Results 1 - 20 of 82
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Shythiyl Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Context versus what is translated. | Not Specified | Shythiyl | 164992 | ||
King James translates 1Sa 25:22, "So and more also may God do to the enemies of David, if I leave to the light of the morning any that is his of one who urinates against the wall." NASB; "May God do so to the enemies of David, and more also, if by morning I leave as much as one male of any who belong to him." I can understand the variance in the discription of the male. What has me confused is the use of the word "enemies" ( 'oyeb ) This appears to me, to be totally out of context with the thoughts of the passage. NIV translates; " May God deal with David, be it ever so severely, if by morning I leave alive one male of all who belong to him!" This seems to be more fitting to the context, Yet in the original transcripts, the word "enemy" ('oyeb ) is used." I know that there is no perfect translation and that, if it is important enough, my Lord will give me an answer in His own time. He has never failed me. But I am curious. Can someone shed some light on this subject? Please forgive me, I am not asking for opinions. I seek knowlege and understanding. |
||||||
2 | We have seen Jesus... | Not Specified | Shythiyl | 165223 | ||
In having read the book umpteen times over the past 1/2 centry, apon my most recient re-reading of it, a thought just came to mind. Keep in mind John 1:1. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” Now consider what Jesus states in John 14:21. "He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him." “And will manifest (show) myself to him.” Now... My thought is, "He has manifest Himself to me in His word." I believe, but have yet researched it, that scripture states something to this affect, elsewhere. Many take this passage literally. I firmly believe that, just like the rest of scripture, depending on the specific circumstances, this passage can be taken either way. literally or figuratively. Having no desire to get into a doctrinal discussion on the matter, I would like to ask, what passages you would provide in support, or contrast to this thought? |
||||||
3 | Is God Violent? | Bible general Archive 3 | Shythiyl | 165699 | ||
Atrocities? No doubt the righteous judgements of the Creator might seem such to a sinner, or babe in Christ, but... Would the pot call the hands of the potter, dirty? He is the potter. We are the clay. If He should utterly distroy us, who are we, what are we? Would such distruction be atrocious? If man ever managed to create "andriods" such as is depicted in Science Fiction, and those droids were to rebel, would their distruction be atrocious? Would man be gracious enough to put up with their rebellion for thousands of years? Would you be able to send your one and only son to them, watch them torture and murder him, then allow them to continue their vile existance? In His "loving grace and mercy", He has. |
||||||
4 | Destressing | Bible general Archive 3 | Shythiyl | 166750 | ||
It seems there is a label for everything today, right on down to the way one believes. You are a this-ist or that-ist. I am a scripturalist. Many call me a Calvinist, yet I disagree with much old Johnny boy wrote. I can't help it if J. Calvin read the same scriptures as I, and came to many of the same conclusions. There is much which man calls sin, which scripture does not label as such. Likewise, there is much which scripture clearly depicts as sin, yet man refuses to see it that way. Man was created by God, and though it was dirrected to the Jews, God said that he would write his laws on our hearts and inner parts. I believe you Kalos, have read His thoughts, not only from His word, but from your heart and inner parts. I could hardly care less what "they say." What they say is rarely worth the paper it is written on. It is utterly worthless, if it isn't in line with what He said. They say "drinking is sin." What does scripture say? They say "this or that is sin." What does scripture say? An illiterate nation depends on a literate preacher. A literate nation has, not only preachers of Gods word, but they have the very word of God at their own disposal. What is their excuse? Grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and forever |
||||||
5 | Gift of speaking in tongues for all? | Bible general Archive 3 | Shythiyl | 168004 | ||
Then it is merely self edification. | ||||||
6 | Gift of speaking in tongues for all? | Bible general Archive 3 | Shythiyl | 168005 | ||
