Results 1 - 20 of 93
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: Jalek Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | when was satin interduce to the world , | Bible general | Jalek | 239547 | ||
Greetings, Satin is a silk like fabric that was imported to Europe from China in the middle ages, and first became popular in the 12th century. Satan, however, was introduced to the world during the events that led up the Fall of Adam. The Serpent who tempted Adam and Eve is identified in Revelation 12:9 as being Satan. Jalek |
||||||
2 | NASV translation accuracy | Bible general | Jalek | 239725 | ||
Greetings, I've heard of Frank Logsdon, but only barely. I've not read any of his works. As far as the claim about the defection of one man invalidating the NASB, that seems a little far fetched to me because the NASB wasn't translated by one man. However, I am familiar with the KJV only movement, and have studied it to a good degree to know the basic premises of the belief. First, KJV only activists claim that since the NASB, and other modern translations for that matter, are based off of greek manuscripts other than the Textus Receptus, then they are untrustworthy. This is specifically directed towards the Alexandrian textform manuscripts. Apparently, there is an obscure warning in the Bible not to trust anything that comes from Alexandria. Thing is, the only passage I find that says something negative about the place is Acts 6:9 when men from Alexandria and other places stoned Stephen. Thing is, other places are mentioned also, and it is my belief that the KJV claim about the Alexandrian text forms are based off of passages taken out of context. Now, aside from this, there is one question that so far every KJV only supporter has yet to answer. If the King James Version is the only inspired word of God, then what was the inspired word of God before 1611? Paul says in 2 timothy 3:16 that all Scripture is God breathed. How can this be referring to the King James Version only if Paul wrote it some 16 centuries before? Second, another common claim, and misconception, is that the modern translations leave out passages or change the meanings of the words. That simply is not the case, and shows the ignorance of the King James Version Only believers in terms of Textual Criticism. Take 2 Timothy 2:15 for example. Now, in the King James, it says "Study to Show thyself approved". However, the NASB has it rendered as "Be diligent to present yourself approved". KJV only people will turn to this and say that the NASB is saying to no longer study the Bible. However, that's not what Paul was saying to begin with. The term "study" and "be diligent" in the greek comes from the same root word that means "hasten" or "Be eager". Paul is advising his pupil to always be ready and always handle the word of God accurately. So, the NASB actually has the more accurate translation. So, what about the King James? Well, it too is correct from a certain point of view. This passage shows the second primary flaw in the King James Version Only belief: Age. The English dialect used in the King James is no longer spoken actively anymore. Thus it is a dead dialect. Words have changed meaning across cultures and time. 400 years ago, "Study" actually meant "to devote oneself to" or "to be busy with". It didn't mean then " to acquire knowledge through reading and investigation", which is what you'll find in the modern dictionary. So, from the old English definition of "study", the King James is correct also, but it isn't correct with the modern definition of "Study". The final part about this is that not only does the age of the King James show differences in meanings of terms used, but older manuscripts have been found in the past 400 years that are far older than the manuscripts used to translate the King James. As a result, these older ones are closer to what the original texts would have included, and shows passages that appear to have been edited in by copyists and scribes. The perfect example is Mark 16:9-20. This passage is not included in the oldest existing manuscripts of the Gospel of Mark. However, this doesn't change any doctrines or beliefs we as Christians hold to because the teachings and events found in this passage are reflected in other places throughout the Bible. I'm sorry I wasn't able to answer your primary questions, but I do hope that I provided some insight into the KJV only debate. There are other issues and concerns not addressed here, and there are further details in the issues I covered that I didn't address simply due to time sake. I merely intended to give an overall summary of what the KJV only view was all about from an objective and unbiased viewpoint. Jalek |
||||||
3 | WHATSOEVER YOU ASK THE FATHER | Bible general | Jalek | 240137 | ||
