17
That the Son (in regard to his Deity) should have a relationship with his Father, which is a matter of filial and voluntary subjection, does not mean that he is not equal in Deity to the Father.
Equal in Divine nature, or 'form', as we see in Philippians :
who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal to God, [Philippians 2:6 YLT]
Yet ...
16
The Queen of England is greater than me in that she is my Queen and I am her loyal subject.. but we are equal in that we are both human.
My father is greater than me in that he is my father, but we are equal in nature, in that we are both human.
The Son of God is, and always has been from eternity, subordinate to the Father in his role as the Son. This ...
13
No problem for Trinitarians at all.
The context of 1 Corinthians 15:27 is actually a big problem for Unitarians.
1 Corinthians 15:27-28
[27]For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him.
[28]And when all things shall be subdued unto ...
10
If you read the general context of this passage in Corinthians you will find that there is a lot of stuff about church order, roles in the church, how to deal with problems inside and outside the body of believers, etc.
The verse you quote in particular starts to make sense when you see it as a reference to church discipline and understand the purpose of ...
10
According to The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict by Josh McDowell, p125, Josephus, who died after 100AD, wrote of Jesus in his Jewish Antiquities, "...for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and then thousand other wonderful things concerning him." (Antiquities, XVIII, 33).
However, those words are ...
10
Read the whole chapter. Earlier in 1st Corinthians 15 the Bible's definitive answer to this question is given.
For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared ...
9
As a "Pharisee amongst Pharisees," Paul would have seen the Scriptures as the Scriptures of the Jews - the Torah, the Ketu'vim, and the Nevi'im, or as we say in English, the Law, the Writings, and the Prophets. When Jesus was on the transfiguration mount, he prefigured this. These Scriptures are the Old Testament to modern Christians, or "the Hebrew Bible" ...
9
Even if the premise that Christ had longer hair is true, it would not matter as that is not the point of this passage. If it is read in context i.e. read the chapter before and after, it is clear that Paul is talking about how Jewish customs and how even though they are no longer necessary due to Christ's sacrifice, they should still be observed if you are ...
9
Since Paul didn't expand on this, the best we can do is to review what noted theologians have said about this. To get some good answers, you really need to look no further than Bible commentaries.
Bear in mind that the type of love here is agape love, which is also translated as charity, or selfless love. It's not speaking of romantic love as on "love ...
9
Actually, in his magnum opus "Institutes of the Christian Religion" (ICR), he cited Tobit, Baruch, 1 and 2 Maccabees, and Siriach. The Geneva Bible, which Calvin accepted and fostered, also contains the Deuterocanonical books. This doesn't say however that Calvin accepted them as having the same rank as others books. In fact, he wrote precisely ...
8
The phrase is a direct quotation from Genesis 2.7. There is some difference in the wording in most modern bibles. This is because Paul was quoting from the Greek text of the Old Testament, known as the Septuagint or LXX, whereas our modern bibles are translated from the Hebrew text from which the Greek was originally translated.
The LXX text of Genesis 2.7:
...
7
Both "Pulpit Commentary" and "Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible" recognize this quote as taken from Genesis 2:7, not word by word but carrying the same meaning.
Then the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground. He
breathed the breath of life into the man's nostrils, and the man
became a living person. (Genesis 2:7, NLT)
The "Last Adam"...
7
From Barnes' Notes on the Bible:
The more obvious signification is, that there is a sense in which it
may be said that the cup is blessed, and that by prayer and praise it
is set apart and rendered in some sense sacred to the purposes of
religion. it cannot mean that the cup has undergone any physical
change, or that the wine is anything but wine; ...
7
The First Epistle to the Corinthians opens with an expanded address (1 Corinthians 1:1-7), identifying its writer as the apostle Paul who, with Sosthenes, was writing to the church community in Corinth. After a warm opening address, Paul urges the Corinthians to agree in what they say, and to be united in the same mind and in the same purpose. The reason for ...
7
You ask how is 1 Corinthians 8:6
yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live.
to be understood with Trinitarian theology? In particular, you state "Paul is saying that the one being of God is shared only by the Father." Trinitarians have ...
6
Being as there is no image of Jesus that has any historical credibility, the question is based on a faulty premise. We simply do not know what Jesus' hair looked like.
The paintings to which you allude tend to be those painted by the European masters in the 16th & 17th Centuries. At the time, it was fashionable for men to have longer hair, and thus it ...
