Results 81 - 100 of 172
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: InGodITrust Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
81 | Reading: John 3:21 | 2 Cor 6:14 | InGodITrust | 189284 | ||
Kalama, Very good question. One that every single Christian should consider foremost. My thoughts; Dating would be any event that you and another would set aside to do together. Christian dating, of course that implies that you would date "only a believer." Dating is simply a modern term. Courtship is probibly a more traditional term. Dating in the world's eyes is "out to have a good time" no matter with who or what for. If a Christian is "to date" I suggest it should be in every way, "as if Christ Himself were your chaperone." Glad to be of assistance, InGodITrust |
||||||
82 | saved and sanctified | Ephesians | InGodITrust | 189282 | ||
Goodmorning John, Thank you for the info. Yes I am well aware that one must be very cautious when using any source. However, in my case, I use Wikipedia simply to refresh my memory. It is so bad I have to keep a photo ID in my wallet to remind me who I am and where I live! May the Lord of Glory be with you today, InGodITrust |
||||||
83 | saved and sanctified | Ephesians | InGodITrust | 189275 | ||
Azure, I missed this as it did not copy, So...........here's a little more, The concept of sanctification is widespread among religions, but is perhaps more common among the various branches of the Christian religion, especially those of the Protestant-Reformed and Wesleyan-Arminian traditions. The term can be used to refer to objects which are set apart for special purposes (i.e., the Temple vessels), but the most common use within Christian theology is in reference to the change brought about by God in a believer, begun at the point of salvation or justification and continuing throughout the life of the believer. Many forms of Christianity believe that this process will only be completed in Heaven, but some believe that complete holiness is possible in this life on earth--particularly in the final days before the ultimate return of Jesus. Some Protestants denominations call the completion of sanctification "glorification". In some branches of Christianity, inanimate objects as well as people are referred to as "sanctified" or "holy". A notable instance is the process of transubstantiation, which in Roman Catholic doctrine means that the bread and wine of Communion are physically transformed into the flesh and blood (respectively) of Jesus. This act constitutes a kind of sanctification of the bread and wine. Blessings to you, InGodITrust |
||||||
84 | saved and sanctified | Ephesians | InGodITrust | 189272 | ||
Azure, Good morning young lady, Very good question and one that is confusing as well as "there is too much being mingled in with the Biblical concept." Sanctification is our given position in Christ. He, not us, is the one who sanctifies us because of Him being our Lord and Savior. Take a look at this post from Wikipedia; Sanctification From Wikipedia, Part of a series of articles on Christianity Christian theology: Sanctification or in its verb form, sanctify, literally means to set apart for special use or purpose, that is to make holy or sacred (from the Latin verb sanctificare, which in turn derives from sanctus, "holy" and facere, "to make".). The Greek word is hagiasmos (Üãéáóìïò), meaning "holiness, consecration, or sanctification." [1] It comes from the root hagios (Üãéïò), which means holy or sacred. Sanctification then refers to the state or process of being set apart or made holy. What is often missed, or overlooked, is the relational aspect that is associated with the word sancification. Only God is truly holy. Everything else, whether it is things or people, is holy only because of its relationship to God God bless, InGodITrust |
||||||
85 | loving others | 1 Cor 13:1 | InGodITrust | 189268 | ||
Hank, I can't believe you didn't recommend my new book? Guess I didn't make much of any impression!! Just kidding........... My book address all these issues and much more than Christian's have ever contimplated. Here's Chapter Eight which is a summation of the entire book; Chapter Eight The House that Love Built… (the prelude to a conclusion) Summing it all up, let’s review… 1. Where’d it all start? 12. Enter your rest 2. Come on in… 13. Who objected? 3. Add, subtract, divide 14. Who’s in charge? 4. The real war 15. The honor role 5. In will be outstanding 16. Do not cross! a. To know God 17. Tough is not b. To walk in love 18. Where does love live? c. To abide in love 19. True Value 6. The Goal? 7. The declaration of dependence! 8. Getting started 9. New tricks 10. Prayer, coming out of the closet 11. Is it rewarding? a. Fruit of the Spirit b. Power, knowledge, fullness c. Blameless d. Knowledge and discernment e. Sin’s covering Hope I am not imposing, is this allowed? InGodITrust |
||||||
86 | Wandering in the Desert | Exodus | InGodITrust | 189267 | ||
chaplin, Because of disobedience and unbelief. Also complaining and murmuring. Due to there own behavior they were not ready to enter the promiced land. Does this help? InGodITust |
||||||
87 | loving others | 1 Cor 13:1 | InGodITrust | 189265 | ||
... | ||||||
88 | David showing manhood, not lust | 2 Samuel | InGodITrust | 189264 | ||
