Results 241 - 260 of 1659
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: Morant61 Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
241 | Can we claim Jeremiah 29:11? | Jer 29:11 | Morant61 | 193819 | ||
Greetings icwessantiago! Can we claim Jer. 29:11? 'No'! This was a specific promise made to Israelites who were going to be in captivity in Babylon for 70 years. As a general principle, we can certainly rest in the assurance that our Sovereign God is in control of every aspect of our lives. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
242 | Mat 28 Great earth quake? 2 witness Only | Matt 28:2 | Morant61 | 193817 | ||
Greetings Eastchicago66! There are a couple of issues that arise from your question. 1) Must all of the gospels record an incident? The answer of course is, 'No'. Each gospel is an independent witness of historical events. As with any historical writer, the gospel writers are free to include or exclude details depending upon their purpose. 2) Were there more than two witnesses? Simply put, we don't know. The text doesn't even specifically state that the two Mary's actually witnessed the earthquake. 3) Finally, the word 'seismos' could refer to something other than an earthquake. I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
243 | witness to neighbors about Jesus Christ? | NT general Archive 1 | Morant61 | 193639 | ||
Greetings Grace! My best advice would be to get to know them first! Befriend them and pray that God will give you the opportunity to share the Gospel with them. There is a an old saying, "People will care about what you know when they know that you care!" Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
244 | Da Vinci assalt attack on Christianity? | NT general Archive 1 | Morant61 | 193637 | ||
Greetings Grace! No! It is just one of many attacks on Christianity over thousands of years. The good news is that it is pretty easy to deal with as most of the claims in the Da Vinci Code are so blatantly false. For instance, the author claims that the 'effeminate' figure seated next to Jesus in the 'Last Supper' is really Mary, the wife of Jesus. However, Da Vinci himself, in his lengthy journal describing his great painting, identifies the figure as the Apostle John. So, was Da Vinci right or was the author of the Da Vinci Code right? ;-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
245 | Is demonic possession relevant today? | Acts 5:16 | Morant61 | 193635 | ||
Greetings Michael! There aren't many references to demons or spirits after the time of Christ, but there are a few. Here they are: 1) Acts 5:15 - "Crowds gathered also from the towns around Jerusalem, bringing their sick and those tormented by evil spirits, and all of them were healed." 2) Acts 8:7 - "With shrieks, evil spirits came out of many, and many paralytics and cripples were healed." 3) Acts 19:11 - "God did extraordinary miracles through Paul, 12 so that even handkerchiefs and aprons that had touched him were taken to the sick, and their illnesses were cured and the evil spirits left them. 13 Some Jews who went around driving out evil spirits tried to invoke the name of the Lord Jesus over those who were demon-possessed. They would say, ‘‘In the name of Jesus, whom Paul preaches, I command you to come out.” 14 Seven sons of Sceva, a Jewish chief priest, were doing this. 15 One day the evil spirit answered them, ‘‘Jesus I know, and I know about Paul, but who are you?” 16 Then the man who had the evil spirit jumped on them and overpowered them all. He gave them such a beating that they ran out of the house naked and bleeding. 17 When this became known to the Jews and Greeks living in Ephesus, they were all seized with fear, and the name of the Lord Jesus was held in high honor." I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
246 | Kingdom of God vs. Kingdom of Heaven | Matt 5:20 | Morant61 | 193311 | ||
Greetings Robert! Searcher gave you a good answer, but allow me to help you start of study process. Matthew is the only person who uses the phrase "kingdom of Heaven" in all of Scripture. He only uses the phrase "kingdom of God" three times: Mt. 12:28, 19:24, 21:31 and 21:43. He uses the phrase "kingdom of their Father" once, Mt. 13:43. There is strong contextual evidence that the phrases 'Kingdom of Heaven' and 'Kingdom of God' mean the same thing. 1) Matthew uses the two phrases interchangeably in Mt. 19:23 and 24. 2) Mark and Luke use the phrase 'Kingdom of God' in contexts where Matthew uses 'Kingdom of Heaven.' Some have argued that Matthew is reluctant to use the the phrase 'Kingdom of God' because his gospel was written primarily for a Jewish audience and they would have been reluctent to use the name 'God'. I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
