bible-truths.com/forums
=> General Discussions => Topic started by: ZekeSr on July 04, 2018, 09:24:42 AM
-
I seem to remember Ray briefly addressing the subject/premise of people being here before Adam. And I also seem to remember that he stated it concurred with Scripture.
Perhaps the most direct example, but not the only indication, is Cain being in fear for his life as he roamed the earth after killing Abel:
Gen 4:14 Behold! You have driven me out from the face of the earth today, and I shall be hidden from Your face. And I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth, and it shall be that anyone who finds me shall kill me.
Gen 4:15 And Jehovah said to him, therefore whoever kills Cain shall be avenged seven times. And Jehovah set a mark upon Cain so that anyone who found him should not kill him.
But I also know there is Scripture relating us all back to Adam and Eve. And I kind of remember Ray making that point, too.
Can anyone shed some light on the subject or reference where I can locate it on this site? I find it extremely fascinating, yet confusing.
Mike
-
Gen 3:20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.
Rotherham has an interesting translaton:
(Rotherham) So the man called the name of his wife, Eve,—in that, she, was made mother of every one living.
Mat 8:22 But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead.
If real science says man has been here 50k years then we should consider that to be true. The bible and true science do not disagree.
https://youtu.be/2AbrPxV1uQU (https://youtu.be/2AbrPxV1uQU)
-
Well, I would say Adam and Eve were not the first people since Adam had undoubtedly a father and a mother, unless God lies (absolutly not!), for Adam had to leave them to marry Eve:
Genesis 2:24 « That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh »
-
If you read Luke 3:23-38, you can notice that we are given a SPIRITUAL genealogy with this accuracy: ADAM IS A SON OF GOD. (Verse 38).
Matthew 1:1-16 gives us a PHYSICAL genealogy as well as in the book of Genesis: Adam is the father of Seth.
In Luke 3 :23, Jesus is NOT the physical son of Joseph « AS WAS SUPPOSED ».
So I would read Genesis 2:7 as a sort of « explanation » onto HOW Adam became a Son of God, a SPIRITUAL SON.
Then in Luke 3, we can read all the spiritual line of descent God has begotten.
It is obvious to me, by the light of this spiritual genealogy, that Adam, and Eve, were not the first to inhabit the earth, they had relatives, neighbours etc for:
1Corinthians 15:46 « The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual »
Meaning they had to be given birth in the flesh first to be begotten a new in the same spiritual way God creates His children, us, with a new spirit, a new heart and later a new body.
I see Genesis 2:4-25 as the Judgement and Salvation of God onto Adam and Eve, since « ALL IS ONE ».
What do you think?
For the Glory Of God throught Christ. Michelle.
-
Well, I would say Adam and Eve were not the first people since Adam had undoubtedly a father and a mother, unless God lies (absolutly not!), for Adam had to leave them to marry Eve:
Genesis 2:24 « That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh »
Hi Michelle,
Well wait a moment. If Adam had a human father and a human mother...then where did they come from?
Somewhere in his ancestry there had to be a first cause of human or sentient flesh to begin the process didn't there?
Bob
Also in chpt 2 verse 21 it says that God took Eve out of Adam's side. So where do you suppose her Mother and Father originated?
-
Hello Bob,
I’m thinking about this verse:
Genesis 1:26 « Then God said, “Let us MAKE mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”
The verb « to make » here is the translation of the Hebrew ASAH ( Strong 06213). Ray taught us that this verb means to make something out of something that already exists, as opposed to BARA (Strong 01254) (Gen 1:27, Gen 2:23) which means to create something that didn’t existed before.
So when God created humanity in His image there was already the material, the basis, the foundations. Before Adam was FORMED (Yatsar, Strong 03335) or established in a spiritual way, there was already humanity on earth, but it was composed of unwise men, no close relationship to God. The fact that humanity needs to be in the image of God means to me that men must be wise so that they can have a real and close relationship with God abd then He can model it (yatsar, Gen 2:7).
The idea is: humanity already was inhabiting earth: ASAH
Then God decides to create a new man taken from this unwise humanity by making this man all new, wiser with a new heart: BARA
And when the man is wise, with a new spirit, God starts to teach him and model him: YATSAR, so that Adam becomes a living soul which is able to cultivate the Eden, which is spiritual.
It reminds me of a post I read yesterday on this forum. It was talking about the work of the goldsmith refining silver. Here’s the link:
https://bible-truths.com/forums/index.php/topic,14337.0.html
We are a soiled piece of silver, then God cleanse us with the fire of His Judgement, and at the end we piece of silver are so pure God can see His own image in us. Big process.
-
About Eve: It says in Gen 2:22 that God formed Eve by taking one of Adam’s rib.
The hebrew word for « rib » is tsela‘ (Strong 06763) which signifies also the sides of a door, or the sides of a chamber( in a temple’s structure), or the sides of an arch.
Eve is not yet wise in the eyes of God, she’s not in the temple of God. And like Adam God took her out of her human foolish position to bring her to His wisdom, and we know Adam, like Our Lord Jesus with His Church, has the prerogative to render his wife pure, unblemished. God brings Eve to Adam after He has fashioned her also, she has come by the same process as Adam. She’s wise now and Adam recognizes it by saying « This now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh ».
Just my humble opinion.. Hope I’m kinda clear. I don’t mean to confuse anyone 😉
Blessed be God, Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
-
But let's not forget they both sinned
-
Hello Dennis,
Yes They both sinned just like we behoove to fall down from our own overproud constructed heavens, work in progress, we must learn to reject evil in our hearts.
Romans 7:13 « Did that which is good, then, become death to me? By no means! Nevertheless, in order that sin might be recognized as sin, it used what is good to bring about my death, so that through the commandment sin might become utterly sinful »
We MUST go through a time where the beast takes a total control of our hearts, even though we are converted. Ray talked about the greek verb « DIE » which means « to behoove to », « to be necessary ». Jesus reminded His disciple of the necessity of those dark times before He comes back again in the end of times. This necessity is for the accomplishment of the Will of God.
So Adam and Eve sinned like we are to sin, just to learn how to reject sin.
Esaiah 7:15-16:
« He will be eating curds and honey when he knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right,
for before the boy knows enough to reject the wrong and choose the right, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste. »
-
Some of us have the understanding that the Adam and Eve story is not literal but a spiritual story chock full of deep spiritual truths. Adam is the Hebrew word for mankind. Eve is the mother of all living. But not all have this understanding. God guides all.
-
Thank you Michelle,
The Lord has blessed you richly.
How much better to get wisdom than gold, to get insight rather than silver!
~ Proverbs 16:16
-
Hello John, Hello Wanda,
Yes John, you’re right, SPIRITUAL, what a wonder!
There are sooooo many levels of readings in the Bible.
Adam signifies mankind and in the same time he signifies God’s elect people, His few.
Ahhh the riches of the Wisdom of God.
Wanda,
I thank God for all those treasures He brings us in abundance and I pray He guides us through the Spirit of Christ, His Spirit, and reveals us His thoughts through the Light of Christ for I don’t want to rely on my own overproud thoughts.
1Chronicles 1:16: « Glory in his holy name; let the hearts of those who seek the LORD rejoice. »
-
Some of us have the understanding that the Adam and Eve story is not literal but a spiritual story chock full of deep spiritual truths. Adam is the Hebrew word for mankind. Eve is the mother of all living. But not all have this understanding. God guides all.
Certainly John. But let's not give the impression that Adam and Eve is only a spiritual story. We have Adam's genealogy recorded in the book of Genesis. So we know they were real people.
As for "Adam and Eve story is not literal." Some of it seems to be not literal if you consider Eve is "the mother of all living" and you believe there were humans before Adam and Eve.
But I've often wondered what "the mother of all living" means? Some of her descendants will become "the elect" or spiritually enlightened? What do you think John?
-
Ecc 3:18 I said in my heart:It is on account of the sons of humanity That the One, Elohim, seeks to manifest them And to show them that they themselves are beasts."
Ecc 3:19 For the destiny of the sons of humanity And the destiny of the beast, It is one destiny for them; As death is for this one, so is death for that one, And one spirit is for all; There is no advantage for the human over the beast, For the whole is vanity."
Ecc 3:20 All are going to one place; All have come from the soil, and all return to the soil."
-
The promise of a Savior from man’s rebellious nature is something we see consistently throughout Scripture—from its origin in Genesis, all the way through to Christ’s ultimate victory in Revelation.
God promised that through the Seed (i.e., descendant) of a woman (Eve) would come one who would crush the head of Satan. This is the first promise of a Savior to come into the world to save ALL MANKIND. Genesis 3:14–15
With the woman’s seed is a hope for life that defeats death, hence the mother of all living
The seed of the woman would redeem All of humanity, and not just the elect.
Is this not Gods plan for mankind since before their creation?
1 Cor 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all will be made alive.
Hebrews 2:14–15
14 Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that ithrough death he might jdestroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, 15 and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject.
It's all so magnificent!
-
Amen.
-
The promise of a Savior from man’s rebellious nature is something we see consistently throughout Scripture—from its origin in Genesis, all the way through to Christ’s ultimate victory in Revelation.
God promised that through the Seed (i.e., descendant) of a woman (Eve) would come one who would crush the head of Satan. This is the first promise of a Savior to come into the world to save ALL MANKIND. Genesis 3:14–15
With the woman’s seed is a hope for life that defeats death, hence the mother of all living
The seed of the woman would redeem All of humanity, and not just the elect.
Is this not Gods plan for mankind since before their creation?
1 Cor 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all will be made alive.
Hebrews 2:14–15
14 Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same things, that ithrough death he might jdestroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, 15 and deliver all those who through fear of death were subject.
It's all so magnificent!
I see what you are saying Wanda but think there could be more to it.
I suspect it has something to do with "let the dead bury their dead" and the living dead. But I'm just speculating.
-
Yes Dennis, there is always more☺
-
Spiritually, those who are “living” are those who believe in God.
Our faith in God is what makes us come alive spiritually and makes us children of God.
John 1:12-12: « Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God. Children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God. »
Eve is the very first woman to whom God gave eonian life.
And then she gave birth to children who had faith in God, she is the mother who started a descendance in the faith of God.
The Church of Christ is often compared to a woman in the Bible. A woman who gives birth, like in Revelation Chapter 12. A mother.
God made Eve the starting point of Christ’s Church.
The Hebrew word for « mother» in Genesis 3:20 is « ´em » (Strong 0517), and it also means « starting point ».
Eve is the starting point of a spiritual nation, the citizens of Heavens.
Besides a family is binded by blood.
