Results 8361 - 8380 of 8433
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: EdB Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
8361 | Why require faith to perform miracles? | Matt 13:58 | EdB | 6322 | ||
I'm sorry I meant for my response to be tied to Hank's question rather than Nolan's answer. | ||||||
8362 | Why require faith to perform miracles? | Matt 13:58 | EdB | 6321 | ||
Jesus being God was sovereign and did many miracles without faith of others being involved. There are many examples of this in the gospels one being Luke 7:11-16. This passage tells of the raising of the widow’s son, no mention is made of faith by anyone and the son was dead. Notice in Jesus’s instructions to the 12 before he sent them out to heal and cast out demons Matt 10:1-14 he gave no requirement of faith. I'm not trying be a wise guy, but I have seen God perform and do many miracles where there was no faith. Just as I have seen nothing apparent happen where there was much faith. Let’s not put God in a box He can and will do as He pleases whether we have faith or not. Although we do know faith is required to please Him Hebrews 11:6. |
||||||
8363 | giving your tithe | 1 Cor 9:16 | EdB | 6299 | ||
I will not dispute any comments made here but I want to make a comment. Where ever you give the money make sure it is going for the purpose you intended. Many many ministries have huge overheads, and while you think your giving to some needy cause you are really giving to fat fund raisers and bureaucrats running the program. Many TV solicitors fall into this group. That is why I believe giving to the church and let them funnel the money directly to the need is often the preferred. | ||||||
8364 | Why send demons into the pigs? | Mark 5:12 | EdB | 6216 | ||
I think what JohnBible wrote is valid and is a good observation. I also think Jesus was giving us a practical demonstration. Jesus by granting the demons request to be sent into the pigs was demonstrating, demons can not predict the future because they have no idea of the future. The demons didn’t want to be without a body to inhabit, so they figured they would ask to be sent into the pigs which a Jew (of which Jesus was) would already consider to be unclean. Jesus on the other hand knew exactly what the pigs would do, so He allowed them to enter the pigs. Lesson Satan and his demons can not tell the future. |
||||||
8365 | Biblical support for animals in heaven? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 6162 | ||
Prayon had us on the right track in Ecclesiastes 3:18-21. However we stopped short. Move on over to Ecclesiastes 12:7 and see the writer answers the question he stated in 3:21. There is no clear Biblical assurance that there will or will not be animals or our pets in Heaven. However I think the above is strong indication there will not be. Any belief that animals will be needed to complete Heaven falls short of understanding the presence of God. When we come into the presence of God and Christ Jesus all else will pale, all else will be forgotten, all else will mean nothing. We have no appreciation for the Glory and Holiness of God. Do you think that Angels worship Him because they don’t have anything better to do? They do it because He is God, He is the center of their being. Acts 17:28 states God is our existence. I’m certain then that none of us will ask to leave heaven should we get there and see there are no animals. I’m also certain if there isn’t any animals we will never ever miss them. If I offended anyone by this answer – I’m sorry I went out of my way not to. |
||||||
8366 | A question of capitalization: small "s"? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 6097 | ||
Matthew 22:43 is ify but I think I will go with a capitalized S, showing the Holy Spirit lead David. Acts 19:21 should be a small s showing Paul decided in his spirit or heart to go. Acts 21:4 should be a capital S showing once again the Holy Spirit’s leading. 1 Peter 4:6 again a little ify but I think I will stick with a small s showing man’s spirit. As far as the NASB and Daniel 3:25 I think they have it wrong, both NKJV and KJV use the term Son of God with capitalization. No way I can see it being the “son of the gods” I think the answer is ascertained by Nebuchadnezzar’s reaction. When the three Hebrew children came out of the furnace Nebuchadnezzar never asked who the other person was, he had already proclaimed him the Son of God which could have been Jesus capitalized or or an angel small capitals. In either case Nebuchadnezzar knew whoever it was he came from the God of the three Hebrew children. |
||||||
8367 | Could our understanding be wrong? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 6096 | ||