Greetings, Are you referring to John 14:13-14? "Whatever you ask in my name, that I will do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you ask Me anything in my name, I will do it." I just happened to have done a lesson on this passage this morning in Sunday School. Jesus isn't proclaiming, as my Dad would call it, a "blab it and grab it" theology that is popular among liberal TV evangelists. Praying in "Jesus's name" isn't just saying "In Jesus's name, Amen" at the end of your prayers. Rather, it is more akin to praying in a manner that would befit and reflect Jesus Christ. In Matthew 6, Jesus gives the Lord's prayer as a model for us to pray by. Praying in a manner similar is what he is referring to. If you look at Jesus's prayers through the Gospels, they follow a similar pattern to the Lord Prayer in Matthew 6. There's no falsehood being proclaimed. As Doc stated, it's a case of taking a passage out of context. The context of John 14:13-14 is that Jesus is going to be an advocate on our behalf to the Father. This is reflected in 1 Timothy 2:5, where Paul calls Jesus the only mediator between God and Humanity. This passage in John 14 is also one of many passages during the last week where Jesus speaks about the Holy Spirit. As mediator, Jesus says he will pray to the Father to send the Holy Spirit as a helper and counselor. Jalek |
||||||
4 | HOW CAN AN AGNOSTIC FULLY BELIEVE IN GOD | Bible general | Jalek | 240143 | ||
Greetings, An Agnostic becomes a believer by the same way everyone else does, by not only acknowledging the existence of God, but also admitting that he is the one true God. The problem lies in proving to the Agnostic that God exists. It was said by my philosophy teacher in college that a true atheist is one who is absolutely positive that there is no God. He went on to say that the only way to make such a claim is to know everything that is knowable, which is impossible. It was his conclusion that there are no true atheists. However, he went on to say that what we call atheism is little more than varying degrees of Agnosticism because we don't know everything. A true Agnostic will admit that he doesn't know everything, and will also admit that the proof for God's existence lies in that knowledge he doesn't have. Now, there are people who will disagree with my former philosophy teacher's definitions, but it does make sense from a certain point of view. The Old Testament refers to people who claim there is no God as being fools. In proverbs, the Fool is described as a person who rejects knowledge. I explained it once to a person who claimed to be an atheist that my faith isn't blind faith. I believe in God, Jesus Christ, and the Bible for a reason. That reason is founded upon facts. We don't believe in mythology and make believe. We believe in actual people who participated in actual events at actual times in history. My advice, start with the facts, and go from there. Jalek |
||||||
5 | How can I understand the Bible? | Bible general | Jalek | 240236 | ||
Greetings, Studying the Bible is easier than many people like to claim. However, you are right. You can study the Bible all your life and still get something new out of it every time you open it. First thing to remember when it comes to studying the Bible is perspective. You aren't reading a book written to the 21st century Christian. Most of the time, you're reading documents with an intended audience. Romans, for example, was written to the Roman church of the 1st century. As a result, trying to understand the passage from the perspective of the intended audience helps. Books such as Eerdmans Handbook to the Bible or Holman Bible Dictionary will provide insight into terms and topics used in the passage. Another useful resource is vine's complete expository dictionary. Second thing is to remember the language. The Bible wasn't written in Elizabethian English like the King James. The Bible was written originally in Hebrew, parts in Chaldean, and the new testament in Greek. If you don't have a solid background in greek and Hebrew, then having something like a Strong Concordance will help compensate, as will some of the resources listed above. Thirdly, you'll come across passages that will be hard to interpret even with the resources listed above. Sometimes turning to a few commentaries will help gain perspective. One that I've come to trust is the Expositor's commentary series. When studying the Bible, you should also keep the context in mind. Keeping a passage within the context will eliminate a lot of interpretation problems. The context is more than a paragraph, but the entire topic at hand. Like the Beattitudes in Matthew 5, for example. The context isn't just Matthew 5:3-12, but the entire sermon on the mount which is from Matthew 5:1 - 7:29. Hope these insights help. Jalek |
||||||
6 | Is cussing and premarital sex wrong or o | Bible general | Jalek | 240758 | ||
