Results 141 - 160 of 6970
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Hank Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
141 | Oxford Study vs Oxford Annotated Bibles | 2 Tim 2:15 | Hank | 204252 | ||
Yes, the Thompson Chain is a good resource indeed. The only fault I find with it is that along about the time I hit 65 years old, I noticed that the size of the print had become remarkably smaller. But it wasn't the Thompson Chain only whose print had the shrinks. So I decided to buy one of these 'talking Bibles' to give my eyes a rest. But guess what? The guy doing the narrating on the talking Bible had a real problem. Not only did he mumble a lot but he didn't seem able to raise his voice much above a whisper. You'd think they would get somebody to make the recording who didn't have such speech impediments. I had to turn my hearing aids up before I could make out what the poor guy was mumbling about. If they'd quit shrinking the print, and start talking above a whisper and cut out the mumbling, I'd be a whole lot happier. --Hank | ||||||
142 | Oxford Study vs Oxford Annotated Bibles | 2 Tim 2:15 | Hank | 204244 | ||
Dear Elaine :: You asked whether you should get the Oxford Study Bible (RSV) or the New Oxford Annotated Bible (NSRV), or both. How about neither? ..... There are better and more conservative study Bibles and truer translations available than either of these. Here are some recommendations for your consideration. ..... The MacArthur Study Bible, available in either the NASB or NKJV ..... The Reformation Study Bible, in the English Standard Version (ESV), edited by R. C. Sproul .... The King James Study Bible, published by Nelson ..... Ryrie Study Bible, in the King James or the New American Standard (NASB) ..... The Believer's Study Bible, edited by W. A. Criswell, (NKJV), published by Thomas Nelson. ....... I recommend any of these Study Bibles over either of the Oxfords and the Harper-Collins; and any of the translations over the RSV and NRSV. --Hank | ||||||
143 | KJV question | Gen 34:19 | Hank | 203870 | ||
Dear Lookin :: To Thomas you write, "Nice to find someone else that keeps to a KJV only opinion." Evidently you read into Thomas' writings something I'm unable to find, for there is nothing in them that leads me to believe that he holds to a King James Only view. But from the "someone else" wording that you used, I incline to infer that you subscribe to the view commonly held by the advocates of the King James Only notion. But none of the points that have been advanced by the King James Only group in regard to the KJV's divine inspiration resulting in its infallibility as a translation, or its unique position of superiority and singular trustworthiness among all other English translations, are in any manner corroborated by the translators themselves in their preface called "The Translators to the Reader" which appeared in the original 1611 printing of the Authorized (King James) Version. In it the translators make no grandiloquent claims for their work such as the devotees to the King James Only position ascribe to it. On the contrary, they write in their preface, "We affirm and avow that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English set forth by men of our profession containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God, as the King's speech which he uttered in Parliament, being translated into French, Dutch, Italian and Latin, is still the King's speech, though it be not interpreted by every translator with the like grace..." ..... I would venture to judge that not everyone who subscribes to the King James Only persuasion has heard of, let alone read, this preface that was appended to the publication of the Authorized Version in 1611, though it seems perfectly obvious that all who are tempted to espouse the King James Only position ought to read it and study it carefully before casting their lot with this group. Sadly, only a few editions of the King James Bible contain this preface called "The Translators to the Reader." Virtually all the King James Bibles published by the Cambridge University Press do have it. This preface is not to be confused with the dedicatory to King James which begins with "To the most high and mighty prince..." ..... Language has been of keen interest to me for many years, and it would follow, I suppose, that an equally keen interest in Bible translations would be a natural and logical by-product. Hence, I've done considerable reading on the subject and of particular interest to me has been the curious position taken by that group of Bible readers who have of late commonly been known as King James Onlyists. I've read with a mind as open as I can make it the reasons they set forth as cogent in support of their position. But I have found them essentially groundless and unconvincing. And in the process of foraging about in an effort to find something that has even the palest similitude of proof for their outrageous position, they cast some very mean and vacuous ad hominem slurs against the translators of some of the most accurate of the newer versions of the Bible in modern English -- which is something, I submit, that the gentle and venerable translators of the King James Bible would never do. --Hank | ||||||
144 | How do we get saved, by baptism? | Eph 2:8 | Hank | 203719 | ||
