Results 41 - 57 of 57
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Unanswered Bible Questions Author: Parable Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
41 | what understanding DO animals have? | Job 12:7 | Parable | 51506 | ||
Mommapbs, Thanks for sharing. I can relate to both things you have learned from Creation and I agree with you that "all creation is a testimony to THE Creator." However, my question relates more to another remark you made, i.e. "but only man can KNOW God in the relational, intimate sense of the word." Do you have any biblical references that support this exclusivity of knowing? In terms of your remark, my question may be restated in two parts, "if Creation is a testimony to the Creator, to whom is this testimony directed?" and "if all creatures are witness to this, what does that imply about their awareness and/or relationship with the Creator?" The verses I cited seem to suggest that at least some kinds of animals know that God is responsible for Creation, e.g. "Who among all these (beasts, birds, earth, fish) does not know that the hand of the LORD has done this?" -- Job 12:10 What else does the Bible say about animals and God? Parable |
||||||
42 | Do animals know God? | Job 12:7 | Parable | 51486 | ||
Given the following verses, what can be said about a) the awareness of God or b) the relationship with God that animals may have? Job 12:7-10 "But now ask the beasts, and let them teach you; And the birds of the heavens, and let them tell you. Or speak to the earth, and let it teach you; And let the fish of the sea declare to you. Who among all these does not know that the hand of the LORD has done this, in whose hand is the life of every living thing, and the breath of all mankind?" Col 1:23b "...the gospel that you have heard, which was proclaimed in all creation under heaven,..." Parable |
||||||
43 | what does baptism mean in each verse? | Acts | Parable | 49050 | ||
Are you suggesting that the baptism of Eph 4:5 is different from the baptism of Mt 29:19? Eph 4:5 "one Lord, one faith, one baptism" Matt 28:19 "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit" |
||||||
44 | Let's explore this in more detail. | Bible general Archive 1 | Parable | 48155 | ||
Searcher, you have a knack for getting to the heart of the issue! Excellent citation! Regarding #3, about which NT ideas are necessary, you said "all of them" and I totally agree. Of course, as we often see in this forum, there are diverse opinions about what those ideas are and how they influence us. 3a. Can you list a few that you feel are central to our relationship with Christ and/or are generally accepted as uniquely definitive of Christianity? Regarding #2, about which OT ideas are necessary, you said "we need to understand how the OT points to Christ". Again, an excellent answer. 2a. Can you describe a few ways how the OT does this? Regarding #1, about which ideas are necessary to accept the authority of Scripture, you said "because one accepts Scripture as the Word of God does not mean one is saved" and "without the Spirit, His Word is confounding". How true! 1a. Is there any hope for those who do not have the Spirit? In other words, is there anything they can/must do so that He may/will reside in them? Your Brother in Christ, Parable |
||||||
45 | What does God accomplish in us? | Bible general Archive 1 | Parable | 48134 | ||
I ask three questions, in reverse order, that you may see the logic I am suggesting. 3. What NT ideas must we hold before we can accept, serve and abide in Christ? 2. Since the OT points to Christ, what OT ideas must we hold before we can accept NT ideas? 1. What ideas must we hold before we can accept Scripture as the Word of God? For the sake of illustrating what I'm asking for, I suggest that before we can accept the Bible as the Word of God, we must accept that God exists and can speak to us through the inspired writings of others. Then, we must accept that He actually did so and the books of the Bible are indeed inspired by Him. My interest is to describe in bullet points what the Bible says is our path as we move from unbelief to abiding in Christ. Also, perhaps there are some conditions that must be in place, but are understood rather than explicity described in Scripture. I acknowledge it may not be a stepwise process, as the Holy Spirit may bring us to Christ in any way He chooses; my thought is to express in brief terms what is accomplished in us by Him. Parable |
||||||
46 | another hypothetical, applied ethics | James 4:7 | Parable | 47778 | ||
Here's another hypothetical to spark your imagination. Yes, there are many reasons it is silly, but that's why its called a hypothetical: You are a paramedic. You find Satan lying on the ground, injured and bleeding. Without first aid, he will die. Let us also say that if Satan dies, the evil now present in the world would disappear. Your options are: do nothing, let him die render aid, save his life kill him, hasten the removal of evil What should you do? Explain. |
||||||
47 | the barren branch never was a branch? | John 15:2 | Parable | 47525 | ||
In other words, as I understand the conclusion of the commentary you provided, the barren branch never was a genuine offshoot of the Vine. Is this an accurate description of what you believe? |
||||||
48 | so "cuts away" means "prunes"? | John 15:2 | Parable | 47493 | ||
For the branches that bear fruit, I agree. But for those that does not bear fruit, the verse, by the translation "cuts away", seems to suggest the branch is removed completely. Are you suggesting that the fruitless branch is only being pruned, and not cut away altogether, in order to stimulate growth? |
||||||
49 | 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. |
||||||
50 | 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 |
||||||
