19

It is easier to say 'Thy sins be forgiven thee'. The audience will not see anything happen. Anyone can say to anyone else, 'Thy sins be forgiven' and nobody will be any the wiser - until the Day of Judgement when it will be demonstrated (and that for all eternity) whether or not eternal punishment has been avoided. So for Jesus to say 'Thy sins be forgiven ...


11

There are numerous cases in the NT of People praying directly to Jesus. Here is a sample: John 4:10 - Jesus answered and said to her, "If you had known the gift of God and who it is saying to you, 'Give Me to drink,' you would have asked Him, and He would have given to you living water." John 14:13, 14 -And I will do whatever you ask in My name, ...


8

Although he was a son, he learned obedience through what he suffered. And being made perfect (τελειωθεὶς), he became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him, being designated by God a high priest after the order of Melchizedek. (Hebrews 5:8-10 ESV) How this applies to Jesus who was already perfect can be seen in how the word is used elsewhere: ...


8

A rhetorical response question would be, "Why would one think Act 2:36 is referring to Jesus being 'made Lord and Christ after the resurrection'?" This idea is reading more into Act 2:36 than is there. The ESV, and most translations, make the aorist indicative ἐποίησεν into "has made" (a perfective idea, a completed action). That is an interpretative move, ...


8

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 ...


7

For a detailed explanation on Christo-centric preaching (and thereby indirectly the hermeutic), I highly, highly recommend Keller + Clowney's 16-part seminar they held on "Preaching Christ to a Postmodern world", available for free(!) on iTunes U. Here is the link: https://itunes.apple.com/us/itunes-u/preaching-christ-in-postmodern/id378879885 I'd ...


6

Short Answer: The word is best translated "one-of-a-kind" or simply "unique". ("Only" would also work, though it could be misunderstood more easily.) The old translation "only-begotten" was based on an honest mistake in parsing the Greek word. Background on "only-begotten" The Greek word in question is μονογενη. It is pretty clearly a compound word formed ...


6

No, Moses and Elijah weren't resurrected so that Peter, James, and John could see them. We already know this because John 3:13 tells us that "no man hath ascended up to heaven". Look at how Matthew describes the event: And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him. — Matthew 17:3 … And as they came down from the mountain, ...


6

Jesus is quoting from Psalm 31: Into your hands I commit my spirit; deliver me, Lord, my faithful God. Psalm 31:5 (NIV) If you read through the whole Psalm, you can see David is asking God to save him from his enemies. This quote isn't supposed to give us a sense of Jesus travelling to be with his father, but trusting in him to deliver Jesus from death. ...


5

According to the new testament witness, the Spirit of God and the Spirit of Christ are one and the same Spirit (Romans 8:9). The apostles tell us that this was true of the Spirit in the Old Testament also (1 Peter 1:11). It is through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, that the Father and the Son are said to "make [their] home" in the believer (...


5

Think of it this way: which of the two statements is verifiable ? Anyone can say, "You sins are forgiven." But how would anyone verify it? However to state, "Get up and walk" is instantaneously verifiable. Thus, he was proving himself to the mentioned skeptics that he had the power to forgive sins because he had the verifiable ability to heal.


5

The KJV and YLT (which both convey the singular 'thee' when it is necessary to do so) have : And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. [KJV] and I will give to thee the keys of the reign of the heavens, and ...


5

Let me layout the occurrence of the verbs used to send "Christ": ἀποστέλλω (apostelló) Christ sent by an unspecified authority (the Father implied??), Matt 10:40, 15:24, 21:37 (parable), Mark 9:37, 12:6, Luke 4:43, 9:48, 10:16, John 7:28 Christ sent by the "Spirit of the Lord", Luke 4:18 Christ sent by "God", John 3:17, 6:29, 8:42, Acts 3:20, 26, 1 John 4:...


5

Matthew 9 32 While they were going out, a man who was demon-possessed and could not talk was brought to Jesus. 33 And when the demon was driven out, the man who had been mute spoke. The crowd was amazed and said, “Nothing like this has ever been seen in Israel.” 34 But the Pharisees said, “It is by the prince of demons that he drives out demons.”


