100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: problem | |
|---|---|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Sat 09/13/08 11:17 AM
|
|
Sharpshooter.....Nowhere in scripture does it say ANY of this stuff you just wrote here, about satan being intimate with adam and eve. Nowhere. Maybe you were just kidding..but if you were not..... well then, the "interpretation " of scripture that you just gave here , is a prime example of what is known as just man's interpretation (which is nothing more than just man's opinion)..... versus the Holy Spirit given interpretation of scripture...which is the only right way to interpret scripture..... otherwise, man can make scripture say any old thing man wants scripture to say. Sharpshooter, Incorrect Answers like you just presented here, are a result of not being led of the Holy Spirit, and not rightly dividing and studying the Word of God . Sorry. Cain, The Serpent's Seed But before we get to Esau, let's talk about Cain. In Genesis 3:15a He said, "And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed." Enmity means mutual hatred. He is saying there is mutual hatred between the seedline of Satan's and the seedline of Eve's. So there are two seedlines. The serpent seed started with Cain and Adam's seed started with Seth. No matter how they have tried to cover it up in the KJV, the Dead Sea Scrolls and even verses such as Gen. 3:15 make it clear that Satan had his own seedline and it started back with Eve. Many of you are hearing this for the first time. Because if you have sat in church programming all of your lives you haven't heard the truth even though it is right there in the Bible. The apple was figurative for sexual relations masked with the terminology "Eve was beguiled by Satan" and until people accept it as the truth it is, they will stay blind to the real war going on today which is between the serpent seedline and the rest of the human race. Beguiled used in this text is the same as "seduced." Furthermore, Scripture says Cain "was of that wicked one" he was a son of Satan's through the seduction of Eve. The term "of" is the same that means offspring. Neither is Cain listed anywhere in the descendents of Adam which strongly indicates Cain was not his son. The official beginning of the wheat and the tares began with Eve. The wheat AND the tares. Most church pastors today will pull out Genesis 4:1 which reads, "And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the Lord." There are many omissions and translation errors throughout the Bible. The Dead Sea Scrolls confirm that Genesis 4:1 was tampered with. In fact the passage should read: And Adam knew his wife Eve, who was pregnant by Sammael (Satan), and she conceived and bare Cain, and he was like the heavenly beings, and not like the earthly beings, and she said, I have gotten a man from the angel of the Lord. Now we know that anything of the Lord is confirmed elsewhere. IF Cain was indeed Satan's son, we wouldn't have to count on just one passage to prove it. In fact there are many: I John 3:12 "Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his (half) brother.." Here the word "of" in Greek is #1537 in the Strong's Concordance. When used implying a person, it means "a son of or offspring." Compare this with other translations: The New Testament in Modern English: "We are none of us to have the spirit of Cain, who was a son of the devil.." Living Bible: "We are not to be like Cain, who belonged to Satan.." New English Bible: "..unlike Cain who was a child of the evil one.." New Century Bible: "Do not be like Cain who belonged to the Evil One." New Jerusalem Bible: "..not to be like Cain, who was from the Evil One.." And the popular commentaries confirm the same thing: The Wycliffe Bible Commentary page 1473: "He (Cain) is said to have belonged to the family of the wicked one." Matthew Poole's Commentary on the Holy Bible, volume 3, page 936. "Which showed him (Cain) to be of that wicked one, of the serpent's seed: so early was such seed sown, and so ancient the enmity between seed and seed." Matthew Henry's Commentary, volume 6 page 1077: "It showed that he (Cain) was as the firstborn of the serpent's seed.." In John 8:44 Jesus was speaking to the Pharisees and proclaimed, 'Ye are of your father the devil.." The term "of" meaning generation, offspring. They were of the physical seed of their father the devil. Trees are often used as metaphors in regards to people. Jesus was the "tree of life." We also find: Mat 3:10 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Mat 7:17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. Mat 7:18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither [can] a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Mat 7:19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Mat 12:33 Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by [his] fruit. Now back to the Garden of Eden. In Genesis 2:16 we read: And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, "Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. In Genesis 3:3 Eve says to Lucifer the snake, And the woman said unto the serpent, (Nahash), We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. Adam and Eve had been commanded not to eat of or touch the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. In Genesis 3:13: "And the Lord said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat." In Strong's, #398 the term "eat" means to eat, also to lay. The term "touch" in Strong's is #5060 which means naga, to touch, also to have sexual intercourse. Both terms had and have sexual connotations to them. The tree of knowledge was the means to sexual knowledge. Knowledge is to "know." Knowing means to perceive, experience, learn. It is also used as an euphemism of "to know someone" sexually as when Adam "knew" his wife. The terms eat, touch, and know are often used in Biblical lingo for sexual relations. Lucifer was the way of knowing good and evil. He was the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil because through him they would learn evil, they would perceive evil, and they would experience it. Who was the tree of life in the Garden of Eden? Yahshua was. Who was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil? Lucifer. How do we 'eat of the tree of life?" We commune with Him. We are never to commune with Lucifer, and in this instance he seduced Eve, impregnated her, and began his own genealogical offspring and seedline on this earth that is part of us today. Before Adam even had a chance to consummate his relationship with Eve, she was already pregnant with Lucifer's child, Cain. And that is what the Illuminati bloodlines of the New World Order don't want you to know. They are Cain's seed, of the wicked one. And it is these bloodlines of Cain and Esau working together through the control of vast wealth around the world that are bringing the Antichrist to power. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
