Results 21 - 40 of 6970
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Hank Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
21 | Quries about Christmas? | NT general | Hank | 211727 | ||
MJH, you've been a registrant of SBF for 4 years and the only thing in your personal profile is your user name, MJH. That's not much to go on. Why not venture to add to it as a Christmas gift to your neighbors at the Forum? --Hank | ||||||
22 | Author's role in acts | Acts 28:28 | Hank | 211524 | ||
Dear Keliy: Your willingness to trace the sources of your post that contained excerpts from various authors is commendable and your inability to locate them is understandable. One handy tool, which Tim Moran explained in a post some time ago, is this: Enclose in quotation marks a phrase or two from a published source and enter the words in a Web search engine. For example, my Google search the following quote yielded consiserable information, viz., "Once upon a midnight dreary" begins the first stanza of the poem, "The Raven," by Edgar Allan Poe. Similar results revealed that "To be or not to be, that is the question" is from William Shakespeare's Hamlet, Act 3, Scene 1. It's a handy tool and frequently makes it possible to detect plagiarism, especially when a passage has been copied verbatim. You might like to test the effectiveness of this tool on your multi-sourced post to see what you can come up with. --Hank | ||||||
23 | Author's role in acts | Acts 28:28 | Hank | 211428 | ||
Thank you, Keliy. For the sake of Forum readers and in deference to your source, please cite the source and refer to your post number in which the quoted passage appears. Plagiarism, as John has pointed out, is serious business and we all of us must be careful to guard aganst it. Plagiarism is literary theft and yet there are people who would not dream of stealing a fine watch from a jewelry store but think nothing of stealing another person's very words and publishing them as though they were their very own. This problem surfaces on the Forum from time to time, so this post is not directed to you only but to all our Forum authors as a reminder to avoid plagiarism like the plague. Grace to you, keliy, and may you and your family find much to be thankful to our blessed God fpr this special season of the year. In Him, Hank. | ||||||
24 | I just started reading the Bible and.... | OT general | Hank | 211320 | ||
Pete, I beg to argue the case: I did not issue any dictum to you or anyone else that you must read the Bible 50 times in order to undertand God's message of salvation! I merely alluded to the practice followed by a Bible commentator, whose name was G. Campbell Morgan by the way, who is on record as saying that he read a book of Scripture at least 50 times before picking up his pen to comment on it. ...... In this brief response, Pete, I will not attempt to address individually the myriad of questions you throw my way but will offer a succinct comment to the final comment of your post. You say there must be a simple way There is, Pete, but first you must disembarrass your soul of the notion that you have a powerful mind, for such is your claim in your post. Pete, how can you, how dare you or I or any other man with feet of clay and eyes that see so dimly claim to have a powerful mind with which to approach the eternal word of the trancendent and mighty God? I quoted it in my former post to you and I'll quote it again in case it was overlooked: Illumination is the ministry of the Holy Spirit by which He enables Christians to understand the truths of God revealed by Scripture. See Psalm 119:18. ...... But you have not indicated whether you are a regenerate believer, but I do pray that you are, Pete. ..... There was a time when I was like Saul of Tarsus, fighting against the goads, challenging the word of God and even God Himself, trying to figure everything out for myself (I also thought I was very intelligent back in those days). By the grace of God I came to realize that I couldn't go it alone, that I was not nearly the mental cracker jack that I thought I was, that I was in fact nothing but a wretched sinner in dire need of a Savior, and that the only way out of my abyss was, as the phrase goes, to "let go and let God" have His way in my life, to surrendor my stubbord will to the Lordship of Jesus Christ. God says in His word, "Be still, and know that I am God. I will be exalted among the heathen, I will be exalted in the earth" (Psalm 46:10). ...... Oh, by the way, G. Campbell Morgan didn't stop after his reading through the Bible 50 times. He topped 100 times before the Lord called him home. --Hank | ||||||
25 | Got Patient, Need Rest TGIF/S? | Titus 3:9 | Hank | 211309 | ||
Ovadyah: Hmmm, I was looking for the Christian Forum called "Study Bible Forum." Evidently I logged on to a Jewish forum. Pardon the intrusion, please. --Hank | ||||||
26 | I just started reading the Bible and.... | OT general | Hank | 211307 | ||
Pete, let's look at a few facts. Scripture is its own best interpreter, but you have only begun to scratch the surface of Scripture. A wise man examines the whole thoroughly before attempting to dissect its parts. When as a young college freshman I decided to take my major in English, I soon discovered that I did not become an expert on Shakespeare by reading through a couple of his plays, and that I was not by any means qualified to become a Shakespearean critic. A Bible commentator several years ago stated that under no circumstances would he write a word of commentary on any Bible book until he had carefully and prayerfully read the book through at least 50 times. .... You have read parts of Deuteronomy, the book of Matthew and now are in Mark. You will have questions, of course you will. Every serious reader of any difficult literary work, whether it is the Bible, Shakespeare or John Milton, will have questions. Write them down and save them for later. Continue with your reading, use a non-technical commentary or study Bible (suggest MacArthur's) if you get bogged down, but continue to read. Compare Scripture with Scripture, do some cross referencing, try to get an overall picture of all of Scripture first before you do anything else. This should be the time for looking at the whole forest, not the time for examining each tree minutely. Furthermore, your battery of questions sounds to me as though you are trying to understand the eternal words of God on your own without divine illumination. It will never happen. This is contrary to what the Scriptures teach: "Open thou mine eyes that I may behold wondrous things out of Thy law" (Psalm 119:18). If you are a regenerate believer in Jesus Christ, and I pray that you are, then pray for illumination. It is the ministry of the Holy Spirit by which He empowers Christians with understanding of the truths of God revealed in Scripture. And a parting word to you, Pete, from Proverbs 3:5,6: "Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge Him, and He shall direct thy paths." --Hank | ||||||
27 | Kill your brother and drink strong drink | James 2:10 | Hank | 211085 | ||
Pete: Where does Scripture teach that drug-induced euphoria (alcohol is a drug and a powerful one at that) "allows me to feel the goodness of God's blessings"? Are Christians therefore who choose not to imbibe depriving themselves of these blessings? Is alcohol a vital crutch without which the followers of Christ are missing out on the full joys of their salvation? Please think about these questions, Pete. I don't want your answers to them for they would only serve to foster further debate and that's not what this Forum is about. ....... The Christian walks by faith, not by sight; he walks by the truth of God's word and is governed by that truth, not by his feelings. If one needs to get a "buzz" on in order to marvel at the mighty works of God and His love in giving His one and only Son to save those who believe in Him from eternally perishing, it's time for him to go back to the Bible and discover its real message to fallen man. That message is not to get a euphoric"buzz" on in order to behold the majesty of God and His creation. Please, no more of this circular chatter Pete. It entirely misses the point of God's word, it edifies no one, and it does not align itself with the aims and mission of Study Bible Forum. So please, I implore you, no more of this. Read the Terms of Use laid down for the benefit and direction of registrants to this Forum and comply with them. --Hank | ||||||
28 | interputer the main thought | Bible general Archive 4 | Hank | 210992 | ||
Dear Cheri: There are as you say 66 books in the Bible, but not all of them have a Chapter 3. Six of them have fewer than three chapters, viz. Obadiah, Haggai, Philemon, 2 John, 3 John, and Jude. Thus, in only 60 books is there a Chapter 3. This narrows the field of inquiry, but not by much. :-) --Hank | ||||||
29 | Am I ignorant | 1 Cor 12:1 | Hank | 210991 | ||
Dear Brad Myers: I use your first and last name in order to avoid confusion, since we have at least one other Brad on SBF, Brad K. ...... Brad the passage from Peter's pentecostal sermon in Acts 2 which you cited to support your position on continuationism really doesn't. In his famous sermon at Pentecost Peter quoted from the prophet Joel, and it shows that while the events at Pentecost were indeed a pre-fulfillment, a foretaste of what will happen in the millenial kingdom, they will not be completely fulfilled until the millenial kingdom and the final judgment. Thus the passage in Acts 2 makes no case for continuationism as it is conceived of and taught in our time. --Hank | ||||||
30 | 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 | ||||||
31 | 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 | ||||||
32 | A difficult question | Bible general Archive 4 | Hank | 210459 | ||
