Results 81 - 100 of 109
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Chris Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
81 | What about human cloning? | Gen 2:7 | Chris | 2763 | ||
I believe it is a very dangerous area, because we are tampering with GOD's responsibility! One of my key passages of scripture is Psalm 131, and I believe that unless we are explicitly asked we should not get involved with GOD's stuff! Everything we humans mess with we screw up, at least we do for 30 years or so and then we say, Oh no! we've got to go fix it (see health research, environment, wild life, etc.; I am very guilty of generalization here, sorry!!). This one (cloning) may be to tough to fix!! However, I don't believe in getting too involved in the government (protest, etc.), again I reference my focus scripture of Ps 131, I don't see anyplace in scripture were GOD specifically asks me to try to rule over a world under the sway of the evil one. Just my opinion, and here in West Virginia, and other places, we have a saying, "Opinions are like rear ends, every bodies got'em and they usually stink!" And remember, you did say 'all'! GOD bless!! |
||||||
82 | Bible and evolution both? | Gen 1:1 | Chris | 2762 | ||
All in Genesis Ch. 1(Creation Story). I believed in both for a long time Hank. Evolution seems to mirror the story of Creation in a general fashion, but it only works at first glance or from a distance. The more specifically you study either, the more they cancel each other out and eventually become mutually exclusive (at least in my experience). Creation: if you study the hebrew words in the creation story and review the exact definitions (created, and notice where, when, and how often the word is used) there is simply no way these words can allow a slow gradual evolution form one form of existance to all the others, this would allow for only one 'created' being, a single cell! Evolution: evolution theory would reject water animals and BIRDS before land animals. Evolution says birds came after reptiles, which came after ?amphibians? (frogs!!), so not only were there water/land animals but also the most pimitive land/water animals (my terminology). The Bible discusses NO land animals until after birds. Evolution is also based upon random mutations in beings that, when the mutations are positive, continue on through the process of natural selection. This completely rejects the idea of design and/or purpose which is a primary force in the Creation story. This is a difficult area Hank, all I can tell you is that at some point all christians are forced to separate themselves from the world. For me, this question was a difficult time in my walk with Christ, I hope you're not having the trouble I was having. I am naturally an analytical person, and it seems like, when a was at this point I was asking Christ to prove Himself to me daily on an analytical basis. I can joyfully say He did, at least He did for me. If you are going through what I went through I will be praying for GOD speed and blessing to you, Hank! Let me know if you need these prayers, or just the general kind!:-) |
||||||
83 | Easter Bunnies...or Risen Lord? | John 11:25 | Chris | 2760 | ||
I'll try to answer all of them, but I'm not promising! 1.Only in the KJV, correctly translated passover.(Acts 12?) 2.Easter was an idolatrous worship of a goddess for fertility(hence, eggs) (Ezekiel?) 3.I believe it was in April of our calender, but correct me on this one. 4.Mary Magdalene (John 20 or 21) 5.Woman, why are you crying(?) (Jn, next verse) 6.He wasn't limited by flesh, walking through doors and such (fill me in on the rest) (Jn 21) 7.the women, peter, apostles, two men on the road, paul, 500 others (tell me what I missed!)(Not even going to try!) 8.I am certain there were, but I've got no scripture in mind, fill me in! 9.Part of the idolatrous practice of Easter.(Ezekiel?) 10.No! (correct me if wrong!?) Sorry about the lack of more specific references, but that's alot a questions! Plus, I took this off the cuff, so I'm hoping you'll tell me how I did! Thanks Hank! GOD bless!! |
||||||
84 | Sexual lust vs. other lusts of flesh? | Not Specified | Chris | 2758 | ||
Why is it that we are asked to overcome all sins of the flesh, with the exception of sexual lust? If we have this desire we should satisfy it in a Biblical manner (marry), but still it is treated differently than other lusts of the flesh, any ideas why? | ||||||
85 | Sexual lust vs. other lusts of flesh? | 1 Cor 6:18 | Chris | 2775 | ||
Why is it that we are asked to overcome all sins of the flesh, with the exception of sexual lust? If we have this desire we should satisfy it in a Biblical manner (marry), but still it is treated differently than other lusts of the flesh, any ideas why? | ||||||
86 | Unmarried men pastors? | 1 Timothy | Chris | 2757 | ||
Wow, this question got some interesting and enthusiastic responses! Good question, remember the great apostle Paul was not married, so there is certainly no restriction on unmarried men being pastors. A previous answer used our Lord Jesus as an example, but that, in my view, is inappropriate, we are His children for Him to marry one of us would be unusual. Also, He will have a bride (the church) and He came to redeem her (kinsman redeemer; see Ruth), so one could say that our Lords future bride was the motivating force behind His leading. Women seem to be restricted from such service according to I Tim 2:9-15, but there are differing opinions on the interpretation of those verses. I believe Paul encourages any male leader with a need, to get married (I Tim, Titus), thereby, avoiding temptation. But, Paul also states that he wishes all men/women were as he is, or single, to focus completely on the Lord. (I Cor 7:7) I do see a problem with the catholic practice of unmarried priest, Paul states clearly that if a person has a desire for sexual relations s/he should get married "rather than burn!" with sin (I Cor 7:9) When these men burn with passion and yet cannot get married it could cause all sorts of sexual problems with the priesthood. Which raises another question, why is it that we are asked to "overcome" all sins of the flesh, with the exception of sexual lust? If we have this desire we should satisfy it in a Biblical manner (marriage; one woman), but still it is treated differently than other lusts of the flesh! Great question! Let me know any other thoughts! GOD bless!! |
||||||
87 | Is it a sin not to vote in elections? | 1 Timothy | Chris | 2755 | ||
Let me get more specific, I have heard preachers and pastors say that it is a sin not to vote in public elections. Surely, we can not claim sinfulness to an implication in a series of verses. (I Tim 2:1-3) I'd like more opinions on whether christians should vote in elections, and whether it is a sin not to vote? (Scripture, please) | ||||||
88 | God can use woman in the ministry? | Gal 3:28 | Chris | 2724 | ||
I would agree with you on I Cor 7:12. However, I don't think the same authority exists on 7:25. This is definitely an oversight on my part, but I believe many would go to great lengths to argue 7:12 as opinion, so I was trying to differentiate any of these debated "opinions" (and again, I agree with you on 7:12) versus the command style statement in I Tim 2:12. Thanks for the additional info!! GOD bless! | ||||||
89 | Why was Christ baptized? | NT general Archive 1 | Chris | 2722 | ||
Your absolutely right about that, I hadn't seen that in the passage, but I do believe that the remainder of the passage suggests that John, himself also realized who Jesus was after the baptism and descending of the Spirit, and I think the passage suggests that this was one reason for the baptism. Jn 1:32-34: John testified saying, "I have seen the Spirit descending as a dove out of heaven, and He remained upon Him. *I did not recongnize Him, but He who sent me to baptize in water said to me, 'He upon whom [you] see the Spirit descending and remaining upon Him, this is the One who baptizes in the Holy Spirit*. I myself have seen, and have testified that this is the Son of God." [you] - I assume that this is John, yea or nay? |
||||||
90 | Why was Christ baptized? | NT general Archive 1 | Chris | 2708 | ||
Sorry!! John 1:28-34. GOD bless! | ||||||
91 | What if Jesus hadn't been crucified? | Heb 9:22 | Chris | 2691 | ||
GOD is Holy or perfect, without blemish. If GOD were to accept anyone who is not perfect He would not be perfect. I picture it like this, if you got a 100 percent on a test, and you had to keep your 100, could you average you score with anyone who got below a 100 percent? No, because that would make your grade something below 100, even if I got a 99.9999 our average grade would not be perfect! So, GOD had to make us perfect. To do this, someone had to live a perfect life, to be worthy. But, someone also had to find a way to wash away the sins of the other people who would be forgiven. Heb. 9:22 says sins cannot be forgiven without the shedding of blood. Jesus had to be crucified be cause: first, GOD is Just and for human sin there must be a human sacrifice, this is why the sacrifical system in the OT is a "foreshadow" check Heb. again the blood of bulls cannot wash away sin. Second, the sacrifice has to be perfect because an imperfect sacrifice cannot cleanse anything! But, this causes a huge problem! How can a just GOD kill a perfectly righteous human being (Jesus)? He had to go to a cross because, it is a curse to hang on a tree! See Galations! So that's why he went to the cross! Hope this helps! GOD bless!! |
||||||
92 | What does it mean to believe. . . ? | John 3:16 | Chris | 2689 | ||
