Results 521 - 540 of 701
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Sir Pent Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
521 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 20061 | ||
Clarification ................................ Dear Charis, Thank you for joining the discussion. I value your input on this. I agree with you that the fractured nature of the Church into denominations is detrimental to our witness to the world. In fact, it is becuase of this that I seek to increase the unity of the Church (and even this Forum). That is one reason why I have suggested several improvements, and support this idea of EdB's. It seems to me that if we had a general guideline that it would help direct several different common thread ideas. For example in the American justice system, a person is "innocent until proven guilty". We could similarly have a guideline that said that the Bible was "literal until proven figurative by another scripture". That way if a person makes a post that says that the Genesis Creation is figurative, the burden of proof would be on that person to point out another scripture passage that contradicts a literal interpretation of it. Or if a person says that a specific number in the Bible is figurative and symbolizes something else, then the burden of proof is on that person to point out another scripture which contradicts it just meaning a literal number. As you can imagine, this could be helpful quite often on this forum. It would help to give direction to threads and keep everything firmly grounded in scripture. |
||||||
522 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 20060 | ||
Support ......................................... Dear Hank, You write, "To address a passage as literal when the meaning clearly is not literal is to miss the point entirely." I completely agree. And that is exactly why we need a consistent way to tell the difference. |
||||||
523 | Earth was without form, and void. | Gen 1:1 | Sir Pent | 20057 | ||
Further Support ............................... Dear Hank, Thank you for this excellent post. I see that you posted basically the same thing on 6-22-01. I really wish that more people would do a search on something before asking a question about it. I am glad that you were here to answer it again though. I think the reason why your answer is the best is that it not only supports there not being any men before Adam and Eve, but also supports the Truth of the KJV. Although the KJV is not my first translation of choice, I have a fundamental belief that God has protected the accuracy of His Word in all major translations. Therefore, I appreciate that you are able to explain this confusion not based on the KJV being wrong and the other versions right, but based on them all being right, and only our ignorance of definitions being wrong. |
||||||
524 | why difference in family tree of jesus | Matt 1:16 | Sir Pent | 20055 | ||
Please do a Search ............................ Dear Sujit, This question has been asked before. Please do a search for "Joseph Mary Father", and you will find another thread on the subject. In my post there, I explain why I think that Matthew has Mary's geneology and Luke has Joseph's geneology. |
||||||
525 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 20005 | ||
Clarification ................................. Dear Tim, So it seems that our process would work in this case as well. We can see too scripture passages that appear to contradict if both taken literally. One implies that the hand can cause sin, and the other says that sin comes from inside the heart of a person. Based on this we can say that one must be figurative based on an objective process instead of just because the first passage appears (subjectively) to be hyperbolic language. So far, so good. |
||||||
526 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 20002 | ||
Clarification ................................... Dear Hank, It seems here that you are making a "slippery slope" argument. By saying that we should cut off hands, then next we'll say cut off arms, and then heads, etc. The problem is that the verse does not say to do these other things. It's when we interpret verses to be figurative that we most often expand their meanings. On the other hand, I completely agree with you that we need to see the overall point of what Jesus was saying. Whether the passage is literal or figurative, it definately shows the importance of living holy lives and the graveness of sin. |
||||||
527 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 20001 | ||
Contrary View, Scripture........................ Dear Hank, I don't know of any universally accepted way of determining biblical literalism and biblical symbolism either. That is the very reason why I am trying to come up with one here on the forum. As for the rest of your ideas about being objective when reading scripture, letting the Holy Spirit guide you, and just looking for the plain sense, I agree in one sense. Those all sound like great ideas, and if we all did them perfectly then there would be no problems. However, they are very subjective, and the simple truth is that we don't do them perfectly, and probably never will. Therefore, in a community there needs to be some kind of established principles that are objective and can be applied consistently. That is all we are trying to accomplish here. To look at the specific example that you cited, I believe it could be dealt with, within our current framework. Jesus said He was bread, a door, and a vine. But another scripture says that Jesus became a human (Phil 2:7). Therefore, based purely on scripture, we are forced to determine which is figurative and which is literal. Then of course it is obvious based on the vast amount of scriptures referring to Jesus that He was definately a human and not a slice of bread. The process seems to work here. |