Greetings, Have you heard of the biblical scholar T. W. Hunt? If you haven't, I'd encourage you to look him up, and specifically his study called "The Mind of Christ". Taken from Philippians 2:5 where Paul tells the Philippian church to have the same attitude that Christ had. He also says elsewhere to "conduct yourselves in a manner worthy of the Gospel of Christ". Think upon those two concepts a moment. There was a popular phrase when I was in High School. Now I'm probably giving my age out when I say this, but I was in High School when the "WWJD" movement began. WWJD was an acronym that stood for "what would Jesus do?". It was intended to be a question to ask yourself when you face with a troubling situation. It had Paul's words to the Philippians in mind. So ask yourself, would Jesus cuss like a sailor? No, he wouldn't. He would, as Paul says in Philippians 2:14, "do all things without grumbling or disputing". So, my advice to you is to sit down and read Philippians all the way through. In fact, don't just read it once, but study it. Try to read it once a day for two weeks straight. When you read it, be sure to read the epistle in one sitting. Now, why am I recommending this? Because when you read something over and over, it has a greater chance of being retained to memory. Also, each time you read it, there is a greater chance that you'll understand it a little better than the time before. So, reading it over and over is a good practice to get into. Now for your other concern about premarital sex. Personally, it is my advice to wait until marriage. Here's why. In the Old Testament, especially in the King James, sex was referred to as "knowing" your mate. It carried the symbolism of sharing intimate knowledge with each other. When you think of sex in that perspective, it becomes clear, at least to me, why it is best to wait until marriage. The Love that a husband and a wife share is to be unique only between them. That's why the Bible is so harsh on adultery and homosexuality and other sexual perversions. Sex was intended to be intimate, a secret, if you will. How would you feel if your secrets were known to everyone around you? Think of sex in the same terms. There's another concern that waiting until marriage solves. In today's world where STDs are rampant, who are the ones you can nearly guarantee won't have one? The ones who haven't had sex. Paul, in Romans 1, refers to STDs and describes it "as the due penalty for their error" when he describes the sexual depravity of sinful man. This links into what I was saying about the Mind of Christ. Do you read of Christ going around and sleeping with every woman that came along? No. He treated women with respect and elevated them, but he wasn't sexually active or married as far as we know. Given how the Church is referred to as his "bride", I seriously doubt he was married. So, again, what would Jesus do when it comes to sex? He'd be careful and respectful to his future spouse, and wait. Jalek |
||||||
7 | Is practicing homosexuality wrong? | Bible general Archive 4 | Jalek | 232343 | ||
Greetings, Read up on the first chapter of Romans. Starting in verse 18, Paul provides a progressing list of depravity of Mankind's continued practice of sin, God's expectation of obedience, and the resulting punishment. Verses 26-27 specifically describes both lesbianism and homosexuality as resulting from God "giving them over to degrading passions". He also claims that such people will be punished even further by "receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error." This phrase can easily be referring to STDs. Paul describes God's expectation of obedience, worship, and repentance along with Mankind's continued depths of sin and depravity. He also goes onto describe what Mankind does as a result of God's periodic punishments, and how it further plummets mankind into sin. His final conclusion comes in verses 28-32. They are depraved, unrighteous, and worthy of Death. Worse of all, they give their approval to their peers who practice such things. Read Paul's words in Romans 1:18-32, then watch the news, and show that to the one you've been speaking with. Is practicing homosexuality wrong? Yes. It's a sign of both an individual's and a culture's depravity and sin. Jalek |
||||||
8 | Salting ourselves? | Bible general Archive 4 | Jalek | 232375 | ||
Greetings, Actually, it comes from the properties of salt. Before refrigeration and canning methods were developed, Salt was used as a preservative to make food last longer, and prevent it from spoiling. Salt is being used as an analogy to encourage the readers to remain righteous, and untainted by the world's influence. Jalek |
||||||
9 | Suicide Stop going to Heaven? | Bible general Archive 4 | Jalek | 232390 | ||
Greetings, Suicide is the same as murder in the Bible. In the 10 commandments, it says Do not Kill. However, would a child of God who commits suicide still go to heaven? If they were truly saved, Yes. Think of God as a loving parent. Does a parent stop loving his child just because the child is depressed? Not at all. We wait in hope for the LORD; he is our help and our shield. In him our hearts rejoice, for we trust in his holy name. May your unfailing love rest upon us, O LORD, even as we put our hope in you (Psalms 33:20-22). Jalek |
