Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

4

Marriage isn't 50-50. It's both parties giving 100%. Dr. Emerson Eggerichs addresses the differences in the commands extensively in his book Love and Respect and on his website, most recently in a September 4 blogpost. This verse doesn't mean that women don't have to love and men don't have to be subject to their wives. Paul was giving instructions about ...


3

1 Peter 3:3 ὧν ἔστω οὐχ ὁ ἔξωθεν ἐμπλοκῆς τριχῶν καὶ περιθέσεως χρυσίων ἢ ἐνδύσεως ἱματίων κόσμος (1Pe 3:3 BGT) A literal translation of the Greek would be “Let not your adornment be external—braiding the hair, and wearing gold jewelry, or putting on clothes.” Peter, however, is not forbidding the wearing of any clothes at all (as a literal reading ...


3

Another perspective on this issue: why should Paul have counselled "love" in each of the three cases of domestic relationship in Colossians 3:18-20 (wives to husbands, husbands to wives, children to parents)? The question assumes that this disposition -- certainly a norm in modern western nuclear families -- is also the default social configuration in ...


3

To answer the question I think we need to need to consider the whole verse and its context. Our English translations begin with “therefore” (οὖν), which suggests that Peter is drawing a conclusion from the previous verses (vv.18–22), where Peter writes about Christ’s victory over hostile powers through his death and resurrection. The connection between the ...


2

Here is the English translation of the interlinear version of 1 Peter 3:3-4 in the New American Standard: Whose let it be not the external of braiding of hair and putting around of gold or putting on of garments adorning1 But the hidden of the heart man in the imperishable [beauty] of the gentle and quiet spirit which is before God of great worth ...


2

The context indicates that the people are still judged -- thus, some transgression must still be "charged" or "accounted" to them. Look and the verse after it: Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses [since death happened, there must be sin and transgression], even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam [Adam sinned against a specific ...


2

John says in his first letter, in verses 7 and 8, "For there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement." It is obvious that we are saved by the blood of Jesus Christ, in that our sins are fully payed for by the act of His death, and there no longer stands any accusation or record of wrong against us ...


2

No contradiction There is not really anything contradictory about stating it this way just because Christ is understood to be pre-existent.1 This can be understood looking at it from two perspectives. Human Perspective You make the statement: I would never say "I foreknow my son" if he is sitting next to me. Yet I believe you can imagine a scenario ...


1

Your analysis is correct, and the following grammar citation provides the grammatical explanation to answer your remaining questions. Please click to enlarge. Thus the "splitting" of the clause with attributives (inserted in the middle of the sentence) is normal in Greek. Such "splitting" would not be typical in English.


1

NOT WATER BAPTISM THAT SAVES YOU: It becomes immediately apparent, when reading this verse, that the ritual of water baptism, though symbolising a spiritual change that has taken place, is not the principal subject here. Peter informs us that he is NOT referring to "the physical removal of dirt from the flesh" (i.e. water baptism) but a spiritual reality of ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible