Results 6621 - 6640 of 6770
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Morant61 Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
6621 | 2Thess 2:7 forum, then respond | 2 Thess 2:6 | Morant61 | 8687 | ||
Greetings Ray! I agree with you about 'it.' I just wasn't sure if that was what you were refering to. There definitely is no pronoun in 2:7. However, the article used with the participle "holding back" is masculine and thus should be translated "he who holds back." John 14:26: "That one" is there. It would have been better to translate it. However, the context still makes it clear who will teach us all things. John 15:26 also uses "that one." So does, John 16:8. I originally brought these verses up simply to demonstrate that the Holy Spirit is sometimes referenced as neuter and sometimes as masculine. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6622 | Why did the NASB change JEHOVAH to Lord? | Deut 5:11 | Morant61 | 8677 | ||
Greetings Mark! You have given an excellent answer on this question. The name translated as Jehovah or Yahweh is actually written as four Hebrew constants - YHWH. Since the Hebrews didnot want to pronounce God's name, they would often simply pronounce it as "My Lord". Later (first attested about the 12th century), someone added the vowels of "My Lord" to the constants YHWH and produced the word 'Jehovah.' The most likely pronounciation, though no one knows for sure is 'Yahweh.' This pronounciation was attested to by both Clement of Alexandria and Theodoret, both early church writers. Either way, the actual choice made in transalation is not the big issue that Jehovah's Witnesses make it out to be. Current preference among modern translations is simply to translate YHWH as LORD. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6623 | 2Thess 2:7 forum, then respond | 2 Thess 2:6 | Morant61 | 8664 | ||
Greeting Ray! I kind of skipped over this post without reading it carefully, so I missed one of your comments. You said, "If the Greek had the word Restrainer, (and it doesn't), I would have it capitalized." The word can be translated several ways, but the text (2 Thess. 2:7) actually says, "There is now only One who holds back....(or restrains.)" So, the word 'restrainer' or 'holder back' is not a noun, but a participle used as a subject. This in fact functions basically as a noun. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6624 | 2Thess 2:7 forum, then respond | 2 Thess 2:6 | Morant61 | 8651 | ||
Greetings Ray! Admittedly, the text here doesn’t specify what will happen when the Restrainer is removed. My assumption is that this will take place at the rapture of the church and that the lawless one will then be active for a short period of time before he is overthrown at the coming of Christ. So I would see a separation of time between the revealing and the overthrowing, even though the text here doesn’t specify that is the case. Concerning the NRSV, are you referring to the addition of the pronoun ‘it?’ I understand your comment about ‘it’ referring to the Holy Spirit. However, there are occasions in Scripture where a neuter is used in reference to the Holy Spirit. Check out John 14:26, 15:26, and 16:13-14. So, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that the neuter a neuter can be a reference to the Holy Spirit. But, 2 Thess. 2:7 is clearly masculine, "He who restrains." Thanks! Great Question by the way! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6625 | 2Thess 2:7 forum, then respond | 2 Thess 2:6 | Morant61 | 8618 | ||
Greetings Ray! May I take a stab at your question? I checked out the Greek on this passage. The Restrainer is never named. However, grammatically, the Restrainer must be the one removed. In the clause, "He who restrains" is the subject. The verb of the clause is the passive "taken out of the way". Therefore, the Restrainer has to be the One who is removed. As to the identity of the Restrainer, I believe it must be the Holy Spirit. However, since the text never says, I have simply expressing my opinion. But, I think the Holy Spirit is the only One who makes sense. The "lawless one" cannot be fully active or revealed until the Holy Spirit no longer restrains him. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6626 | Was Jesus a Nazirite? | Num 6:2 | Morant61 | 8616 | ||
