Results 381 - 400 of 465
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Parable Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
381 | What then, is the meaning of John 15:2? | John 15:2 | Parable | 47485 | ||
The idea of comparing John's usage here to the gospel as a whole seems reasonable. Given that you prefer "take away" to "lift up", what is the meaning for us? Do you endorse the interpretation that if we don't bear fruit, we will be discarded? If so, please explain how this fits with the rest of John's theology. |
||||||
382 | John 15:2, "cut off" or "lift up"? | Not Specified | Parable | 47473 | ||
My question is about how we come to understand the meaning of scripture. I use the example of John 15:2 Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit He prunes, that it may bear more fruit. (NKJV) Some have used this verse to support the idea that salvation can be lost due to poor performance as a servant of Christ. This idea is hard to understand in light of Romans 8:1 "Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus," and Ephesians 2:8-9 "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God-- not by works, so that no one can boast." Also, the footnote on John 15:2 provided at www.biblegateway.com, suggests the word for "takes away" can be translated "lifts up". How are "takes away" and "lifts up" related? Given these questions, how are we to understand what Jesus is really saying? In his book "Secrets of the Vine", p. 33, Bruce Wilkenson offers this: "..a clearer translation of the Greek word 'airo', rendered in John 15 as 'take way, would be 'take up' or 'lift up'. We find accurate renderings of airo, for example, when the disciples 'took up' twelve baskets of food after the feeding of the five thousand (Matthew 14:20), when Simon was forced to 'bear' Christ's cross (Matthew 27:32), and when John the Baptist called Jesus the Lamb of God who 'takes away the sin of the world (John 1:29)." He continues, "In fact, in both the Bible and in Greek literature, 'airo' never means 'cut off'. Therefore, when some Bibles render the word as 'takes away' or 'cut off' in John 15, it is an unfortunate interpretation rather than a clear translation." Clearly, Wilkinson is critical of the many Bibles that translate 'airo' in a way he does not accept. He goes so far as to say "in the Bible and Greek literature, 'airo' NEVER means 'cut off'." This is a bold statement, considering that so many Bibles do translate the meaning as 'take away' or 'cut off'. (See John 15:2 at www.biblegateweay.com and compare versions.) Also, he appeals to Greek literature, a non-biblical source, to support his position. Is it acceptable to question the Bible in this way? Is it acceptable to compare the Bible with other sources? I say YES to both. First, the Bible itself instructs us to "Test everything. Hold on to the good." -- 1 Thess 5:21 Second, the Bible often uses comparisons with life to make its point. Parables are the clearest example of how comparisons with things we already understand from life help us to understand God's truths. Third, Jesus' intent simply is not faithfully conveyed by "takes away" or "cut off". In light of everything the Bible teaches about grace, mercy and love, especially the redeeming work of Christ on the Cross and the meaning of His resurrection, the fact one verse may be translated in a way that is contrary to that global meaning should cause us to question that translation rather than the global meaning. Furthermore, if there is a reasonable way to translate that verse such that it supports the global meaning of Scripture, rather than confound it, we are duty-bound to examine the evidence in support of that translation and its consequences for interpretation. Given this responsibility, how does "take up" or "lifts up" faithfully convey Jesus' meaning? Wilkison explains it this way, in a conversation with a vinedresser he met. He stresses that the vinedresser wants each and every branch to be fruitful. Vinedresser: "New branches have a natural tendency to trail down and grow along the ground. But they don't bear fruit down there. When branches grow along the ground, the leaves get coated in dust. When it rains, they get muddy and mildewed. The branch becomes sick and useless." Wilkinson: "What do you do? Cut it off and throw it away?" Vinedresser: "Oh, no! The branch is much to valuable for that. We go through the vineyard with a bucket of water looking for those branches. We lift them up and wash them off. Then we wrap them around the trellis or tie them up. Pretty soon they're thriving." This is the understanding Jesus wants us to have because it is what the disciples and everyone else of that day would have understood. No one then would have accepted the idea of discarding an entire branch and neither should we. Pruning, on the other hand, is a different matter, and it is likewise understood to be loving discipline, not disposal. My questions to the forum? 1. Is this a biblical understanding of John 15:2? 2. Is there anything wrong in the method used to support this interpretation? 3. If you disagree, what do you suggest is the proper method and interpretation? Parable |
||||||
383 | John 15:2, "cut off" or "lift up"? | John 15:2 | Parable | 47483 | ||
