Results 301 - 320 of 568
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: MJH Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
301 | The pronoun "Him" is God or Son? | John 3:16 | MJH | 179270 | ||
In John 3:16, can the pronoun "Him" refers to "God" rather than to "Jesus"? I do not know Greek, and wondered if any one who did could let me know if the "Him" could refer to the noun "God" at the beginning of the sentence or can the only possible understanding be that the "Him" refers to the "Son"? I am only looking at the possible translation from the Greek to English. Thanks, MJH |
||||||
302 | Spare the rod, spoil the child | Prov 13:24 | MJH | 178401 | ||
"Do not hold back discipline from the child, Although you strike him with the rod, he will not die.You shall beat him with the rod, And deliver his soul from Sheol." (Pro 23:13-14). Again... Child should be translated "young man" and he is delivered from Sheol (death) because the command of God was that such a child be stoned to death by the community if he did not obey and became a drunkered, etc.... That command to stone the "son" was the purpose that the proverb stated was written. The other passages speaks of "the rod of disciplne" which does NOT suggest striking. MJH |
||||||
303 | Spare the rod, spoil the child | Prov 13:24 | MJH | 178400 | ||
Searcher, See my answer to her original question.... But to paraphrase, Proverbs are not commands. The word "child" in Proverbs 22 and 23 should be translated "young man" as it is everywhere else in scripture (that I found). The use of "son" in Proverbs 13 does not mean toddler, but son. And all proverbs was written to a young man, and other proverbs point to this "son" as being older. It is incorrect to read Proverbs as commands. To do so is to fail to understand the genre. To discipline does not equal “to punish.” Punishment may be a part of discipline, but they are not synonyms. To discipline is more of an act of guiding a person in the way they should go as a Shepherd guides a sheep; only in extreme cases is the instrument of guiding ever used to strike. Most Christian parents strike their toddlers and young children, but not their older children. Personally our family uses the spanking method so seldom that my children think we are “non-spankers” that is until they really cross the line. But for families that do not use this form of discipline, their children are no less well off as long as loving guiding discipline is used. And those who use corporal punishment have every right by God do to so, assuming it is never done out of anger or frustration. MJH |
||||||
304 | Spare the rod, spoil the child | Prov 13:24 | MJH | 178399 | ||
The passage is a proverb, not a command. That is often misunderstood. Proverbs do not equal commands. Concerning... Proverbs 22:15 Proverbs 23:13 the Hebrew word translated "Child" is Na'ar, which elsewhere in the Bible is almost always translated young man, or young men. The same can be said about Prov 13:24 where "son" does not mean toddler (but can). If the idea that a literal "rod" of correction is to be used is anywhere in the proverbs, it is upon a youth and not a toddler. And this use would have been out of love, after all, that youth is quickly approaching the place where the death penalty could be handed out. Deut 21:18-21 "If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and, though they discipline him, will not listen to them, then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gate of the place where he lives, and they shall say to the elders of his city, 'This our son is stubborn and rebellious; he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard.' Then all the men of the city shall stone him to death with stones. The word for “son” here is the same one used in Prov. 13:24. I doubt that anyone would assume this passage is referring to a toddler. The fact that many use this passage to say that spanking is required of all good Christian parents is unfortunate. Whether you or anyone else uses spanking or other corporal punishment as a means to aide in discipline, is up to the parents, but the Bible does not "require" it, and in no place can one find it even being suggested unless these passages are to mean "toddler" when in every other passage, the word means youth or young men. MJH |
||||||
305 | A CERTAIN NASB BIBLE... | Bible general Archive 3 | MJH | 178398 | ||
Look at www.allbookstores.com Type your ISBN in the search and you will have a list of every store that has that specific Bible. The ISBN matches the book/bible exactly. Even a different color cover requires a new ISBN number, so you should end up with the right copy if you have the right ISBN number. Hope that helps. MJH |
||||||
306 | Mathew,Mark,luke which written 1st | NT general Archive 1 | MJH | 177235 | ||
Point conceded. MJH |
||||||
307 | MJH: Matthew in Hebrew and "Q" Document? | NT general Archive 1 | MJH | 177234 | ||