Thank you Kalos. To me it is evident from scripture that the miracle is in the speaking rather than hearing. Though I am having a difficult time getting it straightened out in my mind, your quote appears to clarify something which has bothered me. I couldn't understand why when this fact was so clear to me, it wasn't to others. I think I now know. When we see, hear or read something which is so hard to comprehend, we tend to attempt to explain it, just as I am now doing. In the case of tongues, it is understandable that even the most learned would have a hard time understanding what takes place. It is absolutely normal that one would attempt to explain it, even if that one explains it incorrectly. Personally I attempt to stay as close as possiable to the original thought depicted, which I have found, is generally the clossest to the truth. I see the gift of tongues as a miracle. And though this dosen't limit my desire to understand, I also know that I couldnt possiably understand all miracles. Can you imagine a single word spoken which contains all the syllables nessisary to convey the sound of a word in numerous languages? It is nearly unfathomable, but then, so is it's originator. I picture the happening at penticost as being compariable to one who speaks only English, when influenced by the Holy Spirit of God, speaking in a language which is understood in German, French, Spanish, Hebrew, Greek, and whatever other language or dialect is present at the time. This is foolishness to many, yet what is mans wisdom to God? |
||||||
7 | Lord's Supper | Bible general Archive 3 | Shythiyl | 168378 | ||
When they get hungry... No, that's supposed to be funny. Ha, ha. Scripture makes no allusion to when such an observance is to be made. Why do we pay so much attention to that which is so insignificant? Then so little to that which is able to glorify. Just wondering |
||||||
8 | references about importance of the bible | Bible general Archive 3 | Shythiyl | 168380 | ||
I can't recall the passage, but there is an allusion to your question in scripture. Something to the affect that it is for our learning. I'm surprised someone hasn't pointed it out. Doc? |
||||||
9 | In heaven are we male or female? | Bible general Archive 3 | Shythiyl | 168386 | ||
For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. Gal 3:27-28 I have no reason to think it will be anything other in heaven. There is a fictional character on "Star Trek The Second Generation" who has assumed the shape of man. In essence, on his home planet his species are one. They are depicted as some sort or liquid. In our carnal mind we, cannot comprehend heaven. However, except concerning the depiction of us, the Church, as the bride, unlike Star Trek's "shape shifter," scripture does depict individualism, but not gender, other than when refering to God the Father and Jesus the Son. Instead of individually focused love as we now know it, I feel, our love in heaven will be as the people of the shape shifter depicted above. We will love, and be loved by Everyone and Everything. A love, man cannot currently comprehend. Why then would there be a need for marriage? There will be no need for reproduction. Companionship will be as common as the very air we now breathe. |
||||||
10 | Saved by belief or belief and baptism? | NT general Archive 1 | Shythiyl | 165700 | ||
Key words ... An outward SYMBOL. A SYMBOL 1 : an authoritative summary of faith or doctrine : CREED 2 : something that stands for or suggests something else by reason of relationship, association, convention, or accidental resemblance; especially : a visible sign of something invisible *the lion is a symbol of courage* 3 : an arbitrary or conventional sign used in writing or printing relating to a particular field to represent operations, quantities, elements, relations, or qualities 4 : an object or act representing something in the unconscious mind that has been repressed *phallic symbols* 5 : an act, sound, or object having cultural significance and the capacity to excite or objectify a response |
||||||
11 | Saved by belief or belief and baptism? | NT general Archive 1 | Shythiyl | 165701 | ||
Thank you Kalos. Surely the truth of the matter has never been put better than by the very word, inspired by God. Though I have been baptized outwardly, as all true believers I am baptized by The Living Water, and I shall never again know that thirst, not because of the symbolic profession I made before man, but because Jesus is the Living Water. I challenge anyone to show where scripture states that baptism is a requirement for salvation. I am not interested in interpretation. I desire scriptural proof, such as that you have so gracefully presented. If we could only let go the myths and traditional interpretations we have so blindly accepted as truth, and open our eyes to His word, which is so readily available, such threads would not be nessisary. Perhaps we could then discuss how to plant, tend and harvest. The 10 pages of this thread to date, have done nothing other that go around and around, proving nothing but the hardheaded determination of the individuals to make their point, over and over again. I pray for such grace in presenting His truth, as that which you display dear brother. |
||||||
12 | Lot life | Gen 11:27 | Shythiyl | 166237 | ||
Genesis 11:27, 31; 12:4, 5; 13:1, 5, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14; 14:12, 16; 19:1, 5, 6, 9, 10, 12, 14, 15, 18, 23, 29, 30, 36; |
||||||
13 | trying to understand the bible better | Judg 16:5 | Shythiyl | 166755 | ||
