Results 21 - 40 of 53
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: wak Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
21 | How can the Bible be "objective" truth | Bible general Archive 1 | wak | 38325 | ||
Makarios Objective truth was a phrase my bible instuctor used. Reformer Joe gave a good definition Reread my post. I said I believe the Bible is truth but I wasn't sure if it was objective truth because of the subjectivity in the interpretation of even some basics. My second post said I have "faith" in God but I do not "know" there is a God. If you believe those are "faithless"statements or they challenge the authority of the bible or they do not make me a Christian... well, I don't know what to tell ya Makarios.... keep smiling? Do the JW's always smile? |
||||||
22 | How can the Bible be "objective" truth | Bible general Archive 1 | wak | 38341 | ||
Joe: Actually, there's three definitions for objective. The way you essentially defined objective: Having actual existence or reality (unaffected by opinion) does work. With that definition, you can then say the Bible is objective truth. I agree. Thanks for the insight and volcabulary lesson |
||||||
23 | How can the Bible be "objective" truth | Bible general Archive 1 | wak | 38343 | ||
If I read the Psalms, which i love, and David is going on about his many human enemies. Can I in my own mind,for me , interpret that as Satan or even my " self" (my worst enemy). Is that flippant or taking the scripture out of its pure context? Am I breaking a rule? | ||||||
24 | Different levels or rewards in heaven | NT general Archive 1 | wak | 32898 | ||
I wanted to get some information from prior threads about the possible different levels or rewards in heaven.... similar to the awarding of three level of medals at the olympic games. Does anyone know the term... it's something like Bethesa salvation? Does anyone know the exact term??? | ||||||
25 | Saved by belief or belief and baptism? | NT general Archive 1 | wak | 37621 | ||
Seems to me any kind of of cookbook formula goes against the sprit of what Paul's and Jesus's overall message was.... it's the heart, not the law. Simple stuff. | ||||||
26 | Genesis,chapters1-4:True accounts or not | Genesis | wak | 35571 | ||
Why can't God in his sovereignty select any literary method he wants to convey his profound truths . Gee, even humans have that choice. Shakespere says more about the human character, heart, motives than any author of historical facts!!! Why can't God do the same to explain his heart, character and motives ??? I think God, his Word and his Truths (doctrine???) are bigger than science, and bigger than literal history. Maybe the literal explanation of creation is "bigger" than the human mind, beyond our comprehension... so God gave us the essence... what we need to know. Why not? |
||||||
27 | Genesis,chapters1-4:True accounts or not | Genesis | wak | 35631 | ||
My point is that Feinberg's and your postulate below can be questioned; " The book of Genesis is not authoritative if it is not true. For if it is not history, it is not reliable" Essentially, I'm saying that God can select what is reliable. He does not have to limit himself to literal history to express his profound truths, just like humans don't limit themselves to history to explain profound truths. Didn't God create literature and art? Who are we to say he can't use them? It's almost like you're forcing God to be bound by a recitation of literal history in genesis in order for his Word to express truth. Otherwise, his truths are not true and the Bible is not "reliable". Sounds dangerous to me. |
||||||
28 | Genesis,chapters1-4:True accounts or not | Genesis | wak | 35678 | ||
Sorry I didn't answer your questions from your first post. But I didn't say a SINGLE word about " wishing what I could know about God that is not in the Bible". Your questions in your second post are EVEN more confusing, examples:: Q)"What part of truth is dangerous"? A)I didn't say the truth was dangerous. I said YOUR postulate " strikes me has dangerous". Big big difference. Did you intend to be that presumptuous to say that YOUR postulate was truth ? (rhetorical) Q "Please give specifics as to what limiting factor Genesis binds on God". A)Please, please tell me where I said Genesis limits or binds God??? I said virtually the opposite. Why are you putting words in my mouth and then creating questions from them. Is that a not-so subtle debate technique??? Sorry I don't have time to debate for