Results 61 - 80 of 253
|
||||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: Beja Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
61 | KJ Version | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 232102 | ||
Gadrifter58, At first I hesitated to answer your question. Reason being that this question has so much potential to turn into an arguement over superiority of translations. This would neither be edifying nor could I imagine it in line with the purposes of this forum. However, there is a real question there and with real answers. So I'll attempt to do so. Here are some thoughts. 1. There are a variety of Bibles because there are a variety of goals in translations. There is an ongoing question of how literal of translation is best. When the literal words fail to capture the actual idea in English what does one do? When a Hebrew writers says that he feels something in his kidneys, intestines or bowels do we translate that exactly and leave english readers wondering what on earth he means? Or shall we go ahead and translate the word as "heart" in english? Which is really more of what that would have meant to a Hebrew. This is just the tip of the ice berg in a huge amount of questions when it comes to translations. 2. Language changes. Words continual change their meaning. Words used in the KJV no longer mean what they use to in the common usage of today. Study the change in the word "gay" for example. The KJV itself has gone through numerous revisions even. For this reason we will always need repeated translations if we wish the scriptures to be in the common speech. And we do want that. 3. We have continually made progress in understanding Koine Greek, which is what the new testament is written in. This increase in knowledge allows for better translations. Certain places in the king james scripture are translated with a vagueness due simply to this reason. 4. The one thing universal among almost, if not all, translators of scriptures is the conviction that we are to keep growing in understanding the original texts. No translator has ever finished their work on translating scripture and then said, "There, now this translation buisness is resolved. We can all just read this." Just about the ONLY thing all translators of all versions have in common is a recognition that having lots of translations is a very good thing. The translators of the KJV in a preface to their original work affirmed that having multiple translations of scriptures was desirable for getting the sense of a text. 5. I must make a remark with regards to asserting that the KJV is on a 6th grade level. I won't speak to harshly to that idea because you are the second person that I have heard that some. So the two of you must be getting that idea from some place. I have no idea where though. I will just say this. I have a college degree, and a graduate degree, and I routinely read works of the puritans. Yet I very often find places in the KJV where I can not begin to understand what they are saying until I consult another translation or even the greek. I may not be the smartest man, but I feel quite confident in saying that an average sixth grader is not up to the task. The source I have read says that the KJV is grade 12 and higher. All this said, the KJV is a valuable asset to a study library. But I hope this helps people believe that multiple translations are a good thing. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
62 | Question on Hymn of Invitation tradition | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 232118 | ||
rustic1959, I also dissaprove of the invitations system as I have seen it done in my area. There are some ways of doing it which I might not object to. However, I think I'd boil down my objection to two points. 1. The act of lending musical accompanyment to us pressing people to "do something" is a good way to create false conversions. Also I do not think there is anyway that Paul, or Jesus Christ for that matter, would ask a lady to play a piano while he spoke in order to create more impact. 2. Pressing people to walk an isle or say a prayer is not what we are to call people to. We are to press for faith and repentance because that is what the gospel presses us to. Sinners in love with their sins will gladly walk down front if they think it is a substitute for repentance. That being said, there are bigger issues and currently I do attend a church which practices the invitation system. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
63 | Is cremation wrong? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 232200 | ||
CarlaLeo, Since you received two contradictory answers let me just through in my voice with one to help tip the balance. There is nothing in scripture to my knowledge that indicates cremation is wrong. You will also notice no scripture was given to show it was wrong. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
64 | Is practicing homosexuality wrong? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 232321 | ||
Diego, The truth of the matter is that somebody with this disposition will more than likely not listen no matter how well you answer him. This is even more true based on the answer to the question, which is quite easy to for scoffers to accuse us of merely picking and choosing what applies. However, because God is able to grant repentance and for the sake of giving you truth personally I will lay out for you the basis of the historical answer Christianity has given to this dilemma. I myself think this answer is biblically sound. The basis of the answer lies in the division of the law. The law was in three parts, though it is often given all mixed together. The three parts are moral, ceremonial, and civil. The civil law, which is what your friend brings up to mock you, was limited to how Israel was to govern their nation. These things can not be applied merely to individuals or the church. We argue that the civil laws no longer apply, simply because we are no longer a worldly nation. The civil law had to do with the priesthood, clensings, sabbaths, festivals, sacrifices and such. All these things were pictures of Christ and fulfilled by Christ. The ended upon the finished work of Christ in his death, ressurection, and ascension because what they pointed to had been fulfilled. See Colossians 2:16,17 for this. The moral law remains both now and forever as the standard of righteousness. See Matthew 5:17,18 for Jesus' claim that this aspect of the law shall never pass away. We know that is what part he was referring to by his exposition of the moral law that follows. Homosexuality and the laws regarding it fall within this abiding moral law. When scripture says we are no longer under the law if we are in Christ we must grasp two things. 1. It does not mean that we God defines as right and wrong has changed. The moral law remains. 2. It means that if we are in Christ, we are no longer accepted or condemned based upon our keeping of that law. For example. Just because I am no longer going to heaven or hell based upon whether or not I resist coveting, does not mean that I now have permission to covet. I hope this helps. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
65 | Suicide Stop going to Heaven? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 232391 | ||
Toylady, The way one answers this question is usually dependant on other theological convictions. I give a very brief explination of that in post 231575. It might or might not be helpful to you. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
66 | Can anyone explain Mat 24:15? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 232775 | ||
elder4yhwh, My opinion is that Luke interprets that passage for us in Luke 21:20. However, the full answer must be a deep one as Doc has suggested. This is because as CDBJ has pointed out, the same notion is taken up again in 2 Thessalonians. So I think that in that particular passage Jesus was applying the language to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, but there must be a deeper fulfillment of Daniel with regards to this yet to come. In fact, you could pick a intertestemental event which we would almost swear fulfilled Daniel's prophecy had Christ not come along and told us to continue looking for its fulfillment. So there must be some way in which these things are types leading up to the ultimate expression of the prophecy which we would expect is what Paul points to in 2 Thess. But short answer. Luke 21:20 In Christ, Beja |
||||||
67 | What is the law? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 232823 | ||
elder4yhwh, Scripture is not always referring to the same thing when it uses the term "law." What passage do you have in mind? In Christ, Beja |
||||||
68 | Is it wrong to self-please (masturbate) | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 232854 | ||
Magie, I think using the search function on this topic would be helpful of for you. I think this question has been asked many times before. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
69 | we r living together but r not married.. | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 232860 | ||
Magie, This is what scripture would call sexual immorality. It is a sin and should be repented of. 1 John 3:6 and Ephesians 5:5. With regards to loosing salvation, scripture teaches that anybody whom God saves will remained saved. But to be saved we must repent of our sins. Furthermore, scripture teaches that true repentance is an ongoing repentance. This is not to say that saved individuals will not make mistakes, but rather that a person indwell in the spirit of God will not be able to continue in sin without being convicted deeply and actually repenting from the sin. Further, I would like to ask if you attend a church? This is very important. All of your questions involve an inquiry as to what is basic christian morality. I do not point this out to belittle you or make you feel unwelcome on the forum. You are quite welcome here. However, this forum will never be able to successful serve the function in your life which God intended a local church to serve. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
70 | can i find out who my gaurdian angel is | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 232991 | ||
pumpkin7471, Scripture tells us nothing regarding these things. There are only two passages to my knowledge that seem to hint at the possibility of gaurdian angels. Dan 12:1 and Matthew 18:10. With regard to the type of specificity which you are asking about, scripture gives us no hints. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
71 | Adultery always involves married woman? | Bible general Archive 4 | Beja | 233623 | ||
EmethAlethia, I admire your post very much. First, I admire it because I can see you are very much first and foremost trying to understand scripture, and fewer question than we would like have this starting point. Second, I love your post because you clearly are willing to follow wherever scripture takes you on this question despite it seeming to lead you towards an answer you no doubt realize will be unpopular. Finally, I admire your post because in addition to your search for scripture you at least seem to display the humility to realize that while we must completely submit to scripture, yet we ourselves are not infallible interpreters of scripture and need others to help show where we misread. In short I can see why your name is truth truth. That being said, let me tell you why I come to a different conclusion than you in three headings. 1.) First, I think we need to recognize the difficulty of the data we are handling. I call your attention to the section of your post at the beginning where you explain how you see the biblical definition of adultery and its centering on the husband. I want to point out that you have including exactly zero scriptures in support of your view. Now one might wonder how I can praise your pursuit of scripture and at the same time point this out. The reason is that I can see how your view is shapped by biblical passages. Because the truth is we don't, to my knowledge have an explicit biblical teaching answering this question concerning polygamy. Nowhere is it explicitly forbidden in scripture in a simply prohibitive statement such as "Though shall not steal" prohibits theft. And yet I can easily see how the biblical data could press you to your conclusion. But for my first point, I just would like you to recognize that what you are doing is simply trying to reconstruct the ethics from examples of what God did not judge rather than from actual intentional teaching from scripture. Now this is out of necessity, not your fault. 