Results 2121 - 2140 of 2277
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: Hank Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
2121 | Don't sweat the small stuff? | NT general Archive 1 | Hank | 9719 | ||
2 Timothy 3:16 | ||||||
2122 | Puppets? | Rom 5:6 | Hank | 9677 | ||
Puppets? Wist ye not, I wist not what thy question really is. But I have a guess it's about election and free will and that sort of thing. If it is, please use the Search feature and read to your heart's content. It is difficult to see any need to resurrect this tired old debate. --Hank | ||||||
2123 | Luke 23:34 When added to original MSS? | Luke 23:34 | Hank | 9650 | ||
renee007: The translators' footnote of Luke 23:34 in the NIV translation contains these words: "Some early manuscripts do not have this sentence." A similar footnote is appended to the verse by the NASB translators. The footnotes say "some early manuscripts" do not contain the verse; they do not by any means say all of them do not contain it. They give no indication whatever that the verse was added at a later date....... As to your question concerning the matter of Christ's prayer for forgiveness in this case not being contingent on repentence: The first answer that comes to mind is that the Lord is sovereign and thus can do what He pleases. But the real key to understanding the meaning of this verse seems to hinge on two things. The first is inherent in the words that follow Christ's petition for forgiveness. He said, "for they do not know what they are doing." They were not aware of the enormous scope of their wicked act. They were blind to the light of truth. Speaking of this dark hour, Paul says in 1 Cor. 2:8 "for if they had understood it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory."....... The second thing is this: Jesus, knowing full well that these people in their ignorance and blindness, did not really know the full extent of their heinous deed, prayed for their forgiveness. Their forgiveness was quite undeserved, but His prayer is a shining example of the boundless compassion of divine grace..... The passage is not a Scriptural anomaly. It does not negate the teaching elsewhere concerning the necessity for repentence. But repentence is a concomitant of conviction, and conviction, in the Scriptural sense, is a clear sense of wrongdoing. The mockers of Jesus did not have this sense of wrongdoing. Contrast this crowd at the crucifixion with the Jews who comprised the audience of Peter's sermon on Pentecost recorded in Acts 2. Speaking of Christ, Peter told them in no uncertain terms, "you nailed to the cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death." (v.23). In v. 36 Peter says, "Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made Him both Lord and Christ -- this Jesus whom you crucified." V. 37 picks up the narrative, saying they were "pierced to the heart" and asked Peter and the rest of the apostles what they should do. Having heard from Peter who the man really was whom they had led to be crucified, they were convicted in their hearts. Peter's answer to what they should do comes in v. 38. The very first step in his directive was the command to repent. But the command to repent came in the wake of his sermon in which the Jews, having been clearly informed of the nature of their wrongdoing, were pierced to the heart, which is tantamount to saying, they were under conviction for their sins. --Hank | ||||||
2124 | What is the 'spirit of harlotry'? | Hos 5:4 | Hank | 9637 | ||
This "spirit of harlotry (prostitution)" is a Hebrew idiom referring to Israel's idolatry. Hosea makes this clear in the preceding chapter, specifically in Hosea 4:12. The idiom is poignant. Israel violated its covenent with God and sold out to idols in a manner not unlike a prostitute who violates her body by selling sexual favors. In either case God's commandments are broken. --Hank | ||||||
2125 | Please explain "double edged sword" | Heb 4:12 | Hank | 9599 | ||
PK 1776, that would likely be the "two-edged sword" of Hebrews 4:12. The writer uses this as a powerful metaphor for the word of God, which is of course the Bible. For those who know Christ the Bible is a source of comfort and nourishment. But it is a "sword" of judgment to those who do not know the Lord Jesus. Not only is the word of God described in this verse as being "sharper than any two-edge sword" but it is also called "living and active." No other book in the world has ever truthfully been called living and active. --Hank | ||||||
2126 | Is the Scriptures historically reliable? | 1 Tim 2:11 | Hank | 9596 | ||
Lionstrong, greetings. We haven't "interacted" in quite a while, so I'll try to interact amicably and not act up :-) Yes sir, I believe with all my heart that the Scriptures are historically correct. If we believe in God and believe that the Scriptures are God-breathed, that doesn't leave us much wiggle room to come up with alternate humanly-conceived theories, does it?.......Concerning secular historical documents, while some are considerably more reliable than are others, none is perhaps without some error or exaggeration here and there. Some are fairly objective and others quite subjective in the manner in which they treat their material. A sterling example of historical error is Herodotus in his History of the Greco-Persian Wars. Modern historians generally agree that his work is riddled with fantasies and inaccuracies..... But I stray from the question. Suffice it to say that secular historical background does not have to be without some error in order to be helpful to us today in our quest to learn more about people and their manner of life in Bible times. What we want is a general view that does not require pin-point accuracy of every detail. No secular work, historical or otherwise, that I know of has been subjected to anything approaching the minute, virtually microscopic scrutiny that the Bible has. No one yet has truly proved the Bible wrong. And I join an army of believers who believe that no one ever will. --Hank | ||||||
