Results 2261 - 2277 of 2277
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: Hank Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
2261 | What is God's hidden purpose ? | Rev 10:7 | Hank | 30668 | ||
Dakota, let's substitute "mystery" for "hidden purpose" and proceed. In the New Testament, "mystery" is a truth that God concealed but has revealed through Christ and His apostles. The mystery in Rev.10:7 is the final consummation of all things, as God destroys sinners and establishes His righteous kingdom on earth. This explanation was adapted from notes in the MacArthur Study Bible. --Hank | ||||||
2262 | Why translationed "who are and who were? | Rev 11:17 | Hank | 154580 | ||
Joyfulmom: An interesting question. I can give you a plausible reason for using the plural verbs in Revelation 11:17 which is grammatically accurate in the English. The way in which the NASB translators constructed the English rendition, it would seem fairly obvious that they understood the clause to be in the form of a direct address to God; hence, we could read it thusly: "We give You thanks, O Lord God, the Almighty [you] who are and who were..." The antecedent of who therefore becomes 'you' which is understood, although not written, and, according to standard English usage, would take the plural form of the verb. We use the unvoiced but understood 'you' all the time; e.g., we say, "Behave yourself." We don't usually say "You behave yourself." Another example, is "Naughty boy!" when what is clearly meant is "[You are a] naughty boy." The other translations that I have consulted generally have recast the sentence to read, "The One who is and who was." In this construction the antecedent is 'One' and thus takes a singular verb form. In no rendition are we to interpret the clause to mean that the subject itself (God) is plural. ...... According to my analysis, then, both renditions of the verb forms, whether singular or plural, are grammatically correct and deliver the same message. ..... Someone else on the Forum may be able to shed more light on your question than I have. I'd also comment that the Lockman Foundation, translators of the NASB, have been very kind and helpful in answering technical questions concerning their translation, and you may wish to query them on this passage. And, by the way, the book in question is called "The Revelation of Jesus Christ" or simply, "The Revelation." Note that it is always referred to in the singular without an 's' -- but never in the plural. --Hank | ||||||
2263 | Who hardened Pharaoh's heart? | Rev 13:8 | Hank | 88303 | ||
Come now, Doug, just because I'm an Arkansas hillbilly doesn't necessarily mean I'm swamped by total ignorance or steeped in naivete. :-) By the nature and phrasing of your question I'm led to believe that you yourself have already made up your mind on the question, and that leads me to inquire whether you are truly seeking information from me or a debate with me. --Hank | ||||||
2264 | Who hardened Pharaoh's heart? | Rev 13:8 | Hank | 88461 | ||
Both. | ||||||
2265 | Comparison of Revelation to John | Rev 13:18 | Hank | 111972 | ||
Markk: Revelation 13:18, "Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for the number is that of a man; and his number is six hundred and sixty six." ... John 6:66, "As a result of this many of His disciples withdrew and were not walking with Him anymore." .... What possible connection between these two verses of Scripture makes the juxtaposition "cool" in your eyes? I fail to see it. Connect me. --Hank | ||||||
2266 | Belief in "progressive revelation?" | Rev 14:16 | Hank | 149620 | ||
Hi, Ray. "How much should we believe in progressive revelation?" Only as much as Scripture itself teaches! :-) I think one will find that Hebrews 1:1,2 gives reasonable proof, as well as a good synopsis, of what is commonly called progressive revelation. --Hank | ||||||
2267 | "...these necessary things: ..."??? | Rev 17:5 | Hank | 64562 | ||
Pastor Glenn, warm greetings, and may I butt in? Not that I have all the answers, but your question interests me, and being from Arkansas, when the subject of pigs comes up, I perk up my ears because I'm an avid Razorback fan and don't want the genetic scientists monkeying around with 'them hogs' as we fondly call them! ..... Back to the serious topic addressed by your question. Some questions are easy, some pointless and trivial, while others -- the best kind, the kind Socrates posed -- are designed to make us think. Yours falls in this latter category, for it is indeed an excellent one. The fear of the unknown is common to man, and even Christian believers are not immune to this fear; but believers have access to mighty