2.) Is this presented in scripture as something where singleness is what we "ought" to press towards, then failing that we "ought" to strive for a single wife, and then failing that we find ourselves at polygamy? My conclusion is no, because though Paul does suggest that singleness is supperior due to its singleness of focus on the things of God, this superiority is expressed in the sense of ranking of various spiritual gifts similiar to how he does so in 1 Corinthians 12 where he desires the excellency of prophecy over speaking of tongues and states that he wishes all spoke in tongues. Now is their an oughtness in prophecy and speaking in tongues? I mean that am I falling short as if I was not living up to God's will for my life if I fall short of the gift of prophecy? No, the spirit gives what gifts he will to whom he will. I recognize its superiority and goodness, but I do not fall short of God's perscriptive will for my life by not having that gift. In the same way singleness, the ability to not burn with lust while single, is presented specifically as a gift. Paul says in discussing it, "but each has their own gift." So what I mean that in my marriage, though I recognize the greatness of singleness in its ability to solely focus upon God, yet I myself am in exactly God's prescriptive will for me as I lead my wife and daughter in holy devotion to the lord. Singleness is not my gift. 3.) I am out of time, forgive the shortness of perhaps the most important section. As we look at the New Testament where we finally see marriage's purpose unfolded, we do see that there is actually an "oughtness" to only having one wife rather than more than one. I mean to say that it is different than the "gift" of singleness in that I take only one wife to be perscriptive of all men, other than single men ofcourse. I take this from Ephesians 5 showing marriage to reflect the sinular devotion between Christ and his bride and 1 Timothy 3 showing that it is a qualification for being an elder. And I do not think God was meaning to put a character qualification upon the elders other than them being an exmplar of what every chrsitian man should be. I hope this helps. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
72 | Age of accountability? | OT general | Beja | 223858 | ||
Stephanie, Scripture doesn't actually give us any answer to this question. I recently preached on the subject of an age of accountability however and here is some small guidance for what it is worth. If a child is living we never rest on the age of accountability. If they are merely two years old still we labor to teach them the gospel. This can begin with things as simple is teaching them who God is so that later we can explain our accountability to Him, so that later we can explain the need for Christ's redemption. But we never rest on the notion for an age of accountability for a living soul. There is simply no grounds for doing so in scripture. For a deceased child we extend hope. In my experience the most common passage used to teach an age of accountability is 2 Samuel 12 climaxing in verse 23 when David says, "Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me." From this passage people reason that the child would have been in either heaven or hell and since we know David was going to heaven then the child must have been there also. There is ofcourse a chance David only meant he would join the child in the grave. But you can see from a passage such as this we should not build some notion that a child until X age has no need of the gospel. But back to my point, I think there is some valid hope here for a grieving parent. David does seem to be consoling himself with the notion that he will see his child again. So while we can not name an age, if it is at all within reason we can at least give the parent permission to hope. And in the case of infants I would go so far as to try to reassure them. But as I said, I would never rest on such a passage while a child is yet alive. Also you could probably do a search on this and get a much more broader discussion. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
73 | when we die are we go atraigth to heaven | OT general | Beja | 225288 | ||
Godsaves, I would recommend reading 2 Cor 5:1-8 and see if that persuades you of an answer to your question. I personally believe it is saying that we are immediately present with the Lord when we die, if we belong to Christ. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
74 | buying something u know u will refund? | OT general | Beja | 241167 | ||
timley1959, I think the best way to answer that is by the New Testament Standard of love. Would you wish somebody to treat you this way if you owned the merchandise? Second, do you think the behavior brings honor to Christ? I appeal to these questions because I do not think the proverb itself is trying to directly make a statement about the validity or wickedness of this practice, but rather trying to make one wise/aware to the reality of the practice. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
75 | Is it Ok to pray to the Holy Spirit? | NT general | Beja | 221548 | ||
Here is a great answer to that question. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v(equals)VMp5DFsuOTs Make sure you replace the (equals) with an equal sign. This forum won't let you type one. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
76 | How do I keep a meak and humble heart? | NT general | Beja | 224903 | ||