debate sake. PS: Actually , now, I do see a single question (0f six) that honestly reflects something I said. Wow Q:"In fact wouldn't it be fair to say He has chosen to select truth as reliable? He surely doesn't select untruth" A: I'm saying he MAY have selected literal historical truth or he may have used other means to express his Truths.... because it's not verbatim history does not mean it's "untruth". Historical truth is only a tiny fraction of Truth( and it's expression!). If Genesis is verbatim dictated history, great. If not, that great too (He's God!). Just as long as we understand his message. I go back to your postulate that; the Bible is not reliable, if Genesisis 1-4 is not literally, historically true. I challenge that. Let me know if I summarized your postulate incorrectly or if your other 5 questions pertain to what I actually said. Please use quotation marks. Thanks |
||||||
29 | Genesis,chapters1-4:True accounts or not | Genesis | wak | 35685 | ||
I never picked up on that specifically. That's a good insight. The overall flow of Genesis I think is the best indication that Genesis may be sound blow-by-blow history. Again, I don't think God HAD to limit himself to historic precision. Perhaps creation took only seven seconds rather than 7 days or 700 billion years. I don't know. (and I don't its that important in the end) My point is not to start the 1001st argument about fossils and young earth but to say that God did not have to limit himself to literal historical truth in Genesis 1-4 to communicate his Truths and therefore the Bible is still reliable* if Genesis is not a precise literal history lesson. Is my postulate wrong? Thanks *I think that's very important in the end |
||||||
30 | Genesis,chapters1-4:True accounts or not | Genesis | wak | 35732 | ||
Hey Tim Nope, not arguing for a purpose... just trying to reconcile Genesis 1- 4 with 99 percent(?) of the scientists and 65 percent(?) of clergy. I guess it's like like Free Will and "who does God's grace apply to"... no clear cut answers. Just good people doing their best to fiqure out answers My percents are just rough estimates |
||||||
31 | How far would you go in a translation? | Gen 1:1 | wak | 32992 | ||
I know when I was in desperate times in earlier years, a number of times I went to (the only bible we had) the KJV for comfort and wisdom, but just plainly didn't understand a word of it. Imagine how frustrating and very sad that is!. I didn't go back to a Bible for years because of that frustration. I firmly believe if I had picked up an NLT instead back then, I wouldn't have wasted soo many years before being reborn. I believe, because of my limitations; education, patience, etc., that the NASB would not have serve me nearly as well as the NLT ... NLT made a big difference in my life I think many (the majority?)of prospective new Christians need to be spoon (milk?) fed. Think of the literacy of the inner city schools just as one of too many examples. I am limited, but I do see a lot of insularity here... people lost in the trees. Is pedantic the right word ? Wasn't Christ a Populist? Weren't the apostles simple people,virtually illiterate? I'm not critizing or passing judgement, just giving the perspective of a banal Christain on the outside looking in. Positives here? What a resource of knowledege. Many people here are brillant. I can't get over the logic and diciplined dialogues where gems of truth can be found. The Archives are rich with the Word and insights. God's work is being done. Great Stuff! |
||||||
32 | How far would you go in a translation? | Gen 1:1 | wak | 33083 | ||
kalos, thanks for relating. I have graduated from the NLT to NIV and to a leaser degree NASB. I just think we have to very careful about the Christians who do need to be spoon-fed. Isn't God's, hands down, absolute, # 1 goal, to reconcile as many as possible to him. Don't know a particular verse... just an impression. Do I need a verse? I agree with you about the Art analogy, but when I first start reading that NLT it was like Rembrandt to me. Again the child doesn't appreciate high literature or poetry (KJV). They just need Paul's milk... and grow from that. I do read the RSV for the power of the words... the literary merit?... but I don"t study it. I looked at KJV recently, but still don't "get it" Evidence on the assertion that the apostles (fisherman) were virtually illiterate? No, just an impression of a drum beat through-out the NT of the Apostles as polar opposites of the learned religious scholars. Doesn't it scream out to you ? It's not exactly subtle. I would guess the written words were not common to fisherman... that their knowledge was based on memorization. Even Jesus, did he write anything? Just a rhetorical question... I think tone (the drumbeat?) is more important than nuance (a snare?), because God says the important things over and over again. You can't miss them, even in the NLT. God Bless You,kalos |
