Results 1 - 20 of 78
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: pcdarcan Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Who is they in Job 22:28?. | Job 22:23 | pcdarcan | 135764 | ||
Just to add a thought... this situation in the book of Job - where false comforters ended up wrongly judging Job - is a good object lesson for Christians today. Rather than jumping to the conclusion that someone who is suffering greatly must have brought these things upon themselves - or even worse, is a retribution from God - is simply not for us imperfect humans to judge. While Christians realize we reap what we sow, we also realize that some misfortunes don't necessarily mean that we are personally responsible for them. We are all subject to the ill effects of inherited sin Rom 5:3 (The Amplified Bible) "Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death as the result of sin, so death spread to all men [no one being able to stop it or to escape its power] because all men sinned." Certianly we would never blame someone for coming down with ALS, IBD, Parkinson's Disease, etc. May we all show true comfort to anyone we know who may be dealing with chronic illnesses or is otherwise down (perhaps from unemployment, family problems, natural disasters, etc). We can imitate the One who sets the greatest example. 2 Cor 1:3,4 (The Amplified Bible) "Blessed [be] the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of sympathy (pity and mercies) and the God [Who is the Source] of every consolation and comfort and encouragement. Who consoles and comforts and encourages us in every trouble (calamity and affliction), so that we may also be able to console (comfort and encourage) those who are in any kind of trouble or distress, with the consolation (comfort and encouragement) with which we ourselves are consoled and comforted and encouraged by God." Amen. |
||||||
2 | Who is they in Job 22:28?. | Job 22:23 | pcdarcan | 135835 | ||
Thanks for the correction - a mistype on my part. So, I appreciate your prompt reply. In answer to your question. Paul is not contradicting himself. Romans 5:14 (The Amplified Bible) states, "Yet death held sway from Adam to Moses [the Lawgiver], even over those who did not themselves transgress [a positive command] as Adam did. ..." Verse 14 shows that death continued from Adam down to Moses - as the Law's sacrifices couldn't eliminate Adamic sin's effect on mankind - and even continued to those who did not specifically commit a sin (transgression) like that of Adam - disobeying a direct command from God. So, today someone can't argue, 'God, I didn't eat the fruit from the tree that you forbade to Adam and Eve, why should I die?' Unfortunately, as Romans 5:12 indicates, we inherited sin [imperfection] from Adam and Eve who willingly transgressed God's direct command, chosing to alienate themselves from God's rightful rulership of mankind and the penalty of that direct command was death. And, that's why "death reigned... even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam", for we have all sinned, which is proved by the fact that we all die. Hope this helps... |
||||||
3 | Who is they in Job 22:28?. | Job 22:23 | pcdarcan | 135848 | ||
"it was not Adam who was deceived, but [the] woman who was deceived... and fell into transgression. [Gen 3:1-6]" - The Amplified Bible 1 Timothy 2:14. Adam willingly went along with his wife's transgression - eating from the tree that was forbidden to both of them in Genesis 2:16,17, thus putting his wife's wishes above God's. Of course, this resulted in his (their) death and death spread to all mankind - as imperfection can only give birth to imperfection. (Romans 5:12) |
||||||
4 | Who is they in Job 22:28?. | Job 22:23 | pcdarcan | 135861 | ||
Eating was normal/proper, and Adam had been told to 'eat to satisfaction' of what God had given him. (Ge 2:16) But God restricted Adam [and Eve] from their eating of the fruit of this one tree (Gen 2:17); God thus causes the eating of that fruit to symbolize that the eater comes to a knowledge that enables him to decide for himself (without regard for God's direction) what is “good” or what is “bad” for man. Of course, when you re-read Gen 3:1-6, several issues stand out: Satan raises doubts about the prohibition of eating from this one tree in Gen 3:1 "... Can it really be that God has said, You shall not eat of every tree of the garden?" Eve answers in vss. 2,3 'we can eat, but not from this one tree in the middle of the garden for God said we shall die'. Then Satan immediately proceeds to slander God in vs. 4 "... You shall not surely die". No wonder Satan is called "the Father of lies and all that is false" by Jesus Christ in John 8:44. Notice how he continues with his lie to Eve in vs 5 "For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be as God, knowing the difference between good and evil, and blessing and calamity." Adam [like Eve] wasn't forced to recognize God's Sovereignty - his right to rule his creation. They had free will and exercised it. Had they listened to God, they could have enjoyed everlasting life, as Gen 2:17 implies. They could have chosen to eat from 'the tree of life also in the center of the garden' (Gen 2:9), but weren't given that chance because we know they disobeyed God and eventually died. Adam chose to go along with his wife in the path that she paved by listening to Satan - deciding for himself what was right and wrong, good and bad. If only Adam knew the dire consequences this would cause to mankind in general througout history - his legacy lives on though because isn't it true that many today also try to decide for themselves what is right and wrong. Some even do this when shown from the Bible that God is the only one who can really decide what is good and bad, right and wrong for his created beings. Sorry for the long answer, but it requires some reasoning to answer this question because the Bible doesn't come right out and say why Adam acquiesced, we just know he exercised his free will and went right along with Eve in her disobedience. You might say he put family ahead of God. |
