Results 41 - 60 of 61
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: quvmoh Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
41 | "Inner circle" - 3 disciples? | NT general | quvmoh | 203504 | ||
James, brother of John. John the beloved Peter |
||||||
42 | "Son of Man" in NT? | NT general | quvmoh | 203492 | ||
Jesus | ||||||
43 | What is significant about the Word? | John 1:1 | quvmoh | 203481 | ||
The greek word for "Word" is logos. It basically means not just a word, but an intelligently thought out word. Greek has 2 different terms that mean "word". "Lalia" means "utterance". Basically, noise .. babble .. even a foreign language all fall under the category of "lalia". While it might be a thought out word, to the hearer, it is little more than non-sense. John uses "logos". We get out term "logic" from it. By using this term to describe Jesus, john is essentially saying that behind the spoken words, before pen was put to paper, even before the spoken words of creation, that Jesus was the thought behind them all. Before God said "Let there be light", He was thinking about Jesus coming into the world. Quvmoh |
||||||
44 | Saturday or Sunday? | Bible general Archive 4 | quvmoh | 203403 | ||
The Sabbath is Saturday. Sunday is the Lord day .. the day of the week that Jesus rose from the Grave. Christians worship on Sundays to honor the Day that Christ Rose. Quvmoh |
||||||
45 | Does Paul contradict Jesus? | NT general | quvmoh | 203346 | ||
Wow .. the second epistle of John has 15 chapters??? |
||||||
46 | "sons of God saw daughters of men?" | Genesis | quvmoh | 203314 | ||
I mean no offense to Tim or anyone if I come across as a bit strong. I realize this isn't a critical issue in regards to salvation, but I am convicted to ensure that Context is not taken lightly and that my own claims are within context and well founded. Quvmoh |
||||||
47 | "sons of God saw daughters of men?" | Genesis | quvmoh | 203313 | ||
um .. what?? The passage in Luke is stating that angels don't marry, nor die. He's not calling them "sons". He's calling the humans in heaven the "Sons". As for the Nephilim, I have one simple little tiny question. How many Nephilim did Noah take onto the Ark? Quvmoh |
||||||
48 | "sons of God saw daughters of men?" | Genesis | quvmoh | 203309 | ||
I was clarifying the context of the passages he gave, showing that the context supports what I had previously said. I didn't intend to come across as harsh, merely trying to strengthen the support of my claims. Quvmoh |
||||||
49 | "sons of God saw daughters of men?" | Genesis | quvmoh | 203308 | ||
As I stated earlier, I'm not wanting to argue. I was merely using the passages you quoted to better strengthen my own claims. Quvmoh |
||||||
50 | "sons of God saw daughters of men?" | Genesis | quvmoh | 203302 | ||
But look at the context of the passages. In Genesis 6, in the chapters leading up to it you have the geneologies of Seth and Cain, which have names listed in both ones. You also have afterwards, God preparing for the Flood because Man was wicked. There is no serious mention of Angels at all until Abraham, save for the Angel with the Flaming sword guarding Eden. It makes far greater sense within the Context to interpret this passage as when the two family lines fused into one than two assume that Angels came down for a brief moment to have sex. In Job chapter 1 and 2, the first 5 verses of Job talks about Job and his family gathered together for prayer and worship of God, and Job praying for his Sons. Yet that seems to always be conveniently tossed aside and ignored when leading into verse 6 and beyond. In Luke 20, the context clearly points to humans set up in verses 27-24. Also, I don't know what translation you are using, but in the NASB there is a clear change of thought when it comes to the "sons of God" phrase, and clearly points to the Saved Humans. Luke 20:36 "or they cannot even die anymore, because they are like angels, and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection." The passages in Romans 8 and Galatians 3 both clearly identify Human believers in Christ. I'll even add one for you. 1 John 3:1 "See how great a love the Father has bestowed on us, that we would be called Children of God; and such we are. For this reason the world does not know us, because it did not know him." And another that clearly refutes Angels as being identified as "Sons" or "Children" of God. Hebrews 1:5 "For to which of the angels did He ever say 'You are My Son, Today I have begotten you.'?" Then you have this later on .. Hebrews 5:5 "So also Christ did no glorify Himself so as to become a high priest, but He who said to Him 'You are My Son, Today, I have begotten you.'." I'm sorry, Tim Moran, but I cannot in good conscience believe or promote "sons of God" phrases used in the Bible to being in reference to Angels. The Context simply does NOT support it at all. Quvmoh |
||||||
51 | "sons of God saw daughters of men?" | Genesis | quvmoh | 203294 | ||
I don't want to get into a debate over something such as this, but Angels do not fit the criteria you describe here. Angels don't have dominion over anything. Angels are servants to God. Jesus even says that Angels neither marry, nor are given in marriage. Hebrews, I believe is the book, comes right out and tells us that humans are higher than Angels. If you follow the term "Son(s) of God" through the scripture, you see it is referring to Either human followers of God and Jesus or to Jesus himself. Its simple reading of the context of scripture. To insert Angels as the meaning of this phrase in this passage is a blatant misuse of the Context of Scripture. Quvmoh |
||||||
52 | "sons of God saw daughters of men?" | Genesis | quvmoh | 203273 | ||