||||||
528 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 20000 | ||
Apology ....................................... Dear Steve, I am sorry for the confusion. I did indeed confuse you with the Steve other than yourself and Searcher56. I am having a hard time keeping up with all you Steve's :) |
||||||
529 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19999 | ||
Clarification ................................. Dear Tim, I can see your point. Do you know of any scripture passages that directly state that sin does not originate in a part of the body? The closest thing that I could come up with was the one about things going in the mouth not making one unclean, but that's not quite the same thing. |
||||||
530 | Does it take away sins or not? | Lev 16:34 | Sir Pent | 19990 | ||
Personal Note ................................ Dear Tim, Upon hearing that you're an IU fan, I have only two things to say. The first is that God is merciful, and if you repent he will gladly forgive you :) The second is that have you ever noticed that in paintings, Jesus is always wearing a blue and white outfit, and Satan is always wearing red. Just a coincidence, hmmmm ... |
||||||
531 | Earth was without form, and void. | Gen 1:1 | Sir Pent | 19987 | ||
Support, Scripture ............................. Benny Hinn was probably referring to Gen 1:28, which uses the word replenish in the King James Version. I do not personally support his view. I am only giving a scriptural reference for information. It should be noted that it is "fill the earth" in almost all other translations, including NASB, NIV, RSV, NLT, YLT, and even the King James for the 21st Century. |
||||||
532 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19986 | ||
Clarification .................................. Dear Steve, Thanks for joining the discussion. I'm interested in how this idea impacts your interpretation of the Genesis Creation. I am under the impression that you view it to be a relatively figurative explanation of how God created the universe and humanity. However, in this post you mention that you agree with the idea that a passage should be taken literally unless contradicted by another scripture. This raises the obvious question, do you know of any scripture that contradicts a literal translation of the Genesis Creation as being an accurate, historical account? |
||||||
533 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19985 | ||
Contrary View, Scripture........................ Dear Tim, Thanks for providing a good example of a passage which does not "plainly" identify itself as being figurative, and yet is generally interpreted that way. My question is, "Couldn't this passage be taken literally as well?" I think it is important to note that the passages says "causes" and not "caused". In other words, it is not a punishment for a one-time action, but a progressive verb indicating that the sinning is consistent and will continue indefinately. If a person was truly unable to control themselves and was consistently using their eye to lust or their hand to hurt, then it would be better for that person (and those around them) to become incapable of those actions. At the same time, I would submit that this could never be the case for a Christian. As Christians we have the Holy Spirit leading us, and one of the fruits of the Spirit (Gal 5:22-23) is "self-control". Therefore, rather than just cutting off our hands, a Christian should work with God's help to stop allowing any part of us to be used for sin. |
||||||
534 | Does it take away sins or not? | Lev 16:34 | Sir Pent | 19981 | ||
Personal Note ................................... Thanks guys. I'm looking forward to that thread, I think it could be really interesting. As for tickets, I don't have any to give. However, if you have any to a UK basketball game, and wanted to part with them for some reason ... :) |
||||||
535 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19974 | ||
Request For More Input .......................... Dear Tim and fellow Forumites, I agree with you that whether it is a poem or not doesn't tell us for sure whether the Genesis Creation account is figurative or literal. I would appreciate everyone's input on the process that EdB suggested (10/19/01, 1:13am) for consistently determining whether scripture is literal or figurative. I like it, but want to know what the rest of you think. |
||||||
536 | Does it take away sins or not? | Lev 16:34 | Sir Pent | 19973 | ||
Resolution ...................................... Dear Bill Mc, Thank you for being willing to "look for the forrest". As for not being a leader, the dictionary defines it simply as being a guide. There are a lot of other definitions as well, but none of them include fluency in Greek, or any of the other things that you mentioned. I do not intend to insult our distinguished forum members who have this knowledge. I appreciate the insight that they are able to share as a result of this this skill. For example, Tim Moran's "Word Study" post in this thread was excellent and very helpful. I also consider Tim to be a leader on this Forum. My point is just that these things are not required to be a leader, and that all of us (even those like me, that don't know Hebrew, etc.) need to be more responsible with our posts. |
||||||
537 | Does it take away sins or not? | Lev 16:34 | Sir Pent | 19969 | ||
This is off topic .............................. Dear Tim, Steve, and Joe, I am deeply interested in the possiblility of a third view that somehow is a compromise between Calvinism and Arminianism. This would be a tremendous thread. However, it is not the topic of this thread. I would encourage one of you to start a seperate thread to discuss this idea. |
||||||
538 | Animal Intelligence Isn't Rational | Gen 3:1 | Sir Pent | 19965 | ||
Welcome to the Forum ............................. Dear Spark, I am very glad that you have joined our discussion group here. I hope that this forum will be as helpful for you as it has been for me. There are many people here who have pretty well thought out ideas on a broad range of subjects relating to Christianity. I would like to respond to several things in your post. First I would agree with you that animals do have the ability to be "rational". The dictionary defines rational as the ability to reason. It defines reason as the ability to calculate, comprehend, and think in an orderly manner. I think it is obvious that animals exhibit this to a limited degree. A tiger "calculates" what angle to chase it's prey, and exactly when to pounce in order to catch it. Pavlov's dog experiment showed clearly that animals could learn to associate things in an orderly manner. The second thing in your post that I would like to respond to is your desire for no Bible quotations. Since this is a Bible Forum, this request seems a little "unreasonable" :) I do understand that as a non-Christian it would not be authoritative for you though. I would encourage you to do a search on this site for previous posts regarding the Truth of the Bible. There has been some very good discussion on that subject. The final thing that I would like to mention is that I hope that you will continue to dialog with us here on the forum. As a non-Christian, you probably have many questions about Christianity, and I hope that we will be able to help answer at lest some of them. |
||||||
539 | Does it take away sins or not? | Lev 16:34 | Sir Pent | 19837 | ||
Clarification .................................... Dear Bill Mc, It seems that you might have misunderstood my previous post. I am sorry for not being clear enough. I am NOT defending Judaism for the sake of "keeping the peace". In fact, I am not defending Steve's view on the Old Testament at all. I am purely focusing on the nature of your response to the original post. It seemed to me to be very negative, sarcastic, and off-topic. I feel that it is an inappropriate way to respond whether we disagree with a person or not. I would also say that whether your post was meant to convey "self-righteousness" or "saddness" is beside the point that it was potentially hurtful. So to clarify, I am not defending Steve's position, I am asking you to reflect on whether Jesus would be pleased with your response to it. |
||||||
540 | Does it take away sins or not? | Lev 16:34 | Sir Pent | 19836 | ||
Continued admonition ........................... Dear Bill Mc, I understand your frustration due to this disagreement that you have with Steve regarding the continued authority of the Old Testament now that we are under the New Covenant. However, I think that you are missing the forrest for the trees in this particular case. I would like to share an example using myself. I disagree with Steve on his extremely strict definition of the word "worship". For instance, I don't think that he would classify singing praise songs to God as worship. Now let's assume that Steve posts a note on the verse where Moses falls prostrate before God at the burning bush in worship (this would I think fit Steve's definition). I could do one of two things. I could focus on the "tree" and post a response attacking his note and pointing out all the other kinds of ways to worship God. Or I could see the "forrest" and realize that there will probably be someone someday who will read that note about the burning bush and will be helped by it. This person may never even read any of Steve's other posts about worship, and that isn't the point of the burning bush thread anyway. Also if the person did read the other worship posts, they would also see my posts there giving the other side. In any case, it is not helpful at all to confuse things by being negative and not staying on topic. Now that of course is a hypothetical situation, but I hope that you can see that you have done the same thing. Steve just asked a question here about two specific verses that appeared to contradict each other. Yet instead of being helpful and answering the question, you were extremely sarcastic and went off topic to an issue that has been dealt with elsewhere. I hope that you will be able to see more of the "forrest" in the future. There are people who will read these notes that we will never know about. For their sake, let us show our Christianity by our love for each other. Let us always strive to be respectful in our posts. I have suggested several guidelines for respectful posting in another thread (Lockman Forum Improvements #2). You did not respond to that, and I would appreciate your input there. I do value your participation here in the forum, and consider you to be one of the leaders here. With great leadership comes great responsibility. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 ] Next > Last [36] >> |