Results 1 - 20 of 70
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: rabban Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | God is still speaking; what books? | Bible general Archive 3 | rabban | 191693 | ||
One book through which God constantly speaks is the book of Romans which must be seen as of prime importance. It commences by demonstrating in some depth that all men have sinned and come short of the glory of God (Roman 1.18-3.23). The result is that every mouth has been stopped, and the whole world is held accountable to God (Romans 3.19) It then describes how God has dealt with this problem by sending His own Son into the world to die for us so that our sin can be forgiven and we can be 'reckoned as righteous' in His sight. Thus in accordance with Romans 3.24, we can be 'reckoned as righteous by His grace as a gift through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus, Whom God has set forth to be a propitiation through His blood, to be received by faith.' This means that God offers to all who will believe in Jesus Christ from the heart that: 1). He will act on our behalf by His unmerited compassion and love (His grace) - compare John 3.16) 2) He will in consequence of our believing 'account us as righteous' as a result of the redemption (deliverance by the payment of a price) that He wrought in Jesus Christ on the cross - compare Mark 10.45; 1 Peter 1.18-19. 3). As a result of the shedding of His blood on our behalf a means has been provided by which God's antipathy to our sin can be dealt with so that we are seen as acceptable in His sight (1 John 2.1-2), something which is to be received by faith alone. 4). And as a result of our believing in Him as our Saviour in this way 'There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus' (Romans 8.1.). This message is just as important for today as it ever was. So God is still speaking. |
||||||
2 | Stumpped by my son | Bible general Archive 3 | rabban | 191801 | ||
Hi You asked: "Statement of Fact: Christian peoples of the world claim that God's word tells them from before time began God set into motion the "Divine Plan." He knows the end from the beginning. He is all knowing, all powerful and everywhere. When praying, pray that God's will be done. Answer. We must distinguish between God's directive will and His permissive will. His directive will controls all things. His permissive will allows adjustments within His directive will. Questions? If God's will is the "Divine Plan" and has been in existence since before time began, how does praying help? Answer: Because we do not pray for God's divine plan to change, but we pray within God's divine plan as His children. God has not purposed everything we do. It is just that our lives are lived within His over all purpose. Question. What if what you're asking for in prayer is not God's will? Are christians so arrogant to want God to change his plan? Answer: If you ask for what is not within His directive will He will not respond to you. No one can change God's overall plan. It is arrogant to expect Him to do so. What they can do is seek adjustments within it. But even then they should be seeking to ensure that they only ask what is within His will. The Christian always prays, 'Your will be done'. Question: Does God enjoy hearing people whine, moan, grovel and beg for things they will not get? Answer. Actually Jesus taught that we should not pray like this 'This', He said, 'is the way the Gentiles pray (who do not know how to pray properly) See Matthew 6.7, 31-32. The Christian is to approach in faith, love and submission to Him as a child to his father in accordance with what is laid out in the Lord's prayer. Question: Does God delight in the monotonous pleadings, mumblings and cryings of people for things that he planned they would get anyway? Answer. God delights in all our prayers when we approach Him as our heavenly Father. Just as parents delight in their children's often unwise words. But what a sad world it would be if children never asked their parents for anything. Prayer is however supposed to be a means of communication, not a method of getting things out of God. Question: If the "Divine Plan" was developed by God and set in motion before time began, how can any kind of appeal through prayer alter God's will? Answer: No prayer can change God's divine plan. It can only cause changes within it. But even then we should be praying only for what we believe is His will. 'If we ask anything according to His will, He hears us,' (1 John 5.14). Thus our prayers should always be for what is in accord with His will. We can be sure that He will never act against His directive will whateve we pray for. |
