Results 1 - 20 of 499
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Scribe Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Where was satan when he first sinned? | Not Specified | Scribe | 41132 | ||
Did satan sin in heaven? I know you have always heard this. I would like you to take a look at the scriptures you are posting before you post them. When studying about the origin of satan I ran across a few interesting things. I will wait to see what you have to say before I mention them. I am interested to see if others see what I saw when they take a fresh look at this subject. |
||||||
2 | Can a man know God without a Bible? | Not Specified | Scribe | 41878 | ||
Can a man know God and be intimately acquainted with Him and not have scriptures? | ||||||
3 | eternal security | Not Specified | Scribe | 43058 | ||
When speaking of eternal security are there denominations that actually believe that a christian could have a porn addiction, not repent, and die with it, and still go to heaven? I am trying to understand what it is that is being said by many concerning this subject. I know that the saint who walks in faith will repent of sins the Lord convicts them of and so they always have eternal security. I know that if a christian falls into a sin they are not lost. I know that even if they were to fall and then die in the same hour before they repented, it is hardly fathomable that they are eternally lost. But is practicing a porn addiction 'faith?' So then can such a one really claim the promise of eternal security? Shouldn't that christian fear eternal hell? | ||||||
4 | Can you help me with some research? | Not Specified | Scribe | 43644 | ||
For those that believe in keeping the sabbath day for today. Can you help me with some research I am doing? I would like your opinion or description on "how" you keep the sabbath. What I need to know is what do you do different on that day. Thanks in advance. | ||||||
5 | Dake's Annotated Bible | Not Specified | Scribe | 52948 | ||
I just purchased a Dake's Annotated Bible. What do you people think of the Dakes Annotated Bible? | ||||||
6 | Did the high priest have a rope on ankle | Not Specified | Scribe | 64337 | ||
I have heard that the high priest had a rope tied around his ankle when he went into the holy of holies. Is this just a fable or is there any substance to it? | ||||||
7 | In the book of Matthew, who are the goat | Not Specified | Scribe | 84684 | ||
In the book of Matthew, who are the goats and the sheep? Are they nations or individuals? | ||||||
8 | What is it, about Jehovah's Witnesses? | Bible general Archive 2 | Scribe | 104370 | ||
I think the main purpose of the forumn based on the policies you can read, is that of giving Bible answers to Bible Questions. It does not matter if the person asking the question is a JW or a Mormon, or any other cult, if they ask a bible question like "What does this verse mean?" people will give answers. The fact that many can give answers who are not your typically "trained" theology graduate, is a wonderful thing. The answers by the "untrained" are often some of the best given becuase they approach it in a very logical way, looking at the context and using common sense, they are often not using "filters" taught to them to interpret a passage. Yes there are going to be some strange answers and answers that are wrong, but they come from both the "trained" and "untrained" However over time what you have is a huge database of answers and insight by a particular verse. That is if people will post the right verses when they ask or when they answer a question. I am glad this is not the "Kingdom of the Cults" Forum, there are plenty of debate forums for that, and I am sure the JW who is attempting to convert a christian is already aware of those forums. If they really want an answer they should word their post as an honest question and they will find there are many that will give them an answer. | ||||||
9 | What is the most accurate version? | Bible general Archive 2 | Scribe | 104374 | ||
I am teaching a Bible Study on Bibliology. I have been doing research on this for several months now. I am not a Greek and Hebrew Scholar, not yet anyway. And I do not think even 4 years of Greek and Hebrew in a Bible College qualifies a person as superior to the calibur of the scholars of the KJV, but nevertheless after having read many books from men that were far more qualifed to judge on which English translation is closest to the original text (the copies of the original text that is) the consensus seems to be that the NASB is the most accurate if you are going to go by the "oldest manuscripts in extant that we know of" But the KJV is the most accurate if you are going to go by the MOST (majority) of texts in existance. Now being that I believe God has preserved His Word, for Jesus said His word would not pass away, then I have felt more comfortable in my faith and peace in my spirit that the MOST manuscripts were a better measurement. And we do not know if in the future an older manuscript than the Codex Vaticanus and Codex Siniaticus might be discovered in a cave somewhere, and what if these older copies agreed with manuscripts that the KJV scholars used, would we be so surprised? I would not. But I am not one to say that this is for sure the case. I may be mistaken and the NASB might be the better version. But for now I have more faith that the KJV is the most accurate and I also recieve more revelation from the Lord when I read that version than any other. But that is a matter of personal and subject experience and nothing I can use in a debate, other than to say "that's my story, and I'm stick'n to it." May God Bless you as you study His Holy Word. |
||||||
10 | Why not use Yahweh for LORD? | Bible general Archive 1 | Scribe | 39779 | ||
It is an english translation. If they were to translate all Hebrew words to Hebrew. Would not that be an exercise in futility? I suppose there is a degree of sincere reverence in many that wonder which name is correct when addressing God. But since Jesus said Eloi on the cross, when he called out to My God., where does it end? We are talking about God here not man. God does not go by a proper name like Tom or Joe. When men asked God's name he answered with Covenant personalities. I AM, which means I am all that you need God to be to you. If you will obey me in faith | ||||||
11 | when we die where do we go immediately | Bible general Archive 1 | Scribe | 39784 | ||
sleep becuase for the saint it is temporary. I think the first time that this became understood to the new testament saint was when Jesus said about one how had died, "he sleepeth" when the believer in Christ dies he is imeddiately with the Lord as the previous post made quite clear, but to us that are here on earth he sleepeth. We see only the dead body. But that state is not eternal. That body will be raised incorruptible and perfect. That is going to happen as sure as God is God. The promises of our body being raised incorruptible is a foundation of faith. As Paul said, if you remove the faith of a body raised from the dead, you remove faith of salvation. Paul said if the body be not raised you are still in sin. Only those that inherit the promise of a bodily resurrection have entered into the kingdom of not having sin imputed to them. It is a theological understanding that should be studied out. God Bless | ||||||
12 | did the wine from the water make you dr | Bible general Archive 1 | Scribe | 41090 | ||
Paul listed being a drunkard (the simple act of using alcohol to get intoxicated and all the wicked thoughts and impulses that goes with it) as one of the life style sins that will cause even one who wants to number themselves with christians as a brother, as a sin that will keep them out of the kingdom of eternal heaven. If getting drunk is such an heinous sin to God then Why would Jesus give them alcohol of that strength to drink? Could they get drunk if they drank enough of it? Sure, it did contain alcohol, but not of the same strength as what you get at the liquour store. The fact that the fruit of the vine before it is fermented is healthy is undeniable. This too is called wine in Biblical context. The fact is that it would ferment also, But then you know that even to the Jews the person that drank to get drunk was considered a low life and a sinner. Historical evidence abounds that they did dilute the fermented wine for the purpose of both stretching the volumen and to also weaken the alcohol. If you drank even a few glasses you did not get drunk or even intoxicated. If you drank enought you would but then you would be obviously trying to be a sinner. So those that drank a healthy portion of wine diluted in this manner were not in anyway being evil nor did they poison their brains but instead recieved the nurishment of the grape. If you want to use the Biblical pattern of drinking wine and are not going to let anyone make you feel guilty, at least be honest enought to dilute your wine bottle. Add a 50percent mixture of water, maybe even more in lean times. If you notice that your desire for drinking the wine vanishes after you dilute it. Then it is possible your motivation for drinking wine was not Biblically based but a secret sin you were harboring to "feel" the effects of the alcohol, which even among the Jews was considered a scandulous thing. God Bless you ALL. |
||||||
13 | May I Ask Again... Bible Software? | Bible general Archive 1 | Scribe | 41097 | ||
My favorite software is free. Crosswalk.com Bible It has as many resources as most Programs I also use BibleSoft Library edition. It is huge. I have a lot of trouble with it as it relates to programming errors. I have had this trouble with Version 2 and 3 and in different Win 98, WinNT, and forget XP. I did not get support when I emailed them on it. But the program is great if it stays working. |
||||||
14 | Should music be allowed in church? | Bible general Archive 1 | Scribe | 41115 | ||
One of the reasons most commonly given by the Church of Christ denomination (and it is a denomination in every definition of the word even if they say they are not a denomination) that the church should not use musical instruments in worship is that the New Testament does not mention the christians using musical instruments in worship. This is not true. I do not know why they say this it is an out right falsehood. It is a tremendously flagrant error. Here is the reference. Revelation 15:2 And I saw as it were a sea of glass mingled with fire: and them that had gotten the victory over the beast, and over his image, and over his mark, [and] over the number of his name, stand on the sea of glass, having the harps of God. Now if in heaven, where the saints are in the MOST Reverential state of worship they can be in they are using harps then it must be a very Holy thing. Now we do not HAVE to know how to play music on a stringed instrument now to be able to worship Him. But then we will all be able to. Praise God. That't good news for all you people that wish you had learned to play a guitar in order to worship the Lord with sweet music as you sing. No the fair question is not should musical instruments be allowed in worship but rather "can I worship God with just as much "will of God on earth as it is in heaven" without a harp?" and of course the answer is yes, but it would be a fair question since you read that the saints that get the victory over satan are worshippin in heaven with a harp. Now the arguement of not reading of harps in the book of Acts is very weak. We do not KNOW for sure that the New Testament saints did not use a harp or a lyre or a tamborine. There were Jews that did so it could be that there were NT saints that used them in worship. However we do KNOW for sure that the New Testament saints did not use Air Conditioning in their meetings. So in hot months they did sweat it out. So if the logic that we should not use instruments because we do not read of the church in Acts using it, why does not this logic apply to Air Conditioning. I have strong historical evidence that New Testament christians (especially Jews) would have used tamborines, and I have many verses in Psalms and even the prophets that show God was pleased with Praising Him with instruments and I have the resurrected glorified saints in their perfect condition with heavenly instrument of which the earthly harp is only a type. So I have strong biblical evidence that instruments dedicated to worshipping God are acceptable and encouraged by God. (also remember that Lucifer before his fall was discribed as having instruments as part of his being and he was the anointed cherub that covereth of which we see a type in the Cherubs that worship the Lord and say Holy Holy Holy, so again we see that God has made a point even in the angelic creation to use instruments in worship) As I stated I have strong Biblical evidence that God is pleased with instruments of music in worship but I have no Biblical evidence for Air Conditioning. We know that first church did NOT use Air Conditioning when they worshipped. So why is it that the Church of Christ denomination can use Air Conditioning in worship and we know the first church did not. and yet be so adamently against instruments and we DO NOT KNOW for sure that the church in Acts never used instruments. If they were honest in this approach they would not use Air Conditioning in worship. I think this exposes a possible false motive behind the COC teaching. It is the same motive that drives them to state that if you are not a member of the COC you are not the Church. |
||||||
15 | Where was satan when he first sinned? | Bible general Archive 1 | Scribe | 41136 | ||
Did satan sin in heaven? I know you have always heard this. I would like you to take a look at the scriptures you are posting before you post them. When studying about the origin of satan I ran across a few interesting things. I will wait to see what you have to say before I mention them. I am interested to see if others see what I saw when they take a fresh look at this subject. |
||||||
16 | Where was satan when he first sinned? | Bible general Archive 1 | Scribe | 41148 | ||
I think Jensen made a good point here. That there are heavenlies and not just one heaven that God dwells in that satan was at. satan can and still has access to that heavenly realm where he accused Job. I am of the opinion that satan was able to access a higher level before and was cast down after his fall but my main question is do you see that fall occurring in Eden as stated by Ezek 28:13-15? | ||||||
17 | Where was satan when he first sinned? | Bible general Archive 1 | Scribe | 41365 | ||
I am open. I have not concluded anything yet. But if in all instances where Mount of God occurs in the Bible it refers to the one in Jerusalem, then why would be a different Mount in Ezek 28 and if one decides that it is a different one what right or basis does he have to conclude this? In Ezek 20 Ezek referred to the mount and said... Ezekiel 20:40 0 For in mine holy mountain, in the mountain of the height of Israel, saith the Lord GOD, there shall all the house of Israel, all of them in the land, serve me: there will I accept them, and there will I require your offerings, and the firstfruits of your oblations, with all your holy things ... so if the same Ezek later says Ezekiel 28:14 4 Thou [art] the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee [so]: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire. .. Would not this same prophet be still referring to the same mount he has mentioned in a previous prophesy. What right or basis would one have for calling this Eden a different Eden than the Garden of Eden where we all saw that satan was indeed in in Gen 3. So we know that satan was in THAT Garden of Eden, we have no knowledge of any other Garden of Eden. But let us consider the stones of Fire for clarity. One concept I utterly reject is that such descriptions are ever placed in the Holy Word of God for emotional emphasis or poetic language. I believe there is always a power truth and revelation and in this instance a literal application behind such descriptive words as stones of fire. I used to listen to other preachers repeat other preachers about satan falling ages before the garden. I want to see the verse now. I only have this one about when he was perfect and then he was found with iniquity. It distinctly says he was perfect while still in Eden and then he was found with iniquity. When he shows up in Gen speaking to Eve, we know he has iniquity. We never see him in Gen in his perfect state. So unless you can demonstrate how in other parts of the Bible the Heavenlies are called Eden then I only have a right to assume that Eden is the Garden of Eden and no other Eden since I know of no other Eden. Making up things about "we can call heaven Eden if we want to" is Bambi theology and I cannot have anything to do with it because I can only put faith in the Word of God and not in any "made up" explanations. Until I see a passage where a prophet calles heaven Eden and it does not refer to the Garden Adam was in then I cannot say Ezek meant anything but Eden the garden Adam was in. But back to the stones of fire? If I just say that "stones of fire" is just phrases to inspire awe then I am not any closer to an answer to "what is the mount of God here?" And "which Eden does he refer to?" But if the stones of fire have meaning and can be identified then maybe that will bring me closer to a revelation that God would want me to be seeking out, (since He did see fit to put the words in the Bible for our instruction in righteousness). Consider these verses Ezekiel 28:14 4 Thou [art] the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee [so]: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire. Ezekiel 28:16 6 By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned: therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire. Now look at Job 28 5 [As for] the earth, out of it cometh bread: and under it is turned up as it were fire. 6 The stones of it [are] the place of sapphires: and it hath dust of gold. 7 [There is] a path which no fowl knoweth, and which the vulture's eye hath not seen: |
||||||
18 | Where was satan when he first sinned? | Bible general Archive 1 | Scribe | 41366 | ||
This is a deep subject (no pun intended) that the stones of fire are those under neath the earth. That Lucifer had something to do with this realm seems evident by the description of both the precious jewels of his being and of the mention that he walked up and down in the stones of fire. There is a lot here to meditate on and compare with other verses. I do not see any scripture that say Lucifer was in heaven and fell long before man was created. That is raw speculation on the part of centuries of Bible teachers repeating each other not the Bible. That he was cast down from heaven is true but when? The only verse we have is this one. He was perfect in Eden. Then he was found with iniquity. So whatever the time frame was between the creation of Eden and the serpent tempting Eve, Lucifer went from perfect to having been found with iniquity. Now we know that it was the serpent that spoke to Eve and yet satan gets the blame. We know that even in Eden satan could not be seen by Eve, he had to embody a serpent. So it could be that satan was in the Garden as one of the Cherubs that had a job or position that related to planet earth and he had access to the lower parts of the earth, There was no hell there yet. I am guessing. Brain storming. :) Not trying to start a new cult or anything :) |
||||||
19 | why would god want blood not fruit | Bible general Archive 1 | Scribe | 41373 | ||
I think that phebe is possibily referring to a common misunderstanding (or at least I suspect it is a misunderstanding) concerning the passage about Cain and Abel. Many bible preachers for many decades have preached that God did not accept Abels sacrifice because it was the fruit of the ground and He did accept Abel's becuase it was of the firstling of the flock and an animal whose blood was shed. The text actually reads like this... Genesis 4:1 And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD. 2 And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground. 3 And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD. 4 And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering: 5 But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell. 6 And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen? 7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee [shall be] his desire, and thou shalt rule over him. The text does not say God would not accept the fruit of the Ground. The text does not say that God did not accept it because it was the fruit of the Ground. The text does say that Cain did not do well. If I look at the Law I see that God gave commands for offering the fruit of the ground. So we know that God did accept it. We also can read in Malachi 2:13 3 And this have ye done again, covering the altar of the LORD with tears, with weeping, and with crying out, insomuch that he regardeth not the offering any more, or receiveth [it] with good will at your hand. so we see that God would not accept an offering if the attitude was not right. The context of Malichi has them saying "that serving the Lord in offerings was a weariness and a drudgery" So we have scriptures that shed light on why Cain's offering was not accepted. He had a bad attitude. This again is evident by how he reacts when God rebukes him. Cain could have repented and mastered the sin and satan that crouched at the door of his heart, but instead he opens up the door with ANGER and wrath and lets the demons have their way and sin masters him. This application is applicable to your life today. If you go to church and do "christian" things becuase you think you "have" to but it is all becoming a chore to you, then it is time to get your heart right by faith and get back into the JOY that can be yours. |
||||||
20 | do not be drunk with strong wine | Bible general Archive 1 | Scribe | 41379 | ||
Hosea 4:11 1 Whoredom and wine and new wine take away the heart. | ||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [25] >> |