Steve thank you for your answer. Your right America could be included in the one third. Although I’m not sure where America came into the conversation. However since it was brought, America at the present time is too big to just dismiss in Revelation. That gives us a hint. That the time of Revelation America is either not a major player because all of economic power and/or political power has been removed. Or it is included in the word “island”, The word “Island” in the Bible typically refers to any land outside the immediate land mass that contains Israel. So in Revelation 6:4 and 16:20 where we see very island was moved or fled away may be speaking of both American continents as well as Australia and etc. However my question is with everything that happens during the tribulation, earthquakes, famines, flaming hail, wars, and a total collapse of society along with no food, no drinking water, the oceans dead, and other disasters and then the Anti Christ trying to kill every one that doesn’t carry the mark of the beast. Who is going to be left to go into the Millennium? Why in the opening moments of the tribulation we see 1/3 of man kind destroyed there is no accounting given for how many more die in the rest of the judgements and wraths. Then let’s assume there is people left, where are they going to live. The oceans are dead, all drinking water is contaminated, most everything green has been destroyed, all cattle and wild animals have died, the islands are gone, the mountains have been destroyed by earthquakes, major nuclear or conventional war has been raged, the infrastructure of society has been destroyed, the earth is a wreck. Current teaching is that the New Heavens and new earth don’t come into being until the end of the millennium. Now I know all things are possible through Christ Jesus but doesn't it seem like our understanding of the millennium could be wrong? |
||||||
8368 | Who is going into the millenium? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 6093 | ||
I'm going to make one last attempt to educate someone. The two that flagged Orthodoxy's updates as being unBiblical are seriously mistaken. Orthodoxy’s view is called the Preterist view and is held by a great number of theologians. Men of renown that I feel safe in saying has spent more time studying the Bible and in particular the Book of Revelation than the two that flagged Orthodoxy’s updates as unbiblical. There is another school of thought that is very similar to Preterist in that they believe much of Revelation has been accomplished already and that school of thought is call Historist. Of which men such as John Wycliffe, John Knox, William Tyndale, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Ulrich Zwingli, Phillip Melanchthon, sir Issac Newton, Jan Huss, John Fox, John Wesley, Johnathan Edwards, George Whitfield, Charles Finney, C.H. Surgeon, Matthew Henry, Adam Clarke, Albert Barnes, E. B. Elliot. H. Guinness, and Bishop Thomas Newton are members. (Revelation Four Views edit by Steve Gregg, Pub Nelson 1953,1997) Now If you will take a moment and study this list you will see names of men that died for Christ. Men that were persecuted for Christ. Men that gave their lives for Christ. I would like the two that flagged Othrodoxy’s comments as unbiblical to also know they are calling the idea’s these men held as unbiblical. These men may have had mistaken ideas (which has yet to be proved) but I believe they had held valid possible interpretations of the Bible and were not acting as agents of Satan trying to deceive anyone. The futurist view of which I’m sure the two of you hold is a fairly modern view and came into being around the time of John Darby, who then gave the idea to Scofield who incorporated the idea into his Bible. It wasn’t given much thought until Israel became a nation in 1948 and this opened the door for many many Futurist to declare the second coming of Jesus on or before May of 1988, 40 years or one generation from the founding of Israel. Many claimed to have been given visions, prophecy, and angelic visitations that confirmed this date. We now know they are all false. Now let us look at the accuracy of the Historist view. In 1690 the King of England asked Historist Robert Flemming by his understanding of Revelation when would the papal rule of Europe fall? He replied that it would began in 1794 and expire in 1848. 1794 marked the beginning of the French Revolution which was the beginning of the down fall of papal rule and in 1848 the pope was driven from Rome if only temporarily. Mr. Flemming had set those dates 100 years before they happened, and his book title Apocalyptic Key published in 1701 can confirm this. (ibid pg 35) What about the preterist? Well in Revelation chapter 16 it talks about hail raining down weighing one talent or 90 to 100 pounds. In the siege of Jerusalem the Roman army fired their catapults from over a quarter mile away and guess what size the projectiles were? You got it one talent in weight. What about the blood in the rivers? It is said that when the fighting for the temple was finished soldiers were forces to crawl over bodies to reach their next victim. The bodies were piled around the altar of the temple as high as the altar. One observers standing back observed that blood was flowing so freely that it cascaded down the temple steps and over the sides of the temple mount. That view from a distance with the fire in the temple and blood flowing over the mount made the whole thing look like apocalyptic volcano. All I’m asking if your going to flag someone’s comments as unbiblical know enough about the subject to be able to supply a logical defense for your action. |
||||||
8369 | A question of capitalization: small "s"? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 6049 | ||
