bible-truths.com/forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Need Account Help?  Email bibletruths.forum@gmail.com   

Forgotten password reminders does not work. Contact the email above and state what you want your password changed to. (it must be at least 8 characters)

Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: In the beginning...  (Read 12855 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

angie

  • Guest
In the beginning...
« on: August 28, 2006, 10:07:45 PM »

Hiya folks,

I had written some notes a while back, on reading Genesis. I realised [almost a year on] that I never really got to the bottom of it by way of a satisfactory answer, and if anything, I've learned that additional words dropped into somewhere are there for a reason so thought I'd post it and see what others thought.

Using KJV
 
So, God creates Adam, puts him in the garden, tells him [Gen 2:16]

  "...but of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, though shalt not eat of it: for in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die."
THEN God had him name all the animals and birds
THEN created eve from Adam.
 
Eve doesn't say anything until she meets the serpent in the garden. He only asks her a question
[Gen 3.1] '...Yea. hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? What surprised me was Eve's answer
 
3.2 '...we may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden. But the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, ye shall not eat of it, NEITHER SHALL YE TOUCH IT.
 
GOD NEVER SAID THAT. Adam was cleaved to Eve, she was made to be his helpmate. Do you think God would have told Adam all this, then tell Eve the same all over again, but add a bit on Himself, or would adam be responsible for telling Eve the rules. Likely, BUT IT DOESN'T SAY. do you think this is the first time a human [either Adam OR Eve] has ADDED TO GOD'S WORD if this is the case? (so the second half of the statement is a lie)
If so, does it confirm sin was already in the Garden even before desiring the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil?

I also noticed:

Satan said '...Ye shall not surely die [an out and out lie]
 
Satan THEN went on to say [V.5] ' For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof. then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil' This part was NOT a lie, it was TRUE because later in V.22;
       
'And the Lord God said behold, The man is become one of us, to know good and evil:...' [and God doesn't lie]

I've always held the belief that the most dangerous lies were ones that contained an element of truth, But I was really perplexed because Jesus said of Satan that; ' ... there was no truth in him, he was a liar... [not a quote- but you will know the scripture that does quote this meaning]

 I puzzled over it for ages then when I was out walking the dog, I realized Satan didn't use his OWN words to validate the lie he told, he used God's word to VALIDATE/AUTHENTICATE the LIE that was his, even though it seems  that Adam [man] had added to his word in the first place. This is what preachers of false doctrine do, they ADD to the word of God and VALIDATE it using some truth of Gods word. A LIE with some TRUTH in it, plausible and VERY dangerous for newbie's in Christ who will perpetuate the doctrine. Am I way out on this do you think?   :-\   

Angie


Logged

RobRoyal

  • Guest
Re: In the beginning...
« Reply #1 on: August 29, 2006, 01:17:12 AM »

I think your right on. That's how I always understood Jesus' comment about the "yeast of the Pharisee's". A little bit of a twist at the end so that the truth is turned 180 degrees around. It never ceases to amaze me how often in the gospels Jesus warns us to beware lest we be decieved. aand Paul does the same through his writings: "guard the truth" etc. There must be great deception in this world regarding the things of scripture or why so many stern warnings?
God bless'
Rob
Logged

snorky

  • Guest
Re: In the beginning...
« Reply #2 on: August 29, 2006, 01:03:08 PM »

Good work, Angie! I've studied Genesis many times (since my husband and I are always discussing the origina and nature of man as well as how man populated the earth), and never noticed that! Thank you!

As to Satan, and preachers, lying by using God's Word to validate, I have, over the last several months, started to question every word that comes out of a preacher's mouth (as God has me spiritually discerning...and, heck, He's just gotten started with me!). Anyway, one day when we had a visiting preacher, one who really has a lot of discernment, he gave the message on John 17, when Christ is praying to His Father in the garden of Gesthemane before Judas and the soldiers came. Verse 15 says Christ prayed that: "I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil one." and verse 20 says, "Neither pray I for these (the apostles) alone, but for them also which sahll believe on me through their word."

