Results 141 - 160 of 6770
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Morant61 Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
141 | Defending themselves or accusing Jesus? | John 8:41 | Morant61 | 229345 | ||
Greetings Biblicalman! Well, it was a half confirmation. :-) That source certainly confirms that a child born out of wedlock did not have a stigma attached to them personally, unless the child was the result of what would be a prohibited marriage. But, the rest of the source certainly indicated that the betrothal was normally 12 months long, and sexual relations were not to take place until the wedding night. The point you made in another post about sexual relations resulting in marriage does not indicate acceptance, but protection of the woman. It is much like in the OT where if a man raped a virgin, he had to marry her. In summary, I think you are right about the stigma not being attached to the child, so John 8:41 probably is not a reference to Jesus. But, I do believe that sexual relations were not supposed to be a part of the betrothal period, which used to be 12 months. In modern times, this period does not really exist anymore. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
142 | Defending themselves or accusing Jesus? | John 8:41 | Morant61 | 229327 | ||
Greetings Biblicalman! You mention Jewish Halakhic tradition. I looked it up, and here is what it says about betrothal and marriage: "The Process of Marriage: Kiddushin and Nisuin The process of marriage occurs in two distinct stages: kiddushin (commonly translated as betrothal) and nisuin (full-fledged marriage). Kiddushin occurs when the woman accepts the money, contract or sexual relations offered by the prospective husband. The word "kiddushin" comes from the root Qof-Dalet-Shin, meaning "sanctified." It reflects the sanctity of the marital relation. However, the root word also connotes something that is set aside for a specific (sacred) purpose, and the ritual of kiddushin sets aside the woman to be the wife of a particular man and no other. Kiddushin is far more binding than an engagement as we understand the term in modern English; in fact, Rambam speaks of a period of engagement before the kiddushin. Once kiddushin is complete, the woman is legally the wife of the man. The relationship created by kiddushin can only be dissolved by death or divorce. However, the spouses do not live together at the time of the kiddushin, and the mutual obligations created by the marital relationship do not take effect until the nisuin is complete. The nisuin (from a word meaning "elevation") completes the process of marriage. The husband brings the wife into his home and they begin their married life together. In the past, the kiddushin and nisuin would routinely occur as much as a year apart. During that time, the husband would prepare a home for the new family. There was always a risk that during this long period of separation, the woman would discover that she wanted to marry another man, or the man would disappear, leaving the woman in the awkward state of being married but without a husband. Today, the two ceremonies are normally performed together. Because marriage under Jewish law is essentially a private contractual agreement between a man and a woman, it does not require the presence of a rabbi or any other religious official. It is common, however, for rabbis to officiate, partly in imitation of the Christian practice and partly because the presence of a religious or civil official is required under United States civil law. As you can see, it is very easy to make a marriage, so the rabbis instituted severe punishments (usually flogging and compelled divorce) where marriage was undertaken without proper planning and solemnity." Source: http://www.jewfaq.org/marriage.htm It does go on to say that only children of forbidden marriages were considered illegitimate under Jewish Law. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
143 | Defending themselves or accusing Jesus? | John 8:41 | Morant61 | 229324 | ||
Greetings Biblicalman! I have consulted every source at my disposal, and have not found any thing near what you are saying. Everyone says that sexual relations were not allowed during the betrothal period. I am sure, given human nature that it probably occurred. However, that is not the same thing as acceptance. :-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
144 | Defending themselves or accusing Jesus? | John 8:41 | Morant61 | 229282 | ||
Greetings Biblicalman! John 8:41 may or may not have been an insult aimed at Jesus, but sexual relations were not supposed to be a part of the Betrothal period. During the 12 months of the betrothal, the future wife lived with her parents and the marriage was not to be consummated until the the actual wedding took place. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
145 | How long is a Biblical Generation ? | Gen 15:16 | Morant61 | 229173 | ||
Greetings Biblicalman! Just to provide some support for your position, here are a variety of quotes from commentators on Gen. 15:16: NET Bible Commentary: "The term generation is being used here in its widest sense to refer to a full life span. When the chronological factors are considered and the genealogies tabulated, there are four hundred years of bondage. This suggests that in this context a generation is equivalent to one hundred years." K and D: "The calculations are made here on the basis of a hundred years to a generation: not too much for those times, when the average duration of life was above 150 years, and Isaac was born in the hundredth year of Abraham's life." Clarke: "n former times most people counted by generations, to each of which was assigned a term of years amounting to 20, 25, 30, 33, 100, 108, or 110; for the generation was of various lengths among various people, at different times. It is probable that the fourth generation here means the same as the four hundred years in the preceding verse." Barnes: "This age or generation ran parallel with the life of Moses, and therefore consisted of one hundred and twenty years. Joseph lived one hundred and ten years. Four such generations amount to four hundred and eighty or four hundred and forty years. From the birth of Isaac to the return to the land of promise was an interval of four hundred and forty years. Isaac, Levi, Amram, and Eleazar may represent the four ages." Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran " |
||||||
146 | god's mercy why is there hell | John 3:16 | Morant61 | 229172 | ||
Greetings! John 3:16 tells us: "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." John 12:32 tells us: "But I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself." Romans 10:13 says, "for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved." So, if anyone refuses the gift of salvation, he only has himself to blame if he ends up in hell. As for the Jewish people under Hitler, they would make it to Heaven the same way that the rest of us do, by accepting the gift of salvation purchased for them by Jesus on the cross. He is the only way to salvation. Those who accepted Him will be in Heaven, those who did not, will be in Hell. I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
147 | Did Jesus exist? No writings at His time | Bible general Archive 4 | Morant61 | 229170 | ||
Greetings! I would recommend the book, "Evidence that Demands a Verdict" by Josh McDowell. Or, "The Case for Christ", by Lee Strobel. They both do a great job of presenting the early evidence for Jesus. There is a multitude of it. :-) p.s. - Wiki is not a great resource. ;-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
148 | jesus...2year old-30.where was he? | Bible general Archive 4 | Morant61 | 229168 | ||
Greetings Saving my Family! God, in His infinite wisdom, gave us in the Bible everything we need for salvation, doctrine, and holy living. He doesn't tell us why no mention is made of Jesus' childhood, but we can rest assured that we don't need that information since God did not give it to us. :-) I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
149 | How many times is praise used in the Bib | Bible general Archive 4 | Morant61 | 228804 | ||
Greetings and welcome to the forum. If you look to the far right of your screen, you will see a box labeled 'Bible Text'. Simply enter 'praise' in the box marked 'search word(s)' and you will have the answer to your question. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
150 | Is sinless perfection possible on earth? | 1 John 1:8 | Morant61 | 228745 | ||
Greetings Biblicalman! I have been doing a lot of reading on this topic, and I'm trying to picture it in some way that would make it as easy as possible to understand. How is this for a start? There are three distinct situations that a human being can find themselves in (with the focus on the believer primarily). 1) Unregenerate 2) Regenerate 3) Glorified The first and third states are basically perfect states in that as unregenerate beings we cannot please God, while as glorified beings we cannot displease God. The second state is a conjunction of the "already/not yet" that we struggle with as Christians. We are new creations as a regenerate person. We are not the same as before. We have been set free from the slavery to sin, yet we can still choose to sin. This is where I believe the 'dead to sin' comes into play. We really are dead to sin in that it's dominion over us is broken. Yet, we still live in a human body that exists in a fallen world. As long as we walk in the Spirit, we will not sin. But, the moment we get our eyes off of Christ, we begin to act like the world again. These are just some initial thoughts as I work through these passages. Have a great day! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
151 | Is sinless perfection possible on earth? | 1 John 1:8 | Morant61 | 228743 | ||
Greetings Biblicalman! A couple of questions had sprung to mind, but in fairness, I'll address your question first. In my response, I'm not reflecting on your position but simply trying to articulate how I came to my position. First of all, I always try to start with the clear statements of Scripture, not the less clear, or even my own experience. So, I begin with Rom 6:2 By no means! We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? This is a clear statement. In fact, our death to sin is compared and contrasted with Christ's death on the cross. When, I get to Rom. 8:11, I don't take 'reckon' or 'consider' as simply pretending that we are dead, but as a logical recognition of what Christ has done for us. So, to answer your question. I think that we all would agree that Adam and Eve were not created with a sin nature, nor were they slaves to sin in any sense of the word. Yet, they sinned. So, I would argue that someone who is no longer a slave to sin can still choose to sin. This addresses two important truths in Scriptures. One, that we truly are dead to sin. Two, that we can still sin. Well, I have to get ready for work. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
152 | Is sinless perfection possible on earth? | 1 John 1:8 | Morant61 | 228742 | ||
Greetings Biblicalman! While we may disagree in how we express it, we seem to get the same point eventually. A Christian can live a holy life as long as he follows the Spirit, but if he gets his eyes off of Christ, he will fall into sin. Thanks for the explanation of where you stand my brother. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
153 | Is sinless perfection possible on earth? | 1 John 1:8 | Morant61 | 228741 | ||
