Results 61 - 80 of 92
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: LuckyCharm Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
61 | relations after divorce? | Matt 19:5 | LuckyCharm | 44883 | ||
I can well understand and sympathize with your dilemma here. However, your former wife apparently has some conscientious objections to engaging in marital relations before the wedding, and I think those ought to be respected out of love. Paul, in discussing eating questionable food, in 1 Cor 8, says "Be careful, however, that the exercise of your freedom does not become a stumbling block to the weak... When you sin against your brothers in this way and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ." Your former wife may have reasons in her own mind for not engaging in sexual relations before the wedding. Some of these may even be practical considerations, we just don't know. In any case, pressuring her against her convictions would not be consistent with true love, IMO. Be strong, --Cheryl |
||||||
62 | Seeking out suffering? | Col 1:24 | LuckyCharm | 44812 | ||
Hello again Makarios, and thank you for your prompt reply! So far we've only been discussing unavoidable suffering. But are there cases (like fasting) where suffering is legitimately to be sought? And aren't there times when suffering is wrongly sought, consciously or subconsciously, as in the case of people who seem to have an uncanny way of landing themselves in difficult situations? Or do you see all of these sufferings as permitted and sanctified through Christ? And what would be our proper response, then? To never seek to escape suffering, or to seek to escape it and mitigate it for others, to the glory of God? --Cheryl |
||||||
63 | Seeking out suffering? | Col 1:24 | LuckyCharm | 44810 | ||
Thank you for your comments, New Creature! Yes, He did tell us that no servant is greater than his Master (John 13:16). If we follow Him who suffered so much for us, we can expect to suffer ourselves... I am wondering, though, considering everything that has been said in this thread so far -- couldn't this view of suffering lead us to seek out suffering unnecessarily or arbitrarily? There would be nothing holy about that, or would there? Some people seem to do this subconsciously anyway -- instead of seeking out further suffering, shouldn't they be seeking ways to overcome their circumstances wherever possible, to the glory of God? Even Jesus prayed that the cup be taken from Him, if possible. Yet He emphasized that He was laying down His life of His own accord (John 10:11, 18) and even rebuked Peter for trying to interfere with His arrest in the Garden. Is this because He was fully divine, and only did the Father's will? And is this the example we are to follow in every circumstance? What about, for instance, a Christian woman caught in an abusive marriage? Even if her suffering is sanctified through Christ, should she not seek to escape it if possible? --Cheryl |
||||||
64 | Suffering automatically sanctified? | Col 1:24 | LuckyCharm | 44805 | ||
Excellent observations, Makarios! So, I'm wondering about your qualification of suffering that is done "in His name": Are you referring to the practice of consciously "offering up" our trials in prayer as part of becoming a "living sacrifice" (Rom 12:1)? Or do our sufferings become sanctified through Him regardless? Perhaps the Holy Spirit offers them on our behalf, even when we do not consciously do so ourselves? --Cheryl |
||||||
65 | Where's "invading armies" Rev 6:12-16? | Mark 9:1 | LuckyCharm | 44788 | ||
Hi Searcher! I believe you actually meant Rev 16, not 6... :-) In any case, my International Standard Bible Encyclopedia has this entry for Megiddo: "A royal city of the Canaanites, the king of which was slain by Joshua (Josh 12:21). It lay within the territory of Issachar, but was one of the cities assigned to Manasseh (Josh 17:11; 1 Ch 7:29). Manasseh, however, was not able to expel the Canaanites, who therefore continued to dwell in that land. Later, when the children of Israel were waxen strong, the Canaanites were put to taskwork (Josh 17:12 f; Jdg 1:27 f). The host of Sisera was drawn to the river Kishon, and here, "by the waters of Megiddo," the famous battle was fought (Jdg 5:19). By the time of Solomon, Israel's supremacy was unquestioned. Megiddo was included in one of his administrative districts (1 Ki 4:12), and it was one of the cities which he fortified (1 Ki 9:15). Ahaziah, mortally wounded at the ascent of Gur, fled to Megiddo to die (2 Ki 9:27). At Megiddo, Josiah, king of Judah, attempted to arrest Pharaoh-necoh and his army on their march to the Euphrates against the king of Assyria. Here the Egyptian monarch "slew him … when he had seen him," and from Megiddo went the sorrowful procession to Jerusalem with Josiah's corpse (2 Ki 23:29 f; 2 Ch 35:20 ff). The sad tale is told again in 1 Esdras 1:25 ff. "The mourning of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon" became a poetical expression for the deepest and most despairing grief (Zec 12:11). See also ARMAGEDDON. The constant association of Megiddo with Taanach (Tell Ta€anek) points to a position on the south edge of the plain of Esdraelon. In confirmation of this, we read (RP, 1st series, II, 35-47) that Thothmes III captured Megiddo, after having defeated the Palestinian allies who opposed him. He left his camp at Aruna (possibly €Ar€arah), and, following a defile (possibly Waôdy €Aärah), he approached Megiddo from the South We should thus look for the city where the pass opens on the plain; and here, at Khaôn el-Lejjuôn, we find extensive ruins on both sides of a stream which turns several mills before falling into the Kishon. We may identify the site with Megiddo, and the stream with "the waters of Megiddo." Pharaoh-necoh would naturally take the same line of march, and his advance could be nowhere more hopefully opposed than at el-Lejjuôn. Tell el-MutasellŒôm, a graceful mound hard by, on the edge of the plain, may have formed the acropolis of Megiddo. The name Mujadda attaches to a site 3 miles South of Beisaòn in the Jordan valley. Here Conder would place Megiddo. But while there is a resemblance in the name, the site really suits none of the Biblical data. The phrase "Taanach by the waters of Megiddo" alone confines us to a very limited area. No position has yet been suggested which meets all the conditions as well as el-Lejjuôn. The Khan here shows that the road through the pass from Esdraelon to the plain of Sharon and the coast was still much frequented in the Middle Ages." (Sorry about any funny character formatting, but it doesn't seem to carry over perfectly from QuickVerse to this window.) Hope this helps! Peace, --Cheryl |
||||||
66 | Does it include all suffering? | Col 1:24 | LuckyCharm | 44783 | ||
Thank you for your very well-delineated answer, Makarios! I was wondering, though: Would these sufferings that constitute a share in Christ's sufferings only be those that result directly from our efforts to share the Good News? Haven't there been many who have patiently borne sickness and other misfortunes "for His sake," and is this Scripturally sound? Pope John Paul II's apostolic letter on suffering says, "One can say that with the passion of Christ all human suffering has found itself in a new situation. And it is as though Job had foreseen this when he said: "I know that my Redeemer lives...," (Job 19:25) and as though he had directed towards it his own suffering, which without the Redemption could not have revealed to him the fullness of its meaning." Jacob Muller said that it is more than “suffering for the sake of Christ (in tribulation and persecution), or in imitation of Christ. It means all suffering, bodily or spiritual, which overtakes the believer by virtue of his new manner of life, his ‘Christ life’ in a world unbelieving and hostile to Christ.” Do the sufferings of Christ in which we share include not only His passion and death on the cross, but also His suffering at seeing the Father's house turned into a den of thieves, or at seeing His beloved friend Lazarus dead, or when the nine lepers failed to show gratitude for their healing? Is our sharing in these types of sufferings also a share in the suffering of Christ? --Cheryl |
||||||
67 | relations after divorce? | Matt 19:5 | LuckyCharm | 44731 | ||
One would ask, "considered adultery by whom"? Different branches of Christianity regard civil divorce in various ways. But when you originally married, you became "one flesh," according to God's word. Has the marriage covenant been broken? Or did it simply suffer a grievous blow, and is now on the mend, by God's grace? Only the two of you can answer this question. Peace, --Cheryl |
||||||
68 | Compare Mt 7:11 with Luke 11:13 | Ps 119:11 | LuckyCharm | 44728 | ||
Sure I do. The Holy Spirit can come to us in our sufferings just as surely, and sometimes more so, than in our joys. Our God is a consuming fire, we are told, and we must be "refined by fire" so that our faith is proved genuine (1 Pet 1:7). Peace, --Cheryl |
||||||
69 | Where are they taken? | Luke 17:34 | LuckyCharm | 44727 | ||
Is Jesus talking about where they will be taken to? Or is He speaking about all of the horrors that will come to pass on the day of judgment? I understand He was quoting a popular proverb of His day, and I think He meant that just as a rotting carcass draws scavengers, so will a sinful people draw judgment. --Cheryl |
||||||
70 | Explain Romans 1/8 | Rom 1:8 | LuckyCharm | 44721 | ||
"Through Christ, God's love and forgiveness are sent to us; through Christ, our thanks are sent to God." The faith of the Roman church was well-known throughout the world. "By this all men will know you are My disciples...." Peace, --Cheryl |
||||||
71 | An acceptable translation/interpretation | Matt 7:29 | LuckyCharm | 44716 | ||
