Results 1 - 20 of 35
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: survivor Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Jesus in the flesh | Matt 1:23 | survivor | 132920 | ||
Surely you do not mean to imply that Jesus is not God? If he comes visibly, this would invalidate consistent and clear Bible truth that no one can see God and live. (John 1:18; Ex 33:20; 1 John 4:12; 1 Tim 6:16) | ||||||
2 | Jesus in the flesh | Matt 1:23 | survivor | 132923 | ||
Perhaps someone can help me with the following: How does one know when to take the Bible at its word and when to ignore it? How do we answer those that would highlight this apparent contradiction to dismiss further discussions about the good news? |
||||||
3 | Jesus in the flesh | Matt 1:23 | survivor | 132933 | ||
See James210's comments. He seems to understand my confusion. Perhaps he can explain in more clear language. | ||||||
4 | Do I detect the spirit of antichrist? | Matt 1:23 | survivor | 132943 | ||
One must be careful not to diminish trinity text by reading more into verses than can be established. The cited passage shows that Jesus was not only man (for he walked through walls) and not fully spirit (for he ate, drank and had some kind of flesh). Could the account of the angels entertained by Abraham have any bearing on understanding the above? These were spirits that donned human flesh and ate, drank, etc. |
||||||
5 | Do I detect the spirit of antichrist? | Matt 1:23 | survivor | 132948 | ||
Not rhetorical. Whenever I see two or more similar facts or sets or circumstances in Scripture, I attempt to see if truth can be discerned by comparing similarities and differences. No doubt, you do something comparable. If you don't see any thing worth discussing in these two passages, that's fine. I'm here like many lovers of the Bible to see what I can learn from others and share questions, comments and truths that I have with them. No offense, but I must say: You seem a bit paranoid. |
||||||
6 | Dear Forum, can you verify my research? | John 1:1 | survivor | 134108 | ||
No ploy, no debating, just researching and hoping for meaningful dialogue. I'm also researching the use of the word "trinity" in Scripture and the term "God the Son." Can anyone tell me where to locate these. Thanks. |
||||||
7 | Dear Forum, can you verify my research? | John 1:1 | survivor | 134117 | ||
Thanks for the comments. This one struck me: E. C. Colwell: "...predicate nouns preceding the verb cannot be regarded as indefinite or qualitative simply because they lack the article; it could be regarded as indefinite or qualitative only if this is demanded by the context and in the case of John 1:1c this is not so." "A Definite Rule for the Use of the Article in the Greek New Testament," Journal of Biblical Literature, 52 (1933), p. 20. It seems to me that the predicate noun "theos" should be considered qualitative as "demanded by the context" since the Word is said to be with THE God. The apostle would not confuse his readers by saying the Word was "with" God and "is" God. This is especially obvious when one gets to a consistent theme of John as stated in verse 18 - "no one has seen God." Of course his readers had seen Christ. Similarly, Paul, quoting first Isaiah 40:13, states: "For who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ." (1 Cor 2:16) The context demands a qualitative usage such as: divine, godly, godlike, or literally,a god. While the other comments are more difficult to decipher, Mr. Yeager's comments clearly misrepresent opposing arguments in order to stir emotions and mislead his audience. |
||||||
8 | Dear Forum, can you verify my research? | John 1:1 | survivor | 134118 | ||
Read this carefully as it supports my understanding: James Moffatt: "'The Word was God...And the Word became flesh,' simply means "The word was divine...And the Word became human.' The Nicene faith, in the Chalcedon definition, was intended to conserve both of these truths against theories that failed to present Jesus as truly God and truly man..." Jesus Christ the Same (Abingdon-Cokesbury, 1945), p.61. The word was divine, not God. The Nicene creed tried to "preserve this truth against theories that failed to present Jesus as truly God and truly man." Follow the evolution of creeds and you'll see how this truth was later ignored. |
||||||
9 | Dear Forum, can you verify my research? | John 1:1 | survivor | 134119 | ||
You're not "speaking the truth in love." Love throws fear aside. All I hear are clashing symbols! You yourself now belong to a "non-denominational" church. Are you now critical of all denominations? I don't hold your non-affiliation against you, nor use it to reject your comments offhandedly. Let's just discuss facts and Scripture, letting people make up their own minds whether I'm "playing games, not being forthright," etc. Love does not get provoked or puffed up. |
||||||
10 | Dear Forum, can you verify my research? | John 1:1 | survivor | 134188 | ||
Tim: How can you say that "I" clearly misunderstand Moffat's point! I would like to see others weigh in on his statements. "Simply divine and became flesh." "The Nicene faith intended to conserve both of these truths against theories that failed to present Jesus as truly God." I believe you will need to remove this quote from your list in the future. |
||||||
11 | Dear Forum, can you verify my research? | John 1:1 | survivor | 134189 | ||
Steve: You missed Moffatt's point as well. He refutes John 1:1 as a trinity text. Like DIVINE, "deity" also as several meanings: DEITY: 1 a : the rank or essential nature of a god : DIVINITY b capitalized : GOD 1, SUPREME BEING 2 : a god or goddess (the deities of ancient Greece) 3 : one exalted or revered as supremely good or powerful |
||||||
12 | Dear Forum, can you verify my research? | John 1:1 | survivor | 134307 | ||
Are there others that have used "a god" at John 1:1c? Yes, take note: In a beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God, and a god was the Word. (Interlineary Word for Word English Translation-Emphatic Diaglott) Harwood, 1768, "and was himself a divine person" Thompson, 1829, "the Logos was a god Reijnier Rooleeuw, 1694, "and the Word was a god" Hermann Heinfetter, 1863, As a god the Command was" Abner Kneeland, 1822, "The Word was a God" Robert Young, 1885, (Concise Commentary) "And a God (i.e. a Divine Being) was the Word" "In a beginning was the (Marshal) (Word) and the (Marshal) (Word) was with the God and the (Marshal) (Word) was a god." John 1:1 21st Century NT Literal Belsham N.T. 1809 "the Word was a god" 1928: “and the Word was a divine being.” La Bible du Centenaire, L’Evangile selon Jean, by Maurice Goguel. Leicester Ambrose, 1879, "And the logos was a god" J.N. Jannaris, 1901, And was a god" George William Horner, 1911, And (a) God was the word" James L. Tomanec, 1958, The Word was a God" Siegfried Schulz, Das Evangelium nach Johannes, 1975, "And a god (or, of a divine kind) was the Word" Madsen, 1994, "the Word was a divine Being" Becker, 1979, "a God/god was the Logos/logos" Stage, 1907, The Word/word was itself a divine Being/being. Holzmann, 1926, "a God/god was the Thought/thought" Rittenlmeyer, 1938, "selbst ein Gott war das Wort" (itself a God/god was the Word/word) Smit, 1960, the word of the world was a divine being Schultz, 1987, a God/god (or: God/god of Kind/kind) was the Word/word]. John Crellius, Latin form of German, 1631, "The Word of Speech was a God" Greek Orthodox /Arabic translation, 1983, "the word was with Allah(God) and the word was a god" Robert Harvey, D.D., 1931 "and the Logos was divine (a divine being)" Jesuit John L. McKenzie, 1965, wrote in his Dictionary of the Bible: "Jn 1:1 should rigorously be translated . . . 'the word was a divine being.' Others, like Vine's and Harris have recognized that the rendering "a god" is grammatically possible. For a fuller expanded list of various translations of John 1:1 see: http://hector3000.future.easyspace.com/wisdom.htm |
||||||
13 | Can a Christian be a Democrat? | 1 Cor 1:10 | survivor | 134007 | ||
Sorry! My irony is lost on the internet. My concern is actually how can we be united when we are being squeezed into Satan's mold. Paul counsels: "Do not be conformed to this world (this age), [fashioned after and adapted to its external, superficial customs], but be transformed (changed) by the [entire] renewal of your mind [by its new ideals and its new attitude], so that you may prove [for yourselves] what is the good and acceptable and perfect will of God, even the thing which is good and acceptable and perfect [in His sight for you]." (Rom 12:2) And what are the works of the flesh: "enmity, strife, jealousy, anger (ill temper), selfishness, divisions (dissensions), party spirit (factions, sects with peculiar opinions, heresies)" (Gal 5:19) Can anyone else see the disgrace and the futility in worldly debates? Shouldn't we already know the future and God's will as Christians, well-versed in Scripture? Though every man be found a liar, may God be found true! Personally, I don't care who's elected, nor do I think God cares. The nations are as dust of a scale to Him! (Isa 4);15) |
||||||
14 | Can a Christian be a Democrat? | 1 Cor 1:10 | survivor | 134092 | ||
Norrie: You wrote: "I believe that this country was founded by our forefathers with one thing in mind and that being freedom, mainly the freedom to worship God." I'm not aware of any problems the British citizens in America had with their government as regards freedom to worship. The issue I recall had to do with taxation without representation, and it led to a bloody revolution against the Caesar of the time. Glory Bound and you seem to get the gist of my initial comments (tongue in cheek) - politics divides, rather than unites, Christians. As such, we do well to consider the origin of politics, nationalism, etc. The true God is a God, not of disorder, but of peace. (1 Cor 14:33) I thank those who do not totally ignore my comments made in earnest because we may disagree on certain doctrine. Jesus said that wisdom is proved righteous by works. As someone so correctly pointed out - A Christian is much more than someone that believes. "Anyone who does not carry his cross and follow me cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14:27) "By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another." (John 13:35) May the "Prince of Peace" continue to be a source of strength and light to you. |
||||||
15 | Can a Christian be a Democrat? | 1 Cor 1:10 | survivor | 134094 | ||
GB: I agree with your statement: "For if we can save one aborted child with our vote; prevent one same sex marriage, there will be one more soul who may lead someone else to Christ, one less perverted househole in America, and we will have done at least one usefull thing in life." I choose to do this with my Christian ministry - the word of God is powerful. (Heb 4:12) I am not so naive or presumptuous as to think I will stop Bible prophecy from being fulfilled - the love of the greater number will cool off, and things will go from bad to worse. But if I can help one person to accept the good news before the end comes, I will have (and have had) great cause for rejoicing. I spend considerable time, effort and financial resources in this regard, so that no one can legitimately claim I have a "don't care" attitude. I am convinced that living a Christlike life and speaking about the undeserved kindness of God to all that will listen is the best way to follow Jesus' example and please God. Personally,I find politics degrading and ineffective for doing God's will. Despite any small exceptions, I believe history and the present state of world affairs can attest to this fact. Your friend. |
||||||
16 | Are miracles for today? | 1 Cor 13:8 | survivor | 133002 | ||
Ed: You said the following: "As for other miracles where leg grow back or sight is given to a blinded eyes. Yes they occur but they occur in far different settings that we are conditioned to by TV "miracle workers" When they occur it is before the unbelieving as a sign that what was just spoken was in fact God's word. Will the average Christian ever see it? Probably not, unless they spend a lot of time sharing Jesus to truly lost people." A leg growing back? Are you familiar with such a case? Why is it that the average Christian will not see such a thing unless he "spends a lot of time sharing Jesus with truly lost people"? Is the term "truly lost" significant? In curing leprosy, Jesus may have restored parts of fingers, toes, facial appendages, etc. Short of resurrecting the dead, restoring an entire leg would seem to outdo all other miracles in the Bible. Jesus miracles had purpose, as did those of the early disciples - to establish Jesus as the Messiah and the Christians as the true worshipers of God. They also serve as a foregleam of the future. Any "miracles" today seem grossly lacking in purpose, and all too often result in a lack of true faith. People come to rely on the "healer" or constantly look to God for relief from suffering rather than Holy Spirit to endure and the resulting approved condition. I am unaware of any confirmed miracles today that can legitimately be compared to those recorded and attested to in the Bible. |
||||||
17 | Are miracles for today? | 1 Cor 13:8 | survivor | 133009 | ||
Miracle: 1)an extraordinary event manifesting divine intervention in human affairs 2 : an extremely outstanding or unusual event, thing, or accomplishment I concur completely with your perspective of Jesus sacrifice for us. With that in mind, my last comments were my deepest concern regarding the emphasis on "miracles" today. Are they a solid basis for faith? I think not. A true and accurate understanding of the ransom is. Faith follows the thing heard, not seen. Rom 10:17:Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ. 2 Tim 1:13: What you heard from me, keep as the pattern of sound teaching, with faith and love in Christ Jesus. 2 Cor 4:18: So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen. For what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal. I'm looking forward to some undeniable miracles in the future when Jesus 'destroys the ungodly men' at Armaggedon. Then the "sea" of wicked mankind will be gone, and 'God will encamp with us after all suffering and death have been eliminated.' (2 Pet 3:7; Isa 57:20; Rev 21:1-4) Such a Promised Land is for men of faith like Joshua and Calib, not the cowardly 10 spies. May we as mature Christians continue to build such a firm foundation on Christ. |
||||||
18 | Are miracles for today? | 1 Cor 13:8 | survivor | 133024 | ||
I had someone ask me once: From what source are modern miracles, and how can we be sure? I thought the question was a good one, since even in Bible times, the demons were responsible for miracles. (Ex 7:11,22; 8:7; Acts 8:9; 16:16) Paul astutely warned: Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. (2 Cor 11:14) |
||||||
19 | matt. 3 ;from verse 6 down | 1 Cor 13:8 | survivor | 133041 | ||
Matt 10:34: "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword." The sword or fire that Jesus set ablaze caused Jesus himself much distress, including his finish or death. The tongues of fire at Pentecost were a manifestation of the Holy Spirit, but individuals were not immersed in fire as in true water baptism. The fire Jesus speaks of is similar to that James relates at James 3:5,6. This fire consumes or destroys those without the Holy Spirit, and tries to overtake those that have been baptized with Christ toward a faithful dedication to God. One can find a denomination that will support virtually any belief imaginable, but you and I are concerned with the truth. |
||||||
20 | Are miracles for today? | 1 Cor 13:8 | survivor | 133043 | ||
Tim, This post doesn't read like a miracle. Explain. |
||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 ] Next > Last [2] >> |