Results 1 - 20 of 232
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Taleb Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | When did God change "mode" of baptism? | Not Specified | Taleb | 77178 | ||
When did God change the "mode" of baptism today from what it was in Moses’ day, and John the Baptist’s day? Seeing immersion (mikvah) still hasn’t changed for the Jews since it was instituted about the time of their exodus from Egypt. |
||||||
2 | Rebuild a Temple? | Not Specified | Taleb | 78676 | ||
Where does Scripture prophesy the rebuilding of a temple in Israel, other than those which have ALREADY been fulfilled? | ||||||
3 | The second coming of Jesus | Bible general Archive 2 | Taleb | 96356 | ||
SUEDE, your posting in which you quoted Dairy Leader, “…what is a generation to God , its not stated in the scriptures…” and then added your comment: “Doesn’t have to be. Jesus is talking to his mortal disciples at the Olivet Discourse. It is HE that is telling THEM that a generation wouldn’t pass til He came back.” If I may, allow me to add some meat to your argument. You are correct in your conclusion about the fulfillment of Jesus’ words. But Scripture DOES state what He meant by generation. Throughout Scripture, a generation is 40 years. How long did the Israelites wander in the wilderness? One generation. Time for all the second generation to take the place of the first – 40 years. How long after Jesus uttered those words to His disciples about “this generation”? 40 years. Some, to fit their misconstrued doctrine, attempt to change the meaning of that word, in the verse we are referring to, to mean “race”. No where in Scripture is that same word used as even a concept of “race”. It is only used as Jesus meant it to be. Matthew 1:17 uses the same word. If the word translated generation really meant “race” (and, of course it doesn’t), that could only mean that there were 14 “races” from Abraham to David, 14 more between David to the exile, and 14 more races between the exile and Christ. Appreciate your Scripturally-based comments. Keep ‘em rolling. Taleb |
||||||
4 | Suggestions for Bible study programs. | Bible general Archive 2 | Taleb | 98386 | ||
Thanks you for the tip. I tried the "www.esword.net" and discovered it was Korean something or other. I hit on Google for "Bible Study" and, low and behold, it showed up under "e-Sword". Now I will have more study "material" available without cramming more books into my wall to ceiling all the way around the house, with all the extra hundreds of volumns stacked on the floor. And I'm talking literally. :) Taleb. I've always wanted an "orginal Noah Webster's" - now I am able to have one. Thanks to you! |
||||||
5 | What is an Apostle? | Bible general Archive 2 | Taleb | 101792 | ||
Makarios, what about some of the other "apostles" mentioned in Scripture, like Junias and Andronicus, Barnabas, Timothy, Epaphroditus and Silas? Taleb |
||||||
6 | What is an Apostle? | Bible general Archive 2 | Taleb | 101795 | ||
Ken hepting, right on! I know exactly where you are coming from, and appreciate the insight demonstrated. Some would have us believe that "apostles" are extinct. IF they did their homework before knocking someone who has, they would have also discovered that same truth about what you shared about “apostles” merely being missionaries. In the back of almost all my Bibles, (and I have way too many) there are maps of Paul's "Missionary Journeys". According to too many, those pages should merely read "Apostle Paul’s Journey". Paul, like many people today, WAS SENT unto the nations AS Jesus' "apostle" (or in plain English - missionary.) Every "missionary" today is sent by Christ anywhere with the mission of presenting that same Gospel. The sender hasn't changed. The message hasn't changed. Only the terminology has changed - unless you are a Greek. Then, rather than being called a missionary, you would be called an "apostolos", like Peter, Paul, John etc. were called. As, I am sure you already know, the words for "apostle" ("apostolos", or one sent forth, and sent ("apostello") like in Romans 10:15 are so very close. The best definition for someone sent specifically to preach the Gospel (in today's language) IS missionary - "a person SENT on a MISSION" according to my Webster's. According to my Vines' "Apostle" means "one sent forth". Blessings upon you. Taleb |
||||||
7 | What is an Apostle? | Bible general Archive 2 | Taleb | 101800 | ||
Makarios, greetings to you also. Rather than listing the many, how about a few samples? Phil 2:25 tells us about "Epaphroditus my brother and fellow worker and fellow soldier of me, and YOUR APOSTLE (Strong's 652)..." Acts 14:14 "When the apostles (plural) Barnabas and Paul heard of it ..." 1 Thess 1:1. "Paul, Silas and Timothy to the Thessalonian church ... Verse 2 "WE always thank God." Verse 6 "You followed the example set by US" 2:6 "WE (Paul, Silas, Timothy) never sought praise from men, either from you or anyone else, though as Christ's APOSTLES (plural - Paul, Silas, Timothy) WE might have ..." Romans 16:7 "Remember me to Andronicus and Junias, my fellow-countrymen, who went to prison with me. They (Andronicus and Junias) are noted men among the missionaries ..." (strong's 652, the same word always used for the 12 apostles is used here.) If you notice what ALL of these "apostles" were doing during all these Scriptures, it allows us to correctly, and without losing the train of thought, to exchange the word "apostle" for MISSIONARY. Hope this helps, Taleb |
||||||
8 | What is an Apostle? | Bible general Archive 2 | Taleb | 102050 | ||
Hello, John Reformed, I couldn't help but notice you captalized "apostle". Interesting. I recall in Acts where Phillip was "sent" by the angel of the Lord into the desert. He brought the Gospel to the Ethiopian eunich. Would you consider Phillip to be a "missionary" as we know that term today, or would you consider Phillip to be an "apostle"? Who laid the "foundation" in Ethiopia? Phillip didn't go there, he "flew" to another city. Anyways, I have read some of the other postings on this thread and say - I agree with what Tim and Makarios have written about this topic. P.S. You asked, "If the church asks you to take a message across town to another church, does that make you an Angel? :-)" I must confess - often when I am sent on such a venture, as soon as I walk into the other church, the receptionist will look up and blurt out something like, "Halo". So perhaps I am an angel. Or, does she say, "hello"? :) |
||||||
9 | Another name for "The book of Jesus"? | Bible general Archive 2 | Taleb | 102732 | ||
Your question about "the book of Jesus" needs more info. But your "What is another name of books of Moses" - depends. There are a number of "other names" used by a number of sources. For example "Chumash", "Torah", "Pentateuch. The later is sometimes "only Moses' writings" and other times it includes the boooks of Joshua, Judges and Ruth, depending on "the publisher". Blessings, Taleb |
||||||
10 | Living Prophets? | Bible general Archive 2 | Taleb | 109110 | ||
Paraclete, your obvious Mormon stance caught my attention, what with some of my own family members adhere to that teaching. If you have access to a copy of “Divine Authenticity of the Book of Mormon” - Oct 15, 1850 Liverpool England, check out “Orson Pratt’s Works”. Please note “it”, in the following quote, refers to the book of Mormon. “If, after a rigid examination, IT be found imposition, IT should be extensively published to the world as such; the evidences and arguments upon which the imposture was detected, should be clearly and logically stated, that those who have sincerely yet unfortunately deceived, may perceive the nature of the deception, and be reclaimed, and that those who continue to publish the delusion, may be exposed and silenced, not by physical force, neither by persecutions, bare assertions, nor ridicule, but by strong and powerful arguments - by evidences adduced FROM SCRIPTURE and reason.” Capital letters mine for emphasis. The Mormon Church has made a published challenge to the world concerning the Book of Mormon. Number six states, “Other than a few grammatical corrections, you must have no changes in the text.” Considering there has been 4,000 corrections thus far … And let’s not forget the “translation of Egyptian. “The book of Abraham” where Joseph translated with NO knowledge of that language, has been translated by those who could and NOT ONE WORD did Joseph translate correctly. All the things that Joseph Smith lied about HAVE been found out. Historically, geographically, etc. science has disproved MOST of the Mormon writings extensively. Those facts are readily available. And with the results of the DNA testing on the various American Indians, past and present, DISPROVING any connection to the Jews, well, many Mormons are second quessing the authenticity of their faith's origin. I recognize that Mormons are not suppose to read any “anti-Mormon” literature, so, it is my prayer that true, and bold, believers in the complete and finished work of Jesus Christ, God’s ONLY, who know how to use the “Book of Mormon”, “Doctrines and Covenants”, “Pearl of Great Price” to win you to HIM, because from those very books, many have been lead into the freedom that comes through Jesus Christ’s TOTAL redemptive power. Taleb |
||||||
11 | Living Prophets? | Bible general Archive 2 | Taleb | 109204 | ||
Paraclete, your claim that you know how Joseph Smith got the revelations and that you are thankful for them is either a contradiction, or, perhaps you REALLY don’t know “how he got them”. Given you the benefit of my doubt, IF you "know" about the 1823 book "View of the Hebrews" by Ethan Smith, from which the Mormon's first false prophet, Joseph Smith, "got some of his revelations", how does that tie in with Jesus using "parables" to teach truth and Smith using "parables" to teach blantant lies? Taleb |
||||||
12 | NIV bible | Bible general Archive 2 | Taleb | 110494 | ||