Greetings, Ray! My Bible Reader's Companion has this to say about the passage: “Authority” is exousia, and means “freedom of action.” The greater authority a person has, the less others can limit his freedom of action. The centurion’s remark that he was a “man under authority” conveyed the fact that he derived his authority to command his soldiers from a source, Caesar, whose freedom to command those in the empire was unlimited. His affirmation was a statement of faith: his belief that Jesus acted under and with the full authority of God, and thus that distance from his suffering servant could not limit His power to heal. It was this total confidence in Jesus that Christ commends (v. 10)—in centurions, and in you and me. Barnes' Notes on the New Testament says: I am a man —He had full confidence in the ability of Jesus to heal his servant, and requested him simply to give the command. This request he presented in a manner appropriate to a soldier. I am a man, says he, under authority. That is, I am subject to the commands of others, and know how to obey. I have also under me soldiers who are accustomed to obedience. I say to one, Go, and he goes; and to another, Come, and he comes. I am “prepared,” therefore, to believe that your commands will be obeyed. As these obey me, so do diseases, storms, and seas obey you. If men obey me, who am an “inferior” officer, subject to another, how much more shall diseases obey you—the original source of power having control over all things! He asked, therefore, simply that Christ would give commandment, and he felt assured he would be obeyed. The 365-Day Devotional Commentary says: “I myself am a man under authority” Matt. 8:9–13. There is more in the story of the centurion for us. He felt unworthy to entertain Jesus under his roof. But he also knew that Jesus’ authority over sickness was not limited by distance. When he said, “I myself am a man under authority,” the centurion meant that his authority in the Roman army did not depend on him, but was granted him by his commanders in a chain leading ultimately to the Emperor himself. The centurion’s orders were obeyed because the full weight of mighty Rome lay behind each command. In asking Jesus to “just say the word,” and in affirming his faith that “my servant will be healed,” the centurion confessed his belief that Christ too was one “under authority.” When Jesus spoke, the full weight of God’s sovereign power was available to enforce Christ’s decree. The centurion’s faith was honored. Christ did speak the word, and the power of God, which neither distance nor evil forces can limit, flowed. Let’s remember the centurion’s faith when we pray. Jesus has the power to meet any and every need. And finally, Word Pictures in the New Testament says: For I also am a man under authority (kai gar ego anthropos hupo exousian). “Also” is in the text, though the here may mean “even,” even I in my subordinate position have soldiers under me. As a military man he had learned obedience to his superiors and so expected obedience to his commands, instant obedience (aorist imperatives and aoristic present indicatives). Hence his faith in Christ’s power over the illness of the boy even without coming. Jesus had only to speak with a word (8:8), say the word, and it would be done. Hope this helps! Peace, --Cheryl |
||||||
72 | Filling up what is lacking? | Col 1:24 | LuckyCharm | 44697 | ||
I was wondering about this verse in light of Heb 10:10-14: "By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God, from that time waiting till His enemies are made His footstool. For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified." How is it that we "fill up what is lacking in Christ's afflictions," when He has already offered the perfect sacrifice? Thanks, Cheryl |
||||||
73 | "Giving over to the Lord" - destruction? | Bible general Archive 1 | LuckyCharm | 44594 | ||
Thanks for your reply, Searcher. That comment wasn't in the Bible itself, but in the notes (I was reading the Life Application Bible). And now I can't find it again... But since we're on the subject, what *do* you believe it means to give a situation or an object or a question over to the Lord? Does it mean to not do anything about it? And in the case of sacrifices, don't they involve some sort of destruction, in the case of the OT laws? What about fasting? (I realize I'm wandering all over the board here, but to me there's a common denominator in all of these questions.) Why would it please God to have us give up a legitimate good for a time, for His "sake"? What does that do for Him, if such a question can even be asked? Thanks, --Cheryl |
||||||
74 | can divorse be stoped by refuseing | Bible general Archive 1 | LuckyCharm | 44493 | ||
I don't have an answer (I would be guessing), but I do have a question: Why would you want to continue being married to a woman who no longer loves you? Is it because you don't believe in divorce, or are you hoping her love will be rekindled if you stay together? Peace, --Cheryl |