Thank you for allowing me the company of at least one other on the Hewbrew as common language. Also, in regard to the Greek of Matthew being the accepted book into the canon, I completely agree with you. All the other stuff is interesting at best, but in the end, it is the Greek that is what has been preserved and accepted into the canon and that is what holds authority. MJH |
||||||
308 | MJH: Matthew in Hebrew and "Q" Document? | NT general Archive 1 | MJH | 177187 | ||
BradK I'll quote what I posted some years ago on the Hebrew as the spoke language. ----------- "Can anyone still believe that Jesus spoke Aramaic? The most advanced research says He spoke Hebrew. Using one verse to show He spoke Aramaic, when most of the Gospel and Acts say Hebrew, Archeology says Hebrew, Josephus says Hebrew, the early church fathers say Hebrew, Rabbinic literature says Hebrew, the Dead Sea Scrolls say Hebrew, and coins minted in the first century BC say Hebrew. You said, “We know Jesus spoke Aramaic because he spoke it from the cross when he said: "Eli, Eli, lama sabacthani" which is the Aramaic, not Hebrew, version of Psalm 22:1 "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me." Matthew records this in Hebrew (same words). The people in Mark's version are thinking that Jesus is calling Elijah which is only possible if He spoke the words as Matthew records in Hebrew since in Hebrew the term "Eli" can be either "My God" or a shortened from of Eliyahu, Hebrew for Elijah. "Eloi" in Aramaic can only mean, "My God". For Matthew; "lama" (why) is the same word in both languages, and sabak is a verb which is found in Mishnaic Hebrew as well as in Aramaic. Other Hebrew words in the Greek text; levonah, mammom, Wai, rabbi, Beelzebub, corban, Satan, cammom, raca, moreh, bath, kor, zuneem, Boarnerges, Mor, Sheekmah, amen. All archeological finds are 9 to 1 in favor of Hebrew over Aramaic including for those things used by the common man of the day. The Dead Sea Scrolls were in Hebrew 9 to 1 over Aramaic (the common man’s rules for the community were in Hebrew.) … and on and on and on it goes. . . Oh, and a fun one to explain: Jerome says he translated the Latin Vulgate directly from Matthew’s original Hebrew text. Jerome was the most competent Hebrew scholar of all the early church fathers, living in the Land for many years, learning Hebrew from the people who spoke it every day. Then there is the linguistic research which is beyond the scope of this forum I think. MJH" ------ That was posted way back when and since that time the archeological evidence has only increased in favor of Hebrew. All of this evidence is admissible in a court of law. Some of it can be argued against with some good points, but it is the shear volume of evidence over the span of all of these scholarly fields that make the case for Hebrew. I do, however, understand that I am in the minority both on this forum and in Christendom. But I also believe that will change over time as these things often take a long time to do so. MJH |
||||||
309 | MJH: Matthew in Hebrew and "Q" Document? | NT general Archive 1 | MJH | 177186 | ||
John, Sorry... the Galil is [Galilee]. I should have used the more common term. MJH |
||||||
310 | MJH: Matthew in Hebrew and "Q" Document? | NT general Archive 1 | MJH | 177185 | ||
Well, actually "strong evidence" and "theory" are the same thing. A theory is something that can not be "proofed" but there is a lot of evidence to support the idea. I do think there is strong evidence to support a 'Q' of some sort, if not in writting, then certainly in oral transmision. But it is still just a theory. MJH |
||||||
311 | Mathew,Mark,luke which written 1st | NT general Archive 1 | MJH | 177184 | ||
The Jahovah's witnesses believe: in one God; in a round earth, in gravity, and in the necessity of water to sustain life. All of these things are true. So just because a JW believes them too does not mean they must be false because they are considered a cult. That is the point I was making. In Kalos' note, the person he quoted was making the argument that since JW believe in an original Hebrew Matthew, that therefore it must not be true. Logically, this is not a good argument as I showed above. Whether there is or is not a Hebrew Matthew originally has nothing to do with the JW. MJH |
||||||
312 | Mathew,Mark,luke which written 1st | NT general Archive 1 | MJH | 177183 | ||
You are correct and for that I appologize. I should read more closely! MJH |
||||||
313 | Mathew,Mark,luke which written 1st | NT general Archive 1 | MJH | 177174 | ||
Oh Kalos, you are reminding me of too many things. I really don't care if the Jahovah's Witnesses claim that Matthew was written in Hebrew first. The fact remains that we have the Greek, and that is what God inteneded for us to have that is our baises for interpretation. There are many things the Jahovah's Witnesses believe, some of which are true. Just because a cult which has errors in its teachings believes something, does not mean it is therefor false. "The reports of the fathers regarding a Hebrew "Gospel" must be considered as hearsay" It is very serious to call something a hearasy. Just because some believe there is evidence for a Hebrew Matthew does not mean they are Heritics. We must be careful how we use that term. (I know you were quoting someone else) MJH |