My understanding of the Biblical definition of believe is; to trust in something to the point of acting upon that trust. So, there has to be a change in lifestyle based upon one's claim to believe in Jesus Christ, and there should be a willingness and even an eagerness to obey His commands. I'm no scholar, so I apologize if this definition doesn't float! GOD bless! |
||||||
93 | God can use woman in the ministry? | Gal 3:28 | Chris | 2688 | ||
I Timothy 2:9-15: I wouldn't label this passage as Paul's opinion, and I believe many would agree with me. This passage is clearly different than the occasions when Paul gives his opinion about widowers, virgins, and folks married to nonbelievers in I Cor., where he clearly states, I say, not the Lord. Paul speaks with the statement, "I" in many commands that most consider commands of GOD. See Eph. 4:1 Therefore I implore you, Romans 12:1 Therefore I urge you, etc. The "therefore" in the two passages are different words than, "but" however they are both particles, and Paul still commands through his own person, but most agree he was speaking for the Lord. See also Rom. 11:11 "I say then, they did not stumble so as to fall, did they?" I don't think this is Paul's opinion, but he does use ‘I'. Back to the relevant passage, starting at I Tim Ch.2:1 Paul uses ‘I' and again, this is considered by many to be a command from GOD. So, I see no difference in verse 12; the particle translated, "But" in the NASB could be 'but' or 'and', so Paul, in my opinion, is simply giving additional information about women in the church. Paul states in v. 7 his authority as an apostle and starts v. 8 with the particle, ‘therefore' and v. 9 starts with ‘likewise' so the authority continues through to v. 15. If you know something about translation, I would like to know if there is any particular reason the NASB chose "But" in verse 12. It seems to me that the context would demand ‘and'. Any comment? Thanks for the comment please let me know if I'm wrong about anything, or if you simply disagree! GOD bless! |
||||||
94 | is there a specific scripture? | Matthew | Chris | 2679 | ||
I don't know of any particular verse that describes angles, but some things can be inferred from the Bible. First, we were created with flesh bodies, we can't drop them and pick them up again (I mean the physical nature of flesh); angels seemingly can, they are all around us and at times show themselves to us, so they are not flesh in the sense we are flesh (and, for that matter, when they show themselves they may not be flesh at all, but they may simply open our eyes to the spiritual realm). So, I would interpret the Bible as saying that angels are not made like man, they are spiritual beings; whereas, man was created from dust (flesh) and our spirits were "breathed" into us from GOD. We also know that angels have the power of choice; because many angels "chose" to follow lucifer (satan) in his revolt. However, they may have more knowledge and understanding of GOD than we do, because they are offered no salvation, so they know the consequences of their actions, whereas, we sin against GOD, often, in ignorance. All these statements can be "inferred" from the Word. The first two statements are rock solid, the third may not be, GOD will show mercy to whom He will show mercy. So, the fact that the angels are not offered salvation, doesn't mean they know more about GOD. But, they do live with Him in heaven and hover around His throne, so it's a good bet. By the way, where did you get the idea that angels were made in the same way as man? |
||||||
95 | Why was Christ baptized? | NT general Archive 1 | Chris | 2678 | ||
The Bible plainly says, "'I did not recognize Him, but so that He might be manifested to Israel, I came baptizing in water.' John testified saying, " I have seen the Spirit desending as a dove out of heaven, and He remained upon Him. I did not recognize Him, but He who sent me to baptize in water said to me, ' He upon whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining upon Him, this is the One who baptizes in the Holy Spirit.' So, one reason, there may be more, was to let the forerunner know whom he was running for. (Is whom correct there?) |
||||||
96 | Scriptural answers for John 12:31? | John 12:31 | Chris | 2676 | ||
I would tend to agree with your interpretation, Hugger, see John 16:11. The Holy Spirit comes to convict the world of judgement because the ruler has been judged, so by the time the apostles received the Holy Spirit, this scripture indicates that GOD's judgement of satan was complete. As for Rev. 12, this will happen during the Tribulation (at least that my interpretaion). And, if I am missing the point on Rev. 12, I didn't take much time to study the passage before answering. My focus was on Jn 16. Please, correct me if I'm wrong! Thanks, and GOD bless!! |