Greetings Steve! Concerning the statement that prophecy was fulfilled by Jesus coming from Nazareth, one commentator said, "The fact that the family moved to Nazareth was once again said to be in fulfillment of prophecy (Matt. 2:23). However, the words He will be called a Nazarene, were not directly spoken by any Old Testament prophet, though several prophecies come close to this expression. Isaiah said the Messiah would be “from [Jesse’s] roots” like “a Branch” (Isa. 11:1). “Branch” is the Hebrew word nes#er, which has consonants like those in the word “Nazarene” and which carry the idea of having an insignificant beginning." - The Bibe Knowledge Commentary - It wasn't uncommon in the culture of the time to use plays on words. In fact, the quotes that Paul uses in Rom. 9 are mostly drawn from a play on the word 'people.' Good answer by the way! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6627 | Divine Plan | Matt 7:13 | Morant61 | 8517 | ||
Greetings Mike714! You have posted an excellent survery of what the Holy Spirit does in the live of a believer! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6628 | Please explain | Matt 7:13 | Morant61 | 8515 | ||
Greetings Ezekiel! I am kind of jumping into this issue late in the game, but I wanted to make a couple of observations. There is not any doubt that baptism was an important part of the life of the early church. There is not even any doubt that all Christians should be baptized. However, the question is whether or not baptism plays any role in a Christian’s salvation. There are many Scriptures that can be applied to this question, but allow me to address just a couple. 1 Peter 3:21 says, "and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ," This verse makes three very important points about baptism. First of all, it clearly says that baptism does not remove the dirt from the body. Secondly, it says that baptism is the pledge of a good conscience toward God. The footnote in the NIV says "response of a good conscience." Finally, this verse makes very clear that the source of our salvation is Christ (cf. 1 Peter 1:3.) My denomination (United Brethren in Christ) phrases the role of baptism this way, "Baptism is the outward sign of an inward grace." This is a good summary of 1 Peter 3:21. Baptism is our response to what God has already done in our lives. It doesn’t save us. It will not get us into Heaven, but it is an important part of our Christian life as an outward testimony of what God has done. This point is illustrated in Acts 10. In Acts 10, Peter is preaching the gospel to the household of Cornelius. As he was preaching, Acts 10:44 tells us that the Holy Spirit came upon all those who heard the message and they spoke in tongues, just as the disciples had in Acts 2. This is an important sign that God has extended salvation even to the Gentiles. Notice however what Peter says in v. 47, ‘‘Can anyone keep these people from being baptized with water? They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have." These people had already accepted Christ. They had already been filled with the Holy Spirit. They were Christians. Now, Peter asks if there is any reason why they should not be baptized. Did the baptism save them? Obviously not, since they had already been filled with the Holy Spirit in verse 44. In conclusion, baptism is an important act of faith, but it is not a saving act. Our salvation depends entirely upon the finished work of the cross and not at all on any ritual or act that we can do (Eph. 2:8-9). Consider the case of the thief on the cross. He accepted Christ, but was not baptized. Yet, Jesus said, "Today you will be with me in Paradise." (Luke 23:43). Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6629 | Why no gender-neutral language in NASB? | Bible general Archive 1 | Morant61 | 8513 | ||
Greetings Hank! I agree with you completely. Not only are the original languages not gender neutral, but trying to translate them that way adds a whole layer of interpretation to an already difficult task. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6630 | Is suicide a sin? | Bible general Archive 1 | Morant61 | 8471 | ||
Greetings Hank! We will keep your wife's neice in our prayers! After I posted on this subject, my wife and I were talking about just such a situation. I have been fortunate not to have ever even known anyone who has committed suicide, but I am fully aware that even for Christians there can be medical situations where they may not be fully "in control" of their actions. I am fully confident that our gracious God will continue to be gracious. Amen to your comments! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6631 | How old was Solomon when he wrote etc.? | Song of Solomon | Morant61 | 8411 | ||
Greetings ILoveJesus! So do I :-)! I was waiting to see if anybody else wanted to take a stab at your questions, but no one else has thus far, so I will. 1) I don't think anyone knows how old Solomon was when he wrote these three books. He must have been king by this time. He had children at the time he wrote Proverbs. And, he was probably older when he wrote Ecclesiastes, since it expresses what appears to be a more "mature" view of life. But, no one reallys knows his exact age. 2) He probably was married many times over when he wrote these books. It is important to understand two points about these multiple marriages. A) It was the political custom of the time to use marriages to cement alliances with other nations. This doesn't make it morally right, but it was the culture that Solomon lived in. B) Scripture is written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit through the pens of normal humans. Solomon's life definitely didn't measure up to the beautiful love expressed in the Song of Songs, but that is to be expected. Even if Solomon had only been married to one woman, his life still would not have measured up to the ideal expressed in Scripture. I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6632 | Is suicide a sin? | Bible general Archive 1 | Morant61 | 8409 | ||
Greetings Saul! This is always a touchy issue with people. It is the kind of question that many wonder about because they have had friends or family who have committed suicide. So, naturally there is an emotional element to the question for many. I agree with everything JVHO212 said in his response to your question, but I would like to add one point. An act of sin does not cause us to lose our salvation, just as an act of righteousness does not gain us salvation. Scripture is very clear that we cannot earn salvation. It is a free gift (Rom. 6:23) and it is by grace (Eph. 2:8-9). All of us would agree with this point. Yet, for some reason, when we start asking questions about the salvation of someone who has committed suicide, we suddenly change the parameters. I realize that your question didn't do this since you simply asked if suicide would "condemn a soul to eternity apart from God?". Our salvation is based upon God's grace, not our works. So, I believe that if a Christian committed suicide, that he would not "lose" his salvation. To say otherwise would be to say that he could "unearn" salvation when we all would agree that he can't "earn" it. In fact, I don't believe that a Christian can "lose" his or her salvation. To "lose" something implies an accident. I believe that our salvation is assured by Christ's atoning work on the cross. Therefore, as long as we are "in Him" we can never be lost. Now, as an Arminian, I do believe that a Christian can knowingly reject Christ (Heb. 6:6) and no longer be in Christ. But this is a willful choice, not a "losing" of salvation. p.s. - This principle would apply to all single acts of sin. If I was angry and someone and then got hit by a car, I would not "lose" my salvation. If I told a lie and then fell off of a building, I would not "lose" my salvation. I can't do anything to earn salvaiton, neither can I "do" anything to unearn it. My salvation is totally based upon the mercy and grace of God. Special Note: By these statements, I am not implying that sin has no consequences. Sin can cause us to lose our effectiveness in minsitry (how many pastors have fallen into sin?). Acts of sin can lead to patterns of sin. Patterns of sin can lead to a hardened heart that rejects Christ (Heb. 3:12). Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6633 | Cities of Judah or Cities of Demons? | Genesis | Morant61 | 8387 | ||
Greetings Heir of God! I really appreciate your attitude. I was kind of surprized by the responses I've been getting about Benny Hinn. But, you have been a gentleman. To answer your question, the earth referred to in Jer. 4:23 is prophetic. This is an example of what is called apocalypic symbolism. Jeremiah is drawing from the imagery of creation and describing the devastation brought upon Judah by the wrath of God as a complete undoing of creation. It is similar to God's wrath as described in Rev. 6:12-17: 12 I watched as he opened the sixth seal. There was a great earthquake. The sun turned black like sackcloth made of goat hair, the whole moon turned blood red, 13 and the stars in the sky fell to earth, as late figs drop from a fig tree when shaken by a strong wind. 14 The sky receded like a scroll, rolling up, and every mountain and island was removed from its place. 15 Then the kings of the earth, the princes, the generals, the rich, the mighty, and every slave and every free man hid in caves and among the rocks of the mountains. 