Adam the " First Man?"

[mickiel]

I was listening to some of Rays vedios and was happy to hear him say that there were humans before Adam. I mean the science and archaeology is there, we can't deny it. So many religious people do deny it, but the evidence is somewhat overwhelming, if one can see it. In 1Corinth. 15:45 Adam is called " The first man." I have wondered about that for some time now. Just what that means.

Not really knowing, it simply intrest me beyond end. In the next verse, 46, it states the spiritual is not first, but the natural man is first. I have wondered if that could explain why God created Primordal man first? And could it be possible that the humans before Adam, simply were not created with a working consciousness, were not given what Adam was given, an image of God. Or a concrete consciousness with potential blooming personality,  knowledge, or the beginnings of a " Civilized mind." ( Which eventually led to the creation of civilization.)

It makes sense to me that Adam had to have something that Primordal humans didnot have, which could explain why he was even called the " First Man." Perhaps he was the first man with Consciousness, and the first human God dealt with on a closer level. I am not saying he had Gods Spirit, I don't know that he did, I doubt it. But he had something that changed the direction of humanity from primordal humans, who obviously had very little advancement in millions of years, and after Adam there was a dramatic  change in human history that eventually led to civilization.

I have told a few friends of mine that I am beginning to think that Primordal humans may not have been conscious, as we are conscious; of course some of them think I am nuts! They may have been so " Earthy" that they existed solely on a very high level of instinct. I wish I knew " Why" God even created them in the first place. His reason behind it.

I just thought I would throw this out here and see what some of you think of it?

[Foxx]

others may chime in on this, I may be way off but its just my two cents. Adam is the one from which Jesus Christ eventually come from. I think is the importance of "first Adam" and "second Adam". Yes there is evidence to suggest there were other people prior to Adam but did God breath life into them them same way like Adam? I do not believe so. To say they had no conscience or awareness would be skeptical. 

The implication that they were an "experiment" for God is a stretch. That assumes he didn't know what he was doing and we know that he does KNOW ALL.

[mickiel]

others may chime in on this, I may be way off but its just my two cents. Adam is the one from which Jesus Christ eventually come from. I think is the importance of "first Adam" and "second Adam". Yes there is evidence to suggest there were other people prior to Adam but did God breath life into them them same way like Adam? I do not believe so. To say they had no conscience or awareness would be skeptical. If they were people then God made them for a reason just like us.

The implication that they were an "experiment" for God is a stretch. That assumes he didn't know what he was doing and we know that he does KNOW ALL.

I agree that God didnot breathe into the cavemen what he did into Adam, there have to had been a difference, but the difference was I think moreso a " Design", not to imply an experiment. Designing is not experimentation when you know exactly what your doing, and of course God did. Just as the earth was designed to bring forth grass and other things from within it, I think God was designing primordal man, and designed them to go through certain changes, ( what science calls evolution). Human to human changes, not animal to human as some suggest. When God designs something to change, that is not experimentation; such as pupi to butterfly. It would just be natural from his design onward.

I do realize I am being somewhat skeptical in assuming they had no consciousness like ours, I tend to think they were more animal like, as compared to us. Not in appearence, but in characther, personality, education, even perhaps having no religions. As far as we know, they had no education, no agriculture, no government, no biblical scriptures, no transportation, no technology; no signs of those things which display consciousness in a people.

I am sure God had his reasons for creating them, Isaiah 25:1 " Plans formed long ago with " Perfect Faithfulness", reveals a way of God that is not wasteful. I just tend to think in terms of " Why" Adam is called the first man, when he was not the first human. And I think Consciousness explains that, or is one of the keys in helping us to understand this.

Who would think that God would create a whole race of humans who were not as conscious as we are? Not as aware; not as responsible? I think its quite interesting, the possible implications.

[doug]

Mickiel, Hey!  Nice to meet you!
I have also been intrigued with this subject.

I believe that pre-adamites can indeed fit into the biblical scheme, verified with science and history.  Here are some ideas to consider:

"it is not good that man should be alone: I will make him a helper comparable to him."  Gen 2:18

That fact that God had to make Eve as a helper "comparable" to Adam implies that there were no women "comparable" to Adam, not that there were no women living at the time.  The order of "kind after kind" had to be maintained.  Possibly Adam could not "breed" ( I know, a crude term, but true) with another humanoid woman.  A man and woman of the same kind or race are comparable.

