Results 6741 - 6760 of 6770
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Morant61 Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
6741 | Is there evil durning the MR? | Rev 20:7 | Morant61 | 46382 | ||
Greetings Runningbear! I think that Is. 55:3-5 gives us some insight into the purpose and nature of the Millenial Kingdom. "Give ear and come to me; hear me, that your soul may live. I will make an everlasting covenant with you, my faithful love promised to David. 4 See, I have made him a witness to the peoples, a leader and commander of the peoples. 5 Surely you will summon nations you know not, and nations that do not know you will hasten to you, because of the LORD your God, the Holy One of Israel, for he has endowed you with splendor.”" Personally, I believe that the main purpose of the Millenial Kingdom is to fulfill God's covenant with Israel. She will be front and center, so to speak, for the 1,000 years. Now, how does this answer your question? Simply this: the world will be a mix of spiritual and physical. I don't believe that sin will be gone, but only that Christ's physical presence and reign will subdue it. So, when Satan is released again, many will follow their sinful natures and go after him. In the New Heaven and the New Earth, there will not be any more sin. I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6742 | Who are the Gog and Magog? | Rev 20:8 | Morant61 | 21236 | ||
Scripture............................................. Greetings Joy! The phrase "Gog and Magog" occurs in only places in the Bible. It is found in Rev. 20:8 and in Ez. 38:2. Both passages refer to battles, but they appear to be different battles. Ez. 38 involves only a few nations, while Rev. 20 involves the entire world. Ez. 38 appears to be fought in the end times, while Rev. 20 is fought after the millenium. The phrase itself is difficult to understand. Gog basically refers to the ruler, while Magog refers to the people ruled by Gog. Most feel that God is to be identified with Gyges, king of Lydia (c. 660 bc) Thus, Rev. 20:8 cannot be refering to the same person, since he died several thousand years ago. Most feel therefore, that the phrase "Gog and Magog" has taken on sort of a symbolic meaning for "distant enemies." I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6743 | Who are the Gog and Magog? | Rev 20:8 | Morant61 | 21275 | ||
Greetings Ed! I really don't have any personal knowledge on this issue. I consulted both the Harper Bible Dictonary and the New Bible Dictionary about Gog. Both listed the most likely identification as King Gyges. I don't think anyone knows for sure though. It was the same case with the areas of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal. No one reallys know for sure where they are. Given current events, Islam would be an interestings possiblity! :-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6744 | Millions led by Satan equal Goat Nations | Rev 20:8 | Morant61 | 126023 | ||
Greetings Alanh! Tenses in Greek are not quite as cut and dried as you present in your post. Prophetic events can be spoken of in the past tense. Future events can be spoken of in the present tense. Context is the best indicator. The Aorist tense is generally a past tense, but the time of the action is not the most important feature of the tense. There are several well recongnized uses of the Aorist tense. 1) The Gnomic Aorist is an event or occurance regarded as so certain that it is spoken of as already completed. Examples Jn. 15:8, Lk, 7:35, and 1 Pet. 1:24 (Dana and Mantey) 2) The Epistolary Aorist is where a writer would place himself at the viewpoint of his reader and use the aorist indicate to describe an event which was present or even future to him. Examples Phs. 2:28, Acts 23:30, and Col. 4:8. So, it cannot be argued simply that things in the aorist tense must have already happened. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6745 | Millions led by Satan equal Goat Nations | Rev 20:8 | Morant61 | 126025 | ||
Greetings Again Alanh! After I posted my response, I saw something else that I wanted to comment upon. You wrote: "First: "They lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years." It does not mention the second coming of Christ, a bodily resurrection, a reign on earth, or a literal throne in Jerusalem or elsewhere. It does not mention us, and it does not mention Christ on earth. Revelaton 20 mentions none of these things, and a curse was pronounced on the one who add to the words of this book (revelation 22:18)." Are these statements accurate? 1) Many believe that Rev. 19:11-16 is a description of the second coming. 2) Wouldn't Rev. 20:4 qualify as a bodily ressurection? I know of no other way to come to life! :-) 3) Jerusalem is not specifically mentioned in Rev. 20, but thrones are mentioned. 4) Earth is certainly mentioned! V. 3 speaks of the nations and v. 7 also speaks of the nations and the four corners of the earth as the enemy marches against God's people in the city He loves. 5) We are mentioned. Rev. 19:14 speaks of us coming with Christ. How do I know it us? Look at Rev. 19:8. 6) Finally, 'they lived and reigned' refers only to those who died during the tribulation and were raised, the rest of the church has already been raptured by this point. Further, there is no grammatical reason to limit the 'living' with the phrase 'a thousand years'. It is closest in proximity and follows 'they reigned', not 'they lived'. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6746 | Millions led by Satan equal Goat Nations | Rev 20:8 | Morant61 | 126128 | ||
