Results 121 - 140 of 1309
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Radioman2 Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
121 | What is the third toe on the left foot? | Dan 2:41 | Radioman2 | 100286 | ||
Congratulations! You have answered the question correctly in every detail. I nominate you for "Best Prophecy Expert of the forum." Certainly what you have posted here makes as much sense as 99 percent of the prophecy speculation posted on this forum. --Radioman2 |
||||||
122 | Who is "they" in 2 Tim 4:3-4 ? | 2 Thess 2:11 | Radioman2 | 100283 | ||
Question: Who is "they" in 2 Tim 4:3-4 ? Answer: people. For the time is coming when [PEOPLE] will not tolerate (endure) sound and wholesome instruction, but, having ears itching [for something pleasing and gratifying], they will gather to themselves one teacher after another to a considerable number, chosen to satisfy their own liking and to foster the errors they hold, AMPLIFIED 2 Timothy 4:3 (emphasis added) |
||||||
123 | Prophetic perfect tense in other verses? | Ps 102:16 | Radioman2 | 99816 | ||
Tara1: No one uses the NWT except the JW's. JW's on the other hand will use nothing else! Of the NWT you write: "I've yet to come across a better Bible version." Just off the top of my head, I can think of at least 30 Bible versions that are better than the NWT: KJV ASV RSV NASB ESV NIV NKJV TEV CEV GOD's WORD Translation HCSB NLT NAB The Message Amplified Bible The NET Bible (New English Translation) 21st Century King James Version Worldwide English (NT) Young's Literal Translation Darby Translation Wycliffe New Testament Third Millenium Bible NRSV Douay-Rheims Bible Jerusalem Bible New English Bible New Century Version World English Bible Young's Literal Translation Weymouth New Testament --Radioman2 |
||||||
124 | Snatch? | Hebrews | Radioman2 | 99801 | ||
Security of the Believer (Backsliding) [All of the following is a direct quote from the web page (http://ag.org/top/beliefs/christian_doctrines/gendoct_09_security.cfm). The article has been edited solely to fit within space limitations.] What is the Assemblies of God position on the security of the believer's salvation? ...We believe it is possible for a person once saved to turn from God and be lost again... In view of the biblical teaching that the security of the believer depends on a living relationship with Christ (John 15:6); in view of the Bible's call to a life of holiness (1 Peter 1:16; Hebrews 12:14); in view of the clear teaching that a man may have his part taken out of the Book of Life (Revelation 22:19); and in view of the fact that one who believes for a while can fall away (Luke 8:13); The General Council of the Assemblies of God disapproves of the unconditional security position which holds that it is impossible for a person once saved to be lost. ( . . . ) The Assemblies of God leans toward Arminianism, though it accepts scriptural truth found in both positions. We agree with the Calvinist emphasis on God's sovereignty or supreme power and authority. But we also firmly believe the Arminian emphasis on mankind's free will and responsibility for his actions and choices. We believe the Bible teaches both truths. "Eternal security," according to Calvinists, means "once saved, always saved." The key passage for this position is John 10:28,29— "No one can snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand." There is great assurance in this passage and in Romans 8:35,39—"Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? . . . Neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord." The Assemblies of God also stands on these wonderful truths knowing we need not fear that something external will overpower us and take away our salvation. Only our willful choices can do that. But because we are creatures with free wills, we must be vigilantly on guard because the enemy of our soul, the devil, "prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour. Resist him, standing firm in the faith" (1 Peter 5:8,9). In our Fellowship we believe carelessness can lead to apathy, apathy to neglect, and neglect to a conscious decision to sin. We often refer to this spiritual decline as backsliding. We believe one who backslides is in danger of losing his salvation if the individual persists in rejecting the Spirit's call to repentance and restoration. Luke 8:13 makes clear the fact that believers can lose their salvation. It says some "believe for a while, but in the time of testing they fall away." Revelation 22:19 says "If anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life, and in the holy city." Certainly there are true Christians who believe and teach Calvinism; there are also true Christians who believe and teach that men and women have free will. Unfortunately, both sides have spent more time arguing doctrinal terminology and interpretations of theology than reaching out to a lost world. The irony of the disagreement is that Calvinists, who believe in predestination, are sometimes more active in witnessing and evangelism than Arminians who believe that man has a free will and should be encouraged to accept Christ as Savior. God, of course, looks on the heart and the actions rather than on the eloquence with which one defends a position. CONCERNS: Although the Assemblies of God