Results 61 - 80 of 283
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Unanswered Bible Questions Author: kalos Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
61 | Is anything above God's name? | OT general | kalos | 4677 | ||
According to the Bible, has God magnified anything above His name? | ||||||
62 | Is Easter mentioned in the Bible? | NT general Archive 1 | kalos | 1564 | ||
Is Easter mentioned in the Bible? The celebration of the resurrection of Jesus Christ has become referred to often as "Easter". But is this term even mentioned in the Bible? |
||||||
63 | Where did Easter get its name? | NT general Archive 1 | kalos | 1565 | ||
Easter - what is its origin? Is it true Easter is derived from a Pagan celebration? |
||||||
64 | Yes, but Is Easter of pagan origin? | NT general Archive 1 | kalos | 1658 | ||
My sincere thanks for your answer. Can you support your answer with either Scriptural or historical references? Generally, I sort of agree with you. Nowhere in the Bible are we commanded to remember the birth of Jesus (Christmas). But we are definitely commanded to remember his death and resurrection (Easter). However, this alone doesn't answer the questions, "Is Easter derived from a Pagan celebration? What is the historical origin of Easter?" Surely the Bible makes no mention of bunny rabbits, Easter eggs, Easter egg baskets and hunts, Ft. Lauderdale, chocolate candy, etc. | ||||||
65 | In the NT who was Apollos? | NT general Archive 1 | kalos | 1853 | ||
In the NT who was Apollos? | ||||||
66 | Difference between apostasy, heresy? | NT general Archive 1 | kalos | 1870 | ||
What is the difference between "apostasy" and "heresy"? I know this question was asked previously on this forum. A good partial answer was given. Could someone give a more specific answer to this question? I.e., a more specific defintion of "apostasy" and "heresy" would be appreciated. Nothing wrong with the previous answer. It just didn't go far enough in defining apostasy and heresy. Apostates and heretics are similar, but there are well-defined differences. Can anyone explain to me what those differences are? | ||||||
67 | Is church attendance important? | NT general Archive 1 | kalos | 1901 | ||
Is regular church attendance important? If not, why not? How do you answer sceptics who are often heard to say: "Well, you don't have to go to church to get to heaven"? | ||||||
68 | Why was Christ baptized? | NT general Archive 1 | kalos | 2573 | ||
The Bible SAYS Christ was baptized for what purpose? I.e., according to the clear record of Scripture, why was Christ baptized? Someone at this Forum has written: When Christ was baptized, "He showed us what we must do in order to inherit the kingdom of God." Did He? All my life I have heard that Jesus was baptized in order to set an example for us to follow. Was He? WHAT DOES THE BIBLE PLAINLY SAY about the purpose of His baptism? | ||||||
69 | Can Christians be too heavenly minded? | NT general Archive 1 | kalos | 6736 | ||
Can Christians become too heavenly minded? | ||||||
70 | What does NT say about the wrath of man? | NT general Archive 1 | kalos | 7331 | ||
What does the New Testament specifically say about the wrath of man? | ||||||
71 | What about people who attack w/ insults? | NT general Archive 1 | kalos | 7335 | ||
What does the Bible say about people who attack with insults anything they do not understand? Give scripture reference(s), please. |
||||||
72 | Sin or sorrow in heaven? | NT general Archive 1 | kalos | 7443 | ||
Will there be any sin or sorrow in heaven? |
||||||
73 | Adoption - relationship or position? | NT general Archive 1 | kalos | 7460 | ||
As the word is used in the NT, is "adoption" primarily a word of relationship or of position? | ||||||
74 | Angel of the Lord - where in NT? | NT general Archive 1 | kalos | 7467 | ||
In the NT how many references are made to the angel of the Lord? Where are these references found (chapter and verse)? | ||||||
75 | Apostate teachers, where described | NT general Archive 1 | kalos | 7465 | ||
Can you give one or more NT references where apostate teachers are described? | ||||||
76 | Serenetime: Did you know . . . | NT general Archive 1 | kalos | 29729 | ||
Serenetime: Did you know . . . "The text of Scripture can be understood when taken at face value, making allowances for obvious figures of speech, near/far interpretations, its context, and comparative passages of Scripture that harmonize with it, without contradiction." Hermeneutic 'Hermeneutic is the method of interpretation that one uses to study something written or spoken; it is how one understands the Scriptures. To have validity, one's hermeneutic must be consistent and without contradiction and must never be governed by a theological predisposition or school of thought. In other words, if hermeneutic is controlled by theology then the Bible can be twisted to say whatever that theology would have it say. 'By employing a face value method of interpretation, the reader of Scripture attempts to discover the normal, natural, customary sense of the text as it was intended by the Author/author (God/human) at the time that it was written. 'When a consistent hermeneutic is applied, the meaning of Scripture can be understood. Then, as A.W. Tozer put it, "When you find the truth of Scripture, that truth always stands in judgment of you; you never stand in judgment of it." 'TWO CONDITIONS FOR INTERPRETATION '1) Understand that we are working with English translations of texts originally written in other languages. '2) Scripture never contradicts Scripture. 'FIVE PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION '1) Seek to discover the Author/author's intended meaning. '2) All Scripture is to be taken in its proper context be it words, phrases, passages, chapters, books,etc. Remember, "a text taken out of context is a pretext." '3) All Scripture is to be compared with other Scripture. "The best interpreter of Scripture is other Scripture," said Martin Luther. '4) Determine the literal reference of figures of speech. '5) Recognize that many passages of Scripture, in both Testaments, have both near and far implications and applications. 'The text of Scripture can be understood when taken at face value, making allowances for obvious figures of speech, near/far interpretations, its context, and comparative passages of Scripture that harmonize with it, without contradiction. '"Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, handling accurately the word of truth." (2 Timothy 2:15)' (www.signministries.org/hermeneutic.htm) kalos |
||||||
77 | Individuals in Acts expecting tongues? | NT general Archive 1 | kalos | 118722 | ||
WalkingTalkingBible: Is it anywhere in your nature to do me the courtesy of answering at least one of the six posts I have addressed to you in this thread? If Acts is a blueprint for all church history, where in the Book of Acts does one find INDIVIDUALS SEEKING for the Holy Spirit and EXPECTING TO RECEIVE TONGUES as the sign that He's come? This is a SPECIFIC question that calls for a SPECIFIC answer. Cite the chapter and verse in Acts where one finds INDIVIDUALS SEEKING for the Holy Spirit and EXPECTING TO RECEIVE TONGUES as the sign that He's come. If an answer to this question does not include chapter and verse, then the question has not been answered. This is a question that deserves an answer. The choices are: A) Nowhere in the Book of Acts does one find INDIVIDUALS SEEKING for the Holy Spirit and EXPECTING TO RECEIVE TONGUES as the sign that He's come. B) In the Book of Acts one does find INDIVIDUALS SEEKING for the Holy Spirit and EXPECTING TO RECEIVE TONGUES as the sign that He's come. This is found in Acts chapter _____ and verse ______. Choose one or the other. --kalos [DO077-1] |
||||||
78 | Was NT Written in Greek or Hebrew? 1 | NT general Archive 1 | kalos | 130631 | ||
Was NT Written in Greek or Hebrew? 1 DocTrinsograce, BradK, CDBJ, EdB, Emmaus, Hank, Makarios, Morant61, prayon, Searcher56, srbaegon and anyone else who wishes to reply: I recently received the following article in my email. I have been asked to evaluate it. I would appreciate the input of any and all of those named above as well as that of ANYONE ELSE who wishes to participate. In the following quoted article are the top reasons given by some to prove the NT was originally written in Greek. Each reason is then followed by a RESPONSE intended to disprove the argument and to prove that the NT was originally written in Hebrew. What I am asking for when you reply is that you tell whether you agree or disagree with the RESPONSEs, giving us the reason(s) why you do or do not agree. Supporting factual evidence for your agreement or disagreement is what I am looking for. Give as much or as little detail as you wish. I am thanking in advance any and all who reply to this Question. Grace to you, kalos ____________________ [Following is the first of 10 REASONS GIVEN BY GREEK PRIMACISTS and the RESPONSE to each. I will soon post the rest of the 10 REASONS and RESPONSES.] 