Results 6881 - 6900 of 6970
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Hank Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
6881 | what about the K J V | Rev 3:10 | Hank | 25059 | ||
Nolan, on my own behalf, and likely on behalf of many other forum users as well, many thanks for taking the time and thought to give us your rating of the various versions. I'm a trifle put out with myself that I didn't ask you to include The Message and the Cotton-Patch Gospel in your list, but maybe later, huh? :-). In Isaiah 7:14 it's interesting that the ESV translates "virgin", whereas the Revised English Bible and, I believe, the NRSV also, use "young woman." NASB, NKJV and NIV all translate "virgin." Well, thanks again, Nolan, for the informative post. --Hank | ||||||
6882 | what about the K J V | Rev 3:10 | Hank | 25094 | ||
But of course! Amen, Joe. --Hank | ||||||
6883 | what about the K J V | Rev 3:10 | Hank | 25095 | ||
Joe, while you await your Veggie Tales Study Bible, I look forward to the Study Bible for Retired Insurance People Who Live in Arkansas. I want my very own study Bible, tailored specifically to MY needs. Don't laugh. Both yours and mine should hit the press any day now. Didn't Solomon say something along the lines of, To the making of study Bibles and Bible translations there is no end? Offhand, I forget the translation which says that. But it, like the dust-jacket blurb says on them all, is the most accurate and readable yet to appear in the English language! --Hank | ||||||
6884 | what about the K J V | Rev 3:10 | Hank | 25128 | ||
Kalos, while the MacArthur Study Bible, as you note, isn't the only one out there, and may not even be the best by every measure, I would be hard pressed indeed to recommend any other that I would consider more excellent. But I'd nominate as one coming in at a very close second the NIV Study Bible or its clone, the NASB Study Bible, which contains virtually the same notes adapted to the NASB text. The study Bible that was expressly formatted to drive me nuts is the "Bible of many colors" -- the Rainbow Study Bible. --Hank | ||||||
6885 | Jesus Created or Creator??? | Rev 3:14 | Hank | 96131 | ||
Radioman - Once a false doctrinal premise is adopted, it is remarkable how many verses of Scripture can be made to SEEM to support it. If one imagined God to be Santa Claus, I suppose he could twist a sufficient number of scriptural passages to lend this cock-eyed notion enough credence among the guillible to start another cult. And we do need another cult! :-) --Hank | ||||||
6886 | Jesus Created or Creator??? | Rev 3:14 | Hank | 96295 | ||
CDBJ - RSVP ASAP who R.B.T. is :-) -HGH (Hank) | ||||||
6887 | Jesus is wisdom argument leads nowhere. | Rev 3:14 | Hank | 96911 | ||
Truthfinder - If your Christology is correct -- and I do not for a moment believe that it is -- then John 10:30 makes Jesus out to be the biggest, blackest, most blasphemous liar who has ever walked on the face of the earth. --Hank | ||||||
6888 | At whose door is Christ knocking? | Rev 3:20 | Hank | 5161 | ||
At whose door is Christ knocking in Revelation 3:20? | ||||||
6889 | At whose door is Christ knocking? | Rev 3:20 | Hank | 5445 | ||
Dear JVH, what a joy it is, and rare, to read a sound, reasonable, and accurate exegesis of a passage from God's word! --Hank | ||||||
6890 | Significance of emerald in Bible? | Rev 4:3 | Hank | 82644 | ||
Andy, the Apostle in Revelation 4:3 takes us back to references of the Old Testament rainbow. See Ezek.1:28 and Gen.9:12-17. There is no reason to believe that the rainbow that surrounded the throne, in this instance dominated by emerald-green hues, is any less symbolic of God's fidelity to His Word, His promises, and His covenants than it was in the days of Noah. --Hank | ||||||
6891 | Why did God create man? | Rev 4:11 | Hank | 68082 | ||
Lionstrong: Bless you, brother, and my avid thanks on this Thanksgiving eve for a wonderful, scripturally-rooted answer to the user's question. I toyed around with the idea of answering it, but yours is far better than what I had sketched out in my mind. Peace in the Lamb to you and here's wishing you and yours a happy Thanksgiving Day. --Hank | ||||||
6892 | how can catholics be saved | Rev 6:10 | Hank | 36160 | ||
Emmaus, you know what? I half-way suspected all along that Catholics are saved the way everyone else is!:-) But thanks for clearing the issue up with the questioner. Salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ is a ground that ALL regenerated believers share in common. --Hank | ||||||
6893 | how can catholics be saved | Rev 6:10 | Hank | 36194 | ||
Why yes, Emmaus, it is! It's enough to take the warts right off'n a frog! Theologically speaking, I mean. --Hank | ||||||
6894 | Who are the 144000? Is it literal | Rev 7:4 | Hank | 82717 | ||
The "144" in your user name wouldn't have anything to do with the 144,000, now would it? You have stated in a former post that you are not a Jehovah's Witness. Your user profile is blank. So with what religious body (if any) do you associate yourself and what are your core beliefs? This information would be of enormous help to other users of this forum in their efforts to interact with you. --Hank | ||||||
6895 | What would prompt these tears? | Rev 7:17 | Hank | 121247 | ||
Angel: You certainly don't understand Mommapbs correctly! Your 'inference machine' is out of whack and needs repairs. Mommapbs has made many posts to this Forum. To the best of my knowledge and belief she has never advocated cheap grace or said that Christ died so that we would be free to wallow in the mire of our sin and degradation. At the very least you should review Mommapbs' posts and see for yourself what she actually believes and, having done that, admit to your faulty inference. It wouldn't hurt a thing for you to apologize to Mommapbs for your unwholesome innuendo and insinuation. A good rule on this Forum, and in life, is to know what you're talking about before you start talking! --Hank | ||||||
