Results 521 - 540 of 558
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: retxar Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
521 | Holy Ghost Baptism subsequent to salvati | 1 Cor 12:13 | retxar | 4764 | ||
Thanks JVH0212, I am printing out all the posting you referenced. I am pretty busy, so it may take me a day or two to get back to you. I will look at each one before I respond. You are very thorough, thank you. Jesus Lives! |
||||||
522 | Holy Ghost Baptism subsequent to salvati | 1 Cor 12:13 | retxar | 4739 | ||
Hi JVH0212, just a quick note. I know your post here is a few days old, so sorry if I'm bringing up something someone has already brought to your attention. You are correct, Acts 2:4 does not use the word "baptized." However, was this not the baptism with the Holy Spirit as Jesus promised in Acts 1:5? Didn't Jesus also gave a description of the baptism with the Holy Spirit in Acts 1:8? Was Jesus talking about receiving the Holy Spirit and being baptized into the body of Christ at salvation as in 1 Cor 12:13? I think not, as the disciples had already received the Holy Spirit in John 20:22 as promised in John 14:17, but they had not been baptized/filled with the Holy Spirit. Thanks Jesus is Lord |
||||||
523 | Do the italicized words clarify? | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 4737 | ||
Thanks Koinekid, for you input. Jesus be with you, and give you some relief with that tooth. Amen I realize the few verses I mentioned are not required to prove the deity of Jesus. However, if the added italicized words are taking anything away from the words Jesus actually said, this is not a small thing. Compare John 8:24 as you mentioned, with verse 58 in the same chapter. Both verses say "I AM" ("ego eimi" right??). If "the verb cannot exist without there being a noun to complete the thought", what happened to the noun to complete the thought in verse 58? If there actually does NOT have to be a noun added, which seems to be the case here, then verse 24 seems to be an interpretation decision, rather than a clarity decision. You seem to up on your Greek. I am not. The only Greek I know is "Greek salad" and "baklava", so don't think I know enough Greek to ask an intelligent question about it. If I knew Greek, I could probably appreciate a Greek to English bible translator more, so I realize there could be something I am missing here. I use the NKJV instead of the NASB (sorry, not a critical text fan). The NKJV (and KJV) also add an italicized “he” in the places I mentioned, so I am not trying to pick on any particular translation. The LITV and the MKJV are the only translations I know of that do not add “he”, so I suppose a Greek to English translation without adding “he” is possible, if not even correct. I can not help but think that these words were added to what Jesus said as a carry over from years past, not something to add clarity, as was the real intent of italicized words. Let me put it this way. If the KJV had translated these scriptures I AM, instead of I am (he), would the later translations have intentionally ADDED words to produce a WEAKER reading? I don’t think so. Jesus is Lord! |
||||||
524 | Do the italicized words clarify? | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 4623 | ||
Hi Koinekid. Did you read the scripture reference? Did you understand the question? The capitalized words we were talking about were the ones that represent deity "(example Gen. 18:3 we talked about)". You answered, "Italicized words are words that do not exist in the Greek or Hebrew text, but were added to help the text make more sense in English." Thank you, that is correct. Now get out your bible, look up the scripture, and tell me what you think about the question I asked... "Do the italicized words clarify who Jesus is, or do they take away from the very words that Jesus spoke Himself, concerning who He is?" Jesus is Lord! |
||||||
525 | Do the italicized words clarify? | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 4588 | ||
