Results 81 - 100 of 701
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Sir Pent Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
81 | Possible Lockman Forum Improvement #4 | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 18278 | ||
Possible Lockman Forum Improvement #4 In the ever continuing mission to make this Lockman Study Bible Forum the best it could possibly be, I have one more suggestion that has come to my attention. In case you are looking for a pattern, Improvement Posts #1 and #3 depended on changes that Lockman could make. Improvement Posts #2 and #4 depend upon changes that we members could make ourselves. This new sugestion is that we make the beginnings of posts to be more descriptive and standardized. This would make it possible to tell more clearly how ideas have been expressed, when looking at the thread as a whole. If you like this idea, do you have any ideas as to how it might be accomplished? What kinds of things could we use on a regular basis that would be helpful in this way? Possibly labels such as: Further Support Contrary View Personal Note Also possibly stating the basis of the idea: Bible Commentary Link Logic These could be combined: Contrary View, Bible Further Support, Logic These are just ideas, what do you all think? |
||||||
82 | Possible Lockman Forum Improvements #2 | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 18280 | ||
Dear Tim Moran (may I just call you Tim?), I can definately appreciate your point that many issues discussed on this forum are very complex, and need to be explored in depth. At the same time, you mentioned that it is important for "both parties" to be involved ("agree"). This is exactly the point that I'm trying to get across. When a new person to our forum posts a question, and then 40 people respond, I think that is not something that the original poster would have agreed to (as evidenced by the fact that they no longer choose to be involved at all). One of the things that I really admire about Jesus was that He was able to give people exactly the answers that they needed to hear. He didn't leave out critical information, but He also didn't answer each question with every detail that the scriptures contained on the subject. When the rich, young ruler asked what was required to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, Jesus gave a relatively simple answer to him. If a new person asked that question on this forum, I guarantee that the responses would not be anywhere near as limited. Obviously, Jesus had the advantage of being able to know the hearts of the people He interacted with. However, I still think that we could as Christians, at least try to follow His example a little more closely. My suggestion is only my humble attempt to do this. |
||||||
83 | Possible Lockman Forum Improvements #2 | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 18283 | ||
Switch to Improvements #4....................... Dear Tim, the idea of the more descriptive headings was originally brought to my attention by Jensen. In fact there is currently an unanswered question about it (Possible Lockman Forum Improvements #4). For it to work though, you have to put a bunch of periods after your heading, like I did at the beginning of this post. |
||||||
84 | Possible Lockman Forum Improvement #1? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 18498 | ||
Charis, Hank, Kalos, and Nolan, I appreciate all of your answers with regard to this suggestion of deleting duplicate posts. It seems that all four of you voted "no" not because you are against the idea, but just because it would be too difficult. I understand your concern, but would you mind revoting based purely on the idea itself. Of course if it is not possible for Lockman to do this, I'm sure we would all understand. But I think that it would be helpful to at least have an accurate view of what the ideal desires of the forum members are. Also, I have a few ideas that might make it possible to accomplish without too much work. For old posts, they could probably just do a search for the word "search". This would pull up all the threads where someone asked a question that had already been asked and someone else responded by telling them to use the search box. For future posts, we could start using some sort of standardized comment like "this thread is a duplicate" to draw Lockman's attention to any threads that needed to be deleted. This would still be a time consuming task, because there could be some new material in responses to the duplicate question that would need to be added to the original post on that subject. However, I don't think that it would be impossible. In any case, I just would like a little clarification if you are all against the idea in general. Thanks again for all your help in making this a terriffic forum. |
||||||
85 | Possible Lockman Forum Improvement #1? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 18605 | ||