Hi, Tamara :: Thanks for your question and welcome to SBF. You asked, "How do we get saved, by baptism?" The Bible is very clear in its teaching that salvation is of God, wholly of God, from start to finish. It is never gained upon man's merit or his works. It is by God's grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. It is based not on what man can do but on what Christ did; upon the basis of His finished work on the cross, the merit of His shed blood. Scripture references: Ephesians 1:4-7; John 1:12; Ephesians 2:8-10; 1 Peter 1:18,19. --Hank | ||||||
145 | alcohol scripturally wrong? | Eph 5:18 | Hank | 203708 | ||
Hi, Hoppy :: As pertains to the use of tobacco (and the misuse of alcohol), in our time we are also dealing with a medical problem. I dare to posit that had Charles Spurgeon been privy to the current knowledge of the medical aspects of smoking and the pronounced addictive property of nicotine that is common knowledge in our time, he would have ceased to smoke his beloved cigars. Many years ago I read some of these dissertations of Spurgeon upon cigar smoking as well as the remonstrances of his non-smoking friends. Evidently it made quite a stir in Spurgeon's London, and so I have often wondered why the 'Prince of Preachers' didn't view his habit, if not as being sinful, at least as being somewhat of a stumbling block (1 Cor. 8:9-13). Beyond this I dare not opine but abstain from the presumptuous brazenness of trying to second guess Spurgeon. --Hank | ||||||
146 | alcohol scripturally wrong? | Eph 5:18 | Hank | 203665 | ||
Doc, sound advice on drinking. What you say about your experiences with drinking seems to parallel my own to some degree. I never really enjoyed drinking all that much and did it I suppose to be "sociable." But it was more of a nuisance to me than anything else. Moreover, I was always bothered by the gnawing feeling that I was compromising my witness as a Christian and my role as a husband and father. So I put it aside years ago and have never once felt any desire to indulge again. ...... Scripture condemns drunkenness in no uncertain terms, and who can say that he is immune to the abuse of alcohol? I suppose no one sets out with the goal of becoming an alcoholic. For me personally the sensible path to take as a follower of Christ is the sober one. ...... Over the years I've done a little work with alcoholics. Alcoholism does not pose a pretty picture I tell you. And my youngest son was killed by a drunken driver in an automobile accident when he was a junior in college. So I am not exactly a poster boy for the joys of alcohol! --Hank | ||||||
147 | the meaning of joshua? | Josh 1:1 | Hank | 203664 | ||
Godwin :: The meaning of Joshua is "the LORD is salvation." See Strong's #3091 in Joshua 1:1. You can access this by using the search function on this web page and clicking on the green square to the extreme left of the verse. Welcome to Study Bible Forum. Let us know of any questions or problems you may have in connection with using the resources available on SBF. --Hank | ||||||
148 | What is the best version of the Bible? | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 203650 | ||
Dear slightlines :: The question you responded to is more than seven years old. It is therefore unlikely that you will get any feedback from the original questioner. You might like to read my response on this thread (Post 2358) which was my very first post to Study Bible Forum back on April 3, 2001. By the way, welcome to BSF. --Hank | ||||||
149 | KJV question | Gen 34:19 | Hank | 203572 | ||
Thomas :: Thanks for your question. Since its beginning in early 2001 the Forum has never adopted an 'official' Bible translation. The sponsor of SBF is the Lockman Foundation, translators and publishers of the NASB, but they have never mandated the exclusive use of the NASB on this Forum. The majority of regular Forum contributors lean heavily toward the use of literal translations (e.g., NASB, KJV, NKJV, ESV) instead of paraphrastic versions (e.g., NIV, NLT, the Message). Among versions that are severely frowned upon are those which tamper with the sacred text, particularly those that deliberately alter the meaning of the text to force it to comply with cult doctrines (e.g., the New World Translation by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society). ..... We do not hold with KJV-only views, especially with the idea promulgated by some of this stripe that the translation itself was divinely inspired and thus inerrant. The translators themselves in their 1611 message to the reader make no such claims. ...... While not perfect or inerrant, the King James Bible is a masterpiece of English prose and an excellent translation of God's word. It has weathered the test of time for some 400 years, but during those 4 centuries the English language has undergone dramatic changes, changes so profound that some of the words and expressions in the KJV don't mean to us what they meant to the people who read them in 1611. In point of fact, some of them actually mean the opposite now of what they meant then. Moreover, since 1611 there has been considerable progress in the scholarly world that translators inhabit. More ancient manuscripts of the biblical text have been discovered, and more has been learned of the people, places, and