My question is about how we come to understand the meaning of scripture. I use the example of John 15:2 Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit He prunes, that it may bear more fruit. (NKJV) Some have used this verse to support the idea that salvation can be lost due to poor performance as a servant of Christ. This idea is hard to understand in light of Romans 8:1 "Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus," and Ephesians 2:8-9 "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God-- not by works, so that no one can boast." Also, the footnote on John 15:2 provided at www.biblegateway.com, suggests the word for "takes away" can be translated "lifts up". How are "takes away" and "lifts up" related? Given these questions, how are we to understand what Jesus is really saying? In his book "Secrets of the Vine", p. 33, Bruce Wilkenson offers this: "..a clearer translation of the Greek word 'airo', rendered in John 15 as 'take way, would be 'take up' or 'lift up'. We find accurate renderings of airo, for example, when the disciples 'took up' twelve baskets of food after the feeding of the five thousand (Matthew 14:20), when Simon was forced to 'bear' Christ's cross (Matthew 27:32), and when John the Baptist called Jesus the Lamb of God who 'takes away the sin of the world (John 1:29)." He continues, "In fact, in both the Bible and in Greek literature, 'airo' never means 'cut off'. Therefore, when some Bibles render the word as 'takes away' or 'cut off' in John 15, it is an unfortunate interpretation rather than a clear translation." Clearly, Wilkinson is critical of the many Bibles that translate 'airo' in a way he does not accept. He goes so far as to say "in the Bible and Greek literature, 'airo' NEVER means 'cut off'." This is a bold statement, considering that so many Bibles do translate the meaning as 'take away' or 'cut off'. (See John 15:2 at www.biblegateweay.com and compare versions.) Also, he appeals to Greek literature, a non-biblical source, to support his position. Is it acceptable to question the Bible in this way? Is it acceptable to compare the Bible with other sources? I say YES to both. First, the Bible itself instructs us to "Test everything. Hold on to the good." -- 1 Thess 5:21 Second, the Bible often uses comparisons with life to make its point. Parables are the clearest example of how comparisons with things we already understand from life help us to understand God's truths. Third, Jesus' intent simply is not faithfully conveyed by "takes away" or "cut off". In light of everything the Bible teaches about grace, mercy and love, especially the redeeming work of Christ on the Cross and the meaning of His resurrection, the fact one verse may be translated in a way that is contrary to that global meaning should cause us to question that translation rather than the global meaning. Furthermore, if there is a reasonable way to translate that verse such that it supports the global meaning of Scripture, rather than confound it, we are duty-bound to examine the evidence in support of that translation and its consequences for interpretation. Given this responsibility, how does "take up" or "lifts up" faithfully convey Jesus' meaning? Wilkison explains it this way, in a conversation with a vinedresser he met. He stresses that the vinedresser wants each and every branch to be fruitful. Vinedresser: "New branches have a natural tendency to trail down and grow along the ground. But they don't bear fruit down there. When branches grow along the ground, the leaves get coated in dust. When it rains, they get muddy and mildewed. The branch becomes sick and useless." Wilkinson: "What do you do? Cut it off and throw it away?" Vinedresser: "Oh, no! The branch is much to valuable for that. We go through the vineyard with a bucket of water looking for those branches. We lift them up and wash them off. Then we wrap them around the trellis or tie them up. Pretty soon they're thriving." This is the understanding Jesus wants us to have because it is what the disciples and everyone else of that day would have understood. No one then would have accepted the idea of discarding an entire branch and neither should we. Pruning, on the other hand, is a different matter, and it is likewise understood to be loving discipline, not disposal. My questions to the forum? 1. Is this a biblical understanding of John 15:2? 2. Is there anything wrong in the method used to support this interpretation? 3. If you disagree, what do you suggest is the proper method and interpretation? Parable |
||||||
384 | Was Bible time kept the same way as now | Genesis | Parable | 47470 | ||
In his book "Gift of Time: Time and the Kingdom of God", William T. McConnel explains that there are differences in the way people think about time and these views influence our relationship with God. To summarize: In the modern west, we think of time as a series of discreet events, a string of moments one following the other. This has consequences for us in our relationship with God, especially when we try to understand scripture. For us today, time is impersonal and "over before you know it". The past is either irrelevant or drags us down, the present is never where our attention is placed and the future is either to be feared or ours for the making. We cannot understand eternity because we cannot understand now. In the biblical eras, time is understood differently. Events are processes that endure, rather than discrete instances. The attention span is seasons and years, not sound bites, photo ops and microseconds. Events are seen as interconnected and there is meaning behind what happens because of those connections. Past,present and future are a natural progression. Eternity is seen from God's perspective, understood in terms of our insignificance and His glory. Parable |
||||||
385 | How do we interpret scripture? | Gen 1:14 | Parable | 47341 | ||
I suspect the problem is with postings from jmscott2 and lovefountain3, on another branch of this thread. I have asked lockman if there was anything in my posts that are a problem. Perhaps we should wait until they reply. I will do my best to answer your question. I have enjoyed our dialogue. I know I can learn much from you, and I appreciate your willingness to consider my arguments. |