Dear Nolan, Thank you for your further input on the idea of deleting duplicate posts on the forum. Let me try to take some of the things that you said one at a time. You said, "I completely support the 'filtering' of specific threads that are offensive or derogatory in nature, but should we really have the license to edit all threads just to make them more accessible or "look better"?" I completely agree about the filtering of offensive material. At the same time I would encourage you to rethink the benefit of editing threads for duplication. The purpose is not just aesthetic to "look better". Instead it is to help people who are searching for truth to be able to find as much information as possible from this forum. You said, "But just which posts should we decide to keep and which ones should we not keep?" I agree that there would need to be well-thought out guidlines to determine this, but I think a good starting place would be deleting the questions which all of us forum members easily recognize as being repeats. These are the questions that we simply respond by telling the person to do a search on certain words to find the original thread. You said, "If you are the "judge" of this, then does that mean that you will keep all of your particular postings on a subject and consider the postings of others as "expendable"? I do not believe that a single member of this Forum could or should accomplish such an objective task." I agree that it would be too large of a task for one person, but I think that it is deffinately not impossible to be objective. For instance, I just today replied to Prayon about Israel's actions deserving their slavery in Egypt. Afterwards, I realized that you had already replied to them with basically the same answer. In my thinking, my post should be deleted, because yours was first, and mine didn't add anything significant. Simply using chronology is an objective way to do it. You said, "Also, there are other problems like number of postings by users." I do not understand what the problem is there. It seems to me that the number of posts that a forum member has posted has very little relevancy. I do think that knowing whether a person has posted 1 time, 5 times or 100 times can be helpful. However, past that point, I can't think of any good purpose for keeping track of that information. Finally, you said, "Also, what if a completely new subject has spawned off the post or posts that were considered as "expendable"? Does this mean that other valid information concerning a different topic would also be lost?" I think this is a great point. It will be important to be very deliberate to not lose "valid information" during this process (if it ever happens to begin with). There are many threads that have gone in a completely different direction than they were originally intended. In these cases, there are multiple possibilities. Depending on what subject they are about, they could be added to the original thread on the same subject, or to another original thread which they more closely allign with, or to a completely new thread dedicated to that topic. In conclusion, I hope to have shown that although there are many details that would need to be worked out, I think there are answers for all of these very important questions. If this is something that the overall forum sees could be as helpful for enhancing the usefulness of this forum for building the kingdom of God, then it is worth working towards. That's why I started this vote, to see if it is even something that people want. If so then we'll work out the details. If not then I'll drop it and move on. So far the vote is 8 for, 6 against (4 of them just due to difficulty), and 1 undecided. |
||||||
86 | Is killing during war a sin? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 18820 | ||
Search Recommendation ............................ Welcome to the forum Los. You have asked a question which is both complicated, and yet very relevant to the current condition of our country and world. There have been at least a couple of threads in the past that have focused on this issue. I would recommend that you begin by reading through those, and then let us know if you have any further questions. Try doing a search in the top right corner of the screen for "called to never kill" to find a post of mine in one thread. Also search for "old new fundamental" to find a post of mine in a second thread. I hope that these will be helpful for you. |
||||||
87 | Is killing during war a sin? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 18893 | ||
Please start a new thread......................... Dear Lionstrong and Steve, This looks like it could quickly turn into exactly what I have been talking about in some of my posts regarding forum improvements. The original question is by a person new to our forum, and regards killing in war. This is a subject that has already been discussed at length. However, if we're not careful, this thread could turn into a big discussion on whether the Israel of old is the Church of today. This is not only outside of the original question, it also could lead to a large number of posts that could confuse this newcomer to our forum. I would encourage both of you to consider starting a seperate thread to discuss your question, and give Los a chance to return and elaborate on his/her thoughts. |
||||||
88 | Possible Lockman Forum Improvements #2 | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19222 | ||
Summary so far.................................... This is an update on the votes regarding three possible improvement ideas which we forum members could institue ourselves. I want to thank the people who have responded so far, and would encourage all of you who have not voted thus far to please share your ideas. I look forward to your help in continuing to make this forum as helpful as possible to all those who come here. Name,3 initial responses,Stay on topic,End with consensus Bill Mc,Yes,Yes,Yes Charis,Yes,Yes,Yes EdB,Yes,Yes,Yes Jensen,No,Yes, Reformer Joe, , ,No Sir Pent,Yes,Yes,Yes There,No,No,No Tim Moran,No,No,Yes Total Yes,4,5,5 Total No,3,2,2 |