languages of "Bible" times. ...... All of this leads up to your question. Those of us who lack full and exact knowledge of biblical Hebrew and Greek would generally do well to consult several good modern translations, especially on difficult passages. And it would do no harm to follow this with a consult of a good -- and by 'good' I mean a conservative and scholarly -- commentary or two. But the best advice of all is succinctly laid down in 2 Timothy 2:15. And for the regenerate believer, the best teacher of all is the Holy Spirit. ..... As a footnote to Jeff's advice, I agree with him that any debate about the peculiar attributes of the KJV or any suggestion that it is the only reliable translation of the Bible in English has no place on SBF. Now I'm in no way suggesting that that is your motive or desire. No, not at all. I believe your question is honest and sincere and springs from pure motives, and thank you for it and invite your continued participation in Study Bible Forum. --Hank | ||||||
150 | What does "Jesus" mean? | Matt 1:21 | Hank | 203559 | ||
Thanks, r-2; it's nice to have you on SBF. My son lives in Portland, so I'm not unacquainted with the City of Roses, though I've yet to visit the Multnomah Bible College campus. Portland is a handsome city surrounded by much natural beauty. Fine climate too. --Hank | ||||||
151 | What does "Jesus" mean? | Matt 1:21 | Hank | 203527 | ||
Could be test time for some. Exam times vary, Azure, for both private and public educational institutions. Of course, I haven't attended school in a hundred years myself and our kids are long out of school, so I don't keep up with that sort of thing very closely any more.--Hank | ||||||
152 | What does "Jesus" mean? | Matt 1:21 | Hank | 203525 | ||
cpb-randt :: For the answer to your question please read Matthew 1:21 in the Amplified Bible. ...... From time to time Study Bible Forum gets "homework" type questions from Bible students who, instead of digging for the answers themselves, seek a free ride as it were from regular users of this Forum. Your battery of questions frankly has the earmarks of a homework assignment that you really should be doing on your own. If it is indeed homework, then you're playing fair neither with yourself nor the course of study by essentially asking us of the Forum to do the work for you that you should be doing for yourself. If this assessment is wrong, then surely I apologize to you in advance. --Hank | ||||||
153 | Does it Really matter? | Bible general Archive 4 | Hank | 203450 | ||
Cheri :: The Bible tells us this: "Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch" (Genesis 6:14). ...... What I have done -- to quote you from your post -- is "I've simply stated what the Bible states, and that I've not seen where He has changed His mind about it." Even though there be some who teach that we should not build arks these days, what are we to do, take God's word or man's? ..... Still and all, though it is clear what the Bible says about ark building, I do find 2 Timothy 2:15 a bit troubling. But I won't fret about that. As you say, "I'll take God's word over man's in a heartbeat." ..... I'll go to Home Depot and buy a batch of gopher wood (if they still carry it) and start building my ark. How are you coming along with yours? --Hank | ||||||
154 | Specify religion Jesus Christ an angel. | Bible general Archive 4 | Hank | 203398 | ||
Wasn't it Bin Franklen who said "Hast makes wast"? And shouldn't "post-haste" be written "poste-hast"? --Hanke | ||||||
155 | Fellow Christian focused on negative | Matt 24:44 | Hank | 203268 | ||
NAL, the sure and only way to keep from becoming overwhelmed by the "signs of the times" is to stay off YouTube and stay focused on the blessed word of God! Christians take their marching orders from Christ and not from the Internet. Read carefully what Jesus said in Matthew 24:36-51. Saturate yourself in the word of God and cast away man's foolish predictions about end times, because he doesn't know what he's talking about. Trust God with all your heart, soul and mind. It's that simple -- and that difficult. --Hank | ||||||
156 | test question book of Nahum | Nahum | Hank | 203190 | ||
Hi, Dyne :: Now that your test question has been duly processed, would you now like to ask a real Bible-based question, or give a Bible-based answer to an existing question, or perhaps to post a note? You're invited to do so. Welcome aboard. --Hank | ||||||
157 | Ezekiel's Temple updated | Bible general Archive 4 | Hank | 203150 | ||
A thousand and one attempts might pay off for you, Doc. It worked for Scheherazade. --Hank | ||||||
158 | What mother was commended by Paul? | Bible general Archive 4 | Hank | 203097 | ||
