Results 1501 - 1520 of 1659
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: Morant61 Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1501 | A message for the prince of Tyre | Ezekiel | Morant61 | 15313 | ||
Greetings Mawsjams! The answer appears to be both. Ez. 28:1-10 refers to a ruler. The description would seem to be a human ruler. Ez. 28:11-19 refers to a king. The description seems to refer to someone who could not possibly be human. One explanation of this would be that Ez. 28:1-10 refer to the human ruler of Tyre, while Ez. 28:11-19 refers to the spiritual ruler of Tyre, Satan. I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
1502 | Living Livestock | Exodus | Morant61 | 15312 | ||
Greetings Sandman! One possible explanation that I came across was the 9:6 referred to all of the livestock in the field at the time, and not to each individual animal. Another possiblity is that a decent amount of time had passed and they may have imported more animals. I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
1503 | Where are the scriptures, believers? | Matt 6:15 | Morant61 | 15276 | ||
Greetings Bill Mc! I could only find two possible references - Acts 8:22 and James 5:15. Acts 8:22 - I know that you have said that this refered to an unbeliever, but that is debatable. Acts 8:13 says that he believed and was baptized. Then, in Acts 8:24, he seems to have repented of his wickedness. So, there are two possible ways to view this passage. James 5:15 - This is the only undisputable passage I could find. The reason I say this is that the verse says, "if he has sinned". There is no doubt that an unbeliever has sinned. Therefore, this must refer to a person who would not be expected to sin. This could only refer to a believer. Either way, there aren't many references are there? Great question! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
1504 | Is 1 John 1:9 for Christians? | Matt 6:15 | Morant61 | 15248 | ||
Hi Bill Mc! Thanks for your response! Concerning Mt. 6:14-15, I've always viewed it as a warning that Christians have a proper attitude toward others. Notice the example you used of the man who was forgiven much. He was already forgiven, but refused to extend that forgiveness to others. So, I think Mt. 6:14-15 is a warning that we had better extend the forgiveness we have received to others as well. Concerning 1 John 1:9, you have layed out one way of understanding the passage. But, there is another way, that still would do justice to the completeness of our salvation. We can take 1 John 1:9, not as a reference to salvation (as you said, that is complete at the cross), but as a reference to an ongoing confession of individual acts of sin that we commit as a believer. This would not mean that we are being re-saved each time we fail, but simply that we are taking our sins to God and asking Him to forgive and purify us from all acts of unrighteousness. This would fit well with the context of 1 John 2 as well. There John says, "My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have one who speaks to the Father in our defense—Jesus Christ, the Righteous One." (1 Jn. 2:1) I appreciate your thoughts my brother! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
1505 | May I share a simple story to help? | Bible general Archive 1 | Morant61 | 15129 | ||
Greetings Sir! The problem is that the Bible is written in a language, with words that have meanings and rules of grammar that must be followed. What one person might say is explaining away a passage, another might say is interpreting it correctly. It is easier to use specific examples than to speak in general. However, I am all in favor of taking the Bible in the way that it was intended. However, to do that, one must know what a word means. One must know the subject of the sentence. One must know the object of the sentence. These are the kinds of things I was referring to in my last post. If you have a specific passage in mind, maybe we could discuss it? Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
1506 | Should the Bible be taken literally? | Bible general Archive 1 | Morant61 | 15107 | ||
Hi EdB! I forgot to answer you last set of questions. What about bringing in outside knowledge? Let us start with the easiest example. The NT is made up of Greek words. Some of those words are only used once in all of the Bible. Suppose that we have no idea what that word means and the context does not tell us! Where do we go to find out what that word means? Obviously, we will have to search out other Greek writtings to see if we can determine what that word means. We constantly refer to outside sources of history, definitions, grammar, ect... My opinion on the subject is this: 1) The Bible should always be primary. If a word is defined in Scripture in a way that differs from traditional usage, we should use Scripture's defintion. If a culture view is described in Scripture that differs from the "experts" understanding, we should abide by what Scripture says. 2) Outside knowledge should have "authority" only when Scripture is silent or unclear. For instance, a word that is only used once in Scripture may need to be defined from other sources in connection with Scripture. 3) Outside knowledge can be used to illustrate what Scripture says. For instance, Paul calls the Law a tutor in Galatians. That word was used in Greek to describe a person who was given the responsiblity to make sure a young charge made it to class and did his homework. It would be appropriate to dig into history and find out more about such tutors to fill out our understanding of what Paul meant. 4) At no time, should outside knowledge override clear Biblical teaching. I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
1507 | Should the Bible be taken literally? | Bible general Archive 1 | Morant61 | 15106 | ||
