Results 41 - 60 of 11018
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: DocTrinsograce Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
41 | toeat or not to eat swine | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 240002 | ||
Hi, Mb0371030... Welcome to the forum! When God's people lived in a nation-state, there were dietary prohibitions (viz. Deuteronomy 14:7). Christ lifted such dietary prohibitions for the church (Mark 4:17; 1 Timothy 4:1-4; etc.). Christ assured us that every aspect of the Law would be fulfilled (Matthew 5:17-18; Luke 24:44; John 3:17; etc.). Your question presents a false dichotomy. "Do we then nullify the Law through faith? May it never be! On the contrary, we establish the Law." (Romans 3:31 NASB) In Him, Doc |
||||||
42 | Love one another and God? | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 240034 | ||
hi, flutytoot... Welcome to the forum! To the right of your screen there is a Bible Text search tool. You can use it to look up all the bible verses that contain a word or a given phrase. Try it and see if you can find the answer to your own question. In Him, Doc |
||||||
43 | What theory says that man wrote scriptur | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 240055 | ||
Hi, bigred... Welcome to the forum! Well, one thing they all have in common is ink, pen, and paper. :-) I'll give up, though... which theory do you have in mind? In Him, Doc |
||||||
44 | belief in hell? | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 240078 | ||
Hi, Don... Welcome to the forum! It would be helpful if you would use proper case in addressing us in the forum. It is easier on the eyes. Plus, anything that augments understanding, will help us answer your questions. Note, as well, that when you join the forum you explicitly agree to the Terms of Use. It might be helpful for you to read through it. While your personal beliefs are interesting, they are not germane to participation in the forum. We are a Study Bible Forum. Consequently, one of the things that our gracious host asks of us is that we post things with proper Biblical citations. So please tell us on what particular Scripture are you basing your assertions. In Him, Doc |
||||||
45 | WHATSOEVER YOU ASK THE FATHER | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 240133 | ||
Dear SAQuestioner, Welcome to the forum! What has happened is that you have taken a single sentence of Christ out of context. From there, you have constructed what is called a false dichotomy. By the way, this kind of thing is a common human experience: Just ask anyone who has had teenagers! :-) The best way for you to solve the problem is for you to read through John 14 again. Understand who Christ was speaking to and the occasion He was speaking. Look for purpose and intent. Distinguish between descriptives and imperatives. You have a right to be worried. The answer is there in the text. If the origin of your worry is the Holy Spirit, you will search out the answer and find it. Regardless, those who read this will be praying for you as you study. In Him, Doc |
||||||
46 | WHATSOEVER YOU ASK THE FATHER | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 240170 | ||
Dear movingon, Despite the Campbellism advertising, there is a big problem here; i.e., making the Sermon on the Mount -- and, apparently, all the other places Christ mandates forgiveness -- as only applying to the Jews. A hermeneutic that is, by the way, unique to the antinomian dispensationalism to which you ascribe. (A kind of red-lettering distinction without a difference.) Nonetheless, if you dispense with the majority of the gospels as being inapplicable due to their being of "some other dispensation," then, at least in this instance, you will have to deal with the imperatives in passages mandating forgiveness (2 Corinthians 2:10-11; Ephesians 4:32; Colossians 3:13; 1 Peter 4:8) to Christian believers. In Him, Doc |
||||||
47 | How can I understand the Bible? | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 240237 | ||
Good, Jalek... this is what is called the historical-grammatical method of interpretation. That is an essential presupposition to the doctrine of sola Scriptura. "It will greatly help you to understand scripture if you note not only what is spoken and written, but of whom and to whom, with what words, at what time, where, to what intent, with what circumstances, considering what goes before and what follows." --Miles Coverdale (1488-1569) |
||||||
48 | How can I understand the Bible? | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 240241 | ||
Hi, Wendy... Jalek gave you some very practical principles. As I was praying for you, something occured to me: Do not worry so much about what you DON'T understand. Instead, worry about what you DO understand. That is always the starting point. Read the Scriptures and absorb what is clear. Ask the Lord to grant you grace to change your life according to that truth. That which you understand will be the point at which God will work with you. The Holy Spirit always and ever will direct us to the Word -- and He will convict you from the Word. He will lead you into greater understanding, but He has already started to lead you through His Word. That is why you came here to ask about it. (John 8:31-32) We understand that the Bible is the source of all authority. How we feel and what we experience is not the thing of primary importance -- not by a long shot. Those who walk in the Word will be taking that extra step to be praying for you. In Him, Doc |
||||||
49 | what 4 city's did God destroy | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 240270 | ||
Hi, cb5020... Welcome to the forum! Is this a homework question? In Him, Doc |
||||||
50 | Are the words the same? | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 240280 | ||
Hi, John... Welcome to the forum! No, the Old Testament is written in Hebrew; the New Testament is written in Greek. The Hebrew word is a curving object, while the Greek word is a fabric. In Him, Doc |
||||||
51 | need help on the new birth | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 240282 | ||
Hi, Joe... The English word based on the Greek for the new birth is regeneration (John 3:3). Tom Ascol wrote a good article summarizing regeneration here: http://www.founders.org/journal/fj34/article2.html In Him, Doc |
||||||
52 | required to give something we love for a | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 240325 | ||
Duplicate question. | ||||||
53 | I wonder if I will know my parents in He | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 240333 | ||
Hi, Inservice... Welcome to the forum! Ra McLaughlin answered the same question once. He wrote, "The Bible indicates that we will know each other when we get to heaven. In fact, it seems to teach that we will even know people we've never met. For instance, when Peter, James and John saw Jesus talking to Moses and Elijah, the apostles seem to have recognized both Moses and Elijah, even though we are not told that there were any introductions (Matt. 17:3-4; Mark 9:4-5; Luke 9:30-33)." You can see the rest of his response here: http://reformedanswers.org/answer.asp/file/40241 In Him, Doc |
||||||
54 | illigitimate children | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 240385 | ||
Hi, Melody... Welcome to the forum! There is a search box on the right side of screen. You can use it to find references to any particular word in the NASB or Amplified translations. In Him, Doc |
||||||
55 | Kings James Vertion | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 240405 | ||
Duplicate question. | ||||||
56 | thanks Doc! | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 240414 | ||
Hi, MzVicki... Actually, ma'am, that was sonofmom who commended you to Gendron. :-) In Him, Doc |
||||||
57 | what Ex. 23:19 means? | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 240422 | ||
Duplicate question. | ||||||
58 | suicide and salvation | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 240440 | ||
Hi, Dave... Welcome to the forum! This was a statement not a question. That makes it hard to answer! :-) You might try using the search box to the right of your screen. Over the years we have had a lot of questions about both subjects (suicide and salvation). In Him, Doc |
||||||
59 | disciple Peter and Jesus | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 240444 | ||
Hi, Els... We aren't answering homework questions here, are we? In Him, Doc |
||||||
60 | Geniva Bible and the KJV | Bible general | DocTrinsograce | 240456 | ||
Dear justme, There are historic clues to the answer your question. The very names names of these translations reveal those particulars. Here is my simplistic rendering of the story: During the persecution of protestants in the reign of the Roman Catholic Queen Mary I, English scholars fled to Geneva, Switzerland. There was an enormous evangelical work of God taking place in Geneva at the time. The Christians there were sympathetic to the preaching and efforts of men like John Huss, John Wycliffe, Martin Luther, and William Tyndale. These men asserted that the Word of God should be made available to the people in their common tongue, wherever that might be. Thus, the scholars in exile, completed this effort for the English speaking peoples in the late 16th century. Meanwhile, Mary I was deposed, and the throne was assumed by Queen Elizabeth I. Elizabeth was decidedly protestant, as her claim to the throne was dependent on her legitimacy as a child of King Henry VII. She was succeeded by King James VI, also a protestant. The Geneva translation of the Bible was commonly accepted by English speaking peoples everywhere. However, there were two political problems with this translation: (1) the translation had not been officially sanctioned by the Church of England and (2) the Geneva Bible translation (and particularly the notes) were decidedly non-pluralistic. The crown needed a more politically correct translation, for which it could assume responsibility. Thus, a translation project was launched to create an properly authorized version. Of course, an authorized version was problematic for many Christians for the very reasons that King James had implemented the new translation. A lot of Christians (Separatists) believed that the secular head of the state was taking on a responsibility for which God had not granted them. A lot of other Christians (Puritans) believed that the non-pluralistic nature of the translation was an explicit consequence of the original language. (By the way, there was a lot of overlap in these two groups, and many others with similar complaints.) Nonetheless, the authorized translators, while complying with the objective of political correctness (they knew who paid their salary), were no dummies! Their own scholarship was such that they knew a good translation when they saw it. Consequently, much of the new translation used the same language as the Geneva translation. Gradually, over time, the political aspects of the issue tended to be forgotten, particularly in the forming of a new nation, on another continent. The authorized version became more and more extant. Its language became more and more understood, especially as pastors familiar with the original languages, taught from the many pulpits in America. (Those Christians built universities for this very purpose: Harvard, Yale, Princeton, etc.) Gradually the authorized translation even changed the common language of the people; which thing actually improved the translation. So that is the story as I understand it. Sorry for not annotating. Also, sorry in advance, for whatever I failed to properly mention. I am certain, for example, that the Anglican church (secular and clergy), had more numerous and nuanced reasons for doing what they did; just as I am sure that that would have been true of the opponents of their actions. In Him, Doc "And considering how hard a thing it is to understand the holy Scriptures, and what errors, sects, and heresies grow daily for lack of the true knowledge thereof, and how many are discouraged (as they pretend [archaic meaning to undertake]) because they cannot attain to the true and simple meaning of the same, we have also endeavored both by the diligent reading of the best commentaries, and also by the conference with the godly and learned brethren, to gather brief annotations upon all the hard places, as well for the understanding of such words as are obscure, and for the declaration of the text, as for the application of the same as may most appertain to God's glory and the edification of His Church." --Geneva Bible Preface (1560) "We do not deny, nay we affirm and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English, set forth by men of our profession, containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God: as the King's speech which he uttered in Parliament, being translated into French, Dutch, Italian, and Latin, is still the King’s speech, though it not be interpreted by every translator with the like grace nor peradventure so fitly for phrase, nor so expressly for sense, everywhere." --King James Bible Introduction (1611) |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [551] >> |