Well, when he pointed that out, it was a bolt out of the blue! You know how the Pharisees of today use 1 Corinthians and 1 and 2 Thessalonians to "prove" the pre-trib rapture? Well, here is Christ Himself saying there WILL BE NO "RAPTURE" but that we will be protected until He returns! I thank God for this discernment! And I thank God for this forum, which is the ONLY forum I have found on the entire billions of web sites where Biblical sanity reigns!--snorky
Logged

angie

  • Guest
Re: In the beginning...
« Reply #3 on: August 29, 2006, 01:36:34 PM »

Hi snorky

Cheers, must look at John 17 :) I like this forum too, It helps me see scripture in the way it is meant. They are just vast though and I wonder sometimes if I'll ever get through them all, far less remember them and where they are located!  :(    [need to drink more water ;D]


Your mention of the 'rapture' reminds me... I did try to go to several churches on several occasions when I first was drawn to God. You'd never believe the stuff that got in the way of it. I did manage to get to one session of those Alpha courses for newbies. Unfortunately [for the church] I'd read only one paper from bible truths.The man taking the class was very nice [as was everyone there] but he started on about the rapture [complete with diagrams] Yep, that subject was the very  paper I'd read on bible-truths, and suffice to say, it was the last session I went to. I haven't looked back.  ;D

Angie
Logged

Lightseeker

  • Guest
Re: In the beginning...
« Reply #4 on: August 29, 2006, 08:48:44 PM »

Angie,

Just a short comment before going to the jail.

Quote
3.2 '...we may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden. But the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, ye shall not eat of it, NEITHER SHALL YE TOUCH IT.

I once went to a retreat where the speaker used this very verse to declare: "Never depend on a 'secondary word' which hasn't been revealed to you!"  His opinion was that Adam had told her what she hadn't heard herself.  That advice is good anywhere you hear teaching I think.  We all "KNOW IN PART"

1CO 13:9  For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. 
1CO 13:12  For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known. 


Logged

hillsbororiver

  • Guest
Re: In the beginning...
« Reply #5 on: August 29, 2006, 09:44:04 PM »

Angie,


Quote
3.2 '...we may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden. But the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, ye shall not eat of it, NEITHER SHALL YE TOUCH IT.

I once went to a retreat where the speaker used this very verse to declare: "Never depend on a 'secondary word' which hasn't been revealed to you!"  His opinion was that Adam had told her what she hadn't heard herself.


 


Hi Dee,

Did the speaker have any scriptural witnesses for his opinion that Adam spoke this first? It seems that this would constitute "a secondary word" wouldn't it?

Thanks,

Joe
Logged

angie

  • Guest
Re: In the beginning...
« Reply #6 on: August 29, 2006, 10:35:34 PM »

Quote
I once went to a retreat where the speaker used this very verse to declare: "Never depend on a 'secondary word' which hasn't been revealed to you!"

Hello Dee

I think we need to listen to secondary words in the process of learning but not depend or act on them until we can check with the source or cross-reference them. This can be difficult when dealing with what dead people supposedly said many years ago. I believe this is what makes the scriptures unique in that we can check with the source since can personally interact with our Father who is the living God and there is no higher authority. Most of us know that it is very easy for some people to read the words, repeat what they were with pinpoint accuracy, and yet still have no clue as to what was really said. If they did, then all would agree, but they don't.

 I think you are right in that in that no one individual here on earth has all the answers. I also believe that's why it's great to be able to come to this forum and exchange thoughts, knowledge and ideas. We can then think about and process the information so that we see what God wants us to see at any given moment in our individual lives. I have read stuff here that made no sense to me at the time of reading and then weeks later after much thought, it's like a lightbulb being switched on [literally seeing the light- lol] 

Now I'm going to tease you a little bit about this 'retreat' you went to and ask;

was it underground?  :D  [no offence intended mind]

Angie
Logged

YellowStone

  • Guest
Re: In the beginning...
« Reply #7 on: August 30, 2006, 03:01:46 AM »

Angie, you have presented an interesting problem.

Did Eve commit the first lie or not. Clearly we must not assume that God never spoke to Eve, or for that matter that God and Adam were not in converse on a regular basis. Genesis was written a long time after the fact, and such happenings may have been deemed irrelevant by God, whom inspired Moses to begin writing ot the creation account. Of this, I do not no other than what was recorded.