dlstallings, No, not at all. David committed adultry with Bathsheeba and later had her husband Uriah murdered. Better be careful what sources you use....!! InGodITrust |
||||||
89 | bartholomew in acts. ect. | Acts | InGodITrust | 189238 | ||
justsomebody, Check out this web site; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bartholomew InGodITrust |
||||||
90 | judas's field of blood. ref. to acts | Acts 1:18 | InGodITrust | 189236 | ||
justsomebody, Here's what I found; Field of Blood Hakeldama, the Field of Blood where Judas hung himself. Called at present "Hak ed-damm," it signifies "Field of Blood" (Matt 27:8; Acts 1:18-19), now at the E end and on the southern slope of the valley of Hinnom. The tradition that fixes this spot reaches back to the age of Jerome. Once the tradition was that the soil of this spot, a deep pit or cellar, was believed to have the power of consuming dead bodies in the space of twenty-four hours, so that whole shiploads of it are said to have been carried away in A.D. 1218 AD, in order to cover the famous Campo Santo in Pisa. Acts 1:18-19 "Now this man purchased a field with the wages of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst open in the middle and all his entrails gushed out. And it became known to all those dwelling in Jerusalem; so that field is called in their own language, Akel Dama, that is, Field of Blood." First Century Jerusalem Bible History Online http://www.bible-history.com/jerusalem/firstcenturyjerusalem_field_of_blood.html InGodITrust |
||||||
91 | Who are the "sons of God" in Genesis 6? | Gen 6:2 | InGodITrust | 189226 | ||
Greetings OldPilgrim, You got me "flat-footed." My knowledge and studies are confined to New Testament doctrine. I am very weak in the Old Testament. Found out about my Jewish heritage only 5 months ago. I am anything but a scholar, but thank you for the thought!! Also, it is my understanding that the Jewish authorities did not translate the Septuagint into Greek until sometime around 500-600 bc. As far as a suitable Greek word one can only speculate. Right or wrong, whenever I am trying to draw a conclusion to controversial Scriptural issues, I try to look back through history to what those of reputation interpreted it to be. That, in light of what modern scholars of good reputation have found discovered in their studies. With all the technology we have today it behoves us to compare that with history. Usually, if a present day Bible teacher or scholar does not have "most all of his ducks in a row," I don't consider them necessarily reliable. A big mistake Bible students make is that they don't compare "the source." Just because so and so said it, does not make it worthy of consideration. We live in a day and age where "every Tom, Dick, and Harry," have their own opinion. Usually to the great detriment of Scriptural accuracy. Unfortunately, here on the Forum, that is too ofton the case. My opinion or yours or anyone else's is not worth much if we do not balance everything out and consider, most of all, the source in which we conclude our opinion. Wow, I did not mean to get on my high horse, guess I did so as I just came in from church! Sorry I could not be of help in your sincere quest to find an answer. Frankly when it concerns this subject, there may not be one. You have a really good point though, one should very seriously consider Jewish sources, no matter if Messianic or not, when it concerns Old Testament interpretation. Much blessings to you my friend, InGodITrust |
||||||
92 | Who are the "sons of God" in Genesis 6? | Gen 6:2 | InGodITrust | 189176 | ||
10-4, I agree, it is a hard subject to reckon with, "I reckon!." God bless ya John, InGodITrust (all others pay cash) |
||||||
93 | Who are the "sons of God" in Genesis 6? | Gen 6:2 | InGodITrust | 189174 | ||
Hopalong, As I indicated earlier, here is the traditional position on the matter: "Who were the sons of God and daughters of men in Genesis 6:1-4?” Answer: Genesis 6:1-4 tells us, "When men began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose. Then the LORD said, "My Spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal; his days will be a hundred and twenty years." The Nephilim were on the earth in those days and also afterward when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown." There have been several suggestions as to who the sons of God were, and why the children they had with daughters of men grew into a race of giants (that is what the word Nephilim seems to indicate). The three primary views on the identity of the "sons of God" are that (1) they were fallen angels, or (2) they were powerful human rulers, or (3) they were godly descendants of Seth intermarrying with wicked descendants of Cain. Giving weight to (1) is the fact that in the Old Testament the phrase "sons of God" always refers to angels (Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7). A potential problem with (1) is the fact that Matthew 22:30 indicates that angels do not marry. The Bible gives us no reason to believe that angels have a gender, or are able to reproduce. Views (2) and (3) do not have this problem. The weakness of views (2) and (3) is that ordinary human males marrying ordinary human females does not