||||||
3 | Stumpped by my son | Bible general Archive 3 | rabban | 191803 | ||
Statement of Fact: Christian peoples of the world claim that God's word tells them God's "Divine Plan" includes free will. Each and every man has the free will to choose everlasting life or everlasting hell fire. Questions? If all has been determined in the "Divine Plan" from before time began, where is the free will to change and be spared from the torment of hell fire? Answer. God has built within His overall plan the right for us to use our free will within His restraints. We are free for example not to repent and believe. We are free even to challenge Him - many do. But if we do so we must take the consequences. But of course we can only do these things within His overall plan. We cannot interfere with that. Question: If man is given two choices, eternal life through Jesus Christ or eternal hell fire by rejection, where is that person's free will to choose Buddah, Mohamed or to remain neutral? Where is that man's freedom of choice to decide not to choose? Where is his free will? If I stand on a bridge looking down into the ravine below I am free to choose whether I will jump off the bridge or not. The fact that the consequences are not very pleasant does not take away my free will. It simply demonstrates to me what the sensible thing to do is. |
||||||
4 | Stumpped by my son | Bible general Archive 3 | rabban | 191806 | ||
Hi Statement of Fact: Christian peoples of the world claim that God's word tells them that God created the sun on the fourth day of creation. Questions? How is is possible to have three cycles of morning and evening before the creation of the sun? How is it possible that God would create light on the first day of creation when he didn't create the sun until the fourth day? Doesn't everyone know that light comes from the sun and without the sun we cannot have a morning or an evening? Since the sun is 1.3 million times larger than the earth why didn't God inform the bible writers of its importance to life on earth? ANSWER. Scroll back and see my answer on 8.8.07 at 11.08 am. |
||||||
5 | Is there a Theological name for this? | NT general Archive 1 | rabban | 191269 | ||
Biblical Christian? :-)))) | ||||||
6 | What's Pastor's Responsibility? | NT general Archive 1 | rabban | 191458 | ||
Hi May I just add to the excellent advice given 1 Corinthians 3.6-15; 4.1-5; 9.16-23; 13; 2 Corinthians 4.1-2, 7-15; 10.12-13. |
||||||
7 | TWO GREAT LIGHTS. CREATED ON WHAT DAY | Gen 1:16 | rabban | 191727 | ||
Hi, The first important thing when reading the creation account (the meaning of which is widely debated) is to notice exactly what the account does and does not say, whatever our view on it may be. The first thing to notice is that there are only three acts of creation (bara - creation out of nothing)). The first is the creation of heaven and earth. 'In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.' (Genesis 1.1) The second is the creation of living ceatures. 'So God created the great sea creatures, and every living creature that moves with which the water swarm, according to their kind ----' (Genesis 1.21). The third is the creation of man. 'So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him, male and female He created them' (Genesis 1.27). Apart from those three cases the account speaks of things as either 'made, fashioned' or 'brought forth'. In these cases we may assume that previous material is used. The second thing to note is that Hebrew verbs are not specific as to tense. They do not strictly have a past tense or a future tense. They have a complete or definite tense, and an incomplete or indefinite tense (loosely called the 'perfect' and 'imperfect' although strictly they are not). That is why the prophets can use the definite tense about the future. It is because as it is what God is going to do it is definite, and there is no doubt about it (loosely called the prophetic perfect, but it is not). In other words Hebrew verbs are vague as to time. Especially important is it to notice that there is no pluperfect. The Hebrew cannot speak of what God HAD done. He uses the same tense for that as he would for any other past action. I stress this because it is relevant to your question. If you read the account carefully God's main purpose on the fourth day was not to create the great lights, but to utilise them for controlling the times and the seasons. They were brought into play to separate the day from the night (on earth) and to be for portents (the prophets often use them as portents), and for seasons, and for days, and for years. From now on they were to give light upon the earth. Then we read, 'and God made