Results 101 - 120 of 3169
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: kalos Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
101 | What is effeminate | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 172044 | ||
Hank is quite right, of course. Had you asked what the word effeminate means as it used in a particular Bible verse, I would have replied differently than I did. However, when the question was "What is effeminate", with no biblical reference, I merely gave the ordinary definition of the English word Grace to you, Kalos |
||||||
102 | Locate a particular Bib;e | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 172415 | ||
THE OPEN BIBLE Expanded Edition, New American Standard Bible ISBN: 0529119595 Type: Bonded Leather Number of Pages: 1680 Vendor: Thomas Nelson Publication Date: 2004 Dimensions: 9.75 X 6.50 X 1.50 The quickest, most direct way to find a Bible or other book -- even better than looking up the title -- is to look up the ISBN number. Do a search for 0529119595 -- just as it is here, with no spaces and no hyphens. The best places to search are: amazon.com www.christianbook.com Google.com OR Search for Christian Life Study Outlines and Notes at Google.com |
||||||
103 | four words that appear in bible only fou | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 172428 | ||
antichrist... ...is a word used in only 4 verses of the KJV. |
||||||
104 | Only if caught in the act | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 172708 | ||
If there is a book, chapter and verse in the entire Bible that teaches a man or woman must catch their spouse in the very act of adultery before they can obtain a divorce, then I don't know where to find such a verse. Is that even in the Bible? Grace to you, Kalos |
||||||
105 | Adam born a man or baby | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 172710 | ||
Adam was not born a man or a baby. Adam was not born. He was created. Moreover, you and I were not created. We were born. Grace to you, Kalos |
||||||
106 | What does "ask the liver" mean? | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 172854 | ||
In what version of the Bible does it say "ask the liver"? Also, what is the exact verse (one verse) where it says that? Grace to you, Kalos |
||||||
107 | Is the Saved and Lost Position right? | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 173483 | ||
'B. ...what God actually does when He saves a soul. '1. He loves to the uttermost. '2. He purposes to keep in spite of everything. '3. He intends to present us faultless before Himself. '4. His Son ever lives to make intercession to keep us saved. '5. His Spirit has placed us into the Body of Christ. '6. His Spirit has sealed us until the day of redemption. '7. His Word guarantees that nothing (including ourselves) can separate us from Christ. 'In order to lose one's salvation all of these works of God would have to be undone, and THE BIBLE NOWHERE EVEN HINTS THAT THIS IS POSSIBLE. 'C. The Problem Passages. '1. Hebrews 6:4-6. If this teaches that one can lose his salvation, it also teaches that one can never be saved a second time. '2. John 15:6. Probably refers to the judgment seat of Christ. '3. James 2:14-26. Nonworking faith is not a faith that saves in the first place. '4. 2 Peter 2 and Jude are referring to false teachers, who in Jude's estimation were not true believers (Jude 19; compare Rom. 8:9). '5. Matthew 24:13. End of what? (The Great Tribulation.)' ____________________ (Scripture references for section B.) 1. John 13:1 2. John 10:28-30 3. Jude 24 4. Heb. 7:25; 1 John 2:1 5. 1 Cor. 12:13 6. Eph. 4:30 7. Rom. 8:28-39 (Charles Caldwell Ryrie, The Ryrie Study Bible, Moody Press, 1976, 1978) (Emphasis added.) |
||||||
108 | Is the Saved and Lost Position right? | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 173485 | ||
Bro Raymond: The next time someone tells you that "one can lose his salvation by taking himself out of God's hands", just ask them the following: John 10:28-29 In what version of the Bible does John 10:28-29 say: 'And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. [29] My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand, BUT WE CAN TAKE OURSELVES OUT OF GOD'S HAND'? If it is true that we can take ourselves out of God's hand, then according to verse 29, we are greater than God. Rom 8:39 In what version of the Bible does Romans 8:39 say: 'nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God, BUT WE CAN SEPARATE OURSELVES FROM HIS LOVE'? In verse 39, if man can separate himself from God's love, then man was not created. It says: "nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God." Rev 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall ADD unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: Deut. 4:2 Ye shall not ADD unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you. Grace to you, Kalos |
||||||
109 | Can name be blotted out of Lamb's book? | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 173519 | ||
God's pencil has no eraser He who overcomes shall thus be clothed in white garments; and I will not erase his name from the book of life. Revelation 3:5 "It is unfortunate that this passage in Revelation has become a focal point of controversy. The result has been a fixation on what the verse does not say rather than what it does say. This verse was never intended as a warning. Within its context there is nothing negative or foreboding about these words. In fact, it makes a strong statement in favor of eternal security. It is a passage of encouragement and praise. "The comments are directed to a group of faithful believers from the church in Sardis. Unlike the majority of the folks in their congregation, this handful of members had remained unsoiled by the world around them. The verse in question contains Christ's commendation to this group for their consistent walk. "To assume from what is said here that God will possibly erase names from the book of life is to read into the text a concept clearly not present. At best, it is an argument from silence, for the verse simply reads, "And I will not erase his name from the book of life." If this statement raises doubts for some about eternal security, they would do well to