Hi, COG :: If you are serious enough about this subject to invest a few dollars of your money and quite a few hours of your time, pick up a copy of Josh McDowell's "The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict." Published by Thomas Nelson, the book is still in print and can be purchased at religious bookstores and online. With its 760 pages, this book is no wimp. It tackles hard questions such as "Is the Bible historically reliable? Is the Bible from God?" ...And much, much more. ...... I've enjoyed the book enormously and find myself turning back to it periodically in order to refresh my mind on certain questions. And I believe you will enjoy it too. ...... For a postscript, I'll say that the subject that you've broached is of such enormity and scope that no "crash course" or cursory reading is likely to do much good, certainly not a response so necessarily brief as a post on Study Bible Forum must needs be. That's why I recommend this hefty book. And it just happens to be one of the best contemporary books on the subject that I've come across. So please buy it, read it, study it, and I truly do believe, you'll be the richer for having done so. An avid reader for many years, I always feel slightly robbed when I invest my time and money in a book only to find it wasn't very good and hardly deserved the investment I made in it. But I don't think you'll feel cheated when you buy and read "The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict." I certainly haven't felt short-changed by it! --Hank | ||||||
33 | 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 | ||||||
34 | The Emerging Church, is it Biblical? | 1 Cor 9:19 | Hank | 210394 | ||
Hi, Brad. Admittedly I'm no authority on this modern phenomenon known as the emerging/emergent church movement. I've attended a single meeting of one congregation which I suspect was a subscriber to the idea. According to some things I've been reading about this movement, it appears to be making some gains in modern ecclesiology, though what permanent impact it may have is uncertain. One would hope that it, not unlike a variety of faddish notions that have "emerged" and quickly died before it, will soon give way and return to the pattern laid down in the New Testament for the New Testament Church of our Lord Jesus Christ. ....... From what I've gleaned from my readings on this new movement, its promoters take the position that what they call the "traditional church" is, to use their terminology, "out of touch" in this age that has been labeled "post modernism." But what do they mean? Just what is being out of touch? Is Christ's church for which He gave His life out of touch? Is the gospel that Paul charged Timothy to preach out of touch? Out of touch how and to whom -- unbelievers, sinners, scoffers, haters of the truth of God's word? Surely if by "traditional church" one means the church that Christ Himself built, it cannot rightly be said that it is "out of touch" of those who surrender themselves to Him and are thereby divinely added to His body, the church. ...... And wherein does Scripture teach that the church must change in order to conform to the mold of the present thinking, conduct and value systems of the "postmodern society" or any other society? Scripture teaches, "Be not conformed to this world, but be ye transformed by the renewing pf your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect will of God" (Romans 12:2). ....... The "emergers" talk about new and imaginative ways to meet the needs of the "unchurched." So just what are the needs of the unchurched? New and imaginative "purpose-driven" programs? Or salvation of their souls? What's wrong with what Paul charged Timothy to do? Paul said, "Preach the word; be ready in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long-suffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves, teachers having itching years; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables" (2 Timothy 4:2-4). Are the "emergers" by their emphasis on new and imaginative ways of doing things forgetting that it is the gospel of Christ, not "purpose-driven programs, that is the power of God unto salvation? (Romans 1:16). ....... There is no such thing as an emerging church and no such thing as an emerging gospel. The church is the body of Christ, so how on earth can it be said that it is in any sense "emerging"? And there is no biblcal sense in which the gospel is "emerging" -- certainly not. It is about this gospel that Jude wrote when he penned these words: "Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once for all delivered unto the saints" (Jude 3). ....... In summary, doesn't it make more sense simply to dedicate oneself to preaching the word of God (2 Tim 4:2), to let God add to the church those whom He saves -- that's His business anyway -- (Acts 2:47), and forget all this "emerging church" nonsense? ..... A good although short treatment of this emerging church movement is at the following link: http://www.gotquestions.org/emerging-church-emergent.html and at the end of the article the editors cite a book by John MacArthur called, "The Truth War: Fighting for Certainty in an Age of Deception." --Hank | ||||||
35 | 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 | ||||||
36 | 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 | ||||||
37 | Luke 24:36 red letters NASB answered | Luke 24:36 | Hank | 210246 | ||
Husky, thanks for your follow-up on the red-letter issue involving Luke 24:36. The cloud may have a silver lining, after all. If the copy of the NASB you own that has the misprint turns out to be a rare edition, better hang on to it. It might become a "collector's item" someday. :-) I hope you'll become a regular user/contributor to Study Bible Forum. --Hank | ||||||
38 | 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 | ||||||
39 | 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 | ||||||
40 | 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 | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [349] >> |