Hi Ray, OK. My thoughts on the capitalization issue you brought up?? I don’t know, never really thought about it, but I can certainly see how a word capitalized or not capitalized can make us look at scripture in a different light (example Gen. 18:3 we talked about). If breath of life/Life in these verses mean breath of God, then it would certainly be capitalized. If it means physical life, it would not be capitalized. Yea, I know you already knew that! Since I’m not answering your question and only bringing up more questions, here’s some more food for thought. This is along the same lines of capitalization. This is about the liberal use of italicized words in certain places in the NASB, KJV, and NKJV. Here is what I would like for you to do. Read John 8:24, 8:28, 13:19, 18:5-8. Now read Exodus 3:13-14. Now go back and read the verses in John again, but this time don’t read the italicized words. Now answer this question. Do the italicized words clarify who Jesus is, or do they it take away from what Jesus was actually saying? So, good luck in your pursuit of correcting the capitalization errors. I think I might start scratching out a fee italicized words myself! God Bless!! |
||||||
526 | TRINITY | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 4377 | ||
Thanks Ray for the encouraging words, even tho I was a little off base. Maybe even on the wrong base! I see now, after looking at Gen 19, the two “men” who went to Sodom were definitely angels, and the one left talking to Abraham, was the Lord. The two angels, were not the “Angel of the Lord” as with Moses and the burning bush in Ex 3. With that, I see Gen 18 in a different light, but it still intrigues me. The Hebrew word for “Lord” in Gen 18:3 is “Adonay” (strongs 136). It occurs 434 times in the KJV and is translated Lord 431, God 1, and lord only 2 times, so this most likely would indicate deity. However, “lords”, as Lot addressed the two angels in Gen 19:2, is “adown” (strongs 113). It occurs 335 times and is translated lord 197, master 105, owner 1, sir 1, and Lord only 31 times, so this most likely would NOT indicate deity. In Gen 18:3 Abraham seems to be speaking to the three “men” indicated in verse 2 because of what in said in verses 4 and 5. In verse 5 Abraham repeats what he said in verse 3 by calling himself “your servant”, which I see as referring to the “men’s” servant. It is really hard for me to see Gen 18:1-5 any different than this. However, In light of the direction you pointed me in, I now believe the three “men” were God and 2 angels, rather than God manifested as three men, as I originally said. The only way the “Trinity manifested in the flesh” theory could be true is if two angels in Gen 19 were somehow not the same as the men in Gen 18. I cannot believe they are not the same. My only answer to Gen 18:1-5 is that the way Abraham perceived it was a manifestation of the Trinity, not that it actually was. The next time I think I have got a “revelation” at 3 am, I promise you I will wait until daylight to let the world know! Thank you for pointing out my error, and please forgive me Jesus. I do not wish to lead anyone astray. God bless you brother, and thank you again |
||||||
527 | TRINITY | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 4234 | ||
Please follow, if you will, in this illustration of the Trinity in God’s Word. Gen 18:1 Then the LORD appeared to him by the terebinth trees of Mamre, as he was sitting in the tent door in the heat of the day. Gen 18:2 So he lifted his eyes and looked, and behold, three men were standing by him; and when he saw them, he ran from the tent door to meet them, and bowed himself to the ground, Gen 18:3 and said, "My Lord, if I have now found favor in Your sight, do not pass on by Your servant. Notice verse 1 says the Lord appeared to Abraham, but verse 2 says Abraham saw THREE men, but in verse 3 Abraham addressed the three men as one, and as my Lord (not lords) ! Gen 18:9 Then they said to him, "Where is Sarah your wife?" So he said, "Here, in the tent." Gen 18:10 And He said, "I will certainly return to you according to the time of life, and behold, Sarah your wife shall have a son." Notice in verse 9 the three men ask a question as if one person is speaking, but in verse 10 the reply to Abraham is from the Lord! Gen 18:20 And the LORD said, "Because the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grave, Gen 18:21 "I will go down now and see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry against it that has come to Me; and if not, I will know." Gen 18:22 Then the men turned away from there and went toward Sodom, but Abraham still stood before the LORD. Notice verse 21 says The Lord would go down to Sodom, but in verse 22 the men go. But guess what?, only 2 of the 3 men actually go (Gen 19:1). Verse 22 says Abraham was still standing before the LORD! Gen 18:33 So the LORD went His way as soon as He had finished speaking with Abraham; and Abraham returned to his place. Notice when the Lord had went His way, Abraham was apparently alone. What happened to the third “man.” I believe this is Gods illustration of the Trinity. I know others will disagree, but I believe God manifested Himself to Abraham as three different men, yet He spoke and acted as one. When two of the “men” left, God was still there, yet also headed for Sodom! When someone ask to explain the Trinity, I will turn to Genius chapter 18! This is a much better illustration than anything I could come up with! THE WORD IS AWESOME!! Jesus Lives! |
||||||
528 | Didn't Jesus use the Septuagint? | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 4232 | ||
If Jesus and the Apostles used the Septuagint, we can be sure the Apocrypha is NOT God’s Word, rather than think it might be. Why? Because they never taught out of it, even tho it was available. The Jews had already rejected the Apocrypha. Jesus must have agreed, because He never spoke out against the Jews rejection of it. If the Jews had been wrong in rejecting the Apocrypha, Jesus would have spoke out against the Jews rejection of God’s Word. The Holy Spirit does not allow or disallow anyone to believe the Apocrypha as inspired. Romans 8:14 says “For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God.” Notice we are to be “led by the Spirit”, we are not pushed. If we chose to follow false doctrine, we are going down the road we chose, not a path the Holy Spirit pushed us down. Jesus Lives! |
||||||
529 | ... | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 4063 | ||
For me it is based on the use of "you" and "thee" as you said. I do not know Greek (except salad and boklava!) but the Greek for "you" (KJV and NASB) in verse 31 is "humas" (accusative case?). The Greek for "thee/you" (KJV/NASB) in verse 32 is "sou" (genitive case?). So there is a difference. Maybe you or someone that knows Greek could tell us the difference in the two. Thanks, Jesus Lives! |
||||||
530 | Baptism of the Holy Spirit after reborn? | 1 Cor 12:13 | retxar | 4039 | ||
Right on Bro! At salvation the HS is the baptizer, at Baptism of/with HS, Jesus is the baptizer, just as you stated. Thanks for the book reference. Another reliable source of info on the subject is http://angelic.org Thanks Jesus Lives! |
||||||
531 | Baptism of the Holy Spirit after reborn? | 1 Cor 12:13 | retxar | 4012 | ||
Thanks melchizedekau for your words of concern. Please take note of what I have said earlier in this forum: “I believe in the Baptism of the Holy Spirit as Jesus promised in Acts1. That promise bore witness as being true thru out Acts (2,8,10,11,19). I believe it is still true today and is verified by the initial evidence of speaking in tongues as the Holy Spirit gives utterance.” I think that states my position pretty well. I think we might be in the same book, but certainly not on the same page. I think it might help if we could read the previous posts, before we respond with any sort of judgmental comments. Notice I said read the post, not READ INTO the post. When I say “I think” I am stating “my opinion” which does not mean very much. Please don’t think I think you need to believe my opinion, unless the scripture references and the Holy Spirit tell you otherwise. Acts2 : Please re-read my previous post. Sorry if I seemed to be saying something I did not mean. Please believe me, I was only giving another POSSIBLE interpretation, that’s all, not my theology. I can’t even spell theologian, but now look at me, I are one! Just kidding Bro! Anyway, here is my last explanation (I hope) of what I said. Many people claim the tongues in Acts 2 were different from the other examples in scripture, because they were actually understood. ALL I am saying is what I have already said, there is also the POSSIBILITY there could have been a miracle of understanding going on also, because all DID NOT understand (vs13). In Jesus’s Love |
||||||
532 | 1Corinthians questions: Gifts and women | 1 Corinthians | retxar | 3990 | ||
I confess I have not read many books (except the Bible) by scholars on speaking in tongues. All I can say to that is Act 17:11 and 1Th 5:21. You asked: why has the Holy Spirit given spiritual gifts to Christians? Eph 4:12 for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ Thanks Jesus Lives! |
||||||
533 | Baptism of the Holy Spirit after reborn? | 1 Cor 12:13 | retxar | 3970 | ||