resources that are denied unbelievers, chief among which are faith in the absolute sovereignty of God and prayer..... Each milestone of change has been accompanied by dire predictions that this or that new invention, discovery, theory or philosophy signaled the beginning of the end of life as we know it. When the automobile was invented there were naysayers who were convinced that the human body would never be able to withstand sustained travel at the reckless speed of 25 miles an hour. When Charles Darwin published his "Origin of Species" the talking heads of that day predicted the death of the Christian faith because the book, so they said, put to the lie the Genesis story of creation. In the wake of the discovery of atomic energy and the manufacture of nuclear weapons came those who saw this event as the prelude to the utter annihiliation of mankind..... But people travel far in excess of 25 miles an hour; Darwin's theory is now viewed as bunkum by vast numbers in the scientific community and it has not wiped out Christianity by any means; and nuclear weaponry, while still posing a serious threat, has not done away with life on this planet..... Genetic engineering, even human cloning, looms ever nearer on the horizon, and I believe it (parts of it at least; I would exclude human cloning) like nuclear energy, has at least an equal potential for good as for evil. While I would never promote the idea that the Christian should take the ostrich approach to human problems, hiding his head in the sand and hoping a weak hope that somehow the problem will either solve itself or go away, neither would I promote the idea that Christians must become activists to the extent of taking matters into their own hands. We must surrender first and foremost to the sovereign Lord. It is He, not we, who is in charge. We can be instruments for change in the world, but we must be His instruments. We must seek His will through much prayer.... We know not what the future holds for us on this earth -- whether cloning or wars, whether plagues of terrorism or pain of persecution, whether sickness or health, whether fortune or famine.... This much we do know: If God is for us, who is against us? Who will separate us from the love of Christ? Will tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? But in all these things we overwhelmingly conquer through Him who loved us. Nothing will be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord..... Not genetic engineering. Not cloning. Nothing. [Scriptural extracts from Romans 8] --Hank | ||||||
2268 | "...these necessary things: ..."??? | Rev 17:5 | Hank | 64564 | ||
"Should Christians remain silent on these? is the question I meant to address in my former post and so my answer, if it makes any sense at all, will likely appear to make a trifle more sense if viewed as a response to that question and not to the one to which it was attached through my error. You do understand that I'm new to this forum? It takes a slow learner considerably more time than a year and a half to find his way around. Perhaps in another 10 years or so I will be able to stumble around without falling on my face so much :-) --Hank | ||||||
2269 | Does this mean that it is wrong to ask? | Rev 17:16 | Hank | 59876 | ||
Pastor Glenn: By no means do I wish to enter the fray and debate eschatology, for I would soon find myself in water over well over my head! But I would like to make a casual observation on the subject if I may. There was in the days of my youth a radio preacher who not only claimed to be an authority on end times but who actually reckoned a date for the Lord's return and advertised it on his daily radio show. When the date came and passed into history without his prediction having materialized, he was not particularly abashed by his failure and so he set another date, and then another. Eventually he became the object of jokes and ridicule, even his most loyal followers deserted him, and he drifted off into obscurity. My point is that Christians should be extremely careful in their interpretation of the apocalyptic literature of the Bible. It is tempting and all too easy to jump to conclusions about what it is saying. Men have made egregious blunders in their interpretaions of apocalytic passages in the past and continue to make them still. Our burden, as the Lord Jesus himself taught, is to watch and be ready. It is to work in His vineyard as obedient disciples and not concern ourselves unduly about when and how God will work His purpose out. We should, in short, be concerned with the duties we have been assigned and be content to let God take care of the rest. He's far more skillful at running His universe than we are anyway! --Hank | ||||||