6896 | What would prompt these tears? | Rev 7:17 | Hank | 121274 | ||
Mommapbs: Thank you for this post. I believe it is totally biblical and endorse it. As I read some of the posts made to this Forum, I'm compelled to believe that some professing Christians are unwilling or unable to disembarrass their souls of the idea that man's works play a decisive role in his own salvation. To the extent that they believe this they diminish in their own minds the significance of the only act in the history of the world that is capable of bringing salvation to anyone, i.e., the finished work of Christ on the cross. Why can't they understand that justification before God is made possible only by the finished work of His dear Son, totally apart from any works man can possibly do? Mommapbs, I could repent from now till the cows come home and still not be able to do one solitary thing to save my sorry soul. I could do good works from sunrise to sunset every day of my life and still die in my sins and go to hell. I am saved, a regenerated believer, not because I deserve it, not because I repent of my sins every day, not because I do good works. I am saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. Good works, living a life of obedience and holiness are components of progressive sanctification. They are not, I say NOT, components of justification. Why, I ask again rhetorically, why can't man step down from his good works pedestal and believe in the all sufficiency of God's grace? Why does he feel compelled to keep his hand on the salvation throttle? Why can't he let go and let God handle his salvation? My mind is at the end of its tether on this. I cannot understand how man can think that he, not God, is in charge of his salvation. Man didn't get this doctrine from God's word, that's for sure. Bless you, dear Mommapbs. --Hank | ||||||
6897 | What would prompt these tears? | Rev 7:17 | Hank | 121335 | ||
Tim: Amen! Yes, saved by God's gift of grace. not works, so that no one may boast. [Eph 2:8,9]. --Hank | ||||||
6898 | What would prompt these tears? | Rev 7:17 | Hank | 121358 | ||
Rowdy: One of the fruits of all my years on this earth is the realization that there are well-intentioned people who, no matter what Ephesians 2:8,9 says, no matter what the Bible doctrine of salvation by grace says, no matter how strong the clear Bible evidence is that man's righteousness is as filty rags to the holy God [Isaiah 64:6], no matter that God gave His Son and His Son gave shed his blood as atonement for man's sins past, present, and future -- no matter what -- they simply will not trust the promises of God enough to entrust Him fully with their salvation. Simply put, they just don't get it. They do not understand the doctrines of grace. They really don't comprehend the work of the Holy Spirit in regeneration and His indwelling work of sanctification in the life of the regnerate believer. And beyond a certain point it becomes apparent that further discussion with people who avidly espouse works-based salvation is fruitless. And Rowdy, the doctrine of salvation by grace alone is not a philosophy in any sense. It is based not on man's philosophy but solely on God's word. The doctrine of salvation by works definitely IS man's philosophy, man's invention; it is a thread common to all major religions except orthodox Christianity. The views you described in the first item on your list are decidedly not represenative of those the regenerate believer holds. No regenerate believer views God's gift of salvation, His salvation by grace, merely as a free ticket to heaven. "Cheap grace" is what Bonhoeffer called it, and cheap grace, as Bonhoeffer pointed out, is not what the Bible teaches. The regenerate believer is created in Christ Jesus for good works (Ephesians 2:10), and the doctrines of grace do not in any sense abrogate the Christian's responsibility to lead a godly life, to "be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord." [1 Cor. 15:58]. Nevertheless, leading a godly life and abounding in good works do not save us (only the blood of Christ can do that), and they do not guarantee our salvaton, they do not tighten it, seal it, make it more secure. God has already done that for the born-again believer. "(God) also sealed us and gave us the Spirit in our hearts as a pledge [2 Corinthians 1:22]. ...... Rowdy, someone else may wish to address the remaining four points of your post, but I will pass. They cover ground that has been plowed many times over with you on which I and a number of other users have sown seeds. I can think of no cogent reason to do anything but stand aside let the ground bear fruit, if indeed the ground is fertile and the seeds germinate. I see no sense to be made of continuing to spar with you on this, of bouncing the ping-pong ball back and forth on it. A parting note on your fifth point. There is no man who can escape condemnation if all he can offer as atonement for his sins are his works. "Just as I am without one plea, but that Thy blood was shed for me." There is nothing under the sun that can save anyone but the blood of Jesus Christ. --Hank | ||||||
6899 | What would prompt these tears? | Rev 7:17 | Hank | 121366 | ||
Rowdy, as far as I know the idea of this Forum originated in the minds of the big brass at the Lockman Foundation. It is my understanding that the late Dewey Lockman, founder of the Foundation, believed in salvation by grace :-) --Hank | ||||||
6900 | What would prompt these tears? | Rev 7:17 | Hank | 121369 | ||
Rowdy: The etymology of the word "theology" is enlightening. The first stem "the" goes back to the root word "theos" in Greek, meaning "God." The second stem "ology" goes back to the root word "logos" in Greek, meaning "word." That gives us "God-word." Compare John 1:1: "In the beginning was the was the Word [logos], and the Word [logos] was with God [theos], and the Word [logos] was God [theos]. So, what do you think now of the word "theology"? --Hank | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 ] Next > Last [349] >> |