Greetings Alanah! Yet, Scripture does not limit the thousand years to only those beheaded. It only limits the resurrection at the beginning of the 1000 years to those who were beheaded. As I pointed out, there is other Scripture to indicate that the rest of the believers were resurrected prior to this time and come back with Christ. Secondly, I also pointed out that the 1,000 years is grammatically connected to 'reigning' not living. So, it is not true that the 'living' ends with the thousand years. The Greek is quite clear on this point. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6747 | Millions led by Satan equal Goat Nations | Rev 20:8 | Morant61 | 126130 | ||
Excellent quote Kalos! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6748 | Death | Rev 20:14 | Morant61 | 7769 | ||
Greetings Cepas! I was reading this thread, and I noticed that the word "destroyed" suddenly appeared. I was wondering where did you get it from? The text of Rev. 20:13-15 makes it clear that Death and Hades both refer to a state of existence. In vs. 13, these abodes of the dead give up the dead that are in them for judgement. So in verse 14, it is the people who are in Death and Hades that are thrown into the Lake of Fire, not the abodes themselves. This is made clear in verse 15, where we are informed that anyone who is not listed in the Book of Life is thrown into the Lake of Fire. However, none of these verses says that anyone or anything is destroyed. Tim Moran |
||||||
6749 | Why Destroyed? | Rev 20:14 | Morant61 | 7772 | ||
Greetings Cepas! Thanks for the quick response! Verse 14 could definitely refer to the abode as well as their inhabitants. My question would be though: How does an abode get thrown in the Lake of Fire? The easiest answer seems to be that they are personifications. Thus, references to them refer to the individuals within them. But I could be wrong! The main point though concerns the word "destroyed." I think (though I can't realy speak for anyone else) that many of the responders to your original post think that you are fishing for a preconceived answer (i.e. - that people in the Lake of Fire are destroyed, and not tormented for eternity.) So I ask directly, why do you make the inference that Death and Hades are destroyed? Thanks, Tim Moran |
||||||
6750 | Did Christ die the "second" death for us | Rev 20:14 | Morant61 | 18448 | ||
Greetings Peter! You are to be commended for a very teachable attitude. We should always examine our beliefs in light of Scripture. To answer your question, your friend at church is correct. The "second death" is mentioned four times in the NIV. 1) Rev. 2:11 - "He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. He who overcomes will not be hurt at all by the second death." 2) Rev. 20:6 - "Blessed and holy are those who have part in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years." 3) Rev. 20:14 - "Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death." 4) Rev. 21:8 - " But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death.”" The last two references are the most important concerning your question. The "second death" is a reference to the final judgement of all those who reject Christ. It is literally what we think of when we use the term "Hell." You are correct that Christ died as our substitute. However, He has not been nor will He be consigned to an eternity in hell. I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6751 | Hell/Lake of Fire | Rev 20:14 | Morant61 | 171731 | ||
Greetings Winningside! Here is an older post of mine that deals with this question. I hope it is helpful. ********** Allow me to explain my point, but first let me emphasis that I do believe in an eternal punishment in Hell for the wicked. The only problem is that the KJV (along with several other translations) translates four different words as 'hell'. This leads to much confusion over who is in hell, when, why, ect... Here are the four different words: In Hebrew (Sheol) and in Greek (Hades, Tartarus, and Gehenna). Allow me to briefly describe each term. 1) Sheol: Hebrew only uses one word to describe the state of the dead. This word can simply refer to death or the grave in general or it can refer to the spiritual status of all the dead. Prov. 9:18 says of Sheol - "But little do they know that the dead are there, that her guests are in the depths of the grave." Thus, Sheol is a place where all the dead go. Ps. 9:17 says that Sheol is a place where the wicked go - "The wicked return to the grave, all the nations that forget God." However, even godly Jacob expected to go to Sheol according to Gen. 44:29 - " If you take this one from me too and harm comes to him, you will bring my gray head down to the grave in misery.?" And, Ps. 89:48 affirms that all men will go to Sheol - "What man can live and not see death, or save himself from the power of the grave? Selah" Thus, this Old Testament word is best translated as 'Death' or the 'Grave' and simply refers to the state of all men at death. It does not refer to what we think of as 'Hell' in the sense of an eternal place of conscience punisment. 