Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Kat]

Ray's teachings on subjects listed below (those without links are answers sent to the forum).

*) Free Will is an Oxymoron
1) Questions on Christ's baptism
2) Those in LOF
3) The Serpent from LOF
4) Two resurrections; when do they take place?
5) Was Adam's sin passed on to his progeny?
6) Flesh that profits nothing?
7) The infinite mind of an all-knowing, all-wise, all-powerful CREATOR!
08) We are SINNING MACHINES!
09) Demons
10) Timeline of important Bibical dates
11) Email about the creation account in Genesis
12) Joshua's Long Day-the sun stood still
13) Who/What is the Father?

Re: Free Will is an Oxymoron.
on: January 13, 2007, 08:06:16 AM

[Ray's reply]

TO THE FORUM:

The answer your questions regarding why God holds accountable and judges those who merely do what they are inclined to do, is found in Rom. 9:
 
"For the children being not yet born, neither have done ANY good OR evil, that the purpose of God according to election [divine selection, divine chosen] might stand, not of works, but of him that calls; It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. What shall we say then? Is there UNRIGHTEOUSNESS WITH GOD?  God forbid... So then it is not of him that wills nor of him that runs, but OF GOD that shows mercy... Therefore has He mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will be hardens" (Rom. 9:11-18).
 
And so here is where your discussion revolves.  Yes, it is so, that God chooses whom He will have mercy on and whom He will harden.  It is God Himself Who not only chooses whom He will, but it is also God Himself Who BRINGS ABOUT the condition of the two parties in question (a vessel of honor versus a vessel of dishonor--one upon whom mercy is bestowed, and the other upon whom hardness is bestowed).  And so, as this IS the way things are, does this not make God Himself UNRIGHTEOUS?  And Paul also emphatically answers his own question it "GOD FORBID!"
 
But Paul realizes that his readers will find fault with this line of teaching and reasoning, and so Paul presents the question that naturally comes to our minds when we first hear these strange teachings:  "You will say then unto me [or unto Forum members] WHY DOES HE [GOD] YET FIND FAULT? For [because] who has [EVER] resisted His will [purpose, plan, or intentions]?"
 
Yes, since God is Sovereign and no one can go against His foreknowledge of WHAT MUST BE, why then does God find fault with those who are merely doing what they with their evil and carnal minds MUST DO?
 
Okay, here is Paul's answer:  

"Nay but, O man, WHO ARE YOU that replies against God? Shall the thing formed [the man doing merely what he was designed to do] say to Him that formed it [God the Potter] WHY have you made me thus [this way?]" (Rom. 9:19-20).
 
We as God's "Pots" have no right to ask God WHY He does what He does. HE IS GOD!!
 
But, for those who have ears to hear and eyes to see, God, nonetheless, does tell us WHY.

"What if God will to show His wrath, and to make his power known, endures with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: And that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He has BEFORE prepared unto glory."
 
God is going to show how GOOD the good are by contrasting them with how BAD the bad are. And God has this right, since He is the Potter, and we are merely the clay.  It is GOOD that we all LEARN RIGHTEOUSNESS (Isa. 26:9).  One group (the chosen elect) just learn it earlier than do the vessels of dishonor.  They will not be left out:  

"For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of ALL MEN [vessels of dishonour], especially [now] of those that believe [the vessels of honour]" (I Tim. 4:10).
 
But remember, we also were like the vessels of dishonour fitted for wrath, in "times past":

"Among whom also WE ALL had our conversation in times past in the lusts of the flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh [vessels of dishonour] and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others" (Eph. 2:3).
 
We are ALL "marred in the Potter's hand" sometime in our lives, and must be refashioned after the likeness of His Son. So God is no respecter of persons, He merely has a schedule for which vessels get saved first.  It is good that we learn righteousness by the evils that God imposes upon us, even if we are "NOT WILLING" that He should operate in this way (Rom. 8:20).

God be with you all,

Ray

[Kat]

Re: Questions on Christ's baptism
« Reply #20 on: June 23, 2007, 02:10:38 PM »

Mat 3:17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

The question was, Who's voice is this? Since no man has seen the Father or heard His voice who then could be speaking these Words?

We have had answers ranging from angels, to spiritual words that only could have been heard with spiritual ears to the Father manipulating the natural elements (air, clouds, wind, etc.) to proclaim His message of pleasure in His Son.


[Ray's reply]

Actually there is no great mystery concerning this "voice" from heaven.

At Jesus' baptism we read: "And lo A VOICE FROM HEAVEN, saying, This is My Beloved Son, in Whom I am well pleased" (Matt. 3:17). Mark 1:11 and Luke 3:22 say virtually the same words.

Again in in John 12:28 we read: "Father, Glorify Your Name. Then came there A VOICE FROM HEAVEN, saying, I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again."
On what is called 'The Mount of Transfiguration," we read this, "While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold A VOICE OUT OF THE CLOUD, which said, This is My Beloved Son, in Whom I am well pleased; hear you Him" (Matt. 17::5).
And this was something James, John, and Peter never forgot: " but [we] were eyewitnesses of His Majesty. For He received from God the Father honor and glory, when there came such A VOICE TO HIM FROM THE EXCELLENT GLORY, This is My Beloved Son, in Whom I am well pleased" (II Pet. 1:17).

In all cases it is called "A voice," so this does not contradict the Scriptures which state that no man has ever heard the voice of God the Father. It was "a voice," but it is a message from God the Father." What is important is WHERE it came from, and WHAT the message was. In all cases the voice came FROM A HEAVENLY source, and the message established Jesus Christ as the greatest Human Who has ever lived, and the only one acknowledged by God, to "PLEASE" God.

The message is from God out of Heaven, but it is delivered by a messenger. A dozen times in the book of Revelation we have messages from God delivered out of Heaven by messengers.

God be with you all,

Ray

[Kat]

Re: Help re: Those in LOF
« Reply #23 on: July 22, 2006, 02:13:46 PM »

If for non overcomers, those in LOF, how can satan destroy flesh when he too will be in LOF?

[Ray's reply]

Dear Forum:

This post is exactly WHY I have written the rule for our Forum. This is exactly what we do not want on the Forum. As no one in the above debate has an answer, WHY ARE THEY DEBATING? There are too many assumptions and contradictions in the above post to even be able to comment on it. Furthermore, I will not be roped into explaining the entire book of Revelation piece-meal in hundreds and hundreds of emails, anymore than I will explain my four-part series on "HELL" in an endless series of emails.

Who said that all saints have their flesh destroyed and purged by Satan? Can Satan cast out Satan?

Satan has a "carnal mind," and yet he is spirit. How so? Satan dines on dust--flesh--that is THE CARNAL MIND of man. How is the carnal mind of Satan going to purify the carnal mind of man? Satan's carnal mind needs more purifying that most men.

Who said that there needs to be a "resurrection" at the end of one's period of Judgment in the Lake of Fire? Just as those "who remain alive" are "changed" in an instant, so likewise changing those in Judgment would be no greater problem.

Where is the proof that the wicked are resurrected in perfect, GLORIFIED bodies to then enter Judgment? I've heard of this teaching, but I have yet to realize that I Cor. 15 is specifically speaking of the First Resurrection to Glory, not the Second resurrection to damnation. Will Hitler and Saddam's two sons be raised with "POWERFUL, GLORIFIED SPIRITAUL BODIES?" I think not. I'm afraid we will have to re-examine these teachings that I allowed to go unchallenged.

Why did Paul single out just one or two persons to be turned over to Satan so as to learn not to blaspheme, if indeed, ALL the Elect are turned over to him? Did Paul turn over Timothy to be destroyed by Satan?

Etc., etc., etc.

The Forum is NOT the place to solve all the mysteries of the book of Revelation. I realize that EVERYONE (and I mean virtually everyone) wants to be a teacher, but in most cases people cannot write but a few lines or paragraphs before they enter the realm of heresy. I don't take my job lightly. I weight my words carefully, and yet I am not totally exempt from mistakes. Hopefully they are minor and small in number.

I will write on this subject in the future, but not today. I have many many people trying to pull me in every direction that they want rather than in the way that I am presently going. I would love to continue work on Part D of my "HELL" series, but I can't if I am continually distracted by some many other problems. Hope you understand.

God be with you all,

Ray

[Kat]

Re: The Serpent from LOF
on: August 28, 2007, 01:15:33 PM

The whole section entitled "WHENCE SATAN THE DEVIL?" is very good, I'm just stuck on this thought of Satan was/is a serpent as also referenced in II Cor. 11:3

http://bible-truths.com/lake2.html - almost halfway down.

Is this really describing something physical?  

[Ray's reply]

Satan is a spirit being, seeing that he has been around for thousands of years. He is called a devil, serpent/snake, dragon, etc. We are not exactly sure what a dragon looks like, but supposedly it is in the reptile family as are snakes.
Nowhere that I can think of, did Satan ever appear visibly to anyone. Therefore his serpent/dragon qualities (or lack thereof) must be spiritual. Satan is a SPIRITUAL SNAKE. He has the secret, stealth qualities of a snake moving unseen in the dark. Although he is "like" [in certain characteristics] a roaring lion, he is not a lion, but "as" a lion he goes about seeking whom he may devour [Gk: 'swallow up' as in 'swallow a camel']. Spiritually devour/swallow.

So, did Eve talk with a literal, physical, snake, face to face, in the garden? I don't think so.

God be with you all,

Ray

[Kat]

Re: Two resurrections; when do they take place?
on: May 27, 2007, 12:47:31 PM

On the "tares" parable, here is the clarification/response.

[Ray's reply]

We (the ELECT) are the WHEAT, and not the tares.  Besides, we cannot be wheat and tares at the same time "growing up TOGETHER" as this parable suggests.
The wheat and the tares grow up TOGETHER in this world: "I pray not that Thou should take them out of the world, but that Thou should keep them FROM THE EVIL" (John `7:15).

The "EVIL" -- "...the TARES are the Children of the wicked one" (Matt. 13:38).  We are the "good seed" which are "the CHILDREN OF THE KINGDOM [the Elect]..." (Matt. 13:38).

We are not "tares," but we do have "chaff," and it is that CHAFF that is burned out of us, not "tares."  I pointed this out in my last Installment on HELL:

Here, being baptized (immersed) in fire [pur] is as important and beneficial as being baptized with God's Holy Spirit.

"Whose fan is in His hand, and He will thoroughly purge His [threshing] floor, and gather His wheat [wheat is good] into the garner, but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire" (Matt. 3:12).

Chaff is the bracts enclosing the good, mature wheat, which is removed during threshing-it has no value as food, and so is burned like the wood, hay, and stubble of  I Cor. 3:12. The Elect are composed of both the valuable wheat and the worthless chaff, but we are not the tares.  Notice that the chaff is "burned up... with unquenchable fire."  If this "unquenchable fire" "burns up" the chaff, surely it cannot be eternal.  Unquenchable has nothing to do with eternal.  Unquenchable fires is Scriptures that are not allowed to be quenched before they are allowed to burn themselves out.


Winnowing Wheat

"He will gather His wheat... but He will burn up the chaff" (Matt. 3:14).

We are the wheat of Jesus' parable, and we have unwanted chaff surrounding our lives. Jesus is not likening some people to wheat and others to chaff. The wheat is not one group and the chaff another, but rather the unwanted chaff belongs to the desired wheat. The wheat is the baby and the chaff is the bath water. We do not throw away the baby with the bath water, but we do throw away the dirty bath water (in this analogy the bath water represents chaff which is burned in fire).

Notice my statement: "we ARE NOT THE TARES," in the middle of the third paragraph.

Hope this clears up your understanding a little better.

God be with you,

Ray

[Kat]

Re: Something new to me
on: July 15, 2007, 07:51:17 PM


WAS ADAM'S SIN PASSED ON TO HIS PROGENY?

Someone has suggested to the forum that Romans 5:19 contradicts a statement I made regarding the fact that Adam's sins were not passed on to his progeny, but rather his mortality (death) was passed on. Here is my statement: "You might suggest that Adam's sin was PASSED ON to all men. No it wasn't. DEATH was passed on."

Now then, does Rom. 5:19 contradict my statement? -- "For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous."

Why does Paul change words in midstream if they are both identical to his meaning? Why didn't Paul say, "For as by one man's SIN many were made SINNERS...?" Or "For as by one man's DISOBEDIENCE many were made DISOBEDIENT? No, Paul says that Adam's disobedience is the CAUSE of men being sinners. It doesn't say HIS SINS ARE NOW THEIR SINS. Where does this verse say anything like that? Or that the many are GUILTY for the sins that Adam committed. Or that the many are sinners, even if they NEVER SIN This verse does not say any of those things. But the statement is true: Adam's disobedience has made many into sinners. How so? Remember that "NO Scripture is its OWN interpretation" (I Pet. 1:20)? And we need TWO witnesses to establish every fact? Etc. Okay.......let's back up a few verses in Rom. 5 to verse 12:

Wherefore, as by one man SIN entered into the world, DEATH BY sin: and so DEATH PASSED UPON ALL MEN [why? because 'ADAM' sinned? NO, let's read it...]...for that A-L-L  H-A-V-E  SINNED."

There's the answer. Adam's personal sin no more pass on to us making US guilty of HIS sins anymore than Eve's sins passed on to her husband. We inherit our parent's (Adam and Eve) mortality and nature. We are not born with their SIN, but with their nature. We are born with the "natural" mind, the Adamic mind, which is called "carnal" in the Scriptures.  Notice: "Because the carnal [natural fleshly mind] is enmity against God: for IT is not subject to the law of God..." (Rom. 8:7). It is not "Adam's sin in us" that is enmity against God, but rather OUR OWN CARNAL MINDS. Notice what it is that came from the one man, Adam: "For since by man came DEATH...for as IN Adam all DIE..." (I Cor. 15:21 & 22).

We are all guilty and accountable for OUR OWN SINS, not the sins of Adam or anyone else.

God be with you all,

Ray

[Kat]

Rays Replies to 'Flesh that profits nothing?'
on: March 17, 2006, 09:51:28 AM

It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth
nothing: the words that I speak unto you, [they] are
spirit, and [they] are life. [John 6:63]

Does our flesh profit nothing?  Was the design of mans physical body and his experiences to mean nothing?

[Ray's reply]

Sometimes familiar words have a way of prejudicing our minds. In a Scripture such as these where our Lord states that "the flesh PROFITS nothing," and we feel immediately that, why sure it does, isn't that the whole purpose of our physical life, existence, and experience? To be PROFITED by the whole thing? Yes, but that is not specifically what Jesus is stating.

Jesus did not say that there is no value to our physical experience. What He said was that the experience itself is NOT THE PROFIT ITSELF.

I am sure that most read this verse thinking Jesus said this: "...the flesh PRODUCES nothing." As though nothing valuable comes out of our experience in the flesh, when that is decidedly not what Jesus is saying.

The word translated "profits" is from the Greek word "apheleo" and has a primary meaning of "BENEFIT." It is virtually always translated with a negative connotation:

"what is a man PROFITED, if he gain the whole world..." (Matt. 16:26)

"Pilate saw that he could PREVAIL nothing..." (Matt. 27:24)

"and was nothing BETTERED, but rather..." (Mark 5:26)

"...the flesh PROFITS nothing...." (John 6:63)

"Perceive you how you PREVAIL nothing.." (John 12:19)

"For what is a man ADVANTAGED...." (Luke 9:25)

"...it PROFITS me nothing..." (I Cor. 13:3)

"...the word preached did not PROFIT them" (Heb. 4:2)

"...which did not PROFIT them...." (Heb. 13:9)

Next notice that even Christ Himself does not profit some:

"Christ shall PROFIT you nothing...." (Gal. 5:2)

And so what Jesus is clearly stating here is that the FLESH (or any of the other things mentioned above including Christ Himself), are not in and by themselves a BENEFIT (profit) to us until others facts PRODUCE those BENEFITS.

This is why Jesus asked: "What is a man PROFITED if he shall gain the whole world [lots of flesh], and lose his own soul?" (Matt. 16:25).

There is no PROFIT/BENEFIT in the flesh itself, only what comes OUT OF IT. And once you are OUT OF IT (as out of the world), the world is of  NO profit/benefit to you.

Maybe our biggest spiritual example of this is: "Come OUT of her, My people...." (Rev. 18:4). If there is "profit" to be had from being IN Babylon, then perhaps we should all go BACK IN?  No, Babylon is about as fleshly and worldly as anything could ever be, and Babylon BENEFITS NOTHING, so "Come OUT OF HER My people...." The BENEFITS are IN CHRIST, OUT OF Babylon, out of the flesh and the world.

Hope this helps your understanding,

God be with you,

Ray
 
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php?topic=2.0

[Kat]

 
       The infinite mind of an all-knowing, all-wise, all-powerful CREATOR!

We EXIST (there are only a few strange people who deny this fact of the cosmos, believing that all this is merely a dream. Let's not awaken them!). A creation of infinite DESIGN, SYSTEMS, INTERDEPENDENT ORGANS AND INTERDEPENDENT ORGANISMS, PURPOSE, HARMONY, BEAUTY, INTELLIGENCE (the human mind for example), REPRODUCTION, etc., etc., etc., DEMANDS an intelligent, purposeful, living, all-powerful CREATOR!

No sane and rational person, finding a Rolex Watch on a desert dune, would ever suggest that that marvelous mechanism invented ITSELF, and created ITSELF, and assembled ITSELF, without the aid of any intelligence whatsoever. And yet, supposed, intelligent men speculate that the great time-peace of the universe invented, created, and assembled itself without the aid of any intelligent creator.

Even if we make that quantum leap in our minds from no matter, no harmony, no systems, no design, to perfect harmony and design without the aid of a creator, how do we account for the fact of LIFE? Life is as complicated as the universe itself.

A single cell has more communication and reproductive power than all the machines and computers built by man in the history of the world. Yet we are told that it "built itself." It spontaneously generated itself from primortal sea slime by the mixing of chemical in the sea and a genius stroke of lightning to get it all started. Never mind where the sea came from, the chemicals, and the lightning. Life DOES NOT SPONTANEOUSLY GENERATE ITSELF! Life comes ONLY from pre-existing life, and life of the same KIND. These are facts of science, Tom. (By the way, lightning KILLS LIFE, it does not create life from dead chemicals).

Just based on the Law of Probability (I said "law" and not theory), it would take longer to mix the chemicals at random to produce the long chains of amino acids, etc., needed for life, by at least a trillion times longer than scientists estimate the age of the universe. In other words, IT DIDN'T HAPPEN THAT WAY.

Would an intelligent Creator at some point in time communicate with His higher creatures? I think so. The Scriptures are unique in the world of literature and writing. There are for example, numerous laws of science presented in the Scriptures that scientists have only recently come to understand with his combined knowledge of thousands of years. Primitive writers could not have known many of the things attested to in the Scriptures.
There are hundreds of prophecies in the Scriptures that have been fulfilled in minute detail many years and even centuries AFTER the known date of the writings.

The Scriptures are a collection of SPIRITUAL writings. I had tried for many years to understand them with my unaided carnal mind. I could not, and yet now, I am having hundreds of things revealed to me that harmonize perfectly with the rest of Scripture that cannot possibly be understood by mere study and diligence. Of course, here is where I have an advantage over you: I believe and you don't.

If one is too short to see over a high wall, it is only natural that he would ridicule what a taller person might describe to him on the other side. The problem of perception in this case is not with the taller person who can clearly see the other side, but rather with the short-sighted person who cannot see the other side.

Concerning the spiritual teachings of the Scriptures, let me just say, that there is more real and absolute knowledge in the Scriptures regarding what man is and how he thinks and functions in a half dozen verses than can be found in all the psychology and philosophy books in the world.

My God answers PRAYERS! But again, that's for me to know and you to find out.
I would love to write a fifty page paper on the human eye, for example. Then after blowing away every atheist and evolutionists with the facts regarding the human eye (or an animal eye), I would love to discuss the origin and probability of putting TWO EYES SIDE BY SIDE IN ORDER TO INDUCE AN ILLUSION IN THE BRAIN THE MAKES THINGS APPEAR THREE DIMENSIONAL THROUGH DEPTH PERCEPTION!!!

I would just love to sit on a panel with all the evolutionists and atheists of the world and have them explain to me the origin of such a thing as the allusion in the brain of depth perception through the spacing of two eyes without any intelligence whatsoever formulating such an absolute miraculous, unbelievable accomplishment of mechanical, mental, and organic chemical processes! And a thousand other such feats of intelligence only possible by the infinite mind of an all-knowing, all-wise, all-powerful CREATOR!


-L. ray Smith

[Kat]

'We are SINNING MACHINES!'

[Ray Replies:]

Matthew, you have got to stop talking about God as if He were a mere mortal MAN! God is NOT A MAN! God IS GOD! God is Holy and Righteous and Good and LOVING. He is not evil, neither is He LIMITED IN ANY WAY.

There are MANY things that God does that we as mortals are  NOT TO IMITATE! God "makes war in righteousness"--we cannot. God KILLS and brings back to life again--we cannot.

Because God has chosen to create and USE evil for a divine purpose, we have no right to judge God as BEING evil. He is not. Neither is it a SIN on God's part to make mortals WHO DO SIN. A sin is a mistake, a lack, lawlessness. God is NONE OF THESE!

Your suggestion that because God chooses to NOT DO or NOT BE certain things, that that somehow LIMITS Him is ludicrous. Listen carefully to what I am about to say:  A Being (God) Who has the POWER AND ABILITY to be and do ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING HE WISHES, IS NOT LIMITED!!!  The fact that God chooses to not only tell the truth, but is, in fact, the embodiment of TRUTH, and never lies, in no way diminishes God or limits God.  I am surprised that you cannot see and understand this?  God IS AND DOES everything that He wishes--that, my friend, is TOTAL SOVEREIGNTY!!!

The idea that if God were both truthful AND A LIAR at the same time, that then He would be sovereign in that area is nonsense, Matthew.

It is also helpful to understand the Scriptural use of the "relative" and the "absolute". I cover this in my paper. Your example of God being "forgetful" is just such a case. God condescends many times in the Scriptures to interact with man as if God Himself were a man. He likens Himself to one having "eyes" and "hands" and "hair", etc. God DOES NOT possess these physical organs of a physical body. If God had only two eyes in the front of His head as a man, then He wouldn't even be able to SEE BEHIND HIMSELF WITHOUT TURNING HIS HEAD! It is foolishness to attribute mortal, fleshly, inequalities to the CREATOR OF THE UNIVERSE!

When God says He will remember our sins NO MORE, He is not telling us that He is forgetful or has a poor memory. He is telling us that He will NEVER BRING UP OUR SINS to charge us with them. They have all been forgiven at the Cross of Jesus.

Subtracting "infinity from infinity" is a play on words. It is nonsense and foolishness. As is the question: "Can God build a rock so heavy that He cannot lift it?"

You ask: "By separating good and evil, and putting Himself on the side of GOOD ONLY, He has limited Himself." Oh really? Explain to me just how that "limits" God? 

You ask for a theologian's definition of "free will". Matthew, with all due respect, no theologian worth his salt would EVER express his beliefs in UNDERSTANDABLE WORDS OR TERMS!!! Most teachings, doctrines, and traditions of the Christian Church CANNOT be expressed in understandable layman's language. They always shroud their teachings in darkness, mystery, and words that according to them can have DOZENS OF CONTRADICTORY MEANINGS! I BEG you to read the first few pages of my paper on the trinity where I quote a seminary professor and the Encyclopedia Britannic with regards to how to prove there is a trinity.

That's what I do, Matthew!  I express the teachings of Christendom in layman's language so that all can see the absolute foolishness of their teachings, not to mention unscriptural as well. People LEARN from my writings. They learn to BELIEVE GOD. They learn to BELIEVE THE SCRIPTURES--not man's translations. They learn to have confidence in the God of the Scriptures. Many are turning TO or turning BACK to God because they now see His love and don't see Him as a weakling or hideous monster Who either can't or won't save His creation, but rather will torture His helpless creatures in fire for all eternity.

If you still have questions, Matthew, don't hesitate to ask. I understand your dilemma. We have been taught these things from our youth. But Matthew, I am telling as a brother, there is no more sensibility or logic to the traditional theological doctrines of this world than there for the Easter Bunny or Santa Clause.

OF COURSE people don't like my definition of "free will." It shows how utterly stupid the idea is in the first place. So they reduce their theory down to "limited free will" which only makes them look twice as foolish.  There is no such thing as using REAL words with REAL meanings to describe the STUPID WISDOM'S of this world. That's why Paul instructs us to "have a PATTERN OF SOUND WORDS"! "Limited free will" is NOT a pattern of sound words. Saying "limited free..." is no different that saying "square circles"!

You apparently don't like or don't approve of a definition of "free" that includes the words "having NO causality". Okay then, you give me a definition of a will that HAS a cause (that is something is MAKING the will choose as it does), and yet ... and YET, is "FREE"! Free from WHAT, pray tell, Matthew???  I will be waiting with bated breath to hear your definition...


[email]

p.s.  Why does God ask us to pray that His will be done on earth as it is in heaven..., if (as you say) it will be as He wills no matter what?

[Ray Replies:]

Well I'll tell you one thing for sure: you are at least thinking. Your "P.S." was a good question. If God knows all, and has predetermined all, and "operates ALL according to the counsel of His own will," then why should we "do" or "not do" ANYTHING? I think that is the gist of your question.

There are several reasons for this. I think the main reason is that although we know (or at least those to whom God has opened up this understanding) that "God is operating ALL" for the benefit of His creatures, we still don't know always, when, where, or how He is going to do this.  We don't know what a day will bring.  We MUST rely on God COMPLETELY for all our salvation's. Be it safety in traffic, financial supply, health needs, social intercourse's, etc., etc., etc. We never know from hour to hour or from day to day just what will transpire in our lives. This should DRIVE us to our Heavenly Father. And it does. It works. God knows what he is doing.

People ask me WHY do I do what I do?  Why spend all the time and trouble and expense if God is going to save EVERYONE ANYWAY?  I'll tell you why. Because God PUTS IT IN OUR HEARTS to do so.  The Scriptures say that God could raise up stones to do His work. But He doesn't. He uses "the foolishness of preaching" to get His word out.

Maybe an analogy will help. Suppose you had a bad disease and there was only one doctor and one source of medication that could save you from your deadly disease. Even if this doctor agreed to come to your aid, you would STILL do everything in your power to ingratiate yourself with this man, wouldn't you? Wouldn't you be kind and respectful to him?  Wouldn't you even show a bit of reverence for this man, the only man, who can save you from your disease?  Sure you would. And so it is with God. He is our Saviour and our hope and expectation in EVERYTHING!  The Scriptures say that "in God we live and move and breathe and ARE"!

Now I will pass on another bit of wisdom. The people to whom God has opened up this understanding are delighted that this is the way things really are. They would have it no other way, than that it is GOD and God alone Who determines our every footstep. However, those who feel this is NOT RIGHT, or they do NOT APPROVE of God operating ALL (EVERYTHING), or feel that man is far superior in his "will" than the Scriptures allow, this people DON'T BELIEVE GOD IS OPERATING ALL IN THE FIRST PLACE!   So they can't find too much fault with this truth, because they don't believe it anyhow.


[Ray Replies:]

First I need to clarify our use of words again. The word "free" as it is used in "free will" can ONLY mean that a person can think thoughts, make choices, and perform activities completely on his own with nothing CAUSING him to think, choose, or perform.  That's as clear as I can state it. If something, ANYTHING, causes (or let's get stronger--MAKES) a person think a thought or make a choice or perform an action, then he did not do it FREELY. Don't get me wrong; he may have done it voluntarily, but not FREELY.

Our minds have the power and capability to "choose". A choice is merely "what we prefer." Our brains CAN analyze data, weight pros and cons, and MAKE choices. He can, however, do NONE OF THESE FREELY--that is "without a CAUSE." Let me use a softer expression and maybe it will become clearer.  Do you now agree that we are "influenced" to think things, say things, and do things?  OF COURSE WE ARE! Now then, if something influences you to actually DO something, then that influence WAS THE CAUSE. And whatever caused you to do something MADE you do it. And once something is MADE to do something, it is impossible to ever have been avoided!

I realize that this goes a little beyond psychology and theology 101, but it is not impossible to apprehend. It does take considerable time meditating on these things before one becomes COMPLETELY convinced in his own heart and mind that the statements that "ALL is of God" and "God Who operates ALL according to the counsel of own will", are always true under all and every circumstance. Now to your comments:

You suggest that surely God gives us SOME will and SOME choices. Matthew, He gives us THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS of choices according to our own wills. It's just that NONE of them are exercised WITHOUT INFLUENCE (or a cause that makes us do as we do). Try some experimenting if you will. Sit still and try to come up with a thought, choice or action that has zero influence.You might think that something even just "pooped into your mind" and that NOTHING caused it. Sure it did. Something did. There are no effects in the physical or mental universe that have no causes.