'TOP 10 REASONS GIVEN BY GREEK PRIMACISTS 'Some have asked why the NT portion of the Hebraic Roots Version Bible is translated from Hebrew and Aramaic rather than Greek. Many have asked why we should the Hebrew and Aramaic is the original rather than the Greek? 'For more info on the Hebraic Roots Version, the first Messianic NT Version to be translated from Hebrew and Aramaic rather than Greek see the HRV website at: (http://www.hebraicrootsversion.com) 'TOP 10 REASONS GIVEN BY GREEK PRIMACISTS FOR MAINTAINING A GREEK ORIGIN FOR THE NEW TESTAMENT (and the 10 reasons they are wrong on each account) '1. The oldest manuscripts are Greek. 'RESPONSE: 'Yes it is true that our oldest Hebrew copies of Matthew and Hebrews (the only NT books we have in Hebrew) only date back to the middle ages. And it is true that our oldest Aramaic copies of New Testament books date back to the 4th century C.E.. 'However there are some important facts that those making the above argument fail to account for. 'To begin with, prior to the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947 our oldest Hebrew copies of any Tanak ("Old Testament") books dated back only to the Middle Ages. And our oldest copies of any Tanak books were Greek LXX copies from the fourth century. Yet no one would have argued that this pointed to a Greek origin for the Tanak. 'Since no copies of Ester were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, our oldest copies of Ester are still Greek LXX copies from the 4th century. And our oldest copies of Ester in Hebrew only date back to the Middle Ages. Yet this does not in any way indicate that the original language of Ester was Greek. 'The time-lapse from the time of the composition of the Book of Ester to our oldest Hebrew copies of Ester is about 1,500 years. This is about the same as the time lapse from the composition of Matthew to our oldest Hebrew copies of Matthew. So the fact that our oldest Hebrew copy of Matthew dates to about 1,500 years after the initial composition of Matthew does NOT negate the Hebrew from being the original. 'Although there have been no Papyri fragments of Hebrew Matthew found among the Christian Papyri fragments there have also been no Papyri fragments of Hebrew Isaiah or of the Hebrew of any of the other "Old Testament" books found among them. The only Hebrew Papyri fragments of Tanak books have been found among the Dead Sea Scrolls and not among any discoveries of Christian Papyri fragments. Why should we expect Hebrew Matthew (or any Hebrew or Aramaic NT books) to have been better preserved than the Hebrew Tanak? Whoever were the owners of the NT Papyri fragments we have found clearly had no copies of ANY Hebrew books of the Bible at all even from the "Old Testament" books which we know were composed in Hebrew. So the fact that we have found no Hebrew or Aramaic copies of NT books among them is no more significant than the fact that we find no Hebrew copies of "Old Testament" books among them. 'The oldest Greek Papyri fragment of any NT book is P52 which is a fragment of a few verses of John. The word order of this fragment agrees with the Greek Western Type of text which has close agreement with the Aramaic Old Syriac text. 'Our oldest **complete** Greek manuscripts of NT books date to the fourth century and that is also the age of our oldest coplete Aramaic manuscripts of NT books. 'The Hebrew and Aramaic origin of the New Testament cannot be dismissed or disproven by the existence of Greek papyri fragments that predate the oldest Hebrew and Aramaic manuscripts.' ____________________ (http://www.hebraicrootsversion.com) |
||||||
79 | Have you read it for yourself? | NT general Archive 1 | kalos | 142660 | ||
Angel3: Have you yourself actually read the book, The Purpose Driven Life, or are you merely going by what you have heard from others? Grace to you, Kalos |
||||||
80 | Which part of Acts should we emulate? | NT general Archive 1 | kalos | 168006 | ||
Doc: I wonder: if the church today should operate exactly as it did in the book of Acts, which part of Acts should we emulate -- the first chapers, the last, or somewhere in between? Since Acts is a book of transition, at which stage of transition should we be? Maybe Israel should operate exactly as it did in the book of Judges. Grace to you, Kalos |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [15] >> |