2270 | Did Jesus have a tatoo on his thigh? | Rev 19:16 | Hank | 176288 | ||
m8mida - Verse 11 of this 19th chapter of Revelation begins an account of our Lord's Second Advent, i.e., His second coming to earth. Therefore, the events are all cast in the future tense. I believe it is too great a stretch to say that our Lord will return wearing a tattoo; that hardly appears to be the meaning of the passage. Perhaps Dr. John MacArthur says it as accurately and succinctly as anyone when he writes of the phrase "on His thigh" that "Jesus will wear a banner across His robe and down His thigh with a title emblazoned on it that emphasizes His absolute sovereignty over all human rulers." ..... And that title, as we know from the text, is KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS. ..... The verses that follow (Rev. 19:17-21) depict a mighty event unparalleled in human history, the Battle of Armageddon, in which Christ will be the victor and in which all who oppose Him will be slain. ..... A note concerning commentary on a single verse of Scripture: It's risky to attempt to exegete a single verse of Scripture and much better to view it in its natural setting, that is, its context. It's better to get a feel of the depth and overall appearance of the forest before one begins a minute examination of the individual trees. .... Thanks for your question, and I do hope this attempt at a response will help you in some measure. --Hank | ||||||
2271 | "beheading" in modern times? | Rev 20:4 | Hank | 124773 | ||
Pastor Glenn, how right you are: times, they are a-changing and one would have to be either hyper Pollyannaish or just plain dull to think they are changing for the better. We live in a fallen world, brother. This is not the Garden of Eden. Jesus said there would be bad times ahead. But Jesus Christ be praised! We who are sheep of His pasture have the promise of the Shepherd himself that He will be with us always, even unto the end of the age. (Matthew 28:20). Pastor Glenn, many times I have said to the adult Sunday school class I taught for years, "America is at the crossroads. It has a choice of whether it will continue along the paths of its God fearing founders or deviate from those paths." This I said back in the 70's and 80's. No longer do I say this, because I'm not convinced that America is still at a crossroads. The leading indicators seem to be saying that we are beyond the crossroads and have taken the wrong path. The question now before us, and especially before the Christian community of believers, is, "Do we have the courage and fortitude to back up, go back to the crossroads and take the right path?" And my answer to that question is, "I simply don't know." But God is sovereign, He is in control, and our big challenge as Christians is to trust Him totally and to pray fervently and without ceasing. --Hank | ||||||
2272 | Do Jews have to be saved? | Rev 20:15 | Hank | 193042 | ||
carolsue - The way you construct your question, the answer is no -- no one HAS to be saved, but they will surely spend eternity in hell if they are not saved. But, if we assume that you are asking whether Jews have the same need to be saved as everyone else, the answer is yes. And they are saved in exactly the same way as all sinners: "For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body -- whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free -- and have all been made to drink into one Spirit" (1 Corinthians 12:13); "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23); "nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven [except Christ] given among men by which we must be saved" (Acts 4:12). All Scripture quotations from New King James Version. --Hank | ||||||
2273 | Is Jerusalem the wife of the Lamb? | Rev 21:9 | Hank | 144473 | ||
Steve :: This may mean that the city is the residence of the bride, the church. These verses, Rev. 21:9-21 describe the beauty and glory of the holy Jerusalem. It is called Christ's bride (cf. v.2), a reference perhaps to the church as the city's principal inhabitant. ..... The imagery of the bride is used widely in the Bible as a description of the people of God. In the Old Testament the prophets presented Israel as a bride who had committed repeated adulteries (Jer. 3; Ezek. 16; Hos. 3). In the New Testament the bride imagery is used often of the church and her relationship to Christ. The bride belongs to Christ, who is the Bridegroom (John 3:29). In Revelation the church, as the bride of the Lamb, has prepared herself for marriage by performing righteous deeds (19:7-8). In Revelation 21, the great wedding is portrayed with the church prepared for her bridegroom (21:2,9). Finally, the bride and the Spirit issue an invitation "to come" (22:17). Paul used the methaphor of the bride to indicate his feelings toward the churches he had founded. In 2 Corinthians 11:2 Paul wrote that he had bethrothed the Corinthian church to Christ. He wanted to present the church as a pure bride to Christ. The imagery of the bride is used by various biblical writers, but they appear to have a single purpose, which is to indicate the great love which God has for His people. And what other image could express so vividly and so sweetly this love than the ideal love between a bridegroom and his bride? --Hank | ||||||
