Results 21 - 40 of 4325
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Hank Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
21 | Am I ignorant | 1 Cor 12:1 | Hank | 210976 | ||
Well said, Doc. The Scriptures once and for all delivered to the saints, being God-breathed and complete, need no supplementation and require no 'leap in faith.' Quite to the contrary they instill in the heart of the believer a hope that is both sure and steadfast. There is therefore no need whatever to 'leap' anywhere but all the need in the world to obey 2 Timothy 2:15 --Hank | ||||||
22 | The Lord's Day--Does It Matter? | Ex 20:8 | Hank | 210884 | ||
sdaone: In post after post, in defiance of posted Forum guidelines laid down by the Lockman Foundation, you have been pushing the denominational bias of Seventh-Day Adventism. You have even gone out of your way to respond to posts on this subject that are years old. Pushing denominational bias is not permitted. and if you wish to continue as an active participant in SBF, it must cease once and for all. You would have been wise to have heeded Doc's advice some time ago. Please study the Terms of Use for this Forum and follow the rules carefully and consistently. --Hank | ||||||
23 | The Emerging Church, is it Biblical? | 1 Cor 9:19 | Hank | 210422 | ||
Amen, WOS. A fine piece of writing -- relevant, well organized and cogently presented. --Hank | ||||||
24 | Does Christ come into our hearts? | Rom 10:9 | Hank | 210338 | ||
Hi, Justme :: Yes indeed, "surrender" is an apt word to use here, far more meaningful and powerful than "invite" or "ask." To invite or ask in does not necessarily imply that one is submitting to the authority of whomever is being invited or asked in. To surrender to always does. ...... Back in the mid 1930s a popular actress wrote a thin little book called "Why Not Try God?" The title has always bothered me. We don't "try" God. In a real sense He tries us. Similiarly, we must surrender to Christ as our Lord and Savior. I don't believe it quite captures the believer's true relationship with his Lord merely to say we "invite" Him in. The old hymn says it pretty well I think: "All to Jesus I surrender, all to Him I freely give. I surrender all." ...... Justme, I'm sure that the Missouri Ozarks are lovely this time of year, second only in grandeur to the Arkansas Ozarks. :-) Grace to you. --Hank | ||||||
25 | 1C6:9 Church position | 1 Cor 6:9 | Hank | 210266 | ||
Dear Adam's son: In addition to being in violation of the Forum's TOU, dual registrations are highly confusing, as you must know by now. Your "explanation" fails to explain why you registered twice under two user names. Dual registrations don't just happen by accident. Please explain fully and clearly why you registered both as adam's son and writteninthebook. And you must choose now one name and one only and use it exclusively. Failure to do so will result in the loss of your privilege to use either. Again, dual registrations are not permitted on this forum. --Hank | ||||||
26 | Luke 24:36-words in red? | Luke 24:36 | Hank | 210129 | ||
sdaone :: While it is generally true that the more a narrative is retold, i.e., passed from one person to another without reference to the original document, the more likely it is to lose its original meaning, but this does not hold when translating from a single source document. The opposite comes nearer holding true. For example, there is considerably more knowledge of biblical manuscripts and languages, customs and regional archaeology now than there was in the 17th century when the KJV was translated. Therefore there is far more likelihood that the original meaning would be enhanced in today's good quality translations, not lost. ..... When you mention that the NIV has many typos in it, perhaps it isn't typos you really mean, because typos are simply printing mistakes that are almost always corrected by proof-readers before the book goes to the printer. Perhaps the fact that the NIV is not a literal translation may have led you to think it had printed a bunch of typos, because truly is does not always "read like" some of the formal translations. Unlike some of the more literal translations, such as the KJV, the NASB and the ESV, the NIV takes a less formal approach to translation, freely using a device they call "dynamic equivalence." This is an attempt by the translators to render into English what they, the translators, consider the original author meant by what he said but not necessarily telling the reader what he said. Another word for "dynamic equivalence" is paraphrase. Some people love paraphrased Bibles and others do not. I'm one who decidedly does not care for them. I'd much prefer not to have God's word filtered through the paraphrastic little gray cells of a translator! When I read Shakespeare, I want to read what Shakespeare said, not what somebody is all too eager to tell me what Shakespeare meant. And much more importantly, when I read the Bible I want to know as nearly as possible what God said and not what some unknown paraphraser hidden away in his ivory tower thinks He may have meant by what He said. --Hank | ||||||
27 | Luke 24:36-words in red? | Luke 24:36 | Hank | 210126 | ||
sdaone :: Yes, the King James Bible is a worthy and time-honored translation, but in deference to other fine translations, e.g., the New American Standard Bible and the English Standard Version, it should be noted that they too used the same principles of translation as did the KJV. And the relatively new convention of printing the words of Christ in red ink is the work of editors and publishers, not translators. I'm pleased that you like the King James Bible. It is a lovely translation. --Hank | ||||||