||||||
386 | Is it wrong to use condoms? advise | Bible general Archive 1 | Parable | 47329 | ||
I can't help but notice the childlike trust that is revealed in the comment "maybe God wants you have them." Matt 18:3 ..."Truly I say to you, unless you are converted and become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven." Parable |
||||||
387 | How do we interpret scripture? | Gen 1:14 | Parable | 47307 | ||
Before I attempt a synopsis of Dr. Ross' method, in another note, I respectfully submit my basic concern: For me, the issue is this. We risk imposing "non-biblical" premises on Scripture by the very act of reading Scripture in any way, including a "straight-forward" way, depending on what that reading entails. To me, "straight-forward" sounds like a path WE decide, based on our limited view of the local landscape and distant horizon. Not only must we look down at our footing to avoid tripping, but also we must look up toward our destination, to correct our path and avoid getting hit on the head by low-hanging branches. We cannot do this alone, we need the counsel of others (Proverbs 15:22) and we need God to guide us over the rough terrain on our way to Him. For this, we must be open to His guidance. So, for me, I accept the fact that it is not possible to determine if a premise is non-biblical until I established what is biblical, i.e. contained expressly or derived from Scripture according to sound principles. But that understanding is exactly the goal of reading the Word, in a "straight-forward" way or otherwise. So, because I am confounded in myself, I am forced to abandon my own methods, no matter how dependable they seem. In other words, it is not possible to read Scripture in any way without necessarily imposing something from ourselves that may or may not be biblical. We take our chances no matter how we read it. I believe this is the point addressed by 1 Cor 2:6-14. In my opinion, we cannot know what it means to read Scripture in a "straight-forward" way, for that term embodies more than a few assumptions about us that may or may not be biblical. Yet, we must start somewhere. I believe we should begin by meekly submitting ourselves to God, then heed the wisdom and counsel of the most learned and Godly among us, then jump in with eyes and ears open wide. Parable p.s. I will retrieve Dr. Ross' book from a friend and see what I can do to outline his approach. |
||||||
388 | How do we interpret scripture? | Gen 1:14 | Parable | 47290 | ||
A most excellent response! There is no doubt it is God's mercy and grace alone that reveal His truth to us through His Word. To illustrate the magnitude of this miracle, consider this: the Word has been delivered faithfully to us through the many people who served God with their lives devoted to Him. The Word was given through His prophets and apostles, recorded by His faithful servants, translated by competent linguists, interpreted by sincere cultural historians, scholars and theologians and applied by the faithful. Clearly, even with our best efforts, alone we could never have done it! |
||||||
389 | Send in the Clones? | Bible general Archive 1 | Parable | 47219 | ||
Amen, Brother! Cloning may offer humanity many blessings as well, but perhaps only so long as we act according to the belief that life is sacred and sanctity comes from God, not us! |
||||||
390 | How do we interpret scripture? | Gen 1:14 | Parable | 47218 | ||
That, of course, is the real trick, isn't it? I think perhaps Dr. Ross' argument is best left to him in his book, but I'll offer the following comments and questions to help me identify specific points in Dr. Ross' book that I can cite later. Regarding a "straight-forward" reading, accepted methods in biblical hermeneutics incorporate a variety of factors to interpret scripture. Such include: historical context, language (e.g. idiomatic expression, hyperbole), literary style (narrative, parable, metaphor, apocalyptic), cultural traditions, issues of translation vs transliteration and perhaps most importantly, the understanding that communication involves not just the source material but also the many issues associated with the reader. Q: Is this what you meant by "straight-forward" reading? Regarding "non-biblical" premises, by definition a premise is the start of a line of reasoning, rather than something we conclude, although a conclusion of one argument often becomes a premise for the next. I believe the premise we work from is that the Bible is the Word of God. But after that, I'm not qualified to articulate what other, if any, premises may be involved in interpreting God's Word to us. Q: Can you give me one or more examples of "non-biblical" premises? I suppose you need not mention the obvious "there is no God" because one cannot assume something that is mutually exclusive to the whole meaning. Parable |
||||||
391 | Send in the Clones? | Bible general Archive 1 | Parable | 47209 | ||