What better than the blood of Our Savior Jesus Christ to tie the « living » up with each other in God’s family?
The blood shed by Jesus Christ reconciles with God and justify us.
Ephesians 2:13 « But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near by the blood of Christ »
With this purification through Christ’s blood we become children of God.
Exodus 24:8 « This is the blood of the covenant that the Lord has made with you in accordance with all these words »
1 John 3:2 « Dear friends, now we are children of God. »
We’re all one big spiritual living family.
And it started with Eve, the mother of livings.
-
Galatians 4:26 « But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. »
-
Some of us have the understanding that the Adam and Eve story is not literal but a spiritual story chock full of deep spiritual truths. Adam is the Hebrew word for mankind. Eve is the mother of all living. But not all have this understanding. God guides all.
I'm mostly in agreement with this, though I take the garden story at face value. I think the scientific explanation has problems all day long, not the least being that it's not demonstrable theory but purely forensic and speculative. And scientific theories aren't facts but propositions. elaborated hypotheses. There's actually no scientific theory that's factual. It's simply not what a theory is. Theory is proved good or bad by its utility, its predictive capacity, and shouldn't be confused with scientific fact, such as the distance between the earth and the sun. So I don't hold with the concern for reconciling non-repeatable, consensus science with scripture. But I wasn't there. The story may be symbolic in whole or in part. But I believe it's spiritually true, entirely. and much more instructive on that basis than historically or scientifically. So I take it at face value. I've seen that Ray makes significant effort to read science into scripture, but he's done such a fine job with other things that I overlook it. Is this what you guys call being contrary? I could care less about science, while enjoying the benefits of scientific theories that are actually demonstrable.
-
About Eve: It says in Gen 2:22 that God formed Eve by taking one of Adam’s rib.
The hebrew word for « rib » is tsela‘ (Strong 06763) which signifies also the sides of a door, or the sides of a chamber( in a temple’s structure), or the sides of an arch.
Eve is not yet wise in the eyes of God, she’s not in the temple of God. And like Adam God took her out of her human foolish position to bring her to His wisdom, and we know Adam, like Our Lord Jesus with His Church, has the prerogative to render his wife pure, unblemished. God brings Eve to Adam after He has fashioned her also, she has come by the same process as Adam. She’s wise now and Adam recognizes it by saying « This now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh ».
Just my humble opinion.. Hope I’m kinda clear. I don’t mean to confuse anyone 😉
Blessed be God, Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
So the two of them were wise before they ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil?
I would say they weren’t even yet self conscious beings (let alone wise beings) until they ate from the tree. Once they ate, they became conscious of their mortality and conscious of the fact that they will die. Conscious of their vulnerabilities to death (naked) and conscious of the concept of ‘time’ and ‘future’. Before they ate, they were no more conscious than beasts..
-
Hello Lareli,
And Peter was wise enough to recognize Christ as the Son of God, yet he finally denies Him.
I must admit this part on Adam and Eve is pretty tough to understand.. 😅
Hope God guides us and shows us the right interpretation 🙏
Very interesting thread! Thanks for the discussion, brothers and sisters, I get to learn so much with you all!
For the glory of God.
-
Did we?
I didn’t know anything about the beast when God opened my eyes through Christ.
Yet I had a vague idea of what Holiness should be.
I believe firmly in God, yet I still have so much to be cleansed in my heart.
1Corinthians 3:3 « For ye are yet carnal »
Ray taught us about Eve taking the forbidden fruit: good to be eaten, pleasant to the eye and the pride to gain intelligence.
I still fight with those sins. Even if I am deeply anxious to please God.
Heavens we create, false prophets, fortress of our hearts, we all have throughout our lives in Christ to realize they’re here and learn by God’s Grace to reject them.
It’s a real path cross. But God supports us and lead us on this way. Christ’s way.
Eve and Adam didn’t have that chance we have under the New Covenant.
Matthew 13:17 « For truly I tell you, many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see but did not see it, and to hear what you hear but did not hear it. »
-
Some of us have the understanding that the Adam and Eve story is not literal but a spiritual story chock full of deep spiritual truths. Adam is the Hebrew word for mankind. Eve is the mother of all living. But not all have this understanding. God guides all.
Certainly John. But let's not give the impression that Adam and Eve is only a spiritual story. We have Adam's genealogy recorded in the book of Genesis. So we know they were real people.
As for "Adam and Eve story is not literal." Some of it seems to be not literal if you consider Eve is "the mother of all living" and you believe there were humans before Adam and Eve.
But I've often wondered what "the mother of all living" means? Some of her descendants will become "the elect" or spiritually enlightened? What do you think John?
My understanding is that the Adam and Eve story is entirely symbolic and an allegory.
Adam means mankind and he is symbolic of the human father from whom we come. And Adam came from God.
Seth is the first mentioned in the genealogies when men first called on God. But Adam (mankind) was not his literal father but his symbolic father.
Eve is also the symbolic mother of all living. If there were other humans before Eve, then she would only be the mother of some of the living, not the mother of all living.
I have no problem with true science. It appears God created things over billions of years going from simple to complex.
I have no problem with the Scriptures. I believe they teach absolute Truth. Just not literal truth. Spiritual Truths, which provide deep understanding and peace. The Spirit guides us and we grow in grace and knowledge over time, just as the Apostles did over time.
-
« Seth is the first mentioned in the genealogies when men first called on God. But Adam (mankind) was not his literal father but his symbolic father. »
Very enlightening John From Kentucky.
It gives a lot to think about.
-
I have no problem with people who take the first few chapters of Genesis at face value--unless they began to declare to me that "Scripture (or the Bible) says" what scripture (or the bible) does not say. They can declare that to other people all they want, but they can't declare that to me.
-
John from Kentucky, you said...
Eve is also the symbolic mother of all living. If there were other humans before Eve, then she would only be the mother of some of the living, not the mother of all living.
Can you please share scripture to support this?
Do these scriptures exclude others who might have lived outside of the garden, and if so how?
Act 17:26 “And He has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their preappointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings,
v. 27 “so that they should seek the Lord, in the hope that they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us;
v. 28 “for in Him we live and move and have our being, as also some of your own poets have said, ‘For we are also His offspring.'
-
Hi Mark,
I like the way you write and think.
We need to be inquisitive and be seeking to learn as much as we can.
I'm sure that God wants his future leaders to be interested in deeper understanding.
I also believe that God does not assist scientific research with His spirit the way God does concerning spiritual knowledge.
There was a lot that L Ray Smith would have shared with us if he had more time.
His methods were very detailed and careful regarding Scripture and scripture is provided by God even though it is a translation.
There really is not a comparable resource for scientific study, so all scientific theory about the past is questionable and in fact changes with subsequent generations of scholars.
Ole Indiana bob
= = =
Some of us have the understanding that the Adam and Eve story is not literal but a spiritual story chock full of deep spiritual truths. Adam is the Hebrew word for mankind. Eve is the mother of all living. But not all have this understanding. God guides all.
I'm mostly in agreement with this, though I take the garden story at face value. I think the scientific explanation has problems all day long, not the least being that it's not demonstrable theory but purely forensic and speculative. And scientific theories aren't facts but propositions. elaborated hypotheses. There's actually no scientific theory that's factual. It's simply not what a theory is. Theory is proved good or bad by its utility, its predictive capacity, and shouldn't be confused with scientific fact, such as the distance between the earth and the sun. So I don't hold with the concern for reconciling non-repeatable, consensus science with scripture. But I wasn't there. The story may be symbolic in whole or in part. But I believe it's spiritually true, entirely. and much more instructive on that basis than historically or scientifically. So I take it at face value. I've seen that Ray makes significant effort to read science into scripture, but he's done such a fine job with other things that I overlook it. Is this what you guys call being contrary? I could care less about science, while enjoying the benefits of scientific theories that are actually demonstrable.
-
John from Kentucky, you said...
Eve is also the symbolic mother of all living. If there were other humans before Eve, then she would only be the mother of some of the living, not the mother of all living.
Can you please share scripture to support this?
Do these scriptures exclude others who might have lived outside of the garden, and if so how?
Act 17:26 “And He has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their preappointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings,
v. 27 “so that they should seek the Lord, in the hope that they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us;
v. 28 “for in Him we live and move and have our being, as also some of your own poets have said, ‘For we are also His offspring.'
I believe that God's Holy Spirit has led me to understand that the Adam and Eve story is not literal but symbolic.
It does not bother me in the least that others believe the story is literally true. I am an accountant, not a teacher of Scriptures. Jesus is the Teacher of all Truths. It is up to Him to save and bring understanding to all.
Those Scriptures you quoted are true and apply to all.
-
Hi friend Wanda,
It is challenging to try to understand scripture when we cannot really know the original scripture as stated by the author to people who spoke the same language and heard the teaching first hand. Plus those teachings were given in capsule form for direct memorization by the listener who rehearsed them every sabbath for 40 years with family present. If there were any questions, they were addressed at that time.
When the Bible speaks of God creating "things" such as grass, whole fields of grass and cattle, whole herds of cattle it is tempting to see the creation of "mankind" in the same light. But is that appropriate?
Adam or mankind was extremely special since they were made to emulate God, even to the point of participating in the creation process in the production and daily care of their children who were destined to live forever with God.
God planned for mankind to assist in the creation of all future humans by having the first couple to guide and have dominion over all of their descendants even down to the tenth generation or more. That makes the first couple almost like King and Queen of the world for as long as they lived.
Mankind is being made in the image of God so that mankind and God may communicate on a personal level with mankind eventually being given immortality in the presence of God. That is not the case for any other of God's fleshly created order.
2.
Why is it deemed necessary for there to be long ages for mankind to have developed to the point of being able to think cognitively?
Is it imagined by some that God could not have created a "finished product" in the first human. A person with the ability to hear and speak and understand God's teaching from the first breath of life?
Just a few thoughts to stimulate our interest...
Indiana Bob
John from Kentucky, you said...
Eve is also the symbolic mother of all living. If there were other humans before Eve, then she would only be the mother of some of the living, not the mother of all living.
Can you please share scripture to support this?
Do these scriptures exclude others who might have lived outside of the garden, and if so how?
Act 17:26 “And He has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their preappointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings,
v. 27 “so that they should seek the Lord, in the hope that they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us;
v. 28 “for in Him we live and move and have our being, as also some of your own poets have said, ‘For we are also His offspring.'
-
It is challenging to try to understand scripture when we cannot really know the original scripture as stated by the author to people who spoke the same language and heard the teaching first hand. Plus those teachings were given in capsule form for direct memorization by the listener who rehearsed them every sabbath for 40 years with family present. If there were any questions, they were addressed at that time.
I don't recall where 'direct memorization' was used, but I may be wrong. This is what I know:
Gen 5:1 This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;
A book is a long ways away from memorization.
When the Bible speaks of God creating "things" such as grass, whole fields of grass and cattle, whole herds of cattle it is tempting to see the creation of "mankind" in the same light. But is that appropriate?
Why is that inappropriate?
Adam or mankind was extremely special since they were made to emulate God, even to the point of participating in the creation process in the production and daily care of their children who were destined to live forever with God.
You mean I am participating in the creation process because I have children?
Emulate: "match or surpass (a person or achievement), typically by imitation."
You need to be careful when comparing any human being to God. I don't think any human can be part of the creation process with our puny intelect. The creation is well beyond our comprehension.
God planned for mankind to assist in the creation of all future humans by having the first couple to guide and have dominion over all of their descendants even down to the tenth generation or more. That makes the first couple almost like King and Queen of the world for as long as they lived.
Then all their descendants have failed miserably.
Mankind is being made in the image of God so that mankind and God may communicate on a personal level with mankind eventually being given immortality in the presence of God. That is not the case for any other of God's fleshly created order.
Joh 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
And several other scripters say this. But nowhere that I know of says we will ever see God the father. Or even communicate with God one on one. But I could be wrong so please show me some contrary scriptures.
Why is it deemed necessary for there to be long ages for mankind to have developed to the point of being able to think cognitively?
I'm more astonished each year about how cognitive people were ages ago.
Is it imagined by some that God could not have created a "finished product" in the first human. A person with the ability to hear and speak and understand God's teaching from the first breath of life?
Somethings cannot be taught and must be learned the hard way.
Heb 5:8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
Heb 5:9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;
-
Thanks John.
My question should not have included your entire statement, as I only wanted scripture that supports this portion...
If there were other humans before Eve, then she would only be the mother of some of the living, not the mother of all living.
Is asking for supporting scripture the same as asking to be taught? Maybe it is, I'll think about that.
We are both in agreement on who our teacher is, and there is none like him.
Psalm 32:8 “I will instruct you and teach you in the way you should go; I will counsel you with my loving eye on you.”
-
Thanks John.
My question should not have included your entire statement, as I only wanted scripture that supports this portion...
If there were other humans before Eve, then she would only be the mother of some of the living, not the mother of all living.
Is asking for supporting scripture the same as asking to be taught? Maybe it is, I'll think about that.
We are both in agreement on who our teacher is, and there is none like him.
Psalm 32:8 “I will instruct you and teach you in the way you should go; I will counsel you with my loving eye on you.”
Mat 8:22 But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead.
You know someone who is actually dead cannot bury anyone. They are dead.
Gen 3:20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.
The word 'living' may not mean being alive. It's most likely a spiritual statement, IMO.
-
Thanks Dennis,
Very good points.
-
Makes sense to me Wanda, that's all. I just thought of this:
Jesus created Adam and Eve called her the mother of all living which is most likely symbolic.
The same Jesus said let the dead bury the dead.
There can be no denying 'dead' is symbolic here which reinforces 'living' as also symbolic IMO.
-
Thanks John.
My question should not have included your entire statement, as I only wanted scripture that supports this portion...
If there were other humans before Eve, then she would only be the mother of some of the living, not the mother of all living.
Is asking for supporting scripture the same as asking to be taught? Maybe it is, I'll think about that.
We are both in agreement on who our teacher is, and there is none like him.
Psalm 32:8 “I will instruct you and teach you in the way you should go; I will counsel you with my loving eye on you.”
The Scripture was that Eve was called the mother of all living.
From that Scripture I asked a question, if there were humans before Eve, then how could she be the mother of all living? My question is not Scripture. And I do not have an answer.
-
There were humans before Eve, or at the very least there was one human before Eve.. and she was not his mother.
Like Dave pointed out the scripture “let the dead bury the dead”. Not all who are breathing are living apparently.
-
Makes sense to me Wanda, that's all. I just thought of this:
Jesus created Adam and Eve called her the mother of all living which is most likely symbolic.
The same Jesus said let the dead bury the dead.
There can be no denying 'dead' is symbolic here which reinforces 'living' as also symbolic IMO.
It does give me much to ponder.
-
The Scripture was that Eve was called the mother of all living.
From that Scripture I asked a question, if there were humans before Eve, then how could she be the mother of all living? My question is not Scripture. And I do not have an answer.
Im familiar with this teaching process John. Things not taught by human wisdom.
-
The way I see it, Adam was a walking talking individual that had a beating heart, and Adam lived 930 years and he died.
Humanity, mankind, the family of Adam and Eve created in the image of God, can also be called Adam.
1st Corinthians 15:45 KJV - And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
1st Corinthians 15:45 Amplified - Thus it is written, The first man Adam became a living being-an individual personality; the last Adam (Christ) became a life-giving Spirit-restoring the dead to life.
Jacob had 12 sons that made up the 12 tribes know as Israel as a whole, but each tribe was called after their fathers house, from Reuben on down, and it was very common for a son that was looking for a wife to obtain one from his fathers family. Jacob/Israel was a walking talking individual that went into Egypt, but only the children of his 12 sons came out of Egypt about 400 years later.
Numbers 26:51- These were the numbered of the children of ISRAEAL, six hundred thousand and a thousand seven hundred and thirty.
-
There were humans before Eve, or at the very least there was one human before Eve.. and she was not his mother.
Like Dave pointed out the scripture “let the dead bury the dead”. Not all who are breathing are living apparently.
Is it possible the mother of all living was not meant in the literal sense?
Could she be the life giver of all, ibecause through her seed would come the true and only life giver, who would ultimately save every living soul he has ever created?
-
Thank you Joel,
Your understanding helped me rest in my own.
-
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't genealogy traced mostly thru men in the scriptures?
-
Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't genealogy traced mostly thru men in the scriptures?
You're correct Dennis, the Redeemer would be a descendent (a “seed”) of Adam and Eve.
I can see how by my wording it would be confusing.
I corrected this in my other comments.
-
Greetings
Act 17:25 Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;
Act 17:26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;
It is very clear that God made all nations with one blood running thru all men. Think about it folks. If God had created one race of people that hunted only and than Adam and Eve to till the ground, than Eve could not have been the mother of all the living and the Scripture cannot be broken. Adam the first man thru whom all have sinned, Jesus the second Adam thru whom all are justified. Both account of the creation of man is, they were created in “his image”. You have to ask yourself why would God create a man and a woman twice? All have sinned and come short of the glory of God. The first creation could not have been accounted for sinning since without the law there is no sin. Adam and Eve sin because they had the law. But its said "all have sinned".
The creation of two races of mankind has been used to promoted the theology of enslavement. From Ballentine's Law Dictionary, 1948 Edition. 'Human Being' is defined as follows: 'See monster' . From the same dictionary, 'monster' is defined: 'A human-being by birth, but in some part resembling a lower animal.'
Therefore they conscribe human beings have no inheritable right so cannot own land, property. Legally speaking that would include all of you and I. This is the way it works in Satan's world. Adam of the mankind family was “formed” the other creatures were created. So if you are not of the right blood line you cannot be part of the Kingdom according to those of such persuasion. If we deviate from biblical principle we end up with dogmatic presumption and divisions.
Sea Of Glass
-
Thank you seaofglass,
Your contribution is very benifical to this discussion.
You made several great points that helped clear up a few things I was confused about.
-
Wanda, I think a translation earlier on in the thread was shown. It said Gen 3:20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.
Rotherham has an interesting translaton:
(Rotherham) So the man called the name of his wife, Eve,—in that, she, was made mother of every one living.
Sandie
-
From Ballantine's Law Dictionary 1969.
Human Being: A Person, Male or Female.
Monster: A plant or creature terribly deformed. A human being by birth but in some part resembling a lower animal. "A monster...hath no inheritable blood, and cannot be heir to any land, albeit it be brought forth in marriage; but, although it hath deformity in any part of its body, yet if it hath human shape, it may be heir." 2 BL Common 246.
The part in quotations is from 2 BL (or B1, or BI) Common 246, a more archaic law "dictionary" or book.
Regardless, these are "legal" definitions to be understood "legally", and not Scripture.
-----
From Genesis 1
Gen 1:24 And God saith, `Let the earth bring forth (H3318--a broad word, decently translated) the living creature after its kind, cattle and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after its kind:' and it is so.
Gen 1:25 And God maketh (H6213--a very broad word with the broad meaning of "produce, accomplish, do, make) the beast of the earth after its kind, and the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing of the ground after its kind, and God seeth that it is good.
Gen 1:26 And God saith, `Let Us make (H6213--same broad word used when "making" the animals) man in Our image, according to Our likeness, and let them rule over fish of the sea, and over fowl of the heavens, and over cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that is creeping on the earth.'
Gen 1:27 And God prepareth (H1254--a less-broad word with the main connotation being bringing into existence some new thing or condition) the man in His image; in the image of God He prepared him, a male and a female He prepared them.
Gen 1:31 And God seeth all that He hath done (H6213), and lo, very good; and there is an evening, and there is a morning--day the sixth.
From Genesis 2.
Gen 2:7 And Jehovah God formeth (H3335--a fairly broad word with the connotation of to form, fashion, frame) the man--dust from the ground, and breatheth into his nostrils breath of life, and the man becometh a living creature.
Gen 2:19 And Jehovah God formeth (H3335) from the ground every beast of the field, and every fowl of the heavens, and bringeth in unto the man, to see what he doth call it; and whatever the man calleth a living creature, that is its name.
These are the "verses" in the opening account(s) that refer to the beginnings of both man and animal. I don't make this post to teach anything (except what the Spirit of God intends you to learn). I do want to dispel the notion that a simple "definition" of words (created vs. formed) should cause us to believe that "Man/Mankind/Adam" came to be in different way(s) from the animals.
For me, fundamental Judeo-Christianity does nothing to answer the questions I have--neither concerning the natural nor concerning the Spiritual. Jesus himself gave me permission to view things this way.
Luk 16:8 ...And his lord was pleased with the false servant, because he had been wise; for the sons of this world are wiser in relation to their generation than the sons of light.
Luk 16:9 And I say to you, Make friends for yourselves through the wealth of this life, so that when it comes to an end, you may be taken into the [eonian] resting-places.
-
One more, I reckon.
Rom 4:15 ...for where no law is, there is no transgression.
An axiomatic statement.
Neither did Adam bring "sin" to all men. What we've "inherited" is death, for all have sinned.
Rom_5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
Rom_5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.