the two great lights --- and he made the stars also'. Now if we translate 'had made', which is quite legitimate, then it would be referring back to verse 1 where God created 'light'. After all the sun and moon are important givers of light. Some see the first day as also including the creation of the heavens and the earth. Others see verse 1 as a general heading. The Hebrews were more concerned that God had done it rather than when He did it. This helps us to understand the pattern of the account. Initially God creates the heavens, and on the first day creates light. On the fourth day, He brings the lights into use for man's benefit. On the second day He makes the waters below and the atmosphere, and on the fifth day he makes the creatures that live in the water below and the atmosphere (sea mammals, fish and birds). On the third day He produces vegetation, and on the sixth day the animals and man who will make use of the vegetation. So we could argue that God made these 'lights when He first created the heavens and the earth, or when He called forth light, and that what is described in verse 4 is how He brought them into use for the benefit of earth (and of course for the benefit of man). Others, however, see them as 'made' (not 'created') on the fourth day. The interpretation I will leave to you. It is, however, important to do it noticing the nuances of the languages, nuances which are clearly intended. In Him |
||||||
8 | exodus 33;23 | Exodus | rabban | 191543 | ||
Hi, My view on this is that we need to see what it was that God was going to reveal. Moses had asked to 'see His ways that he might know Him'. He wanted to know what God was going to do. Then he grew bolder and asked, 'Show me your glory.' God's reply was, 'I will make all My goodness pass before you and will proclaim the name of the LORD before you.' There is no promise of a bodily presence. He is to see His glory and goodness. Up to this point Moses had always 'seen' God in the cloud. Now the promise was that he would be able to see the glory of God unveiled, but only as it were the tail end. For no man could see Him in the fullness of His glory and live. The language is anthropomorphic. We can compare how Isaiah saw the glory of the LORD 'high and lifted up', although in His case the Temple was filled with smoke (Isaiah 6). Note that with all the descriptiveness there is no attempt to describe God. And compare how Ezekiel saw the glory of the LORD, 'on the likeness of the throne was the likeness of the appearance of a man on it above, and I saw as the colour of amber, as the appearance of fire within it round about, from the appearance of His loins and upwards, and from the appearance of His loins and downwards I saw as it were the appearance of fire, and there was brightness round about Him. As the appearance of the bow that is in the cloud on the day of rain, so was the appearance of the brightness round about. This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the LORD.' It will be noted that while powerful the description is vague. He was describing the indescribable.'The likeness of' indicates how difficult he is finding it to discover the exact words with which to describe Him, and note also the repetition of 'the appearance of'. He gained the impression of a man and yet not a man. Rather the appearance of fire, and glory, spoken of in terms of a heavenly storm (note the rainbow). We need not speculate on exactly what of God was revealed in either case, only to recognise His utter glory. To speak of a pre-incarnate spiritual body of Christ appears to me almost to suggest that God is not One being. I think that it is to tread on dangerous ground. Can we so separate God? (It was a different matter once Christ had become man, then He did have a separate body in His manhood). Because God sometimes chose to take the appearance of a man e.g. with Abraham before His dealings with Lot (Genesis 18-19) and with Jacob at Peniel (Genesis 32), and in the appearance of 'the Angel of the LORD' this does not justify us in thinking that God is normally so limited. (Remember they are not considered to have 'seen His face'even though Jacob thought of it in that way, otherwise they would not have been alive). As Jesus declared so clearly, 'God is Spirit' (John 4.24). But He manifests Himself in different ways. |
||||||
9 | Did God really speak the Ten commandment | Exodus | rabban | 191591 | ||
