Results 21 - 40 of 4923
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: DocTrinsograce Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
21 | How long is a Sabbath day walk? | Acts 1:12 | DocTrinsograce | 243114 | ||
Hi, Well... The Sabbath to the Jew would be from Sunset Friday through Sunset Saturday. A Sabbath day's journey would have been about seven furlongs (about 8.75 miles). Joshua 3:4 describes it as two thousand cubits. That would make sense, since by the Mosaic Law. The normal mode of transportation was riding upon an ass. That was prohibited on the Sabbath. Interestingly enough, riding a horse on the Sabbath was permissible. (Of course, there were few of them because of the cost of their upkeep.) Nonetheless, even riding a horse was not allowed to exceed the two thousand cubits mentioned above. In Him, Doc |
||||||
22 | Free will, or ? | Rom 9:16 | DocTrinsograce | 243112 | ||
Hi, Justme... I don't think that you CAN sidestep the debate. You know how Paul in Romans asks those rhetorical questions along the way? Any study of Romans has failed in its exegesis unless the reader finds himself asking those very questions. They are guideposts in following the apostle's explanation of Christian theology. Furthermore, you must never take any book of the Bible and pick and choose which passages suit your own taste. Context is king. You must understand the book in its entirety, front to back. Only the many cults in our world select which passages are more significant than others. As the old divines put it, "All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto all; yet those things which are necessary to be known, believed and observed for salvation, are so clearly propounded and opened in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of ordinary means, may attain to a sufficient understanding of them. (2 Peter 3:16; Psalms 19:7; Psalms 119:130)" Also, realize that the Doctrines of Grace are far more than the silly issues that the Remonstrants brought up in Holland. You may right use their objections to define historic Arminianism, but you will falling very short in thinking that TULIP is all there is concerning Calvinism. Read Calvin's Institutes, there is nothing that can stand beside them in such careful Biblical exegetical veracity before the King of Kings. In Him, Doc |
||||||
23 | WAR ROOM (prayer room)? | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 243059 | ||
Hi, Justme... The movie tended to look at prayer as a means to an end. A method of insuring that God would respond to you. An aspect that I deem is nothing other than superstitious. I remember when the movie by Mel Gibson came out called "The Passion of Christ." Everyone said, this will lead people to Christ! I have not met a single new believer from that movie that simply encouraged Romanists errant perspectives of Christ's crucifixion. It is also like the movies about a near death encounter or the Left Behind series. These were supposed to be mechanisms that draw people to faith in Christ. Again, no fruit, just superstition. We shouldn't be surprised because the Word does not say that plays, or novels, or other things are the means of Grace. It only says that the Word is the Means of Grace (Romans 10:17). Getting excited about this kind of thing is like running to and fro when people say "Here is the Christ" or "There He is!" We can clearly see them as faulty by the fruit that they fail to bring forth. In Him, Doc |
||||||
24 | Test to.prove??? | Rom 12:2 | DocTrinsograce | 243046 | ||
Hi, Midwife... Welcome to the forum! My mother was a midwife. :) Testing and proving are very related words. Testing is a standardized process by which the contents or characteristics of something is guaranteed; i.e., proven or assured. Since the earliest human history this was of particular concern relative to precious metals. When someone paid in gold, how could the seller be certain that the gold was pure? That problem troubles us all the way up to our own time. Coins, for example, were originally developed as a way to assure people that the coin was actually worth its intended value. The stamping out of the coin was a process reserved by the government, with stiff penalties for forging the coins or cutting away some of it before hand. When we talk about alcohol we speak of its "proof" which is a standardized measure of the amount of ethanol contained in a particular kind of liquor. Armour used to be tested by firing a crossbow quarrel into it to be sure it would protect the soldier who would wear it. The dent was called a proof mark. There are many other examples. Thus, in scripture, testing always reveals a person or nations true character. It is the proof visible to everyone of the quality of people or nations. A man may be strong, but if his muscles are not tested by lifting a heavy weight, we would have no proof of how strong he was. Remember, Scripture never tells us to look into our hearts to see what we are. Instead, it tells us to look at what comes out of others or ourselves to know what is inside; i.e., the fruit. In Him, Doc |
||||||
25 | Gen 1:28, Sex in the garden of Eden? | Gen 1:28 | DocTrinsograce | 243019 | ||