adheres basically to the Arminian position on the spiritual security of the believer, there are extremes and potential abuses which must be avoided. The Christian life is not a roller coaster of Sunday salvation and Monday through Saturday backsliding. On the other hand, no Christian, no matter how spiritual, can claim perfection and sinlessness (1 John 1:8-10; 2:1). Therefore as Christians we must continually come to God sincerely asking His forgiveness for living below the potential He makes possible through the gift of His Holy Spirit. The truth of God's marvelous and free grace has sadly led some to imagine and indulge in a cheap grace, a grace that covers all sins with no need to live a holy life. Such an attitude is an insult to the great price Christ paid to purchase our salvation. Though we may fail and fall, and sometimes sin, the heart of the true believer always regrets, repents, asks forgiveness, and seeks never to sin that way again. To carelessly participate in sin, expecting to gain forgiveness later, is itself an act of backsliding that will lead ultimately to losing one's salvation. We therefore reject any "once saved, always saved" doctrine that excuses sinful lifestyles. |
||||||
125 | where to look next time? | 1 Cor 6:18 | Radioman2 | 99599 | ||
Kingdom Interlinear Translation 'In 1969 the Watchtower [Bible and Tract Society] published "The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures," presenting "a literal word-for-word translation" of the Westcott and Hort Greek text, together with the Revised Edition of the "New World Translation of the Christian Creek Scriptures." A preface entitled "By Way of Explanation" says that the literal interlinear English translation is designed to show what the Greek says "without any sectarian religious coloration". The first edition numbered 500,000 copies.' www.holybible.com/resources/Trinitarian/article_67.htm --Radioman2 |
||||||
126 | Evidence against authenticity 1 John 5:7 | 1 John 5:7 | Radioman2 | 99597 | ||
Jehonadab: Thank you for posting this additional information re 1 John 5:7. --Radioman2 |
||||||
127 | why God denied cain's offering not ables | Bible general Archive 2 | Radioman2 | 99454 | ||
Where would Cain get a copy of the first-century Letter to the Romans? | ||||||
128 | KJV vs "New Age Bible Versions"? | 2 Tim 3:16 | Radioman2 | 99253 | ||
mkm9: My sincere thanks to you for providing this information. Grace to you, Radioman2 |
||||||
129 | KJV vs "New Age Bible Versions"? | 2 Tim 3:16 | Radioman2 | 98978 | ||
Apparently the goal of some on this forum is contained in the first part of the verse: "I determined to know nothing." And they have succeeded. | ||||||
130 | KJV vs "New Age Bible Versions"? | 2 Tim 3:16 | Radioman2 | 98905 | ||
If you are of that opinion...remain so ____________________ "It seems odd, that certain men who talk so much of what the Holy Spirit reveals to themselves, should think so little of what he has revealed to others." ____________________ "In order to be able to expound the Scriptures, and as an aid to your pulpit studies, you will need to be familiar with the commentators: a glorious army, let me tell you, whose acquaintance will be your delight and profit. Of course, you are not such wiseacres as to think or say that you can expound Scripture without assistance from the works of divines and learned men who have labored before you in the field of exposition. If you are of that opinion, pray remain so, for you are not worth the trouble of conversion, and like a little coterie who think with you, would resent the attempt as an insult to your infallibility. It seems odd, that certain men who talk so much of what the Holy Spirit reveals to themselves, should think so little of what he has revealed to others. " - C. H. Spurgeon --Radioman2 |
||||||
131 | KJV vs "New Age Bible Versions"? | 2 Tim 3:16 | Radioman2 | 98902 | ||
DL5: It seems that it is you yourself who does not know or care about anything that anyone else is talking about. Why study Hebrew or Greek or even English, when we can all bask in the light of your many opinions? --Radioman2 |
||||||
132 | KJV "inspired"?? | 1 John 5:7 | Radioman2 | 98778 | ||
Makarios: Please do post the translators' preface to the KJV. I would truly enjoy reading it. As you know, I love (but do not hold as perfect) the KJV. Grace to you, Radioman2 |
||||||
133 | IS YOUR MODERN TRANSLATION CORRUPT? | 2 Tim 3:16 | Radioman2 | 98777 | ||
IS YOUR MODERN TRANSLATION CORRUPT? Answering the Allegations of KJV Only Advocates by James R. White 'Summary 'King James Version Only advocates argue that all modern translations of the New Testament are based on Greek manuscripts that contain intentional doctrinal corruptions. However, an examination of the most important manuscripts underlying these translations demonstrates that such charges are based more upon prejudice than fact. The papyri finds of the last century, together with the great uncial texts from the fourth and fifth centuries A.D., do not deprecate the deity of Christ, the Trinity, or salvation by grace through faith. Modern translations, such as the NIV and NASB, are not "corrupt" but instead trustworthy and useful translations of the Word of God. (...) 