51 | 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 |
||||||
52 | 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 |
||||||
53 | 2 followups, masturbation and 1Cor7:2-5 | Bible general Archive 1 | Parable | 46161 | ||
Of course, James is right, and this is why all of us continue to sin each day. We fail to act according to love for the good we know we should do. Unfortunately, this verse doesn't help someone if they are in fact looking to the Bible to understand what is the good they ought to do, as is the point of the original question about masturbation. My questions merely illustrate that, to the best of my knowlege, the Bible has not established that masturbation, in itself, is necessarily sin, yet the first answer seemed to suggest this is the case. My concern lies with how this conclusion was reached, i.e. what are the assumptions and inferences used to interpret God's intent with this matter. Remarkably, your question about how I "honestly feel" makes my point for me. We are not to interpret scripture in terms of our feelings, rather we are to interpret our feelings in terms of scripture. To answer your questions, I "feel" we are blessed by God and one of his many gifts to us is our sexuality. Others include the enjoyment of food and drink. For the details of my position on the topic of masturbation perse, see my posting of 4/3/02. I'm not saying God blesses acts of masturbation, and I'm not saying he curses them either. Its just that I don't see any biblical basis for cursing ourselves if we do it, unless of course it leads to sexual immorality or overwhelming guilt. I have two points to address this possible risk. First, is it a sin, if when I am far from home for a long time, I masturbate and I think only of my wife, whom I love dearly? In light of what Paul suggests in 1Cor7, I can't see why this would be sinful. 1Cor7:2-5 "But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband. 3The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband's body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife. 5Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control." Is Paul suggesting that marriage is an acceptable way to indulge the fleshly desire for sex? Is he suggesting that the fleshly desire for sex is a legitimate reason to marry? Second, isn't verse 5 saying that release of sexual tension with the spouse is preferable to becoming so frustrated that the person falls prey to temptation? If so, then might Paul not also suggest that masturbation, while unseemly, might actually be a way to avoid falling into temptations that are most definitely sin, such as adultery or fornication? I have read many of your postings and I have come to respect your insights and bible knowledge. If I come across as argumentative, I am, but in the classical sense of the word and not in the sense of bickering or quarreling. Thanks, Parable |
||||||
54 | please clarify | Bible general Archive 1 | Parable | 45964 | ||
True enough, so long as we rightly divide the Word, i.e. understand the meaning of the term LUST, as inspired by the Holy Spirit, and if masturbation, which is never expressly mentioned in the Bible, "is sin because it is an expression of lust", as you suggest. My inspiration here is from 1Thess5:21, where we are instructed to test everything and hold onto the good. Thus, I have two questions: 1. how does the Bible define or otherwise explain the meaning of LUST itself? and 2. what is the scriptural basis for the idea that masturbation is "an expression" of this sin? I think we agree that where the Bible speaks, we stand firm, but where the Bible is silent, we have liberty to live according the principles revealed in God's Word. To me, the fundamental principles include grace, love, forgiveness, redemption, sanctification, mercy, compassion, truth, righteousness, justice and peace. Please don't misunderstand my intent, which is not to encourage or defend masturbation, but rather to understand clearly what the Bible does and does not say. Finally, to know more about my perspective on this topic, see my answer given on 4/3/02. Sincerely, Parable |
||||||
55 | How to show Christ is God? | John 14:6 | Parable | 44509 | ||
Excellent advice! If I may follow-up ..... Your answer hinges on Christ not only being the incarnation of God, a radical idea to be sure, but also that Jesus is ONLY incarnation of God, an offensive idea for many because it denies the legitimacy of other religions. This of course is the essence of our faith, but for unbelievers, it is perhaps the most difficult truth to accept. As I work in a highly secular environment, a university, I'm looking for credible ways to share the truth of Christ without depending on Scripture as ultimate authority, at least at first, and without assuming the person accepts that Jesus is God and that He is the ONLY incarnation of God. |
||||||
56 | How to explain Jesus' exclusive claim? | John 14:6 | Parable | 44452 | ||
In John 14:6b, Jesus says "No one comes to the Father except through me." Many reject Christ, or have real trouble accepting Him because of His unique, exclusive claim. When witnessing to unbelievers, how do you explain to them why you accept His claim? And, in practical terms, what difference does it make to your walk with him? I'm not looking so much for bible verses that support the truth of His statement, but rather how you explain to unbelievers why this makes sense, knowing that they do not yet recognize the authority of scripture. |
||||||
57 | How has God sanctified you? | 1 Thess 4:3 | Parable | 41738 | ||
This is for believers who have been experiencing sanctification by the Holy Spirit. Aside from being made a new creation in Christ, how has sanctification changed your life, your outlook and your relationships with others? |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 ] |