You use the word "forcing" our foot steps. God never uses that word. But He does use words such as "directs" or "guides". It doesn't take a great deal of energy for God to make people follow the footsteps that He has established for us. The SLIGHTEST motivations in our finances, stomach, social life, egos, etc., will easily cause us to go either this way or that way.

Of course none of this is of any value unless we can establish it in God's Word. Notice what God says regarding our "steps":

"...It is NOT IN MAN...to direct his steps..." (Jer. 10:23).

"A man's heart deviseth his way: but the Lord DIRECTS HIS STEPS" (Prov. 16:9).

God could have just as easily said: "...the Lord directs HIS WAY" It's all the same to God.

"Man's goings [Heb: steps] ARE OF THE LORD: how can a man then understand HIS OWN WAY? [it matters not if our steps are good or sinful]" (Prov. 20:24).

"For now thou NUMBEREST my steps [THAT'S pretty specific, Matthew]: dost thou NOT watch over my SIN?" (Job 14:16).

"The steps ['steps' is used to symbolize ALL OF MANS DOINGS] OF A MAN ARE ordered [Heb: established] by the Lord" (Psa. 37:23). If ALL man's steps are "established", then of necessity they are ordered by God IN ADVANCE of him taking those ordered steps!

You question God "FORCING people to do evil." God doesn't have to FORCE people to do evil, we do it NATURALLY. It is our NATURE to do evil and commit sins. As I have said: "We are SINNING MACHINES"! God does not FORCE a man to rob a bank. He robs the bank because he is either in a financial bind or is lazy or is lusting for the easy life. Either way, he VOLUNTEERS to rob the bank. Now. . .what INFLUENCES him to rob the bank. Well, we just listed a few reasons. But what specifically at each step of the process causes him to carry out his deed? Thousands of things. Did he bring about the THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS of things that influenced (CAUSED) him to follow this path? NO! ABSOLUTE NOT. Where then DID all of it come from? Ultimately we must conclude that it came from GOD! GOD is the Creator. Why even the rotation of earth on its axis CAUSES men to sin!Yes it does. Many people wait until sunset to going about an evening of SINNING--loving the DARKNESS because their deeds are evil.

It's a nice thought that men would come to Jesus and come to God and opening love and adore them. But it's a fantasy. Do we have Scriptural proof of this? HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF VERSES:

"For the disposition of the flesh is death, yet the disposition of the spirit is life and peace, because the disposition of the flesh [the carnal mind] is ENMITY to God, for it is not subject to the law of God, for NEITHER IS IT ABLE" (Rom. 8:6-8).

"Not ONE is just--not even one. Not one is understanding. Not ONE is seeking out God. All AVOID Him... Not one is doing kindness: THERE IS NOT EVEN ONE!" (Rom. 3:11-12).

No, God doesn't need to 'FORCE' people to do evil, neither CAN THEY do good! In fact, Jesus plainly said that:

"NO ONE CAN come to Me if ever the Father Who sends Me should not be drawing [Greek: DRAGGING] him" (John 6:44).

Oh yes, we DO have a will, but our will does not NATURALLY do the will of God.

You say that "warnings and guidance" are useless if we have no will." But we DO have a will. It's just not "free" from causes, that's all. Matthew, surely if our wills were "FREE," someone, at sometime in the history of billions and billions of humans would have chosen ON HIS OWN, by his FREE WILL to DO GOOD. Don't you think? But what saith the Scriptures? No such thing!

You state: "If God determines our footsteps. . .we have no will." Yes we do. And God even CAUSES our wills to come in line with His. Don't you ever pray: "Thy will be done in earth as it is in heaven"?  "Not MY will, but THEY will be done"? If our wills are FREE FROM BEING FORCED OR CAUSED OR MADE to do anything, we couldn't even pray these words. That WHY we work out our own salvation in FEAR AND TREMBLING. Because we, of ourselves, CAN DO NOTHING, as Jesus plainly told us. It is a fearful thing to realize that we can do NOTHING on our own. We only THINK that we can. And if that is what we think then we are fools!

"So that, my beloved, according as you always obey, not as in my presence only, but now much rather in my absence, with fear and trembling, be carrying your own salvation into effect, FOR IT IS GOD Who is OPERATING IN YOU TO WILL as well as to work for the sake of His delight" (Phil. 2:12-13).

Even the very "words" that Paul is here speaking to the Philippians are inspired OF GOD to CAUSE these people (and us) to RESPOND to his admonition. Words are powerful. Words CAUSE THINGS TO HAPPEN.  That's why God uses words:

"The WORD of God is LIVING and OPERATIVE, and KEEN above any two-edged sword, and PENETRATING up to the parting of soul and spirit... and is a JUDGE of the sentiments and THOUGHTS OF THE HEART" (Heb. 4:12).

No, God is not playing chess with himself. God IS REPRODUCING HIMSELF! God's purpose for creation is far more than a game of chess. On God's chess board EVERYONE is a king and NO ONE gets "check-mated"! We are ALL WINNERS. We will ALL be the SONS OF GOD IN THE FAMILY OF GOD and Paul tells us that after death is abolished God will be ALL IN ALL (I Cor. 15:28).

How can God hold our face in the fire and at the same time hold US guilty for getting burned, you ask? Well, of course, He doesn't hold our face in the fire, but I know what you mean. I will let God answer your question to the point and very succinctly. The ancient king of Assyria was just as proud of his "free will" as most of humanity is today. Notice how God handled him:

"Woe, Assyria!  Club of My anger! And a rod!  He, in their hand, IS MY MENACE!  Among a nation polluted will I SEND HIM.  And against a people, object of MY RAGE, will I INSTRUCT HIM. To loot loot and to plunder plunder, And to place them for tramping, as the clay of the streets.  YET HE, NOT SO is HE planning. And HIS heart, NOT SO is devising. For to exterminate is in HIS HEART, And to cut off nations not a few" (Isa. 10:5-7).

Are you getting the picture? Continuing:

"I will visit evil on the fruit of the INSOLENT HEART OF THE KING OF ASSYRIA, And the high beauty of his eyes. [Why? Why would God do such a thing? Here's why] For, SAYS HE, 'By the vigor of MY HAND I DID IT, And by MY WISDOM, for understanding have I" (Vers. 12-13).

Next notice what God has to say concerning this king of Assyria's sell-appointed proud "free will" heart:

"Will the ax [the Assyrian king] beautify itself over the one [God] hewing with it?   Should the chief's mace magnify itself over the one [God] waving it? As if a club is also waving the one raising it! As if the rod is raising one who is not wood!" (Isa. 10:15).

Yes, Matthew, God clearly shows us how He "operating all according to the counsel of His own will"! God said that He used the Assyrian king to judge other sinful nations just as surely as if the King were an ax in God's own hand! But the beauty of the whole thing is; the king of Assyria didn't think so. He never dreamed that he was but an ax in the HAND OF GOD his Creator! Amazing! The king took credit for all his exploits and great wisdom of warfare. In reality it was ALL OF GOD. And so one day this king was be embarrassed to tears for his great swelling egotistical boasting. God will chastise him and punish him NOT because he could have done otherwise by some supposed free will, but because (1) in this kings heart he THOUGHT he was accomplishing all these things, and (2) because he ACTUALLY DID DO THESE EVIL THINGS. God us JUSTIFIED. Oh yes He is! This king will be a GREAT SON OF GOD one day and he will THANK GOD for using Him to glorify God's name, fame, and greatness.

And, yes, Job did have a choice. He had and made MANY choices during his ordeal. But God sustained Job's integrity and trust in his God. It was ALL of God. Job knew it. And Job PRAISED GOD FOR IT and God blessed Job DOUBLE! I'll be the first to admit that our thoughts are not God's thoughts, but I am beginning to understand them. Praise God that that!

And so, if all is of God (the good and bad), why does He hold us accountable for our sins and deeds? This time I will let Paul answer:

"For this selfsame thing I rouse you up, so that I should be displaying in you [Pharaoh] My power, and so that My name should be published in the entire earth. Consequently, then, to whom He will, He is merciful, yet whom He will, He is hardening. You will be PROTESTING to me, then, 'Why, then is He [God] STILL BLAMING [us for our sins]? for who has WITHSTOOD HIS INTENTION?'" Paul answers this way: "O man! WHO ARE YOU, TO BE SURE, WHO ARE ANSWERING AGAIN TO GOD? That which is molded [that's us] WILL NOT PROTEST TO THE MOLDER, 'Why do you make me thus [a sinner unable and unwilling by my own fabled 'free will' to ever do what is right]?' Or has not the potter [God] the right over the clay [us mortals] out of the same kneading to make one vessel, indeed, for honor, yet one for dishonor?" (Rom. 9:17-21).

I hope it is all beginning to make more sense to you, Matthew. Ask God for a spirit of wisdom and He will surely give to you.

Sincerely,

Ray

[Kat]

A compilation of Ray's teaching concerning DEMONS.

http://bible-truths.com/lake9.html -------------------------------------

"And the seventy returned again with joy, saying, Lord, even the DEVILS are subject unto us through your name. And he said unto them, [I know] I BEHELD Satan as lightning fall from heaven [when and as it was happening through the commands of His disciples]."

Christ’s disciples were filled with JOY over the power that Jesus had given them so that even spirits were subject to them. Jesus had just said that He would thrust Capernaum down from THEIR HEAVEN, their high place in their own mind. Next the disciples report back that they were able to cast down spirits (demons) from men’s minds, from their own heavens. They were excited to tell Jesus what they had done. They had the power to cast down DEMONS from men’s heavens, from out of their MINDS. And Jesus answered them back by saying, YES, I KNOW, I BEHELD Satan (prince of the devils and demons), fall from the heaven of men’s minds while you were doing it! And then even Jesus "rejoiced" (Verse 21).

God has a heaven. It is a SPIRIT REALM. It is where God lives and has His Being. Men too have a heaven. It is likewise, the REALM where they live and have their being—they spiritually live in their own minds, their own heavens.

Notice Prov. 23:7, "For as he THINKS in his heart, SO IS HE." The ‘heart’ is the innermost seat of our deepest emotions, but it is accessed through the MIND. It is what one thinks that determines what one is. When the king of Babylon THOUGHT that he had ascended into heaven in his mind, then that is where HE WAS, "so IS he." But ... BUT, it was man’s heaven and not God’s. No ‘man,’ no ‘carnal man’ has ever ascended into God’s heaven of spirit,

"And NO MAN has ascended up to heaven [God’s heaven], but He that came down from heaven, even the Son of man WHICH IS IN HEAVEN [right at the very time He was speaking these words]" (John 3:13).

Jesus could live "on earth" and "in heaven" at the same time! But carnal men live in the heaven of their minds all the time. Man’s heaven is a place of spiritual delusion; whereas God’s heaven is a place of spiritual enlightenment.

"And I saw a great white throne, and Him that sat on it, from whose face the EARTH [of man] and the HEAVEN [of man] fled away; and there was found NO PLACE FOR THEM… And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. And I saw a NEW heaven and a NEW earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea." (Rev. 20:11, 16 & 21:1).

It would be mind-boggling enough to think that the entire UNIVERSE could "flee away," but it would be quite another to then suggest that, "there was found NO PLACE FOR THEM." That would be absurd if taken literally. ALL THESE THINGS ARE SPIRITUAL! In the white throne judgment there will be no more a place for the flesh, for the carnal mind, for man’s heaven. There will truly be no place found for them. They will be annihilated in God’s "CONSUMING FIRE" (Heb. 12:29 & I Cor. 3:15)!

God will give man a new earth and a new heaven, and as for the great sea of carnal, God-defying humanity, "…and there was NO MORE SEA."


http://bible-truths.com/lake15-C.html --------------------

SATAN AND THE ANGELS DID NOT HAVE “FREE-WILL”

Was Satan once an angelic cherub named “Lucifer” who used his supposed God-given free-will to rebel against God and thus become Satan the Devil?

It’s a fable. It never happened. It is a Christian hoax. Satan was never “good.” Satan was never “truthful.” Satan does not have free-will. Satan was always Satan, and nobody but Satan  “…from the beginning.”

For proof that Satan was never an angelic cherub named “Lucifer,” see Installment IX. I will not take the time to re-write that proof here, however, we will look at Scriptural proof that Satan was Satan from the beginning, and that God created him as he is. Satan did not create himself or free-will himself into the Devil.

“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth”  (Gen. 1;1).

We all know what the earth is. The heavens, however, is a different matter. The physical heaven is where we find the moon, sun, and stars. But God’s domain is a spiritual heaven.

“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world [Gk: ‘age’], against spiritual [Gk: ‘spiritual powers of, or spiritual hosts of, or spiritual forces of’] wickedness in high places [Gk: ‘heavenly places’]” (Eph. 6:12).

So God created the plural “heavens” “in the beginning.” And Paul tells us that there are “principalities and powers” in these “heavenly places” or “celestials” as it is in the Greek. And that these “principalities and powers” are powers, hosts, or forces that are “wicked!”

“For by Him [Jesus] were all things created that are in the heaven [Gk: ‘heavens”—it is plural in the Greek as it is in the Hebrew], and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers ALL things were created by Him, and for Him” (Col. 1:16).

“Principalities and powers” are part of the “all” which Jesus created “in the beginning,” at the beginning of creation. And these “principalities and powers” are “wicked” forces, which we wrestle against. These powers are under authority.  

“But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow does not cast out devils [demons], but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils”  (Matt. 12:24).

Beelzebub is from the Hebrew, Baal [a Phoenician deity] and Zbuwb [a fly], thus the “god fly.” Couple this with the knowledge of where flies hang out, and in parody, Satan was known as the dung god. Fitting, I think. Jesus accepted their use of this title for Satan:

“And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand. And if Satan [referring back to Beelzebub introduced by the Pharisees] cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?”  (Matt. 12:25-26).

Satan never was a cherub possessing free will; neither does he now have free will. Satan is a creature that obeys the commands of his Creator and never talks back. Whenever Jesus told Satan to “get thee behind Me,” Satan got behind Him (Matt. 16:23, Mark 8:33, Luke 4:08).   When God said he could go so far and no further in the trial of Job, then that’s precisely how far he went and no further. When Jesus told Satan “get thee hence… then the devil leaves Him…” (Matt. 4:10). Satan has no “free will” to resist.
v
v
THE KINGDOMS OF SATAN AND HIS ROLE AS ADVERSARY

A note of great importance: Why didn’t God personally, and directly bring all of these trials and calamity of evils upon Job? Why did God USE Satan? Or is this just another case of God “allowing” Satan to test Job? We shall soon see how much God “allows” in the Scriptures, and it will shock most people when they learn the Truth.

At the start of this paper we learned that Satan (Beelzebub) has a “kingdom.” And that it involves the spiritual realm of demons and devils.

But Satan rules over far more than just the realm of demons.


http://bible-truths.com/email9.htm#wrestle ----------------------

[Ray Replies]

Dear Jim:

Well, just like almost everything else Christians adopt as truth, their knowledge of demons and spirits is equally eschew.  First, Jim, always remember the basics:

"...for it is not ours to wrestle with blood and flesh, but with the sovereignties, with the authorities, with the world-mights of this darkness, with the spiritual forces of wickedness among the celestials" (Eph. 6:12).

So it is NOT the physical that is our biggest problem (flesh and blood), being overweight, etc.

Next we must understand that demons are FALSE DOCTRINES -- "doctrines of demons" Paul calls them. So anything that would influence us to believe in, follow, or be persuaded by any such things are demons influences.

So when we speak of "anger" we are in the realm of the spirit. James says, "Whosoever is ANGRY with his brother is a MURDERER"! WOW! "Be angry and SIN NOT -- do not let the sun go down upon your ANGER" is another.  

So being overweight and having uncontrolled anger are two totally different things.  Being overweight is no more a sin than having flat feet. There are thousands of things in the biological makeup of our bodies over which we have and nor can we have control. If one is a total glutton, that is a lust of the flesh, but MANY overweight people eat very little for their size. But anger, that's different. Anger comes from within the man and it can cause one to SIN.

Now then, what do we do with the demons of anger, lust, and other aberrant behavior, cast them out?  Well, if all we had to do was "cast them out," we wouldn't have to "wrestle" with them, would we?

Satan and his demons have their role in God's creation. God Himself has even commissioned LYING spirits to go out and do their dirty work (I Kings 22:22). So demons are real, they are here, and they will be around for a long time.

How should we handle them -- ask the preacher to cast them all out so that we are clean and will never be bothered in any spiritual way again, not to mention having a perfect size body? No, here's what God tells us we should do after telling us that we DO WRESTLE against these forces:

"Therefore take up the panoply [armor] of God that you may be enabled to WITHSTAND in the wicked day, and having effected all, to STAND.  STAND, then, girded about your loins with TRUTH [remember I said demons are FALSE doctrines], with the cuirass of righteousness put on, and your feet sandaled with the readiness of the evangel [gospel] of peace; with all taking up the large shield of FAITH, by which you WILL BE ABLE TO EXTINGUISH ALL THE FIERY ARROWS OF THE WICKED ONE."

So the truth is that we continue to wrestle and do battle with them -- it is good for us to do so, it MAKES US STRONG in the TRUTH and in our reliance of God's spiritual armor to protect us.

Hope that helps your understanding a little better.


http://www.forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,2600.0.html ------

ALL of God's created celestial beings are "messengers."  Angel means messenger. From that Perspective, Jesus is a Messenger (Mal. 3:1-2).  If these messengers are bad, we might refer to them as devils, demons, OR adversaries, but they are STILL MESSENGERS.


http://www.forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,2540.0.html ------

The only spirits "roaming around" are demons, not the spirits of DEAD people.


http://www.forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,1910.0.html -------

    There is "possession" and there is "obsession."  Many people are obsessed with demons and evil spirits rather than being actually possessed and totally out of control mentally.

    Catholic exorcism is more superstition than Scriptural.  Protestant ministers try to shout and SCREAM them out of people.  I had only a few personal experiences with people who were demonized.  With one elderly woman we prayed and one by one Jesus casted out a half dozen or so demons--each with his own name, I might add.

    The truth is that we "wrestle against such spiritual wickedness in high places" (Eph. 6:12).  It is part of our Christian walk of faith.

    The world is filled with "spirits of antichrist."  Many Christians worship these spirits.  I cast out dozens and dozens of these spirits of antichrist on our bible-truth.com site, and many pastors, theologians, and Christians hate and despise me for doing it. They love these evil spirits. But always remember, that if you have the Spirit of God in you, then:

    "Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is He that is in you, than he that is in the world" (I John 4:3-4).


http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,7769.0.html -----------

Could you please comment on Henry W. Wright's  assertion that all physical illness has its origins in sin?

Dear Reader:  Certainly.  It is an amazing thing to me how that Christians will often spend many hours, years, and whole lifetimes, researching and writing books, etc., using as a premise something that can be totally invalidated by 30 seconds in the Scriptures.

Jesus Christ "knew NO sin" (II Cor. 5:20). Contrary to those deranged heretics who think this verse teaches that Jesus was the very personification of sin.  No, Jesus was "WITHOUT sin" (Heb. 4:15).  Now then, did Jesus ever experience sickness or disease?  Yes, matter of fact, He did.  Isaiah is a prophecy concerning Jesus Christ, and here is what it says:

Isa 53:3 He is despised959 and rejected2310 of men;376 a man376 of sorrows,4341 and acquainted3045 with grief:2483...." Strong's #2483, choliy, SICKNESS, DISEASE."

So much for Wright's assertion that "...all physical illness has its origins in SIN."

See also:  Luke 4:23--Why would Christ the Great Physician need to be "healed?"

Notice also:

Joh 9:2 And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?

Joh 9:3 Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents [that is 'sinned to cause this blindness']: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.

God be with you,

Ray


http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,2862.0.html ---------------

Who makes people sick God or satan?  Preachers say God is all powerful but then give satan all the credit when something bad happens.    

    Dear Reader:

    I can give you the simple answer, but few there be who [1] believe it or [2] understand it.
    "ALL is of God," but God never lies, never temps people, and never causes people to sin.
    Men lie, and men are tempted by their own lusts, and men sin VOLUNTARYILY from their heart.
    
    Yes, Satan causes disease, Luke 13:16, but only becuase it is in God's plan and purpose that there be disease in the first place.

    God be with you,
    Ray


http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,2470.0.html ---------------

Ray;
        Are ministries, dedicated to the casting out of demons, lagitimate?  Is every sickness a demon?    
 
   Dear Rod:
    There is no way that I can answer a question like that without knowing all ministers.  I am sure that most of them are dedicated to whatever it is that they do.  No, all sickiness is not a demon, however, these messengers can be responsible for bringing on sickness and disease.

    God be with you,
    Ray


http://bible-truths.com/email4.htm#stop ------------------------------

Demons do not want you to trust God for the salvation of all humanity, and so they are placing doubts in your mind about everything.

God is quite capable of saving all humanity and all of the heavenly host including all demonic forces.  He will not loose ANYTHING that He has created for a purpose. They will ALL fulfill His purpose. You, Tina, have a purpose in God's Kingdom. There are evil forces that want to discourage you realizing that calling and purpose. I will pray that God will rebuke these evil forces causing you discouragement.  Remember, it is through MUCH tribulation that we enter the Kingdom of God.  

Trust me, Tina, God is not punishing you for not going to your husband's church. Study and pray daily for God's guidance in your life. Listen to GOD'S WORD and not to demons whispering in your ear!  Let me know how else I can help you, Tina. You will be all right!

Sincerely,

Ray

[Kat]

In a Bible study (April 1, 2007) This is a reasonable facsimile of the chart Ray used.


                                DATES TO REMEMBER
                 [A short timeline of important Bibical dates]

Things make a lot more sense if we can put them into some sort of a frame of reference. 
Mobile -- south USA -- North America -- earth -- solar system -- Milky Way Galaxy.............

We will start with Adam and Eve and move forward:

Adam and Eve --------------------------------------4000-BC
Cain murders Abel ----------------------------------3900-              wheel is
Methuselah is born----------------------------------3250-              invented
Adam dies age 930 ---------------------------------3000+               3700
Noah is born ----------------------------------------2885
Noah's flood [Methuselah dies at 969] ------------2285
Babel, languages confused ------------------------2150+           copper & gold
Abraham born --------------------------------------1995                 mined
Noah dies age 950 [500 pre&post flood]----------1935
Sodom & cities burned -----------------------------1900-
Isaac [Abraham's (100 yrs old) first son] is born -1895
Jacob & Esau born ----------------------------------1835
Jacob & Leah have 6 sons in 7 yrs -
[first children of Israel] -----------------------------1777
Joseph viceroy of Egypt [famine ends] ------------1700
Israel prospers in Egypt for 150 yrs ---------------1600           King 'Tut' reigns
Israel slaves of Egypt for 175 yrs ------------------1450            9 yrs - 1350
Moses leads exodus [Ten Commandments]--------1275     
Israel invades Canaan and
walls of Jericho fall ----------------------------------1234          Pyramid building
Philistines in Canaan --------------------------------1190              in Mexico
Samson is born -------------------------------------1090
Samuel leads Israel for 40 yrs ---------------------1050-
David born at Bethlehem ---------------------------1034
Saul first king of Israel -----------------------------1025
David king of Israel - rules for 40 yrs. ------------1000+
David dies at age 69 and
Solomon rules 40 yrs - begins building temple -----965            Greek writer
Solomon turns all Israel to idolatry ------------------935            Homer - 800
Elijah & Baal priests ----------------------------------860+
Jonah - Assyria's enemy -----------------------------777         Hanging Gardens
Israel falls to Assyria ---------------------------------700            of Babylon,
Babylon takes Judah - Temple burned                                  Buddha in China
Ezekiel, Daniel, Jeremiah -----------------------------600-        Confucius - 550
Zechariah calls for new Temple ----------------------520
Worship restored by Malachi, Ezra & Nehemiah -----450           Plato in Athens
Books of OT are now called Scripture ----------------350            Socrates 400
Temple built in Samaria and 
Alexander conquers Palestine peacefully -------------333
Egypt rules Palestine 100 yrs., many Jews in Egypt -300
Septuagint: the law from Hebrew to Greek ----------250
Antiochus III of Syria conquers Palestine ------------200
Antiochus IV defukes Temple - burns the Law and
dedicates it to Zeus -----------------------------------167
Antiochus V rescinds decree against Jewish Law and
Temple is rededicated = Hanukkah ------------------164
Rome rules Judea --------------------------------------64
Herod the Great is made king of the Jews and
rebuilds the Temple -----------------------------------37          world population
Jesus is born ------------------------------------------4-3             250 million
Resurrection -----------------------------------------30AD
Titus demolishes Jersalem & Judea ------------------70

[Kat]

Email about the creation account in Genesis

http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,12719.0.html

Genesis one does NOT state that "angiosperms (or plants that are today classified in that category) -- existed before any animals whatsoever."  His assumption is based on the spurious King James translation: "And it was so" (Gen. 1:11).  The Hebrew reads: "...and it did come to pass so," or "and it came to be so."  Clearly it doesn't say that it "WAS" (passed tense) so at that moment, but rather this was the start of vegetation which continued then for millions of years.  Yes, all of these creations "did come to pass so," over a long period of time.  These were not 24-hour time periods as young earth creationists falsely assume.


Genesis one does NOT say "birds."  The King James has "fowls," which are birds, but the Hebrew word used here is "oph"  (Dr. Strong's # 5775 which comes from #5774 and is defined as "covered with feathers, or rather covering with wings").  Yes, fowls are "ophs," but not all ophs are fowl or birds.  Notice that Dr. Strong's definition says that this word "rather" means "covering with wings," rather than "covered with feathers."  Only one time out of thirty some times this word is used in the O.T. does it refer to fowl rather than to something that flies or the act of flying.  Birds are not "covered with wings," but flying insects have four wings rather than just two as birds have.  Flies have two functional wings, but they have two homologous appendages which may have been another set of wings in the past.

The Concordant Literal Old Testament translates this word "oph" as "winged flyer," for that is what they were.

Likewise, contrary to popular belief, Genesis one does not speak of the creation of fish.   God did not tell the waters to bring forth "fish," but rather "moving [living] creatures" [Heb: sherets], but this was on the 5th day time period.  It was later, after the creation of mankind in verse 26 (millions of years after) that God makes the declaration to the humans that they should "...have dominion over the FISH of the sea."  Fish in this verse is not the "sherets" of verse 20, but rather the Hebrew is "dagah," which does mean "fish."


.  It does not say that the sun was "formed" on the fourth yom (time period--yom means time, not day) period. It is just stated that there were to be lights in the firmament to shine on the earth.  They were created back in verse 1, but now they are shining through the dense clouds and chaos which surrounded the earth for millions of years before the atmosphere was cleared enough for these lights to shine through to the surface of the earth.  King James says, "And God made two great lights..."  But that is not the proper tense in the Hebrew Manuscripts.  It should read:  "And God HAD MADE..."  That is, He "had [already] made" these lights.  Yes, of course, He made them back in verse one before He even began to fashion the earth suitable to be inhabited.


Chapter two does not contradict chapter one. The order in chapter one is plants, animals, and then humanity.  Is this not the order found in the geologic table?  Chapter two does not recount the creation of humanity, but rather the creation of Adam and Eve.  In Genesis 1:26 God "made" [Heb: 'asah'] male and female. In Gen. 2:6 God "formed" [Heb: 'yatsar'] Adam--two difference Hebrew words: two different formations.  Notice that it doesn't say in chapter 2 verse 3 that there was no man on earth at this time, but rather that there was "no man to till the ground."  There were men, but they were hunters/gatherers, not farmers.  God is now going to make a more advance human to cultivate and farm the land.  

The phrase "dress it and keep it" in verse 15, is "tend and cultivate." God is teaching Adam to be a farmer. When in doubt, read a proper translation.  God did not create the animals AFTER He created Adam. Notice a proper translation from the Concordant Literal Old Testament: "And furthermore, Ieu Alueim ['the Lord God'] HAVING FORMED [yes, having ALREADY formed, millions of years in the past] all field life and every flyer of the heavens."  God is bringing to Adam the Animal species which He had already created millions of years in the past, to have Adam give names to them.  This obviously took years.  Some, such as the dinosaurs (the reptilian 'tannyin, tannyim,' of Gen. 1:21 had already been extinct for many millions of years. These were decidedly not, "great whales," as the King James erroneously translates it).

It was from this first group of humanity that Cain apparently got his wife, cities were built, etc.

Chapter two does not cover the creation of plant life. That began hundreds of millions of years earlier.  What God is doing in Chapter two is He is planting a garden for the man to cultivate, farm, and harvest. The word "planted" in Gen. 2:8 is from the Hebrew meaning "to sprout." God "sprouted" newly planted trees, etc.  They were mere buds, which would require years to produce fruit to eat. What was Adam expected to eat until these trees matured?

[Kat]

Dear Readers and Members of the Forum:

Somehow I got pulled into this Joshua's long day debate.  I think it is fine to disagree on such matters, but it is not fine to resort to name-calling and suggesting that someone is an heretic or blaspheming God by having an opposing view.  It has been suggested by one that there are a plethora of Scientific proofs that the earth does not move, and only a few indications that it may possibly move.  I think I can say for certain that it is just the opposite:  there are a few indications that the earth is stationary, but multiple scientific experiments and observations that show that the earth revolves around our sun.

When I was a youngster of about 14, we visited the Franklin Institute in Philadelphia, Pa.
They had there a tall winding staircase with a large metal ball hung on a cable suspended a few inches over the floor.  From the top of the staircase you could see the metal ball very slowly swing back and forth. This is known as Foucault's Pendulum (named after its French inventor). The floor had a sort of North-South/East-West pattern painted on it to help one orientate the swing of the ball.  This we were told was proof that the earth underneath the ball is moving.

There appear to be many more complicated and mathematically challenging proofs that our earth moves within the solar system, and that the solar system moves within one of the outer arms of the Milky Way Galaxy.  Although to be fair, there are elements of both a geocentric and heliocentric universe that can be supported by known data.  But whether the earth actually moves or not, I believe there is little doubt  I searched the Scriptures to see if I could find another example of something that has been found to contradict science.  Well I found one such amazing example.  I'll present it at the bottom of this email. Below are some examples supporting a moving earth and the earth orbiting the sun rather than the sun orbiting the earth.

From:  http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=190

Isaac Newton has stated:  If gravity works, Earth and other planets have to go around the Sun, because it is much heavier.
-----------------------
There was no straightforward proof for the motion of Earth until 1725 when James Bradley discovered stellar aberration. This is the (apparent) yearly change in positions of all stars in the sky due to Earth's own motion. Aberration arises due to adding up of the speed of light coming from the star and Earth's own speed. This is a very complex phenomenon and its description requires some math.
-----------------------
Another, much simpler, consequence of the Earth's motion is stellar parallax. If the Earth changes its position relative to the stars, than the stars should appear to change position in the course of the year.

A common experiment illustrating parallax is just looking at a close object (a finger, a pencil etc) with one eye at the time. When you switch from one to the other eye, the object will appear to move against the background. The closer the object is to your eyes, the more pronounced the effect is.
Parallax should not be confused with aberration: parallax arises from the change of Earth's position and depends on the distance to the star, while aberration is caused by Earth's great speed and does not depend on how far the star is.
Parallax of a star was first measured by Bessel in 1838. It was not measured before because this change of a star's apparent position is very small (the stars are very far from us). This was a very important discovery because Aristotle himself mentioned the lack of observable stellar parallax as the proof that the Earth is not moving (he didn't have a telescope and didn't know that the stars are so distant).
--------------------------
A third discovery proving Earth's motion was that of Doppler effect. Wavelength of the light that we receive from objects moving relative to us becomes a little shorter (i.e. bluer) when we approach the source and becomes longer (i.e. redder) when we move away from the source. When the Earth moves toward a star, the star will appear slightly bluer (only high-tech instruments can measure this) while it will appear redder when Earth is on the other side of the orbit and moves in the opposite direction. This effect proves that Earth has a velocity relative to the stars, similar to aberration.
--------------------------
So, aberration (slight change in stellar positions due to Earth's speed), parallax (slight change in stellar positions due to Earth's changing position) and Doppler effect (slight change in color of stars due to Earth's speed) all prove that Earth is moving around the Sun, and not the other way round.
-----------------------------
From: http://en.allexperts.com/q/Astronomy-1360/2010/4/earth-moves-round-sun-2.htm
The solar system is Heliocentric. The Sun is at the center. Most of the disproved alternate theories have the Earth as the center of the solar system, where the Sun orbits the Earth.

If I ever doubted the accepted scientific definition of the Heliocentric Solar System with the sun being the center and the planets revolving around the sun and the moons of a planet circling the planets, I would have been convinced of this truth by an exercise I did in the mid 1980's.

The proof was my visual observation of the moons of Jupiter. It was a long but worthwhile experiment. I found and plotted the motions of the four largest moons of Jupiter to see if I could reconcile the data with known information.

I was playing "Galileo" in order to see if I could get the feeling of being a discoverer. [Galileo was the original discoverer of the four big moons of Jupiter]. This is proof by way of observation. I took no pictures, but I did sketch everything. I was able to determine orbital periods, elongation dates and many other things about the four moons. I could find no way to explain this except to accept the fact that the solar system is as described in modern day, Sun centered, Heliocentric.

Here you have a person that has actually proved to himself that the Earth revolves around the sun. In this Jupiter moon study mentioned above, there were several times that the moons circling Jupiter would enter and exit from the planet's shadow as they orbited around the far side.

The times of the occurrences matched predicted timings. They coincided with the accepted view of Copernicus' layout of the solar system, with the sun being at the center of gravity, and the Earth and Jupiter circling the sun and the four moons of Jupiter circling that planet.

All this data observed also pointed to the fact that the Earth and Jupiter circled the Sun in specific time periods at predictable distances.
-------------------------------
From:  http://en.allexperts.com/q/Astronomy-1360/earth-revolves-around-sun.htm

If the Earth revolves around the Sun - and is not static in space - then it must be true that over the course of a year say, we observe differences - for example in:

i) the stars that appear at the same time in the night sky

ii) the altitude and azimuth (position with respect to the horizon's N, S points) of the Sun.

The first is easily verified, say over the course of obseving the night sky at the same time (say, 8 p.m. local time) each night. You will therefore see a procession of different stars, objects as time goes by.

This is the first indicator that Earth must be moving through space and not stationary.

A further observation to reinforce this is *revolution* and not merely linear displacement is obtained by repeating said observations *year after year* and making notes of the objects seen.

In the same 6-month period, therefore, you ought to see the same objects in the night sky at the same time.

This implies repetitive motion, and hence that the Earth is not merely linearly moving in space, but returning time and again to the same relative position in space (e.g. in it s orbit)
-----------------------------------

There are numerous Internet sites which support a motionless earth.

Some of the "Motionless Earth" societies quote Psalm 93:1 as proof that the earth cannot
possible orbit the sun because it says the earth cannot "be moved."

Psalm 93:1  "The LORD reigneth, he is clothed with majesty; the LORD is clothed with strength, wherewith He hath girded Himself: the world also is established, that it cannot be moved. "

Is this verse a scientific statement of fact that proves the Earth does absolutely does not move?  The Hebrew word translated "moved" is mot, and is defined by Dr. Strong:  "waver; by implication to slip, shake, fall: - be carried, cast, be out of course, be fallen in decay, X exceedingly, fall (-ing down), be (re-) moved, be ready shake, slide, slip."

God said that the earth cannot 'BE moved," or "caused to slip, shake, fall, be carried, be out of course, be fallen," etc., not that it doesn't move under God's direction.  And, of course, it is man that does not have the ability to move the earth.  God can and does.

Someone on the Forum suggested that God would not make us believe that the Sun
moves, if indeed it does not.   First of all, Joshua's long day is not written for our scientific enlightenment.  God is not teaching in these verses that the earth is stationary in space, and the sun  orbits  around the earth.  But God does at times do things that cause men to believe things that are not true.   It was God Who authorized the "lying spirit" to deceive.  It is God who sends "strong delusion that they should believe A LIE" (II Thes. 2:11).  And remember Jesus on the road to Emmaus where we read this:  "And they drew night unto the village, whither they went: and He [Jesus] MADE AS THOUGH He would have gone further" (Luke 24:26).  Jesus made them think that He was going to travel down the road further, but all the while, He knew that He wouldn't.

To say that the sun rises and the sun sets,  even if it can be proven scientifically that it is the earth that rotates which causes the appearance of the sun moving across our sky. is nonetheless perfectly justifiable.  From our perspective, that is exactly what it does--it rises above the eastern horizon in the morning and moves across the sky until it disappears below the western horizon in the evening.  To this day we refer to "sunrise" and "sunset" millions of times a day around the world.  Question:  Just how would the weatherman say "sunset this evening will be at 6:15,"  without using the word "sunset? He would have to say something like:  "This evening at 6:15 pm the sun will appear to go down over the horizon, but this perceived movement really is caused by the earth rotating on its axis toward the east that only makes it appear as though the sun is moving below the horizon in the west."  Let me know if someone has a shorter version in replacing "sunset?"

To state that the sun rises and sets or stating that "the sun stood still" does not in any way contradict science.  The sun appears to rise and set, and the sun appeared to "stand still" in Joshua's day.  And to report what they SAW is not a lie.  At evening in Key West many tourists gather at the pier to watch the beautiful sunsets.  They watch THE SUN SET!  I personally watched with them on many occasions and saw with my own eyes, THE SUN SET.  Now then, for those who like to argue over accuracy saying that the sun does not rise or set and the sun could not have stood still in Joshua's day, please answer me this:  If I didn't watch the sun SET, you tell me what I did see?  No seriously, tell me--what did I SEE?  All elements of a statement do not always have to be scientifically correct in order for the statement itself to be true.

If we say a certain perfume makes someone smell great, is that a scientifically accurate statement?  Scientifically, is it the person that smells great or the perfume that smells great?  A dress or article of clothing may indeed, scientifically, cause a woman to "look" better, but a perfume does not necessary cause a woman to "smell" better.  I remember once when someone said to me: "You smell great, Ray," I kiddingly responded by saying: "Well thank you, but it's not me but my cologne."  Is that the way we must always talk in order to be "scientifically" correct?  Nonsense.  

Now for another example of the Scriptures making unscientific statements:

Gen. 1:26--"And God made two great LIGHTS; the greater light to rule the day [this has to be the sun], and the lesser light to rule the night [this has to be the moon, because next we read...]...He made the stars ALSO."  So the "lesser LIGHT" can only be the moon.  But notice that God calls it "a LIGHT."