Ken John, on Sunday, at 5:08 PM, you wrote on under your number 2: “When the translators are questioned about this, they contend "this is a better translation" and are "easier to read" and "understand"? Praise the Lord! Have you never read what KJV 1611’s translation’s preface declares? In effect it stated it was not their purpose to make a new translation, but to make a good one better”. Like many today, people rejected the “new translation (KJV), claiming ” the Geneva Bible (originally printed in 1560) was the only correct one. Some of the pre-Geneva’s more than likely protested when that new fangled translation came out. I can almost hear their outcry today - “What’s the matter with Wyclif’s translation? We’ve been using that since 1384. Look what they that evil King James’ translators did with Matthew 7:1,2 “ Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged…” Then they would quote what they had memorized from Wyclif’s “Nyl yee deme, that yee be no demede, for in what dome yee demen yee schulen be demede.” But those who spoke the “king’s English” accepted KJV because it read like they spoke. Like in Luke 17:9 where KJV reads “I trow not”. ! Sam 21:3 talks about scrabbled on the doors. Numbers 20:3 “the people chode”. Gen. 8:1 ”and the waters asswaged”. Sorry, but God’s intention is to remember what Jesus said about “coming as little children” and I TROW NOT (don’t think) that any child would understand what we are CHODING (arguing) about. THAT is why updated translations, which use pre-KJV manuscripts, are so important to us today. Blessings, Taleb |
||||||
13 | NIV bible | Bible general Archive 2 | Taleb | 110501 | ||
Thanks, Hank. I read a neat book once on this topic. Before I believed the Gospel of Jesus Christ, I spent some time on skid row. In order to obtain a free bed and bowl of soup, I HAD to attend the chapel meeting. Too often I heard what sounded like gibberish, such as, “For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do. Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.” (Romans 7:19-21) Needless to say, I had absolutely no idea what they were trying to say. Had they used something like the NIV, well I wouldn’t have gone away with only a bed, supper and slip for breakfast. I would have become a believer a year earlier. “When I want to do good, I don’t. And when I try not to do wrong, I do it anyway. But if I am doing what I don’t want to do, I am not really the one doing it; the sin within me is doing it. It seems to be a fact of life that when I want to do what is right, I inevitably do what is wrong. ” I would have jumped up and shouted, “I know exactly what you are saying. I have the same problem. How do I get rid of this sin that keeps me from doing what I know is right?” Blessings, Taleb |
||||||
14 | NIV bible | Bible general Archive 2 | Taleb | 110534 | ||
TommyS, that was a good catch. I have too many Bibles too handy. I had just read from the NIV and then checked it out in the NLT. Apparently I still had the NLT open when I "copied" from it. Lke EdB wrote to CCBJ. the NLT to a good tool. Mine is a "Life Application Study Bible" and includes a lot of helps my many other study Bibles don't. Blessings, Taleb |
||||||
15 | NIV bible | Bible general Archive 2 | Taleb | 110562 | ||
Hank, a while ago I obtained a copy of “New Age Bible Versions”. This anti-modern translation book erroneously depicts that ALL translations, except the authorized King James Version, ARE satanic. It even has a hideous picture of a winged dragon on its cover. One doesn’t have to read far to discover how off the wall G.A. Riplinger is in her faulty assessment. She quickly paints a fake picture that the NASV and the NIV are the result of a conspiracy of the New Agers, preparing “Christians” to fall for the schemes of the antichrist. With misquotes and taking other authors out of context, she weaves a path that is actually destructive to the purposes of God. Then, apparently in the hopes that no one really knows what the KJV really says, she quotes verses from various new translations as her evidence. (Huh?) :) On page 17, she lists a few examples where the KJV reads Jesus and the NIV “translated” the name to “he”. What she fails to reveal is the real truth about the matter. The KJV uses the name “Jesus” 983 times. The NIV uses it 1,275 times. About halfway through the book she tries to convince her readers “We should be particularly wary when someone refers to Jesus Christ as “the Christ”. This obviously contrived attempt to “prove” they are removing the name of Jesus to make way for the antichrist flopped dead in the water - considering she failed to take into logical consideration concerning the 19 times that the KJV uses “the Christ”. I use the KJV for all my memorization work. I use the KJV for all my “word study definition work”. I use the KJV whenever I want to read Scripture out loud. But, I know that, contrary to what some bumper stickers claim, “We use the Bible that GOD uses-Authorized King James Version 1611,” God’s word is NOT KJV. Blessings, Taleb |
||||||
16 | Is the Sabbath on Saturday? | Bible general Archive 1 | Taleb | 73661 | ||
It is interesting that people today are arguing about the same things they did in the "Bible Days." Praise the Lord, He has given us Roman's 14:5-6, among many other Scriptures, that deal with the same topic. "Whether one is weak in their faith (gives preference to one day over another), or strong (esteems every day), Each person should be FULLY convinced in his OWN mind. He who observes the day, observes it with the Lord in view." Of course the rest of Romans 14 comes into play. Read it and obey it and be at peace with God and man. In Christian Love, Taleb |