"there was no man to till the ground"  Gen 2:5.  The literal translation to this is "there was no adam to till the ground".  There were none of the adamic "kind" on earth before Adam was created,, but there were other humanoid "kinds".

Eve is called the "mother of all living"  Gen 3:20 and Adam "the first man was of the earth".  I Cor 15:45 & 47.

It is inferred that the verse which says Eve is called the mother of all living means she is the mother of all races.  Then if we were to take this literally, then why can't we say that she is the mother of all things that breathe, i.e. all animals?  All of these are "living" things.  I believe it should mean nothing more than that Eve was the mother of all the Adamic race and not the animal humanoids that pre-existed.

The first man, Adam, is of the earth, earthy, and the second man, Christ, is the Lord.  Now, if the "first" is meaning universally, then so is the word "second" which means Christ was the second human being on earth.  We both know that that certainly isn't so!  Those Corinthian verses are comparing Adam and Christ spiritually and not to imply that there were no other prior humanoids (pick your own term - caveman or whatever).

When God cursed and cast out Cain, God placed a "mark" on Cain, "lest any finding him should kill him."  I believe Gods statement indicates other people existing at the time of Adam, Eve and Cain.

I have heard of other defenses arguing that no others could have possibly existed before Adam & Eve and then coming to this scripture, their arguments then seem to me distorted.  One theory being that because of the longevity of Adam & Eve they bore many other sons and daughters and that sons married sisters, cousins etc. down the line and that it wasn't wrong or sinful because the incest law hadn't been established as of yet by God through Moses.  And not only that, the purity of the blood at the beginning was free of diseases so that the issue of abnormalities we would normally be faced with today through interbreeding (like the Hatfields and McCoys that is being discussed on another thread) does not come into play.  Those could be possible solutions to those in disagreement, but I think they are bogus.  There is too much speculation to those kinds of views.

So, therefore, I see these and other verses do make sense in light of other people and races existing before Adam when proper interpretation and common sense is applied.

doug

[Gina]

But how do we know that all animals everywhere have no knowledge, or aren't conscious, of God?  Because of the way we see them behave?  Sorry to say but I've known dogs that behaved more humanely in certain ways than some humans. 

I agree it's much too presumptious to say that all animals everywhere aren't aware of God in the slightest.  God's aware of them.  Think of the sparrows.  You know what I'm saying?

And I don't know that God is "consciousness." 

Consciousness is being awake, to know something (anything), being aware.  That's all that consciousness means. 
God's certainly awake and aware, but to say God is "consciousness" begs the question:  Was there ever a time when God was unaware?  Unconscious?  Sleeping??  What woke Him up? 

That's probably silly.  I just like picking on the newbies, I guess.  hehe.  You make me think, Mikiel -- that's for sure and that's become my favorite past-time.

Tah-tah!

[mickiel]

But how do we know that all animals everywhere have no knowledge, or aren't conscious, of God?  Because of the way we see them behave?  Sorry to say but I've known dogs that behaved more humanely in certain ways than some humans. 

I agree it's much too presumptious to say that all animals everywhere aren't aware of God in the slightest.  God's aware of them.  Think of the sparrows.  You know what I'm saying?

And I don't know that God is "consciousness." 

Consciousness is being awake, to know something (anything), being aware.  That's all that consciousness means. 
God's certainly awake and aware, but to say God is "consciousness" begs the question:  Was there ever a time when God was unaware?  Unconscious?  Sleeping??  What woke Him up? 

That's probably silly.  I just like picking on the newbies, I guess.  hehe.  You make me think, Mikiel -- that's for sure and that's become my favorite past-time.

Tah-tah!

Hi Gina,

I never stated that God was consciousness, I do believe however that the image of God is consciousness. I think when Genesis states in 1:26, " Then God said, Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness", well I think that means lets give Adam Consciousness, or the Spirit " In Man." Which I doubt very seriously that he put that same spirit in primordal man, or humans before Adam. Then he said " Let them " Rule" over fish, birds, cattle and over all the earth. And over the insects as well. In my view, Primordal humans didnot " Rule" over these things as we do now. In fact, some of the primordal animals were so big, they probally ruled over the humans back then; thats not far fetched to assume. I mean that makes sense to me. How are you going to rule over a dinosaur? Not without the weapons we have now.

