Results 41661 - 41680 of 42010
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions On or After: Wed 02/16/00 Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
41661 | Experience Hell? | Mark 15:34 | charis | 1166 | ||
Shaka, braddah! I got the 'understand death' part, but I'm not sure what you mean about the 'experience Hell' part? Again, 'separation' from His identity? Please elaborate. In Jesus. | ||||||
41662 | Jesus separated fron the Trinity? | Mark 15:34 | charis | 1165 | ||
Jesus separated from the Trinity? I don't quite understand your meaning, Mike. Did He return to the Trinity? In Christ Jesus. | ||||||
41663 | Names of the 4 generals after Alexander. | Daniel | Len Randall | 1158 | ||
What are the names of the four generals who succeeded Alexander the Great in chapter 8 of Daniel? | ||||||
41664 | Violence by force? Matt 11:12 | Matt 11:12 | SpreadWord | 1153 | ||
I'd like to hear some opinions on the meaning of this verse. I've heard teachers say that this is a "good thing" indicating that we should be "violent" in our pursuit of the kingdom of heaven, but it is difficult for me to accept this interpretation. To "suffer violence" seems to be something that undesirable, and an improper way to secure the kingdom of heaven. No "right" or "wrong" answers on this one that I know of, but I'd love to hear your comments. | ||||||
41665 | Executive privilege? | Matt 18:17 | charis | 1144 | ||
Dear bjanko, thanks for your answer. I believe in the authority you described, but am not sure how vv. 18-20 "show clearly that there is an ecclesiastical authority; an authority the church leaders -- ministers and elders -- have that the laity does not have." Did your caps mean that the two or three witnesses are ministers? I very much agree that the congregation can be spared the 'gory details,' but how much can the leaders hold back? Men, even ministers, have a tendency to hold back that which implicates them. Understand that I am simply stating the caution needed to save the church from the abuse of 'executive privilege.' The reason I ask the sin is that apostate, or not of the Kingdom, is often equated as, "If you're not with us, you are against us. (and possibly in the enemy's grasp or even employ)" This is a pretty serious pronouncement, and cannot be made glibly. Also, with this kind of judgment, it doesn't seem that reconciliation and repentance are truly desired or hoped for. My point is that the church must be a place of great love and patience, and a sin leading to a situation of this magnitude must be truly heinous. Love in Christ Jesus. | ||||||
41666 | Are you kidding? | Revelation | charis | 1137 | ||
Elijah, are you kidding? No one has ever done it, but maybe I can help you? I hope you are saying that we can discuss it here and maybe clarify some specific areas through this forum. Yes there are lots of commentaries, but the best is the Bible. Take your time. Ask the Holy Spirit to guide you. A study Bible will give you a good start. Click one of the tabs at the top of this page. My own advice: if someone professes to 'understand' the Book of Revelation, watch out! Ask if they are affiliated with the Mormons, the Jehovah's Witnesses, the Seventh Day Adventists, the Unification Church (Moonies),or any other cult. Look at their eyes when they answer! May the Lord lead your path, and guard your soul in Him. In Christ Jesus. | ||||||
41667 | The church involved? | Matt 18:17 | charis | 1134 | ||
Good answer! Tell me, does the above scripture also say 1) what kind of sin is punishable by banishment? and 2)would the whole church be privy to the information leading to this judgment? I am not being petulant, it simply seems to me that the verse is fairly clear that this is 1) a pretty bad sin, and 2) the church should be made aware of the circumstances of their brother's demise. It appears that the whole point of going through 4 steps (vs.15-17) is to do whatever possible to 'win your brother,' but if it doesn't work, all must know why, in order to cleanse the church without causing division. It seems that this also works as a Biblical safeguard to protect the church from ministers who might abuse their authority to boot out someone they disliked for personal reasons. Your answer implies that 1) the person is apostate, outside the Kingdom (even salvation?), and 2) the church officers wield the authority of judgment, AND forgiveness, and that the congregation is not privy to the reasons. Thoughts? In Jesus' name. | ||||||
41668 | A Third Name? | Col 3:17 | charis | 1131 | ||
Doctor emery, I presume? :-) Am I correct in saying that you are proposing that a third possibility exists in proper usage of the name of the Lord? That of YaHWeH? I must admit that it is an interesting hypothesis, but, though the name is valid, the argument is gobbledegook to me. It sounds more like the Jehovah's Witnesses at worst, or, at best, trying to legitimatize the Messianic Jews as something 'more than a Christian.' Giving you the benefit of the doubt regarding your motives, I would have to say that I can see no practical reason why God would be this cryptic. It would take a doctorate to figure out the proper name for living in the Lord! The verse above, and about 900 other entries, proclaim that His name is Jesus. Though this could be Y'hoshua, Ie_sous, Y'heshua, Joshua, (Iesu, in Japanese) or whatever your translation says, it is not YaHWeH. I cannot help but think that God would be much more clear if He intended us to call upon His Old Testament moniker. Thank you for the brain-teaser! In Christ Jesus | ||||||