search the Scriptures for an answer. But to base one's answer to this important question on this verse is to adopt a method of study with the potential of leading to all kinds of problematic conclusions." (...) "The good news is, God's pencil has no eraser. Before you breathed your first word, God knew how you would respond to His offer of grace. According to His foreknowledge, He wrote your name in the book of life. And there it shall remain forever. Jesus said it this way: "My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow me; and I give eternal life to them, and they shall never perish; and no one shall snatch them out of My hand. John 10.27-28 "And as if that were not clear enough: "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. John 10.29 " ____________________ To read the entire article, which I suggest you do before you reply with questions, go to: www.intouch.org/myintouch/exploring/ bible_says/eternal_security/erase_149096.html At StudyBibleForum.com see also ID# 149613 or go to: www.revelationcommentary.org/03_chapter.html and read the commentary on Revelation 3:5-6. |
||||||
110 | rapture or tribulation? | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 175269 | ||
If one approaches the Bible with the preconceived idea that the rapture will occur before the 7-year tribulation, then one will likely conclude that the rapture will occur before the 7-year tribulation. That is, if one's study of the rapture passages is preceded by the premise that the rapture occurs before the tribulation, then it will be easy to interpret the Scriptures to support that notion. Grace to you, Kalos |
||||||
111 | rapture or tribulation? | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 175403 | ||
Prewrath vs. Pretrib Pretribulationalism 'Pretribulationists teach that the return of Christ has been imminent since the days of the early church and that the church will be raptured sometime before the seventieth week begins. Although they have no Scripture that in so many words teaches it, they teach that there are no signs and the rapture could take place at any moment. The seventieth week of Daniel is therefore considered to be a seven-year period of God's judgmental "tribulation" (hence the term pretribulation). This position generally views the seventieth week as the day of the Lord's wrath from which the church is excluded.' Prewrath 'The Prewrath position teaches that the true church will be raptured when the great tribulation by Antichrist, inspired by Satan, is cut short by God's day-of-the-Lord wrath, which will occur between the sixth and seventh seals of Revelation, sometime during the second half of the seventieth week. The persecution associated with the great tribulation of Antichrist is viewed as the wrath of Satan, whereas the events that follow, beginning with the seventh seal, are considered the wrath of God.' (For much more information go to the source of the above quote: www.solagroup.org. ) While I neither desire nor intend to debate the Prewrath Rapture position, I will nevertheless be happy to provide further information upon request. After all, the pre-tribbers have been having their say since the "secret" or "any moment rapture" view was picked up by Plymouth Brethren pastor John Nelson Darby, who first preached on it in 1843. It came to America in the late 1800's. Grace to you, Kalos |
||||||
112 | Prayer Request. | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 175494 | ||
I'll be praying for you. Grace to you, Kalos |
||||||
113 | who has the most accurate bible | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 175718 | ||
What do you mean? You ask: "Who has the most accurate translation of all the scripures word for word?" What do you mean? I'm not sure what your question is. Are you asking, "What is the most accurate (literal) English translation of the Bible?" The most literal would be an interlinear Bible. Grace to you, Kalos |
||||||
114 | Is this scripture? | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 175749 | ||
"That which does not kill me makes me stronger." Actually this is a quote from Rev. Eric Camden on the TV series "7th Heaven." |
||||||
115 | marriage with cousins | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 175794 | ||
Cousin marriage-no Biblical prohibition "Fact: Leviticus 18 lists all forbidden sexual relationships. Cousin relationships are not included. "Fact: God commanded many cousins to marry, including Zelophehad's 5 daughters, Eleazar's daughters, Jacob (who married both Rachel and Leah, first cousins), and Isaac and Rebekkah (first cousins once removed). All were ancestors of Jesus Christ." "There is more than one account of where God put cousins together. Read the following references in their entirety. "Isaac married Rebekkah, his first cousin once removed. Genesis 24:12-51 "Jacob married two of his cousins, Rachel and Leah. I love this story! Genesis chapters 28-29 "Zelophehad's five orphaned daughters were commanded by God to marry cousins. Numbers 36 "Eleazar's daughters each married first cousins, as they were instructed. I Chronicles 23:22 "In the 18th chapter of Leviticus, the Bible provides a lengthy list of forbidden relationships. These laws are the scriptural definition of sexual impurity. Not one mention of cousins, of any degree, is made. "Some would argue that these are all Old Testament references. That is correct. The reason for this is that the New Testament does not specifically address the rules of sexual misconduct, with the exception of fornication, other than to refer you back to the Old Testament laws. "Biblical prohibitions of cousin marriage reside only in the minds of the unlearned." (www.cousincouples.com/info/religion.shtml) |
||||||
116 | how do i love my neighbor as myself? | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 176000 | ||
Where does the Bible say we must hang out with those people who degrade us? I'm not sure that it does. Regarding those who mistreat us, the Bible teaches us to love them, pray for them, do good to them, etc. But does it say we have to hang out with them, i.e. spend a lot of time being around them? It may, but offhand I can't think of any place where it does. |
||||||
