Results 41 - 60 of 154
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: stjones Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
41 | When were we a Christian Nation? | 2 Chr 7:14 | stjones | 107865 | ||
Hi, justme; Alas, the United States never was a Christian nation. The founding document - the Constitution - makes no mention of God. Some of the colonies were distinctly Christian, but that did not carry over to the United States. The Constitution does reflect some philosophical principles that arose from Christianity but it embodies none of the theology. Perhaps the biggest difference between now and then is that those politicians who were Christians seemed to be a bit more open about it and were more willing to be guided by their Christian values. And people were not horrified to learn that a politician might read the Bible and be guided by Biblical principles. That is not to say that the great promise in this passage is irrelevant. It just means that it is up to individual Christians to apply the Great Commission to our own neighborhoods, cities, and states. If we make this a Christian nation - not politically but one convert at a time - I'm sure God will indeed heal our land. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
42 | Will the Lord let us "catch" Him? | 2 Chr 15:15 | stjones | 27145 | ||
Hi, Nolan, my friend; That was my experience. About eight years before I was saved, the threat of nuclear war was weighing on my mind. Given that man eventually uses just about every weapon he creates, I reasoned that only a being like the God of the Bible (whose existence I doubted) could keep it from happening. So I started praying nightly to a God I was not certain was there, asking him to prevent it. As time passed and it didn't happen, I took a small step of faith and decided that if he was there and listening, he deserved the credit. So I added a word of thanks to my prayer. Then I began to consider that my family's safety, my career, and other good things might also be his doing, so I thanked him for those things as well. I don't think a day passed during those eight years without my silent utterance of that prayer. To make an already long story a little shorter, I found myself being dragged to church occasionaly. There I stood silently during the hymns and Lords's Prayer because I did not wish to voice a faith I did not have. But I listened. I started asking that unseen God to tell me if Jesus' claims about himself were true - claims I had dismissed as nonsense at the ripe old age of 10. God answered. On Christams Eve I had a deep desire to take communion for the first time in 30 years. The grape juice - not even wine! - hit me like pure grain alcohol, weakening my knees and filling me with warmth and a feeling of strength. I prayed and met with the pastor and a couple of months later made a public profession of faith in Christ. As someone once said, God searches for us until we find him. He is indeed willing to be found: '"... For I know the plans I have for you," declares the LORD, "plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future. Then you will call upon me and come and pray to me, and I will listen to you. You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart...."' (Jeremiah 29:11-13) Peace and grace; Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
43 | Who was Elihu? | Job | stjones | 30232 | ||
Hi, Saved; I'm inclined to accept his identity as the bible presents it: a young man of the clan of Ram whose father was Barakel the Buzite. Given some idea of his age and ancestry, I think he's just an ordinary human. God didn't rebuke Job's wife either, despite her suggestion that Job just "curse God and die". Elihu at least tried to do a better job of defending God than Job's other friends did. Absent more compelling evidence (and there may be some; I've never looked), I'd say some commentators have w-a-a-a-y too much time on their hands. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
44 | Let's crucify Ezra Brown | Job | stjones | 33213 | ||
SRN: Not to speak for Jensen (who doesn't need my belp) but ... What are you talking about? Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
45 | When was the book of Job written? | Job | stjones | 49919 | ||
One of my favorites! Tradition holds that it was written by Moses or by Job himself. It may have been written during the time of the Patriarchs (2000-1800 BC); some say Abraham was familiar with the story. It is definitely quite old and is unique in this sense: It is the only book in the Bible that is neither about the Hebrews nor known to be written by a Hebrew (assuming that Solomon wrote the books attributed to him). This suggests to me that it predates Abraham and speaks of a time (like the early chapters of Genesis) when God dealt directly with people or through individual priests like Melchizedek (Genesis 14:18). Indeed Job himself functioned as something of a priest to his children (Job 1) and his friends (Job 42). Hope this is useful. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