||||||
33 | Howcould Jesus / John the B be strangers | Matthew | wak | 32504 | ||
Anyone have an explanation why when Jesus and John the Baptist initially met they were secular strangers??? When in fact , they were cousins whose mothers were very close and shared such glorious knowledge ? You would have thought they would have had some time together, Passovers in Jerusalem etc, etc. Thanks |
||||||
34 | Howcould Jesus / John the B be strangers | Matthew | wak | 32599 | ||
Thanks Joel, forgot the Bible reference. New here. Actually it was John 1:31..."I myself do not know him". But I just found my answer on the notes for John 1:33 | ||||||
35 | Is there nothing we can do? | Matthew | wak | 38680 | ||
What's so tremendous about God loving "some" people. Even I love some people. That's easy. Didn't Christ say someplace in the Bible that loving some is easy, loving everybody is the hard part. Do you think God would ask us to do something that he doesn't do himself? |
||||||
36 | Is there nothing we can do? | Matthew | wak | 38720 | ||
No difficulties. I just thought you originally said God loved only some people. Therefore, died on the cross only for some people and some sins. Glad we cleared that up! Jesus was very precise on what his most important commandment was and I would think he would follow that commandment himself. Even one the Pharasees (who was close to heaven) fiqured that out. |
||||||
37 | Was John the baptist doubting? | Luke 7:19 | wak | 38486 | ||
My opinion: John the Baptist was human. He had faith. He believed Christ was the Messiah. He did not absolutely "know" Christ was the Messiah. So, he struggled with his faith ... he questioned... just like all humans. That's one of the best things about the Bible: it doesn't sweep people's questioning or doubts under the carpet. There may be a reason for that. |
||||||
38 | why is Acts 2:44 not practiced today | Acts 2:44 | wak | 38180 | ||
Was the church ever that selfless or not concern with position/ambition? I think of James and John's Mom asking about her son's rank, right after Christ announces his upcomong death! Can you get any more selfish (or crass) then THAT... even in 2002? Just read yesterday where Paul couldn't send anyone but Timothy to the Philippians (2:21) because " they ALL seek after their own interest, not those of Christ". Think about that; even in Paul's own inner circle(the best!) in the supposedly idyllic selfless church no christian could make the grade. Somehow, I find that comforting. Thank God for grace. (did someone ask earlier, if you could be a christian and be in sin?) There's no reason to pine for the past. For the most part, it's always been the best of times and the worst of times...in 100AD or 2002AD. Has there ever been a generation of preachers who didn't think it was the worst of times? |
||||||
39 | Does Christ stand alone for salvation?? | Acts 4:12 | wak | 33383 | ||
Paul or anyone else: Pragmatically speaking, what about the 65 percent of the U.S.population?: - who have faith in Jesus's salvation (grace) thru the cross -do some nice things for others (WORKS) - live somewhat better moral lives than their neighbor because of their faith - don't read the Bible, but trust in the main 3 or 4 messages - talk to Jesus (pray) usually only if something is very good or very bad. Are they saved under your definition? |
||||||
40 | Does Christ stand alone for salvation?? | Acts 4:12 | wak | 33470 | ||
Robert, Funny,of all things, you would pick "discipleship". I fear that work the most... anything but that. I'd rather parachute out of a plane (and I don't like flying). I too try to avoid discipleship, rationalize it,etc. But the Bible NT is just oozing with how we need to be disciples of the word. If you get the Bible down to two words they would be faith and love... and discipleship is THEE act of love I think in our culture today we worship Image more than Money... I'm a product of that culture. Hopefully, overtime, I will die to that part of it. WAK |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 ] Next > Last [3] >> |