Patricia, 1.) How do I keep a meek and humble heart? I can not help but marvel at 1 Corinthians when Paul is trying to correct the factions in the first four chapters. They were struggling with several teachers being exalted and all the "lesser" brethren falling into place behind one of the various teachers, resulting in factions. So in the first chapter Paul takes them directly to the cross. He shows them that in light of the cross the notion of exalting any man whatsoever is foolishness and completely contrary to the doctrine of the gospel. When we are tempted to exalt ourselves, or to think ourselves above reproach, we are thikning along lines that are contrary to the gospel. So how do you keep meek and humble? Soak your mind in the gospel. Let it constantly remind you of who you are. We react to redicule instinctively as if to say, "Nobody speaks to ME like that!" But we constantly need to let the gospel ask us the question, "who are you?" And the answer in the gospel is that you are a sinner that had God not made you his own personal charity case, you would be doomed to an eternal hell that you rightly deserved. Let the grace of the gospel saturate your mind so that you do not see yourself as somebody whom it would be surprising that you would be rebuked. Read 1 Corinthians chapter 1 to see what I am referring to. 2.) What would God want me to do in this situation? 1 Peter 2:18 Servants, be submissive to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and gentle, but also to those who are unreasonable. Some might say that doesn't refer to employees. But this directly follows what he says in verse 13, "Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every human institution" It is also followed by chapter 3 verse 1 where it is applied to wives. So God calls us to submit to even sorry bosses. And when we continue reading in 1 Peter chapter 2 and on into chapter 3 (Which I am encouraging you to do!) then we see that the reason for this is that it finds favor with God and also it is a powerful witness. Our being willing to suffer, and doing so in a gracious and kind way that our persecutors do not deserve is the most fertile of all grounds for spreading the gospel. So I encourage you along with Peter that, "Since Christ suffered in the flesh, arm yourselves with the same way of thinking, for whoever has suffered in teh fles has ceased from sin, so as to live for the rest of the time in the flesh no longer for human passions but for the will of God." (1 Peter 4:1,2) 3.) We discover in Proverbs that one of the surest signs and means of wisdom is to learn from rebukes. This is difficult to do when somebody actually means the rebuke to harm us rather than sincerly wishing to better us. But we must strive to hear a rebuke that is meant to harm us, and to then turn it to our good by putting aside all the hate in it and then looking honestly to see if behind all the ill intentions there is something we truely needed to hear. Spend years learning in such a way and you will be surprised at how you can grow at your job. 4.) You stated, "I want God to dwell in my heart" Ephesians 3:14-17, "For this reason I bow my knees before the Father, from whom every family in heaven and on earth is named, that according to the riches of his glory he may grant you to be strengthened with power through his Spirit in your inner being, so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith.." So we see that Christ dwells in our hearts through faith. Now to what faith do we refer? For this isn't just some vague trust in God to which Paul refers. Our faith is in Christ through the gospel. The gospel teaches us that you and I and our own attempts at righteousness are worthless in the sight of God due to our inherrent sinfulness. Therefore God has placed our sins upon Christ Jesus and condemned them in Him on the cross, giving us his righteousness in its place so that we may stand acceptable before God. To accept, to believe, to trust wholely in THAT is to have faith. And to do so requires us to be meek and humble in our own admission of our shortcomings before God. That is the meek and humble heart that God will dwell in, the one that is meek and humble in that it believes this gospel of their failure and Christ's sufficiency to be true and responds to it in Faith (trusting in it.) If you have that then as Ephesians states Christ dwells in your heart. We need not worry that in a moment of pride and anger towards another that He abandons us, for that is not the meekness meant, but the meekness of one who trusts Christ alone for righteousness before God and counting not on their own good. May God bless you and keep you. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
77 | Can you be pro-life but not do anything? | Genesis | Beja | 220761 | ||
Arundel, There is, of course, no biblical basis for our inaction. I believe if I recall correctly that it is around 3 percent of churchmembers that even support their church financially. If we can't motivate them to do this, how much more difficult for a pastor to get his people to join a protest? I can assure you that the biggest obstical in my own church is not a lack of pro-life protests. If it makes you feel any better I loathe abortion and I try to instill the same mindset in the church I serve. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
78 | Destruction of Sodom | Genesis | Beja | 226361 | ||
butchb, The exchange with Abraham is hypothetical. Abraham is asking, if there are 10 righteous in Sodom, will you spare the city? God's reply is that the city would be spared on account of the ten righteous, but the understood implication is that would happen IF there were ten righteous to be found. However, the point is that there were not ten righteous men found there, so God's wrath came upon the city. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
79 | people on the other side of the mountain | Genesis | Beja | 228064 | ||
Mariaan, Can you give the passage in question? In Christ, Beja |
||||||
80 | TWO TRIBULATIONS | Genesis | Beja | 235968 | ||
Escar, The way I understand it is that Christ gathers up the one who is taken. Keep in mind that Matthew 24:44 is not just describing the end. From a literary standpoint it is comparing the flood with the end. So just as on the day of the flood some were "taken" and others left, so will the end be. In the flood, taken was being upon the ark, left was perishing in the flood. So one group is taken up in Christ, the other is left to perish in God's earth shattering judgment. That's how I read it. In Christ, Beja |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [13] >> |