2127 | Isn't a righteous man a good man? | Rom 5:7 | Hank | 9531 | ||
Nolan, Paul's thrust here is that we were neither of these things -- righteous or good -- but sinners, and Christ died for us (Romans 5:8). To your question "Isn't a righeous man a good man?" a possible answer is that a righteous man would be likely to be a good man, but a good man would not necessarily be righteous. The Greek word Paul uses here translated "righteous" generally has the meaning of being in a right relationship, e.g., with God. The word translated "good" can be associated with doing good deeds, being benevolent, but not necessarily righteous. Perhaps this is the distinction Paul is making, but I offer this as a possibility only, with no warranties or money-back guarantees that this is the right interpretation..... But Paul's main point is clear and worth restating: Christ died for us -- unrighteous, no-good, helpless sinners. --Hank | ||||||
2128 | Women being called 'cows'? | Amos 4:1 | Hank | 9530 | ||
What an indelicate question, Nolan -- there are ladies present :-) But yes, sure enough, cows is what Amos calls the women of Samaria who lived luxurious lives. He was comparing the upper-class women to the best breed of cattle in Canaan, which were pampered and given the run of the best pastures. Whether by his odd metaphor Amos meant to flatter or insult these women is not certain. And Scripture doesn't reveal what the women thought of being called cows. I considered asking my wife what she thought about this passage but later decided I'd better not take the risk! --Hank | ||||||
2129 | Multiple authors for Paul's epistles? | NT general Archive 1 | Hank | 9526 | ||
Nolan, Hank's Famous Theory No. 166 states: "It is entirely possible that the great apostle Paul dictated many of his letters, or parts of them in any event. It is likewise possible that some of his companions, including those you cited, may have assisted him with the mechanics of putting his words down in writing. But the words were Paul's, or, more properly, they were Paul's words guided by, under the inpiration of, the Holy Spirit."...... I've always pictured Paul as a man literally bubbling over with zeal for the Lord Jesus, his words fervently tripping off his tongue, gushing out with such rapidity that they fairly well bumped into each other, so eager was he to spread the word of the gospel of Christ to the world. I would imagine that he would have presented quite a challenge to a secretary to pace with his verbal outpouring. --Hank | ||||||
2130 | literalness between NAS77 and 95 | Bible general Archive 1 | Hank | 9489 | ||
The 1995 Update of the NASB was an effort to render into contemporary English a smoother, more natural translation of the the ancient texts. While some passages may be less "literal" it doesn't necessarily follow that they are less accurate. Literalness and accuracy are not the same things. For example, in contemporary French, a literal translation of the French for "What's your name?" would be, "What do you call yourself? In German, a literal rendering of their way of saying, "We're not going home." would be "We go not to house." To say "We're not going home" instead of "We go not to house" certainly does not sacrifice accuracy, but it does render into the receptor language a more natural, less wooden, construction..... From what I've read from the translators' notes about the 1995 Update, this -- the smoothing out of certain passages in order to make them more readable, without sacrificing accuracy -- was their aim. No less accurate but perhaps somewhat less literal in precise word order and syntax. It remains according to the publisher the most literally accurate of the English translations. --Hank | ||||||
2131 | Should the pastor be honored as a king. | Eph 4:12 | Hank | 9378 | ||
The role of the pastor is clearly defined by Scripture: "And He (Christ) gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evanglists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ." (Eph.4:11,12). The pastor is the shepherd of the people. Jesus said, "The one who is greatest among you must become like the youngest and the leader like the servant." (Luke 22:26). As the Good Shepherd, He set the perfect example of humble service to His sheep...... Should the pastor be treated like a king? Well, if a church bows before their pastor as subjects of a kingdom bow to royalty, how far down does Jesus come in their pecking order? --Hank | ||||||
2132 | where to find "come as you are" in bibl? | Matt 11:28 | Hank | 9372 | ||
Angela: What a lovely name! My daughter is named Angela. A couple of passages come immediately to mind that seem to suit your question. (There are others which could suit it equally well). In Matthew 11:28 our Lord extends His invitation, "Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest." And from Revelation 22:17, "The Spirit and the bride say, 'Come.' And let the one who hears say, 'Come.' And let the one who is thirsty come; let the one who wishes take the water of life without cost." Both of these verses are echoed in the words of the well-known hymn, "Just as I am, without one plea, but that Thy blood was shed for me; and that Thy biddest me come to Thee: O Lamb of God, I come, I come."..... These verses, along with a number of other verses in the New Testament are saying "come as you are" to the Lord Jesus and He will forgive your sins and make you a new creation in Him. This ends my answer to your question, Angela. What follows is a "Statistical P.S." --------- This is post No. 500 for me. It has been quite an experience. My heartfelt gratitude to the Lockman Foundation for making it possible and to you, the users of the forum, for the kindness and Christian love you have shown to me. --Hank | ||||||