Hi In Exodus 20.1 you will find that it says "And God spoke all these words saying." And then he gave them the essence of the Sinaitic covenant which included the ten words from God, what you call the ten commandments. Thus it is clear that God did 'speak the ten commandments'. This covenant in Exodus 20.1-17 is in the format of a Suzerainty treaty similar to those which were made in the time of Moses. A suzerainty treaty was a treaty between an overlord and the people whom he had 'come to help' because they were in bondage. That was always how conquerors described their activities. But in God's case it was genuinely so It begins with a description of the Overlord 'I am the LORD (YHWH) your God'. That is then followed by what He has done for them, 'Who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage'. That is then followed by the Overlord's requirements, in this case the 'ten words'. You will note that once the ten words have been given the accompanying phenomena terrify the people as His words have also clearly done and they ask that they might not have to listen to Him again (verse 19). In future they want Moses to receive God's words rather than receiving them themselves. In verse 22 God confirms to the people through Moses, 'You have seen yourselves that I have talked with you from Heaven.' In Deuteronomy 4.12 we read, 'then the LORD spoke to you out of the midst of the fire. You heard the sound of words but saw no form. There was only a voice, and He declared to you His covenant,which He commanded you to perform, even the ten words'. Compare Deuteronomy 5.4, 'Moses said to them, " The LORD spoke with you face to face at the mountain ". Again in Deuteronomy 5.22 says, 'These words the LORD spoke to all your assembly at the mountain out of the midst of the fire, the cloud and the thick darkness, with a loud voice, and He added no more" And it was when they had heard His voice that they asked that they might be spared from hearing it again (Deuteronomy 5.23-27). Thus it is constantly emphasised that they actually hear His words for themselves In Him |
||||||
10 | Does YHWH equals ELOHIM? | Ex 24:10 | rabban | 191800 | ||
Hi, This actually demonstrates that when Elohim is used with a singular verb it is always speaking of YHWH. YHWH is YHWH ELOHIM. YHWH is His Name. ELOHIM is His title. Compare, 'You shall say to the children of Israel, "YHWH the God of your fathers --- has sent me to you. This is My Name for ever ---' (Exodus 3.15). (You cannot say 'the YHWH of Israel' because YHWH is His Namw). YHWH was the Elohim of Israel. The Elohim of Israel was YHWH. Each is the other. |
||||||
11 | Colors - Tabernacle/High Priest | Ex 25:3 | rabban | 191665 | ||
The idea may well be because each symbolises the approach to God. In the case of the Tabernacle we commence with the linen, followed by the colours of the veil within the Holy Place, then the gold of the Ark of the Covenant (this is roughly speaking for the whole is much more complicated in reality as you will appreciate. There is for example gold in the Holy Place, and the veil includes linen). In the case of the High Priest he is approaching God first through the white of his inner garments, then through the colours of the outer garment, then through the gold on the breastpouch and tiara. From purity to divine royalty through the heavenly and the blood (?). In Him. |
||||||
12 | Jealousy? | Ex 34:14 | rabban | 191688 | ||
Hi It depends what we are 'jealous' over, and what we mean by 'jealousy'. To look at someone or what someone has and be grieved because they have some thing or some status that I do not have is certainly wrong. But that is not what God does. (God has everything and enjoys supreme status). What He does is watch over us and be concerned that we do not be caught up with anything that will cause us to divert from the path of true goodness and true worship, because we have become His people. He was saying, 'If you choose to follow Me then I require that you do it wholly'. He is not jealous of idols, nor on His own behalf. He is jealous for us, and for our wholesomeness in all things because He wants the best for us as His people. He knows that the one to one relationship that we have with Him is vital for our wellbeing, and He watches over it like a hawk (if only we did the same). It is like the true 'jealousy' of a husband or wife for their relationship with each other. They rightly expect faithfulness the one to the other. The NBD (New Bible Dictionary) defines it as 'God's holy zeal for the honour of His Name and the good of His people who are bound to Him in the marriage of the covenant'. In Him. |
||||||
13 | unclean meat | Lev 11:2 | rabban | 191241 | ||