247 | I will pour out of My Spirit | Acts 2:17 | Morant61 | 193116 | ||
Greetings Cuhigher! I am on my way to church, so I will have to respond quickly. :-) Allow me to simply respond with numbered points corresponding to your numbered questions. 1) The last days had already begun. 2) Yes! He specifically stated in v. 16 that 'this is what was spoken by the prophet Joel' and then he quoted the entire passage. Therefore, He must have meant the entire passage was fulfilled. 3) Yes! I don't believe that God has stopped pouring out His Spirit. 4) As in point 3, I don't believe God has stopped. He has, and is, pouring our His Spirit in a remarkable way. That hasn't changed! :-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
248 | I will pour out of My Spirit | Acts 2:17 | Morant61 | 193085 | ||
Greetings Cuhigher! While it is certainly possible that God will yet again pour out His Spirit in some remarkable way, Acts 2:17 is the wrong verse to use to support such a view. Acts 2:17 is a quote from Joel 2:28-32. Peter said that the events of the first Pentecost were the fulfillment of Joel's prophecy. I read the 'vision' you referenced and saw nothing, other than the misapplication of Acts 2:17, which could be either supported or denied from Scripture. Like most 'visions', it will stand or fall depending upon whether or not it comes to pass. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
249 | Is it O.K. to question the Scriptures? | 1 Cor 2:2 | Morant61 | 192622 | ||
Greetings Lucciola! Welcome to the forum! You have already received several fine answers, but I would like to add just one point. Begin reading Genesis without any scientific presuppositions and see what you think about your questions then. How does the text define a day? How does the text say that God created? You can probably answer many of your questions simply by reading the text as it is written and not how modern critics tells us it should be read. :-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
250 | Can someone clarify 1 Sam 13:1? | 1 Sam 13:1 | Morant61 | 192538 | ||
Greetings Satnj! Here is what the Bible Knowledge Commentary says about 1 Sam. 13:1: ********** 13:1 . If the setting of the reaffirmation of Saul’s kingship and Samuel’s address on that occasion is the first anniversary of his coronation, it may be that the events of this chapter occurred after his second anniversary. This is a possible interpretation of the textually difficult passage translated by the NIV as Saul was 30 years old when he became king, and he reigned over Israel 42 years. The Hebrew is literally, “Saul was years old when he began to reign and he reigned two years over Israel.” Obviously a figure has dropped out of the first part of the statement, and the second part cannot mean that he reigned for a total of only two years. Old Testament chronology implies—and Paul in his address at Pisidian Antioch (Acts 13:21) distinctly teaches—that Saul reigned for 40 years, no doubt a round number but close to the actual figure. There is no reason to think that the number “two” is suspect, however, for all manuscripts and versions retain it. It is only the desire to see 1 Samuel 13:1 as a regular formula for kingship (as in 2 Sam. 2:10; 5:4; 1 Kings 14:21; 22:42; etc.) that leads many scholars to postulate that “40” or some other figure is missing. In the context, however, the historian is not introducing a kingship formula (why do so here, well into Saul’s reign?), but is probably indicating that the Ammonite threat had come in Saul’s first year and now, in his second, the Philistines must be encountered. A problem remains with the first part of the Hebrew statement, “Saul was years old. . . .” Many scholars, following Origen (ca. a.d. 185-254), postulate “30” (so niv). Since Jonathan, Saul’s son, was already grown then and served as a military commander, Saul would have been older than 30. It is more likely that the figure to be supplied is “40” though this too is difficult to reconcile with the description (1 Sam. 9:2) that Saul was, at the time of his anointing, “an impressive young man.” Of course “young” in this latter passage may not be a good translation for the Hebrew baµh\uÆr, a word that could be rendered “choice.” The best translation of 13:1 would seem to be, “Saul was [40] years old when he began to reign, and he reigned over Israel for two years.” This is further supported by the next verse which begins with a verb in the preterite tense, a construction indicating a close connection with the previous clause. “Saul chose . . . ” (v. 2) implies that after he had reigned for two years Saul began to select and train a regular army, not the larger militia he had used previously. *********** I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
251 | God's purposes | Romans | Morant61 | 191612 | ||
Greetings Begbie! Rom. 8:28 says, "And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose." Rom. 11:30-31 says, "Just as you who were at one time disobedient to God have now received mercy as a result of their disobedience, 31 so they too have now become disobedient in order that they too may now receive mercy as a result of God’s mercy to you." However, one must also read Rom. 11:32 to understand the connection. Rom. 11:32 - "For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all." God's purpose was to have mercy on all. Thus, He used Israel's disobedience to extend the gospel to all nations. However, as Rom. 11 also makes clear, He has not rejected national Israel. Thus, the promise of Rom. 8:28 still holds true to them as well. I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
252 | ... | John 16:31 | Morant61 | 191491 | ||
Greetings ParsonPat! One of the dangers of Strong's is that individuals with little or no training in Greek can misunderstand his definitions and simply plug all of the meanings for a particular word in everywhere. In the case of John 16:31, Strong is not presenting alternative 'meanings', he is presenting alternative ways of translating the word. The word in question 'arti', is an adverb. It's basic meaning, whether used with a past tense or a present tense is 'now' or 'just now'. It refers to an action that has just begun. In your alternate form of John 16:31, you have changed the meaning of the word to 'still'. This is not what the word means. It does not have this meaning anywhere in Scripture. When Strong uses the phrase 'even now', he is not saying that the word means 'still'. He is using the word 'even' to emphasis the word 'now'. The following sample sentence would be an example of what he is saying: "Today is the day of salvation, even now!" So, in answer to your question, John 16:31 cannot mean what you have proposed. It violates both the meaning of the word and the context of the passage. In John 16:31, Jesus affirms their 'new found' faith, but warns them that there is coming a day when their new found faith will not keep them with Jesus. They will be scattered - v. 32. From my reading of your posts, you seem to have some 'pet theory' that you would like to believe, thus you are trying to change the meaning of this passage in John to fit your theory. I would urge you to stay away from the Gnostic texts and simply accept what Scripture clearly states: God is the Father. I hope this is helpful. |
||||||
253 | When did Paul write Romans Chapter 7 ? | Rom 7:14 | Morant61 | 190850 | ||
Greetings K_Peace! It is quite clear that Romans 7 (the text itself) was written after Paul's conversion to Christ. However, I think what you are asking is whether or not Paul is describing a Christian or not in Romans 7. There are many different views on this question. Here is how I responded to a similar question some time ago. ************ This is a tough question on which reasonable people can and do disagree. However, my position is that Paul is describing his life apart from Christ and under the Law in Rom. 7:7-25. Here are my reasons. 1) There is a contrast made between Rom. 7:7-25 and Rom. 8:1-17. This is one of the cases where chapter divisions are less than helpful. The person described in Rom. 7 is: a) A slave to sin - Rom. 7:14. b) Subject to the Law of sin - Rom. 7:23 and 25. However, in Rom. 8, the person is described as one who: a) Is not condemned - Rom. 8:1. b) Has been set free from the Law of sin - Rom. 8:2. c) Is not controlled by the sinful nature - Rom. 8:9. So, there is a clear distinction made between the person described in Rom. 7 and the one described in Rom. 8. What is the difference? The one in Rom. 7 is trying to obey the Law apart from Christ and is unable to do so because of their sin nature. The person in Rom. 8 has been made alive by the Spirit of Christ and is now led by the Spirit. 2) The second reason I believe that Rom. 7 cannot refer to a believer is because of Rom. 6. Romans 6 makes statements that cannot be reconciled with the view that Rom. 7 describes a Christians ongoing struggle with sin. Consider the following: a) We have died to sin - Rom. 6:2. b) Our old self was crucified with Christ - Rom. 6:6. c) The body of sin has been done away with - Rom. 6:6. d) We are no longer slaves to sin - Rom. 6:6. e) Sin is not our master - Rom. 6:14. These statements cannot be reconciled with the view that Rom. 7 is speaking of a believer who continually struggles with sin. In particular, Rom. 7:14 says that this person is a slave to sin, but Rom. 6:6 says that believers are not slaves to sin. ****************** I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
254 | Polygamy, Prostitution, etc. Bad things? | Bible general Archive 3 | Morant61 | 190678 | ||
Greetings Newbeliever! Scripture is quite clear that we are all born sinners; thus, the historical accounts in Scripture include a lot of sin. :-) God doesn't hide the warts when He describes how His people have lived throughout the ages. All of them did things that were forbidden by God, and tried to justify them. These individuals should serve as examples of how we should not live. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
255 | Isaiah 40:1 | Is 40:1 | Morant61 | 190084 | ||
Greetings Azure! Here is what the Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament says about this phrase: "The expression “saith your God” is peculiar to Isaiah, and common to both parts of the collection (Isa 1:11, Isa 1:18; Isa 33:10; Isa 40:1, Isa 40:25; Isa 41:21; Isa 66:9). The future in all these passages is expressive of that which is taking place or still continuing. And it is the same here. The divine command has not been issued once only, or merely to one prophet, but is being continually addressed to many prophets. “Comfort ye, comfort ye my people,” is the continual charge of the God of the exiles. who has not ceased to be their God even in the midst of wrath, to His messengers and heralds the prophets." I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
256 | Greek Question in Romans | Rom 7:25 | Morant61 | 189901 | ||
Greeting Rzacc! Welcome to the forum! As for web sites, you might try www.studylight.org. They have some Greek helps there. The phrase 'apa ouv' can be translated many ways. It it basically a phrase that introduces an inference or conclusion. The same phrase is used 12 times in the NT: Rom. 5:18, 7:3, 7:25, 8:12, 9:16, 9:18, 14:12, 14:19, Gal. 6:10, Eph. 2:19, 1 Thess. 5:6, and 2 Thess. 2:15. As you can see, it is uniquely Pauline. :-) The only real special significance that one might draw from it is that there is an element of emotion attached to it. It is as if the writer is agitated or excited. I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
257 | I'm Christian but after I accept Jesus a | Luke 23:43 | Morant61 | 189718 | ||
Greetings! Fortunately, we don't have to guess about the answer to your question. Scripture is quite clear! 1 John 1:9 says, "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness." Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
258 | reconcile Mark 6:8 and Luke 9:3 | Mark 6:8 | Morant61 | 188608 | ||
Greetings Manahan! Here is how the Bible Knowledge Commentary answers your question. ************* The two concessions of a staff and sandals are unique to Mark. Both are forbidden in Matthew 10:9-10, and the staff is forbidden in Luke 9:3. Matthew used ktaomai (“to procure, acquire”), instead of airoµ (“to take”); so the disciples were not to acquire additional staffs or sandals—but to use the ones they already had. Mark and Luke both use airoµ, “to take or carry along.” But Luke says, “Take nothing for the journey—no staff (rhabdon),” presumably no additional staff; while Mark says, “Take nothing for the journey except (cf. Mark 6:5) a staff (rhabdon),” presumably the one already in use. Each writer stressed a different aspect of Jesus’ instructions. ***************** Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
259 | why is mary anointing christ said first | John 11:2 | Morant61 | 187912 | ||
Greetings Rosegirl! Excellent questions! First of all, John 11:2 is not recording that the event took place prior to the resurrection of Lazarus. It is simply identifying Mary by mentioning one of the most famous events in her life. It would be like me writing a story about Dan Marino's childhood, and mentioning that Peyton Manning would eventually break his single season record for touchdown passes. (Sorry about the sports analogy, but it is the NFL draft day) :-) Secondly, John 12:1-2 does not say that the dinner was given six days before the passover. It simply says that Jesus arrived in Bethany six days prior to the passover. The dinner is mentioned in the next verse, but no 'time' element is included in it. I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
260 | defiling bodies by eating meat? | Bible general Archive 3 | Morant61 | 187906 | ||
Greetings Angel72! Could you specify which verse you are asking about? Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ] Next > Last [83] >> |