||||||
89 | How can we tell figurative from literal? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19549 | ||
Dear Forum Members, An interesting question has arisen on the forum recently in multiple posts, which I would like to address directly. We would all agree that it is possible to interpret one part of scripture figuratively and another literally. The question is, "What are the criteria that can be consistently applied to tell the difference?" This is something that creeps into many different threads. It impacts how we interpret the creation story in Genesis, and the end of the world in Revelation. It even affects whether we believe that there was a certain number of soldiers, years, etc, or whether those numbers are figurative to mean something else. |
||||||
90 | How can we tell figurative from literal? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19550 | ||
Dear Forum Members, An interesting question has arisen on the forum recently in multiple posts, which I would like to address directly. We would all agree that it is possible to interpret one part of scripture figuratively and another literally. The question is, "What are the criteria that can be consistently applied to tell the difference?" This is something that creeps into many different threads. It impacts how we interpret the creation story in Genesis, and the end of the world in Revelation. It even affects whether we believe that there was a certain number of soldiers, years, etc, or whether those numbers are figurative to mean something else. |
||||||
91 | How can we tell figurative from literal? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19551 | ||
Duplicate post please disregard | ||||||
92 | How can we tell figurative from literal? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19552 | ||
Summary of Previous Posts....................... From a search of previous threads, I have found only limited answers. The most common are: 1. The Holy Spirit will tell you. 2. Church leaders will tell you. Neither of these are very objective 3. Decide based on the type of literature. 4. Figures of Speech are obviously figurative. These can lead to problems. For example, the Creation story is written in the form of ancient poetry, and figures of speech vary between cultures. 5. Descriptions use "Phenomenal" language. (ie. the sun rises) 6. Parables, symbols, and "picture stories" are figurative. The problem here is, who decides whether something is one of these things. |
||||||
93 | How can we tell figurative from literal? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19611 | ||
Contrary View, Scripture ......................... Dear EdB, Thanks for your response, but would you mind clarifying some of your ideas a little more. You said, "The Bible must be taken literally unless the text itself shows it is speaking figuratively by using metaphors, allegories and other such figures of speech." What is a consistent objective way to tell that? For instance you might suggest that anytime someone says, "such and such is LIKE", that it is metaphorical. Or you might know of a book of common figures of speech in ancient Hebrew or Greek. You also say, "Or unless a literal interpretation would violate common sense". I would submit that there are many Bible passages that violate common sense, yet I believe to be literal. Some examples are: the Creation story of making a person out of dirt, or Baalam's donkey talking, or Jesus being born of a virgin, or Jesus comming back to life after being dead for part of 3 days. As you can see, there needs to be a better method of determining the literal from the figurative. I appreciate your help in finding one. |
||||||
94 | How can we tell figurative from literal? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19616 | ||
Contrary View, Logic .......................... Dear Kalos, It seems like we are in disagreement so often on this forum, and yet I am confident that we are truly much closer to brothers than it would at first appear. I really like your quote about seeking the plain sense and avoiding nonsense. However, although that is a great summary statement, it does not actually answer the question at all. It is not objective to simply say intepret scripture using "common sense". The most obvious reason is that different people would tell you that "common sense" leads them to opposite interpretation of certain biblical passages. The only objective way to determine "common sense" would be to take a survey and if a certain percentage (ie. 75 percent) of the people agree on something then it would be "common sense". I am relatively certain that you would not recommend that we base our Biblical beliefs on just what the large majority says. Therefore, my question remains. What are OBJECTIVE and CONSISTENT methods for correct scripture interpretation? |
||||||
95 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19627 | ||