Hi, Paula... Welcome to the forum! That is an interesting question. Most interesting questions have been asked many times. So Bible students have been thinking about this since Moses penned the Pentateuch. I think that the words in Genesis 4 -- euphemism for intercourse -- tended to be one used concerning intercourse that resulted in pregnancy. Of course, this would not necessarily mean that Adam and Eve did not have intercourse prior to the Fall. If so, none of that would have been productive for the conceiving of a child. Indeed, Eve asserts that her birthing of Able was due to God's specific intervention (Genesis 4). Of course, we understand that if Eve had conceived a child while in their innocence before the Fall, that would have created a number of issues for everyone involved (no pun intended). Some Jewish scholars with whom I am familiar thought that the birth of Able was as long as twenty years after our first Parents were expelled from the Garden. That reasoning is beyond my ability to remember. Consequently it might be entirely speculative. On the other hand, we must realize that the Fall may have been an event that closely followed Eve's creation. I have even heard -- but I do not recall where -- that Martin Luther and John Calvin thought that the Fall took place no later than nine hours after Adam was given Eve. If that is the case, it might not have given them sufficient time to explore the physical aspect of their relationship. Rather than having your question being fully satisfied, I would do what I do on particulars of the Bible that cannot be definitely answered: (1) hang on to the question until you've had an opportunity to deal with it in the context of Christian scholarly debate; (2) don't say yes or no until you are certain (lest you violate Deuteronomy 4:2 and suffer the consequences of Revelation 22:18-19). In Him, Doc |
||||||
26 | Is Jesus addressing his mother abnormal? | John 2:4 | DocTrinsograce | 243007 | ||
Hi, Raquel... The name Raquel means innocent. Do not worry about asking questions that might seem irrelevant. Everything in the Word of God is more relevant than all the wisdom of the world combined. You are correct that if we, in English, called our mother's "Woman" it would have a negative connotation. I do not doubt that if I had ever used that term on my mother that I would have received a severe trouncing! However, remember that as the gospels unfold, they are relating to us a narrative in the context of a time, place, and culture very different than our own. Note that our Lord uses this term speaking to Mary again in John 19:26. Also notice than in neither place is Mary offended. This term meant no disrespect. Perhaps it would be like my calling my mother -- if she still lived -- dear lady. John Gill, still an acknowledged expert in the ancient Jewish culture, says that the term was used, at that time, to show great respect, tenderness, and affection. In Him, Doc |
||||||
27 | Why does Jesus say this? | John 1:47 | DocTrinsograce | 243006 | ||
Hi, Raquel... Welcome to the forum! Nathanael, given of God... a true descendant of Jacob. There is a play on words here that needs a bit of explanation. Think about Jacob, his name actually means supplanter. He stole Esau's birthright. More than that, he was also a bit of scoundrel. Nonetheless, God chose Jacob over his brother. Nathaniel, means given of God. Contrary to the character of Jacob, Nathanael was an honest, plain hearted man, more similar to what Jacob became. See the contrast? Perhaps Nathanael by his God given nature was the kind of Jew that Paul talked about in Romans 2:28. I tend to think that Jacob was more like the prophet Samuel (cf 1 Samuel 3:10); he was open and accepting, ready to hear God. Perhaps he had been in prayer in a particular way (see John 1:48), and our Lord was responding to that prayer. But Jesus makes a comparison again with Jacob in vv50-51. Note, however, that this does not mean that Nathanael was sinless or faultless. You asked, "Are Israelites normally considered deceitful?" I'm a son of Jacob... oh the stories I could tell. Yet, no need. Look again at 1 Samuel 3:10. Then consider, how many of the Jews responded to God in this way when He called to them? "There was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man. He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him." (John 1:9-11) In Him, Doc |
||||||
28 | 10 kings and beast goal in revelation | Rev 1:17 | DocTrinsograce | 242994 | ||
It is explained in Psalm 2. In particular, vv2-3. | ||||||
29 | revelation 17 6-14 angel explain to john | Rev 1:17 | DocTrinsograce | 242993 | ||
The angel in 17:6 explained to John vv7-14. | ||||||
30 | Creation of the universe and life | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 242976 | ||
Hi, Hash... In my opinion, the idea of the so called "rapture" is a confusion with the resurrection described in Revelation 22. Consequently, I cannot otherwise comment on that. "The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things revealed [in the Bible] belong to us and to our sons forever, that we may observe all the words of this law." (Deuteronomy 29:29) In 1 Timothy 1:3-7, the Apostle Paul warns Timothy to instruct men not to teach nor to listen to speculative themes. Even more than that, God commands, "You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it." (Deuteronomy 4:2b; cf Revelation 22:18-19) Anything that I might speak concerning extraterrestrials would be sheer speculation. Given the passages I mentioned above, it would be sinful for me to do so and likewise sinful for those who would listen to me. Consequently, I can do nothing but remain silent on subjects for which the Scriptures do not address. In Him, Doc |