Ray, at first blush I would have to say the first three Rev.1:10, 4:2, 21:10 should be small "s" However knowing the intent is to show that the Holy Spirit is leading or revealing to John’s spirit, I’m not sure the capitalized “s” is all that wrong. In reference to Rev 1:13 it should be capitalized as I believe this is a direct reference to Jesus. NKJV bears this out. |
||||||
8370 | Please help. Post your comments. | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 6023 | ||
Hank I'm sorry I vented. I apologize to you and the forum. It's just this person that put those red flags on Orthodoxy's comments to my questions has me seeing red. As far as the forum giving advice I'm very worried about the quality given. I think this forum is too far removed from any situation to give good, helpful and Godly advice. I also get a definite feeling that many “Christians” look at prayer as, “well there is nothing else to do we might as well pray”. Jesus told us faith expressed in prayer moves mountains. I believe that! I believe because prayer is so powerful it is the weapon of choice of a Christian when they find themselves in need. Second guessing is very common in our society and many people do it without even realizing they are doing it. People when they respond to forum need to ask themselves, why are they responding? Do they have something to add to the discussion? Do they need a point clarified? Do they have another point that is as of yet un-thought of? Or are they trying to one up or one down a previous answer. If the later is their reason they aren’t interested in a Bible study they are looking for a debate. Or they are looking to make themselves appear to have all the answers. In other words they want to appear superior and haveeveryone else should hold them in high esteem and yield to their intellect. |
||||||
8371 | Should they be red flagged? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 6022 | ||
Hank I don't really care who did it, although it appears it was done vindictively, in that they have flagged all of Orthodoxy's updates. What I care about is the closed ignorant mind, such a mind is ripe for deception. Revelation is a book with many views of it’s interpretation, of which there are four major, Historicist, Preterist, Futurist, and Spiritual. Most Futurist are dispensational and pre millennial, and either pre trib or post trib, I fit into that category and I have never really appreciated the Preterist view. In the Bible study on revelation I had asked a question of who would go into the millennium? Disappointingly all the responses I received were the standard futurist answer that are easily rebuffed. Orthodoxy made a Amillennial observation which I was trying to understand when someone that has no appreciation for knowledge tried to disrupt the study with the use of the red flags. By challenging that person to identify themselves I was trying to open their eyes that just maybe they don’t have all the answers to Biblical questions? That there are people of equal intelligence who are honestly on both sides of many issues. I consider John MacArthur and Jack Hayford as two brilliant minds yet they stand at opposite ends of the spectrum as far as Bible interpretation on issues such as gifts of the spirit, once saved always saved, women in ministry and the list goes on. Is either a heretic? No. Is either unbiblical? No. Is either bad? No. Then look at MacArthur and RC Sproul both look at Revelation differently is one a heretic? No. Is either unbiblical? No. Is either bad? No. I believe in the case of these three men they have all have made a honest attempt to answer questions that doesn’t seem to have one answer. Should they be red flagged? |
||||||
8372 | What is the point of the flags? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 6020 | ||
I can agree with the intent I just disagree with the use. In this case a valid point was being made and since it was in response to my question and since I felt no attitude how did someone else decide it was Inappropriate, Unbiblical, Bad, Controversial and Biased. I will yield to Biased for it definely came from a person of the pretrist presuasion however I imagine the person that red flagged it was biased to dispensationalism. So what is the point of those flags? | ||||||
8373 | Please help. Post your comments. | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 6001 | ||
Hank, You asked so here goes. The rating system has me about upset. I asked a legitimate question and had received some answers; most left me looking for more. A person responded that offered another approach. This approach did not agree with someone, even though the approach is an accepted possible biblical scenario to a question that has been debated for years. Someone now has red flagged all the updates of that person. Which to me is absurd. I think we should be able to have the identity of who voted. Also I think this forum should not be used as an advice column. Too much of the advice that has been given in this forum is ungodly and straight from the pit of hell. Third problem I have is with the frequent responders that present themselves as Biblical scholars. When a tough or difficult question is asked they either do not response to it or more often they wait until someone else does, then they very piously, but oh so graciously tear apart that persons answer. It has all the appearances of an effort to esteem themselves above others by making others look like fools. |