I also do not believe animals are conscious of God, and I have never seen any evidence of that. I don't even view animals as being conscious, as we are conscious. One has to understand just what consciousness is; I quess thats another thread. There is no need for animals to be conscious, none that I know of. For example, here are some of the signs of consciousness; Religion, education, technology, government, festivals, sports,  math, astrology, laws, transportation, language, interpitation of language, writting, spelling, the ability to see into the consciousness of another; and so on. Animals don't do these things. Oh there are freak examples of humans teaching and training certain animals to mimick these things, but they are not aware of consciously doing these things verbatum. Not in my view.

[mickiel]

Mickiel, Hey!  Nice to meet you!
I have also been intrigued with this subject.

I believe that pre-adamites can indeed fit into the biblical scheme, verified with science and history.  Here are some ideas to consider:

"it is not good that man should be alone: I will make him a helper comparable to him."  Gen 2:18

That fact that God had to make Eve as a helper "comparable" to Adam implies that there were no women "comparable" to Adam, not that there were no women living at the time.  The order of "kind after kind" had to be maintained.  Possibly Adam could not "breed" ( I know, a crude term, but true) with another humanoid woman.  A man and woman of the same kind or race are comparable.

"there was no man to till the ground"  Gen 2:5.  The literal translation to this is "there was no adam to till the ground".  There were none of the adamic "kind" on earth before Adam was created,, but there were other humanoid "kinds".

Eve is called the "mother of all living"  Gen 3:20 and Adam "the first man was of the earth".  I Cor 15:45 & 47.

It is inferred that the verse which says Eve is called the mother of all living means she is the mother of all races.  Then if we were to take this literally, then why can't we say that she is the mother of all things that breathe, i.e. all animals?  All of these are "living" things.  I believe it should mean nothing more than that Eve was the mother of all the Adamic race and not the animal humanoids that pre-existed.

The first man, Adam, is of the earth, earthy, and the second man, Christ, is the Lord.  Now, if the "first" is meaning universally, then so is the word "second" which means Christ was the second human being on earth.  We both know that that certainly isn't so!  Those Corinthian verses are comparing Adam and Christ spiritually and not to imply that there were no other prior humanoids (pick your own term - caveman or whatever).

When God cursed and cast out Cain, God placed a "mark" on Cain, "lest any finding him should kill him."  I believe Gods statement indicates other people existing at the time of Adam, Eve and Cain.

I have heard of other defenses arguing that no others could have possibly existed before Adam & Eve and then coming to this scripture, their arguments then seem to me distorted.  One theory being that because of the longevity of Adam & Eve they bore many other sons and daughters and that sons married sisters, cousins etc. down the line and that it wasn't wrong or sinful because the incest law hadn't been established as of yet by God through Moses.  And not only that, the purity of the blood at the beginning was free of diseases so that the issue of abnormalities we would normally be faced with today through crossbreeding (like the Hatfields and McCoys that is being discussed on another thread) does not come into play.  Those could be possible solutions to those in disagreement, but I think they are bogus.  There is too much speculation to those kinds of views.

So, therefore, I see these and other verses do make sense in light of other people and races existing before Adam when proper interpretation and common sense is applied.

doug

Nice to meet you too Doug, the subject has intrested me for a couple of years now. In the effort to counter deception that religion has heaped on the world in their misunderstanding of scripture, we have to rely on God to help us to understand just whats going on. Many Christians misunderstand this world not being just some 6,000 years old, when it is over 4 billion years old. I mean the earth; the universe is perhaps over 14 billion years old. Conversely many misunderstand just what it means for Adam to be the " First man." Or what the image of God means. I think it means he was the first human created in Gods image, or given consciousness, which is the Spirit in man, which I think is different than the breath of Life. The question then is, can something be alive, but yet not conscious? I think the answer is yes. Can things be alive, but not have the " Spirit in man", in them? I think again, yes.

Its no telling how many primordal humans God created, my intrest is moreso " Why"? Not if they existed, but why they existed.

[Dave in Tenn]

Jesus Christ is the express image of the invisible God.  Is Jesus Christ simply 'conciousness'?  Of course not.

It's tough work to bring all Scripture together and there isn't any short cut.  There can be short-circuits, however, that just continue to spark even though they don't provide any useful flow.  They just tend to start fires.    

Remember why we're gathered together here.

[mickiel]

Jesus Christ is the express image of the invisible God.  Is Jesus Christ simply 'conciousness'?  It's tough work to bring all Scripture together and there isn't any short cut.  There can be short-circuits, however, that just continue to spark even though they don't provide any useful flow.  They just tend to start fires.    