28 | Luke 24:36-words in red? | Luke 24:36 | Hank | 210113 | ||
Hi, sdaone :: You are right in your observation that there are a few textual differences among certain translations. This can be accounted for because of differences in manuscript traditions. The King James Bible follows a family of manuscripts known by its Latin name of "Textus Receptus." Most contemporary translations follow sundry other manuscript traditions, variously known as critical text, majority text, eclectic text, etc. Those who favor one tradition accuse the other of leaving something out, while those in the other camp accuse the first of adding something to Scripture. All of which means that manuscript disagreements still go on. But whether it's the old King James or the New American Standard, they are both trustworthy and reliable, and the minute differences between them do not alter any points of doctrine. --Hank | ||||||
29 | Two Natures or One? | Rom 6:6 | Hank | 210073 | ||
Hi, Nevvvvine :: You ask why a Christian should "bother getting baptized today." Well, I really didn't know it was a bother at all! ..... Reason aplenty is that the Lord Jesus Christ commanded it (Matthew 28:19). Baptism of the believer in Christ by immersion in water is therefore an essential of obedience, whereas only faith is essential for salvation (John 3:36). Baptism neither saves nor contributes to salvation in any way. Salvation is wholly of God. Man is not saved by works. Man is not saved by faith plus works. Man is saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone (Ephesians 2:8,9). ...... Here are a couple of links that will probably be helpful to you: http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/0573.htm and http://www.gotquestions.org/baptism-salvation.html --Hank | ||||||
30 | Two Natures or One? | Rom 6:6 | Hank | 209965 | ||
Newwine :: I urge you in the strongest terms possible to read and take to heart Post 209949 entered by BradK. In it Brad quotes C. H. Spurgeon. and considering the sum and substance of your posts to date, my friend, it seems perfectly obvious that you may be able to profit by giving close attention to what Spurgeon has to say. ..... Again, that's post No. 209949. Please read it, study it, print it out and carry it with you -- and above all, think about it. Opinions and views based but loosely on Scripture, if indeed at all, are not edifying to the readers of Study Bible Forum. --Hank | ||||||
31 | Two Natures or One? | Rom 6:6 | Hank | 209947 | ||
Newwine :: I'm confused about your position on baptism. Perhaps you can help clear away my confusion in this way: Which of the following statements more clearly reflects your belief? (1) Salvation is by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. (2) Salvation is by grace through faith plus baptism. --Hank | ||||||
32 | How many Gods | Bible general Archive 4 | Hank | 209869 | ||
92406 :: Are you a Jehovah's Witness? --Hank | ||||||
33 | Prophets in the church | Eph 4:11 | Hank | 209812 | ||
Nevvveine :: Before getting into the business of considering percentages of accuracy of today's so-called prophets, should we not first search Scripture to determine whether it supports the doctrine that there in fact are contemporary prophets at all? From the multiple passages in Scripture that warn against false prophets we may be sure that there are prophets today whose message is patently false. But are there true prophets? We can extend the question by asking can there be true prophets and what need is there for them if the Scriptures are complete? When we assert that there are divinely inspired prophets today, we affirm that God's word is incomplete and requires additional revelation. Such a position poses a most serious problem, and flies in the face of what the Bible says about itself. See, for example, 2 Timothy 3:16,17. ....... Ephesians 4:11 has been suggested in this thread as a "proof text" in support of the continuation of true prophets from Apostolic times down to the present time. But this text does not support such an assumption, nor does any other passage in the New Testament. ....... There are true prophets today, yes, but not in the sense of being foretellers of the future. There is another sense in which the word is frequently used in Scripture, and that is forth-tellers. In our time those who proclaim the gospel of Christ as it is revealed in the word of God are in fact forth-tellers or prophets. ...... I'd like to close this post by recommending an article by John MacArthur in which he exegetes Ephesians 4:11 as well as sets down an excellent biblically-based exposition of the subject of apostles and prophets. Please note how the Amplified Bible renders Ephesians 4:11 ,,,,,,, Perhaps you and Bloodwashed and others could profit from a study of this article by John MacArthur. The URL is as follows: http://www.biblebb.com/files/MAC/sg1851.htm --Hank | ||||||
34 | Alter Calls? | Rom 10:9 | Hank | 209710 | ||
Cheri, well spoken, and I like the spirit of your post. God's grace to you. --Hank | ||||||
35 | Alter Calls? | Rom 10:9 | Hank | 209660 | ||