46 | Question re: Job | Job | stjones | 72431 | ||
Hi, boowig; I'll take a swing at the first one; I love Job. If you think about it, God first "incited" Satan. It was God who, out of the blue, said "have you considered my servant Job?" He then very pointedly told Satan that Job feared him (God) and shunned evil (Satan). I don't believe that Satan's response came as a surprise to God; he knew that Satan would respond by challenging Job's righteousness. I think God's remark about Satan "inciting" him is the key to understanding the entire book. God had expressed his pleasure with Job and his righteousness, implying that he (God) was worthy of Job's love and obedience. Satan challenged God by saying, in effect, that God was not worthy, it was only God's providence that had earned Job's allegiance. God responded by allowing Satan to take away all that God had provided. It was Satan's denial of God's worthiness that "incited" God to allow Satan to mistreat Job. As I said, I'm sure God knew all of this would happen when he first mentioned Job. But he knew something else too. This whole conversation took place "in public" in Heaven. In a sense, God took a terrible chance by bringing up Job. Suppose Job had followed his wife's advice to "curse God and die". Can't you just imagine Satan dancing around in Heaven going "neener, neener, neener; I got Job"? But God knew Job's heart and knew that he would not fail. From the very start, I think God chose the fight and chose Job to be his champion, to carry his colors in a battle waged before Heaven and - through the Bible - before us. What this story reveals is not just Job's faith in God but God's faith in Job – Job strengthened and sustained by his faith in God. Hope this is useful or interesting or something. ;-) Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
47 | a righteous man | Job 1:8 | stjones | 58204 | ||
Hi, STRIVING; I am preaching Job 1-2 in two weeks myself. Two things that I have noticed about this pasage: 1) Job is a sinner just the like the rest of us. It seems to me that Job's righteousness must be similar to Abraham's: "Abram believed the Lord, and he credited it to him as righteousness." (Genesis 15:6) In effect, Job was righteous because God said he was, not because he was perfect. 2) God started the whole thing, a very loving thing to do. God had everything to lose and nothing to gain by this contest between Job and Satan. God made himself vulnerable by the confidence he placed in Job. If Job failed, God would have lost to Satan; Job was God's champion. God also loves us, so he ensured that the story would be recorded and preserved. In some ways, God's willingness to become vulnerable in this instance prefigures Jesus' willingness to make himself vulnerable to the cross. Hope this is useful to you. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
48 | What is the tone of this statement? | Job 6:10 | stjones | 56182 | ||
Hi, Momma; I don't think Job is being prideful. He's doing what God expected him to do. Satan, in his exchanges with God in chapters 1 and 2, predicted that Job would "curse you to your face". Even Job's wife encouraged him to do so (2:9). But he doesn't. This statement is part of his defense against his friends' false accusations. Job's whole dilemma is captured in God's own description of Job in chapters 1 and 2. God himself describes Job as upright and blameless. It is a testament to Job's faith that throughout these tragedies that he does not deserve, he manages to say "though he slay me yet I will trust in Him." (13:15) Job is one of my favorite OT characters. I hope to have a long conversation with him one day. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
49 | Do you have any themes regarding Job? | Job 13:15 | stjones | 34896 | ||
Hi, Lapdog; Job is one of my favorite OT books so maybe I could help you if I had a little better idea of what exactly you're looking for. There are many themes in Job; one of the dominant ones (described by Phillip Yancy) is Job's struggle to reconcile three facts - God is just; God is all-powerful; he, Job, is innocent. If you think about it, any two of those can be true but from Job's point of view, they can't all three be true. Yet he knows they are. Other themes are his friends' foolish prosperity theology (not unlike what we sometimes see on TV these days) and Job's faith. The roles played by God and Satan and God's confidence that Job would disprove Satan's cynical view of humans' love for God are important. One theme you certainly will not find is "the patience of Job" - Job was hardly patient. Hmmm, well, I guess I tried to answer anyway. ;-) Hope this is useful. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
50 | IN PSALMS 37:4 | Psalm | stjones | 20054 | ||