6
The preceding verses answers your question:
6 Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?
7Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
8Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice ...
6
The simplest way to reconcile these passages is to dispute the KJV's translation of βραχύ as "a little." This is, in fact, what most other translations have done, including those that have no interest in internal harmonization. The NET renders Heb 2:7 as follows:
Hebrews 2:6–8a (NET)
6 Instead someone testified somewhere:
"What is man that ...
6
Since the question does not specify a denomination, I am assuming that any denomination is OK. I thus am basing my answers with one of the clearest doctrinal statements I could find. However, it is pretty representative of most arguments that argue against obligatory head coverings, coming from a variety of theologies.
Here is a statement by the Reformed ...
6
The bread and wine we offer at Mass do become, in Catholic understanding, "truly, really, and substantially, the body and blood together with the soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ"1, and this is what we consume in the Eucharist.
However, this does not mean—as I mentioned in this answer—that the sacrificial offerings are no longer like ...
6
Evangelical commentators generally hold that Paul is speaking authoritatively in 1 Corinthians 7:12, and only indicating that he was not aware of any direct teaching on this subject by Jesus during his earthly ministry. The Reformation Study Bible explains:
With regard to the problem treated in vv. 10, 11, there was a well-known instruction given by Jesus ...
answered Sep 1 '17 at 1:23
Nathaniel is protesting
40.9k11 gold badges111 silver badges273 bronze badges
6
The short answer: revelation to Joseph Smith.
The long answer:
The LDS edition of the King James Version (KJV plus references) was authored in 1979 under the direction of the Apostles:
In 1979 and 1981, following a historic effort led by Elders Thomas S. Monson, Boyd K. Packer, and Bruce R. McConkie of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, The Church of Jesus ...
5
1 Corinthians 13 is one of those chapters that tends to be read at weddings and get taken out of context. Because of its association with weddings, many associate it with romantic love, and David Stratton is right to say clearly that this is not what Paul was thinking about.
If you look at chapter 12, you'll see that Paul was addressing the issue of the ...
4
Paul is not trying to make the point that 1 Corinthians 7:12ff is his opinion where the rest is God's inspired Word. Rather, Paul knows the oral tradition of Jesus’ sayings on divorce that were later written down in the Gospels, but he is not aware of a time when Jesus ever spoke specifically to a situation in which one spouse becomes a Christian and the ...
4
John Gills exposition of the Bible always explained it the best for me:
The bread and cup are called the bread and cup of the Lord; these may
be eaten and drank "unworthily", when they are eaten and drank by
unworthy persons, in an unworthy manner, and to unworthy ends and
purposes. The Lord's supper may be taken unworthily, when it is
partook of ...
4
Orthodox bishops, priests and monks always remove their hats (of whatever kind) when praying. The Bishop removes his mitre at the Altar. Monks hang their klobuk over their shoulder or remove it entirely during the service. So the question seems to stem from ignorance, or not actually attending an Orthodox Liturgy to see what we do. Incidentally it is ...
4
Anthony Thiselton, in his NIGTC commentary, has offered the following translation of 1 Cor 13:7:
It never tires of support, never loses faith, never exhausts hope, never gives up.
Here, the phrase "never loses faith" is used to translate πάντα πιστεύει (panta pisteuei).
The basic argument underlying this translation is that panta ("all things") here is ...
4
You missed an essential part of the scripture in 1 Corinthians, I feel. The full scripture in KJV reads:
14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the
unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children
unclean; but now are they holy.
Paul is opposing views here that may have arisen, that a believing woman ...
4
There are actually two similar ways that this passage is interpreted:
That the "gods" and "lords" are the completely imaginary gods of the heathen
That the "gods" and "lords" are supernatural beings that do exist, but are not divine
Many commentators don't attempt to draw a distinction between these two, like George Leo Haydock (a Roman Catholic), who ...
answered Sep 3 '15 at 13:10
Nathaniel is protesting
40.9k11 gold badges111 silver badges273 bronze badges
4
Matthew 27:3 says that the impetus for Judas' suicide was seeing him be condemned, rather than seeing him being executed or anything else. Jesus' interactions with Pilate, including the possibility of his being freed, are narrated afterwards. Although the gospels do jump forwards and back in time, I take the explicit description of Judas' remorse being ...
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible
