Results 321 - 340 of 380
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: biblicalman Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
321 | having sex if engaged biblical stance? | 1 Cor 6:16 | biblicalman | 228074 | ||
Beja, you are of course always entitled to disagree with me but i would claim that the Scripture is quite clear: 'perhaps you dont know that the man who joins his body to a prostitute becomes physically one with her'. to me that is quite clear the two have become one. and that is the essence of marriage as in Genesis 2.24. Jesus was not speaking in Biblical terms to the woman at the well, He was using common parlance. he was using the words as the woman understood them. you really cannot base your doctrine on what is said to a worldly woman. lol u wont offend me by disagreeing with me. you are welcome to do so. if what i say does not stand up then it deserves to be knocked down. thats what a forum is all about. i just happen to think that it does stand up. others must decide :-)) why do u think in the Old Testament that a man who had sexual relations with an unmarried woman was forced to marry her? it was for the reason i have stated. why was divorce permissible after adultery? for the same reason. the relationship of marriage had been broken by the sexual act best wishes |
||||||
322 | having sex if engaged biblical stance? | 1 Cor 6:16 | biblicalman | 228072 | ||
Beja. I would not call 1 Corinthians 6.16 speculation. It clearly teaches that sexual union makes us one with the person we have sex with. And that is marriage in God's eyes (Genesis 2.24; Mark 2.7-8) if we have not had sexual relations before. If we have tnen it still makes us one but in an adulterous relatonship. The principle is that sexual union makes us one with the person whom we have sexual union with. In the case of the first sexual union that is marriage (the two have been made one). A second sexual union is adultery. It is not marriage in God's eyes because the person had been made one with someone through the first sexual union May I suggest that your illustration misses the whole point In God's eyes (and in Jesus' eyes)she was married to the first man that she had had sexual union with. That being so Jesus would clearly not see her as married to the fifth or sixth man. Have you considered the fact that that was why He said that the man she was living with was not her husband (even if she was married to him, we do not know)? Man's misuse does not cancel the word of God. But we are not talking about a multiple adulterer who is at odds with God anyway. We are talking abut a pure girl who has had sexual union with a man she intends to marry. She can still have a husband in the eyes of God by marrying the man that she has had sexual relations with. If she marries anyone else she will be an adulterer. That is why if anyone in the Old Testament had sexual relations with an unmarried girl he was required to marry her and had no choice. As Jesus would have said concerning your illustration, 'from the beginning it was not so'. |
||||||
323 | having sex if engaged biblical stance? | 1 Cor 6:16 | biblicalman | 228070 | ||
Well the truth is that in God's eyes you are now married. By making love you have been made one with your fiancee (1 Corinthians 6.16 clearly demonstrates this in much worse circumstances). And what God has joined together let no man put asunder (Mark 10.8-9). Sexual union is no light thing in God's eyes. To the Jews, and in Jesus' day betrothal was as binding as marriage. Only adultery could justify breaking a betrothal. Thus many betrothed couples did engage in sex. But while not totally condemned it was frowned on. You will notice that Joseph, Jesus' father, for example did not do so. But in the modern day engagement is not seen in that light, so that you are quite correct in surmising that you have done wrong, although marriage would right the wrong. I realise that you are confident that you will be married, but there are far too many broken engagements for it to be a certainty. On this basis i would suggest that you would be right to wait until marriage before continuing with sexulal relations. In this you will be truly honouring God. All best wishes for your future happiness. |
||||||
324 | is it wrong? | 1 Tim 2:12 | biblicalman | 228067 | ||
Hi Julia, It is not in my gift to pass judgment on others. What is in my gift is to explain what in my view the Scripture teaches and to do it as best as in me is with the guidance of the Holy Spirit. I am not one of those who claim infallibility because 'the Holy Spirit spoke through me'. Nor will I say that the Holy Spirit 'gives the gift of preaching' contrary to the teaching of Scripture. If the Scripture teaches that only men should preach then clearly it is error to say that the Holy Spirit gives the gift to women, for He wrote Scripture. He will not go against Himself. The question must always be, not what seems reasonable to me, but what does the Scripture teach. Do you not think that it is significant that Jesus appointed only men as His Apostles? There were women who preached in other religions in Jesus' day. Why did Jesus not strike out and appoint women? As Paul stated, 'i do not allow a woman to teach/preach or usurp authority over a man.' Now that is quite clear except to those who do not want to see it. The question comes as to at what point a woman can teach. And it is significant that in all the New Testament references to the ministry of women it never includes preaching and teaching. The only exception is where an older woman teaches younger women to love their husbands and children and to behave rightly (Titus 2.3 ff.) While women certainly prophesied it is never stated that they did it before men. Now like you i find this difficult to understand. My sister was a preacher and taught the Scriptures as a teacher (but the latter is not in church). She would have dismissed what I am saying in an instant (although not by citing Scripture). And I sympathise. As i mentioned previously i recognise that God has worked through women on the missionfield. And I find it diffiult to understand. But every effort that I have made to justify that position from Scripture has failed. I would be delighted if someone could prove me wrong. But after a lifetime of trying to prove otherwise in the end I have to accept that Scripture is clear on the subject, even though i do not like it. It is you who must decide whether your church is doing wrong in going against Scripture |
||||||
325 | Matthew 28:18-19 | Matt 28:18 | biblicalman | 228066 | ||
I have to disagree with the one who says that 'all authority in heaven and earth does not apply to the Son in His Godhood. We cannot thus separate the divinity and the humanity of the Son. Jesus was both God and man at the same time. He was and is ONE. The fact that He excluded from Himself the right to utilise His powers as God did not make Him less than God, nor did it mean that He had lost those powers. It simply meant that He would not call on them. When He said that He was being restored to the glory which He had with the Father before the world was (John 17.5), He was not thereby saying that He had lost that glory. He was indicating that He had submerged it within His manhood, and was now about to enjoy it again. Thus when He said that all authority in heaven and earth had been given to Him it was as the God-man. Yes, He was receiving that authority as both God and man, having deliberately subsumed for a while His authority over all things in order to live as a man. We all too glibly speak as though Jesus Christ could be two persons. This is proved by His claim that He would be with us always. That could only be true of Him in His Godhood. At no stage did Jesus Christ lose His Godhood. In all that He did He acted as both God and man. And in all that happened to Him it happened to Him as both God and man. The fact that He chose not to manifest His glory (except at the Transfiguration which reveald that it was still His), and chose not to exercise His authority over all things was a deliberate choice, not a cessation of His Godhood. |
||||||
326 | help finding a fake prophet | 1 Samuel | biblicalman | 228043 | ||
try 1 Samuel 28 | ||||||
327 | women preachers | 1 Tim 2:12 | biblicalman | 228037 | ||
1 Corinthians 14 is irrelevant to the question as it has nothing to do with teaching. It is blurring the issue. Furthermore we cannot reasonably apply the situation at Corinth to every church. 1 Timothy 2.11 says nothing about it referring to church meetings. Ephesians 5 is also not referring to teaching but the meaning is quite clear that the woman is to be subject to her husband because he stands as representative of the Lord. To cite 'greek scholars' is irrelevant. There is wide disagreement among them. With regard to prophesying, no one would deny that women prophesied. The question is whether they did it before men, and there is no Scriptural evidence that they did so. Huldah was very much an exception. The daughters of Philip were prophetesses. We can read into their ministry what we will. But our ideas are not Scripture. The question was, what does Scripturee say. And my point was that Scripture is quite clear. I personally have no problem with some women preachers and teachers, although I am very much aware that many of them introduce ideas which distort Scripture in an unusual way. But that was not the question. I recognise that I cannot justify my position from Scripture. In my view Scripture clearly restricts teaching to the church to men. | ||||||
328 | women preachers | 1 Tim 2:12 | biblicalman | 228033 | ||
This is a huge question to deal with in a small space but undoubtedly the most emphatic verse in dealing with the subject is 1 Tim 2.12. 'I do not permit a woman to teach, nor to have dominion over a man, but to be in quietness'. And the context is that women should be modest in their appearance and prominent in good works, and above all fruitful in bearing children. This is then the ministry of women. It serves to underline the positive statement. So Paul makes it quite clear here what the ministry of women should be, and what is their God given purpose. The emphasis with regard to ministry is on who 'rules' and 'teaches' the church as a whole. And the answer is 'men'. This is not to deny women a part to play in teaching and preaching, especially where it is to women, but it is a warning against them being given authoritative positions, and the right to teach with authority. It was of course given before there was a New Testament as we know it, when Spitit guided men interpreted the Old Testament and could so easily have led the church astray. But it is quite unequivocable. Whether it suits the modern generation of women is another question, and i think we certainly have to consider the fact that the Gospel would not have spread as widely as it has had it not been for women missionaries. But you asked for what the Scriptures teach. God bless you. | ||||||
329 | what is ark | Bible general Archive 4 | biblicalman | 228014 | ||
the angels who watched over the ark were called cherubim compare Ezek 1. if u mean an archangel then that means a leading angel Michael was an archangel see Jude 9. |
||||||
330 | Can aliens be real? | Gen 1:6 | biblicalman | 227992 | ||
The impression given by Genesis 1 ia that creation built up to the creation of man and the remainder of the Bible described God's dealings with man. This would suggest that to God man is the central figure in the Universe. It really leaves no room for aliens. There are of course other spiritual beings but they are not of this universe. However be assured of this. If there are aliens we will never know. |
||||||
331 | How old are the children? | Mark 16:15 | biblicalman | 227991 | ||
assuming you mean Mark 10.15 they were old enough to come to Him and for Him to put His arms round them and then lay His hands on them. 'that He might touch them' indicates those who were not babes in arms. They were therefore probably 5 upwards. In a comparative passage Jesus speaks of 'those who believe in Me' (Mat 18.6). Thus they were of an age to believe. His whole point is their openness and honesty without prejudice creeping in. | ||||||
332 | will our new bodies be spirit or physica | 1 Cor 15:44 | biblicalman | 227990 | ||
they will be spiritual bodies (1 corinthians 15.44) | ||||||
333 | Jesus was born in 4 bc | Luke 2:7 | biblicalman | 227968 | ||
we do not know for sure when Jesus was born. we do know that He was born before the death of Herod. but the date of the death of Herod is not known for certainty. it could be anywhere between 5 BC and 1 BC. it depends on the interpretation of certain data. the 'registration' which brought Joseph to Bethlehem was probably the one which celebrated the 25th year of Augustus in 3 BC but it would take years to complete and Herod may have demanded it early. But Jesus was born in BC because the later calculators got the date of His birth wrong. | ||||||
334 | Speaking in tongues | Acts 2:4 | biblicalman | 227959 | ||
The first thing to recognise is that all true believers have been baptised in the Holy Spirit. 'In one Spirit have we all been baptised into one body' (1 Corinthians 12.13). The baptism in the Holy Spirit that John promised would be brought about by Jesus was in contrast to his own baptism in water. Jesus would bring what John was unable to bring the new work of the Spirit, so that in contrast to those who followed John (who undoubtedly experienced a work of the Spirit of a kind) those who followed Jesus would be 'drenched in the Holy Spirit'. That is the sign of the true Christian. Nowhere in Scripture is the baptism in the Holy Spirit linked with speaking in tongues as a 'must have'. Clearly some who were baptised in the Holy Spirit did speak in tongues, for we know that some Christians spoke in tongues. And all Christians have been baptised in the Holy Spirit. It is noteworthy that baptism in the Holy Spirit is not mentioned in Acts 2, although it may be read forward from Acts 1. But tongues was a gift mainly for private prayer. It was only to be used in church if it was interpreted. But as Paul said, 'do all speak in tongues?' and the answer he expected was 'no'. So yes you may well be advised to seek a new church where the truth is expounded |