Greetings Biblicalman! I seldom argue with A. T. :-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
154 | Is sinless perfection possible on earth? | 1 John 1:8 | Morant61 | 228735 | ||
Greetings Biblicalman! I apologize, I just realized that I did not complete my thought about aorist imperatives. :-) An aorist imperative does not indicate present continual action. It indicates a command, which has not yet been obeyed, without saying anything about the duration of the action. The imperative, like the optative, subjection, and future moods, is a mood of possiblity. I am assuming that this discussion on aorists relates to my understanding of Eph. 4:22-24. The aorists in Eph. 4:22-24 are infinitives, and seem to be designed to make a point. We are to "put off" the old man v. 22 (an event viewed as a whole or even completed action), and we are to "put on" the new man v. 24. If Paul had meant a continual action, then he could have simply used the present infinitive, which distinctly carries that meaning. The contrast though is stark. The 'be made new' in v. 23 is a present, passive infinitive. It clearly indicates an ongoing process done to us (or for us) by the Spirit. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
155 | Is sinless perfection possible on earth? | 1 John 1:8 | Morant61 | 228734 | ||
Greetings Biblicalman! While we may not agree on every point, I commend you for an excellent and well thought out post. Allow me to highlight what we do agree on. You wrote: "In order to live a holy life I am wholly dependent on Christ and His risen power. I am wholly dependent on the Spirit. Without Him reigning in me sin will again take over the reins. " I have stated over and over again, that living without sin is only possible as long as we are led by the Spirit. So, we agree that it is possible for Christians to sin, if they cease to be led by the Spirit of God. Where we disagree is concerning the present nature of a Christian. 1) Slaves or not: You seem to take the position that believers have to natures. Allow me to ask a question. What determines which nature we will follow? 2) To sin or not to sin: Do we just reckon ourselves as dead to sin, or are we really dead to sin? We both agree that a believer can sin. It just appears that we disagree concerning the nature or natures of a believer. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
156 | Is sinless perfection possible on earth? | 1 John 1:8 | Morant61 | 228733 | ||
Greetings Biblicalman! Thanks for the response! Allow me to address the present and the aorist. 1) Historical Present: We both agree that the historical present only occurs in narratives. Hence, it is usually found in the gospels. I have readily admitted that there is disagreement, even among Greek scholars about whether or not Rom. 7:14-25 is an historical present or not. My position is that it is and that this violates no rule of Greek grammar. We will just have to disagree on this point. :-) 2) Aorist: The aorist is probably the most difficult tense to understand, especially from an English perspective. In the indicative mood, it is generally used in much the same way as we would use a past tense. But, in Greek, the time of the action is not the primary focus. The kind of action is the focus. The aorist looks at the action as a whole. In the examples that you cite, there is no evidence that the aorist can be used of the present, if by present you mean present tense. Allow me to explain what I mean. The last five of your examples, all involve aorist imperatives, not aorist indicatives. (With the possible exception of John 14:15, most modern texts have future active, not an aorist imperative) There are differences between aorist imperatives and present imperatives, but that is for another post. However, aorist imperatives are in no way present tense. The first example is a little different. It is an Aorist Active Indicative verb, which is rather unusual. A. T. Robertson calls it a 'timeless aorist', while others refer to it as a gnomic aorist. The gist of it is that the Aorist here indicates something that is 'timeless' in nature. In other words, the Father has always been, and always will be, pleased with His Son. Thus, I would disagree with your statement: "These are clear examples and make plain that the aorist can be used of the present, and can be used of continual action." Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
157 | Did 2 or more enter Cannan Num14:29 | Num 14:29 | Morant61 | 228730 | ||
Greetings! I have had a chance to do a little reading, and I believe that you are correct. Great observation my friend! It appears that Caleb and Joshua were the only ones left from the census, but there could have been many more who were not counted because of tribe, age or gender. Thanks for the info! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
158 | Did 2 or more enter Cannan Num14:29 | Num 14:29 | Morant61 | 228725 | ||
Grat observation. I'll have to do some more digging. | ||||||
159 | Is sinless perfection possible on earth? | 1 John 1:8 | Morant61 | 228723 | ||
Greetings Beja! Thanks for the great questions! I have sent you an e-mail response. I'm not going to participate in this thread from here on out. Thank you for the great discussion. You are a scholar and a gentleman. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
160 | Did 2 or more enter Cannan Num14:29 | Num 14:29 | Morant61 | 228722 | ||
Greetings Petals! Based on Num. 26:65, I would say that no one over the age of 20, except Joshua and Caleb entered the promised land. Num 26:65 For the LORD had told those Israelites they would surely die in the desert, and not one of them was left except Caleb son of Jephunneh and Joshua son of Nun. I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ] Next > Last [339] >> |