripts. 3) Yes, Paul’s citations of these books can’t automatically make Scripture of them. By the same token, however, Paul’s non-citation of others can’t automatically render those “mere works of man”. In other words, NT Apostolic quotation doesn’t equal inspiration, or lack thereof. 4) That the early church fathers disagreed on canonicity may not be so decisive since Jerome himself ultimately acceded to the Catholic Church’s authority in the matter and even defended them as inspired (“Against Rufinas” 11:33; http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2710.htm). How do we judge the inspired status of these books? What settles the question for me is that Jesus Himself made reference to the Apocrypha in a typological (i.e. pointing to Himself) way. One reference in particular should suffice. Jesus and His Apostles observed Hanukkah (John 10:22-36), which is recorded as divinely established only in 1 and 2 Maccabees and never mentioned in any other OT book. On the day of the Feast, Jesus says: "Is it not written in your Law, 'I said, you are gods'? If he called them gods to whom the word of God came--and Scripture cannot be broken-- do you say of him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world, 'You are blaspheming,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God'”? (Joh 10:34-36 ESV). Jesus while standing near the Temple during the Feast of Hanukkah speaks of his being “consecrated” (“separated from a common to a sacred use” Websters), just as Judas Maccabeus “consecrated” the Temple 1 Macc 4:36-59 and 2 Macc 10:1-8. Jesus made a deliberate and direct connection in the minds of his Jewish hearers with the Feast and the account of it in the “apocryphal” Maccabees 1-2 as a foreshadowing or “type” of His own consecration by the Father. Just as Jesus taught His disciples to read the OT typologically (John 5:39) in the Manna (Joh 6:32-33; Exodus 16:4); the Bronze Serpent (John 3:14; Num 21:4-9), and in Jacob’s Ladder (John 1:51; Gen 28:12), here He clearly accords the same status of divine inspiration of these other accounts to this Self-reference in the Books of Maccabees. Christ does not distinguish these 2 “apocryphal” books from any other inspired book of the OT nor, apparently, did His Apostles. These books appear to be canon-worthy. Some observations from my studies. 1) Protestant scholarship suffers from suspicion of anything Catholic. This is a terrible fault on our part as Protestants as I’m increasingly finding the Catholic Church, though freaky at times, to be an immense, supernatural, exegetical resource. We all could open our tidy little minds a bit in this regard. 2) Very, very few, both Catholic and Protestant, seem to know any Church history at all. For example, did you know we nearly lost James, Hebrews, Jude and Revelation to Martin Luther’s redaction of the NT? I’ve heard, but haven’t found the primary source, that only an “accident of history” saved these books, which begs my closing question: How were these NT books saved from the Apocalypse of Apocrypha? Colin |
||||||
4 | Luther and Aquinas | Bible general Archive 2 | flinkywood | 142610 | ||
I'm reading Martin Luther. How might Luther have responded to Thomas Aquinas’ statement, “God who created you without your cooperation will not save you without your cooperation”? (from Sermon 169,11) Colin |
||||||
5 | The gates of hell... | Bible general Archive 2 | flinkywood | 135402 | ||
To all: A Protestant pastor I know once described the Catholic Church as "the devil's perfect masterpiece." I overheard another pastor of a large church describe Catholicism as "a garment of Bayblon". The current ugliness in this forum between Dalcent and Doctrinesograce is sickening. Could someone please put it in context? Where does it come from? Is it historical? Doctrinal? What is its essence, and what's it doing in the body of Christ? | ||||||
6 | The gates of hell... | James 4:1 | flinkywood | 135404 | ||
To all: A Protestant pastor I know once described the Catholic Church as "the devil's perfect masterpiece." I overheard another pastor of a large church describe Catholicism as "a garment of Bayblon". The current ugliness in this forum between Dalcent and Doctrinesograce is sickening. Could someone please put it in context? Where does it come from? Is it historical? Doctrinal? What is its essence, and what's it doing in the body of Christ? | ||||||
7 | Who is our mutual enemy? | Mark 13:7 | flinkywood | 119498 | ||
(Re-posted as a question). Dear forumites: I urge you all to go online and read the NY Times front-page article, "British Militants Openly Support Bin Laden and the Rule of Islam." www.nytimes.com The Imam's prophesy that all Muslims will be duty-bound to carry the sword against the West is killer truth. I heard a Christian-former-Muslim, once a sniper in Arafat's Fatah, outline Islam's agenda thus: 1) World domination under sharia law through, 2) their young men targeting young Christian girls for conversion and marriage, and 3) to accomplish these aims not overtly, but covertly through disinformation and creeping sedition. Islam is a diabolical and urgent threat to western civilization. I also urge you who espouse something other than the Holy Trinity and the supernatural deity of Jesus Christ to recognize the emptiness of your feckless "belief" and to prepare yourselves for the battle ahead. Colin |
||||||
8 | How did Paul understand salvation? | Eph 1:5 | flinkywood | 114698 | ||
Hank, I'm posting this as a general question. Your verses helped. Let me get the ball rolling and see where it leads. The question of whether salvation is guaranteed is moot because God has promised it: Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. (Joh 5:24) …and “I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand. "My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand. "I and the Father are one." (John 10:28-30) But is that guarantee categorical or contingent? Can we forfeit our salvation? Jesus also says, "He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me; and he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and will disclose Myself to him…” (John 14:21) …that the one who loves Him will keep His commandments and, "…he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our abode with him. He who does not love Me does not keep My words” (John 14:23,24). If we don’t keep His commandments we evidence our disdain for Him and His word, and both He and the Father will not abide in us, apparently. That doesn’t mean the Holy Trinity moves out, but that we must be made a fit abode by abiding reciprocally in our Holy Tenants (John 15.5). It follows that our faith consists in our love for Him and obedience to His word. Faith requires our willingness to do His will; otherwise our faith is dead (James 2), without which we can’t please God (Heb 11.6). In the family of God we’re free to reject His love and our promised eternal life through sin. In God’s family we’re free to be prodigal. Did Peter understand salvation as a done deal irrespective of subsequent prodigality? In Acts 8:20-21 Peter’s rebukes Simon, a baptized believer, for his apostasy: “But Peter said to him, "May your silver perish with you… for your heart is not right with God.” (Act 8:20). Peter warns Simon that he stands to lose his salvation unless he “…repent of this wickedness… and pray the Lord that, if possible, the intention of your heart may be forgiven you.” v.22 Peter’s rebuke accords with a clear understanding that salvation is both progressive, “Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure…” (2Pe 1:10) and contingent: “For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and are overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. For it would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn away from the holy commandment handed on to them. (2Pe 2:20-21) Could Peter have written this without Simon in mind? Could Paul have understood salvation any differently from Peter? “for if you are living according to the flesh, you must die; but if by the Spirit you are putting to death the deeds of the body, you will live.” (Rom 8:13) Paul is talking about spiritual death, since we’re all bound to die physically. Colin |
||||||
9 | Did death come by Adam to the creation? | Rom 8:22 | flinkywood | 106117 | ||
How do we square Romans 8:19-22 with the fact that the creation has been subjected to death long before the fall of Adam? Add to this the following: "For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead." (1Co 15:21) Does this verse mean death for all things or just man alone? Colin |
||||||
10 | God's "Mind" or "Soul" in 1 Sam 2:25? | 1 Sam 2:35 | flinkywood | 105937 | ||
Makarios, In your post to Mommapbs (ID# 105932), you cite ESV 1 Sam 2.25: "And I will raise up for myself a faithful priest, who shall do according to what is in my heart and in my mind. And I will build him a sure house, and he shall go in and out before my anointed forever." Both the ESV and KJV have it "mind" in 1 Sam 2.25. The NASB renders it "Soul": "But I will raise up for Myself a faithful priest who will do according to what is in My heart and in My soul; and I will build him an enduring house, and he will walk before My anointed always." (NASB) 1) How interchangeable are mind and soul as attributes of God? In the OT, soul is what has been breathed into being by God, e.g. our personality, will, intellect, emotion. Mind could almost be an aspect of soul, not vice-versa, at least as I understand it. 2) Why this peculiar choice in the NASB? 3) What do you think is the better choice? Colin |
||||||
11 | Why did Jesus curse the fig tree? | Matt 21:19 | flinkywood | 101243 | ||
In both Matthew 18-21 and Mark 11:12-14,20-24 Jesus curses the fig tree. In Mark 11:12-14 Jesus 1) Is hungry 2) Sees a fig tree in leaf 3) Goes to it to find it fruitless because it was not the season for figs 4) Curses it saying, "May no one ever eat fruit from you again." The next day, He and the discples return to find it withered. Assumption: Jesus, who often spoke in agrarian terms, would likely have known that figs were not in season. Question 1) Why then does He curse it to death? Question 2) Why does He say, "Have faith in God", then apply a teaching on the power of faith and prayer to the death of the fig tree? Colin |