Hi, Charlotte; I think I would say "holy happiness" - happiness that comes not from the world and its pleasures and wickedness but from the joy of God's grace. More specific to this context, Psalms 1 (1-3)and 119 (69-71, 76-78, 91-93, 173-175) talk about delighting in the law. Taken as a whole, these passages convey the idea that the law provides access to God's love, providence, protection, and salvation. So I think it would be safe to say that "delight" means to find satisfaction or joy in these things. Hope this helps. Peace and grace, Steve |
||||||
51 | Is it true? | Prov 3:5 | stjones | 107733 | ||
Hi, Aixen7z4; You can't have it both ways. You say that the questioners "could be aggressive in expressing their thoughts", yet you object to that very behavior today. How will you compel questioners to end by "asking the 'experts' how those thoughts squared with Scripture"? As for the Bereans, they were indeed exceptional. So was Jesus. Should Christians not strive to be exceptional? We would do better to encourage all visitors to test every word rather than spoon feed them with "expert" answers. You said "I do fear that if we abridge the freedom of the participants to come on and pontificate, that they may not come at all." I wonder if you can make the same statement reversing the "we" and "they": "I do fear that if they abridge the freedom of the participants to come on and pontificate, we may not come at all." Are you among those who pontificate? Do you see yourself as a questioner or an "expert"? Indeed, I would like everyone who is calling for "experts" to state unequivocally that they would submit to the judgment of the "experts" if they were not among the chosen few. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
52 | Would I submit? | Prov 3:5 | stjones | 107777 | ||
Fair enough. Probably time to let it go. - Indy |
||||||
53 | Sexual orientation determined at birth | Prov 3:13 | stjones | 104873 | ||
Hi, kalos; Disagree. But not on any Scriptural basis. I have to agree with the liberals who say that the Bible does not specifically address sexual orientation. Scientists have studied this question, however. Despite the best efforts of some to spin it otherwise, science has shown that sexual orientation is not genetically determined. Note that I am citing science rather than Scripture only because the Bible does not specifically address sexual orientation. Don't get me wrong - homosexual behavior is specifically forbidden in the passages you cited. The prohibition is real; the Bible's silence on sexual orientation in particular provides no excuse. Scripture does deal with sinful desires in general - they are the result of our fallen nature and our inclination toward sin. Since homosexual behavior is a sin, we can safely say that the desire to indulge in it is a consequence of the sinful nature. Whether or not sexual orientation is determined genetically at birth is an interestinq question, but the answer doesn't lead to the acceptance of homosexual behavior by the church. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
54 | The Bible the only guide for USA law | Prov 3:13 | stjones | 104984 | ||
Hi, kalos; Disagree. The Mosaic Law was given to a nation chosen by God with a king of God's choosing (Deut 17:14-15). The laws of that nation were to be adjudicated by judges chosen for each tribe (Deut 16:18) in courts that included the Levitical priesthood (Deut. 17:8-9). That nation no longer exists as a political entity, so there is no longer a civil society for it to govern. Jesus distinguished between the Kingdom of God and the civil authorities (Matthew 22:16-21), as did Paul (Romans 13:1-6). Paul wrote that the civil authorities were God's servants and exercised power instituted by God, but neither Jesus nor Paul asserted that the Roman Senate or Emperor were subject to the Mosaic Law. In Romans 1, Paul condemned the pagan religion of Rome, but not the exercise of political power by the Roman civil authorities, pagan or otherwise. I think American Christians should accept the historical reality that ours is a secular nation established by the Constitution. The Constitution reflects the values and beliefs primarily of Christians, Deists, and a handful of Enlightenment philosophers. It is a political document with no mention of Jesus or even God. There is a great deal that could be said about the role of religion - any religion - in American society and politics and about what part Christians should play. But that's a different discussion. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
55 | virgin birth | Is 7:14 | stjones | 72109 | ||
