Results 1 - 20 of 819
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: flinkywood Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Why include "even" in John 1:12 | Not Specified | flinkywood | 26993 | ||
The NASB has John 1:12 "But as many as received him, to them he gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name." Even is italicized (added). Neither the NKJV nor the Holman Christian Standard Bible (NT only) includes this word. The NASB verse appears to distinguish receiving from believing, as though one could even believe in His name and still be a child of God. The NKJV and the NHCS equate the two senses. Why the difference? What gives? | ||||||
2 | Did Paul have a gospel account? | Not Specified | flinkywood | 99003 | ||
Dear Forumites, 1) Does Paul ever allude to the Gospels themselves? 2) Were there any Gospels written or extant that Paul could have consulted for his epistles? 3) If so, which? 4) If not, what could have been his primary NT sources? Colin |
||||||
3 | Did death come by Adam to the creation? | Not Specified | flinkywood | 106109 | ||
How do we square Romans 8:19-22 with the fact that the creation has been subjected to death long before the fall of Adam? Add to this the following: "For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead." (1Co 15:21) Does this verse mean death for all things or just man alone? Colin |
||||||
4 | How did Paul understand salvation? | Not Specified | flinkywood | 114668 | ||
Hank, I'm posting this as a general question. Your verses helped. Let me get the ball rolling and see where it leads. The question of whether salvation is guaranteed is moot because God has promised it: Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. (Joh 5:24) …and “I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand. "My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand. "I and the Father are one." (John 10:28-30) But is that guarantee categorical or contingent? Can we forfeit our salvation? Jesus also says, "He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me; and he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and will disclose Myself to him…” (John 14:21) …that the one who loves Him will keep His commandments and, "…he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our abode with him. He who does not love Me does not keep My words” (John 14:23,24). If we don’t keep His commandments we evidence our disdain for Him and His word, and both He and the Father will not abide in us, apparently. That doesn’t mean the Holy Trinity moves out, but that we must be made a fit abode by abiding reciprocally in our Holy Tenants (John 15.5). It follows that our faith consists in our love for Him and obedience to His word. Faith requires our willingness to do His will; otherwise our faith is dead (James 2), without which we can’t please God (Heb 11.6). In the family of God we’re free to reject His love and our promised eternal life through sin. In God’s family we’re free to be prodigal. Did Peter understand salvation as a done deal irrespective of subsequent prodigality? In Acts 8:20-21 Peter’s rebukes Simon, a baptized believer, for his apostasy: “But Peter said to him, "May your silver perish with you… for your heart is not right with God.” (Act 8:20). Peter warns Simon that he stands to lose his salvation unless he “…repent of this wickedness… and pray the Lord that, if possible, the intention of your heart may be forgiven you.” v.22 Peter’s rebuke accords with a clear understanding that salvation is both progressive, “Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure…” (2Pe 1:10) and contingent: “For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and are overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. For it would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn away from the holy commandment handed on to them. (2Pe 2:20-21) Could Peter have written this without Simon in mind? Could Paul have understood salvation any differently from Peter? “for if you are living according to the flesh, you must die; but if by the Spirit you are putting to death the deeds of the body, you will live.” (Rom 8:13) Paul is talking about spiritual death, since we’re all bound to die physically. Colin |
||||||
5 | The gates of hell... | Not Specified | flinkywood | 135396 | ||
To all: A Protestant pastor I know once described the Catholic Church as "the devil's perfect masterpiece." I overheard another pastor of a large church describe Catholicism as "a garment of Bayblon". The current ugliness in this forum between Dalcent and Doctrinesograce is sickening. Could someone please put it in context? Where does it come from? Is it historical? Doctrinal? What is its essence, and what's it doing in the body of Christ? | ||||||
6 | Luther and Aquinas | Not Specified | flinkywood | 142591 | ||
I'm reading Martin Luther. How might Luther have responded to Thomas Aquinas’ statement, “God who created you without your cooperation will not save you without your cooperation”? (from Sermon 169,11) Colin |
||||||
7 | Who saved James, Hebrews and Revelation? | Not Specified | flinkywood | 143770 | ||