||||||
17 | Is the Sabbath on Saturday? | Bible general Archive 1 | Taleb | 74132 | ||
Mr. Billy Joe, Either you accept ALL of Scripture to be inspired and acknowledge when, how and why Christians may worship on Sunday, or you ONLY believe those that tie in with your particular doctrine. With enough "Jewish blood" to have gone to the furnace in Germany, I have a certain view on "the Sabbath". If the "Jews" today KNOW the early church began to worship on Sundays during Paul's day, why can't the church 2,000 years later accept the same truth as gospel? The following is from Jewish Encyclopedia under “Sabbath”. I believe they “know” the facts better than someone who arose one morning with a “better day to worship”. “A brief consideration is desirable as to why and when the keeping of the seventh day as the Sabbath ceased among Christian churches. That Jesus and his disciples kept the seventh day, and without vital departures from Pharisaic usages, is indisputable. The question of Sabbath observance first became acute under Paul, with the rise of the non-Jewish Christian communities. The Petrine, or Judæo-Christian, party insisted on rigid adherence to the Jewish law. It scorned the looser practises of the converts from without Israel. To this Col. ii. 16 et seq. has reference; Paul protests against judging the piety of the neophytes "in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a feast-day . . . or a Sabbath-day" (R. V.). He protests with greater bitterness in Gal. iv. 9-11, where observance of days is denounced as a return to the "weak and beggarly elements." In Rom. xiv. 5 et seq. it is assumed that whether one day or another is distinguished, or whether all are regarded as equally sacred, is a matter of indifference: every man must decide for himself. Thus while the Petrine partizans continued to assemble for worship on the Sabbath (Acts ii. 1, iii. 1, et al.), in non-Jewish Christian circles the first day of the week came to be marked by longer worship than usual and by collections of gifts (I Cor. xvi. 2; comp. Acts xx. 7). The name "Lord's day" first occurs in Rev. i. 10, where it may mean the day of judgment (see Day of the Lord); it is next found in Ignatius, "Ad Magnesianos" (§ 9). Pliny testifies to the fact that the Christians assembled on "a fixed day" ("stato die"; "Epistolæ," x. 96).” (Thus ends info from Jewish Ency) I find it particularly interesting that, although most who have responded to this “problem” have used the same Scriptures as the Jews use. I doubt if anybody used this same source to back them up. They simply used the promise of the Holy Spirit to teach them truth. I might be "a little prejudice", but if anyone claims one thing and history AND Scripture proves another, I’ll go with Scripture and history every time. Sir, with all due respect, if you feel you must worship on Saturday, I will abide to what the Holy Spirit inspired Paul to write about those who are weak in faith, in Romans 14:1 and want to push their bondages etc, "Welcome the weak believer and do not criticize his views." Welcome! In His Service, Taleb |
||||||
18 | To obey or not to obey ! | Bible general Archive 1 | Taleb | 74166 | ||
EdB, I so appreciated your insight about this "question". I was wondering, when some are pushing observing the "Sabbath" on Saturdays, what do they do with all the other Sabbaths throughout the year? Do they observe them like they did in Old Testament, or like the Jews today? Like, if one of the Sabbaths that is on the first day of a given month happens to be a Tuesday, then they would have that day off. But they would have to work the next six days before the next Sabbath which made Tuesdays the Sabbath until another Sabbath would change it to whatever day the pre-chosen date happened to fall on. Does this make sense? Anyway, I was just wondering how they handle it? Peace to you and yours, Taleb |
||||||
19 | Is the Sabbath on Saturday? | Bible general Archive 1 | Taleb | 74167 | ||
CBBJ, Your kind comments caused my day to extra nice. Thank you. Taleb |
||||||
20 | To obey or not to obey ! | Bible general Archive 1 | Taleb | 74198 | ||
EdB, please remember the promise concerning “when you fall – He WILL pick you up.” Hopefully, this will too. Are you a carpenter on the side? The reason I ask, you hit every nail square on the head. Not one bounced off, nor bent. They ALL were placed in their proper position. As I read your well thought out post, a song popped into my mind. When I was young in the Lord (eons ago), we put Scripture to music. (It really helps memorize huge portions, (sort of) and we easily remember songs and jingles.) Galatians 5’s song is what “played”. If I may, I want to stand fast on that soapbox of yours. I know it will hold me, because it is solid, firm and sturdy. “Stand fast therefore in the liberty, wherein Christ has made us free, and be not entangled again in bondage. Only use not liberty as an occasion to the flesh, but with love serve one another. For the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, goodness, temperance, meekness, faith, against such there is no law. Stand fast therefore in the liberty.” In tune, Taleb |
||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [12] >> |