I agree that we probably could not come up with a method that would work 100 percent of the time. However, I think that a process that could tell 95 percent of the time would be good enough for me. I like your ideas of combining things, however, let's take a look at a specific example and see how it would apply. Genesis as a book would I guess fall under your category of Gospel (historical narrative), and therefore we would assume that it was literal unless noted otherwise. Then if we look at the Creation story, we discover that it is written in the form of ancient poetry, and doesn't make a lot of sense literally. It would seem that this method would tell us that it was meant to be figurative, yet you and I both believe it is literal. How do we reconcile this? |
||||||
96 | How can we tell figurative from literal? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19828 | ||
Clarification and Support ........................ Dear EdB, Thanks for your further thoughts on this idea, I think you have hit upon a great process. If I understand correctly, you are suggesting that all of scripture should be taken literally, unless it is plainly contradicted by another scripture. In those cases one must be interpreted figuratively. I really like this, because it goes along with two very important beliefs that I hold. The first is that the Bible is completely authoritative, and the second is that it was written and protected by God so that it could be understood by the common man. This process seems to me like it would be very consistent, and could be applied by anyone. One doesn't need a knowledge of ancient culture, so that they can recognize literature types or archaic figures of speech. They only need to read God's Word. Also it seems that everyone would be able to pretty simply decide between just two contradictory passages, which one was literal and which was figurative. Finally, I also like the idea that when in doubt, take it literally. Does anyone else have thoughts on this technique, or can anyone think of any times that this would not work? |
||||||
97 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19830 | ||
Contrary View, Logic ........................... Dear Steve, Of course you can join the discussion, you're always welcome. I admit that poetry does have the possibility of being literal (ie. Roses are red, violets are blue). However, it is quite often figurative (ie. My love is like a red, red, rose). Since the literal interpretation of the Genesis Creation doesn't make sense (to many people), and it is in the form of poetry, many people assume that it is the figurative kind of poetry. |
||||||
98 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19831 | ||
Clarification.................................. Dear Tim, I wish that I could explain better why the Genesis Creation is poetry. However, I am not anywhere near an expert on this subject. My only knowledge is based upon a lecture given many years ago by an Old Testament professor at a Christian college. He had many complicated reasons how it fit with an ancient form of poetry based on many things (not just the use of days). It was a completely foreign kind of poetry from what we use today (ie. it didn't rhyme, or even have a very good flow to it). The style was not as important as particular content that was required for it to qualify as poetry. My opinion was that it stunk, and I'd never write a love poem to my wife like that. But that's beside the point. Suffice it to say, that I respected this professor's knowledge of ancient languages and cultures, and have nothing to contradict his reasoning that the account was poetry. Yet at the same time, I disagree with his interpretation of much of pre-Abrahamic Genesis. He did not believe in a 6-day creation (or a worldwide flood for that matter). P.S. I'm sorry for picking the hardest example. I only choose the Genesis Creation, because, I know that there are some on this forum who interpret it figuratively while interpreting other passages literally. |
||||||
99 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19974 | ||
Request For More Input .......................... Dear Tim and fellow Forumites, I agree with you that whether it is a poem or not doesn't tell us for sure whether the Genesis Creation account is figurative or literal. I would appreciate everyone's input on the process that EdB suggested (10/19/01, 1:13am) for consistently determining whether scripture is literal or figurative. I like it, but want to know what the rest of you think. |
||||||
100 | Genesis Creation, a practical example? | Bible general Archive 1 | Sir Pent | 19985 | ||
Contrary View, Scripture........................ Dear Tim, Thanks for providing a good example of a passage which does not "plainly" identify itself as being figurative, and yet is generally interpreted that way. My question is, "Couldn't this passage be taken literally as well?" I think it is important to note that the passages says "causes" and not "caused". In other words, it is not a punishment for a one-time action, but a progressive verb indicating that the sinning is consistent and will continue indefinately. If a person was truly unable to control themselves and was consistently using their eye to lust or their hand to hurt, then it would be better for that person (and those around them) to become incapable of those actions. At the same time, I would submit that this could never be the case for a Christian. As Christians we have the Holy Spirit leading us, and one of the fruits of the Spirit (Gal 5:22-23) is "self-control". Therefore, rather than just cutting off our hands, a Christian should work with God's help to stop allowing any part of us to be used for sin. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ] Next > Last [36] >> |