Results 41 - 60 of 3692
|
||||||
Results from: Notes Author: Makarios Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
41 | Is Salvation lump sum? | Heb 7:25 | Makarios | 220095 | ||
Hey Doc, This is an excellent post! The way you have put this post together shows how truly the Lord is working through you as He has put you in the place that you are right now - "in top posting form" - to provide answers to such questions as these. Keep up the great work! Your brother in Christ, Makarios |
||||||
42 | The Only God | Is 44:6 | Makarios | 219864 | ||
The Only God Isaiah 44:6 "Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: 'I am the first and I am the last, And there is no God besides Me." Isaiah 43:10-11 "You are My witnesses," declares the LORD, "And My servant whom I have chosen, So that you may know and believe Me And understand that I am He. Before Me there was no God formed, And there will be none after Me. I, even I, am the LORD, And there is no savior besides Me." Isaiah 44:8 'Do not tremble and do not be afraid; Have I not long since announced it to you and declared it? And you are My witnesses. Is there any God besides Me, Or is there any other Rock? I know of none.'" Isaiah 45:5 "I am the LORD, and there is no other; Besides Me there is no God. I will gird you, though you have not known Me;" Isaiah 45:18 For thus says the LORD, who created the heavens (He is the God who formed the earth and made it, He established it and did not create it a waste place, but formed it to be inhabited), "I am the LORD, and there is none else. Isaiah 45:21-22 "Declare and set forth your case; Indeed, let them consult together. Who has announced this from of old? Who has long since declared it? Is it not I, the LORD? And there is no other God besides Me, A righteous God and a Savior; There is none except Me. "Turn to Me and be saved, all the ends of the earth; For I am God, and there is no other." Isaiah 46:9 "Remember the former things long past, For I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is no one like Me," --Makarios |
||||||
43 | number 5 means in the bible. | 1 Sam 17:40 | Makarios | 218646 | ||
Greetings WOS, My posts on this topic are not "forcing" any meaning onto Scripture. According to a simple Bible word search utility that I have downloaded from this very website, the word "five" is found in a total of 191 verses in the NASB. Since I have addressed only a very small number of occurrences of the number five in the NASB, my findings could not in any way be found to be exhaustive. Therefore, it is an overreaction to say that I am forcing any meaning onto scripture since I have only examined a very small amount of occurrences of where a subject actually comes up throughout the whole of Scripture. This is akin to saying that all people in a group wear dark clothing because I have seen five people within the group wear dark clothing. I never said that all occurrences of the number five in the Bible mean this or that, and if I only specified 5 verses or so instead of the total 191, then my findings are faulty at best. Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||
44 | number 5 means in the bible. | 1 Sam 17:40 | Makarios | 218645 | ||
Greetings Lionheart, I fail to see where 2 Peter 1:21 fits with this topic. 2 Peter 1:21 "for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." This entire thread is not speaking at all about prophecy, but about the number five in the Bible. Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||
45 | number 5 means in the bible. | 1 Sam 17:40 | Makarios | 218644 | ||
Greetings Searcher! As you well know, I always provide scriptural support, just as I did in my last post. Yes, David had faith in God as you have pointed out in 1 Samuel 17:45. But what you are missing here is the fact that David, who God spoke through to speak such words of praise and wisdom in Psalms (you mentioned Psalm 9:10), picked out "five smooth stones" (1 Sam. 17:40). We can argue all night long about David's faith, but the bottom line is that the Bible says that he picked out five smooth stones. You also mentioned the five loaves and two fish. Yes, I realize that there were also two fish along with the five loaves. The fact of the matter is that God could have used no loaves and no fish to feed the multitude. But, if you read Luke 9:16, the Bible does, in fact, say that there were five loaves that were found and used to perform the miracle. You actually stated that the "numbers for the objects is wrong" when speaking about the five curtains. I'm not sure which Bible translation you are using, but the NASB actually uses the number five (5) in Exodus 26:9: "You shall join five curtains by themselves and the other six curtains by themselves, and you shall double over the sixth curtain at the front of the tent." So, are you in fact stating that the Bible is in error when it does, in fact, state that five curtains must be joined? One could make the point that if these are God's directions to the Israelites for building His tabernacle, then this very well could be considered as God's design, direction or gift to man, since He specifically indicated five curtains in Exodus 26:9. As for Leviticus 26:8, it does specifically state that "five of you will chase a hundred." So, we could argue about which verse you like better, but it does state that "five of you will chase a hundred." Based on your responses, Scripture plainly speaks for itself, regardless of preference for which verse you might actually favor over another. --Makarios |
||||||
46 | number 5 means in the bible. | 1 Sam 17:40 | Makarios | 218633 | ||
Greetings Searcher, You ask, "Is five ALWAYS the number of God's grace or His gift to man?" Obviously, the answer is an emphatic "NO", since I only provided scriptural support for the few examples that were provided in the source that I quoted. You stated, "I thhink we a forcing Scripture even in the verses you presented." Could you please explain what you think, and preferably back it up with Scriptural verses or examples? Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||
47 | nothing to fear cause of what Jesus did | Rom 8:37 | Makarios | 218472 | ||
Greetings YenIsaRap! Thank you for your reply to the question, but you actually replied to my Answer instead of to the original Question, which was posted by LovemyLord7. If your intent is to provide an Answer to the question, please keep in mind to reply to the original question instead of to the reply. Thank you, Makarios |
||||||
48 | i looking for notes on ruth | Ruth | Makarios | 218253 | ||
Greetings Venus562, Need good notes on Ruth? Check this out: http://www.enduringword.com/commentaries/08.htm Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||
49 | Oneness theology wrong again | 2 Cor 13:14 | Makarios | 218144 | ||
Greetings 5282jt, There is absolutely nothing within the context of Acts 1-2 that would in any way indicate that the ascension of the Lord Jesus into heaven was in any way a vision only: Mark 16:19; Luke 24:51; John 3:13; Acts 1:11; Heb. 9:24; 1 Peter 3:22. Christ rose from the grave, bodily, and He ascended into heaven also bodily! Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||
50 | the last Adam | 1 Cor 15:45 | Makarios | 218031 | ||
Greetings John! Yes, there is a difference between "perfect" and "immortality." I asked three questions to Alex's reply that were intended to lead to one answer: that Adam was not perfect. Also, there is a lot more to "perfect" than just the physical aspect of the body: there is the spiritual aspect to factor in as well. Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||
51 | the last Adam | 1 Cor 15:45 | Makarios | 218030 | ||
Greetings Lionheart! Is it in God's nature to create anything less than perfect? This is one of those questions that I believe will never be accurately or sufficiently answered before get to heaven. I believe that God created Adam and Eve as they were, but they sinned. I believe that God knew beforehand what they were going to do, but He had a plan. As for His purposes being "right" or "wrong", that is up to God to decide. Do we have a standpoint to pass any kind of judgment on God's creation? (I will go ahead and answer this one as to remove any kind of speculation before it starts:) No, we do not. The fact is that God created man, but man sinned, and man, therefore, was not perfect. Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||
52 | the last Adam | 1 Cor 15:45 | Makarios | 218029 | ||
Greetings YenIsaRap! There was only one correct answer to my three questions: Adam was not perfect before he sinned. Also, the fact that he sinned is evidence itself that he was not perfect. I believe that there is a lot of confusion about the subject of immortality in conjunction with being "perfect." There is a lot in your reply that is based purely on speculation and is not based on any scripture. Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||
53 | the last Adam | 1 Cor 15:45 | Makarios | 218001 | ||
Greetings Alex! One thing to consider: If God had created Adam as 'immortal' or perfect, then why would God have included the tree of life (Gen. 2:9) in the garden? Why would man need to eat of the tree of life if he was already immortal? And why would God include death as a consequence (Gen. 2:17) of disobedience if man was already immortal? Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||
54 | the last Adam | 1 Cor 15:45 | Makarios | 218000 | ||
Greetings Lionheart! Was Adam's body perfect until he sinned? Going back to Genesis, "God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good." (Genesis 1:31) I believe that there is a difference between "very good" and "perfect." When God saw everything that He had made and pronounced His creation (collectively) as "very good," but does not follow up with a "and God saw that it was good" after the creation of man as He did with the light (v.4), the earth and the sea (v.10), seed bearing plants (v.12), the sun and the moon (v. 18), the animal kingdom (v.21) and every other beast other than man (v.25), then I do not see verse 31 as such a ringing endorsement of perfection on man's part - I see that God is collectively pronouncing that His creation was, in fact, very good, or very pleasing to Him. But even though God does not follow up with a 'saw that it was good' after the creation of man, I believe that mankind itself can be included in the all inclusive "it was very good" when God describes His creation collectively, because the creation of man was according to His purpose (Rom. 8:29). I believe that when God pronounces everything as "very good" in Genesis 1:31, He is not saying that man is perfect (see John 2:25), but only that the creation of man was pleasing to Him. I do not believe that mankind was perfect before the fall because God had to give man instruction after he was created but before he fell (Gen. 2:16-17), and man ultimately sinned anyway (Gen. 3:6, Rom. 8:22), which proves that he was not perfect. If man was "perfect," then he would not have sinned. Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||
55 | Using the word Lucifer | Is 14:12 | Makarios | 217872 | ||
Greetings Doc, One of the purposes for the inclusion of the 1st and 3rd links was to describe the background of Erasmus - that he was a Roman Catholic. The 2nd and 4th links had to do with more with his work - The Textus Receptus. The scriptorium link was posted first because it speaks of both the man and the work. Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||
56 | Using the word Lucifer | Is 14:12 | Makarios | 217846 | ||
Greetings Vintage68! If you would like to learn more about Erasmus and the Textus Receptus, here are a few good articles: http://www.scriptorium.org/articles/faqs/faq_0032.html http://www.skypoint.com/members/waltzmn/TR.html http://www.dbts.edu/journals/1996_1/ERASMUS.PDF http://www.bible-researcher.com/kutilek1.html (*) As for my comment about the last 7 verses of Revelation, please see paragraph 5 (from the top) of the link in which I have placed a (*). This will explain what I mean in more depth. Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||
57 | Using the word Lucifer | Is 14:12 | Makarios | 217845 | ||
You are welcome! :-) Makarios | ||||||
58 | Using the word Lucifer | Is 14:12 | Makarios | 217839 | ||
Greetings Tim! Here are links to the best information I found on the "Lucifer" manuscript topic: http://www.crivoice.org/lucifer.html http://www.apostolic.net/biblicalstudies/isaiah1412.htm http://www.kjvonly.org/doug/kutilek_notes_on_lucifer.htm According to http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0.htm, Zechariah 11:2 has a similar 'yalal' to the Hebrew 'heylel' of Isaiah 14:12, but the vowels are different. Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||
59 | Using the word Lucifer | Is 14:12 | Makarios | 217837 | ||
Greetings Tim! Good point about the misinterpretation of 'morning star' in Isaiah 14:12: it is not associated with the fall of Satan. Many do believe that this is a 'dual reference' to Satan, but there is no real way to prove that through Scripture. I have searched for Textus Receptus manuscript information about Isaiah 14:12 and, aside from a bit of misleading KJV Onlyism stuff, did not find any substantive information to lead anyone to believe that the rendering of "Lucifer" originated any earlier in history than the Vulgate. It could be that this misinterpretation survived from the Vulgate to the KJV and only with the modern translations is now sufficiently corrected. I myself have always favored translations based on the NU/Alexandrian manuscripts more so than the Textus Receptus, in which Erasmus himself completed by copying the last 7 verses or so of Revelation right out of the Vulgate. Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||
60 | Using the word Lucifer | Is 14:12 | Makarios | 217804 | ||
Greetings Searcher! I've noticed that that NKJV and KJV both translate 'heylel' as Lucifer in Isaiah 14:12 instead of 'morning star' or shining one/Daystar. The NET Bible notes do support the possibility of mistranslation: "What is the background for the imagery in vv. 12-15? This whole section (vv. 4b-21) is directed to the king of Babylon, who is clearly depicted as a human ruler. Other kings of the earth address him in vv. 9ff., he is called “the man” in v. 16, and, according to vv. 19-20, he possesses a physical body. Nevertheless the language of vv. 12-15 has led some to see a dual referent in the taunt song. These verses, which appear to be spoken by other pagan kings to a pagan king (cf. vv. 9-11), contain several titles and motifs that resemble those of Canaanite mythology, including references to Helel son of Shachar, the stars of El, the mountain of assembly, the recesses of Zaphon, and the divine title Most High. Apparently these verses allude to a mythological story about a minor god (Helel son of Shachar) who tried to take over Zaphon, the mountain of the gods. His attempted coup failed and he was hurled down to the underworld. The king of Babylon is taunted for having similar unrealized delusions of grandeur. Some Christians have seen an allusion to the fall of Satan here, but this seems contextually unwarranted (see J. Martin, “Isaiah,” BKCOT, 1061)." [Quoted from www.bible.org - Isaiah 14:12] Therefore, would the question be that this is a Textus Receptus (NKJV/KJV) vs. NU manuscript translation (just about everything else) difference since those translations that claim reliance on the Textus Receptus generally have "lucifer" in Isaiah 14:12? If that is true - that the NKJV and KJV are translating "Lucifer" based on the tradition of translation from the Textus Receptus or from the Textus Receptus itself, then it could all just boil down to manuscript family preference. Blessings to you, Makarios |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [185] >> |