Results 101 - 120 of 174
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: following him Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
101 | Explanation of Mat. 9:14-17 please | Matt 9:17 | following him | 121677 | ||
I believe emmaus is correct. This scripture is not refering specifically to the Holy Spirit; although that may be part of it, but the entire New Covenant. Remember this was an answer Jesus gave to the disciples of John about the way they and the pharisees did thing. Jesus essentually told them that there was going to be a new way of doing things that did not fit within the parameter of the old covenant. | ||||||
102 | God and gods? | Matt 11:11 | following him | 123264 | ||
I'm not so sure about this. As I watched the barrage (spelling?) toward ralph2. He obviously began to claim it as persecution and it only solidified in his heart he was right. The thing about being decieved is that the person being decieved doesn't know that he is. He truely believes he is right and blasting him just doesn't bring wisdom. It may be that more JW's will come on thinking they can get a little persecution and thereby moving themselves up the ranks closer to being one of the 144,000. What I think is that there is a time for everything under heaven. There is a time to cast your pearls and a time not to cast your pearls or stop casting your pearls. It is wisdom (form the Holy Spirit) that determines what to do. But whatever we do when they go away they should be going away thinking that we still loved them. Just a thought |
||||||
103 | God and gods? | Matt 11:11 | following him | 123314 | ||
Hello Tim; I've prayed and thought hard about responding to your note. For some reason it has desturbed me greatly. Please don't take this wrong. I sat on the outside and watched this whole episode of "Pointing him to the truth." I did not say that you should let them have free reign to say or teach whatever they want. My concern was how the forum responded to him. Since Bradk mentioned it here is one of the rules of the forum, " You agree to interact with each other in a Christian spirit, with respect and grace." Does this just pertaint to belivers or is everyone who logs on entitled the same respect and grace? Perhaps you should go back and reread ALL the posting toward ralph2 forget the ones he sent just look how the forum responded. If all that was pointed in my direction there is no way I would consider it love. Put yourself in his place would you consider it love. Would you consider it "pointing him to the truth." When a JW has the boldness to come to a forum like this and "strut his stuff" he is not looking to convert anyone, and the chance of converting him are practically non existent. He is only here to puff himself up and walk away with thoughts of "I did battle with the forces of darkness and have prevailed. I have come away still holding to the truth" And that is exactly what happened. The forum gave him what he wanted. He went away victorious while the christians showed themselves to be unloving and intolerant. At least thats his view. And from my vantage point he would have been right. I am not saying that you should let such a major error go unchallenged or maybe I should say unanswered or that we should tolerate false doctrine. But there has got to be a better way of responding to these guys than what I saw here. Perhaps when a JW surfaces the forum could designate one maybe two at the most people to enlighten him without drowning him in a sea of posts showing him how his beliefs are heretical etc. Perhaps you could do it, out of all the posting yours and Zsuzi's were the most curtious and respectful inspite of what ralph2 said. I have gained a great deal of respect for both of you because of this. Sincerely in love |
||||||
104 | God and gods? | Matt 11:11 | following him | 123341 | ||
I had been intending to fill it out but haven't figured out what to include. I will do so now but will probably update it later. Thank you for your patience with me. I appriciate it. |
||||||
105 | Is Hell fire literal that burns forever? | Matt 13:40 | following him | 122116 | ||
Why do you say that it is possible for us as believers to go there? | ||||||
106 | Disciples will not die | Matt 16:28 | following him | 121671 | ||
This is a difficult passage. I'm not sure about it myself, but I've heard that some believe it refers to those who witnessed the transfiguration. I been thinking it may refer to those who in visions ie Paul's vision where he saw things he could repeat and prehaps John's vision on the Island of Patmos where He did see the Lord coming into His kingdom and descibed it in the book of Revelation. Just a thought. | ||||||
107 | Matt 16:28 some and see | Matt 16:28 | following him | 127670 | ||
Tim Moran; I have a question regarding the greek in this particular scripture if you don't mind answering it? The word "some"...I looked it up myself and found that it could mean "one". Is this an acurate accessement? I see that there might be a connection to John 21:21-23 regarding John only and not refering to several people. Also the word "see" does it imply experiencing the kingdom not just watching it. If it is just a visual observation then this scripture could very well be refering to the vision John was to receive on Patmos. He indeed saw Christ coming into His kingdom in that vision. Grace to you brother |
||||||
108 | Matt 16:28 "some" and "see" | Matt 16:28 | following him | 127827 | ||
Tim; I have a question regarding the greek in Matt 16:28. The word "some"...I looked it up myself and found that it could mean "one". Is this an acurate accessement? Would this be a viable interpretaion? Is it possible that this verse Jesus is refering to John only (and the revelation given to him) and not refering to several people. Also the word "see" does it imply experiencing the kingdom not just watching it. If it is just a visual observation then this scripture could very well be refering to the vision John was to receive on Patmos. He indeed saw Christ coming into His kingdom in that vision. Grace to you |
||||||
109 | Matt 16:28 "some" and "see" | Matt 16:28 | following him | 127874 | ||
hello Tim Moran; Thank you for the insight. As you mentioned that the Kingdom was a present reality, I was reminded that many times as Jesus walked along He said that the kingdom of God was at hand and even demonstrated that same kingdom through the miracles He performed. The desciples although given authority to do many things while Jesus was with them; really received power when the Holy Spirit came upon them in Acts. This could not have happened unless Jesus had gone to be with the father. So many of those standing there not only saw the kingdom coming in power but also became the avenue through which God exercised that power to the people around them. I greatly appriciate your help brother Blessing to you. |