41669 | Who is James addressing here? | James 5:4 | wwjdlc | 1120 | ||
Is James talking to Christians or the rich Jews who were keeping their hired help's wages from them? | ||||||
41670 | BEST COMMENTARY ON REVELATION? | Revelation | DAN HOLMES | 1121 | ||
WHO HAS WRITTEN THE BEST VERSE BY VERSE COMENTARY ON THE BOOK OF REVELATION AND WHY? | ||||||
41671 | WHY DOSE IT HAVE TO BE MOSSES AND ELIJAH | Revelation | DAN HOLMES | 1123 | ||
WHY DO THE TWO WITNESSES HAVE TO BE SOMEONE WHO LIVED IN THE PAST? COULD IT NOT BE TWO WHO GOD HAS RAISED UP FOR THE END TIME? | ||||||
41672 | WILL A BABY IN THE WOMB GO IN THE RAPTUR | 2 Thessalonians | DAN HOLMES | 1125 | ||
IF LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION, AND IT DOSE, WILL THE BABY GO IN THE RAPTURE EVEN THOE IT IS STILL IN THE WOMB? IT HAS NOT YET REACHED THE AGE OF ACCOUNTABILITY. AND IS THEREFORE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR IT'S SINS. | ||||||
41673 | WILL A BABY IN THE WOMB GO IN THE RAPTUR | Revelation | DAN HOLMES | 180126 | ||
IF LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION, AND IT DOSE, WILL THE BABY GO IN THE RAPTURE EVEN THOE IT IS STILL IN THE WOMB? IT HAS NOT YET REACHED THE AGE OF ACCOUNTABILITY. AND IS THEREFORE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR IT'S SINS. | ||||||
41674 | Please explain this verse? Mark 15:34 | Mark 15:34 | Delores | 1113 | ||
Please explain this verse? Mark 15:34 | ||||||
41675 | A pastor who is there? | NT general Archive 1 | charis | 1112 | ||
I like this answer, bjanko! If I may ask, do you mean that the minister (pastor) is actually around, and aware of all the individuals in his flock? I ask your clarification, because I have heard the argument that the pastor of a church of (for the sake of discussion) 2,000 souls, who has a paid ministerial staff of 20, and 40 lay-ministers, who is either out of town or has 'days off' 200 days a year, is busy building a 'network' and writing 'feel-good' books, and, though very good at remembering names, has no idea who you are (all this is hypothetical, you understand), is shepherding his flock. I find this to be contrary to the Bible. Yet, many aspire to this kind of situation, both shepherds and sheep! God bless you in Christ Jesus. | ||||||
41676 | explain Mark 15:34 | Mark | Delores | 1111 | ||
What do this verse mean? My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? |
||||||
41677 | ...by His grace, right? | 2 Peter | charis | 1109 | ||
...by His grace, right? jg8ball, I couldn't help adding this to the end of your note. It IS true, even if it is not Election with a capital 'E' (...which rhymes with 'P' which means 'Pool!' Sorry, we were watching "The Music Man" the other day :-) In any case, I fully expect to see jg8ball and JVH0212 together as brethren someday in His glorious eternity. That's my point. I cannot discard wholesale either opinion or bent, and I cannot endorse in the Lord any capital 'X' doctrine. How then should we live? Excommunicating one another is an option, but I don't think it is Godly. Discussion, prayer, humility, repentance toward God, and fellowship of the saints is the option I choose. With love in Christ Jesus. | ||||||
41678 | Sin vs. sins vs. iniquity? | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 1108 | ||
That's the question! Sin and sins, with an 's' at the end. There seems to be a difference. I have heard that iniquity is in-born sin. Bible? I agree with your comment on dead works. Well said. Anyone else? In Jesus. | ||||||
41679 | Sin vs. sins vs. iniquity? | Bible general Archive 1 | charis | 1107 | ||
That's the question! Sin and sins, with an 's' at the end. There seems to be a difference. I have heard that iniquity is in-born sin. Bible? I agree with your comment on dead works. Well said. Anyone else? | ||||||
41680 | Which question? | Col 3:17 | charis | 1106 | ||
Welcome, dr_emery, in Jesus' name! I am not sure of your question. Is it about '...except baptism?' or 'Jewish baptism in YHWH?' Both are unanswered. Remember, in the Old Testament, the name of God was not pronounceable, the Law seems to have prohibited a personal relationship with the Lord. I do believe that many Christians today are too 'familiar' with the name of the Lord, using it vainly. I desire to 'do all' in the name of Jesus, but you can become ridiculous in it. (i.e. clipping your nails, waxing the car, excommunicating your 'former' brother, etc.) I look forward to hearing more from you, both question and answers. In Christ Jesus. | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 2080 2081 2082 2083 2084 2085 2086 2087 2088 ] Next > Last [2101] >> |