2274 | completeness of the bible. | Rev 22:18 | Hank | 13683 | ||
Revelation 22:18-19 are most likely the verses you have in mind. --Hank | ||||||
2275 | Is God's Word Complete ? | Rev 22:18 | Hank | 32938 | ||
Hello, Robert. Greetings from the land down under! I'm not in Australia but Arkansas, and that is down under Canada :-).... Robert, there can be no doubt that the OT and NT canons are closed for all eternity. Jude 3 speaks in unambiguous language about the subject, using the words "once for all delivered to the saints" in speaking of the faith. I believe that the Scriptures reveal God in the exact manner that God has willed to reveal himself. Accordingly, I believe that no one today is the recipient of any special, extra-biblical revelation from God, and that anyone who proclaims that God has made him privy to any such revelation is a false teacher. Hebrews begins with the declaration that in times past God spoke through prophets but in these last days has spoken to us through His Son, and the Scriptures testify of God's Son, Jesus Christ. In summation: The canon is closed; the Scriptures are complete; claims to extra-biblical revelation are heretical. --Hank | ||||||
2276 | Why do some sermons misrepresent truth? | Rev 22:18 | Hank | 145549 | ||
Gilderd ::: Thanks for your question and for voicing your concern about the content of some of the sermons that are being delivered in our time. While I don't mean to down play any of the specific criticisms you cited, I offer that they are trivial by comparison to other more serious things that are being preached from pulpits these days. From a multitude of examples here are a few. Congregations of worshipers are being told to name it and claim it: the infamous and heretical Word of Faith Movement. Others are being told that a woman has a right to choose: to get an abortion if she chooses, and for any reason at all. Other sermons promote and encourage unrepentent practicing homosexuals to be admitted to the fellowship of the saints and, in fact, to be ordained as bishops or allowed to serve in other positions of leadership within the church, the body of Christ. Many is the sermon today that paints God as a fuzzy old celestial elf in the sky who would not harm a fly, much less condemn any human being to hell. I've heard sermon after sermon in which terms such as hell, sin, repent, the shedding of blood, the wrath of God, and obedience to God's commands were never, never mentioned. In short, the preaching of the gospel of Jesus Christ to sinners who are dead in their sins and surely on their way to hell has given way to an alarming degree to a fuzzy wuzzy, feel-good religion that is carefully engineered to tickle the ears and entertain. It isn't a new wrinkle by any means. Charles Haddon Spurgeon fought it in his day, calling the dumbing-down of the Christian message the "down grade." Well, what began to go "down grade" in Spurgeon's time has continued steadily since. When one begins to think it has sunk as low as it can go, someone comes along with yet another trick to pull it farther into the pits. God have mercy on us and jar us back into our senses! --Hank | ||||||
2277 | Will Christ be coming back very soon? | Rev 22:20 | Hank | 51721 | ||
Andrew, of that day and hour no one knows but God [Matt.24:36] It COULD be within the next couple of years of course, as your full question asks, or in the next couple of minutes, or in a couple of thousand years. One guess is as good as another -- and we are deceived if we believe anyone who claims to know...... Out of curiosity, why did you set a possible time frame of "within the next couple of years"? The New Testament speaks of our time as the 'last days,' but that covers the entire Christian era, from the first Advent of Christ to the second. No specific measure of time is given, i.e., the Bible is silent on exactly how long the 'last days' will last until Christ returns, but it is clear in its teaching that He will return. --Hank | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 ] |