||||||
8374 | Would you explain your action? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 5998 | ||
Would whoever has red flagged Orthodoxy's updates in this subject string please explain to me why you consider them inappropriate to the discussion? Or why they are unbiblical? Or even why you consider them not good? As far as being controversial or biased I feel safe in saying probably all of this forum would meet that criteria to some degree. Unless we are patting each other on the back, most updates are controversial and I think everyone carries some demoninational bias. I would really like to hear an explaination for red flagging the first three categories. Does that person have the courage to step up and explain themselves? |
||||||
8375 | Who is going into the millenium? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 5983 | ||
If you want to see an ignorant and a closed mind in action take a look at this exchange of information. Who ever went through this string and red flagged Orthodoxy's updates is in just such a state. As a Pre-Millennial dispensationist I do not agree with Orthodoxy’s position. However his position is a valid and was a traditional view that was held by most Christians until less than 150 years ago and since Hal Lindsey and a few others made popular the Pre Millennium dispensational view. To Red flag comments because they disagree with your thinking, provided they are based on a valid Biblical interpretation, is absurd and displays great ignorance. I think whoever did this is direct opposition to the idea of this forum and the red flags. To me the red flags were put in place to warn others of a totally non-biblical point of view not one that merely disagrees with the rater. I’m not defending Orthodoxy in any way. I’m defending the exchange of information in this forum from someone that has no understanding of the Preterist’s point of view and has allowed that ignorance to close their mind to another possible view of something that open to interpretation. |
||||||
8376 | Where do you see chpt 16 historically? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 5981 | ||
Orthodoxy I think you have two trains of thought here. I never mentioned the American Continent in any of my updates. Though I totally agree with you, anyone that thinks they see a mention of the United States or even the American continent in the Bible is pushing prophecy. If you believe revelation has been accomplished in the first century and mainly through the destruction of Jerusalem. Where do you see chapter 16 being historically being played out? For instance where did the oceans turn to blood and every living sea creature die? Or an earthquake that leveled every mountain? |
||||||
8377 | Must prophesy speak to original audience | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 5954 | ||
Orthodoxy you say every part of scripture means something to the original audience. In Daniel we see scripture define the beast with iron teeth Dan. 7:7 which we know to be the Roman empire, yet that held no meaning for the original readers. In fact all through Daniel and many other prophetic books we see examples of things that didn't come into fruition until well after the original audience’s demise and therefore held little or no meaning to them. You say the church should have no interest in Jerusalem. Aside from the Futurist's view of Revelation where Jerusalem plays a very important role. Isn't Jerusalem, more specifically the Mount of Olives, where Jesus will touch down Zech. 14:4 when He returns? |
||||||
8378 | Six fingered man today? | 2 Sam 21:20 | EdB | 5853 | ||
Reading 1 Sam 21:22 and 1 Chronicles 20 I think there is enough evidence to conclude these four were related to Goliath the giant that David first killed. I think this is the reason David picked up 5 smooth stones 1 Sam. 17:40. David evidently knew Goliath had four relatives and I think David was preparing to fight Goliath plus the four of them. Evidently the 6 fingers along with their great stature was a generic trait. |
||||||
8379 | Urgent and swift help needed!! | Eph 6:12 | EdB | 5839 | ||
Theresa please let us know the outcome. Make sure you know God's will for you in this. God places each of us in a church for a reason, if you have accomplished that reason and God has given you release then go. Your reason for being there may be for such a time as this. It may be to stand arm and arm with your pastor, or to hold him before the Lord in prayer. It may be that your the light that shines forth in the darkness. I pray God will give you direction. |
||||||
8380 | Three way split? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 5820 | ||
This really isn't helping me to get an answer according to my premillennial thinking but it is fascinating. I had a thought could the three way split of the great city in Rev 16:19 be talking about the situation between the Jews, Muslims and Christians? | ||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 ] Next > Last [422] >> |