   Isa 13:10  "For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine."

   Eze 32:7  "And when I shall put thee out, I will cover the heaven, and make the stars thereof dark; I will cover the sun with a cloud, and the moon shall not give her light."
 
Mar 13:24  "But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light."

Now then, is the moon really a "light?"  Does the moon produce its own light?  Does even God Himself believe that the moon has its own source of light?  Well, there are those in the "Motionless Earth" groups that do indeed teach that according to the Bible, the moon has its own light source, and they believe it!  Amazing.  No, the moon does not have its own light source.  It is, in fact, a mirror for the light of the sun.  So is the Bible wrong and  unscientific?  Imagine God having His Word read:  "And God made one light and one reflector of light; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser reflector of sunlight to rule the night."  Or imagine Jesus saying, "Immediately after the tribulation of those days, shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not reflect the light from the sun...."

 Maybe God should have inspired Isaiah to say:  "For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause the light from the sun which shines on its surface to be reflected."

What in the world would the readers of Scripture have thought of such verses before enough scientific knowledge came to light so as to understand the reality of these things.  What pray tell would the phrase "reflected light" of the moon have meant to early readers of Scripture?  These things are accurately stated in Scripture.  If the sun did NOT "stand still" over Gibeon that fateful day back in Israel, you tell me just what did the sun do that day?  It matters not that the earth rotates causing the appearance of the sun moving across the sky, when that rotation stopped, THE SUN STOOD STILL OVER GIDEON!!

The sun stood still in relation to it's position in the SKY from the viewing point of THE EARTH.  The moon most assuredly gives off light regardless of the fact that it is reflected light from the sun, and it is right and proper to state it as such.  


One last observation concerning the little matter of gravity:

It does not seem conceivable that the tiny insignificant gravitational pull of the earth
could possibly hold the huge mass of the sun (93 million miles away) in orbit!  Listen:  The sun would have to travel at approximately 24,000,000 miles a hour (400,000 miles a minute) to circle the earth in 24 hours.  How pray tell could our tiny earth hold the giant sun travelling at 24 million miles an hour from flying out into space at that phenomenal speed?    Obviously the sun has many times more gravitational pull on our tiny earth than our tiny earth has on the sun.

Try this silly little experiment:  Tie a medicine ball to a string long enough that you can swirl the ball in a circle over your head.  You remain stationary while the ball swirls round and round.  Question:  If the tiny gravity of the tiny earth can hold the huge sun in orbit, why is it that when you swirl the medicine ball on the string that instead of the ball orbiting your body why doesn't your body orbit the ball!  your body may be only ten times heavier than the ball, whereas the sun is 300,000 times heavier than the earth.  Anyway, to me it seems almost silly to believe that our huge heavy sun could travel at 24,000,000 miles an hour, 93 million miles away, could be held in its orbit by the small gravitational pull of our tiny planet.

Now let me get back to more important things.
God be with you all,
Ray

[Kat]

Email self explanatory.  Ray's comments will be in blue.

Let me make a few COMMENTS.......in your email.

Hi Ray, I hope this is a good day for you. I have been thinking a lot about the things you brought out in the last Bible study, really interesting stuff. I thought an email might be the best way to ask you about this, of course only if you feel like looking at it. I know you are studying this subject of 'the Father' and what He is and all, so it would not hurt my feelings at all if you do not feel like you can't go into this right now or do not have the time. But I will present this and if you find any point worth commenting on that would be nice.

I will start with this Scripture.

John 5:37 And the Father Himself, which hath sent Me, hath borne witness of Me. Ye have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His shape.
 
I understand that we have not heard the Father's voice, yet many did hear Christ and He represented the Father completely and was "the Word of God."

Rev 19:13 He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God.

So is it wrong to think that when we hear Christ we are hearing the Father? Not literally, but in essence it is the Father?

COMMENT: Yes, of course, we hear the Father through Christ. Jesus is the "Word" as you point out, which is really the "expression," the "statement," and the "representative" of the Father. The meaning of "logos--word" is more than just a single word as we see defined in a dictionary, but historically represented the message of the messenger. Jesus is the Bridge between the spirit realm of God and the physical universe.

John 12:49 For I have not spoken on My own authority; but the Father who sent Me gave Me a command, what I should say and what I should speak.
v. 50 And I know that His command is everlasting life. Therefore, whatever I speak, just as the Father has told Me, so I speak."

I do want you to know that I realize that Christ is not the Father, and the voice that spoke at the baptism of Christ was not His (Jesus') own voice saying those things, it was "a voice," as you have stated before, of an angel/messenger.
The other part of John 5 also says "you have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His shape." Yet Christ seems to be stating that the disciples did see the Father when they see Him.

COMMENT: He not only "seems to be stating," He literally IS stating. But if the Father is invisible spirit, how can He be seen through visible humanity?

Are we to believe that somehow the Father looks like a man? And doesn't the Bible say that "God is NOT a man?" Actually, it doesn't. We are yet allowing the theology of Christendom to influence our thinking. I have used Numbers 23:19 myself in the past as a verse that shows that "God is not a man." But that is not really what this verse or I Sam. 15:29 are saying at all. There is no period (.) after the word "man" in either verse.

When one sees a comma or a semi-colon, it means that there is more to follow, and often brings out a totally different textual meaning than is meant by presenting only fragments of a sentence. The same is true with teaching that God never changes. What proof do we have for this? Why Mal. 3:6, right? Wrong! Read it: "For I am the LORD, [comma] I change NOT; [semi-colon--ah, there's more to follow that shows in what WAYS God does not change]..." More on all these things later in my study.

John 14:7 "If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; and from now on you know Him and have seen Him."
v. 8 Philip said to Him, "Lord, show us the Father, and it is sufficient for us."
v. 9 Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, "Show us the Father'?
v. 10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works.

Col 2:9 For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.

COMMENT: How could anyone believe this verse and yet believe that Jesus was just a "lucky Jew" who was chosen to be the lottery winner of the universe! Just believe God, live a few years of a sinless life, and this Jewish man will be given ALL THE POWER IN HEAVEN AND EARTH FOR ALL ETERNITY! We should all be so lucky! Nonsense! No mere mortal could EVER fill the shoes of God the Father and be given control (including all judgment of all humanity) of God's universe for all eternity. Jesus Christ was a billion times more than just a mere moral man! More later..........

Col 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.

COMMENT: Yes He is. But think about this: As Jesus is the image of His Father, His Father MUST HAVE AN IMAGE. Not only is Jesus the image of the invisible God, but He made humanity likewise: "Let Us make man [Heb: 'humanity'] IN OUR IMAGE" (Gen. 1:26). I have known for thirty years that the Hebrew word for "image" always means "form, image, and shape," and never means "spiritual or moral character." So how can humanity be made in God's "image" if He doesn't have an image?

So I am wondering if the simple statement of fact "I and My Father are one" says it all?

COMMENT: Maybe not quit all, but pretty close once we understand all the facts and contexts of that statement.

Is the bond of oneness between the Father and Son such a perfect oneness of mind, that to hear or see Christ is to see or hear the Father, in essence anyway?

COMMENT: Yes, of course (I would leave off the phrase "in essence anyway").

So I'm wondering about the statement in Kings "Behold, heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain You," isn't this the Father?

COMMENT: I Kings 8:27 does say "God--Elohim" in verse 27,  And we know that it is the "LORD--Jehovah" which Moses saw at Siani, therefore this is Jesus and not the Father. Besides, Deut. 10:14 states that the "heaven of heavens" are the "LORD'S thy God," and so again, that is Jesus.

Maybe He can't be brought down into a "shape" or a being,

COMMENT: But then again, maybe HE CAN!

so could it be that Jesus Christ was created to be the image of the Father to meet the need we (humanity) would have to 'see' God? So are we actually seeing the Father through Christ?

COMMENT: There is a problem here not only with tirinitarianism, but with most all other isms as well, if we try to make two Beings (or Persons, although I am not comfortable with the word person as its first definition is "a human being") out of the Father and Son, and that is, if Jesus is God and the Father is God, we then have TWO GODS and the Scriptures are plain that there is but "ONE GOD."

I use to think the word "Elohim" solved the problem, seeing that is plural for "El" which means "God" or the "Deity." After all didn't God (Elohim) say, "Let US...after OUR...." (Gen. 1:26)? Yet, but in Gen. 11 it was "the LORD--Jehovah, Jesus" Who said, "let US go down," not Elohim. Likewise, the Shema of Deut. 6:4 says: "Hear O Israel the LORD thy God is ONE LORD." It doesn't say that the "LORD thy God is one ELOHIM." No, it says "one LORD--YHWH." And YHWH is singular, not plural.

So according to Paul, the One God must be "the Father," not?

Didn't Paul say: "But to us there is but one God, THE FATHER" (I Cor. 8:6)? Yes, but once again, the sentence doesn't end there with a period (.), does it?

If we take out all the descriptive phrases we have this: "...there is one God, the Father...AND one Lord Jesus Christ..." Before everyone shouts "heresy," let me finish my research. What would happen if we were to replace the comma (,) after the word "Father" with a colon ( : )? "But to us there is but one God: the Father...AND the Lord Jesus Christ...." But wouldn't that mean then that the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ (the two of Them) are ONE GOD? Yes of course, isn't that what John 10:30 says: "I AND My Father ARE ONE"?! There's much more to this, but I will save it till later.

COMMENT: I believe that Christendom has failed to teach us what it is that God the Father wants and desires FOR HIMSELF. Why did He make a "physical" universe? Was it only to have and bring children into His Kingdom? We really need to reconsider how much was involved in God acquiring the Wisdom necessary to build His universe and create a suitable Family for His Kingdom.

God be with you,
Ray