'The importance of the topic should not be underestimated. While the vast majority of conservative Christian scholars completely reject the KJV Only position, the emotionally charged rhetoric of KJV Only advocates causes unnecessary concerns among many believers. It is a sad truth that most Christians have only a vague knowledge of the history of the Bible and almost no knowledge of the mechanisms by which the Bible has come to us today. Issues regarding the transmission of the text over time (the process of copying), the comparison of one written text to another (textual criticism), and translation are not popular topics of discussion or study in the church today. Therefore, the claims of KJV Only advocates are liable to deeply trouble many Christians, even to the point of causing them to question the reliability and usefulness of their NIV or NASB Bibles. When believers are wrongly led to doubt the integrity of the translation they have used for years, Christian scholars have a responsibility to set the record straight. 'Moreover, there is a real desire on the part of many to hold to the "old ways" — the "traditions" of the "good ol’ days" when things were so much better than they are today. Since many believers distrust anything connected with the term "modern," for them the KJV becomes an icon of what was "good" about the past, and modern translations end up representing everything that is wrong with today’s church. 'Is there any weight to the charges being made against the manuscripts used by modern translations? Should one distrust modern translations? Those are the questions we must answer.' ------------- To read this entire article, go to (www.equip.org/free/DK115.htm) IS YOUR MODERN TRANSLATION CORRUPT? Answering the Allegations of KJV Only Advocates Also recommended, James White's book: "The King James Only Controversy: Can You Trust The Modern Translations?" James R. White/Bethany House Publishers/1995 (Type: Trade Paperback) |
||||||
134 | KJV vs "New Age Bible Versions"? | 2 Tim 3:16 | Radioman2 | 98776 | ||
KJV vs "New Age Bible Versions"? 'STATEMENT DB015 'A Summary Critique: New Age Bible Versions G. A. Riplinger (A. V. Publications, 1993) by H. Wayne House 'Another book against modern versions of the Bible has entered the marketplace. Like previous works by King James Version (KJV)-only advocates, it argues for the KJV and/or majority text-type as being truer to the original manuscripts than the modern critical Greek texts and their underlying textual traditions. It goes beyond previous works, however, by developing a conspiracy theory for the KJV-only view. Author G. A. Riplinger believes that lying behind modern versions (especially the NASB and NIV, apparently) is New Age influence. 'Until the late 19th century, the texts used by scholars generally were built on a manuscript tradition begun in the seventh century of the Christian era (though I would concede that some readings found in this tradition date back before the fourth century). With the discovery of older Greek manuscripts, and other New Testament manuscripts, critical texts began to be built on manuscripts developed in the fourth and fifth centuries — in addition to a number of ancient papyri, some of which date into the second century. Riplinger rejects these earlier manuscripts and urges us to return to the Bible of the precritical era. 'If there is anything good to say about Riplinger’s New Age Bible Versions (hereafter NABV), it is that the book is not any longer than it is and that the foolishness of its various claims are transparent when one takes the time to study them. Unfortunately, NABV has received considerable praise from many popular authors who either did not really take the time to evaluate the book or apparently share Riplinger’s ignorance of the issues of textual criticism and translation. 'NABV is replete with logical, philosophical, theological, biblical, and technical errors. Riplinger lacks the proper training to write this book (her MA. and M.F.A. in “Home Economics” notwithstanding). Many of her errors arise from a lack of understanding of Old and New Testament textual criticism as well as biblical and theological studies. In a two-hour debate I had with her, I found her very able to articulate her position. But she repeatedly mispronounced terms used by biblical scholars and did not seem to understand the development of the textual tradition from the Byzantine/“majority” manuscripts to the Erasmian text used by the translators of the KJV. Moreover, I had to ask her four times before she hesitatingly admitted that she really could not read Greek. 'A seminary degree is not required to understand the matters of Bible transmission and translation. But one must learn the history and methodology of textual transcription and transmission, and gain a good grasp of the Hebrew and Greek languages, before one “pontificates” on the subject as Riplinger has done. Simply comparing the KJV with the NIV and NASB through endless charts does not prove a thing. She needs to demonstrate that the specific translations she accepts are really better textual renditions than the alternatives she rejects, rather than merely assuming the superiority of the majority text type or the KJV. 'I have no personal interest in defending the NIV or NASB. I prefer to use the NKJV (New King James Version), though I adopt a more eclectic view of textual criticism than its translators, who hold to the majority text theory. (...) 