||||||
75 | "Giving over to the Lord" - destruction? | Not Specified | LuckyCharm | 44446 | ||
My NIV commentary says that for the ancient Jews, to "give something over to the Lord" meant to destroy it. Questions: 1. Was this always true? Were there other ways of giving something over to the Lord? 2. Why was destruction necessary? How did it signify giving something to the Lord? 3. In which cases was destruction considered necessary? 4. Is this still practiced in any way today? If so, how? Thanks in advance for any insight.... --Cheryl |
||||||
76 | "Giving over to the Lord" - destruction? | Bible general Archive 1 | LuckyCharm | 44547 | ||
My NIV commentary says that for the ancient Jews, to "give something over to the Lord" meant to destroy it. Questions: 1. Was this always true? Were there other ways of giving something over to the Lord? 2. Why was destruction necessary? How did it signify giving something to the Lord? 3. In which cases was destruction considered necessary? 4. Is this still practiced in any way today? If so, how? Thanks in advance for any insight.... --Cheryl |
||||||
77 | Jesus according to Paul, vs. the Gospels | 2 Tim 3:16 | LuckyCharm | 42818 | ||
Thank you, Scribe! I've bookmarked that site for future reference. I already had these texts in hardcover form, but it sure is nice to have an online version available! What you said about false teachers is very true, too. It's just human nature to want to believe whatever suits us. Do you have any examples of the kind of false pretenses you mention (i.e. writing as a "spiritual" Timothy)? And also, wouldn't this throw some of our canonical letters into question, where the authorship is disputed (i.e. Hebrews)? Thanks, --Cheryl |
||||||
78 | Hoping for sources to back me up | 2 Tim 3:16 | LuckyCharm | 42813 | ||
Thanks, Kalos. Unfortunately, my correspondent does not share our faith in the inspiration of the Scriptures, and his question is part of the reason why he feels that Christianity as we know it today is a corruption of the faith of the original Christians, who he claims did not believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ. I have encountered this objection from several quarters now, and am really searching for some authoritative sources with which to refute it. (BTW, I liked your closing remark... *grin*) Peace, --Cheryl |
||||||
79 | Jesus according to Paul, vs. the Gospels | Not Specified | LuckyCharm | 42765 | ||
Jesus according to Paul, vs. the Gospels? The following question was posed to me elsewhere, and I was wondering whether anyone here has done any study or knows of any good sources on the subject: "My personal point of view is that the (later-written) Gospels present a version of Jesus that is developed along a certain line from the (earlier written) authentic letters of Paul. The authentic letters of Paul are consistent with a spiritual/non-historic Jesus who is the focus of a mystery religion. The Gnostics, who claim Paul's teaching as one of their primary sources, and for whom other non-canonical Gnostic gospel versions of Jesus exist, may have been the "true" christians and the canonical-gospel-following christians the heretics, but since the canonical-gospel-following christians got to write history, it was the Gnostics who were branded the heretics. Paul's letters could be interpreted to fit both (although I find them more consistent with the Gnostic view). All that said, I wouldn't recommend interpreting the writings of Paul based on the later-written and tangentially developed Gospels." Appreciate any input! --Cheryl |
||||||
80 | Jesus according to Paul, vs. the Gospels | 2 Tim 3:16 | LuckyCharm | 42771 | ||
Jesus according to Paul, vs. the Gospels? The following question was posed to me elsewhere, and I was wondering whether anyone here has done any study or knows of any good sources on the subject: "My personal point of view is that the (later-written) Gospels present a version of Jesus that is developed along a certain line from the (earlier written) authentic letters of Paul. The authentic letters of Paul are consistent with a spiritual/non-historic Jesus who is the focus of a mystery religion. The Gnostics, who claim Paul's teaching as one of their primary sources, and for whom other non-canonical Gnostic gospel versions of Jesus exist, may have been the "true" christians and the canonical-gospel-following christians the heretics, but since the canonical-gospel-following christians got to write history, it was the Gnostics who were branded the heretics. Paul's letters could be interpreted to fit both (although I find them more consistent with the Gnostic view). All that said, I wouldn't recommend interpreting the writings of Paul based on the later-written and tangentially developed Gospels." Appreciate any input! --Cheryl |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 ] Next > Last [5] >> |