Hi, Tim, Kalos, Doc, EdB, the thread I prepared this study for has been restricted. I don’t know why, so I’m placing it here so it won’t go to waste. My question comes at the end. I thank Kalos for his excellent link to “The OT Testament Apocrypha Controversy”, by Don Closson. Tim You make 4 strong arguments (id #143427) against including the Apocryphal books in the “Inspired” OT canon. 1-2) I don’t think a “lack of agreement” among those few early LXX manuscripts impugns their inspired status any more than it does our current “Protestant” canon which, after all, derives from myriad extant and often dissimilar manuscripts. 3) Yes, Paul’s citations of these books can’t automatically make Scripture of them. By the same token, however, Paul’s non-citation of others can’t automatically render those “mere works of man”. In other words, NT Apostolic quotation doesn’t equal inspiration, or lack thereof. 4) That the early church fathers disagreed on canonicity may not be so decisive since Jerome himself ultimately acceded to the Catholic Church’s authority in the matter and even defended them as inspired (“Against Rufinas” 11:33; http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/2710.htm). How do we judge the inspired status of these books? What settles the question for me is that Jesus Himself made reference to the Apocrypha in a typological (i.e. pointing to Himself) way. One reference in particular should suffice. Jesus and His Apostles observed Hanukkah (John 10:22-36), which is recorded as divinely established only in 1 and 2 Maccabees and never mentioned in any other OT book. On the day of the Feast, Jesus says: "Is it not written in your Law, 'I said, you are gods'? If he called them gods to whom the word of God came--and Scripture cannot be broken-- do you say of him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world, 'You are blaspheming,' because I said, 'I am the Son of God'”? (Joh 10:34-36 ESV). Jesus while standing near the Temple during the Feast of Hanukkah speaks of his being “consecrated” (“separated from a common to a sacred use” Websters), just as Judas Maccabeus “consecrated” the Temple 1 Macc 4:36-59 and 2 Macc 10:1-8. Jesus made a deliberate and direct connection in the minds of his Jewish hearers with the Feast and the account of it in the “apocryphal” Maccabees 1-2 as a foreshadowing or “type” of His own consecration by the Father. Just as Jesus taught His disciples to read the OT typologically (John 5:39) in the Manna (Joh 6:32-33; Exodus 16:4); the Bronze Serpent (John 3:14; Num 21:4-9), and in Jacob’s Ladder (John 1:51; Gen 28:12), here He clearly accords the same status of divine inspiration of these other accounts to this Self-reference in the Books of Maccabees. Christ does not distinguish these 2 “apocryphal” books from any other inspired book of the OT nor, apparently, did His Apostles. These books appear to be canon-worthy. Some observations from my studies. 1) Protestant scholarship suffers from suspicion of anything Catholic. This is a terrible fault on our part as Protestants as I’m increasingly finding the Catholic Church, though freaky at times, to be an immense, supernatural, exegetical resource. We all could open our tidy little minds a bit in this regard. 2) Very, very few, both Catholic and Protestant, seem to know any Church history at all. For example, did you know we nearly lost James, Hebrews, Jude and Revelation to Martin Luther’s redaction of the NT? I’ve heard, but haven’t found the primary source, that only an “accident of history” saved these books, which begs my closing question: How were these NT books saved from the Apocalypse of Apocrypha? Colin |
||||||
8 | Adieu, Forumites. | Not Specified | flinkywood | 143774 | ||
Dearest Forumites, It's been a good four years amongst you. I've learned loads within these digital walls. I'll be logging off, now. Thanks, adieu. Colin |
||||||
9 | To turn, or not to turn? | Not Specified | flinkywood | 193548 | ||
Dear Forumites, Dietrich Bonhoeffer was hanged by the Nazis for plotting to kill Hitler. In light of verses like Luke 6:29: "To one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also," and Matt 5:39, is there scriptural justification for a Christian to murder a tyrant? |
||||||
10 | Who is the Bride of Christ? | Bible general Archive 4 | flinkywood | 206277 | ||
The expression “Bride of Christ” is figurative and is found only once, in so many words, in the NT: For I feel a divine jealousy for you, since I betrothed you to one husband, to present you as a pure virgin to Christ. (2Co 11:2) As a Church we are a betrothed to Christ insofar as we have become “one flesh” in Christ: "Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." (Eph 5:31) Which is cited from: Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh. (Gen 2:24) If, as Paul states, we are betrothed to Christ, then in a sense we have been formed from Christ, the New Adam, as Eve was bride-formed from the rib of the First Adam. This is a function of the Cross, when Christ merged 2 men into one: …by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace, and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility. (Eph 2:15-16). This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. (Eph 5:32) |
||||||
11 | ... | Bible general Archive 4 | flinkywood | 218484 | ||
Humility, If you don't like strip clubs, don't go. If these "friends" really cared for you they'd "chill" with you. Here's permission from the Man himself: "Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you." (Mat 7:6 KJVA) |
||||||
12 | ... | Bible general Archive 4 | flinkywood | 218488 | ||
Azure, I advise against stip clubbing. | ||||||
13 | ... | Bible general Archive 4 | flinkywood | 218490 | ||
I've liked some Mormons I've met, but I won't go to temple with them. | ||||||
14 | ... | Bible general Archive 4 | flinkywood | 218492 | ||
It's common-sense: If you don't want fleas, keep out of fleabags. | ||||||
15 | Why did Eve react like that? | Bible general Archive 4 | flinkywood | 218517 | ||