||||||
314 | MJH: Matthew in Hebrew and "Q" Document? | NT general Archive 1 | MJH | 177173 | ||
Matthew being first, I don't recall at hand and it's too late to think that hard, plus I really don't care if Matthew or Mark was first right now. Sorry. Originally in Hebrew. Again, there is not credible evidence other than looking at how the Greek is written and linguistically it seems likely to have been written in Hebrew first. Also, the evidence that Hebrew was the common spoken language of the people in the Galil is so over whelming that it baffles the mind that anyone would think otherwise. Every form of evidence favors Hebrew as the spoken language, and yet since Aramaic was also spoken and since the Jews were in captivity in Arabic speaking nations, most pastors still hold to the Arabic language as the common tongue. Given that theory, then in 2000 years the historians then will claim that the people living in Israel now are speaking anything but Hebrew. After all, they were spread all over the globe among other languages for not 70 or 400 years, but 1,900 years! They couldn't have preserved their language no matter what Archeology and the written texts from the time show. Right? Sorry for the sarcasm, but this topic with me on this forum is getting too old and I am in the minority still. Oh well, I still love all you people who are wrong. hee hee. The 'Q' is just a theory that people have of which I do not have any opinion on. I only tossed it out there for information...that some believe. Sorry Hank, I could go into the Matthew being in Hebrew and being first, but I just don't have the energy right now. MJH |
||||||
315 | Emergent Church question | Not Specified | MJH | 177164 | ||
Does anyone have an opinion on the so called, "Emergent Church?" I ask because I happen to attend a church that when I join was simply another church which happened to grow very fast, had a gifted teacher, etc... But nothing spectacular. Since then, over the past few years, the gifted teacher has become very well know, almost an icon in the so called "Emergent Church" movement, although he has never claimed that our church was an "Emergent Church." Needless to say (unfortunately) he has been attacked by several Pastors around the country. My stance among those I meet is that I am not responsible for defending my pastor or church against comments. I will talk and listen, but I am not ever going to get "defensive" and try to argue for a point. I will clarify and ask why they think what they think, but I won't get drawn into an argument. It has bothered me, however, to see that so far every critic I have read or heard has gone to the level of revering to my pastor as "Satan’s agent" or "a clear Heretic" etc... Not one critic I have read so far has refrained from using such vitriolic statements which I interpret as meaning they are so afraid that their critic isn't strong enough on content that they have to use stupid statements to try and reinforce their ideas. One pastor even stated that since my pastor's following was so large, he obviously was not of God and used the same argument to refute Rev. Billy Graham. I’d love to discuss this topic with some of you, since I have anonymity here, and I would like to know what gifted people like you all think. MJH |
||||||
316 | Emergent Church question | Bible general Archive 3 | MJH | 177170 | ||
Does anyone have an opinion on the so called, "Emergent Church?" I ask because I happen to attend a church that when I join was simply another church which happened to grow very fast, had a gifted teacher, etc... But nothing spectacular. Since then, over the past few years, the gifted teacher has become very well know, almost an icon in the so called "Emergent Church" movement, although he has never claimed that our church was an "Emergent Church." Needless to say (unfortunately) he has been attacked by several Pastors around the country. My stance among those I meet is that I am not responsible for defending my pastor or church against comments. I will talk and listen, but I am not ever going to get "defensive" and try to argue for a point. I will clarify and ask why they think what they think, but I won't get drawn into an argument. It has bothered me, however, to see that so far every critic I have read or heard has gone to the level of revering to my pastor as "Satan’s agent" or "a clear Heretic" etc... Not one critic I have read so far has refrained from using such vitriolic statements which I interpret as meaning they are so afraid that their critic isn't strong enough on content that they have to use stupid statements to try and reinforce their ideas. One pastor even stated that since my pastor's following was so large, he obviously was not of God and used the same argument to refute Rev. Billy Graham. I’d love to discuss this topic with some of you, since I have anonymity here, and I would like to know what gifted people like you all think. MJH |
||||||