account for why the offspring were "giants" or "heroes of old, men of renown." Further, why would God decide to bring the Flood on the earth (Genesis 6:5-7) when God had never forbidden powerful human males or descendants of Seth to marry ordinary human females or descendants of Cain. The oncoming judgment of Genesis 6:5-7 is linked to what took place in Genesis 6:1-4. Only the obscene, perverse marriage of fallen angels with human females would seem to justify such a harsh judgment. The weakness of view (1) is that Matthew 22:30 declares, “At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.” However, this weakness can be overcome by noting that the text does not say “angels are not able to marry.” Rather, it indicates only that angels do not marry. Secondly, Matthew 22:30 is referring to the “angels in heaven.” It is not referring to fallen angels, who do not care about God’s created order and actively seek ways to disrupt God’s plan. The fact that God’s holy angels do not marry or engage in sexual relations does not mean the same is true of Satan and his demons. View (1) is the most likely position. Yes, it is an interesting “contradiction” to say that angels are sexless and then to say that the “sons of God” were fallen angels who procreated with human females. However, while angels are spiritual beings (Hebrews 1:14), they can appear in human, physical form (Mark 16:5). The men of Sodom and Gomorrah wanted to have sex with the two angels who were with Lot (Genesis 19:1-5). It is plausible that angels are capable of taking on human form, even to the point of replicating human sexuality and possibly even reproduction. Why do the fallen angels not do this more often? It seems that God imprisoned the fallen angels who committed this evil sin, so that the other fallen angels would not do the same (as described in Jude 6). Earlier Hebrew interpreters, apocryphal, and pseudopigriphal writings are unanimous in holding to the view that fallen angels are the "sons of God" mentioned in Genesis 6:1-4. This by no means closes the debate. However, the view that Genesis 6:1-4 involves fallen angels mating with human females has a strong contextual, grammatical, and historical basis. I rest my case, although it probibly won't sit still! InGodITrust |
||||||
94 | Who are the "sons of God" in Genesis 6? | Gen 6:2 | InGodITrust | 189166 | ||
Dear Azure, Thank you, but I do believe, that my reply (not because I think so) is the correct one. Anyone who traces all the uses of the term "sons of God," would have to conclude it is a generic term since God the Father of all creation would naturally refer to His creatures as "sons of God." The very term implies, all by itself, God is the Father, meaning the Begetting One, who created all things before sin ever entered the scene. I rest my case, even if (God forbid) I am wrong. Blessings abundantly to you Azure, InGodITrust |
||||||
95 | is it a sin to go outside ur race? | Bible general Archive 3 | InGodITrust | 189163 | ||
... | ||||||
96 | do you think tarot cards are a sin? | 1 Cor 10:23 | InGodITrust | 189161 | ||
leapordgirl13, Greetings in the name of the Messiah, The Bible gives us a lot of latitude, enough to hang ourself.(not literally) Would you play with fire and hope not to get burned? If a person is not born again, they could be exposing themselves to demonic influence and possibly possession. Tarot cards are Satanic in nature and contrary to what a Christian would want to expose themselves to. In God's grace, blessings to you, InGodITrust |
||||||
97 | Who are the "sons of God" in Genesis 6? | Gen 6:2 | InGodITrust | 189158 | ||
Greetings John, I hate to throw a monkey wrench into your assumptions but I have heard several times over the years by Biblical scholars that the Bible refers to "sons of God" in a very general way at times. The way this is resolved is what God would have said "before" the fall. All of His creations were then referred to as "sons of God" This is the traditional view held by most going way back in Church history. I know it does not agree with what we normally would think of as sons of God, but in the beginning before sin, they we all "sons of God." The term "sons of God," is a generic term (usually) as God Himself created each and every one making them all "sons of God." I did not look up all the arguments over the last few days so forgive me if I "got in the middle." Much love and grace to you, InGodITrust |
||||||
98 | is oral sex a sin | Bible general Archive 3 | InGodITrust | 189124 | ||
Duplicate question | ||||||
99 | oral sex | Song of Solomon | InGodITrust | 189122 | ||
gordonb1667, My dear friend, although I assume your question is sincere, since this is a unisex forum with (most likely) single men and women, I highly advise that this subject is very inappropriate. Hope you understand, InGodITrust |
||||||
100 | God shall come down like rain | Ps 72:6 | InGodITrust | 189118 | ||
GHelen, Greetings, First of all do you know that Psalm 72 is considered Messianic. Meaning it is revealing something about Christ? To give you a thorough answer at this time,what it is all about, I can't. So, is that your understanding, that is it also Messianic? Let us know, InGodITrust |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [9] >> |