Rom 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made [designated] sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made [designated] righteous.
Was Jesus literally and physically the "last man"? If we don't have a problem with this answer, perhaps it will help not have a problem with "Adam" being literally and physically the "First man", though "so it is written".
1Co 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
1Co 15:46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
1Co 15:47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.
-
”Act 17:25 Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;
Act 17:26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;
It is very clear that God made all nations with one blood running thru all men.”
Seaofglass..
.. running through all men??
The scriptures don’t say that do they?
Also, you’d have to acknowledge that Eve was not literally the mother of Adam wouldn’t you?
-
It makes sense to me that when God said;" Let us make man in our image, after our likeness;" Eve shouldn't be considered the mother of every creeping critter that lives on the face of the earth, that includes apes or anything that my look humanoid or manlike.
Joel
-
Listen this is my first time posting as I was moved to do so but I will not belabor this thread in the interest of those new to the forum. So here is my last post.
Act 17:26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men..
I introduced the “human being “ definition to show the worldly view and from whence come racism. Jews believe the rest are goys less than animals; some black sec believe the whites were created in a test tube; British Israelism believe they are the true bloodline; Christian believe the majority are going to hell cause they did it their way, etc etc. Get my point. Are we not our brother’s keeper. I never indicated ”human being” was SCRIPTURAL or maybe I went to fast.
Where did I say Adam brought sin into the world Dennis? Read what I said.
Did God created a person? Human being? A resident? A citizen? A parent? Etc. If you concede to such titles you will fall into the legal chicanery of this world and thus remain a slave LEGALLY.
God created a “man” and a “woman”. That is, a man with a womb to bare children. If you do not understand what I am talking about I will gladly provide you with a free PDF of my book “The Trading of Men Souls” and shine the light on what has been done to Americans and now the entire world. Just email me adesign57@aol.com
Lareli as Ray would say “show me a Scripture saying that the same blood does not run thru all men”
Act 17:26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth
If Ray during my exchanges with him can conclude I made a good point if I meant “man” and Wanda can see thru the fog why can’t others? Webmaster can find Ray’s candid respond regarding this point. Sadly God took him before we could continue the matter. But that’s ok. Now it’s our turn to grow in grace and knowledge.
Once the towels fell Ray realized we were closer to the end of the gentile rules than he thought and God is lifting the skirts of the present system and exposing them like never before. Pray like this is your last day on earth that we can all see with one vision. Knowing the 12 truth outline by Ray does not mean anything, it is the seed that is to grow. That’s why Ray would ask how many of you really get what he was saying.
Love Peace and most of all Mercy
Benelyon Man on the land
Sea Of Glass
-
I must have been wondering about this subject in the past and for longer than I realized, even though it seems as though I have only begun to think about it just recently. I found a copy of one of Ray's Emails that I saved early in the morning on 1/31/2011. I did not even know it was on my computer; nor do I know why I copied and pasted this particular Email, as I do not remember it. So, I can't reference back to where it is on this site. I saved it as "Understanding Genesis." So, that is most likely the original title. I came across it in a Bible Truths folder while looking around in My Documents. It covers more than Adam and Eve, but I believe it is pertinent to the whole. So, I have included the entire Email as copied. Ray's comments are in blue.:
Ray,
First of all thank you for ALL of your articles! I began reading your articles when I was 18 in 2008. I'm 21 now. I hope to meet you in person at a future conference (lord willing), if He gives you the strength and health.
On Youtube I posted a comment about how 'yom' in Genesis 1 represents an "Extended Period of Time." The next day an atheist replied to my comment. I found out that he was a former Christian who got a Biology degree and subsequently became an atheist because he says there is too much evidence for "evolution". Here is his (Ricks) reply below if you have the time. I'm Jake from Baytown, Texas.
Dear Jack: I'll make a few short comments to this man's understanding of Genesis one and two:
"The Creation Myth in Genesis I is scientifically refuted because:
1. It wrongly states that plants - including angiosperms - existed before any animals whatsoever. Science has shown that angiosperms are the last of the major plant groups to evolve, and appeared about 200 million to 140 million years ago. That is hundreds of millions of years after the first animals. In fact, not even looking at the the first animals, the Cambrian "explosion" started some 530 million years: that some 350 million years before angiosperms.
And since the order is wrong, people can play with the length of a "day" of Creation all they want and they won't be able to save this part of the Bible from science.
RAY COMMENTS: Wrong. 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.
2. It wrongly states that birds appeared before land animals. Science has shown that to be wrong. Using Archaeopteryx as a stand in for the first bird, birds appear about 150 million years ago. But the first land animals - even if we ignore the earlier arthropods and stick to just vertebrates - appear some 360 million years ago.
And again, since the order is backwards, it doesn't matter if a "day" of Creation is 24 hours, 1000 years, 1 million years, or a billion years, this part of the bible is still refuted by science.
RAY'S COMMENT: Wrong. 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."
3. It wrongly states that the sun formed at the same time as the first stars ... both of which occurred after plants appeared. Science has shown that the sun formed about 4.5 billion years ago, but that the first stars formed some 9 BILLION years before that! And of course, both the first stars and the sun existed billions of years before the first angiosperms appeared.
RAY'S COMMENT: Wrong again. 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.
Those are 3 solid scientific refutations of the Creation Myth in Genesis I. There are less clear cut ones.
4. The Bible writers had a view of the universe where the earth was almost the entire universe; other than it, there were some pinpoints of light -- what we know know to be massive stars, trillions upon trillions of miles away -- stuck in a solid firmament above the earth, and a large light (sun) and a small light (moon). Other than that, there was just water: water below the earth and water above the solid firmament, held up by the firmament. This firmament was a solid, hemispherical dome that arches over the flat earth's surface, and it had windows in it that could be opened to let the waters it help up fall to the earth as rain ... or a flood. The earth was a disc: flat and circular. It rested upon pillars and could not be moved.
RAY'S COMMENT: Well that's just utter nonsense. The Bible says no such thing. The Bible writers knew that the earth was an sphere, and that the stars and heavens were massive.
This of course is alsowhat other scientifically ignorant cultures believed, but now science has shown us how silly that picture of the universe is.
5. There are discrepancies among the two Creation accounts.
The order of creation of Genesis I is:
plants, animals, and then both man and woman at the same time
The order of creation of Genesis II is:
man, plants, animals, and finally woman
RAY'S COMMENT: 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?
The reason for the discrepancy? There are two different creation myths in Genesis, written by different authors.
RAY'S COMMENT: There is no proof of this theory.
Genesis 1: P Source
a. Story calls God Elohim throughout: 35 times. God never called YHWH in the story.
b. Order of Creation: plants, animals, and then man & woman together
c. God creates a firmament in the sky separating waters above it from waters below it
d. God does not talk to humans
e. God does not take a stroll in the garden
f. No magical trees, dirt-man, rib-woman, talking 'snake', or cursed fruit
RAY'S COMMENT: There is no reason to assume these are different renditions of the same creation events.
Genesis 2-3: J Source
a. Story calls God YHWH throughout: 11 times in chapter 2 and 9 times in chapter 3. God never called just Elohim in the story.
RAY'S COMMENT: So what? How does that prove two different writers? The Creator is also referred to as Elohim fourteen times in chapter two (three more times than YHWH)--so what? And Elohim is used thirteen times more in chapter 3.
b. Order or Creation: man, plants, animals, and finally woman
c. No mention of God creating a firmament
d. God talks to Adam and to Eve
e. God takes a stroll in the garden
f. Two magical trees, a dirt-man, a rib-woman, a talking 'snake', and cursed fruit" End of Quote.
RAY'S COMMENT: Chapter 2 also neglects to say that God "Created the heavens and the earth." Maybe that is because in Chapter 2 verse 1 it says, "Thus the heavens and the earth WERE FINISHED..." !!
I don't mind answer things like this once and awhile, but I really, really, don't have the time.
God be with you,
Ray
Perhaps I was meant to save this for today.
Mike
-
According to researchers - the ancient Sumerians, builders of the world’s first known civilization, are a mystery to us. Settling in what we would now call southern Iraq from about 5400 BCE on, they produced a written language, a complex system of mythology, impressive architecture, and a lost world that held regional hegemony for thousands of years. We don’t know where their language came from; we don’t even know where their genes came from. We have no idea who their modern descendants would be, and we’ve never been able to test the DNA of Sumerian remains.
Well, not until now. A complete skeleton from the Sumerian capital of Ur, dating back to about 4,500 BCE, was recently rediscovered in the Penn Museum—and its intact teeth may include enough soft tissue to allow DNA testing. Nicknamed “Noah,” the skeleton appears to have survived an ancient flood and everything that followed.
[British archaeologist Sir Leonard] Woolley’s team found 48 or more graves in a flood-plain, an area which was once subject to regular flooding. The skeletons there were unusually old, dating to an early era known as the Ubaid period (ca. 6500-3800) but only one was intact and fit to be removed. The skeleton and the dirt surrounding him was excavated and coated in wax and shipped to London first. Upon reaching Philadelphia, however, he was lost to time — only one of a multitude.
Until recently, the primary advocates for testing Sumerian DNA have been followers of Zecharia Sitchin, who hold the unusual belief that the ancient Sumerians socialized with extraterrestrials and may have carried alien genes. But there are plenty of more conventional reasons to study Sumerian DNA: it stands to tell us where the first city-builders came from and who their contemporary descendants are. The migration of the Sumerians is one of the great untold stories of human civilization; if we aim to tell it, DNA is the best tool we have.
Then this could be the origin of a very clouded thesis of how these "first humans" that were a product of extraterrestrial programming came into being. We now are the product of such engineering modified by aliens into what we are today.
According to the texts of the our Bible - this runs totally contrary to any such notion. Intelligent design by aliens!!! And today there are no such beings still reproducing and in existance. Why would they be all gone knowing their recent history - a race of man like creatures that act like they had a lobotomy? Interesting indeed.
Johnny70
-
Where did I say Adam brought sin into the world Dennis? Read what I said.
You may be referring to me. That's OK. Earlier in the thread somebody attributed something Dennis said to me. You said, "Adam the first man thru whom all have sinned..." It's true that I didn't quote you correctly, nor was I trying to. I don't really understand what you said, and can't find in Scripture your statement. You'll have to forgive me for moving beyond it to address a more common misunderstanding in Christian Theology.
As for all "Jews believe the rest are goys less than animals; some black sec believe the whites were created in a test tube; British Israelism believe they are the true bloodline; Christian believe the majority are going to hell cause they did it their way..." such rubbish will continue and maybe even proliferate as long as the "pride of life" exists in men. When they all understand that they themselves are beasts, what a great repentance that will be.