Dear DLorddaughter :: Please try to avoid taking umbrage at the feedback your many questions have engendered. Words standing alone on a screen have a way of appearing stark and harsh at times. There is no way by which your correspondents are able to soften them with the warmth of a smile, the friendly clasp of a handshake, or the disarming sparkle in the eyes that brings loving animation of countenance. I do not believe, and beg you not to believe, that any of the respondents to your posts intended to convey a mean and unloving spirit, because I am convinced that none of them are in fact mean and unloving. We none of us always choose the right words to reflect our real thoughts and feelings, so perhaps in some of the responses you've received, the words betray the true meaning that the author intended. ...... Looking at the situation in retrospect, it becomes fairly easy to understand why it has been inferred that some of your questions had their generation in sources outside yourself. To cite two examples: your question (Post 196694) asked, "Who pleaded with God not to destroy a city?" My question is, unless you had read and knew the answer from your study of Scripture, how would you otherwise know that anyone pleaded with God to destroy a city? ...... The second question in the example is Post 203055 in which you ask, "What mother was commended by Paul?" Same situation: how did you know that Paul commended any mother? ...... Are you now better able to understand the concern of your Forum peers? It is not that there is any ban on asking Bible-based questions. On the contrary, it is basically a question-and-answer format that this web site uses. This is not the problem. The problem lies in the fact that your questions were constructed in a way that is very typical of "homework" questions -- questions that read as though they came straight from a textbook. And it is an unwritten code of the Forum, as it were, that Bible students should do their own homework -- should roll up their sleeves and dig in on their own and do their own research -- and not have someone else do it for them. In looking for an easy fix, they are not only being unfair to the teacher and their classmates, but they are being unfair especially to themselves. There is no magic yellow-brick road to learning. Studying is hard work and demands our best efforts, as the Scripture says, "Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth" (2 Timothy 2:15, ESV). ..... An afterthought. You are most welcome to continue to study and learn with us, as together we seek to follow our Lord ever more nearly and to love Him ever more dearly. The hand of friendship and fellowship is most assuredly extended to you. --Hank | ||||||
159 | What mother was commended by Paul? | Bible general Archive 4 | Hank | 203094 | ||
Dear DLorddaughter :: Please try to avoid taking umbrage at the feedback your many questions have engendered. Words standing alone on a screen have a way of appearing stark and harsh at times. There is no way by which your correspondents are able to soften them with the warmth of a smile, the friendly clasp of a handshake, or the disarming sparkle in the eyes that brings loving animation of countenance. I do not believe, and beg you not to believe, that any of the respondents to your posts intended to convey a mean and unloving spirit, because I am convinced that none of them are in fact mean and unloving. We none of us always choose the right words to reflect our real thoughts and feelings, so perhaps in some of the responses you've received, the words betray the true meaning that the author intended. ...... Looking at the situation in retrospect, it becomes fairly easy to understand why it has been inferred that some of your questions had their generation in sources outside yourself. To cite two examples: your question (Post 196694) asked, "Who pleaded with God not to destroy a city?" My question is, unless you had read and knew the answer from your study of Scripture, how would you otherwise know that anyone pleaded with God to destroy a city? ...... The second question in the example is Post 203055 in which you ask, "What mother was commended by Paul?" Same situation: how did you know that Paul commended any mother? ...... Are you now better able to understand the concern of your Forum peers? It is not that there is any ban on asking Bible-based questions. On the contrary, it is basically a question-and-answer format that this web site uses. This is not the problem. The problem lies in the fact that your questions were constructed in a way that is very typical of "homework" questions -- questions that read as though they came straight from a textbook. And it is an unwritten code of the Forum, as it were, that Bible students should do their own homework -- should roll up their sleeves and dig in on their own and do their own research -- and not have someone else do it for them. In looking for an easy fix, they are not only being unfair to the teacher and their classmates, but they are being unfair especially to themselves. There is no magic yellow-brick road to learning. Studying is hard work and demands our best efforts, as the Scripture says, "Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth" (2 Timothy 2:15, ESV). ..... An afterthought. You are most welcome to continue to study and learn with us, as together we seek to follow our Lord ever more nearly and to love Him ever more dearly. The hand of friendship and fellowship is most assuredly extended to you. --Hank | ||||||
160 | Radical Change which we Cannot Perform | John 3:3 | Hank | 202913 | ||
Amen to the Spurgeon quote (Post 202910) and thanks for posting it, Brother Doc; for surely it can cast much light to the paths of us all. Every member of SBF ought to meditate upon it himself and pass it on to others also. Soli Deo gloria! --Hank | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ] Next > Last [349] >> |