But did Eve tell the first lie, or is it the first recored case of Eveusing the intelligence that God gave her. How, many times are children told: "Don't touch the cookies" in direct reference to "Don't EAT the cookies!"? :) So perhaps she added a natural progression.

However, this line of thinking is flawed inasmuch as neither Adam nor Eve were yet laden with Sin. She would have had no reason to lie. Why then would she?

So now we come back to the author, Moses; did he or more likely one of the many translators either drop or add a word or two from the original text?

I am really not comfortable with the idea that by God saying: "though shalt not eat of it: " but left the door open to touching, picking, smelling, licking and possibly using it as a ball in some pre modern-time game of baseball.

I personally woould not lose a lot of sleep over this particular verse, as it does not change the promise of salvation promised us all. But I do degree that the doctrines of Christianity are filled with second words that drasically alter meanings, so to your point, it is a very worthy lessen and I commend you on your post. :)

Also, I to have often thought about how Satan stated: said '...Ye shall not surely die'  which, is both a lie and the truth all at once.  We are reminded many times in scripture that God see human death as nothing more than sleep.

Job 14:12  So man lieth down, and riseth not: till the heavens [be] no more, they shall not awake, nor be raised out of their sleep.

Job 14:13 ¶ O that thou wouldest hide me in the grave, that thou wouldest keep me secret, until thy wrath be past, that thou wouldest appoint me a set time, and remember me!

Oh, I think he pulled a fast one on Eve, but he "technically" told the truth when viewed through God's eyes.

Such as this has got me to the point where unless a preacher speaks of Love and charity, I am not interested.

Great thread.

Darren
Logged

YellowStone

  • Guest
Re: In the beginning...
« Reply #8 on: August 30, 2006, 09:39:51 AM »

Well pick me up and knock me down :)

I missed that one Bobby. But my point still remains that we should not be so quick to condem one on the word of another. Are we 100% sure that God did not tell either Adam or Eve not to touch the forbidden fruit from the tree of knowledge? I don't think the bible told us of dinosaurs either.

Many thanks for your correction Bobby, my brother

Darren
Logged

angie

  • Guest
Re: In the beginning...
« Reply #9 on: August 30, 2006, 09:52:35 AM »

Hi Darren,

re-reading this thread and the original scripture, I had another thought as I stared at the sentence;

"...but of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, though shalt not eat of it: for in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die."

  you said that
Quote
...I am really not comfortable with the idea that by God saying: "though shalt not eat of it: " but left the door open to touching, picking, smelling, licking...

The tree is NOT good and evil in of itself, it's the tree of KNOWLEDGE of good and evil. We only get the knowledge by experiencing the evil. In this way we can know what good also is. The way I see it at this juncture, either way we die. If we live the evil life in the flesh, we spiritually die and if we live righteously, we die to the flesh.

Your quote about God leaving the door open to touching, picking etc. made me think that, in fact this is what God really does. We touch evil, or it touches us in some way or another all the time, we are said to be  'only evil continually'  As far as picking it goes, we could liken that to contemplating or thinking about an action before the actual doing [eating] of it. We might only pick it because we are curious about it [to learn about it] doesn't follow that we will automatically desire to eat it. Am I making any sense?  :-\  [or talking complete c**p?] lol  ;D

Another way of looking at it is that we can look at good, we can look at evil [or at least the outcome of both] we can be and we can experience it and learn, after that if we continue to live it [evil], knowing it for what it is then  we will   "...surely Die" [twice!] The tree isn't 2 trees, one each of good and evil, they are in the SAME tree in the SAME garden as the tree of life. Strange how a tree THAT important never got any kind of mention until AFTER the deed was done [the apple eaten] but was lumped [the tree of life] together with the rest of the trees. God never said 'never mind that tree, that ones much better' did He? [unless I missed that bit...Lol] Seems to me anything worthwhile seems to always come along second.

Anyway, I think I'm starting to ramble now and going off what I originally intended so I'm offski for the moment.

Cheers Darren

Angie
Logged

YellowStone

  • Guest
Re: In the beginning...
« Reply #10 on: August 30, 2006, 10:03:55 AM »

Angie responded with:

Your quote about God leaving the door open to touching, picking etc. made me think that, in fact this is what God really does. We touch evil, or it touches us in some way or another all the time, we are said to be  'only evil continually'  As far as picking it goes, we could liken that to contemplating or thinking about an action before the actual doing [eating] of it. We might only pick it because we are curious about it [to learn about it] doesn't follow that we will automatically desire to eat it.