Remember why we're gathered together here.

The subject has been useful to me, and has sparked a definte intrest in me. I have never stated that Jesus is simply consciousness, I stated that I believe the image of God is consciousness. Jesus certainly is conscious, and he is conscious of his Father God. And we are conscious, all humans are conscious; thats what we have in common with God. Thats the common denomenator, thats what I think the image is. The " Gift is." And that intrest me. And I share that intrest.

I have come here to be with those of like mind and beliefs, because I grow tired of walking alone in my belief. I have simply shared what has been on my mind. If my sharing has offended, I offer my sincere apoligy; I understand I am not used to being in a group; I am a loner, a free thinker who's mind has been influenced by this great God I do not yet know. I have not been under a leader or a teacher, nor am I accoustomed to group mentality, so I apoligise for that. In 2Corinth. 4:2 " We have renounced the things hidden because of shame, not walking in craftiness or adulterating the word of God, but by manifestation of truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God."

I have said nothing that adulterates Gods word; why should I? I admit I am new here, but if I don't fit here, I know how to leave, just like I came. It wouldnot surprise me a bit, I have never fit anywherelse.

[Kat]

Hi mickiel,

We gather here to fellowship and for discussion the articles that that we have read on the BT site. Those concepts that are taught there are profound to our spiritual understanding and some are quite difficult to understand, so we have this fourm so as to help one another with those teachings.

Now if we all were to express what we understood about all the different things that are in the Scriptures (Ray certainly did not cover them all), then that would set up a prime situation for debating and confusion. We are not like other sites that welcome everybody's opinions, we want to stick to those things that we agree on that is on the BT site.

Here are some of the rules of the forum as a reminder of what I speak of.

If you are considering joining this forum before reading and studying  www.bible-truths.com, please reconsider.
It would be beneficial to all involved if you take the time to familiarize yourself with the teaching of L.Ray Smith first.

This is not the place to decide if you agree with the teaching of L.Ray Smith, but a place you can retreat to when you do.

This forum is primarily a place for people of a like mind to fellowship, and secondarily to discuss and question what they learn on bible-truths.com.

If you come here to teach us, please take your teaching elsewhere.

THIS FORUM IS NOT TO BE USED TO DEBATE RELIGIOUS TOPICS

mercy, peaceand love
Kat

[Dave in Tenn]

You are in good company here with free-thinkers.  If there is anything about 'this group' of individuals that God has led here, it is that we are all different.     So welcome home.

Kat explained why we can't let all these differences boil over into debate.  If I misunderstood what you were saying, well that's just what happens.     It's evidence of why 'debate' on a webforum is not always productive.  You say "image is conciousness".  YOU may know what you mean, but what comes to my mind is something else.  Round and round.  Where's the 'center'?  if it's not on something we mutually agree on or a discussion of scripture, there is no center.  You still think image is conciousness, and I still don't know what you mean.     Either way, it's OK.

Do good.   

[mickiel]

You are in good company here with free-thinkers.  If there is anything about 'this group' of individuals that God has led here, it is that we are all different.     So welcome home.

Kat explained why we can't let all these differences boil over into debate.  If I misunderstood what you were saying, well that's just what happens.     It's evidence of why 'debate' on a webforum is not always productive.  You say "image is conciousness".  YOU may know what you mean, but what comes to my mind is something else.  Round and round.  Where's the 'center'?  if it's not on something we mutually agree on or a discussion of scripture, there is no center.  You still think image is conciousness, and I still don't know what you mean.     Either way, it's OK.

Do good.

Well I understand you. I didnot come here to convince anyone of anything, I was simply expressing what has been on my mind of late. I took no thought of wether the site had any recorded information on it, or if Ray had covered it before; I meant no harm. I didnot fully understand that you only rehearse or study what is already recorded on this site, but I understand that. Although I agree with everything I have studied here in the last two days, I am not limited to only what is here, but I respect what ways you have here. So out of respect for that, just consider this thread closed.

Perhaps I just don't know how to talk to " The people of God", or just what they allow to be discussed; I have never met Gods people before. You must excuse me, I have walked in the desert for so long, I have not known just how much is understood by those God is dealing with. Or even how wrong I could be in my own thoughts. In fact, I have never really physically met anyone who believes in the Salvation of all. And when I meet them online, the result is always the same; I say something that seems to rattle them a bit.