16 They called to the mountains and the rocks, ‘‘Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb! 17 For the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand?”" Notice that this text says that the text says that stars fell from the heavens and that the sky receded like a scroll. Yet, throughout the rest of Revelation there are still stars and a sky. This is another example of apocalyptic symbolism. It was a common and sympolic method used to describe earth shattering events, like God's judgement. So, in Jer. 4:23-26, Jeremiah is simply using apocalypic symbolism to say that when God gets done with Judah, it will be as if creation itself has been undone. Regarding the "no man" phrase, it is simply another way of saying that no one will live there anymore. In fact, look at Jer. 4:29 which actually says that the towns are deserted. It would be profitable to read all of the prophecy in it's context. The whole passage extends from Jeremiah 2 through Jeremiah 6. It gives a very complete description of why God is bringing judgement upon Judah and a promise that He will not destroy them completly. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6634 | Cities of Judah or Cities of Demons? | Genesis | Morant61 | 8384 | ||
Greetings Shogun! I was in full agreement with your earlier post about Jer. 4:23. You were exactly right about the context! But, I'm not sure how to respond to your current post since I'm not a Calvinist! :-) As I've mentioned several times, minor differences in theology are to be expected. However, Benny Hinn's theology is so far out, I don't believe that he is preaching the God of the Bible. He's preaching what people what to hear and he is a fraud. People need to hear the truth of the Gospel, not fairy tales told to Benny Hinn by the ghost of Kathyrn Kullman (sp?), as he recently claimed. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6635 | Why did Paul and Barnabas disagree? | Acts 15:38 | Morant61 | 8381 | ||
Greetings Nolan! This is a very interesting study! I have often wondered if both Paul's and Barnabas's responses to John Mark were essential to his future ministry. Barnabas gave him the support that he needed, while Paul gave him the wake up call that he needed. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6636 | What Cities are Refered to in Jer. 4:26? | Genesis | Morant61 | 8376 | ||
Greetings DocSpock! Welcome to the forum! Since I was the one who first criticized Benny Hinn (at least on this thread), I would like to respond to your thoughtful post. There are many non-essential doctrines and teachings upon which many of us can disagree agreeably. If you follow many of the threads on this forum, you will see many points of view. This is a good thing. However, some teachers fall into the category of false teachers. I believe this is the case with Benny Hinn. You obviously don't agree. But there is Biblical precedent for exposing false teachers. Consider 2 John 9-11. The whole letter deals with false teachers, but verses 9-11 in particular warn about having anything to do with false teachers or contributing in any way to their ministry. The reason Benny Hinn was brought into this thread is that he was the one teaching the Jer. 4:23 refered to Demon cities before Adam was created. Consider the following outlandish teachings that Benny Hinn has expoused: a) That Christians are gods: Benny Hinn, Our Position In Christ, tape # AO31190-1 b) That he is a 'little messiah': Benny Hinn, "Praise-a-Thon" on TBN, November 6, 1990 c) That Adam was a super being who could fly: Benny Hinn, Praise the Lord program on TBN, December 26, 1991 d) That each member of the Trinity has a body, soul, and spirit: Benny Hinn, Benny Hinn program on TBN October 3, 1991 e) That we are not human: Benny Hinn, Our Position in Christ #2-The Word Made Flesh (Orlando: Orlando Christian Center, 1991), videotape #255. f) That Jesus was capable of sinning: Benny Hinn, Good Morning, Holy Spirit (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1990), 135-36. g) That Jesus took on the nature of Satan: Benny Hinn, Benny Hinn program on TBN (December 15, 1990). h) That Jesus had to be reborn spiritually: Benny Hinn, Our Position 'In Christ,' Part 1 (Orlando, FL: Orlando Christian Center, 1991), videotape #TV-254. These were all taken from the following web site: http://www.gospelcom.net/apologeticsindex/h01.html#quotes I always try to extend the love and grace of Christ to everyone, but this man is a false teacher. He is negatively impacting hundreds of thousands of people through his "ministry". Therefore, I feel that it is entirely approriate to address his false teachings. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6637 | Who wrote the letter to the Hebrews? | Hebrews | Morant61 | 8372 | ||