Sorry I came across as I was seeking to debate. I was not. Sorry. I was only expressing my beliefs, as you, which I base on scripture, not experience. A few more points to ponder, and I will shut up. If Acts 2 does not mention the baptism of the Holy Spirit, where is Jesus’s promise fulfilled in Act 1:5? 1Cor 14:2 says “For he who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God, for NO ONE understands him; however, in the spirit he speaks mysteries”. I can’t understand how anyone could say tongues could be a known world languages, based on 1Cor 14? I have heard testimonies as such, but I can’t see how anyone could use 1Cor 14 to back it up. As far as the tongues in Acts 2, I said “this COULD have been a miracle of hearing”. Please don’t think I do not believe the disciples could not have spoken in real foreign languages. I was just giving another possibility that would be consistent with other accounts of tongues in scripture. In Jesus Love |
||||||
534 | 1Corinthians questions: Gifts and women | 1 Corinthians | retxar | 3965 | ||
Thanks Ray for asking me to reply. Jesus gave us a definition of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit in Acts 1:8 (not baptized with a holy spirit). When a believer is baptized “with the Holy Spirit”, (Mat 3:11, Mark 1:8, Luke 3:16, John 1:33, Acts 1:5) Jesus is the baptizer. When a sinner is drawn to repentance by the Holy Spirit, and is baptized into the body of Christ at salvation (Rom 6:4, 1Cor 12:13, Gal 3:27, Col 2:12, 2Cor 7:10), the Holy Spirit is the baptizer. When a person speaks in tongues, the person’s spirit is speaking with the assistance of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:4, Rom 8:26, Jude 1:20 ). The word “spirit” in 1Cor 14:2, 14, 15, 16, and 17 is indeed speaking of the person’s spirit, but they are speaking with the assistance of the Holy Spirit. The person speaking in tongues is speaking praises, blessings, and thanks, to God, not the people (1Cor14:2,16-17). I have heard interpretations of tongues to be a prophetic message, but I can’t see that happening in Scripture. Tongues and prophesy occurred together, (Act 19:6) but I don’t think the prophetic message was the tongues interpretation, but I may be wrong. Other possible helps. The Holy Spirit converses with the believers spirit (Rom8:16). See also Mat10:19-20, Luke12:11-12. Hope this helps. Jesus Lives! |
||||||
535 | 1Corinthians questions: Gifts and women | 1 Corinthians | retxar | 3873 | ||
I am probably not of Pentecostal faith as your are thinking of, but I do speak in tongues and hopefully within the guidelines set forth in Scripture. I am actually of a Southern Baptist background (BELIEVE IT OR NOT!). So I guess you could call me “Bapti-costal”! Am I a nut. Yes! But not because I speak in tongues! I believe in the Baptism of the Holy Spirit as Jesus promised in Acts1. That promise bore witness as being true thru out Acts (2,8,10,11,19). I believe it is still true today and is verified by the initial evidence of speaking in tongues as the Holy Spirit gives utterance. Can speaking in tongues be faked? Yes! Can Jesus’s words in Act1:8 be faked? No! By their fruits you will know them (Matt 7:20). I believe all spiritual gifts will last till Jesus comes back, and none are excluded (1Cor1:7). 1 Cor 14 does not forbid tongues (vs39) in any way, either now or then. It only gives guidelines on how they are to used in public worship. 1. Tongues spoken for the congregation to hear, must be interpreted (vs28). Notice the un-interpreted tongue speaker is not disallowed to speak, but must speak to God and himself, not to the congregation. 2. Who should interpret? The tongue speaker themself (Vs13). Could that have been what happened in the Church you mentioned? Maybe, maybe not, but it seems strange for a man to declare God’s guidelines before the congregation, and them deliberately disobey and be subject to their ridicule. 3. Why must tongues spoken to the congregation be interpreted? For the benefit and protection of the uninformed and the unbelievers (vs23). Uninterprettd, the sign to the uninformed or the unbelievers (vs22) would NOT be a sign of edification, as would occur with interpretation (vs5). They would scoff and the Holy Spirit would be mocked (Acts2:13) and it would become a sign of judgement. The Isaiah quote bears this out. 4. What would be a true interpretation of a message in tongues to the congregation be? A message of man to God not God to man (vs2,16). In other words it will be thanks and praise not prophesy; not “Thus saith the Lord”. 5. Will proper us of tongues ever interrupt the teaching of the Word? NO! I do not think the Holy Spirit would interrupt Himself. 