2) Hades: This is the New Testament equivalent of Sheol. It has much the same meaning as did Sheol with one exception. That exception being that the New Testament fills the meaning out with the passage to which you refered. Thus, we discover in Luke 16:20-31 that there are compartments in Sheol/Hades. There is a place of punishment where the wicked go to await final judgement and there is a paradise side, Abraham's bosom, where the righteous go to await salvation. This paradise side is now empty. After the death of Christ, complete atonement was made for sin and all those who died 'in Christ' went to be with Him in Heaven. Notice that Jesus did not tell the thief on the cross that he would be with Him in Heaven today, becase Heaven was not available until after the resurrection of Christ. The wicked dead still go to the punishment side of Sheol/Hades and will remain there until the Great White Throne of Judgement. 3) Tartarus: This word is only found once in the Bible. 2 Peter 2:4 desribes it as a place where certain Angels were placed until judgement. Some believe that it may be a lower part of Sheol/Hades. 4) Gehenna: This word describes what we commonly think of as Hell. It is used 12 times in the New Testament and describes a place of punishment, fire, and condemnation. I believe that Gehenna is also refered to in Rev. 20:11-15, where it is called a 'lake of fire'. However, note that this passage teaches that those in Sheol/Hades will be judged and then place into the 'lake of fire'. Thus, no one is actually in Hell right now! This is part of the reason why it is unBiblical to say that Jesus descended into Hell after His death. He went into Sheol/Hades (or the Grave), where Scripture foretold that God the Father would not leave Him. He went to paradise (possibly the prison of 1 Peter 3:9), but there is not any Scripture which says that He went to Hell. *********** Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6752 | Hell/Lake of Fire | Rev 20:14 | Morant61 | 171783 | ||
Greetings Alanah! The exact text of your post can be found at: http://www.mwchurchofchrist.com/pages/articles/aftdeath.htm It is copywrited by the Mineral Wells Church of Christ. Do you hold the copywrite on this material? Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6753 | Hell/Lake of Fire | Rev 20:14 | Morant61 | 171787 | ||
Sorry! ;-) p.s. to all - If you ever think that your child, or someone else, may have 'borrowed' someone else's work, simply pick out a distinctive sentence and using quotation marks, enter it into your search engine. Usually, you will find the work 'borrowed' right away. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6754 | Hell/Lake of Fire | Rev 20:14 | Morant61 | 171827 | ||
Greetings Hank! :-) It would probably suprise us all how often two people think the same thoughts! :-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6755 | Hell/Lake of Fire | Rev 20:14 | Morant61 | 171841 | ||
Greetings Kalos! I am glad the info was helpful! :-) I forget where I first found out about this 'trick', but it does come in handy. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6756 | Rev 21:6 | Rev 21:6 | Morant61 | 214420 | ||
Greetings AmO14! While the Peshitta is certainly a valuable textual tradition and worthy of study, the majority opinion of scholars is that it was translated from the Greek text about the 5th century. F. F. Bruce describes it's history this way: "About AD 170 an Assyrian Christian named Tatian turned the fourfold Gospel into a continuous narrative or 'Harmony of the Gospels,' which for long was the favourite if not the official form of the fourfold Gospel in the Assyrian Church. It was distinct from the four Gospels in the Old Syriac version. It is not certain whether Tatian originally composed his Harmony, usually known as the Diatessaron, in Greek or in Syriac; but as it seems to have been compiled at Rome its original language was probably Greek, and a fragment of Tatian's Diatessaron in Greek was discovered in the year 1933 at Dura-Europos on the Euphrates. At any rate, it was given to the Assyrian Christians in a Syriac form when Tatian returned home from Rome, and this Syriac Diatessaron remained the 'Authorised Version' of the Gospels for them until it was replaced by the Peshitta or 'simple' version in the fifth century." Some newer evidence pushes the date back some, but there is no evidence to suggest that the Peshitta was the original manuscripts and that the Greek was translated from them. There are early church fathers who claim that Matthew originally wrote in Hebrew (not Aramaic), but these claims are unclear at best. Did they mean his gospel was originally in Hebrew or did they mean that some other writing of his was written in Hebrew? Either way, there is no manuscript evidence of this writing. Even if he did write his gospel in Hebrew, this does not mean that all of the New Testament was originally written in something other than Greek. :-) p.s. - For anyone interested in the original manuscripts and early versions, here is a link to an interesting and informative page: http://www.angelfire.com/sc3/myredeemer/Evidencep9.html Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6757 | what does second death mean? | Rev 21:8 | Morant61 | 24845 | ||