Hi, consider; I assume your question is about Jesus' deity. Simple answer: The implication is that the person does not believe what the Bible says about Jesus. Since the Bible is the only authoritative source of information about Jesus, this person would have no reason to believe anything about Jesus. More complicated answer: As I have explained in another thread, I don't think Isaiah 7:14 is a prophecy about Jesus. But that doesn't matter; both Matthew and Luke make it clear that God - not Joseph or any other man - is Jesus' father. Luke says "The angel answered, 'The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God.'" (1:35) I suppose that the Holy Spirit could have come upon Mary even if she weren't a virgin. But there are two problems with that. First, the passage in Isaiah establishes virgin birth as an extraordinary sign from God (even if it didn't directly foretell Jesus' birth). Second, there would always be room to question Jesus' paternity. Like any woman who sleeps around, it might be difficult to establish who the father of Mary's baby really was. Mary's virginity leaves no room for doubt. The angel's words sum up the dilemma: if this person believes that Jesus was the son of a man, then he or she cannot simultaneously believe that he is the Son of God - except in some vague, symbolic sense. The rest of the NT leaves little doubt that a vague, symbolic son would be an inadequate savior. Ultimately, if there is no virgin birth, there is no savior. Further, I think it's completely irrational to assume that God could not accomplish a virgin birth. I think it's entirely reasonable to believe that God would choose a virgin birth to bring his son into our world of space and time. So if this person can believe anything about Jesus, I can't imagine why the virgin birth would be a problem. Hope this helps. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
56 | Child or child? Boy or boy? | Is 7:15 | stjones | 106833 | ||
Hi, Ray; I'm not sure what to make of it. The NIV and NASB, among others, leave it lower case. - Indy |
||||||
57 | Two Christmases? | Is 9:6 | stjones | 106373 | ||
Hi, Hank; I'm inclined to think that the second (secular) Christmas was inevitable. There are really two aspects of this second Christmas. One is the obvious gross commercialization that has grown up around it. But I don't think that would be as pervasive if it were not for the emotional - even spiritual - dimension of this second Christmas: People who don't know the origin of the words speak longingly of "peace on Earth" and universal goodwill. Even the Coca-Cola company would like to "teach the world to sing in perfect harmony". I think this emotionalism arises out of our nature, created in the likeness of God. C. S. Lewis once observed that there are many religions with tales and myths that resemble events described in the Bible. There are resurrection myths and incarnation myths that preceded the birth of Christ. Critics point to these myths and claim that Christianity borrowed them. Lewis said that these myths arose out of the deepest longings of the human heart; it's no surprise that God, who knows the human heart best, satisfied those longings perfectly in his son, Jesus. Those myths don't undermine the truth of Christianity; they testify to it. I think the secular Christmas continues to speak to these deep desires - even while it fails to know or acknowledge the truth of Jesus' birth. So, yes, they are compatible in some ways. It is the only time of the year that I can think of where the universal desire for peace and hope is universally expressed. When all the beggars in the world are openly starving for bread, we have an opportunity to tell them that it can be found right under their noses. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
58 | lucifer | Is 14:12 | stjones | 27945 | ||
More offten translated as "morning star". Smith's Bible Dictionary (online at www.biblestudytools.net) defines "Lucifer": (light-bearer), found in (Isaiah 14:12) coupled with the epithet "son of the morning," clearly signifies a "bright star," and probably what we call the morning star. In this passage it is a symbolical representation of the king of Babylon in his splendor and in his fall. Its application, from St. Jerome downward, to Satan in his fall from heaven arises probably from the fact that the Babylonian empire is in Scripture represented as the type of tyrannical and self idolizing power, and especially connected with the empire of the Evil One in the Apocalypse. Hope this is useful Peace and grace and a blessed and merry Christmas, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
59 | Searching for the truth | Is 45:21 | stjones | 104872 | ||
Hi, FytRobert; I can only find two mentions of Gabriel in the Bible - helping Daniel interpret visions in chapters 8 and 9 and announcing Jesus' birth to Zacharias and Mary in Luke 1. Where does it say that Gabriel is now opposed to God? Thanks. Peace and grace, Steve aka Indiana Jones |
||||||
60 | Searching for the truth | Is 45:21 | stjones | 104879 | ||
Thanks for the clarification. I guess I could have assumed Lucifer, but given some of the weird ideas that turn up here from time to time ... well, you never know. - Indy |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ] Next > Last [8] >> |