Results 7481 - 7500 of 7732
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: kalos Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
7481 | Why was Abraham called the friend of God | Not Specified | kalos | 1851 | ||
Why was Abraham called the friend of God? | ||||||
7482 | Why was Abraham called the friend of God | James 2:23 | kalos | 1877 | ||
Why was Abraham called the friend of God? | ||||||
7483 | What does abomination mean? | Bible general Archive 1 | kalos | 1850 | ||
What does the word "abomination" mean? Please define the word first, then give examples, if you wish. |
||||||
7484 | How to "Call on the name of the Lord"? | Acts 2:21 | kalos | 1839 | ||
I'm not sure what your objection is to the prayer at the end of God's Simple Plan of Salvation. Is it not Scriptural? Is there some bad doctrine in it? You have to understand the prayer in GSPOS is merely an example, a model, of how to pray when you ask God for salvation. (If you don't like it, you don't have to use it. Its use is certainly not mandatory for salvation.) I'm not sure you need to see word for word examples of it in the Bible. Every word of the prayer is based upon sound Bible doctrine. It seems to me that you are taking something relatively simple and straightforward (calling on the name of the Lord) and trying to turn it into some deep theological mystery. Basically to call upon the name of the Lord is another way of saying to pray to the Lord. . . . There is nothing more to "calling on the name of the Lord" than praying and admitting one is a sinner; that one believes Jesus was his substitute when He died on the Cross. That His death burial and resurrection according to the Scriptures IS the essence of the Gospel (1 Cor 15:1-4). The prayer closes with the praying person receiving Christ as his Savior and thanking God for the forgiveness of sins and the gift of salvation and everlasting life. To question whether the prayer is Scriptural or to expect some long-drawn out mystery in answer to your question seems to be going beyond the Scripture and unnecessarily complicating that which is not complicated. |
||||||
7485 | To capitalize or not to capitalize? | Bible general Archive 1 | kalos | 1838 | ||
Dear R.V.H. Thank you for your reply. I feel I now have a better understanding of your position and where you are coming from. I do understand your point that, when done accurately, capitalization would clarify whatever text one is reading. You no doubt have given this question much thought and research -- way more than I ever have. I'm with you in that I think translation should strive for both maximum clarity as well as maximum accuracy. You certainly are no dabbler where this subject is concerned. You've done your homework well and what more can a man do? Thank you for explaining it for me again. You do have valid points and I thank you for sharing them with the group. Yours in Christ, JVH0212. | ||||||
7486 | If elect is not choose, then what is it? | Job 38:1 | kalos | 1835 | ||
Amen! Thank you for telling it like it is. It may be that the majority of the members of this Forum are against the Bible doctrine of election. However, as you know, sir, truth is not established by a majority vote. | ||||||
7487 | How to "Call on the name of the Lord"? | Acts 2:21 | kalos | 1834 | ||
Acts 2:21 (The Amplified Bible) "And it shall be that whoever shall call upon the name of the Lord [invoking, adoring, and worshiping the Lord--Christ] shall be saved." . . . It has been said that "A good translation is the best commentary." For more information go to www.godssimpleplan.org/gsps.html . . . Read "God's Simple Plan of Salvation." There you will find a much more complete answer to your question. |
||||||
7488 | This is why...? | Bible general Archive 1 | kalos | 1832 | ||
Dear Rancher: After reading all the Q's and A's on the debate over man's free will vs. the sovereignty of God, I must say in all sincerity that I thank you for one of the most reasonable, logical and polite replies that I have yet to see. Your reply does not stray from the subject, bring up irrelevant points and irrelevant Scriptures, or go off into human reasoning without the Scriptures. Also there was no hostility in your answer. I mean it when I say, thank you for one of the very best-written entries on the subject of election. I'll be looking forward to your other postings to read and enjoy them. --JVH0212 | ||||||
7489 | WHAT DOES JESUS MEAN BY THIS VERSE | John 14:6 | kalos | 1830 | ||
John 14:6 "In response to Thomas' query (v. 4), Jesus declared that He is the way to God because He is the truth of God (1:14) and the life of God (1:4; 3:15; 11:25). In this verse, the exclusiveness of Jesus as the only approach to the Father is emphatic. Only one way, not many ways, exist to God, i.e., Jesus Christ." (MacArthur Study Bible, Word Publishing, 1997)See also the cross references to John 14:6 in your center column reference Bible. | ||||||
7490 | To capitalize or not to capitalize? | Bible general Archive 1 | kalos | 1817 | ||
Philippians 2:3 (ASV 1901) "[doing] nothing through faction or through vainglory, but in lowliness of mind each counting other better than himself;" (Note: the entire text of the ASV is available online at bible.crosswalk.com(slash)OnlineStudyBible) . . . Dear R.V.H.: Let me begin by saying that I DO count YOU better than myself. I mean that sincerely. In no way am I above anyone else. My reply is not a personal attack on you. There is no malice in my question. Please re-read my original answer to your original question about capitalization of pronouns referring to Deity in the Bible. . . . "Some religious literature chooses to capitalize pronouns that refer to the deity. As in the original languages, GOD'S WORD does not capitalize any pronouns (unless they begin sentences). In some cases scholars are uncertain whether pronouns in the original texts refer to God or someone else. In these cases the presence of capitalized pronouns would be misleading.". (p. xiii, GOD'S WORD, Grand Rapids: World Publishing, 1995) . . . Let's take a look at the main points in the above quotation. . . . 1) Some religious literature chooses to capitalize pronouns that refer to the deity. Some do not. . . . 2) The Scriptures "in the original languages" do not capitalize any pronouns. If the original manuscripts did not capitalize pronouns, and those Scriptures have endured until now, then WHY does anyone today feel that pronouns referring to the Deity MUST be capitalized? . . . 3) "In some cases scholars are uncertain whether pronouns in the original texts refer to God or someone else." If SCHOLARS -- those who have learned Hebrew and Greek and have studied the Bible IN THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGES -- if they are in some cases uncertain, is there not some arrogance in the assumption that the rest of us could just take a red pencil and go merrily through the Bible, capitalizing as the mood struck us? (Perhaps you have studied Greek and Hebrew at seminary level. If you have, then more power to you.) . . . 4) "In these cases the PRESENCE of capitalized pronouns would be misleading." If, on the other hand, the ABSENCE of capitalized pronouns is misleading, then blame God. For that is how the Bible was written in the original languages. The argument that the original manuscripts (as well as certain English translations including, but not limited to, the King James) are somehow misleading sounds to me like criticism of the Author of the book. (I am not writing the Bible. I can capitalize in my personal writing whenever I want to. That is not the issue here.) . . . My point is: Since you apparently do not understand my original reply, quoted above, then you could continue to ask questions about the lack of capitalization of pronouns until the Rapture, but any answer would be meaningless to you. That is, if you cannot grasp the concept that "In some cases scholars are uncertain whether pronouns in the original texts refer to God or someone else. In these cases the presence of capitalized pronouns would be misleading." . . . Again, WHO is going to make those decisions? Sincere laymen, Catholics, Protestants, Charismatics, non-Charismatics, liturgical churches, non-liturgical churches, the Mormons, the Jehovah's Witnesses, the Christian scientists? . . . If only the solution to the problem of capitalization were as simple and simplistic as you imply they are! I'm not against capitalization. I'm just against every Thomas, Richard and Henry with a red pencil tampering with the Bible. |
||||||
7491 | WHY DOSE IT HAVE TO BE MOSSES AND ELIJAH | Revelation | kalos | 1803 | ||
I must admit that when I asked what Enoch ever did with respect to the Second Coming, I was in error. Thank you so much for pointing out what it says in Jude 14. Citing the reference in Jude tells me you are quick and sharp. My hat goes off to you. Again, thanks for your reply, without which I would still be in the dark about Enoch. God bless. --JVH0212 | ||||||
7492 | Is prophecy dead? | Matt 11:13 | kalos | 1800 | ||
I'm not sure whether this is primarily a "tongue talker" network. It might be. From my reading of many postings, I thought it was a network of people who don't believe in the Bible doctrine of election. Also, though not mandatory, a belief in capitalization will go a long way on this forum. | ||||||
7493 | If elect is not choose, then what is it? | Job 38:1 | kalos | 1788 | ||
Thank you for your sensible, scriptural posting of 03-24-2001. I would like to comment on your Note, the part where you say, "That man chooses isn't in debate, the issue is who enabled him to choose?" . . . Exactly! That man chooses is indisputable. Allow me to quote from the Baker Theological Dictionary of the Bible (p. 199, Baker Books, 1996). "In the Scriptures the term 'choose' is used of both God and human beings. With respect to human beings, it covers all human decisions. ...God also makes choices and by a large margin, the term 'choose' is used in Scripture to refer to the choices of God rather than human choices." . . . Footnote: 'Elect' means THE SAME THING AS 'choose.' Here is the dictionary definition of 'elect': "to CHOOSE (as a course of action) especially by preference ( example: might elect to sell the business)." Therefore 'choosing' equals 'election.' (Dictionary definition of 'election': "the right, power, or privilege of MAKING A CHOICE.") . . . My point: when the anti-Calvinist, anti-election, anti-everything crowd refuses to agree with the ordinary meaning of the English words 'elect' and 'choose', they make it impossible to even discuss election. |
||||||
7494 | Tongues - do you realize... | Matt 11:13 | kalos | 1786 | ||
Do you realize the question of tongues is one subject about which there can be no pure objectivity? Everyone on earth has either spoken in tongues or they haven't. Either way, one's answer will be influenced by one's experience in this matter. | ||||||
7495 | Is Biblical literacy dead?Or is prophecy | Matt 11:13 | kalos | 1785 | ||