||||||
335 | Is judgement on judgement day private? | Rev 20:12 | biblicalman | 227929 | ||
Jesus said, 'nothing is hidden that will not be openly revealed, nor anything secret that will not be known and come to light' (Luke 8.17). This suggests that God will deal with men on an open basis. Indeed the whole point of a court is not only that justice is done, but also that it be seen to be done. Thus it would appear that we will be judged in the open publicly. That is why the books are opened. However, the observers will be our fellow accused. They will not be tut tutting at your sins. They will be facing up to their own. However, having said that we must recognise that all the pictures of judgment are given in earthly terms. What wlll actually happen will be beyond our knowledge. And the judgment might well be over in seconds. God hardly has to hear the evidence. The purpose of the books is not to assist Him but as evidence before all of what we have done. But if you are a Christian then you are being judged for your success or failure in service. Every Christan will have praise of God (1 Corinthians 4.5). Our problem may be that there is little to be praised. There will be no question of judgment and punishment (Roman 8.1). |
||||||
336 | How will God judge on judgement day? | Psalm | biblicalman | 227928 | ||
Paul tells us in Romans that when Christians come before God's judgment seat they come as those who are 'reckoned as righteous' (justified) in Christ. They have been freely 'accounted as righteous' through Christ's blood (Romans 3.24). Thus they are 'clothed with the garment of salvation and robed with the robe of righteousness' (Isaiah 61.10). They need therefore have no fear, for 'He has perfected for ever those who are being sanctified' (Hebrews 10.14). They have received the gift of the righteousness of Christ(Romans 5.17). | ||||||
337 | believing and being born again? | John 3:16 | biblicalman | 227927 | ||
To be 'born again' or more preferably to be 'born from above' refers to the work of the Holy Spirit producing spiritual life within. It is not sufficient to have a vague intellectual belief about Jesus (compare John 2.23-25). The belief that is required for this to happen is 'belief into Christ', that is a genuine personal response to Christ, calling on Him to act as our Saviour. As we genuinely believe His promises to be our Saviour as a consequence of His work on the cross, and call on Him to work in our lives and make us into what He wants us to be, we come within the sphere of His salvation. He makes us into new creatures (2 Corinthians 5.17). We are born again of imperishable seed through the living and abiding word of God (1 Peter 1.23). | ||||||
338 | Is the Holy Spirit Leading? | Gal 5:16 | biblicalman | 227925 | ||
I alway cringe when i hear someone say, "I was led by the Spirit', or 'the Holy Spirit showed me'. What it usually means is 'I decided what I wanted to do' or 'this is my opinion' given a tinge of spiritual repectability. Different people have been 'showed by the Holy Spirit' views which were diametrically opposed. Churches acting as a whole have been 'guided by the Holy Spirit' to appoint ministers who turned out within a short time to be a disaster. The way to be guided by the Holy Spirit is through careful and prayerful study of the Scriptures and careful assessment of what we are thinking of doing while in prayer before God. Then we must assess whether we have peace in our hearts about our decision. While this cannot guaranteee that you are being led by the Spirit, it makes it more likely. But at the best of times we are not pure and unprejudiced recipients of truth. Thus even acting in the way described above will be no guarantee that our ownviews have not overridden the Holy Spirit. We must seek to 'walk with God' prayerfully and Scripturally and trust God to lead us. But we are foolish if we believe that this means that our decisions will always be right, or indeed will be the leading of the Spirit. Fortunately for us, however, God is able to overrule our mistakes when they have been genuinely made. |
||||||
339 | loving your 1st cousin | Leviticus | biblicalman | 227911 | ||
No, but it is questionable how wise it is for genetic reasons. | ||||||
340 | Where did Adam and Eve's find their wife | Genesis | biblicalman | 227908 | ||
They each married one of Adam's daughters (Gen 5.6). There were no genetic problems in those days. | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ] Next > Last [19] >> |