||||||
5 | Who is they in Job 22:28?. | Job 22:23 | pcdarcan | 135864 | ||
Possibly. When Adam deliberately - remember unlike Eve his decision wasn't based on deception (1 Tim 2:14) - sinned against God, he knew that the penalty was ultimately physical death. But you raise a very interesting point. The Bible says about eating from this tree in Gen 2:17 "... for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die." Of course, Adam physically lived "930 years, and then he died" (Gen. 5:5). So, he didn't physically die, as you know, in that day. What can we make of this? The first man, Adam, had a strong physical heart but a weak spiritual heart. He did not maintain strong affection for his Creator and for what is righteous and so allowed his inner desires and motives to become bad. This failure of his spiritual heart brought upon him eternal death. When Adam made that decision to eat from the tree of good and bad, he died immediately in a spiritual way, telling God in effect 'I don't care to live by your rules anymore'. So, it appears that Adam died spiritually (immediately upon disobeying God) and consequently physically, although it took 930 years because his body was so close to perfection - a body that could have partaken of the tree of life in Gen 2:9 if he obeyed the command in Gen 2:17, as we have discussed in these threads. So, Adam's spiritual death lead to his physical death. If you have ever cut the power to a smooth running fan, it runs for quite awhile before it stops. Adam's spiritual death cut him off from the life-giver, the Almighty Father and Creator of mankind, the Sovereign of the Universe. |
||||||
6 | Who is they in Job 22:28?. | Job 22:23 | pcdarcan | 135871 | ||
In what sense? Eve no doubt understood the penalty of Gen 2:17, for she repeats God's command to the serpent in Gen 3:3 "Except of the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden. God has said, You shall not eat of it, neither shall you touch it, lest you die." The serpent opposed that by slandering God in verse 4: "You shall not surely die." Simply put, that's a lie - both Adam and Eve eventually died. First spiritually, then physically because they removed themselves from the live-giving force of the Creator. I'm not sure what is meant by 'in a sense the serpent didn't lie when he said this to Eve'. The statement by the serpent is diametrically opposed to what God said - if that isn't a lie, I don't know what is. Could you qualify your statement, perhaps I don't understand the premise for it? Let's get back to the account and my previous thread. Adam and Eve forfeited eternal life on earth (that's where they were created and placed and commanded to reproduce and to take care of the earth and all the rest of God's creation, in the Garden of Eden - right here on earth). They forfeited this privilege not for "knowledge" sake alone, but for the right to decide for themselves what was right and wrong, as the serpent put it in Genesis 3:5, "... you will be as God, knowing the difference between good and evil, and blessing and calamity." The serpent was implying that God was holding something back from them by always listening to Him. Sure, you or I may not make such a decision today because we have the benefit of 20/20 hind-sight vision - look at the mess this alienation from God has brought upon mankind (Please compare Gen. 3:16,19 and 24, and Ecclesiates 8:9 'man has dominated man to his injury'). When Adam and Eve took the fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, it wasn't so much the fruit, but what it stood for (namely, independence from God's right to determine good and bad) that caused them to "chuck it" - everlasting life on earth and a peaceful relationship with God. :) They took something - the right to decide 'good from evil' - which didn't belong to them. Do you mean "couples" in this statement? "If you've ever watched husband and wife doubles, that does not compute." I'm not sure what you mean by this statement? I'm simply showing you the Biblical account and I have no reason to doubt what it says. Albeit it doesn't contain a detailed dialogue between Adam and Eve, the Author wouldn't have left out any detail if it was that important. There's enough there to deduce that Adam and Eve were telling God by their premeditated and disobedient actions, 'we want to decide for ourselves from now on what is good and evil, right and wrong'. What a major mistake that was for mankind. (Ro 5:12) We can't just simply look at couples today (who are imperfect and far removed from this pivotal event in mankind's relationship with God) and try to figure out why they did what they did. The scripture contains so many hints of which Gen 3:1-6 is key. How eloquently Jeremiah put it in Jeremiah 10:23 (NIV) "I know, oh Lord, that a man's life is not his own; it is not for man to direct his steps." |