Here is MY "resting place" that Jesus promised. I am a part of the ongoing result of the "sixth day" coming to be so, along with all other mortal men, women and children, past present and future. We, together, are the offspring of God and share a common destiny, each in his own order. It's the last who will be first.
-
All good stuff Dave. At a certain point in this thread I was inspired to read the creation account again, more than once. Facinating what can be gleaned from scripture when the spirit moves.
-
The way I see it, Adam was a walking talking individual that had a beating heart, and Adam lived 930 years and he died.
Humanity, mankind, the family of Adam and Eve created in the image of God, can also be called Adam.
1st Corinthians 15:45 KJV - And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
1st Corinthians 15:45 Amplified - Thus it is written, The first man Adam became a living being-an individual personality; the last Adam (Christ) became a life-giving Spirit-restoring the dead to life.
Jacob had 12 sons that made up the 12 tribes know as Israel as a whole, but each tribe was called after their fathers house, from Reuben on down, and it was very common for a son that was looking for a wife to obtain one from his fathers family. Jacob/Israel was a walking talking individual that went into Egypt, but only the children of his 12 sons came out of Egypt about 400 years later.
Numbers 26:51- These were the numbered of the children of ISRAEAL, six hundred thousand and a thousand seven hundred and thirty.
I'm not sure what you might not be saying in this, but I find what you have said fully embraceable. I take the creation story at face value. No doubt it's symbolic, but is it only that? I can see that there is much interest here in reading science into scripture. I wouldn't do that, preferring to let science be what it is, with its faults and virtues, and let scripture stand on its own. I wan't there at the beginning, so I can't claim that the events described happened exactly as they're presented, but neither was I present at our Lord's resurrection, and the world thinks that taking either or both of these things at face value is foolishness, depending on science for its indictment. Many things in scripture are presented symbolically, and there is as much metaphor, figure of speech and idiomatic expression that one finds in expression rendered in any language. But the creation story isn't presented like this, but rather as historical narrative, much as the story of Calvary is presented, not as simply a poem filled with spiritual truth. We're smart people, but I would caution against being too clever.
-
Greetings
Act 17:25 Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;
Act 17:26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;
It is very clear that God made all nations with one blood running thru all men. Think about it folks. If God had created one race of people that hunted only and than Adam and Eve to till the ground, than Eve could not have been the mother of all the living and the Scripture cannot be broken. Adam the first man thru whom all have sinned, Jesus the second Adam thru whom all are justified. Both account of the creation of man is, they were created in “his image”. You have to ask yourself why would God create a man and a woman twice? All have sinned and come short of the glory of God. The first creation could not have been accounted for sinning since without the law there is no sin. Adam and Eve sin because they had the law. But its said "all have sinned".
The creation of two races of mankind has been used to promoted the theology of enslavement. From Ballentine's Law Dictionary, 1948 Edition. 'Human Being' is defined as follows: 'See monster' . From the same dictionary, 'monster' is defined: 'A human-being by birth, but in some part resembling a lower animal.'
Therefore they conscribe human beings have no inheritable right so cannot own land, property. Legally speaking that would include all of you and I. This is the way it works in Satan's world. Adam of the mankind family was “formed” the other creatures were created. So if you are not of the right blood line you cannot be part of the Kingdom according to those of such persuasion. If we deviate from biblical principle we end up with dogmatic presumption and divisions.
Sea Of Glass
There ought to be a way on here to just like something. Thanks for this. I think it's very helpful to do as you have done. If something is presented as truth, certainly examine it as a candidate for such distinction in light of the text, but also examine what other purpose it might serve if we might too casually accept it. I think the world at large can be very instructive in this way, with regard to distinguishing truth from error.
-
Wanda, I think a translation earlier on in the thread was shown. It said Gen 3:20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.
Rotherham has an interesting translaton:
(Rotherham) So the man called the name of his wife, Eve,—in that, she, was made mother of every one living.
Sandie
Very interesting translation, thanks Sandie.
-
Well, I would say Adam and Eve were not the first people since Adam had undoubtedly a father and a mother, unless God lies (absolutly not!), for Adam had to leave them to marry Eve:
Genesis 2:24 « That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh »
All that Adam said was; "This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, for she was taken out of Man." (Genesis 2:23) The passage you quoted that immediately follows this statement from Adam is part of the narrative that Moses is writing for OUR admonition
(1 Corinthians 10:11)
Genesis 2:24 is not Adam speaking, it's a commentary insert from Moses' perspective
___
-
Horan, all I can tell you is that I do not (cannot) read (especially) the 2nd chapter of Genesis as History. To me, there is a clear difference between the way the Gospels (and all the NT) "read" and nearly all of the Old Testament, and I don't think that's because of the differences in the original languages, though it might be.
I "am" where I am on this matter, and sense great rest being "here". For all I know, I'm confessing my sins. So be it. I don't mean to disturb anybody else's rest, but sometimes I am less than sure that what they are experiencing really IS rest. I've never preached what I "believe" on this subject to anybody with the intent of winning converts. In fact, I've never preached the "complete" version to anyone, ever. I'm just saving a spot in the Higher Assembly for such as me. I want them to know its OK. Thousands have tried to preach to me all my life. First the church, then the world. Everybody is going to answer, including me.
Beyond that, scripture itself doesn't require me to believe that Samson slew exactly 1000 philistines with the literal jaw-bone of a literal a@@. It does require me to believe in the death and Resurrection of Jesus. And I do. When I left the church and went into the world with a passion, only He "remained" of my ever-dimming faith until He himself was almost extinguished. He is Lord, and no bible character old or new is more important than Him. Since Jesus, I don't care any more about Samson, Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Job, or David. He is Lord of the living.
-
Hi Chris
Please consider this and similar passages. Even Moses was inspired by God to teach what he taught.
2 Tim 3…15 From infancy you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for instruction, for conviction, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be complete, fully equipped for every good work.…
Please consider this and similar passages.
Well, I would say Adam and Eve were not the first people since Adam had undoubtedly a father and a mother, unless God lies (absolutly not!), for Adam had to leave them to marry Eve:
Genesis 2:24 « That is why a man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh »
All that Adam said was; "This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, for she was taken out of Man." (Genesis 2:23) The passage you quoted that immediately follows this statement from Adam is part of the narrative that Moses is writing for OUR admonition (1 Corinthians 10:11)
Genesis 2:24 is not Adam speaking, it's a commentary insert from Moses' perspective
___
-
Hi Chris
Please consider this and similar passages. Even Moses was inspired by God to teach what he taught.
2 Tim 3…15 From infancy you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for instruction, for conviction, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be complete, fully equipped for every good work.…
Please consider this and similar passages.
I never said Moses was not inspired, he most certainly was, he wrote the first 5 books of scripture. The post that I was replying to made the claim that Adam was the one being quoted in Genesis 2:24 and that Adam knew his physical mother and father. I was simply pointing out that is not the case because Adam was not speaking in Genesis 2:24, it was from a God-inspired Moses.
___
-
Horan, all I can tell you is that I do not (cannot) read (especially) the 2nd chapter of Genesis as History. To me, there is a clear difference between the way the Gospels (and all the NT) "read" and nearly all of the Old Testament, and I don't think that's because of the differences in the original languages, though it might be.
I "am" where I am on this matter, and sense great rest being "here". For all I know, I'm confessing my sins. So be it. I don't mean to disturb anybody else's rest, but sometimes I am less than sure that what they are experiencing really IS rest. I've never preached what I "believe" on this subject to anybody with the intent of winning converts. In fact, I've never preached the "complete" version to anyone, ever. I'm just saving a spot in the Higher Assembly for such as me. I want them to know its OK. Thousands have tried to preach to me all my life. First the church, then the world. Everybody is going to answer, including me.
Beyond that, scripture itself doesn't require me to believe that Samson slew exactly 1000 philistines with the literal jaw-bone of a literal a@@. It does require me to believe in the death and Resurrection of Jesus. And I do. When I left the church and went into the world with a passion, only He "remained" of my ever-dimming faith until He himself was almost extinguished. He is Lord, and no bible character old or new is more important than Him. Since Jesus, I don't care any more about Samson, Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Job, or David. He is Lord of the living.
Right on, Right on, Right on. I agree Dave.
Jesus said John the Baptist was greater than all who came before, but the least in the Kingdom of God is greater than the Baptist.
Grace and Truth came by Jesus.
No one was saved before Jesus.
Paul taught us that Jesus was the Seed, not Isaac, and by Jesus all will be saved.
The Elect of Jesus are greater than and will be saved before the great ones of the Old Testament.
Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.
Adhere to Jesus the Anointed of God and our Great King and Savior.
-
Horan, all I can tell you is that I do not (cannot) read (especially) the 2nd chapter of Genesis as History. To me, there is a clear difference between the way the Gospels (and all the NT) "read" and nearly all of the Old Testament, and I don't think that's because of the differences in the original languages, though it might be.
I "am" where I am on this matter, and sense great rest being "here". For all I know, I'm confessing my sins. So be it. I don't mean to disturb anybody else's rest, but sometimes I am less than sure that what they are experiencing really IS rest. I've never preached what I "believe" on this subject to anybody with the intent of winning converts. In fact, I've never preached the "complete" version to anyone, ever. I'm just saving a spot in the Higher Assembly for such as me. I want them to know its OK. Thousands have tried to preach to me all my life. First the church, then the world. Everybody is going to answer, including me.
Beyond that, scripture itself doesn't require me to believe that Samson slew exactly 1000 philistines with the literal jaw-bone of a literal a@@. It does require me to believe in the death and Resurrection of Jesus. And I do. When I left the church and went into the world with a passion, only He "remained" of my ever-dimming faith until He himself was almost extinguished. He is Lord, and no bible character old or new is more important than Him. Since Jesus, I don't care any more about Samson, Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Job, or David. He is Lord of the living.
Dave, since you've addressed me personally I'll respond in kind. I don't know what I said specifically that prompted this. This is a discussion board and I've engaged in discussion. I've not told you what to think or believe. I think you have every right to not care about Samson, Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Job or David. So I'm forewarned to not discuss any of these things with you.
-
Hello Chris, hello brothers and sisters,
Woahh! What an inspiring thread, it brings so much to say to all of us!
Wonderful!
Chris, I never said Adam told anything about the fact he had to leave his mother and father, for you’re totally right: he actually only spoke as we can read it about Eve as bone of his bones and flesh of his flesh.
Now may I insist on one thing: ALL IS ONE, one Spirit and only one inspires us, God’s children, whether it inspires Moses or Adam or Paul or Timothe or... us.