Greetings Nolan! I agree with you. The strongest case can probably be made for Barnabas! I like the idea of Apollos being the author, but I realize there is not any evidence for it. Normally I don't agree with those who argue against Pauline authorship based upon style, but in this case I think they are right. Usually there is strong external evidence for Pauline authorship, but not in this case. Whoever the author, Hebrews is definitely a powerful letter. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6638 | Who wrote the letter to the Hebrews? | Hebrews | Morant61 | 8358 | ||
Greetings Stobor! I have been doing some reading on this question. Apparently, even the early church fathers had no clue who wrote the Letter to the Hebrews. A few late references mention that some thought Paul may have written it. One early African reference mentions Barnabas as being the author. Origen even wrote about the authorship of Hebrews, "But who wrote the Epistle God only knows certainly." The list of prospective authors over the years include: Paul, Barnabas, Luke, Clement, Silvanus, Apollos, Philip, and Priscilla. So, the external evidence is very inconclusive. The internal evidence suggests that Paul was not the author, based upon sytle. The most telling point I could find was the Heb. 2:3 seems to indicate that the author wot someone who personally knew the Lord. Paul, even though he was not a disciple of Christ, received his commission directly from Christ, so he probably would not have described his introduction to the Gospel in the manner found in Heb. 2:3. All we know for sure is that the author was acquainted with Timothy (13:23). Every position is a guess at this point. I have always been fond of the opinion that Apollos may have written this letter. There is not a single shred of evidence to support that position, so I am not dogmatic on it. Like Origen, I would say that only God knows in this case. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6639 | Cities of Judah or Cities of Demons? | Genesis | Morant61 | 8347 | ||
Greetings Heir of God! Thank you for such a polite response! If I may, allow me to deal with two of your points (the context of Jer. 4 and Benny Hinn's ministry.) 1) The context of Jer. 4. The word town is used 3 times in Jer. 4 (.vv. 7, 26, and 29.) The context makes it very clear that the towns refered to our in Judah. Verse 5 talks about warning Judah and Jerusalem. The warning is about destruction coming from the north (v. 6) in the form of a destroyer of nations who will lay waste to their land and ruin their cities (v. 7). Verse 8 tells them to lament God's wrath on them. Verses 9-10 talk about the false prophets who said that Judah would have peace when even now the sword is at their throats. Verse 16 talks about a besieging army from the north which is raising a war cry against the cities of Judah. Verse 20 talks about the land lying in ruins. Why or how, in light of this context, would Jer. 4:23-26 suddenly change meaning and refer to cities in exitistance long before Adam? Jer. 4:23-26 is clearly an apocolyptic description of God's judgement upon Judah. There is no mention of demons. There is no mention of a time before Adam. However, there is constant mention throughout Jer. 4 of Judah and her cities. The problem I have with Benny Hinn is exactly this kind of teaching. There is not a shred of evidence to support what he is saying. But the problem even goes beyond this one issue. His theology is constantly this messed up. I wouldn't trust anything he says on any issue. 2) Concerning messengers of God: There are many "messengers" with whom I don't agree on every point, but they are solid in their theology and ministry. However, I believe that Benny Hinn is a complete fraud. I don't say that lightly. If you are interested, we can examine his theology point by point. I only say this to you (and to others reading on this forum) because I believe this man is dangerous to the faith. Even if we don't agree about the man, I appreciate your positive attitude. I look forward to your response. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6640 | EXPLAIN REPLENISH | Genesis | Morant61 | 8284 | ||
Greetings Hank! Excellent observations! The problem has spread through all levels of Christianity. Most people are too lazy or apathetic to really dig into Scripture. As Paul said 2 Tim. 4:3, we have itching ears. The good news is that tools like this forum can help promote disciplined Bible study. Your posts are good examples for all of us to follow. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 ] Next > Last [339] >> |