||||||
7 | Who is they in Job 22:28?. | Job 22:23 | pcdarcan | 135888 | ||
You're very welcome and thanks for the sincere reply... my wife and I play tennis, I just didn't understand how you were using that statement. :) Again, sorry for the long-winded answer however that particular account about Adam and Eve's fall is so important in understanding the Bible, God's original purpose, other verses in the Bible, etc. You'll see what I mean as you continue to examine the Bible, if you haven't already noticed. Interestingly, some accounts in Genesis are often referenced in the Christian scriptures (as you probably know). On one occasion Jesus Christ cited Genesis in order to show that religious Jewish leaders of this time were misleading people with oral traditions that went beyond the written word. Some background: Pharisaic self-righteousness was rooted in oral traditions. These had been initiated in the second century B.C.E. as “a fence around the Law” to protect it from the inroads of Hellenism (Greek culture). They had come to be viewed as a part of the Law. In fact, the scribes even rated the oral traditions above the written Law. The Mishnah says: “Greater stringency applies to the observance of the words of the Scribes [their oral traditions] than to the observance of the words of the written Law.” Hence, instead of being “a fence around the Law” to protect it, their traditions weakened the Law and made it void, just as Jesus said: 'you set aside the commandment of God in order to retain your tradition' —Mark 7:5-9; Matthew 15:1-9. Now, consider this account in Matthew 19:3-5 (The Amplified Bible) "And Pharisees came to Him [Jesus] and put Him to the test by asking, Is it lawful and right to dismiss and repudiate and divorce one's wife for any and every cause? He replied: Have you never read that He Who made them from the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and shall be united firmly (joined inseparately) to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. [Gen 1:27; 2:24]" Just how far did these oral teachings on divorce go? Some Jews dealt treacherously with their wives and divorced them on the flimsiest of grounds. (Malachi 2:13-16; Matthew 19:3-9) Oral traditions allowed a man to divorce his wife “even if she spoiled a dish for him” or “if he found another fairer than she.”—Mishnah. No wonder Jesus had to address this issue and he corrected the view by pointing his listeners back to the first book of the Bible, Genesis. |
||||||
8 | Who is they in Job 22:28?. | Job 22:23 | pcdarcan | 135912 | ||
I believe the quoted vss (specifically Mt 19:5) from The Amplied Bible contained some cross-references (namely Gen 2:24). Please read Gen 2:24 and re-read Mt 19:5 and note the similarities. The Pharisees were using "oral" traditions - which had gained popularity amongst some Jews - to trick Jesus with the question: "Is it lawful and right to dismiss and repudiate and divorce one's wife for any and every cause?" By Jesus referencing the "written" word of God (Gen 2:24), he set the matter straight that the word of God should be used to settle this question and it wasn't right "to dismiss and repudiate and divorce one's wife for any and every cause". Is B.C.E. (before our common era) the same as A.D. (Anno Domini) used to indicate a date that is a specified number of years after the birth of Jesus Christ? No. As The World Book Encyclopedia says: “Dates after that year are listed as A.D., or anno Domini (in the year of our Lord).” |
||||||
9 | Who is they in Job 22:28?. | Job 22:23 | pcdarcan | 135928 | ||
Further scriptural background on the first point about oral traditions .vs. the written scriptures (btw, perhaps this will answer you follow-up question). When Jesus quoted from the Hebrew Scriptures, he said: 'It is written.' (Matthew 4:4, 7, 10) But six times in the Sermon on the Mount, he introduced what sounded like statements from the Hebrew Scriptures with the words: 'It was said.' (Matthew 5:21, 27, 31, 33, 38, 43) Why did he do this? Because he was referring to the Scriptures as interpreted in the light of Pharisaic traditions that contradicted God’s commandments. ( Compare Deuteronomy 4:2 and Matthew 15:3) This is made apparent in Jesus’ sixth and last reference in this series: 'You heard that it was said, ‘You must love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’' But no Mosaic law said, “Hate your enemy.” The scribes and Pharisees said it. That was their interpretation of the Law to love your neighbor — your Jewish neighbor and no others. Interesting that Jesus would later provide the parable of the Samaritan man - if it's been awhile since you read this account, its a gem!!! (Please read Luke 10:25-37) On your question about C.E. or A.D., I prefer C.E. - only because many count time from what is supposed to be the year of Jesus’ birth, anno Domini, A.D., “in the year of (our) Lord, i.e., Jesus Christ.” and I believe the chronology they use for Jesus' birth is not completely in harmony with Bible chronology. This would take pages to answer