Doc, There are many "problem verses" (as my pastor once phrased it) in the bible that the Evangelists deliberately included w/o any apparent interpretive key or associated scripture. Take John 20:23, for ex: And when He had said this, He breathed on them, and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained." (Joh 20:22-23 NKJV) Jesus appears to give these men divine authority to forgive or retain sins, heretofore the prerogative of God alone. If we are constrained by the rule of "explicity", as you state it, we are left with 2 options: either John the Apostle deliberately left us conjecture-less, or there existed a tradition, perhaps lost, perhaps not, with which his readers were familar but of which we're unaware. It seems that we must conjecture in order to discover what did provide the interpretive framework for this verse. In other words, it appears that in some cases the NT presupposes a contemporary knowledge, tradition or practice within the early church, a background to render intelligible certain verses like the above; otherwise, and according to your formulation, wouldn't John be violating Sola Scriptura by corraling us into conjecture rather than clarity? |
||||||
16 | Why did Eve react like that? | Bible general Archive 4 | flinkywood | 218525 | ||
Doc, I'm referring to a Calvary Bible Church pastor, not to a priest. Priests tend to know little about the bible. And I don't mean to be provocative. I mean to say that conjecture or speculation can either spur fruitful inquiry or harden untenable assumptions. Shouldn't we investigate the history, literature and lifeways of OT and NT Israel in order to understand and interpret scripture? |
||||||
17 | Why did Eve react like that? | Bible general Archive 4 | flinkywood | 218526 | ||
You may be referring to Doc's response, not mine. | ||||||
18 | The Problem with WoF in a nutshell | Bible general Archive 2 | flinkywood | 95131 | ||
Jim, I was led to the Lord in a small bible study led by a man who claimed a direct line to the Holy Spirit. One morning he actually announced that the Sprit had told him there were 2 thieves, not one, on either side of Jesus. I was a young Christian and though this, among other, equally fantastic assertions, struck me as false, I nevertheless held onto it until I left this group and began to seriously study and trust the written word. I was also baptized Catholic at a young age, and through time grew to loathe organized religion and what I imagined as the Christian (read "Catholic") concept of God, sin, hell, redemption, etc. I even cursed God to my Christian brother in the vilest language I could muster, so I'm a case study on how God can use a false prophet or a heretic to save a wretch like me. In writing this I realize He even used my own vanity, my own craving for exclusive knowledge (because I'm better than most), to break through my stubborn, thick hide. (I'm reminded how He used the Devil himself for Job's edification). So I stand as an example of your thesis, and it's plain that love for Jesus, the Father, our neighbors are the heart of it all; but I also believe in calling heresy heresy, don't you? Especially in context of a Christian forum. I speak here of anyone who would deny or quasi-deny the deity of Jesus (JW's, Mormons and their ilk) in sleight-of-hand attempts to destroy the work of the cross and the nascent sprit life of young believers. (You are new to this forum; there's plenty of that here). Yes, God works among the Mormons and JW's (in very mysterious ways!), so I believe it's our job to slap them around a bit. I speak as a former slapee. Colin |
||||||
19 | How to "win the world" ? | Bible general Archive 2 | flinkywood | 95314 | ||
ApostoloB, You've posted 3 times in this forum, initially with a warning to "be careful not to condemn brothers who are preaching Jesus, and Him crucified." Several forum regulars have queried you about this post, but you've not responded. It sounds as if you meant to say something edifying about judging fellow Christians, so I'd like very much to hear your thoughtful answers. Also since you began with a warning and, more recently, with the sweeping declaration, "The Body of Christ will never function as God intended until these discrepencies have been corrected", I ask, 1) What "discrepencies" 2) What do you know about God's intentions for the Body of Christ that God doesn't know already? 3) According to what you've "taught", at what point can a believer "be considered a member of the Body of Christ"? You raise intriguing questions about the nature of your belief. How do you answer? Colin. |
||||||
20 | Re-inventing the Wheel | Bible general Archive 2 | flinkywood | 96630 | ||
Hank, "Paul, called to be an apsotle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother, unto the church of God which is at (studybibleforum.com)...I I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind, and in the same judgment. For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of (certain, unspecified, Forum user ID's), that there are contentions among you. Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name. And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other. For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men. For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to naught things that are: That no flesh should glory in his presence. But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption: That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord", not in some cruddy credo contest... (1Co 1:1-31, redacted) Just a follow-up to your spot-on note. Colin. |
||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [41] >> |