Very good reasoning. But how much better is ones faith that they can believe on faith (The Word of God) alone, without exploring temptation. We humans seem to be all about tearing down borders and boundries and erasing established lines just to creat new ones. Your reasoning seems to fit very well, although, even though the desire to eat the fruit may not be automatically there, the act would itself seem inevitable. How less the possiblity of sin (if this were possible) by rejecting all temptation?

Angie, I enjoy reading your insight :)

Love to All,
Darren
« Last Edit: August 30, 2006, 10:04:19 AM by YellowStone »
Logged

angie

  • Guest
Re: In the beginning...
« Reply #11 on: August 30, 2006, 11:13:45 AM »

Okay,

First, we weren't made NOT to sin, we were made flesh and 'subject to vanity'  I quote ray when he said we were made 'sinning machines'. We were supposed to get the knowledge of good and evil, without it, we can't be made into the image of God, so there goes being tempted right out the window.

When Mathew says: '...That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart'
He is in fact talking about the lust part of it, not the looking part, when deciding where about in the proceedings you have committed adultery.  It all depends on what you see, then think, once you have already looked. I do this with 'stuff' all the time. I go to the shops, can see something pleasing to the eye, [eye candy] agree that its very nice, go home and never think about it again. Now, were I to go home and sit wondering how I could possibly get it to the point that I thought of very little else, in other words 'lusted after it', then thats the bit that would be the sin. Another way to look at it is, we can agree that a simple wee bumble-bee is a beautiful sight, but would I want one in my house? No thanks! Yet the way they go around contrary to all the laws of physics intrigues me.

We are 'in the midst' of temptation all the time, certainly we can remove ourselves from it, but doesn't that only serve to tell us how weak we are? what else would we learn? How would we learn to overcome? We can resist temptation, but not by ourselves, but by having Jesus in us and us in Him - no other way round this.

We need the first part [the physical] to get to the second part[the spiritual]
It's after that, after we have experienced evil, know how it is different from good and have learned, that we move on to spiritual maturity if called by God to do so. I do believe things through faith now, that I hope will turn out to be true. God through Jesus gives us this Hope. I also know a lot of [though not all] that which is false and evil through experience
I didn't know or believe I was in the dark, till I walked in the light. Now I do know an believe it

I will now go and look up all the scriptures to add in to all of this so as to add to my own learning. I know roughly where they are and the words.  :-\ This is just my understanding of them [so far] please bear with this wee learner! ;D

Angie
Logged

orion77

  • Guest
Re: In the beginning...
« Reply #12 on: August 30, 2006, 11:35:48 AM »

Good point, Angie.

The wages of sin is death, has been twisted around to mean something totally untrue nowadays.  A little leaven, clouds without water, spotted leopards, and many other pictures God shows us, to beware and watch, for they mix a little truth with lies.

Interesting discussion.

God bless,

Gary
Logged

Harryfeat

  • Guest
Re: In the beginning...
« Reply #13 on: August 30, 2006, 11:48:29 AM »

Okay,

First, we weren't made NOT to sin, we were made flesh and 'subject to vanity'  I quote ray when he said we were made 'sinning machines'. We were supposed to get the knowledge of good and evil, without it, we can't be made into the image of God, so there goes being tempted right out the window.

When Mathew says: '...That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart'
He is in fact talking about the lust part of it, not the looking part, when deciding where about in the proceedings you have committed adultery.  It all depends on what you see, then think, once you have already looked. I do this with 'stuff' all the time. I go to the shops, can see something pleasing to the eye, [eye candy] agree that its very nice, go home and never think about it again. Now, were I to go home and sit wondering how I could possibly get it to the point that I thought of very little else, in other words 'lusted after it', then thats the bit that would be the sin. Another way to look at it is, we can agree that a simple wee bumble-bee is a beautiful sight, but would I want one in my house? No thanks! Yet the way they go around contrary to all the laws of physics intrigues me.

We are 'in the midst' of temptation all the time, certainly we can remove ourselves from it, but doesn't that only serve to tell us how weak we are? what else would we learn? How would we learn to overcome? We can resist temptation, but not by ourselves, but by having Jesus in us and us in Him - no other way round this.

We need the first part [the physical] to get to the second part[the spiritual]
It's after that, after we have experienced evil, know how it is different from good and have learned, that we move on to spiritual maturity if called by God to do so. I do believe things through faith now, that I hope will turn out to be true. God through Jesus gives us this Hope. I also know a lot of [though not all] that which is false and evil through experience
I didn't know or believe I was in the dark, till I walked in the light. Now I do know an believe it

I will now go and look up all the scriptures to add in to all of this so as to add to my own learning. I know roughly where they are and the words.  :-\ This is just my understanding of them [so far] please bear with this wee learner! ;D

Angie

Greetings Angie

I had planned a day of mental numbness with no serious thought.  But Nooooooooo! You have to spoil my plans with these thought provoking gems.  I'll get even somehow. ;)

If you mutually fantasize about movie stars while with your spouse are you committing adultery?

Is it possible to commit a sin that isnt a sin through thought?  In other words, can you possibly commit adultery without doing so in thought before the action actually takes place?  If sin takes place in the mind first, then is it another sin to actually commit the deed?
Is it like two sins to think about stealing then another sin to actual take that pack of gum without paying?

Finally, if sin take place in thoughts of  the mind, then is there such a thing as physical sin?


*****************************************************
Adam and Eve

I had been taught as many others that Eve actually ate some physical fruit, an apple to be exact.  It wasn't until high school that I realized that the tree of life and the tree of knowledge of good and evil were just metaphors.  What I have never really been able to answer precisely is this question:

What kind of "fruit" does having a knowledge of good and evil bear?  If having this knowledge makes us more like God then why wouldn't we understand agape a lot better than we do?




Now do you see what rattling my cage does?  Please be more careful and take pity on this lunatic.  :D

Just for today, I am swearing off milk and meat today and turning into a vegetable, I mean vegetarian.

Thanks for the great posts by everone.

feat

Logged

buddyjc

  • Guest
Re: In the beginning...
« Reply #14 on: August 30, 2006, 12:26:56 PM »

This is a very interesting thread!  I used to think that the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was some mystical tree with this knowledge embedded in the fruit, but now I realize that the tree was just like any other tree in the garden.  The knowledge of good and evil was not 'in' the fruit at all.  It was the act of disobedience that taught Adam and Eve the difference between good and evil.  This is the same as the Law of Moses.  God told the people how NOT to live in order to teach them how to live righteously. 

Brian
Logged

angie

  • Guest
Re: In the beginning...
« Reply #15 on: August 30, 2006, 12:55:44 PM »

 hi feat ;D

Sorry to have upset your plans for the day! ;)

you said

Quote
If you mutually fantasize about movie stars while with your spouse are you committing adultery?

Uuum.....I would say so. Does mutual [both of you doing the fantasizing] with consent, stop it being a sin. I wouldn't have thought so, simply because I believe that an act is an external expression of internal feeling of love/desire for the one you are with/committed/married to. Anything else is carnal, after the 'lusts of the flesh'. Anyway, why think hamburger when you have steak at home?  :)

Quote
Is it possible to commit a sin that isnt a sin through thought?  In other words, can you possibly commit adultery without doing so in thought before the action actually takes place? 

What like as in, frontal lobotomy with no thoughts or memory prior to or at any point in the proceedings?
I can't imagine anyone, male or female getting away with that one whereby it would be acceptable because they didn't think about the deed before the deed was done!! [unless the acceptee was the one with the lobotomy]

Quote
Is it like two sins to think about stealing then another sin to actual take that pack of gum without paying?

I would say that it's the same sin. The eyes see, the heart [mind] wants, and the hand takes. the physical act of stealing, adultery etc. is the conclusion, the 'fruits' of the thought [sin]

Luk 6:45  "A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil:..."

Quote
Finally, if sin take place in thoughts of  the mind, then is there such a thing as physical sin?

Yep, same answer as last one

Quote
What kind of "fruit" does having a knowledge of good and evil bear?  If having this knowledge makes us more like God then why wouldn't we understand agape a lot better than we do?

Sorry, remind me what agape is [love?]  :-[

Quote
Just for today, I am swearing off milk and meat today and turning into a vegetable, I mean vegetarian.

Maybe you were right the first word with these questions  ;D  ;D  ;D  ;D  ;D ROFL

Quote
Now do you see what rattling my cage does?

yes, but you haven't seen what rattling mine does!  :D :D :D

Quote
Please be more careful and take pity on this lunatic.

not a chance! Sorry, that was the  'old' me !  ::) ;D 

Angie




Logged

YellowStone

  • Guest
Re: In the beginning...
« Reply #16 on: August 30, 2006, 01:12:01 PM »

I think it is time to bring attention to being of sin and incapable of no other in defference to the act of sinning itself. If our human, flesh and bone bodies are sinful by nature as Paul so clearly states below, then what action is not of sin?  I mean, even the kind words given with love, are such actions totally without sin. Are there ulterior motives that even our carnal minds cannot comprehend.


Rom 7:13
  • Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.

Rom 7:14
  • For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

Rom 7:15 
  • For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.

Rom 7:16 
  • If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that [it is] good.

Rom 7:17 
  • Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

Rom 7:18 
  • For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but [how] to perform that which is good I find not.

Rom 7:19 
  • For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.

Rom 7:20 
  • Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

Rom 7:21 
  • I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.

Rom 7:22 
  • For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:

Rom 7:23 
  • But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.

Rom 7:24 
  • O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?

Rom 7:25 
  • I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.


If one reads and fully comprehends the words of Paul, how possibly can one look down on any other?

Paul, does make an interesting point in vs 25: I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

Here he would seemingly clearly seperate the acts of the flesh seperate from the thoughts of the mind, but I do not believe that this is what he is saying. More than likely Paul's eyes were opened to more truth than my own clouded eyes, but even he firmly believed that his body was not capable of doing the good that he sort: vs 18: For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but [how] to perform that which is good I find not.

If Paul was unable to perform the good that he so desperatly wanted, how then can we? Does not Satan have a stronger hold on us now than then? I would believe so.

So what are we to do as hopeless sinners? We are to Pray for forgiveness, humility and wisdom so that we can clearly understand that without the love of God, we are nothing but evil doers. Sounds harsh doesn't it, but until this is learned, what have we learned. To put this plainly, I know in God's eyes that I am no better or worse than either Bin Ladan or the Pope. They are as nothing, just as I am without faith in the promise given to us all. It is this that gives meaning to my existence. And sadly, even my contious thoughts fall short. :(

Is there a greater sin than I? I think not. :(

This has been a wonderful thread and I hope my words are true, for they are as I understand them. :)

Much Love to All,

Darren
« Last Edit: August 30, 2006, 01:15:43 PM by YellowStone »
Logged

orion77

  • Guest
Re: In the beginning...
« Reply #17 on: August 30, 2006, 02:57:26 PM »

Feat and Angie, you all crack me up!   ;D ;D ;D


Darren, I think you hit the nail on the head.  It's all about being totally dependent on faith, and even the faith we have is a gift.  We really can do nothing in ourselves, it's all about Him.  Getting to this point goes way beyond knowing Him crucified, but being crucified with Him.  Nevertheless, not our will, but His will be done.

Good post, my brother!   8)

God bless,

Gary
Logged

Lightseeker

  • Guest
Re: In the beginning...
« Reply #18 on: August 30, 2006, 03:47:28 PM »

Joe Post #5,

Man this thread is way ahead of me already.  But to answer your question:

Quote
“Did the speaker have any scriptural witnesses for his opinion that Adam spoke this first? It seems that this would constitute "a secondary word" wouldn't it?”
I really don’t remember him giving any other scripture for the statement.  Where does it say scripture has to be the second witness.  For Pharoah it was two different dreams.

Angie #6

Quote
“I think we need to listen to secondary words in the process of learning but not depend or act on them until we can check with the source or cross-reference them. “

I agree but I also believe that it is the Spirit who truly teaches us:

1JO 2:27
But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.


Quote
“I have read stuff here that made no sense to me at the time of reading and then weeks later after much thought, it's like a lightbulb being switched on [literally seeing the light- lol] “

The following is a prayer Paul prayed for the saints (those already walking the walk).