because it involves the entire chronology of the Bible and many of the points are [unfortunately] controversial. The reason is that different cultures down through history have used various means to keep track of dates. I think the questions you have been asking are excellent and it reminds me of Jesus words on the famous Sermon on the Mount, "Keep on asking and it will be given you; keep on seeking and you will find; keep on knocking [reverently] and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who keeps on asking received, and he who keeps on seeking finds, and to him who keeps on knocking it will be opened." - Mt 7:7,8 (The Amplified Bible) Also, like Jesus, we can always rest assured that the Bible will always assist us in correcting any errors of teaching, like those of the Pharisees who taught oral traditions above the written word - please see what the Bible says of itself in 2 Timothy 3:16 and its authoritative Source. |
||||||
10 | Vote against abortion | Prov 29:2 | pcdarcan | 136271 | ||
"They [Jesus disciples] are not of the world, even as I am not of it." - John 17:16 (NIV) "Jesus said, 'My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my Kingdom is from another place.'" - John 18:36 (NIV) "You adulterous people, don't you know that friendship with the world is hatred toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God." - James 4:4 (NIV) "We know that we are children of God, and that the whole world is under the control of the evil one." - John 5:19 (NIV) |
||||||
11 | Vote against abortion | Prov 29:2 | pcdarcan | 136284 | ||
True. At God's time and by God's power... (reference Daniel 2:44; 1 John 2:15-17, John 18:19). Matthew 24:14 says, "And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come". "No one knows about the day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father" - Matthew 24:36. In the meantime, Christians endure: "but he who stands firm to the end will be saved." - Matthew 24:13 |
||||||
12 | Vote against abortion | Prov 29:2 | pcdarcan | 136285 | ||
Proverbs 29:2 is an observation highlighting the stark contrast of righteous rule vs. unrighteous rule of mankind towards their subjects. Christians are focused on the righteous rulership of God's kingdom for solving all of mankind's problems for "a man's life is not his own, it is not for man to direct his steps" - Jeremiah 10:23. God's servants (like Jeremiah) realize that imperfect mankind cannot direct his own footsteps - never mind ruling himself - and thus Jesus responded to Pilate: "My kingdom is not of this world." - John 18:36 |
||||||
13 | Why bother to make requests when we pray | Eccl 7:17 | pcdarcan | 135497 | ||
1 Peter 4:8 addresses the comment: "Makes me wonder if as sinful humans can we truly love our brother." You're welcome. Yes, 1 John 4:21 contains an important commandment and the reasoning found in the preceding verse is interesting: 1 John 4:20 (The Amplified Bible) "If any one says, I love God, and (detests, abominates) hates his brother [in Christ], he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen, cannot love God Whom he has not seen." Note how the Bible helps us to appreciate the power of love in our dealings with each other in 1 Peter 4:8 (The Amplified Bible) "Above all things have intense and unfailing love for one another, for love covers a multitude of sins - forgives and disregards the offenses of others." The latter part of this verse shows that there will be bumps in the road in our dealings with each other (due to imperfection), but the love displayed in Christ's congregations will help even us sinful humans to show at the least, agape [principle] love. |
||||||
14 | I would like to know the original prayer | Matt 6:9 | pcdarcan | 136446 | ||
Thanks for the feedback. I know that understanding these scriptural points has helped make my personal prayers to feel like they are my own, and not someone else's, albeit my fellow Christians are all praying for God's kingdom to come and for his will to take place on earth as in heaven... and additional similar scriptural thoughts of course. :) And, I love that Christians can pray for personal issues as long as they harmonize with God's will. God's peace be with you. |
||||||
15 | Jesus sisters names? | Mark 6:3 | pcdarcan | 135255 | ||
Actually, the quoted verse (Mark 6:3) from the NASB [read above] is that record and it shows Joses, Judas and Simon as the other three brothers names. Some ancient manuscipts read "Joseph" in Mark 6:3 and this would harmonize with Mt 13:55 "Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not His mother called Mary? And, are not His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?" - all rhetorical questions btw :) Hope this helps. |
||||||
16 | Jesus sisters names? | Mark 6:3 | pcdarcan | 135268 | ||
You're very welcome - I expect the same help if I mis-speak. :) Have a good evening! | ||||||
17 | who was Jesus | John 1:1 | pcdarcan | 125179 | ||
Jesus is the only begotten Son of God, the only Son produced by Jehovah alone. This son is the firstborn of all creation. By means of him all other things in heaven and earth were created. He is the second greatest personage in the universe. It is the son whom Jehovah sent to the earth to give his life for a ransom for mankind, thus opening the way for eternal life for those of Adam's offspring who exercise faith. | ||||||