4

There are definitely limits as to how the approach should be used, and it is not an exegetical approach. Instead it is an approach which says that it is important that we see an overarching metanarrative through the whole Bible and that its focus is on Jesus. Graeme Goldsworthy says: The immediate appeal of biblical theology to preachers, teachers and ...


4

The ones you have in bold are from two Psalms which were considered to have Messianic applications by the writer of Hebrews. He was arguing from the nature of Messiah that he was greater than angels. It seems that at the time the recipients of the letter had a high view of angels as above every possible person outside of God himself. As the writer really ...


4

The Idea in Brief The mystery was that believers were participating not only in the New Covenant, but were also in actual ontological union with the body of Jesus Christ. That is, in the Hebrew Bible the prophets indicated that the New Covenant was exclusive to Israelites (that is, to faithful Jews). However the Apostle Paul later received exclusive ...


4

Jesus does not explain on that occasion why He is washing the Apostles' feet, but He tells Peter, What I am doing you do not understand now, but you will know after this (John 13:7). The understanding here is that Jesus was teaching a lesson in humility. Theophylact explains: "You do not yet understand that I am teaching you humility. But after this ...


4

St. John Crysostom gives an insightful commentary on this scene; his conclusion was that it was to convince Judas not to betray Him, to give him occasion to reconsider his intentions freely, and not by compulsion, by offering him a gesture of the uttermost kindness and humility (though God—cf. Phil 2:5-11): ... Let us see also what He does now towards the ...


4

The logic of the sentence goes that if man can do something more difficult, he surely would be able to do something easier. For instance, if one can rise a big stone, for sure the same one can rise also a smaller stone. Thus, here, according to this logic Jesus tells them that since to say to the paralytic man "get up and walk" with an effect that he would ...


4

The text cannot possibly mean that Jesus Christ is 'identical' in the past, present and future, because the Son of God became incarnate whereas, previously, he was not so. Jesus grew in stature before God and men, Luke 2:52, which involves a change. He was unscarred, then he was scarred and showed those scars to Thomas, John 20:27 : which, again, involves a ...


4

The question states the opinion that : Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich Greek lexicon cites Mark 10:18 to show that Jesus did not equate himself with the Lord God the Father of the Shema. In support of this opinion, the OP quotes from BDAG the following : BDAG θεος 2. Some writings in our lit. use the word θ. w. ref. to Christ (without necessarily equating ...


4

The passage is in Aramaic and is more accurately translated as the plural, "gods:" He answered and said, “But I see four men unbound, walking in the midst of the fire, and they are not hurt; and the appearance of the fourth is like a son of the gods.” (Daniel 3:25) [ESV] The majority of translations have either the plural, gods, or a divine being. The ...


4

Many of the commentaries remark on this but the best summary is by BDAG under the entry " ἐν ", and meaning #4 which says: *Marker of close association within a limit, in - … (c) especially in Paul and Johannine usage, to denote a close personal relation in which the referent of the ἐν-term is viewed as the controlling influence: under the control of, ...


4

I would answer with just two comments: It is almost certain that since John probably wrote his Gospel almost at the end of the first century and the synoptics were written possible 25 years earlier, John was well aware of them. [The purpose in John composing is account is quite different - it is theological rather than historical as per the synoptics. But ...


4

If monogenes (mono + genes) really means 'one of a kind', 'special', 'a single example' and so forth, then what has happened to genes ? Mono alone means 'one', 'sole', 'single'. The rejection of monogenes meaning 'only begotten' is too complex and too extensive to properly cover all the many convolutions of argument used in the controversy, on a site such as ...


3

The question implies that that law of non-contradiction is not well-understood. The Un-begotten Only Son and the Only Begotten Son are one and the same. John calls him the Word (Joh 1.1, 1Jo 5:7 ) and it is by the Word that God created all things. (Eph 3:9, Col 1:16) In his incarnation, he was formed in the womb;he was begotten. (Joh 1:14 ) Everything ...


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