||||||
10 | If not saved and suicide done Lost??? | Bible general Archive 4 | Jalek | 232397 | ||
Greetings, The Bible is clear on how one goes to heaven. It's through belief in Christ, and the acceptance of Christ as one's savior. John 3:18 says it as clear as any other verse. "He who believes is not condemned. He who believes not is condemned alread, because he has not believed." Jesus also said once "all manner of sin will be forgiven". The only exception to that was blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, not suicide. As to what to tell your friend, I would remind him of John 3:18. If his dad was genuinely saved, regardless of how his life ended, then he will go to heaven. If his dad was not saved, ... well, the Bible is clear on that as well. Jalek |
||||||
11 | Who went to Rome with an interupeter? | Bible general Archive 4 | Jalek | 232402 | ||
Greetings, Sorry, could you clarify please? Thanks, Jalek |
||||||
12 | don"t know chapter! | Bible general Archive 4 | Jalek | 235653 | ||
Greetings, Actually, The Bible contains no such teaching about Jesus going to hell to teach to anyone or, as some believe, to battle with Satan. Where this comes from, I have no idea, but it's not in the Bible. I hear it largely mentioned by Dispensationalists such as Scofield. According to the teaching, during the time in the tomb after the Crucifixion, Jesus decended to hell to battle Satan to obtain the supposed "Keys to Hell" or some such. However, when you read the conversation Jesus had with the repentant Thief on the Cross, he says "Truly I say to you, Today you shall be with me in paradise." in Luke 23:43. Jalek |
||||||
13 | does God hear the prayers of unbeleivers | Bible general Archive 4 | Jalek | 238898 | ||
Greetings, If he didn't, there would be no such thing as a saved person. Jalek |
||||||
14 | evanglical hermeneutical approach mean | Bible general Archive 4 | Jalek | 238995 | ||
Greetings, Basically, hermeneutics is the field of proper interpretation of the Bible. This includes exegesis, or getting the meaning out of the passage. It's a big and complicated series of terms that basically mean to study in context. I had a class at bible college where I got my religion degree called "Religious Authority and Biblical Interpretation", or "RABI" for short. It was all about hermeneutics. Hermeneutics basically gives principles on identifying the parts of the context, how to study the context, applying the context, and organizing the information in a workable outline. The context basically includes two primary parts: Greater and Immediate. Others might have different terms for them, but the basic definition is that the Greater Context is the background information. This includes the locations mentioned in the passage, the author of the passage, the people focused on in the passage, as well as the culture of the people in the passage. It also refers to the intended audience. The Greater Context also includes the passages immediately before and after the focus passage. The immediate context is the passage itself, and what it says. It also includes the grammar, language, theology taught, and literary style. Having a basic understanding of Hebrew and Greek is often helpful in hermeneutics. Now, apart from getting a degree from a major university in the field, you can accomplish much of the same thing by keeping in mind four simple phrases, which also coincide with the basic tenants of Hermeneutics. 1) Context is king! Basically, don't take a passage out of context. It's like reading the verse that says "Judas went out and hanged himself" and believing that suicide by hanging is permissible. Many false religions/denominations/teachings have come about because people didn't pay attention to the context, and yanked a verse out to apply their own meaning to it. Read the series of verses before and after the focus verse. Read the entire chapter if you have to, or even the entire book if you need to in order to get a proper understanding of that verse. 2) Scripture interprets Scripture! Are you confused about the meaning of a certain phrase or word? Look it up in the concordance, and read how it is used elsewhere in the Bible. More often than not, a similar meaning for the word or phrase is carried throughout the Bible. 3) The Simplest explanation is usually correct! As Paul said in 1 Corinthians 14, God is not the author of confusion. When you have multiple options for what a passage means, and you'll have that come up quite often, lay them out as it were and approach from which is the simplest to wrap your mind around. Nine times out of ten, the simplest explanation will be on the mark. 4) You're studying History, not mythology! This is a major mistake done by most secular readers. They approach the Bible from the belief that it's just like Homer's Illiad or the stories of Hercules's trials. The Bible is the recorded history of Israel and the Early Church, not a collection of myths and legends like some secular skeptics like to claim. As for why it matters, well, it should be obvious. It's important to study the Bible properly. It's our guide into the will of God. Many people have been led astray by false teachers who ignored the basic guidelines of proper biblical interpretation, and warped the Bible into supporting their own weird ideas. Many of those false teachings are listed as heresies. Proper interpretation helps steer you away from them. Jalek |