Jesus reminds us that all He does or says comes from God Our Father.
The bible is ONE BIG PARABLE. Of course historical events came out of it but it was for our admonition as Paul said. It is still a parable we, as God’s children, oughta understand, not a mystery: everything in it shows us what we have to endure as God’s elect.
Adam giving names to animals is part of it: we must learn to recognize the beasts in us and around us, name it and then reject it as external to us, for we are not part of this world inhabited by animals, whatever they are, whatever they look like. So that we should be able to recognize plainly who is part of Christ’s body, who is a real help for us, bones of our bone and flesh of our flesh.
Eve is the mother (the starting point) of the few (the real church not the synagogue of Satan) which God has gave aionios life, those few are parts of Christ’s body.
His bones and flesh. For our body is the temple of God.
Now I maintain the fact that Adam and Eve were NOT the first people and that they had earthly mothers and fathers (genealogically and spiritually) they had to LEAVE OUT to become part of Christ’s body.
Matthew 10:35 « For I have come to turn "'a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law ».
Luke 9:59-60 « He said to another man, "Follow me." But he replied, "Lord, first let me go and bury my father. Jesus said to him, "Let the dead bury their own dead, but you go and proclaim the kingdom of GOD »
Revelation 18:4 « Then I heard another voice from heaven say: "'Come out of her, my people,' so that you will not share in her sins, so that you will not receive any of her plagues »
We must leave out our own beliefs, what we thought we came from and what we thought made us, for it is God in Christ in us that is forming us from now on, we are becoming part of a new family, but we must have recognize the old one and then reject it to turn ourself as part of a totally new family, because « new wine must be poured into new wineskins » (Luke 5:38).
-
Yes, Horan, this is a discussion board. Your post did not specifically prompt me to post, though it did give me opportunity to share that other views are possible.
You said. "...But the creation story isn't presented like this, but rather as historical narrative, much as the story of Calvary is presented, not as simply a poem filled with spiritual truth." I just want people to know that they can believe in an Historic Jesus who died and was raised from the dead without believing that the Second chapter of Genesis is historically factual. That the "story of Calvary" has exceedingly more historical evidence. And maybe it is even way more important.
Look above at the email exchange Zeke Sr. posted. But for the grace of God, that could have been me being talked about. So I'm a wee bit passionate about this, but I didn't mean to come across as bowling you over. Sorry.
I know of some ultra-literalists who make YEC proponents look like flaming liberals. We all find our place.
-
When I started this post, I never thought it would develop into the structure that it has or continue on for this lengthy a stretch. And despite a few somewhat slightly “testy” moments, it’s been quite interesting and informative. After reading and considering all these posts, as well as doing quite a bit of prayer, contemplation, and of course some research inside and out of Scripture, I thought I’d interject the elements that have come into the light from my perspective:
First of all, Adam and Eve were absolutely not the first humans to walk the face of the earth. Of that, I am now certain.
Were they real? Were they an allegory? A metaphor? Is the whole account “just” another a parable? Well someone had to breed children and flesh out the lineage leading to our Lord and Savior. And that genealogy, in my opinion, is laid out in too much detail to be a pure parable. And, obviously, there had to be a first man and woman somewhere along the line. With that being said, like so many other dualities contained in Scripture, Adam, while genealogically correct, could still be considered “humanity,” according to his name, whereas the more direct line leading to Jesus could begin with Seth whose name means Anointed.
But now I see a more symbolic lesson in who or what Adam and Eve really are—a deep spiritual lesson—a parable. Adam and Eve are types. They are the human paradigm of God and the Word. The first example of what human relationships and family really represent:
Who was Jesus before he was a man? He was the Word:
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John 1:2 He was in the beginning with God.
John 1:3 All things came into being through Him, and without Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being.
John 1:14 And the Word became flesh, and did tabernacle among us, and we beheld his glory, glory as of an only begotten of a father, full of grace and truth.
Before the Word became flesh, the Word was God’s Helper (Helpmate?) through whom all things came into being. And where did Jesus say He originally came from?
Joh 16:27 for the Father Himself loves you, because you have loved Me, and have believed that I came out from God.
Joh 16:28 I came out from the Father and have come into the world; I leave the world again and go to the Father.
Joh_10:30 I and the Father are One!
And where did Eve come from? Eve came out from Adam:
Gen 2:18 And Jehovah God said, It is not good, the man being alone. (Was it good for God to be alone? Apparently not.) I will make a helper suited to him.
Gen 2:22 And Jehovah God formed the rib which He had taken from the man into a woman, and brought her to the man.
Gen 2:23 And the man said, This now at last is bone from my bones, and flesh from my flesh. For this shall be called Woman, because this has been taken out of man.
I’m going to use gender here; and that may seem strange to some, but I see no other proper way to describe it. Spiritual aspects can only be expressed by humans in human terms.
Eve’s name means “mother” …and as Prune pointed out… it also means “starting point.”
Adam and Eve are a parable based in spiritual truth with what I believe to be some historical facts sprinkled in. And the “real Eve” is the Word, the Starting Point, the Helper who came out from God, the Creator of all that exists in the Universe, the “Mother” of all living.
Gen_3:20 And the man called the name of his wife, Eve; because she became the mother of all living.
And the Word, divested of glory, became flesh and dwelt among us as Jesus, the Son of god.
Php 2:5 For think this within you, which mind was also in Christ Jesus,
Php 2:6 who subsisting in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God,
Php 2:7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a slave, having become in the likeness of men
Php 2:8 and being found in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself, having become obedient until death, even the death of a cross.
Php 2:9 Because of this also God highly exalted Him and gave Him a name above every name,
Php 2:10 that at the name of Jesus "every knee should bow," of heavenly ones, and earthly ones, and ones under the earth,
Php 2:11 and "every tongue should confess" that Jesus Christ is "Lord," to the glory of God the Father.
Mike
-
Much thanks Mike!
This thread has been very benifical to me, as I'm sure it will be to others reading it along the way.
My understanding is much the same, and this point you made...Is quite interesting.
And the “real Eve” is the Word, the Starting Point, the Helper who came out from God, the Creator of all that exists in the Universe, the “Mother” of all living.
-
Thought i relent from posting it troubles me with all the truth God revealed thru Ray are you all so quick to not see.
Was there more than one first man?? Why can't you all believe what the bible says. My mother had 10 children in 13 years!! And if you reasonably take the time to study how many Eve could of had, especially being in the tremendous health she was, i can only imagine. There is 1,600 years packed into 10 biblical pages so of course you will not have every detail outlined, like what time frame Cain killed able.
Nevertheless you have to contend with the below Scripture and if you don't believe there was only one first man name Adam then you don't believe in the word of God. I show you a scripture when it said Adam was the first man, yet how many of you will believe what it said? Where is the scripture Adam was not the first man? Personal interjection are not justified.
1Co 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
Sea Of Glass
-
Thought i relent from posting it troubles me with all the truth God revealed thru Ray are you all so quick to not see.
Was there more than one first man?? Why can't you all believe what the bible says. My mother had 10 children in 13 years!! And if you reasonably take the time to study how many Eve could of had, especially being in the tremendous health she was, i can only imagine. There is 1,600 years packed into 10 biblical pages so of course you will not have every detail outlined, like what time frame Cain killed able.
Nevertheless you have to contend with the below Scripture and if you don't believe there was only one first man name Adam then you don't believe in the word of God. I show you a scripture when it said Adam was the first man, yet how many of you will believe what it said? Where is the scripture Adam was not the first man? Personal interjection are not justified.
1Co 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
Sea Of Glass
Sea of Glass,
I never said there was more than one first man. Apparently you did not read what I wrote very closely. I said just the opposite. Also, I said there's a parable involved. And if you believe God revealed truths through Ray, I suggest you back up and read the post of Ray's Email that I put up on this thread in which he states that Adam and Eve were not the first humans. Something easily ascertained based on Scripture.
Mike
-
Seaofglass,
You said... Was there more than one first man?? Why can't you all believe what the bible says.
I know I did not agree to any such nonsense.
You also said... I show you a scripture when it said Adam was the first man, yet how many of you will believe what it said? Where is the scripture Adam was not the first man?
I'll quote Dave from Tennessee.
" Was Jesus literally and physically the "last man"? If we don't have a problem with this answer, perhaps it will help not have a problem with "Adam" being literally and physically the "First man", though "so it is written".
And this... There is 1,600 years packed into 10 biblical pages so of course you will not have every detail outlined, like what time frame Cain killed able.
Exactly!
There are many details missing in this account and there is a deeper spiritual message contained in it, that others have posted.
.There can be no doubt there was a first man, and in the Genisis account it was Adam. I'm not settled on much past this, because I don't see the Genisis creation the way Ray did.
-
1Co 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
I read all the words, and I believe that passage. It is most certainly written.
-
Thanks Dave, very inspiring,
Also consider the rest of the story explaining what is so different about humanity.
We all are to become like our elder brother the Lord Jesus and take the form of the Celestial when our change comes.
Then we will see our lord AS HE IS, for we shall be like him.
1 Cor 15:46 CLV
But not first the spiritual, but the soulish, thereupon the spiritual." 47 The first man was out of the earth, soilish; the second Man is the Lord out of heaven." 48 Such as the soilish one is, such are those also who are soilish, and such as the Celestial One, such are those also who are celestials." 49 And according as we wear the image of the soilish, we should be wearing the image also of the Celestial."
50 Now this I am averring, brethren, that flesh and blood is not able to enjoy an allotment in the kingdom of God, neither is corruption enjoying the allotment of incorruption." 51 Lo! a secret to you am I telling! We all, indeed, shall not be put to repose, yet we all shall be changed, 52 in an instant, in the twinkle of an eye, at the last trump. For He will be trumpeting, and the dead will be roused incorruptible, and we shall be changed." 53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal put on immortality.
1 JN 3 CLV(i) 1 Perceive what manner of love the Father has given us, that we may be called children of God! And we are! Therefore the world does not know us, for it did not know Him." 2 Beloved, now are we children of God, and it was not as yet manifested what we shall be. We are aware that, if He should be manifested, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him according as He is.
-
To add to Bob's comments and scripture, the Adam in my bible left the garden in a higher spiritual condition than he entered it. There is no "fall of man" and no "fallen humanity", though men do fall.
-
To add to Bob's comments and scripture, the Adam in my bible left the garden in a higher spiritual condition than he entered it. There is no "fall of man" and no "fallen humanity", though men do fall.