So I have walked alone. Still believing what they do, just seeing some things a bit differently. So perhaps there is no real home for me, but thats alright; its still good to have spent a few days with those who are not riddled with so much deception. Perhaps I visted at the wrong time, maybe the mourning of Ray has a few unsettled, he seems to have been a great teacher, I didnot know he passed until after I joined.

I get the chance to talk to God everyday, but not to those he is dealing with in truth. God does not talk back to me, so it gets quite lonely; and I am not so good with groups or sites who consider themselves people of God; can't figure out why, its just me I quess.

This head of mine just sees what it sees. I only hope what it sees is the truth, but I don't know; each has a path, and mine will perhaps always be alone. But I am used to it; I don't like it, but it is what it is.

Anyhow, Peace to you.

[Gina]

But how do we know that all animals everywhere have no knowledge, or aren't conscious, of God?  Because of the way we see them behave?  Sorry to say but I've known dogs that behaved more humanely in certain ways than some humans. 

I agree it's much too presumptious to say that all animals everywhere aren't aware of God in the slightest.  God's aware of them.  Think of the sparrows.  You know what I'm saying?

And I don't know that God is "consciousness." 

Consciousness is being awake, to know something (anything), being aware.  That's all that consciousness means. 
God's certainly awake and aware, but to say God is "consciousness" begs the question:  Was there ever a time when God was unaware?  Unconscious?  Sleeping??  What woke Him up? 

That's probably silly.  I just like picking on the newbies, I guess.  hehe.  You make me think, Mikiel -- that's for sure and that's become my favorite past-time.

Tah-tah!

Hi Gina,

I never stated that God was consciousness, I do believe however that the image of God is consciousness. I think when Genesis states in 1:26, " Then God said, Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness", well I think that means lets give Adam Consciousness, or the Spirit " In Man." Which I doubt very seriously that he put that same spirit in primordal man, or humans before Adam. Then he said " Let them " Rule" over fish, birds, cattle and over all the earth. And over the insects as well. In my view, Primordal humans didnot " Rule" over these things as we do now. In fact, some of the primordal animals were so big, they probally ruled over the humans back then; thats not far fetched to assume. I mean that makes sense to me. How are you going to rule over a dinosaur? Not without the weapons we have now.

I also do not believe animals are conscious of God, and I have never seen any evidence of that. I don't even view animals as being conscious, as we are conscious. One has to understand just what consciousness is; I quess thats another thread. There is no need for animals to be conscious, none that I know of. For example, here are some of the signs of consciousness; Religion, education, technology, government, festivals, sports,  math, astrology, laws, transportation, language, interpitation of language, writting, spelling, the ability to see into the consciousness of another; and so on. Animals don't do these things. Oh there are freak examples of humans teaching and training certain animals to mimick these things, but they are not aware of consciously doing these things verbatum. Not in my view.

Jesus Christ IS God.  And in that sense, Mikiel, you most certainly did state that God is consciousness.  Unless you don't believe that Jesus Christ (God's express Image) is God?

And with that, and based on what Kat and Dave said, I'm going to leave this discussion and go back to reading Ray's articles.  There's so much I still have to learn from his writings alone.

Thanks, Kat and Dave.

Have a good night, Mikiel!

[Kat]

Hi mickiel,

There is no reason why you should leave us over this, we always allows some leeway for new comers to this forum    The way we set up the rules is so we would have a peaceful place for discussion and fellowship. Now I'm sure we all have our own studies on topics of interest and that is good, we need to spend time in personal Bible studies, meditation and pray.

There is just so much that has been written at BT and there is many level of understand you can gain, so if you reread you see things you missed the first time and you continue to gain a deeper spiritual understand. So it really is enough to have for our discussions here. I hope you will stay around a while and until you get more use to how this could work for you. Here are links to the different boards that you can check out if you so desire.