||||||
12 | How do we preach the Gospel? | 1 John 2:2 | flinkywood | 100292 | ||
Dear Forumites, Oswald Chambers wrote: "The key to the missionary message is the remissionary aspect of Christ's life, not His kindness and His goodness, and His revealing of the Fatherhood of God; the great limitless significance is that He is the propitiation for our sins." He continues: "Paul did not say - 'Woe is unto me if I do not preach what Christ has done for me,' but - 'Woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel.' This is the Gospel - 'The lamb of God, which taketh away the sins of the world.'" ("My Utmost for His Highest", October 15 devotional). When we introduce Christ to someone new, someone who might think of sin as an anachronism, do we preach hell-fire and damnation? Do we ask whether they've ever stolen, lied, etc.? What can we say about sin that will open rather than close a heart to the Gospel of Jesus Christ? Colin |
||||||
13 | Did Paul have a gospel account? | 1 Cor 11:23 | flinkywood | 99006 | ||
Dear Forumites, 1) Does Paul ever allude to the Gospels themselves? 2) Were there any Gospels written or extant that Paul could have consulted for his epistles? 3) If so, which? 4) If not, what could have been his primary NT sources? Colin |
||||||
14 | Is Paul Hill going to heaven? | Luke 23:43 | flinkywood | 95900 | ||
Just finished reading a charming article on a fellow Christian, Paul Hill http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,482865,00.html who wrote a how-to booklet on stalking and killing abortion doctors and, if necessary, their police guard. Is this man going to heaven? Colin |
||||||
15 | Have we chosen freely? | James 2:19 | flinkywood | 87010 | ||
What a great little string! I've clipped the whole shebang and kept it for my notes. Great going, guys. On another topic: I've followed some predestianrian stuff from another string. I wonder: Since God is outside of time and knows the beginning to the end and back, it can appear that all has been predetermined and that we've been chosen to believe rather than having chosen to believe. Yet: Doesn't predestinarianism violate our free will? Doesn't our freedom to choose Him give our love for Him it's superb value? If so, doesn't predestinarianism violate His love? Does God's already knowing our choice mean we haven't freely chosen? Colin. |
||||||
16 | Did David chop and roast the Amonites? | 1 Chr 20:1 | flinkywood | 76173 | ||
Both here and in 2 Sam 20.31, David is either "cutting them with" or "putting them to" various iron objects. In the former verse these are additionally either roasted or set to work in the brick kilns. Wow! The NASB and KJV have the ugly variation; the NKJV and NIV the gentle one, in which the inhabitants are disenfranchised but efficiently enslaved. A note in the NKJV shows the LXX as the source for the nastier version. This appears to be a fresh topic for this forum. I've tried to find studies on this; they are spare and rare. Pastor Chuck Smith avoids commentary on these verses altogether. God called David "a bloody man", but the bloodier take on these verses doesn't make sense to me: Jeffrey Dahmer, maybe, but King David? Kind of perverse, even for that guy and that time. Any clues on the nature of this discrepancy? |
||||||
17 | Why would Jesus change His mind? | John 7:8 | flinkywood | 48696 | ||
I visited a short, inconclusive string on the ommission of "yet" in John 7:8. The absence of "yet" in the NASB (w/o a margin note, no less) is puzzling in view of its inclusion not only in the Amplified, but in the NKJV and the NIV. I asked an old-hand Navigator who loves the NASB about this verse and he opined that perhaps Jesus had simply changed his mind. Asked whether Jesus had ever changed his mind like that anywhere else, He couldn't think of an example. Since the fullness of the Godhead dwelled in Him bodily, Jesus knew his moves miles ahead, so this ommission does not jibe with His character at all--nor would He lie. Trouble with this translation? What gives? Colin |
||||||
18 | "Begotten Son..." in Psalm 2:7? | Ps 2:7 | flinkywood | 29102 | ||
Why does God tell David that "Today I have begotten you?" I'm asking in relation to John 3:16, "...His only begotten Son." I notice also that psalm 2:7 puts son (David?) in uppercase. Why? | ||||||
19 | Why include "even" in John 1:12 | John 1:12 | flinkywood | 26995 | ||
The NASB has John 1:12 "But as many as received him, to them he gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name." Even is italicized (added). Neither the NKJV nor the Holman Christian Standard Bible (NT only) includes this word. The NASB verse appears to distinguish receiving from believing, as though one could even believe in His name and still be a child of God. The NKJV and the NHCS equate the two senses. Why the difference? What gives? | ||||||