||||||
97 | Why not Jesus' words in Red? | Bible general Archive 1 | Chris | 2675 | ||
My personal reason (silly as it may be) is that in the Bibles I buy (even Zondervan) the red print is faded in some areas. This is distracting, espescially when the print is blood red on one page and you turn to the next and it is so faded you can't make out the words! For a more mature and reasoned answer, I believe the primary reason is that all Scripture is inspired, so it all comes from GOD. It is possible, and I have seen this happen, that those that don't know much about their faith, or what they think is their faith, believe that the words in red mean more than the rest of the NT. Especially for some of the controversial topics spoken of by Paul in his letters. I still use red-letter but I know some that don't. GOD bless! |
||||||
98 | God can use woman in the ministry? | Gal 3:28 | Chris | 2674 | ||
This is certainly a controversial topic, and I can only give you my understanding of the Scriptures. Gal. 3:28, in my opinion, is talking about all believers being in the body of Christ or being one in Christ. No member of the body is less important or more important than another, we are all in Christ, but that does not mean that any member of the body can assume any position in the body. See I Cor. 12:20 Paul says (paraphrase), there are many members but one body, but a foot cannot be a nose, ect. So, I do not believe Paul wrote Gal. 3:28 with positions of authority in the church in mind. To further add to this conclusion, I Tim. 2:9-15 seems quite adament about women not being in the highest position of authority, Paul being the author of both these letters. Anytime women are forbid something in scripture, I look to see if the reasoning is because of the social climate at the time of writing, or if it is a command from GOD; the reasoning for this one seems to be a command based upon the rights of first born and the punishment of Eve in the garden. I know some say that these verses could be translated as talking about husband and wife, but if that were the case, Paul must have no interest in what single folks do in church, he being single, because the greek words for man and woman remain the same from 2:8 thru to v15. And, there is no further discussion of what should be done in the church by single folks; Paul immediately moves to the leadership positions in the church. I should say that I would only forbid women from assuming the highest role in the church, pastor or elder. I believe that women should be deaconnesses. I also am one to simply trust the scriptures as I read them if the debate is too complicated for my miniscule mind; that may be the case here! Hope this helps! GOD bless! |
||||||
99 | God can use woman in the ministry? | Gal 3:28 | Chris | 1541 | ||
This is certainly a controversial topic, and I can only give you my understanding of the Scriptures. Gal. 3:28, in my opinion, is talking about all believers being in the body of Christ. No member of the body is less important than another, but that does not mean that any member of the body can assume any position in the body. See I Cor. 12:20 Paul says there are many members but one body, but a foot cannot be a nose, ect. So, I do not believe Paul wrote Gal. 3:28 with positions of authority in the church in mind. To further add to this conclusion, I Tim. 2:9-15 seems quite adament about women not being in the highest position of authority, Paul being the author of both these letters. Anytime women are forbid something in scripture, I look to see if the reasoning is because of the social climate at the time of writing, or if it is a command from GOD; the reasoning for this one seems to be a command based upon the rights of first born and the punishment of Eve in the garden. I know some say that these verses could be translated as talking about husband and wife, but if that were the case, Paul must have no interest in what single folks do in church, he being single, because the greek words for man and woman remain the same from 2:8 thru to v15. And, there is no further discussion of what should be done in the church by single folks; Paul immediately moves to the leadership positions in the church. I should say that I would only forbid women from assuming the highest role in the church, pastor or elder. I believe that women should be deaconnesses. I also am one to simply trust the scriptures as I read them if the debate is too complicated for my miniscule mind; that may be the case here! Hope this helps! GOD bless! |
||||||
100 | Should Christians Vote in elections? | Not Specified | Chris | 2636 | ||
Should Christians vote for their leaders? (Scriptural documentation, please.) | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 ] Next > Last [6] >> |