Check out the forum rules, it will help you understand how this forum is moderated.
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,3.0.html
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,4558.0.html
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,3614.0.html

General discussion board, this is to ask questions and discuss what is presented at the Bible-truths.com site.
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/board,3.0.html

Child board for General discussion board - FAQ
(most frequently asked questions)
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/board,23.0.html

Forum Indexes & Info.
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/board,14.0.html

Ray's Videos
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,8227.0.html

Ray's Audios 
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,2641.0.html

Ray's 2008 Audios
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,8256.0.html

Transcripts of Audios
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/board,12.0.html

Off Topic board, this is to discuss things that do not directly relate to BT, you will find a good bit of humor here.
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/board,4.0.html

child board on Off Topic board
Inspirationals, Writings, Poems, Etc.
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/board,15.0.html

Testimonies / Prayer Requests / Fellowship board, this is mostly for personal posts.
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/board,5.0.html

Child boards (only available to members) on Testimonies board
Who Am I? (members pics and other stuff)
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/board,16.0.html

Members Recipes, for sharing recipes and food tips
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/board,22.0.html

mercy, peace and love
Kat

[mickiel]

Thank you Kat,

Oh I'll vist from time to time, but I quess I am not limited to just " Certain avenues of study", I need to be free in my scope and range, both in study and expression. When it comes to the knowledge of God, I cannot feed from just one plate or source where people are concerned. I cannot sit still under one persons teaching or understanding, but I understand those who are comfortable with such. I am used to gaining my understanding from the Spirit, even though I do not have it permanently within me. I take no pride in people, places and things in my involvement with the truth. The truth is larger than a person, a place, or the things we value so much. The truth cannot be contained here, but here can be a home for those called to a home, and the truth can be learned at home.

I quess I am still on the road.

I couldnot be comfortable with any type of confinement where the knowledge of God is concerned; because I understand that the truth can often only be a present truth, and knowledge can change and grow on you. Its happened far too many times to me. I remember reading in scripture that a time will come where Gods people will not need teachers or these comfort zones of knowledge, that the Spirit will deal with them directly. That crutch will not be easily taken away from some, but for me, I already am accustomed to learning on my own, which is perhaps a horrible " Church Attitude" or fellowship thinking; I only hope God helps me with that. I quess underneath I am just not attracted to the teachings of just one person.

Quess I am just weird like that. Anyhow the knowledge God has given here is robust and the important thing is that you love one another, and love Gods truth. I would like to settle in one place, but not under certain conditions. Thats just not for me.

Anyhow, Peace to you.

[Dave in Tenn]

Mickiel, I was 20+ years "in the desert".  First time I met any of our folks in person, I barely knew how to behave in polite company, much less among "people of God".  I don't really have any friends IRL as I spent 13 years travelling alone on the road.  So I definately feel your pain.

Consider this:  There is no scripture (that I know of, not being a bible-scholar) that says "the image of God is conciousness."  There are more than one scriptures that say "Jesus is the image of God".  This is not only said 'about Him', it is 'said' by Him in John 14.

To me, John 14 and the rest of Scripture are deep enough to 'think on'.  Do you understand all of what He is saying?  I don't.

The same John starts his epistle with this:

1Jn 1:1  That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;
1Jn 1:2  (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)
1Jn 1:3  That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.

Now, if you can reconcile what you think to Scripture, then do so.  I don't have to understand it, and you don't have to explain it.  If you can't reconcile it, you run the risk of creating "an idol of the heart".  These don't lead TO Truth, but block access to it and/or lead us away from it.

When I first crashed into BT, my 'conception' of God grew so rapidly that it almost got away from me.  "God" became so huge that I felt like my voyage of discovery was almost pointless.  Well, God IS more than the mind can fathom, but that is not how He has presented His own Self.  He hasn't left us gazing into the heavens or into our navels.  I don't know if this mind-blowing is/was happening to you.  I'm just hoping you can see that we don't need to create doctrines.  We've got more than enough to keep everybody from the simplest to the most inspired busy.

Do good. 

   
   

[Gina]

p.s.  Mikiel, what you say about not wanting to learn from  just one man got me thinking, so I'm chiming back in.  I'm sure you're not suggesting that we're "followers" of Ray.  That's okay if you are. 

As Ray said, sticks and stones...  (I love that.)

I don't believe that we're learning from one man.  Ray didn't learn from just one man, either; he learned from many men.  How about all the men who were inspired by God to write the scriptures?  How about all the men and women who translated them into the English language,  not to mention all those many men and women who provide the study aids?

When you break it down that way, we're not learning from just one man, but many -- relatively speaking, that is. 

I used to go here and there and everywhere.  I've done all that.  But the funny thing is, I keep coming back here.  (I'm not a genius by any stretch, but I know I'm not completely unaware of what's being revealed to me by God through other people and my interactions and experiences with them.)