The laws of unclean meat in Leviticus 11 had a specific purpose. They were in order to indicate to the Israelites that they should live at a high and holy level and avoid the dust of death. Thus the animals that were clean were those that parted the hoof and 'chewed the cud'. Their hooves in the main prevented them going into unwholesome places and their chewing of the cud meant that they only ate wholesome food. In contrast pigs scrabbled in the dirt and camels went into the desert, the place of death. The clean birds were those which were not scavengers, did not kill other birds, and did not dig in the dirt (all these were excluded specifically). They rather lived as it were in mid-air and in trees and ate wholesome food e.g. the scattered seed and insects that also flew in mid-air or were in trees. The clean fish were those that swam mid-water and not among the mud at the bottom of the sea, river, etc. The lesson was that the Israelites were to live in a similar way, and were to avoid what was dirty and associated with death. This was reinforced by the other laws of uncleanness. It also resulted in them only eating wholesome food and prevented many food problems. It was a very important lesson in those early days, but by Jesus time it had become almost irrelevant and its significance lost sight of. They were replaced by the coming of Jesus Who was an even better exemplar of the pure life. Like so much of the Old Testament ritual it found its fulfiment in Jesus Christ. Now the pure life was to be found by the coming of the Holy Spirit Who would cause them to follow Christ. |
||||||
14 | Is marking or piercing our bodies wrong? | Lev 19:28 | rabban | 191350 | ||
Hi Leviticus 19.28 does say, 'You shall not --- print any marks upon you.' But the main question is, why you want to do so? And the only answer must be either peer pressure or vanity. Either way it is a bad witness for Christ. The Scripture makes clear that to adorn ourselves for a vain purpose or ostentatiously is not to behave as a true Christian woman should (1 Timothy 2.9-10). Rather our lives should give our testimony for us by their wholesomeness and beauty of behaviour. To mark or pierce the body is to misuse what God has given us and to declare to the world that we are just like them and that we are no different. And we are supposed to be different. It really all depends on how dedicated to Christ you are and what kind of a witness you want to give. |
||||||
15 | Only God can make a promise? | Deut 23:22 | rabban | 191443 | ||
God leaves the question of whether we should make promises an open one (Deuteronomy 23.22). What He does however insist on is that if we make promises we will keep them. (Deuteronomy 23.21; Ecclesiastes 5.4-6; Psalms 15.4; 24.4) See also Proverbs 20.25. |
||||||
16 | does God send depression? | 1 Sam 16:14 | rabban | 191330 | ||
We have to be careful when talking about depression to define our terms. There are at least four kinds of depression; 1). The depression that we feel when things go wrong or we are in a backslidden state. The remedy to this is submission to God and putting our confidence in His love and upholding. It is often due to sin. 2). There is mild clinical depression. It may arise through exceptional stress (e.g. childbirth). This may need assistance by means of tablets for depression, but for those who walk with Christ such treatment should not be necessary for very long. Faith and trust are part of the remedy. 3). There is severe clinical depression (the person might not appear to be depressed). This often results from deep childhood trauma and often comes out later in life and is a disease caused by lack of dopamine to the brain. It requires expert medical attention. It can result in irrational behaviour and even hearing voices. Nebuchadnezzar may well have suffered from this form of deprssion. The thinking of such people is often distorted so that they get the wrong idea about what is going on which can lead to violence and even suicide without suicide really being intended. 4). There is depression caused by evil spirits. Saul's depression would appear to have been of this variety. He may well have been involving himself with the occult. Alternately 'spirit from the LORD' may not refer to an entity and it may have been clinical depression which resulted in his deep suspicions. Which is from the LORD? Well that depends on whether we see disease as from the LORD. Mild depression is intended to help us get ourselves sorted out. But clinical depression is often not the person's fault at all. |
||||||
17 | Should we sell domestic pets? | 2 Sam 12:3 | rabban | 191476 | ||
I must confess I know of nowhere in Scripture that forbids the selling of animals raised at home. It sounds like an 'old wives tale', although with some truth in it. Indeed many Jews raised animals in their home on the ground floor, and would then sell their offspring. The possible objection would be that it is ungrateful and is to treat a 'friend' too lightly. (Perhaps the 'little ewe lamb' of Nathan is in mind? - 2 Sam 12.3) But my feeling is that people are far more likely to care for their pets properly if they have to pay for them, rather than if they are given them. Why not pass them on lovingly in return for a suitable donation to charity? And you could then give the money to the needy and everyone would benefit :)))). (Just a thought. You are of course quite entitled to give them away :-)))) ). |
||||||
18 | Does anyone understand why this prophet | 1 Kin 13:9 | rabban | 192081 | ||
... | ||||||
19 | Nehemiah 4 | Nehemiah | rabban | 191440 | ||
Like Joseph and Moses, Nehemiah was raised by God to high office in a foreign court in order that he might be ready to carry forward God's purpose for God's people, in his case for Jerusalem. As the king's cupbearer he was one of the most powerful men in Persia. (Compare the Rabshakeh who held a similar position in Assyria - 2 Kings 18.17, 19 ff). It was a position that could only be held by someone who was totally trusted by the king. When the servants brought the king's wine the Cupbearer would take it from them and taste it before passing it to the King. Thus he was the one man who could poison the king. He held high office and would also have great responsibilities. (Becoming governor of Judah would be a demotion). So Nehemiah was a powerful and trusted servant of the king of Persia. Indeed only one who was as trusted as he was would have been allowed to do what he did. Jerusalem had been resettled after the exile by Sheshbazzar (Ezra 1.8)and those who returned with them, and a small temple had been built. But it was little more than a huddle of buildings, unprotected and vulnerable. Most of the returnees probably settled outside Jerusaelm. Jerusalem seemingly came within the province of Samaria, which would be ruled by a governor appointed by the Persians. It was in his interests to prevent Jerusalem from becoming important as a rival to Samaria. And Jerusalem had a reputation for being rebellious. Sanballat was probably at this time the governor of Samaria (he certainly was later).He was probably a syncretistic Yahwist (as we know from his sons' names). Tobiah's name suggests that he also was a syncretistic Yahwist. He was clearly a powerful aristocrat and held high office (as 'the servant') possibly in Ammon. The arrival of Nehemiah with the king's authority would have infuriated them. They dared not openly oppose him, but along with other neighbouring groups (Ammonites, Ashdodites and Arabs) they determined to undermine what Nehemiah was doing. This was why no army is involved. Anything that happened had to be portrayable as performed by bandits. It was after all rebellion against the king's commands. This explains why such a powerful coalition were unable to directly prevent the work. It had to be done surreptitiously as far as the outside world were concerned. Nehemiah the new governor of Judah and Jerusalem set about rebuilding the walls in accordance with the authority given to him by the king. The first attempt against them was one of ridicule. They tried to discourage the local returnee Jews who were supporting Nehemiah Did they not recognise that they were wasting their time. Their walls were pathetic and would only fall down (4.2-3). Nehemiah combated that with prayer (probably public in order to encourage the builders). When that failed Sanballat and his cronies decided that the next thing was to use unofficial armed bands to disrupt the work. The effect of their double efforts was that many men of Judah did become discouraged (4.10). But Nehemiah would not be discouraged and simply arranged that the builders must double up as builders and guards. He also arranged that they would all sleep in Jerusalem so as to protect it at nights. And they slept with their clothes on and their arms ready to hand. The lessons are clear. Ridicule must be combated with prayer. Active interference must be combated by self-sacrifice, wisdom and courage and a readiness for self-defence. This is a very abbreviated account which you will clearly need to fill out, especially with regard to the lessons to be learned from it. . |
||||||
20 | Explain in more detail Esther 2: 12 | Esth 2:12 | rabban | 191554 | ||
Hi, Being a pedantic kind of person I actually think that it is describing the actual Persian custom for preparing the king's women for their royal duties. However if I was preaching on it I would turn to Ephesians 5.21-27 and use it as an illustration of our practical sanctification. In Him |
||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 3 4 ] Next > Last [4] >> |