As to your question concerning Sampsons, "bride to be" wasn't it? It's been a long time since I read it and I don't remember him actually marrying her. But either way, it would appear that Delilah posessed what many women today posess in excess; the ability to entice man. Scripture itself explains Delilah's manipulative manner. So... What more can be said. I fail to understand your question. What I really don't understand is why Sampson was so gulliable as to give her what she wanted after what happened the first and second time he teased her with his untrue answers. Now that is a lesson men SHOULD learn from. Stupid! comes to mind. Stupidity never ceses to amaze me. Particularily when it is my own. |
||||||
14 | thats how i understand in Ephesians | Judg 16:5 | Shythiyl | 166812 | ||
What grieves the Lord today is the lost, and those who so proudly talk the talk, yet fail to walk the walk, resulting in many remaining lost, when they could have been guided to the path of salvation. | ||||||
15 | Context versus what is translated. | 1 Sam 25:22 | Shythiyl | 164997 | ||
King James translates 1Sa 25:22, "So and more also may God do to the enemies of David, if I leave to the light of the morning any that is his of one who urinates against the wall." NASB; "May God do so to the enemies of David, and more also, if by morning I leave as much as one male of any who belong to him." I can understand the variance in the discription of the male. What has me confused is the use of the word "enemies" ( 'oyeb ) This appears to me, to be totally out of context with the thoughts of the passage. NIV translates; " May God deal with David, be it ever so severely, if by morning I leave alive one male of all who belong to him!" This seems to be more fitting to the context, Yet in the original transcripts, the word "enemy" ('oyeb ) is used." I know that there is no perfect translation and that, if it is important enough, my Lord will give me an answer in His own time. He has never failed me. But I am curious. Can someone shed some light on this subject? Please forgive me, I am not asking for opinions. I seek knowlege and understanding. |
||||||
16 | Context versus what is translated. | 1 Sam 25:22 | Shythiyl | 165007 | ||
Thank you Kalos. What you appear to be saying, correct me if I am wrong, is that David is saying "may my enemies do this to me, and more if I do not do it to Nabal and his house. "a scribal attempt to deliver David from the implied consequences of this oath'" A scribal attempt? For some reason, this brushes me wrong. The thought that it is not a "literal" discription of what happened, but then, there is much I do not understand. I have always considered an "oath" as non retractable. I know that the circumstances are not even simular, but this brings into question Jephthah's vow. But then, perhaps I confuse the words vow and oath. This is what I was desiring, knowlegable information, and if all follow your lead on this sight, you will more than likely see many of my questions and comments herein. Do you know of an English translation of the Jewish Scripture prior to the LXX? Does such a thing exist? |
||||||
17 | Context versus what is translated. | 1 Sam 25:22 | Shythiyl | 165041 | ||
Out of ignorance, and because I believe I may have saw the term in the previous post, I used the term Jewish Scriptures, but then I just realized that I have always thought of the Hebrews as Jewish. I have only the scriptural education of a self/Holy Spirit taught student of the scriptures. I believe this would be a safe assumption, but where scripture is concerned, though my ignorance never fails to amaze me, assumption is against my character. I have thought of this; that the Jew came from Judah, the son of Jacob, but I have never researched it. |
||||||
18 | Context versus what is translated. | 1 Sam 25:22 | Shythiyl | 165085 | ||
Interesting. It is funny how one can have read all that two or three tines in scripture, yet still not absorbed it. I guess it's just my thick head. | ||||||
19 | Context versus what is translated. | 1 Sam 25:22 | Shythiyl | 168013 | ||
The term "pisses against the wall" is not a literal term. It is figurative. Could a female piss against the wall. Probably. If she was determined enough. Does every male piss against the wall? I hope not, for it would be a pretty smelly wall, but then it is more likely that it would be a mele who could, or would piss against the wall. True, the males hadn't personally done anything to David, but he was dertermined to cut off Nabal's blood line. One must understand the thinking of the day before they render a judgement concerning the actions of the individuals of that time. Please do not take offence, but I don't know where you get your "whole text in the original" from. It may be wonderful in the original you have, but I do not believe yours to be original anything, other than counterfeit, for there is no doubt in my mind that scripture is not as far from the original as you would have me believe. |
||||||
20 | why is it hard to get an answer to your | Prov 1:28 | Shythiyl | 168376 | ||
Because they didn't listen when they had the opporitunity. |
||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 3 4 5 ] Next > Last [5] >> |