You didn't come here by accident.  But if you want to leave, that's understandable.  I did that lots of times over the past 10 years, and it got very confusing.  And I don't mean to be rude, I promise, but you sound like me about eight years ago.  (I tell you that as a friend, because a friend will tell you when you have Spinach in your teeth.)

If you have to go, that's okay.  Nobody's going to try and pull you back in.  We certainly don't need your money to keep this site in operation.  Please, I beg you, don't do what I've done and leave under the false assumption that you would be learning from just one man (meaning Ray); you wouldn't be.   I can't learn in a vacuum, Mikiel. 

If you don't mind me making a small unsolicited suggestion:  If you desire that others consider what you have to say and listen to you (and I can tell you do), maybe ask God to reveal to you why He led you here.

As Ray would say, God be with you.  (Love that.)

[Revilonivek]

Maybe it's just a story moses thought of to explain what happened 3500 years before his time. Its quite a stretch. Since he got his "story" from his ancestors. Orally not written. U know stories get less and less reliable as time goes by. Have u hheard of eye witnesses accounts of accidents they witnessed. Their storoes are all different and the details gets fuzzy the longer u wait to get details of what happened..Jesus was here over 2000 years. Imagine someone telling u what happened 3500 years ago from his time orally with no written accounts. I would say the story is approximate. Not exact to the minute detail.for me tthe Scripture in genesis creation story is indeed misleading. Even with mistranslations that ray has found already. I would say they wrote something to help explain the unknown. Science has already proved that there were different human species. Maybe Adam is the first of a specific human species that God works with but it doesn't explain the othrr species God already created. Its ttrue that in the old testament that the Hebrew people are heavily racist toward other races prob because they weren't of the line of Adam maybe? According to the bible. The Hebrew people werr the only ones that led a long life up to almost 1000 years back then while other races during tjeir ttime didn't. So who knows? Maybe the line of Adam is who God wants to work with but it doesn't explain the rest of other races and how they came to suffer along with us. I mean genesis explains how the line of Adam came to be and sinned. But it doesny explain how tthe other races sinned and Gods hostility and racist behavior toward them. I mean every time The Hebrew people wins a war. They're percieved a hero but when others win. Herbrews look at them as non heroic people. This is typical behavior of people of different races. They just think their God is the right one. Hebrew's God in ot wants to wipe other races off the face of earth because theyre not Hebrew people or Gods people..sometimes we just need to take a stand back and consider that Adam 's line is not the first people that Genesis claims to havr made.

[Gina]

Maybe it's just a story moses thought of to explain what happened 3500 years before his time. Its quite a stretch. Since he got his "story" from his ancestors. Orally not written. U know stories get less and less reliable as time goes by. Have u hheard of eye witnesses accounts of accidents they witnessed. Their storoes are all different and the details gets fuzzy the longer u wait to get details of what happened..Jesus was here over 2000 years. Imagine someone telling u what happened 3500 years ago from his time orally with no written accounts. I would say the story is approximate. Not exact to the minute detail.for me tthe Scripture in genesis creation story is indeed misleading. Even with mistranslations that ray has found already. I would say they wrote something to help explain the unknown. Science has already proved that there were different human species. Maybe Adam is the first of a specific human species that God works with but it doesn't explain the othrr species God already created. Its ttrue that in the old testament that the Hebrew people are heavily racist toward other races prob because they weren't of the line of Adam maybe? According to the bible. The Hebrew people werr the only ones that led a long life up to almost 1000 years back then while other races during tjeir ttime didn't. So who knows? Maybe the line of Adam is who God wants to work with but it doesn't explain the rest of other races and how they came to suffer along with us. I mean genesis explains how the line of Adam came to be and sinned. But it doesny explain how tthe other races sinned and Gods hostility and racist behavior toward them. I mean every time The Hebrew people wins a war. They're percieved a hero but when others win. Herbrews look at them as non heroic people. This is typical behavior of people of different races. They just think their God is the right one. Hebrew's God in ot wants to wipe other races off the face of earth because theyre not Hebrew people or Gods people..sometimes we just need to take a stand back and consider that Adam 's line is not the first people that Genesis claims to havr made.

As Ray would have said:  Brilliant!  (love that, too! hehe)

I gotta get outta here before I start a fire....   

[Dave in Tenn]

And I reckon maybe that's enough.  Especially since Mickiel has already given his blessing, locking her up.