Amen! 😁
-
Nevertheless you have to contend with the below Scripture and if you don't believe there was only one first man name Adam then you don't believe in the word of God. I show you a scripture when it said Adam was the first man, yet how many of you will believe what it said? Where is the scripture Adam was not the first man? Personal interjection are not justified.
1Co 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
Sea Of Glass
You need a second witness to prove the "only" part of your statement as 1Co 15:45 does not interpret itself. Besides, that is not even the spiritual jist of it even if Adam really were the first human/man ever.
Paul gives a bunch of spiritual witnesses as to what he is talking about in those passages surrounding that particular verse you quoted. Sorry, but I'm not seeing the word "only" in that verse, but like Ray I do see 666 followed by 777.
Why are you so hung up on the physical aspect of it all when it will soon pass away? Milk is for babies, have some meat. 8)
1Co 15:53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption , and this mortal (First Man Adam) must put on immortality (Last Adam).
Eph 4:22 That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man (First Man Adam), which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts;
Eph 4:23 And be renewed in the spirit of your mind;
Eph 4:24 And that ye put on the new man (Last Adam), which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.
So was there more than one "first man Adam"? Yes according to Scripture all of humanity is a "first man Adam".
Ecc 3:18 I said in my heart:It is on account of the sons of humanity That the One, Elohim, seeks to manifest them And to show them that they themselves are beasts.
Rev 13:18 Here is wisdom. Let him who has a mind calculate the number of the wild beast, for it is the number of mankind, and its number is six hundred sixty-six.
Forgive me if it seems like I'm preaching at you, but when you accuse brothers and sisters of not believing the Word of God, you should really look at yourself first. I came here because the literal, physical preaching of Christianity wasn't cutting it and only holding me back from the spiritual truth I would come to love and cherish above all else.
If I have completely misunderstood you I'm sorry. Please explain to me how your statement is beneficial to me and my spiritual growth, because it's very possible I may just be missing it completely.
-
There are many topic of discussion that do not have “two witnesses” such as “it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: “ Does a lack of a 2nd witness denies this scripture? Where is ONE scripture that said there was more than I creation??
Does Bob's lack of two witness of Scriptures undermines his statement “the Adam in my bible left the garden in a higher spiritual condition than he entered it. There is no "fall of man" and no "fallen humanity", though men do fall.” No this is a statement out of spiritual growth I agree with and need no Scriptures to see it.
It said “and Adam knew his wife” not found a wife. And it all happened in “in process of time”. 130 years later Eve had Seth. Are we to presume nothing happen in between because there is no scripture witnesses? I am sure Eve was a hot looking babe with curves Adam just couldn’t resist which meant many bambinos and those bambinos had many other bambinos.! Why cause that how God made us men, attracted to curves and he put a force in us to be fruitful and multiply and thus procreate which few men can resist. Do any one then thinks that between Cain and Able growth that Adam and Even did not “know” each other especially on a full moon and no TV? And puberty at 12 to 15 years is a monstrous force to content with for boys. In some countries 15 years old is standard for a female to have babies. “Be fruitful and multiply” was a command from God not “Oh honey Adam can we just have 3 children?” Humor intended.
Ray was a great man use by God and now its our turn to grow with what Ray left and go beyond that. After four years of research to understand, because God moved me to pray about this not that I wanted a pass time of something to do, I wrote a small book on the crooked scheme of the elite and how they have being and are robbing the entire world and a PDF is available to anyone free of charge [removed].
From the forbidden fruit to this present day, the time of the reveling of the sons of God is closing in as the end of the gentile rule closes:
Rom 8:19 For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.
Will these “sons of God” die once and then be judged?” No these sons of God will see the beast within first and I tell you as Ray did when you see the beast within, you will know and your life will never be the same again. Where did Cain get his wife? I am past this long time ago, I take no offense and I speak in general not pointing the finger at one person cause there are three fingers pointing back at you when you do this. Over 60 now don’t have time.
If Ray’s response to me was “if you mean “man” than you have a point” meant a lot to me BUT it did not make me self righteous as I can not match his wits. God dragged me to Ray’s writing and believe me it was not a pleasant thing and all I want to do is stay close to the trunk of the tree, the tree of life.
Be blessed and strive for the faith, we are going to need cause we are in for bad weather.
Benelyon
Sea Of Glass
-
Hello Dennis,
Thanks for the helpful suggestion.
Personal info has been modified or deleted.
Indiana Bob :)
Hi Seaofglass,
Tried writing to your email address and was rejected.
Maybe I'm not understanding how it works with aol.com
Thanks for any help you can provide.
-
Bob
I emailed you PDF please confirm you received. aedesign57@aol.com
-
I feel I have to tell Bob and seaofglass that exchanging this information would be much better in a PM.
There are people that have robots that search the Internet for email addresses (scrap) and sell them to others to send you junk email or worse infect your computer via an email.
I suggest you delete these posts. But if you cannot delete them let us know here and one of the moderators will do it for you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_scraping (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_scraping)
-
Hello Dennis,
Sometimes curiosity gets the better of us.
Your helpful suggestion is appreciated.
Personal info has been removed.
Indiana Bob
-
There are many topic of discussion that do not have “two witnesses” such as “it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: “ Does a lack of a 2nd witness denies this scripture? Where is ONE scripture that said there was more than I creation??
That's a fair point, however not many members will tell me that I do not believe in the Word of God if I do not agree with their interpretation of particular verse. It just felt like you were forcing it down my throat.
Honestly I don't even know that much about the physical aspect of the creation account as I've never really studied it to any great length aside from what Ray said about it. If you want to know what Ray thought here is a quote and link below. Also, Ray didn't seem completely sure about it as he said that he wasn't trying to make a big stand.
https://bible-truths.com/forums/index.php/topic,9130.0.html
Gen 1:20 And God said, let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creatures, that hath life.
Did He just make one male and one female fish or was there an abundance of them? Then we go on verse 21, “He made the great tanniyn.” Which I believe you know are the dinosaurs, the reptiles.
Then we have the cattle, verse 24. Did He just make one cow and one bull, is that it? Well, it says He made cattle.
Well then when we come down to verse 26, it says “God said, Let Us make man…” But the Hebrew is ‘humanity.’ “Let us make humanity.” Did He really just make one man and one woman? That’s not what He did with all the other things, did He? Look at it.
Gen. 1:27 Let Us make humanity in Our image after Our likeness, and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle…
“Male and female created.” Now in our translation, it says “male and female He created them.” So it’s pretty difficult to say, ‘well there was one man and one woman.’ He created humanity, He created humanity male and He created humanity female. Humanity, okay.
Now when we come to Adam and Eve, He gives them a name and we know it’s just one. Are they the first ones though? Maybe not. Because we later have Cain, that says his sentence is too great, wherever I go, they will kill me (Gen. 4:13-14). Who will kill him? Who? There was only Abel and he killed Abel. So if there’s only Adam and Eve and their two sons, Cain and Abel… well Cain killed Abel, so now there’s only one man left, and his mother and father. He says to God, wherever I go, “anyone who finds me will kill me." Who? He killed the only other man alive on earth. Well if we interpret it that way, there are problems. Then Cain took a wife… so there’d be all these other things to contend with and so on. Alright.
------------------
Me personally I don't know either way, but I'm ok with that as I like to think that I at least know the spiritual basics. God is STILL creating humanity in His image.
Does Bob's lack of two witness of Scriptures undermines his statement “the Adam in my bible left the garden in a higher spiritual condition than he entered it. There is no "fall of man" and no "fallen humanity", though men do fall.” No this is a statement out of spiritual growth I agree with and need no Scriptures to see it.
Another fair point because Bob's statement in the quote above is kind of common knowledge around here, just said in way and style that is unique to Bob which I personally always find easy to listen to and understand. Plus it's a good refresher am I rite? :)
Peace to you Sea of Glass.
-
Honesty goes a looong way my friends. Fantastic, now we are progressing unto onto spiritual growth. Why should we stand close to the trunk of the tree??
Why do I insist there was only one first man named Adam? Because it said so:
Co 15:47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.
And since:
Co 13:9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
1Co 13:10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
Then all we have are these book called Scriptures for validation, for this is what God has given us.
Until God reveals something 100% I stick to the book. This is all we have along with this thing called faith. We get a lot of knowledge and information but we can never prove anything in a tangible way to anyone. We have the intuitive wordless word of God speaking to us individually. Why is this? Why does God not just show up? Why doe the righteous have to live by faith? Why was Paul even after having seen the Lord in his Glory, something only Moses experienced when he asked “show me your glory”. Why wasn’t this enough? Paul was given a minister of Satan to keep him in check and though he prayed for relieve God said “Nope”. Why?
Answer:
Co 12:7 And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure.
Uumm. Now that’s something we all need to meditate about. I see goodness in you guys, seriously. Ever since I read Ray’s writing I have never been the same again. I have been writing ever since and surely this stuff is not for everyone at this time so pray and stand close to the trunk of the tree. The world is being memorized today like never before and black magic, as Pharaoh's priest performed, is being done publicly and on TV like never before memorizing the people.
In the Marine Corps we were taught to be leaders and to be a good leader you need to be a good follower first. All who believe the truths on this site are called to be leaders and a leader of righteousness does not need followers. We may be physically alone but spiritually hey you guys want to see all the angles on spiritual horses covering the peak of the mountains?
Benelyon
Sea Of Glass
-
Friend Wanda,
please see my PM to you
-
So is bible truths endorsing the book that Seaofglass has been advertising?
Is his book up for discussion on the forum?
-
So is bible truths endorsing the book that Seaofglass has been advertising?
Is his book up for discussion on the forum?
No, people are not to link to other teachings. It's been in the rules for 18 years.
-
So is bible truths endorsing the book that Seaofglass has been advertising?
Is his book up for discussion on the forum?
No, people are not to link to other teachings. It's been in the rules for 18 years.
That wasn’t my question.
The posting of a link to another teaching has already been done twice on this thread. You’ve already allowed it without objection which leads to my question which is, does bibletruths endorse the teaching and can we discuss it.
-
So is bible truths endorsing the book that Seaofglass has been advertising?
Is his book up for discussion on the forum?
No, people are not to link to other teachings. It's been in the rules for 18 years.
That wasn’t my question.
The posting of a link to another teaching has already been done twice on this thread. You’ve already allowed it without objection which leads to my question which is, does bibletruths endorse the teaching and can we discuss it.
Fair enough, but I don't see any seaofglass links now. I removed a link days ago and PMed him. Not a problem. He's new and did not understand. But please let me know if I missed something.
But thanks.
-
So is bible truths endorsing the book that Seaofglass has been advertising?
Is his book up for discussion on the forum?