meta, sorry you chose to feel offended at a short post that was written seven years before you registered on Study Bible Forum and directed not to you but to someone else you probably never heard of. It seems incredible that a beginner on the Forum would choose to post a tirade against someone he doesn't know, about something that doesn't concern him that was written in a seven-year-old post. The idea of Study Bible Forum is not to search through the archives and drag up something to be disagreeable about. The users of this Forum who get on well are those who contribute worthwhile, Bible-based posts that teach and edify. Telling someone to "get a life" has always struck me as being particularly contentious and presumputous. There are registrants here who have been active on this Forum since its beginning in 2001, one of whom is the person you told to "get a life, His life." It can be very annoying to others when a new registrant comes on and starts dishing out advice right off the bat. For example, I happen to know that the person you told to "get a life, His life" has been a regenerate believer in Jesus Christ for years. He does not need your advice. Think about it and please enhance your understanding of what this Forum is all about by studying the terms of use and applying them to your contributions to it. The longer you stay around and the more you know about Study Bible Forum and its people, the more inclined you will likely be to see your own need for Christian growth and your own limitations in dishing out advice to others. --Hank | ||||||
36 | Crucified with Christ | Gal 2:20 | Hank | 209505 | ||
Dear Kcabml4 :: Many thanks for your questions, mein Herr. Actually I am more of a student of Doc than he of me. And even if I were Doc's teacher back when the post you refer to was written, he has long since surpassed me, as Plato surpassed his teacher Socrates. Let's do this: let me ask Doc to respond to your questions. It will give you another, different, perspective on the subjects and, besides that, will almost surely be an improvement on anything I could do. I'll contact Doc and see whether I can talk him into doing both of us the favor of responding to you. --Hank | ||||||
37 | more than one gospel? | 2 Tim 2:15 | Hank | 209442 | ||
"...WOF movement much more dangerous" ..... I think so too, Brad -- WOF and this "emerging church" business. That's pretty wild. ...... If we have any of this brand of "dispensationalist churches" in my neck of the woods, I've been blissfully unaware of them. I think sometimes I must wear blinds around my eyes, like a horse does, and therefore see only the church I attend and miss what's happening in all the rest. --Hank | ||||||
38 | more than one gospel? | 2 Tim 2:15 | Hank | 209438 | ||
Truthseeker68 :: (1) WHO: Who are these dispensationalists? .....(2) WHAT: What do "they" believe? ..... (3) WHY: Why do you call their beliefs heretical? ..... (4) HOW: How do you propose to "call them out? ...... Thus far all I've read is a rant against this nebulous, staw-man army of supposed heretics. Let's examine the teaching of Scripture on this topic or else drop the issue. A general tirade against presumed heretics really does no good. Talk to us about what the word of God teaches and we will be much more likely to listen to you. --Hank | ||||||
39 | God Punished New Orleans with Katrina | Bible general Archive 4 | Hank | 209437 | ||
Hi, Jack :: Wouldn't it also be fair to ask, "If Kim Clement is a true prophet, how did he get things wrong?" You see, there is no record in Scripture of a bona fide prophet, chosen by God Himself, ever being wrong. ..... The problem with self-proclaimed prophets, Jack, is this: If in fact they are true prophets and get their prophecies wrong even once, then that would mean that God didn't get it right when He inspired the prophet to prophesy. Thus we are faced with a choice. We must choose to believe the prophet who claims to be inspired by God or to reject him. If we choose to believe he is divinely inspired yet see clearly that his prophecy is simply untrue, what can we say then? That God made a boo-boo? Or do we amend our thinking about the prophet's claim and accept the obvious, that the prophet himself is bogus? Anyone with enough brass can claim to be a prophet. Those who are glitzy and gutsy enough to dazzle and deceive large numbers of people make pretty good money at it. --Hank | ||||||
40 | Church membership...a requirement? | Bible general Archive 4 | Hank | 209409 | ||
Good, sound post, Doc. I've been a follower of Christ, i.e., a Christian for well over 50 years and never been quite able to understand the thinking of anyone who claims to be a Christian but refuses to tie himself to the church, the body of Christ. My analogy may be corny and simplistic, but for me to say that I am a Christian and refuse to affiliate myself to the church, for whose life the Lord gave His, is unthinkable. It's like saying that I am a citizen of the United States but refusing to obey its laws, to pledge allegiance to its flag or to honor the Constitution upon which it was founded and according to which it is governed. ..... Speaking of the very early days of the church, Scripture says, "And the LORD ADDED to the CHURCH daily those who were being saved" (Acts 2:27, emphasis mine). Salvation is God's sovereign work. God Himself adds the regenerate to the church, the body of Christ. Scripture does not teach that church membership is an option for God's elect. It is thus quite impossible to be among Christ's redeemed without being a member of His body, the church, since Scripture plainly states that it is God who adds to the church those who are being saved. --Hank | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [217] >> |