Scripture................................... Greetings Toto! The phrase "second death" is only used four times in the Bible. All four occurances are in the book of Revelation. Two of the verses define who will not be effected by the second death. Two of the verses define the second death. Here are the two which define who will not be effected by the second death. 1) Rev. 2:11 - "He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. He who overcomes will not be hurt at all by the second death." 2) Rev. 20:6 - "Blessed and holy are those who have part in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years." Here are the two which define the second death. 3) Rev. 20:14 - "Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death." 4) Rev. 21:8 - "But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death." Thus, the second death refers to what we would normally think of as hell. It is the final destination of all those who have rejected Christ. Those who have accepted Christ will never experience the second death because it is primarily enteral seperation from God. I hope this helps! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6758 | Spritual or Physical ? | Rev 21:8 | Morant61 | 24958 | ||
Greetings Toto! Since the "second death" is speaking of Hell, I would say that it is more spiritual than physical. Most who are thrown into the lake of fire have already died physically, while some may have still been alive. I think the key point is that this will be an eternal seperation from God. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6759 | Will unbelievers be raised from Sheol? | Rev 21:8 | Morant61 | 32001 | ||
Greetings Joe! Excellent post my friend! A little outline I have used in the past on Romans 1-3 is this: Romans 1 - The Pagan is lost because he rejects the testimony of nature itself. Romans 2 - The Jew is lost because he rejects the testimony of the Law. Romans 3 - Therefore, there is none righteous for we all have sinned. You made an excellent point, the purpose of Romans 1-3 is to utterly condemn us and point us to the way of faith in chapter 4. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6760 | Will sin enter heaven? | Rev 21:17 | Morant61 | 140832 | ||
Greetings BradK! I hope you don't mind if I jump in on the sanctification question! I don't accept the common view that Christians still have 'two' competing natures that we must struggle with the rest of our lives. I reject this view because of Rom. 6, which makes it very clear that the power of sin 'has' been broken in our lives if we are in Christ. Here is a previous post of mine on this question: ************************************* I agree with your point that it is POSSIBLE to live without sin, but I think the term "entire sanctification" brings up a lot of baggage when people read it. So, without appealing to the term, let's look at what Romans 6 actually says: In Romans 6, Paul makes the case that it is possible to be holy. He says there that: · We died to sin - Rom. 6:2. · Our old nature was crucified with Him - Rom. 6:6. · We are no longer slaves to sin - Rom. 6:6. · We are not to let sin reign in our mortal bodies - Rom. 6:12. · Sin shall not be our master - Rom. 6:14. · We have been set free from sin - Rom. 6:18. If Christians are incapable of holiness, then in what sense did we die to sin? In what sense, are we no longer it's slaves? If it is not possible to avoid sin, how can Paul command us not to yield to it? The point that Paul is making, and that most people seem to miss, is that we have changed in Christ. Apart from Him, we were slaves to sin. It's power over us was absolute. In Him, we are no longer sin's slaves. It's power is not irresistable. Thus, Paul is not saying that it is NEVER possible for a Chritian to sin! We all know that we do. There are times when we yield to sin and temptation and commit acts of sin. But, as Christians it is no longer impossible for us to resist sin. It's power has been broken in our lives. If we abide in Him, moment by moment, and refuse to yield to sin, we can live holy lives. Does this mean that we can be sinlessly perfect? No! We are still human. We will at times sin in ignorance. We will at times sin out of willfulness. But, sin's has been broken in Christ and we no longer HAVE to sin. We will sin when and only when we choose to sin! Thus, the problem is one of our will. Entire sanctification basically teaches that we can come to a moment in our Christian lives when we fully consecrate ourselves to God. As long as we remain fully consecrated, we won't will to sin. Therefore, we will not yield to it. But, we can still sin if we choose. Thus, it seems to me that there are two unBiblical extremes which must be avoided: 1) The belief that we cannot help but to sin. 2) The belief that it is impossible for us to sin. (Note: Even entire sanctification doesn't teach that it is impossible to sin!) ************************************* So, I would argue that it is POSSIBLE to not sin this side of Heaven, but that it is also possible for a Christian to sin this side of Heaven. The 'old man' has been crucified already, he is not simply hanging out on death row using up his appeals! ;-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 ] Next > Last [339] >> |