'The bottom line in Riplinger’s mind is that the King James Version of 1611 is alone the Word of God. Anything prior to or after that specific translation is in some measure not really the Word of God. We are back to the absurd view that the KJV is the Bible of Paul and the apostles. 'A volume the size of NABV would be required to point out Riplinger’s misunderstanding of theology, translation technique, and her fascination with New Age conspiracy and its association with modern versions. This book will cause a temporary stir. Hopefully, however, most Christians will recognize NABV as an ill-begotten book and will turn back to a study of the Word of God in the language of the people today. In so doing they will fulfill the prayers of godly translators of centuries past, including the very ones who translated the King James Version of the Bible.' — H. Wayne House H. Wayne House, author, lecturer, and professor-at-large at Simon Greenleaf University School of Law, holds earned doctorates in theology and law, and a master’s degree in biblical and patristic Greek. [This article has been edited to fit here within space limitations. To read the entire article, see (www.equip.org/free/DB015.htm)] --Radioman2 |
||||||
135 | Who being over all? | Rom 9:5 | Radioman2 | 98771 | ||
Ray: I do not want you to think that I wasn't intending to answer your question. My time on the Internet has been extremely limited in the past several days. I need time to compose a reply to your question. I will answer it soon. Take care. Your brother in Christ, Radioman2 |
||||||
136 | Why would you include 1 John 5:7? | 1 John 5:7 | Radioman2 | 98641 | ||
It is impossible to either take away or put back a verse that was never there to begin with. --Radioman2 |
||||||
137 | put 1Jn 5:7 BACK where it belongs! | 1 John 5:7 | Radioman2 | 98628 | ||
Is the KJV the Bible of the Apostle Paul? Are we back to the absurd view that the KJV is the Bible of Paul and the apostles? Many people, such as the KJV-Only advocates, are scared to death that someone might get hold of a so-called corrupt Bible translation that will somehow deceive them into committing apostasy or heresy. The inspiration of the Bible, the Trinity, the deity of Christ, the incarnation, the atonement, God's plan of salvation, the Second Coming of Christ, etc. can be proven using the KJV, NKJV, NIV, ASV, RSV, NASB, or any number of other translations. The idea that the same passage in one version will be translated to have an opposite meaning in another verison is pure nonsense. I see no need for people to become hysterical in their fierce opposition to this translation or their fanatical defense of that translation. Moreover, the differences in the wording of various translations is due more to the aim of the translators (to produce a word-for-word or thought-for thought translation) than to differences in the underlying Greek texts, which are minor. --Radioman2 |
||||||
138 | IS there any answers out there? | NT general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 98623 | ||
'The Prayer of Jabez, a book based on a passage in the Old Testament , has sold four million copies in America with the message that greed is Godly It is a message that has struck a welcome chord with both well-to-do and cash-strapped Americans: greediness is next to Godliness. That is why a slim volume has sold four million copies - even more, in some states, than Bridget Jones's Diary. 'The Prayer of Jabez has been the publishing sensation of the year, which is unusual for a work of biblical exposition - especially one that deals with Chronicles, a stretch of the Old Testament as arid and hard to cross as the Gobi Desert. 'Of course, there is a gimmick: Jabez prayed for more cows, more sheep and more land; and by updating his prayer, modern Americans believe they will get more money. 'It has worked for the author, Bruce H. Wilkinson, an Atlanta evangelist whose organisation ''Walk Thru the Bible'' has grown steadily for the past 30 years: he claims it is represented in 40 countries.' Please Lord, make me rich, The Times (England), May 10, 2001 ____________________ (www.apologeticsindex.org/p12.html) --Radioman2 |
||||||
139 | But I Ain't No Roman! | NT general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 98299 | ||
Hank: You have did a write good job of summarizing the Theolowjee of the latest Lone Ranger Internet Bible Expert. I 'preciate what you writ when you said: "..some of the Apostles that the Epistles wrote has done got lost. God don't seem able to keep up with His books somehow..." To quote kalos, the oft heard about, but seldom seen sage of the Forum: "There are no lost books of the Bible. God is the author of the Bible and He doesn't lose His books. --kalos" --Radioman2 |
||||||
140 | And what about those who will die before | NT general Archive 1 | Radioman2 | 98297 | ||
Hank: Good observation! :-) To whom it may concern, my next question: How is it that Paul and James can both contradict each other and not contradict each other at the same time? Maybe I should ask Nostradamus, Shirley MacLaine, or Stephen King. --Radioman2 |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ] Next > Last [66] >> |