18 | One God, One Jesus Christ | 1 Cor 8:5 | pcdarcan | 130726 | ||
Pushing ones own personal and denominational views Please limit, to the best of your ability, the known denominational biases that produce potential strife and undue conflict. Please avoid interjecting obvious denominational biases, especially when urged by peers to cease. Otherwise, it becomes a battle of wills, and only tears down morale and causes division. If we are notified that this situation is occurring we will review it and act as necessary. |
||||||
19 | Still waiting.... | 1 Cor 8:5 | pcdarcan | 130927 | ||
I wasn't going to re-enter/reply (as previously stated) to this thread, but Mary... your sincere response urged me on. Bro. Tim responds that "basic logic demands that we start with the simplest statements first and then build from there." Here's another approach. Anytime a scripture (or portion of a verse) is extracted out of its context, read the surrounding verses for contextual understanding of the Bible to see what point is being established. Tim states, "It cannot be true that there are 'other gods' and are not 'other gods' at the same time! These are two contadictory statements." However, within Bible context, it can be true that there ARE 'other gods' (after all, why would God warn against worshipping 'other gods'), but no 'other [true] God'. Notice the capital "G" in the title "God" and singular nature in KJV Isaiah 45:21 "... there is no God else besides me". Interesting is the context of the preceding quote: "... there is no God else besides me; a just God and a Savior; there is none beside me." These qualifying remarks clarify what this scripture is really talking about. God Almighty is called a "just God" and "a Savior". And here's the point, within the context there is no other true God, just one God in whom salvation lies - a recurring theme in Isaiah. I believe that Tim may be taking some verses too literal or not allowing the surrounding verses to explain the meaning. The surrounding scriptures highlight the issue that Isaiah is trying to present, there is only one true God. Of this true God, the sciptures saith: "I have made the earth, and created man upon it;" (Isa 45:12a), "a just God and a Savior" (Isa 45:21). Isaiah (under inspiration) is building a case for worshipping the only true God and Creator for note Isa 45:20 "Assemble yourselves together and come; draw near together, ye that are escaped of the nations; they have no knowledge that set up the wood of their graven image, and pray unto a god that CANNOT save." And, that's the crux of Isaiah's writing, there is no other God (capital G) other than the true God. Isa 45:5 (American Std. Bible) says: "I am Jehovah, and there is none else; besides me there is no God." (Interesting that when Bibles include the name of God, it becomes less confusing to the reader.) That there are 'other gods' though (small "g") is very clear from the Bible. The statement "false gods do not really exist" is a loaded statement. Molech was a god who was worshipped, he doesn't have to be real - just real to those who worship him. Of course, we know Satan is real and was called "...the god of this world [who] has blinded the minds of unbelievers..." - NIV 2 Cor 4:4 He even tried to get Jesus (in his weakened physical state) to worship him (imagine that!) - Mt 4:9 KJV "And saith (Satan) unto him (Jesus), All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me." I don't doubt that Tim believes in his interpretation of his quoted verses and I actually understand what he is saying - I just respectfully disagree because I surmise that they are taken out of context. Hope this is helpful. |
||||||
20 | Still waiting.... | 1 Cor 8:5 | pcdarcan | 130994 | ||
You're very welcome Mary - keep up the earnest research and comparison's with other portions of the Bible. I found your comment interesting and very sincere: "I still am trying to fit 2 Cor. 4:4's use of god and what Tim is saying but am having trouble." I believe it can be explained in this way. When other scriptures don't support a viewpoint, it's like a piece of puzzle forced into a location - it really doesn't interlock and when you stand back and look at the overall picture, it's slightly askew and doesn't match the surrounding pieces - no amount of reasoning is going to convince anyone that the puzzle piece is in the proper place. If someone leaves that piece in place, it will only cause confusion to the overall picture and people who look at it closely will always reason, 'this piece isn't quite right, I'm having trouble seeing how it fits'. It doesn't fit because the Bible does say there are "other gods", however there is only 'one true God' and from that true God's perspective, there is not another true "God" (or 'there is not another me, God'). It's reasonable when you view it that way - otherwise, you have to do a lot of dancing to disprove other scriptures that clearly indicate that there are other gods. The reason tranlators translate the small "g" in Hebrew to upper-case in English "G" is because they understand this argument and want to convey the true meaning of the Hewbrew text into English, or else it really would be confusing. Wish you the best in your research! |
||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 3 4 ] Next > Last [4] >> |