||||||
110 | "the generation that saw Israel become a | Matt 24:32 | following him | 122232 | ||
Matt 24:32-34. Is the reference. The fig tree is one of the trees used as a symbol of Israel. The putting forth new branches and leaves is regarded as being Israel becoming a nation once again. But it is rather ambiguous and may be refering to the signs He mentioned just prior to the parable about the fig tree. There are many OT references of Israel returning and becoming a nation again. Most of them refer to the last days. | ||||||
111 | Why did the Savior Dread the Cup? | Matt 26:38 | following him | 133125 | ||
Good Morning Doc; I think anyone with even just an incling of the horror of that type of death. Would at least have some desire to avoid it. Physical pain and suffering are, well...... painful. I wonder if I was in the same boat would I be able to say "Not my will but Yours be done" or would they take me screaming and yelling NO No No? But there is another thing that Jesus may have been suffering here as well. He knew that He had come to die on the cross and take the sins of mankind upon HImself. Did He know that in doing so it would seperate Him from the Father. "Father, why have You forsaken Me." It seems to me that this may have also been added to the weight of the physical torment that He was willing to suffer for us. All through the gosples we hear Him teach that He and the Father are one. And now that relationship was going to be severed for a little while. Good question Blessing to you Aaron |
||||||
112 | God can't die or look on sin! | Matt 27:46 | following him | 225418 | ||
Hello CDBJ; It's been years since I have posted, and have recently started looking in again and saw your posting here. In response to your question, I think it may be important to look at whose sin it was. The sin He became was not His it was ours. On the cross while dieing for our sins and taking them on Himself He was still Holy, blameless and without sin of His own. He has never committed sin and therefore is uncontaminated by carring and suffering for ours. Does this sound reasonable? God Bless Aaron Erberich |
||||||
113 | Roman guard myth? | Matt 28:11 | following him | 122145 | ||
This idea comes from Matt 28:11-15. The idea is that if the guard were temple guards then it would not have mattered what Pilot would say about their acts at the tomb. But if they were Roman then Pilot could have them put to death. This is why the chief priests assured the guards that if the matter came to Pilot they (the chief priests) would protect them. | ||||||
114 | Roman guard myth? | Matt 28:11 | following him | 122191 | ||
Hello again Norrie; along with what JCrichton explained; much of our idea that the guards were temple guards comes from how we interpret Matt 27:65 Pilate said to them, "You have a guard; go, make it as secure as you know how." We can either say Pilot was saying that they have their own guards so use them or; to use idioms of today "you want them you've got them" meaning you asked for them I will give them. The Hebrews may have had a guard for the temple to keep order there but JCrichton is correct that they certainly would not have had authority anywhere outside the temple. The Romans held absolute authority every where else. The only reason they would not interfere with the temple is because that would certainly cause dissention and possibly rebellion among the Jews. | ||||||
115 | Roman guard myth? | Matt 28:11 | following him | 122246 | ||
If it was a Roman guard they may not have reported back to Pilot because of the punishment they would face due to their failing to guard the tomb as they were supposed to and so went to the priest to insure their own survival. It is also conceivable that they would report first to the priests because it was priests who received the guards from Pilot. | ||||||
116 | Demon forbid to identify Jesus. Where? | Mark 1:34 | following him | 121921 | ||
Try Mark 1:34 | ||||||
117 | what is the simple gospel? | Mark 16:15 | following him | 123416 | ||
The word gospel means "good news" what is the good news? That God has made "A" way for us to get back to Him. Unfortunately that is also why it is difficult for most to accept. He made "A" way; singular, one, no other, And that is through Jesus Christ. John 14:6 Jesus *said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me. This bring up any one of several hinderences people have 1. It involves repentance - who likes to admit they are wrong? Especially after a lifetime of doing things wrong. 2. It is absolute. People nowdays do not believe in absolutes therefore they cant accept that Jesus is the only way. 3. People feel so guilty they cant accept that they dont have to do something to get right with God. Meaning they think that they have to earn it. They cant believe it is a free gift from God. The very simplicity of the gospel; Jesus died for your sins so that you wouldn't have to yourself. and God did it just because He loves you. Is very hard for most to accept. In their minds it just has to be more complicated. |
||||||
118 | Jesus waited until 30 to minister | Luke 3:23 | following him | 121571 | ||
The reference you gave in Numbers refers to the levites not the actual priest. The priesthood is from the house of Aaron not the house Kohath. Both are from the tribe Levi, but only Aaron and his sons can hold the priesthood. Besides Jesus is not a priest after the order of Aaron but after the order of Melchizedech. There is great deal of difference between the two. See Heb. 5:6, 8-10; and especailly Heb 7:11-28. | ||||||
119 | What is service? | Luke 12:42 | following him | 121865 | ||
Jesus defines a good servant as one who does the will of his master even when the master is not around. Read Luke 12:42-48. | ||||||
120 | What is the answer to this question? | Luke 20:4 | following him | 123340 | ||
Hello Rowdy; Baptism began in the Tabernacle that Moses set up in the wilderness (at God's direction). The priests were required to wash with water from the laver prior to putting on their priestly garments and entering into the Tabernacle. It was a requirement for them to do this before they entered into the service of God. This "maybe" what Jesus was talking about when he told John to baptise Him to fulfill all righteousness, John's baptism was one of repentance, Jesus had no sins to repent of but He was preparing to enter into the service of God and redeem man and become our high priest. The baptism of John being one of repentance was for the people a preperation for them to have their hearts turned back to God. Wasn't that his ministry, to prepare the way of the Lord? So I would have to say John's baptism was from heaven God bless |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [9] >> |