317 | Emergent Church question | Titus 1:9 | MJH | 177168 | ||
Does anyone have an opinion on the so called, "Emergent Church?" I ask because I happen to attend a church that when I join was simply another church which happened to grow very fast, had a gifted teacher, etc... But nothing spectacular. Since then, over the past few years, the gifted teacher has become very well know, almost an icon in the so called "Emergent Church" movement, although he has never claimed that our church was an "Emergent Church." Needless to say (unfortunately) he has been attacked by several Pastors around the country. My stance among those I meet is that I am not responsible for defending my pastor or church against comments. I will talk and listen, but I am not ever going to get "defensive" and try to argue for a point. I will clarify and ask why they think what they think, but I won't get drawn into an argument. It has bothered me, however, to see that so far every critic I have read or heard has gone to the level of revering to my pastor as "Satan’s agent" or "a clear Heretic" etc... Not one critic I have read so far has refrained from using such vitriolic statements which I interpret as meaning they are so afraid that their critic isn't strong enough on content that they have to use stupid statements to try and reinforce their ideas. One pastor even stated that since my pastor's following was so large, he obviously was not of God and used the same argument to refute Rev. Billy Graham. I’d love to discuss this topic with some of you, since I have anonymity here, and I would like to know what gifted people like you all think. MJH |
||||||
318 | Mathew,Mark,luke which written 1st | NT general Archive 1 | MJH | 177163 | ||
Most consider Mark first, but I personally subscribe to Matthew being first and orginally written in Hebrew, not Greek. Either way, there is strong evidence for an earlier writting no longer in existance that predates Mark, Matthew, and Luke. Some call this "Q". Luke was obviously not first since he says so in the first verse. A good read is, "Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus" which is a short book but very insightful and does deal some with this topic. MJH |
||||||
319 | Why is the raven use to feed Elijah? | 1 Kings | MJH | 177162 | ||
I have asked this same question myself, so I don't think I will have a good answer, but to further the interest.... I have read very old Jewish commentaries that equated the Raven during the flood with the Devil, flying to and fro over the waters. Else where in scripture Satan is described as going to and fro (Job 1:7). Also, the bird is unclean and would have fed on the dead, not needing to re-enter the Ark. Also, Noah may not have wanted it to re-enter considering that which is symbolized, death, while the dove would symbolize life. Most likely the raven did return to the ark from time to time to rest and it would not have had a shortage of food. The raven is never seen as a positive creature when seen symbolically, so the question still remains, WHY DID A RAVEN FEED ELIJAH? After all, we know what the raven feeds on and symbolizes. So why would God have a Raven feed Elijah at this time. ...I do not know. But one thing I am certain of, there is a purpose and meaning that I do not see yet, but it is there and the original readers would have known it at least in part. God doesn’t produce His word without every word and even every letter being significant (Matt 5:18) MJH |
||||||
320 | Jeremiah 3: 12-15 what verses support | Jer 3:12 | MJH | 177161 | ||
You have chosen an incredibly rich passage; one of the most profound in all scripture, for it speaks the theme of all scripture for not only Israel, but for all mankind. God is faithful and will remain faithful for all His people both corporately and individually. And undoubtedly, He will eventually lead you to the right shepherd for your church and youth group. However, this may be a wonderful time for your group to grow and learn and seek God. After all, we can all get lazy when we have a good shepherd to do the work for us rather than searching and seeking out God’s will for ourselves. It seems that you have a heart of leadership and a heart for your fellow youths! Pray through that and seek God through prayer and His word to know how you can be an effective member of your group during this time. The passage you stated has an interesting point: “RETURN.” The question you have to answer is “Return to what?” What was Jeremiah asking the people to “return” to? What is God asking your group to “return” to? Returning and repentance are very closely related. To “Repent” is to “Turn back toward something.” The Lord is asking for a true revival of His people. If God laid this verse on your heart, then you have a lot of work cut out for yourself I believe, and it will start not with others in your group, but with your own heart. And don’t forget, Jeremiah was called the “weeping prophet” for a reason. I pray the best for you and your church. MJH |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ] Next > Last [29] >> |