||||||
15 | OT saints went Paradise when they died | Bible general Archive 4 | Jalek | 239218 | ||
Greetings, It was explained to me once that salvation begins with belief in Christ and repentance of sin. After the coming of the Christ, it's belief in his saving work on the cross. However, before the Christ, it was faithfulness to the Law and belief in the future work of the coming messiah. It still boiled down to faith and belief in Christ. The Old Testament prophets called for repentance time and time again, prophesied the saving work of the messiah, and taught the spiritual necessity of adhering to the Law. The Old Testament saints who rested in Abraham's Bosom were those who did such. Jalek |
||||||
16 | 13 Apostles to sit on 12 thrones? | Bible general Archive 4 | Jalek | 239242 | ||
Greetings, Here's something to think about. The twelve tribes were actually 13. The tribe of Joseph is divided in between his sons Ephriam and Manasseh. They got the lands when the Promised lands were conquered. Levi didn't get any land, but got promised various cities throughout the land. Levi isn't always listed among the list of tribes. Now, you have the disciples, 12 originally, one dies (Judas), and is replaced with two others to make 13. Yet one, Mathias, is only mentioned once as an apostle. It's only a thought that I haven't fully researched, so don't misunderstand me, but since only twelve of the 13 tribes got land, and there are twelve thrones, then one is left out possibly because Levi didn't originally get any land. Jalek |
||||||
17 | Holy Spirit called Holy Ghost in Bible? | Bible general Archive 4 | Jalek | 239299 | ||
Greetings, Actually, yes and no. The usage of Ghost instead of Spirit comes from the King James Version. In the old English of the King James Version, Ghost and Spirit meant pretty much the same thing when the King James was translated. Jalek |
||||||
18 | making some else the bad guy | Bible general Archive 4 | Jalek | 239380 | ||
Greetings, I'm not aware of any single person who did this or was the victim of this, but one that does come to mind for me is Eve. Women in biblical times were treated poorly. In fact, it's only within the past century or so that women have even gained equal rights. There are still some nations that still treat women poorly. A lot of it has to do with Eve being the one who first ate of the forbidden fruit. Now, one thing that I point out to people is that according to the text, Adam was standing right beside her. He, more than anyone, should have known that Eve was about to break God's command. It was his duty to protect her, but he didn't. In fact, he later puts the blame on her. So, yes, she sinned also, but I would see her also as a victim of being vilified, and generations of women have suffered as a result. Jalek |
||||||
19 | Knowing the Old Testament Story | OT general | Jalek | 235652 | ||
Greetings, There is a saying that I heard once from an old preacher: "The Old Testament is the New Testament contained, and the New Testament is the Old Testament explained." Basically, this means that what you find in the New Testament can be found in the Old Testament as well. Also, if you want to properly understand the New Testament, you need to turn to the Old Testement. In the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus, Abraham tells the Rich Man that his family has Moses and the Prophets to lead them to Paradise, and to listen to them. Paul quotes the Old Testament time and time again, as do many of the other New Testament writers. In the New Testament, the term "Scripture" is unanimously referring to the Old Testament. You can even present a basic plan of Salvation, and never leave the Old Testament. The point is simple. Without the Old Testament, the New Testament wouldn't make any sense. Jalek |
||||||
20 | how many brothers and sisters did Jesus | OT general | Jalek | 239074 | ||
Greetings, We're not sure, but since there is mentioned "Brothers" and "Sisters" plural, then we can assume he had at least two half-brothers and two half-sisters. We do know that the New Testament authors James and Jude were his half-brothers. Jalek |
||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 3 4 5 ] Next > Last [5] >> |