The following was posted on 03-24-2001. "Being especially wary of people who claim to be Apostle or Prophets. Jesus warns us to beware of people who say, "I am He". I agree. I would also like to add the following. The Word tells us to prove the spirits. 1 John 4:1 (ASV) "Beloved, believe not every spirit, but prove the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets are gone out into the world." What is the test of a true prophet? It is very simple. Deut 18:22 (RSV) "when a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word which the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously, you need not be afraid of him." . . . On the other hand, the existence of false prophets does not preclude (rule out in advance) the existence of true prophets. Don't throw out the baby with the bath water. |
||||||
7496 | Is prophecy dead? | Matt 11:13 | kalos | 1784 | ||
I agree. I would also like to add the following. The Word tells us to prove the spirits. 1 John 4:1 (ASV) "Beloved, believe not every spirit, but prove the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets are gone out into the world." What is the test of a true prophet? It is very simple. Deut 18:22 (RSV) "when a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word which the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously, you need not be afraid of him." . . . On the other hand, the existence of false prophets does not preclude (rule out in advance) the existence of true prophets. Don't throw out the baby with the bath water. |
||||||
7497 | The Trinity. | John 1:1 | kalos | 1783 | ||
It is apparent to me that not everything in the Bible, such as the Trinity or the origin of God Himself, can be explained. I no longer try to explain that which cannot be explained. One should be able to define the Trinity. But defining and explaining are not the same thing. Note also that because a thing is unexplainable does not make that thing untrue. | ||||||
7498 | WHY DOSE IT HAVE TO BE MOSSES AND ELIJAH | Revelation | kalos | 1782 | ||
Heb 9:27 (ASV) And inasmuch as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this [cometh] judgment; . . . No disrespect to either you or your answer is intended. I fully agree that we ought not to be dogmatic about the answer to this question. Your answer has merit and should not be dismissed lightly. However, it would seem that the Scripture cited to predict Enoch as the second witness instead of Moses is far outweighed by the number of similarities between Moses and the two witnesses. What did Enoch ever do besides the fact that "God took him"? What did he ever do relevant to Christ's Second coming? I feel the fact that Enoch was taken by God before death is a weak argument indeed. . . . If one means to interpret Heb 9:27, as many honest and sincere folks do, to mean that every individual must die once and only once, this is easily refuted by our general knowledge of the Bible together with common sense. . . . In his Study Bible, John MacArthur comments on Heb 9:27: "to die once. This is a general rule for all mankind. There have been very rare EXCEPTIONS (emphasis mine) (e.g., Lazarus and the multitude who were resuscitated at Christ's resurrection died twice; compare John 11; Matt 27). ... Another exception will be those who don't die even once, but who will be 'caught up...to meet the Lord in the air' " (1 Thess 4:17) Thanks for your participation. I want to emphasize that I am NOT being dogmatic. I do not insist that the two witnesses will be Moses and Elijah. Any human who says he knows the answer with certainty is in error. |
||||||
7499 | Church Age? | Acts 2:17 | kalos | 1779 | ||
Dear Charis: From all my study and research on the topic of "the last days" I would have to agree with you: "it seems that his (Peter's) quotes from Joel and David are talking about the 'church age' until the last days. Peter testifies that Joel's prophecy was about then and now, and until the return of the Lord." . . . Answer (short): In Acts 2:17 the phrase " 'last days' refers to the present era of redemptive history from the first coming of Christ (Heb 1:2; 1 Pet 1:20; 1 John 2:18) to his return." (p. 1636, MacArthur Study Bible, Word Publishing, 1997). . . .Answer (long): "LAST DAYS. In the passage quoted from Joel the Hebrew has 'after this' and the Septuagint 'after these things.' Peter interprets the passage as referring specifically to the latter days of the new covenant in contrast to the former days of the old covenant." At the time of Acts chapter 2, "the age of Messianic fulfillment" had "arrived." (p. 1575, Zondervan NASB Study Bible, edited by Kenneth Barker, Zondervan, 1999) . . . "Last Day(s), Latter Days, Last Times. There are problems with the terminology of 'the latter days' in that, for example, the King James Version quite often refers to 'the latter days,' an expression not found in modern translations. Further, it is not always clear whether 'the latter days' means a somewhat later period than that of the writer or the latest times of all, the end of the world. There are also expressions that locate the day being discussed in the time of the speaker. Care is needed as we approach the passages that use these terms." (pp. 464-465, Baker Theological Dictionary of the Bible, Walter A. Elwell, editor, Baker Books, 1996) . . . --JVH0212 |
||||||
7500 | FAMILY EATING HABITS FOR MOSES DAY? | Leviticus | kalos | 1752 | ||
The Egyptians had their eating habits; the Hebrews had theirs. You will find the eating habits of the Hebrews in Leviticus chapter 11 and Deuteronomy chapter 14 | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 ] Next > Last [387] >> |