EPH 1:16-18  Making mention of you in my prayers that God...may give you revelation...The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints,

Quote
“Now I'm going to tease you a little bit about this 'retreat' you went to and ask;

was it underground? [no offence intended mind]”

I’m not offended.  It’s been said you can tell the size of the believer by the size of what it takes to ‘GET’ him/her offended.   I would truly hope I’m big enough to take your tease.  :)  Now to answer your question in point.  No it wasn’t underground…it was on a mountain in Colorado.  Actually another reason I wouldn’t have been offended is…well...OK….I’ll admit it….I don’t know what you’re really referring to.  Is this "underground" thing something that means more on your side of the pond?  :-\
Logged

hillsbororiver

  • Guest
Re: In the beginning...
« Reply #19 on: August 30, 2006, 08:57:26 PM »

Hello Dee, this verse immediately came to mind, I will also incluse a portion of Ray's article as well as the link you can peruse at your convenience.


2Pe 1:20  Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation.

Here is some of Ray's paper "12 Truths" that is relevent to this subject;

 
TRUTH NUMBER 6

[A] "…that in the mouth of TWO OR THREE WITNESSES every word may be established" (Matt. 18:16).

"…In the mouth of TWO OR THREE WITNESSES shall every word be established" (II Cor. 13:1).

[C] "And I will give power unto my TWO WITNESSES…" (Rev. 11:3).

This particular law of Scripture is constantly violated. We are to have at least a second witness to establish a Scriptural truth or doctrine.

Unfortunately, the Church does not follow this truth of God in establishing doctrine. Truth be known, orthodoxy has not even one witness to support any of their doctrines! Example: The Scriptures tell us that man is "mortal," not "immortal." They teach that man’s soul is immortal. Where do they have a Scripture to support this claim? No Scripture—no witness. Where is their second witness to this claim? No second witness. They will not be encumbered with Scriptures to support their damnable heresies and lies.

God told Adam if he ate of the forbidden fruit he would die: "And the Lord God commanded…you shall surely die." (Gen. 2:17). Theologians teach that, "once we are born, we shall NEVER surely die." Say, doesn’t that sound like the very same thing the lying serpent told Eve? Check it out:

"And the serpent said unto the woman, ‘Ye shall NOT surely die"

Can we all agree that the phrase: "shall NOT SURELY die" is a contradiction of the phrase "SHALL SURELY die"?

Does the Church teach what God said or what the serpent said? Why would you prefer to believe what the serpent said rather than what God said? Am I going to fast for anyone?

So do souls actually die, or are they immortal? A "soul" in Hebrew is a "nephesh." Does the Church have "two witnesses" that souls do not die? They don’t have even one. Well then, do we have two witnesses that tell us plainly souls do die?

Yes we do:

"…the soul [Heb: ‘nephesh’] that sins, it [the soul, the ‘nephesh’] shall die. (Say, isn’t that exactly what God taught us back in Gen. 2:17? Of course). (Ezek. 18:4). Doesn’t this then contradict both the lie of Satan and the Church?

"The soul that sins, IT SHALL DIE" (Ezek. 18:20).

Jesus tells us in parable of two great witnesses:

"Then said He unto them, Therefore every scribe which is instructed unto the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which brings forth out of his treasure, NEW AND OLD" (Matt. 13:52).

What "new and old" treasures do "scribes" preserve for us regarding the "kingdom of heaven?" Why the NEW Covenant Scriptures and the OLD Covenant Scriptures, of course. And both the Old (Deut. 17:6 & 19:15), and the New (II Cor. 13:1 & Matt. 18:16) command that we must have two witnesses to establish every Word of God.

I will keep this truth short, as it overlaps with the next spiritual truth # 7 which requires that we compare and match spiritual with spiritual.

The next time your pastor mentions "immortal souls," "Christians going to heaven," "Jesus being in hell for three days," "not all men will be saved," "Christian tithing," "consciousness in death," "resurrection of the body," "parables make the teaching clear," "man’s will being free and independent of God," and dozens of other such nonsense, ask him to give you two Scriptures to support each of his unscriptural heresies.

http://bible-truths.com/twelve.htm

Hope this helps,

Joe

Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.065 seconds with 20 queries.