6. Can spiritual gifts be misused? OH YES! How? If they are not exercised in love (1Cor13:1-3). Example: Anyone with a I have, you have-not attitude. If they are exercised with pride instead of love. 7. Can tongues be used properly? YES! How? Personal prayer (vs14,15,Rom8:26) Build up your faith (vs4,18,Jude1:20). That the church may receive edification if interpreted (vs5). 8. Should we still hold true to what Paul says about women speaking in verse 33-35?. Jesus came to fulfill the law. One of the ways of fulfilling the Law was showing us Gods intentions, showing us Gods heart. Jesus told the Pharisees that an outward display of obedience was nothing, without an inward change of the heart. I think we have to look at this with Gods intent. If we imposes this as an outside display of obedience with no thought of God’s intent, we miss the point. I think we have to treat this in the newness of the Spirit, as Jesus taught, and not in the oldness of the letter (Rom7:6). The intent here was not to gag women, but to establish order in service. This addressed something that was causing disorder, just as the uncontrolled display of spiritual gifts was causing disorder. The theme of 1Cor14 is craptuted in verse 40, “so all things will be done decently and in order.” |
||||||
536 | How can we bear another's burdens? | Gal 6:2 | retxar | 3841 | ||
Gal 5:14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." The law of Christ is the law of Love. |
||||||
537 | But the older NASB did. Why? | Bible general Archive 1 | retxar | 3817 | ||
Maybe because "thee" is not the same thing as "you" as we might think it is now. "Thee" (in the KJV) addresses only one person. "You" (in the KJV) addresses more than one person. We are not wired up to think that way now, but if we were it might would help us in Bible study. example: Luke 22:31 And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you (the disciples not just Peter), that he may sift you (the disciples), as wheat: Luke 22:32 But I have prayed for thee (Peter in particular), that thy faith (Peter's faith) fail not: and when thou (Peter) art converted, strengthen thy (Peter's)brethren. |
||||||
538 | "the Ethiopian woman Moses married?" | Num 12:1 | retxar | 3812 | ||
I agree, Zipporah was definitely Moses's wife, I'm just not sure if "the Ethiopian woman whom he had married" here is her. If this is speaking of Zipporah, why does it say "Ethiopian woman" because Zipporah was from Midian? Like I said before, maybe she was adopted, or perhaps Jethro, her father, was a Ethopian who now lived in Midian and was also priest of Midian? Maybe someone out there can shead some light on this? Like you said though, that's not really the point, God's reaction to Aaron and Miriam's sinful intentions should be something we take note of today. Jesus Lives! |
||||||
539 | How was books in KJV compiled? | OT general | retxar | 3752 | ||
I know I’m in the minority here as this is a NASB forum, but I prefer the NJKV as a modern, literal translation, over the NASB, because I believe it is based on more accurate text. The NKJV is based on the Antioch manuscripts, where the NASB is based on the Alexandia manuscripts that you mentioned. I base my belief on Acts 6:7, 12:24, 13:49, and 19:20 which describes the Word of God as growing, spreading, and multipling. This seems to describe the Antioch manuscripts. The Alexandria manuscripts pretty much just stayed on the shelf and did not grow, spread, or multiply. The Alexandia manuscripts as you stated correctly, are the oldest. However they are highly suspect, as they were isolated, away from the Church and under the control of one group of people. Age alone does not make them the most accurate. The additions as you mentioned, could have just as easily been deletions of the earlier, rather than additions of the later. I am not dogmatic about this and my pastor, who is my closest brother on Earth, would probably agree with you. Jesus Lives! |
||||||
540 | Baptism question in Acts 2 and John 3 | Acts 2:39 | retxar | 3735 | ||
Acts 2:37-39 This refers to being baptized by the Holy Spirit into the Body of Christ upon salvation. (1Cor 12:13) John 3:4–6 Note Nicodemus's question's "How can a man be born again, or in other words a second time? Jesus answered the question just as He was asked, 1st be born of water, then of the Spirit. First of the flesh, then of the Spirit. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ] Next > Last [28] >> |