2133 | Hank your feelings on Ruth? | Ruth | Hank | 9365 | ||
Ed, I've read this beautiful little book of Ruth many times, as I'm sure you have, and have always felt it says to me essentially what you in your post indicate it says to you. Honestly, while being aware that Boaz as a kinsman-redeemer was seen by some expositors as a type of Christ, I'd never given it more than passing thought. In a fairly recent series of messages on the book of Ruth, Adrian Rogers (lwf.org) made what I thought was a persuasive argument for this interpretation. Persuasive but not, to my mind, altogether conclusive. This is one of those issues on which, whether one feels that Boaz was or was not a type of Christ, I feel pressed to say, "You may be right." It has long been a concern with me the ease with which one can read more into Scripture than Scripture says. --Hank | ||||||
2134 | Who cannot believe in the Trinity? | Matt 28:19 | Hank | 9204 | ||
bt musa, while I can give you no precise number of people who call themselves Christians but are not Trinitarians in the orthodox sense of the word, it is evident that they have been around as a minority group for some time. Orthodox Christians have for centuries denounced as heretical the doctrines of modalism, subordinationism, and tritheism.--Hank | ||||||
2135 | Co-authors 'inspired'? | NT general Archive 1 | Hank | 9197 | ||
Nolan, I'm sorry. I posted an answer to this question and it ended up as a note. Please see my note headed, Paul had no co-authors, only secretaries. --Han | ||||||
2136 | A proper approach to studying scripture? | 2 Tim 2:15 | Hank | 8981 | ||
Zyph! Hello, and thanks for such an excellent query. My answer to it is YES, YES, and by all means YES! --Hank | ||||||
2137 | What is meant by talking in tongues? | 1 Cor 13:1 | Hank | 8976 | ||
Clearly human language is meant in 1 Cor. 13:1. The Greek word is glossa. From Key Word Study Bible (Spiros Zodhiates): "The tongues of men refer to understandable human language. The tongues of angels may refer to the medium by which angels communicate in heaven. But even though if one was gifted to speak in such languages, it should not be considred the ultimate of the Christian experience. The ultimate is the manifestation of love, not the speaking in tongues."...... And from John MacArthur (MacArthur Study Bible): "tongues of men -- that this gift was actual languages is established in Acts 2:4-12, affirmed in this text by Paul's calling it 'of men' -- clearly a reference to human language. This was the gift which the Corinthians prized so highly, abused so greatly, and counterfeited so disasterously." ----- "Speaking in tongues" continues to be misunderstood and "prized so highly, abused so greatly and counterfeited so disasterously." --Hank | ||||||
2138 | Re: Ex 33:19 | Ex 7:3 | Hank | 8952 | ||
Hiram, this verse (Exodus 33:19) is quoted by Paul in Romans 9:15 "in response," so says John MacArthur in his Study Bible, "to the accusation that such a teaching about God's sovereign election is inconsistent with His fairness. Paul cites this text from the Old Testament that clearly indicates that God is absolutely sovereign and does elect who will be saved without violating His other attributes. He determines who receives mercy." ..... But this is in no way seen as being inconsistent with "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life." (John 3:16) --Hank | ||||||
2139 | Why did God not create more one couple ? | Gen 2:7 | Hank | 8926 | ||
No one knows why God created only one couple but God himself, and He has not revealed that information to mankind. Neither does anyone know for certain whom Cain married. It has long been a widely-held assumption that she was a descendent of Adam and Eve and thus a near relative of Cain. It is the only assumption that would appear valid in light of the Genesis account. The prohibition against incest did not come until later. By Moses' time, this kind of close marriage was forbidden (Lev.18:7-17) because of genetic decay.... The Bible does not tell us all we may wish to know about the creation or the Creator. To assume it does is wishful thinking. It contains all that God has chosen to reveal of himself and not a word more. It does answer the most crucial question any human being has ever asked or ever can ask, "What must I do to be saved?" --Hank | ||||||
2140 | Did Shakespeare help write the KJV? | 1 Cor 2:1 | Hank | 8903 | ||
Nolan, as a reader of books and a lover of good writing, it has been my good fortune to have been associated with a number of people over the years who share like interests. In a discussion some years ago a rather learned gentleman brought up the subject about Shakespeare and his possible association with the King James Bible. I'd never heard of this idea before but he was convincing in his arguments, the details of which have escaped me. He mentioned a hidden "clue" buried in one of the Psalms that contains the words "shake" and "spear" or "speared" -- something like that. He cited some authority in support of his assertions, but, alas, I don't remember the name..... I'm sorry to be unable to be more specific and keep thinking that someday I'll try to do some research on this fascinating topic. We know that Shakespeare and the King James Bible translators were contemporaries, so it is entirely possible the Bard of Avon could have lent a hand. This is not to say he did, by any means, but the thought is a charming one to muse on. It can hardly be debated that the King James Bible is a towering masterpiece and a standard by which English prose has been measured for almost 400 years. Among the characteristics which have made it so singular is that, in the history of the English tongue, the King James is the only masterful work to have been produced by a committee! --Hank | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 ] Next > Last [114] >> |