||||||
31 | Earth's fate | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 242973 | ||
Hi, Hash... Welcome to the forum! Every generation of men seek to provide a sound and reasonable explanation for our observations. If you went back to the height of the Greek civilization, you would find that they had a very cogent explanation concerning the many fossils they found them and for the motions of the planets and stars. One thing that all these things -- including our own contemporary explanations -- have in common is a denial of God. As Romans 1 clearly explains, it is not truth that men seek, rather it is justification to avoid being obligated to the Creator. Thus, it is not a question of fact, but a question of ethics. Now the word "fate" that you use is not one employed in Christian theology. Rather it has its roots in ancient paganism. Ephesians 1 and 2 describe the objective toward which our God is heading -- unimpeded by creatures' choices, plans, and efforts. This is what we call His Eternal Purpose. You can find further details in the last few chapters of Revelation. In Him, Doc |
||||||
32 | Biblically waht is the difference? | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 242969 | ||
Hi, Justme... Eastern Orthodox is pretty much the same as Roman Catholic. They differ predominantly in church polity. The Easter Orthodox deny the authority of the Pope. In Him, Doc |
||||||
33 | The Jews Have No Biological Genesis | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 242962 | ||
Hi, ma'am... Welcome to the forum. No, we Jews actually exist. We are quite careful in tracking our lineage. We only do it through the mother ... father's are harder to prove. We also do it in order to keep track of kohanim (the descendants of Levi). In Him, Doc |
||||||
34 | Fool means what exactly here.? | Matt 5:22 | DocTrinsograce | 242955 | ||
Hello, Winfred... Welcome to the forum! That is a very good question. Now think about this: Our Lord is instructing the church in the sermon on the mount. He is speaking to Christians. Now, the verse says a brother. Consider, if I were to say to a brother in Christ that He is worthless -- which is the sense of that word raca -- I am condemning him as one unworthy of salvation. I would be raising my own judgement above that of God Himself! Consequently, I am by implication condemning God for having chosen one of His own! Mercy, Lord! What a thing to imagine! Can you see the enormous presumption in doing such a thing? If you would like further discussion, I recommend: John Calvin's Commentary John Gill's Commentary Or even Jamieson, Fausset and Brown. All three of them go into much more detail. In Him, Doc |
||||||
35 | Info, on Christ'st Ressurection | 2 Thess 2:3 | DocTrinsograce | 242954 | ||
Dear Bill, If you go to my friend John Hendrix web site: https://www.monergism.com/ Type in resurrection in the search box. You will see both lectures and sermons delivered by many theologians -- from Jerry Bridges to Charles Spurgeon. A veritable plethora of material, free for the taking, on our Lord's Resurrection. In Him, Doc |
||||||
36 | Psalm 110 Hebrew Version Used by Lockman | Ps 110:1 | DocTrinsograce | 242944 | ||
Hi, Paul... We promise not to lecture you as long as you are here without an agenda -- of course, that would have already been settled when you joined the Study Bible Forum in full agreement with the Terms of Use! So we have no worries, right? This appears to answer your question: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_American_Standard_Bible There are further links to various Lockman documents that might help your inquiry. In Him, Doc |
||||||
37 | is John, Jonah in different languages | John | DocTrinsograce | 242939 | ||
It is the same... Yo-Naw... Why all the interest in the etymology of names? |
||||||
38 | moses, hebrew or egypian etymology | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 242937 | ||
Given Exodus 2:10, "And the child grew, and she brought him unto Pharaoh's daughter, and he became her son. And she called his name Moses: and she said, Because I drew him out of the water." Why would we not see the names origin as Egyptian. | ||||||
39 | what language is Moses and Gershom | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 242930 | ||
See Exodus 2:1-10. Moses was a son of Levi. | ||||||
40 | Help me understand the bible | Genesis | DocTrinsograce | 242908 | ||
Hi, Adien... I would join in welcoming you to the forum! One cannot differentiate what God says from who God is. His Word is living and true (Hebrews 1:1-2; John 1, etc.). Christ even states that those who have the Word and obey the Word are the ones who love Him (John 14:21). If I have learned anything in my Bible study over the years, it is this: It is more important for a person to be attentive to what they DO understand in the Word than what they do NOT understand. I hope that these brief thoughts may augment the advice given you by Ed. In Him, Doc |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [247] >> |