As I have said previously, I'm not a specialist on the theory of evolution. Yet, I believe that for whatever utility it may have in modelling the variations within a species, e.g. through the process of natural selection, the theory has been extrapolated way beyond what the biological evidence supports. This theory attempts to explain a narrowly defined set of observations and cannot be reasonably generalized to the whole of Creation. Perhaps more important, biotechnology, i.e. genetic engineering, is creating far more urgent challenges to our ethics and morality. For example: 1. Is a clone of a human really a person? This demands that we clarify how we define a person, and many will look to the Word for this. Some may say that because clones are not conceived in the traditional way, i.e. sperm/egg, they are not human because that experience is a fundamental part of what makes us human, and the content of our DNA is only part of being human. 2. Do clones have rights or can they be considered property, perhaps to be used for spare organs that won't be rejected by the "original" person? What does the Bible say about using clones in this way, or for that matter, organs that have been grown from donor DNA artificially, but not taken from a cloned human? 3. Fetal stem cell research, a major area of development, requires the removal of cells from a zygote such that it "dies". I use quotes here because some people debate whether or not such are "alive". Is it wrong for people to harvest stem cells in this way, even if those cells were artificially produced in a dish by injecting sperm DNA into an ovum? If we believe the Word speaks to these issues, and I believe God has very definite opinions about how we manipulate life, the time has come for us to give account for the faith that we have on this kind of question. Failure to do so will inspire many to mock the Bible as out-dated, obsolete and inadequate to address the issues of modern technology. On the other hand, if it can be shown that Word offers clear guidance, that might bring many people to faith, but again, only if it convicts them of their sin. Parable |
||||||
392 | Plants were created, and then stars? | Gen 1:14 | Parable | 47166 | ||
TOMN, Thanks for your kind words about my post. However, I disagree with you about Lionstrong's note. For the record, I agree with his basic premise that good scholarship does not mean bending the Bible. I think all of us agree that good scholarship only helps us to understand the Bible better. For example, if we don't understand the difference between salt in biblical times and the highly purified chemical sodium chloride we use today, Jesus' teaching about salt losing its flavor has no meaning for us. Sodium Chloride never loses its flavor and because it dissolves in water, is not useful for paving roads. However, the salt of old was not pure, containing many other ingredients that were not water soluble and had no taste. If the sodium chloride were leached out of that mixture, the remainder was thrown out. Accordingly, we must be able to consider what good scholarshlp says and what it means to our understanding of the Word. If scholarship is contrary to the fundamental principles God has clearly revealed throughout, then we must be skeptical. However, in those areas where our understanding of specific details is reasonably open to discussion, we must not be stiff-necked in our willingness to review well considered explanations, that if correct, can only add to our understanding of God's message to us. |
||||||
393 | Is it wrong to use condoms? advise | Bible general Archive 1 | Parable | 47162 | ||
I agree with Searcher56 that the answer given by Makarios on 03/11/02 is excellent. I would only add that we may be confident in his interpretation by also knowing that God gave us sexual relations not just so we could reproduce, but also that we could enjoy pleasure and intimacy, i.e. profound relationship, with our mate. Biblical support for this may be found throughout the Song of Solomon, one of the most beautiful books of the Bible and one that demonstrates the scope and magnitude of what is possible in a Godly marriage. Parable |
||||||
394 | where do blacks come from? | Bible general Archive 1 | Parable | 47161 | ||
I am not a life scientist, but fortunately this is not necessary to understand the most recent scientific dialogue about "race". Hank is right that "it's never been proved...that one race is genetically superior to any other race." I believe the best reason for this is explained by Dr. Joseph L. Graves, a biologist, in his book "The Emperor's New Clothes: Biological Theories of Race at the Millenium". Dr. Graves' thesis is that there is no biological/genetic basis for race, i.e. a sub-species, in humans. This does not mean the social construct of race and its consequences are not real, but rather that arguments about race based on genetics are unfounded. This is because studies have shown that the human genome is remarkably homogeneous, much more so than any other higher organism. For example, there is more genetic diversity in one community of chimps than in the entire human species. This means that it is not possible to classify individuals or groups based on genetic content. To me, this is consistent with the biblical idea that God created man, distinct from other animals. Regarding physical differences, as Hank describes, characteristics and traits are a result of the many expressions of possibilities contained in the genetic code. All of us contain the potential to have the traits of any of us have, but each of us only expresses a small subset of the total possible. To me, these diverse possibilities are God's provision to us in order that we may not only survive in diverse environments, but also for us see is His Creative imagination expressed in US that we may come to love others without regard to external appearances. Parable |
||||||
395 | Plants were created, and then stars? | Gen 1:14 | Parable | 47086 | ||
Dr. Ross is the founder of Reasons to Believe; the website is www.reasons.org The Genesis Question is a book, so I doubt the full text is available on-line. The website has lots of info, so go there for more. In the future, I'll try to post some of the many scientific insights found in the bible. To me, by demonstrating a clear understanding of creation, centuries before science "discovered" these things, those insights give skeptics something to think about. |