Greetings EdB! I see one small problem with your example. Like you, I tend to see the passage in terms of repentance. However, the passage never says that he repented. He could simply be resigned to going back and working for his father rather than starving to death, without realizing that he was wrong to begin with. My point is this: Both views are making an assumption based upon the evidence, since the text does not spell out the situation. So, I'm not sure we can say that seeing a reference to "repentance" is taking the passage at face-value, while seeing a reference to "rebellion" is adding to the passage. To answer your main question: I think that we misuse the term "literal". To read the Bible literally simply means to read it in the way it was intended. If it is a parable, we interpret it as a parable. If it is a narrative, we interpret it as a narrative. So I would say all of Scripture should be taken literally, if by literally we mean that we should read it in the way it was intended to be read. If we mean that we should read every verse as a statement of fact, then I would say we should not read all of the Bible literally. p.s. - Concerning Luke 15, I do see the passage in the same way as you! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
1508 | Why does it say "since", not "if"? | Matt 4:6 | Morant61 | 15105 | ||
Greetings Steve! There are some who believe that 'ei' can be translated as "since" at times. However, it takes a combination of form and context which is not present in this verse. So, none of the translations I checked translated the verse as "since...". Neither would I translate it this way. In fact, I think that "since" has been way overused to begin with. The simple conditional clause assumes the truth of the statement for the sake of argument. Thus, in this question, Satan is asking Jesus "If (for the sake of argument) you are the Son of God...." It is this assumption of fact that leads many to think that 'ei' can be translated as "since." However, if we followed this rule all the time, we would end up with some very strange statements. Consider Mt. 12:27: "And if I drive out demons by Beelzebub, by whom do your people drive them out? So then, they will be your judges." Do we really want to translate this verse, "Since I cast out demons by Beelzebub...."? My preference is to stay with "if" unless the context absolutely demands it. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
1509 | Order of events at the 2nd Coming? | 1 Thess 4:17 | Morant61 | 14845 | ||
Greetings Nolan! Let me be the first to attempt a response to your question! Disclaimer: The following is based upon a chart I prepared for a 2 year Bible study that I conducted in two different churches where I pastored. I do not consider it to be infallible! It simpy reflects my current understanding of eschatology. Leading up to Daniel's 70th Week: a) The Seven Seals (Rev. 6:1-8:5): I view these as general signs leading up to the 70th week. As such, we are probably experiencing them right now. The First 3 1/2 years of Daniel's 70th Week: a) The Time of Jacob's Trouble (Jer. 30:7-12): I see this first period as being a time of testing for Israel. The result of which will be many in Israel coming to faith in Christ. b) The Ministy of the Two Witnesses (Rev. 11:1-19): I view these two men as prophets who will primarily be reaching out to Israel and speaking out against the anti-christ, much like Elijah did with Ahab. c) The Reign of the Anti-Christ (Rev. 12:1-13:18): This was the most difficult decision I had to make. This may belong in the second half, but currently, I believe it belongs in the first half. d) The Seven Trumpets (Rev. 8:5-11:19): I view the trumpets as more specific signs which will occur throughout the first half of Daniel's 70th week. They will probably be much like the plagues on Egypt and be a constant thorn in the side for the anti-christ. The Middle of Daniel's 70th Week: a) The Rapture of the Church (Rev. 14:14-20): I believe that the rapture will occur at the sounding of the 7th trumpet and will signal a change from a time of trouble for Israel to a time of wrath for the world. The Last 3 1/2 Years of Daniel's 70th Week: a) The Time of God's Wrath (Rev. 11:16-19): I believe that the second half will be composed of God's judgements being poured out upon an unbelieving world. b) The Seven Bowls of God's Wrath (Rev. 15:1-16:20): These judgements will be very specific and intense. Events Following Daniel's 70th Week: a) The Second Coming of Christ (Rev. 19:1:21) b) The Millenial Reign of Christ (Rev. 20:1-6) c) The Battle of Armageddon (Rev. 20:7-10) d) The Great White Throne of Judgement (Rev. 20:11-15) e) Creation of the New Heaven and the New Earth (Rev. 21:1-22:21) *************************************** Again, this is just my opinion. It is nothing more and nothing less. I think I can defend it from Scripture, but I am open to other views. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
1510 | Prewrath position? | Bible general Archive 1 | Morant61 | 14842 | ||
Greetings CDBJ! Yes, I hold to the pre-Wrath rapture of the Church! I assume you are refering to my quote to Nolan. My point there was simply that no matter when the rapture occurs, we need to be ready. The "best" case would be if Christ raptured the Church before any of the events of Daniel's 70th week. The "worst" case would be if Christ did not rapture the Church until the close of Daniel's 70th week. Either way, we need to be ready. Now, having said that, I personally believe that Daniel's 70th week is divided into two 3 1/2 year segments. The first will be a time of trouble for Israel. The second will be a time of wrath for the world. This view would mean that Christians will indeed face intense persecution during the first 3 1/2 years, but will not face God's wrath during the last 3 1/2 years. I hope this answers your question! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
1511 | Words are windows to the heart | Luke 6:45 | Morant61 | 14647 | ||