It is important who the "Sons of God" were. As John wrote in his 1st epistle, "Beloved how wonderful it is that we are called the Children of God." Paul told the Romans, "We cry out "Abba, Father." Even the author of Hebrews asked "To which of the angels did God say 'Today you are my son, today I have begotten you.'" The implication is that none of the Angels have ever earned that title. To be called a son or a daughter or a child of the Most High is an honor and a pleasure that no being in all of creation or beyond it can ever attain except those who are washed and cleansed by the saving blood of Christ Jesus. While it may seem trivial to some about this issue of who these groups are in this passage in Genesis is referring to, it is vital that we comprehend the damage and insult it is to give our title of Adopted children of God to a being such as an angel whose entire purpose is servitude. The true believers and followers of God through out the Bible are the Children, sons, and daughters of God. No one else is given that title. We don't even deserve it because of our sinful past. Yet through his mercy and grace, we receive it gladly and lovingly, secure in the knowledge that nothing we do will ever change the fact that we are God's beloved children. Quvmoh |
||||||
53 | Does God make Himself known to all men | Rom 1:19 | quvmoh | 203232 | ||
Greetings, Bradk is correct. Paul clearly tells us in the first chapter of Romans that God is clearly seen to every person. The difference is the perception of the person. There are those who perceive and follow the will of God. There are those who refuse to perceive and as such, become subject to God's wrath. Romans 1:18-32 is all about those who refuse to perceive God's power and authority. As their refusal continues, God begins to punish them. Over time, these punishments grow more and more severe until finally, the only option is death. Paul makes his argument very clear. It's never been about whether or not God shows himself to us. It's all about whether or not we want to pay attention. Quvmoh |
||||||
54 | what are biblical principles | Bible general Archive 4 | quvmoh | 203203 | ||
Jesus said it perfectly. "Love God with all your heart, mind, and soul." "Love your neighbor as yourself." Quvmoh |
||||||
55 | "sons of God saw daughters of men?" | Genesis | quvmoh | 203164 | ||
Genesis 6:1-6, unlike many far fetched theorists claim, doesn't refer to angels marrying humans in some kind of Dungeon and Dragons RPG knockoff. It's referring to the lineage of Seth and the Lineage of Cain intermarrying. One line, the line of Seth, apparently remained true to God's will. The line of Cain didn't. The Giants in the land reference is a time reference. As if I were to tell you something and say "The Rams football team was still in California ... ". By that, you would understand I was referring to a time prior to their move to St. Louis, MO. The same is true here. Moses is establishing a time reference that the readers of his day and culture would understand, but has now lost it's meaning. With that said, God was sorry that he remade man because they had grown wicked. The two separate lines had mingled and as such both were even more sinful than before. What the details are, we don't know, but it was significant enough for God to try and wash man away and start from scratch. The Sons of God reference universally identifies human believers, especially so in the New Testament. Those who were obeying God's desire. Something that is referred to as being "by man" or "of man" is often identifying something contrary to God's will. In the context of the first 6 chapters of Genesis, these would easily define Seth and Cain's family respectively. Quvmoh |
||||||
56 | who was Ezra | Ezra | quvmoh | 203053 | ||
Its more Old Testament history than anything else, but the books of Ezra and Nehemiah both go into detail. Quvmoh |
||||||
57 | who was Ezra | Ezra | quvmoh | 203049 | ||
Ezra was one of the three people important in rebuilding Jerusalem after the Period of Exile ended with King Xerxes of Persia allowing the Jews to return to Israel. Zerubabbel rebuilt the temple, Nehemiah rebuilt the city walls, and Ezra rebuilt the religion. In fact, the Old testament canon we have today is largely in thanks to Ezra. He started the process by collecting the manuscripts that taught the law. By the time that the Greek Septuagint came out, the Old Testament Canon was largely established. Ezra also helped establish and reaffirm the close adherence of the Mosaic Law that would later become the Sanhedren spoken of in the New Testament. Quvmoh |
||||||
58 | Does Paul contradict Jesus? | NT general | quvmoh | 203047 | ||
One last bit that I intended to mention, but didn't. There are no contradictions in the Bible. Paul doesn't contradict Jesus. Instead, he clarifies what Jesus taught. Every apparent contradiction can be easily explained when viewed with in the context of scripture. Quvmoh |
||||||
59 | Does Paul contradict Jesus? | NT general | quvmoh | 203046 | ||
Paul sums salvation up perfectly when he wrote that "By grace are you saved, through faith. Not of works, lest any man should boast." Basically meaning, that there is no act under heaven that you did to achieve salvation. It is purely based upon the Grace of God through the channel of your faith in his power and his son Jesus Christ. You, as a saved person, have no bragging rights over another. Now .. where do works come in? Works are the outward expression of your inner faith and belief. The saying "if it walks like a duck, looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it must be a duck .." holds true here. A true Christian will gladly and freely perform acts of generosity and love. Not because he is trying to get into heaven, but because he wants others to know who he serves. Paul reflects this time and time again when he addresses himself as "a slave of Christ" in the introductions of his epistles. Now, if you came across a person claiming to be a Christian, but was rude, violent, obscene, and simply un-caring, then there would be severe doubt as to whether or not that person was truly saved. As Jesus describes in many of his parables, when a seed is planted and there is growth, there should also be fruit. Works support and show others that we are bearing fruit. Works doesn't save you. You don't work your way into heaven. You prove to others that you are on your way to heaven by doing what a Christian would naturally want to do. Quvmoh |
||||||
60 | When/ why did Israel separate into 2 | 1 Kings | quvmoh | 202960 | ||
Israel split because of Solomon's son Raheboam. I think it's in 1 kings. Basically, he didn't listen to his elder and wiser advisors and made the wrong people made. Israel split because of it and formed two nations. Israel with 10 of the tribes, and Judah with two .. the tribes of Judah and Benjamin. quvmoh |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 ] Next > Last [4] >> |