117 | where did God come from? | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 176151 | ||
You will find the teachings of Pastor David Assherick, as well as those of Ellen G. White (SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST Church), at the same website. | ||||||
118 | Testimony of hearing the Word of God | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 176247 | ||
"Do not allow yourselves to be condemned by anyone who claims to be superior because of special visions . . . For no reason at all, such people are all puffed up by their human way of thinking." Colossians 2:18 Today's English Version Like virtually all cults and false religions, the Colossian false teachers based their teaching on visions and revelations they had supposedly received. Their claims were false, since Jesus Christ is God's final and complete revelation to mankind (Heb. 1:1,2). |
||||||
119 | Elders not a pastor should lead church | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 176428 | ||
Is a home church a true Biblical church? 'Answer: Churches in the New Testament era were indeed small assemblies that met in homes. So, the practice is certainly biblically allowable. There also seem to be some good reasons to have house churches as opposed to large gatherings: greater intimacy, stronger relationships, more comfortable worship, single mindedness, etc. The fact that large churches usually have their own home groups speaks to this fact. Several considerations should be made, however, concerning the reason for doing so. 'First, the fact that first century Christians did something does not establish it as a pattern for all generations to follow (unless there is also a clear command to do so elsewhere). Simply because Scripture records an event or practice that does not, of itself, establish a command (nor, in some cases, even approval!). So, for example, the fact that early Christians often sold all they owned and shared the profits among other believers does not mean that we must do so today (although it certainly would be acceptable). So we should not think that home churches are any more "biblical" in this sense. 'Second, there was a perfectly practical reason for meeting in homes. Where else would they meet? There were no church buildings, YMCA's, grammar schools, or even movie theaters that could hold large groups. Further, even if there was room somewhere, in a time of persecution a public gathering of hundreds or thousands of people would simply not be safe. Thus, it might not have been by design that the early church met in small groups. It is even possible that they would have preferred large meetings (as Jews would have been accustomed to), but they simply could not pull it off. So we should also not think that home churches are any more "spiritual" than large churches either. 'Third, home churches that are started in an effort to counter "the institutional church" are rather suspicious. While often listing the above reasons to appear more biblical, the real reason often seems to be displeasure with large church movements. While these complaints are often valid, it can lead to an egalitarian "us vs. them" mentality that should be avoided. 'In addition to the above considerations regarding motive, one final caution concerns the issue of accountability. For Protestant churches the Bible alone is the final court of decision in matters of faith and practice. This is fine, but the fact is that few people have the time to gain the skills and knowledge to accurately handle the word of God (2 Tim. 3:14-16). In classical education theology was taught last - for it builds on many other disciplines that cannot be learned from the Bible alone. Therefore, some degree of higher education was usually sought before one becomes a teacher of the word (James 3:1). The popular view today, however, is that the Holy Spirit teaches believers directly through the Bible. This idea might lead people to believe that whatever the group teaches is from God and is therefore safe from error. But the Bible does not teach that this is the case, and it is clear that most believers disagree on at least some issues, and most simply end up "interpreting" the Bible according to their churches' teaching anyway. 'The answer to the interpretation issue requires another article, but the problem it creates becomes more ominous when dealing with home churches. The New Testament is full of warnings against heresies coming from within the church. Since it was written in the first century, these would actually be warnings regarding house churches. While this problem is certainly not limited to house churches, there is clearly no guarantee of protection from false teaching simply because the church changes its meeting format. Further, because home churches function as independent small groups, they need have no accountability to anyone but themselves. This makes it much more difficult to judge their teachings (in fact, the Jehovah's Witnesses cult began in exactly this manner). 'In conclusion, there is nothing unbiblical about Christians gathering together regularly in houses, or large buildings, or any other appropriate venue. The Bible does not, in fact, give any guidelines as to the proper gathering size or location. What it does do is explain what is to take place at those meetings (Heb. 10; Col. 3; etc.). So long as biblical teachings (orthodoxy) and practices (orthopraxy) are undertaken by those in assembly, it really does not matter what meeting format one chooses.' Source: www.gotquestions.org/home-church.html |
||||||
120 | when are kids adults | Bible general Archive 3 | kalos | 176615 | ||
Julie: Fact: No, I do not know of any reference in the Bible to an age that children should be encouraged to live on their own. Opinion: However, I do not think that in Bible times children were still single and living with their parents when, for example, they were 21 years old. I don't think they were living off their parents while working a part-time job, spending their money on a new chariot, taking no responsibility, sleeping till noon, etc. Grace to you, John P.S. How’s that for labeling my opinion AS opinion? |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ] Next > Last [159] >> |