Lareli,
When you posted you could see the links had already been removed, so I couldn't help but question your motives.
You've been a member here for many years and know the site is monitured, by those that give of there time freely to ensure the rules are followed, and they do have lives, with trials of their own to deal with. Calling any one of them out for not removing the links as fast as you would have liked, is not fair from my view.
Maybe you should meditate on these scriptures.
Proverbs 16:2 says, “All a person’s ways seem pure to them, but motives are weighed by the LORD.” Because the human heart is very deceitful (Jeremiah 17:9), we can easily fool ourselves about our own motives. We can pretend that we are choosing certain actions for God or the benefit of others, when in reality we have selfish reasons. God is not fooled by our selfishness and is “a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart” (Hebrews 4:12).
-
Just wanted to add a couple Scriptures to what Wanda mentioned. Don't think that I am exempt from this either, as I still struggle with the flesh. Remember that we don't perfect Christ, but Christ perfects us.
1 Corinthians 3
3For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?
1 John 3
18My little children, may we not love in word nor in tongue, but in word and in truth!
2 Timothy 2
1Stedfast [is] the word: For if we died together — we also shall live together;
12if we do endure together — we shall also reign together; if we deny [him], he also shall deny us;
13if we are not stedfast, he remaineth stedfast; to deny himself he is not able.
-
Wanda I did not know any links had been removed until reading yours and Dennis post just now.
I don’t know when the links were removed but I’m pretty sure (could be wrong) they remained at the time I asked the first question, post #89 on this thread. I know that Dennis acknowledged the links in his caution to Bob and Seaofglass about it. Yet the link remained after that. Which is when I began to question if the content of the book was ok by bibletruths.
If you question my motives then feel free to ask the question...
-
FYI, If I remember correctly, I found the link in the middle of the night and it had been viewed seven times but in the middle of the night it's mostly search engine bots crawling the site. So I doubt more than four human beings saw the link.
But it's no big deal. It's happened before and will happen again.
-
Wanda I did not know any links had been removed until reading yours and Dennis post just now.
I don’t know when the links were removed but I’m pretty sure (could be wrong) they remained at the time I asked the first question, post #89 on this thread. I know that Dennis acknowledged the links in his caution to Bob and Seaofglass about it. Yet the link remained after that. Which is when I began to question if the content of the book was ok by bibletruths.
If you question my motives then feel free to ask the question...
Thanks Lareli. I think the issue has been settled. As Dennis said, "it's no big deal. It's happened before and will happen again".
-
Beyond that, scripture itself doesn't require me to believe that Samson slew exactly 1000 philistines with the literal jaw-bone of a literal a@@. It does require me to believe in the death and Resurrection of Jesus. And I do. When I left the church and went into the world with a passion, only He "remained" of my ever-dimming faith until He himself was almost extinguished. He is Lord, and no bible character old or new is more important than Him. Since Jesus, I don't care any more about Samson, Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Job, or David. He is Lord of the living.
Dave (or anyone) could you explain what you mean when you say “scripture requires me to believe”?
What do you mean by “requires” and how do you define “believe”?
Thanks
-
Lareli, I think these verses make it pretty clear, for me anyway.
John 6:28-30
28 Then they asked him, “What must we do to do the works God requires?”
29 Jesus answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.”
-
Hi Largeli, hope you are well my friend.Scripture doesn’t require me to believe. God does , with His gift of Grace. The Divine influence of
God on the heart. .
Eph.2:8
For by grace are ye saved through Faith(belief) and not that of yourselves. It is the gift of God.
1Co.15:10
By the Grace of God do I do anything good.
I remember someone saying on the forum. “ Scripture did not bring me to God, God brought me
to the scripture.”
Without God’s Amazing Grace opening up my understanding and heart and proving He is real , I would still be an unworthy dirtbag.
God has a way of proving He is real.
God is Love and love never fails.
Define believe . Faith, it’s the gift of Grace and being Graced (chastised, corrected, taught)
Having the Faith Of Jesus Christ in us.
Acts 5:29 We must obey God rather than men. ( Like Jesus. We of course can’t do this on our own. It’s very hard at times .
It’s all for the love of Jesus, is the best way I can explain it.
Psalm 116
I Love the Lord, for He heard my voice;
he heard my cry for mercy.
2- Because He turned His ear to me,
I will call on Him as long as I live.
3- The cords of death entangled me,
the anguish of the grave came over me;
I was overcome by distress and sorrow
4- Then I called on the name of the Lord;
“ Lord, save me!”
And He did.
Love to all❤️ Pamela
-
Well said Pamela and very helpful.
Thanks for caring and sharing.
Indiana bob
-
A wonderfully inspired message Pamela. Thank you!
Galatians 2:20 “I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.”
everything God requires for our salvation has been fulfilled by Jesus Christ. This is grace All that remains is to receive this salvation by faith...and don't worry, God gives us that, too!
2 Timothy 1:9
Who has saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,
-
Wonderful thoughts guys ❤️
Eph 3:14 For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,
Eph 3:15 of whom the whole family in the heavens and on earth is named,
Eph 3:16 that He may give to you, according to the riches of His glory, with might to be strengthened through His Spirit, in regard to the inner man,
Eph 3:17 that the Christ may dwell through the faith in your hearts, in love having been rooted and founded,
Eph 3:18 that ye may be in strength to comprehend, with all the saints, what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height,
Eph 3:19 to know also the love of the Christ that is exceeding the knowledge, that ye may be filled—to all the fulness of God;
Eph 3:20 and to Him who is able above all things to do exceeding abundantly what we ask or think, according to the power that is working in us,
Eph 3:21 to Him is the glory in the assembly in Christ Jesus, to all the generations of the age of the ages. Amen.
Rom 8:38 For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,
Rom 8:39 Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
-
Beyond that, scripture itself doesn't require me to believe that Samson slew exactly 1000 philistines with the literal jaw-bone of a literal a@@. It does require me to believe in the death and Resurrection of Jesus. And I do. When I left the church and went into the world with a passion, only He "remained" of my ever-dimming faith until He himself was almost extinguished. He is Lord, and no bible character old or new is more important than Him. Since Jesus, I don't care any more about Samson, Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Job, or David. He is Lord of the living.
Dave (or anyone) could you explain what you mean when you say “scripture requires me to believe”?
What do you mean by “requires” and how do you define “believe”?
Thanks
I won't argue with the answers given on my behalf. They are certainly true of me, and continue to be. But when a question is asked or a concern raised "topically" or about a certain "topic", the easiest way to answer is according to the topic.
Jesus is Savior of the whole world, but (and) especially those who believe. What is "salvation" from unbelief if it isn't belief? In this way too, "belief" is "required". But that is not the best way to put it, I admit.
-
My question was more about the definition of “believe” as in the way Dave used it.. “scripture requires me to believe in the death burial resurrection of Jesus Christ”
When you say “believe” do you mean an intellectual agreement that something is true? As in you believe that 2000+ years ago there was a literal man who literally and physically died, was buried and came back to life physically and literally?
Is this what scripture “requires”?
-
Hi Lareli,
Yes that is what I believe.
Otherwise, according to Paul we ourselves have no salvation and are to be most pitied
<1 Corinthians 15:14>
The Resurrection of the Dead
1Co 15:12 Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?
1Co 15:13 But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen:
1Co 15:14 And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.
1Co 15:15 Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.
1Co 15:16 For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised:
1Co 15:17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.
1Co 15:18 Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.
1Co 15:19 If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.
1Co 15:20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.
1Co 15:21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
1Co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
-
My question was more about the definition of “believe” as in the way Dave used it.. “scripture requires me to believe in the death burial resurrection of Jesus Christ”
When you say “believe” do you mean an intellectual agreement that something is true? As in you believe that 2000+ years ago there was a literal man who literally and physically died, was buried and came back to life physically and literally?
Is this what scripture “requires”?
Color me confused, but didn't we just go around in a silly circle?
Unless you were making this distinct clarification, for those reading, who may still not believe Jesus died in the litteral physical sense.
-
"Faith" and "belief" are most often the same word in the original. It's a word(s) and not just a bible-word. People "believe" in any number of things. Yes, there are specific "things" that I am "required" to believe. If they didn't happen, then my "faith" is in vain/for nothing. It certainly involves, then, an intellectual agreement that something is true. That's the basis for faith. Faith itself, however, is also (even mostly) forward-looking.
Heb 11:1 Now faith is an assumption of what is being expected, a conviction concerning matters which are not being observed;"
Heb 11:1 And faith is of things hoped for a confidence, of matters not seen a conviction,
see the rest of that chapter for examples.
My question was more about the definition of “believe” as in the way Dave used it.. “scripture requires me to believe in the death burial resurrection of Jesus Christ”
When you say “believe” do you mean an intellectual agreement that something is true? As in you believe that 2000+ years ago there was a literal man who literally and physically died, was buried and came back to life physically and literally?
Is this what scripture “requires”?
-
Sorry for the confusion.
I’m not so sure that “belief” or even “faith” have so much relation to what I think is true or real as much as they have relation to what I act like is true and real.
-
Sorry for my confusion.
Are you trying to say that you don't think these things are true, but you like believing them because how it affects your life?
-
Sorry for the confusion.
I’m not so sure that “belief” or even “faith” have so much relation to what I think is true or real as much as they have relation to what I act like is true and real.
I like this comment.☺ It was worth the confusion.
-
Sorry for my confusion.
Are you trying to say that you don't think these things are true, but you like believing them because how it affects your life?
I’m saying that my life is the embodiment of my beliefs. My life will reveal to me and to God what my true beliefs are.
In his mind, Peter believed that he would never forsake Christ.
-
Sorry for my confusion.
Are you trying to say that you don't think these things are true, but you like believing them because how it affects your life?
I’m saying that my life is the embodiment of my beliefs. My life will reveal to me and to God what my true beliefs are.
In his mind, Peter believed that he would never forsake Christ.
= = =
Hi Lareli,
Yes that is what Peter believed humanly speaking, but that was before he had been gifted with God's spirit was it not? Later he was a changed person...!
I think that gift of understanding faith has a lot to do with what we believe and act upon.
Indiana Bob
-
Dave I should have asked you (or anyone), : do you think scripture requires you to believe in the death burial resurrection of Christ literally and physically? Or could the death burial resurrection of Christ be believed in spiritually/psychologically?
-
Dave I should have asked you (or anyone), : do you think scripture requires you to believe in the death burial resurrection of Christ literally and physically? Or could the death burial resurrection of Christ be believed in spiritually/psychologically?
I am going to lock this thread since the original subject "First People" has been well discussed. The question posted above is a totally different topic.