||||||
396 | Plants were created, and then stars? | Gen 1:14 | Parable | 47084 | ||
Sharonrose, I once read that the first rule of consulting is that the problem is always with the people, not the equipment, policies, software, infrastructure or anything else the people use. In the case of the "science vs faith" conflict, the problem is with people. To address the needs of people, then, I recommend the following approach. Regarding faith, I believe the facts of our faith are best understood in light of the Godly principles they demonstrate. I think we agree that knowing all of "what" the Bible says and having it at your fingertips is no small task, but knowing the "how" and "why" of the Bible is much more feasible and fruitful; when we understand the lesson God wants us to know, we can better understand the details he uses to teach that lesson and we can apply those lessons in the circumstances of our lives. Of course, learning both the lesson and the facts happens together. Likewise for science, no one can know all of what science has to say. I've heard physicists talk about biology and biologists talk about astronomy and when they do, they reveal how even learned scholars can be like novices in another field. So, rather than learn the "what" of science, i.e. science facts, which are static, I suggest you learn the "how" of science, which is dynamic, so you can apply proper scientific method to any subject or line of reasoning you face. For me, I have to remind myself that sometimes, no matter what I say, people will continue to believe what they want, perhaps in order to justify what they want to do. As a friend of mine once said about those who raise objections to faith, "if you yank those objections out of the ground like a weed, what you find clinging to the roots is sin." So, what people need is to be convicted of their sin, rather than intellectually convinced that, without God, science is empty and dead. Indeed, conviction is the first step in understanding this; science can do nothing for the fundamental condition of human depravity. |
||||||
397 | Shame?? What could this be? | Rom 10:9 | Parable | 47037 | ||
The apostle Pauls answers your first question: "...if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved" --Romans 10:9 He also teaches that once we have accepted Christ, we are no longer condemned. "Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus" -- Romans 8:1 This means that we are no longer in bondage to sin, so we no longer need to have any fear that God accepts us into His Kingdom, even though we do not live perfect lives. But that doesn't mean we can do just anything we want and expect there to be no consequences, for doing bad things always leads to problems and we are always responsible for what we do, here and in heaven. As for being timid about your faith in front of others, this is natural. Fellowship with mature Christians will help you grow in faith and have more confidence with your testimony. Pray that God will give you strength, patience and wisdom to bring you through this difficult time. Parable |
||||||
398 | Whom should I direct my love and praise | John 14:5 | Parable | 47035 | ||
Christians believe that the one God is revealed to us in three persons, the Father, the Son (Jesus) and the Holy Spirit. This idea of one God in three persons is called the Trinity and is central to our faith. As you learn more about Christianity, you will see the nature of the Trinity is one of the things that makes Christianity special and unique in the world of faith. Each person of the Trinity is fully God, yet each has a distinct role in our lives. Jesus is our representative with the Father, yet because Christ lives in us and we are adopted into God's family through Jesus Christ, we are welcome to come before the Father. Also, in my daily life, I often ask the Holy Spirit to work His will through me. The Holy Spirit was sent by Jesus to be with us after he went to heaven to be with the Father. You should feel free to speak to each or all persons of the Trinity. God knows your heart and your needs even before you ask, and he wants to hear from you. I suggest you pray for God to guide you in your prayer life. Praise God! Parable p.s. GK, please, please be careful not to reveal ANY information about yourself that might help someone bad (yes, even at a bible website) to identify you, and never engage in private email conversations with anyone you don't know and trust personally, and NEVER NEVER go anywhere to meet anyone you meet over the web who tries to arrange a meeting. If anyone ever tries to arrange a meeting with you, say "no" and report them to the police, OK? Stay safe by staying anonymous. |
||||||
399 | Plants were created, and then stars? | Gen 1:14 | Parable | 46953 | ||
We seem to know, without anyone telling us, right from wrong, real from imaginary and true from false. Yet how often we choose wrong, imaginary and false over right, real and true. The knowledge of good and evil is indeed dangerous if all you have is a fallen nature! I have come to a point in my life where the "line and rule", although useful for the world, is more like a shimmering mirage, and the truth of faith, although unmeasureable, is the oasis in the desert. |
||||||
400 | Plants were created, and then stars? | Gen 1:14 | Parable | 46952 | ||
And that more scientists will come to faith! I specialize in chemistry, physics and materials science/engineering. Grace and Peace My Brother, Parable |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ] Next > Last [24] >> |