Greetings Daughter of Zion! Could you be thinking of Luke 6:45? - " The good man brings good things out of the good stored up in his heart, and the evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in his heart. For out of the overflow of his heart his mouth speaks." I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
1512 | Who is the we in John 4:20? | John 15:1 | Morant61 | 14644 | ||
Greetings Kindness! Actually, there is no "we" in the Greek text. The Greek literally reads, "Our Fathers worshipped on this mountain, but you say, 'The place where it is necessary to worship is in Jerusalem.'" I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
1513 | How can Christ return be imminent? | Bible general Archive 1 | Morant61 | 14620 | ||
Greetings CDBJ! The word "imminent" is never used in Scripture in connection with the return of Christ. The word is used by believers to stress that Christ could return at any moment. However, it may not be the best word to use. In it's favor, there are many Scriptures which stress that we do not know when Christ will return. Against it, there are many Scriptures which refer to things that must occur before Christ can return (though we must be cautious simply because our interpretation may be wrong). Milliard Erickson (a well known theologian) recommends that we speak of the whole complex of events surrounding the second coming of Christ as being 'imminent', but the second coming itself as 'impending'. Great question! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
1514 | keep committing the same sin over and ov | Is 53:1 | Morant61 | 14587 | ||
Greetings Annov2! It was very brave of you to admit that you need help in this area of your life. There are no easy answers, but I would recommend a two-fold approach. 1) Trust in the promises of God. 1 John 1:9 makes it very clear that not only does God forgive us when we sin, but He also cleanses us from all unrighteousness. You can nuture this promise in your life by: a) Filling your heart and mind with God's Word - Ps. 119:11. b) Saturating your life with prayer. c) Avoiding circumstances that will lead you into temptation. 2) Become accountable to someone. Let your pastor or a close friend in the Lord know about your struggle. Let them help you by making you accountable. It is much easier to avoid temptation and sin if you know that someone is going to ask you how you are doing in that area of your life. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
1515 | Hebrews 6:4 | Heb 6:4 | Morant61 | 14586 | ||
Greetings Ren333! Disclaimer: I approach this verse from an Arminian perspective. The way I understand Heb. 6:4 is simply this: Hebrews is addressed to a congregation made up of primarily Jewish Christians. Because of persecution and false teaching, some of these Christians were tempted to go back to Judaism. The message of Heb. 6:4 is that if you turn your back on Christ, there is no other way of salvation. The same sort of concept is discussed in Heb. 10:26-29. The concept addressed is a knowing and deliberate rejection of Christ. Both of these passages describe someone who has known Christ and rejected Him. Such a person will not be brought back to repentance. How could they? They have known Christ's love and yet rejected it. I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
1516 | not any more? | Ex 22:16 | Morant61 | 14495 | ||
Greetings, It's too bad that we don't. It sure would cut down on illicit behavior wouldn't it! :-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
1517 | what does this mean Exodus 22:16 | Ex 22:16 | Morant61 | 14493 | ||
Greetings 12Besaved! You are correct. The penalty for pre-marital sex was marriage! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
1518 | Are we do pray to Jesus? | Matt 6:9 | Morant61 | 14335 | ||
Greetings Steve! I think most people would say that since Christ is a member of the Godhead that it is appropriate to address prayers to Him or to the Holy Spirit. There is one verse (that I have found so far) where prayer is addressed to Christ - Acts 7:59. It says, "While they were stoning him, Stephen prayed, ‘‘Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.”" I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
1519 | Are those He called always chosen? | Rom 8:30 | Morant61 | 14313 | ||
Greetings Steve! At the risk of beating a "dead horse," as I have been accused! ;-) I would say that Mt. 22:14 and Rom. 8:30 are in full agreement. There is no doubt that Mt. 22:14 is a difficult saying. It appears to be making a distinction between "calling" and "choosing", yet the rest of Scripture doesn't seem to make that distinction. In fact, Rev. 17:14 uses both of these terms together to describe believers. Yet, for all the difficulty of Mt. 22:14, the parable of which it is a part is perfectly clear. It is a part of a set of parables which all say that the Kingdom has been extended to others because of Jewish rejection. This would be in harmony with Rom. 9-11 as well. Rom. 11 makes it very clear that the Gospel is extended to Gentiles because of Jewish unbelief. So, I guess I would see Mt. 22:14 as refering to the expansion of the Gospel rather than limiting it. However, I am open to other possibilities. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
1520 | Resurrection of 2 witnesses and Rapture? | Revelation | Morant61 | 13932 | ||
Greetings Rextar! I concur with your points. I too think that the resurrection of the 2 witnesses can be identified with the rapture of the Church. Or maybe just prior to it. Either way, your comments are sound. Concerning the "thief in the night" passages, I'm not sure how they relate exactly to any of Revelation. Revelation gives so many indicators that it seems impossible that believers (pre or mid) will not have some indicate that the time is approaching. Maybe someone else has given this some thought! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 ] Next > Last [83] >> |