tribo
on
Sat 09/13/08 12:15 PM
|
 well now this ought to get someone's hackles up - 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sharpshooter.....Nowhere in scripture does it say ANY of this stuff you just wrote here, about satan being intimate with adam and eve. Nowhere. Maybe you were just kidding..but if you were not..... well then, the "interpretation " of scripture that you just gave here , is a prime example of what is known as just man's interpretation (which is nothing more than just man's opinion)..... versus the Holy Spirit given interpretation of scripture...which is the only right way to interpret scripture..... otherwise, man can make scripture say any old thing man wants scripture to say. Sharpshooter, Incorrect Answers like you just presented here, are a result of not being led of the Holy Spirit, and not rightly dividing and studying the Word of God . Sorry. Cain, The Serpent's Seed But before we get to Esau, let's talk about Cain. In Genesis 3:15a He said, "And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed." Enmity means mutual hatred. He is saying there is mutual hatred between the seedline of Satan's and the seedline of Eve's. So there are two seedlines. The serpent seed started with Cain and Adam's seed started with Seth. No matter how they have tried to cover it up in the KJV, the Dead Sea Scrolls and even verses such as Gen. 3:15 make it clear that Satan had his own seedline and it started back with Eve. Many of you are hearing this for the first time. Because if you have sat in church programming all of your lives you haven't heard the truth even though it is right there in the Bible. The apple was figurative for sexual relations masked with the terminology "Eve was beguiled by Satan" and until people accept it as the truth it is, they will stay blind to the real war going on today which is between the serpent seedline and the rest of the human race. Beguiled used in this text is the same as "seduced." Furthermore, Scripture says Cain "was of that wicked one" he was a son of Satan's through the seduction of Eve. The term "of" is the same that means offspring. Neither is Cain listed anywhere in the descendents of Adam which strongly indicates Cain was not his son. The official beginning of the wheat and the tares began with Eve. The wheat AND the tares. Most church pastors today will pull out Genesis 4:1 which reads, "And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the Lord." There are many omissions and translation errors throughout the Bible. The Dead Sea Scrolls confirm that Genesis 4:1 was tampered with. In fact the passage should read: And Adam knew his wife Eve, who was pregnant by Sammael (Satan), and she conceived and bare Cain, and he was like the heavenly beings, and not like the earthly beings, and she said, I have gotten a man from the angel of the Lord. Now we know that anything of the Lord is confirmed elsewhere. IF Cain was indeed Satan's son, we wouldn't have to count on just one passage to prove it. In fact there are many: I John 3:12 "Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his (half) brother.." Here the word "of" in Greek is #1537 in the Strong's Concordance. When used implying a person, it means "a son of or offspring." Compare this with other translations: The New Testament in Modern English: "We are none of us to have the spirit of Cain, who was a son of the devil.." Living Bible: "We are not to be like Cain, who belonged to Satan.." New English Bible: "..unlike Cain who was a child of the evil one.." New Century Bible: "Do not be like Cain who belonged to the Evil One." New Jerusalem Bible: "..not to be like Cain, who was from the Evil One.." And the popular commentaries confirm the same thing: The Wycliffe Bible Commentary page 1473: "He (Cain) is said to have belonged to the family of the wicked one." Matthew Poole's Commentary on the Holy Bible, volume 3, page 936. "Which showed him (Cain) to be of that wicked one, of the serpent's seed: so early was such seed sown, and so ancient the enmity between seed and seed." Matthew Henry's Commentary, volume 6 page 1077: "It showed that he (Cain) was as the firstborn of the serpent's seed.." In John 8:44 Jesus was speaking to the Pharisees and proclaimed, 'Ye are of your father the devil.." The term "of" meaning generation, offspring. They were of the physical seed of their father the devil. Trees are often used as metaphors in regards to people. Jesus was the "tree of life." We also find: Mat 3:10 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Mat 7:17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. Mat 7:18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither [can] a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Mat 7:19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Mat 12:33 Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by [his] fruit. Now back to the Garden of Eden. In Genesis 2:16 we read: And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, "Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. In Genesis 3:3 Eve says to Lucifer the snake, And the woman said unto the serpent, (Nahash), We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. Adam and Eve had been commanded not to eat of or touch the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. In Genesis 3:13: "And the Lord said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat." In Strong's, #398 the term "eat" means to eat, also to lay. The term "touch" in Strong's is #5060 which means naga, to touch, also to have sexual intercourse. Both terms had and have sexual connotations to them. The tree of knowledge was the means to sexual knowledge. Knowledge is to "know." Knowing means to perceive, experience, learn. It is also used as an euphemism of "to know someone" sexually as when Adam "knew" his wife. The terms eat, touch, and know are often used in Biblical lingo for sexual relations. Lucifer was the way of knowing good and evil. He was the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil because through him they would learn evil, they would perceive evil, and they would experience it. Who was the tree of life in the Garden of Eden? Yahshua was. Who was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil? Lucifer. How do we 'eat of the tree of life?" We commune with Him. We are never to commune with Lucifer, and in this instance he seduced Eve, impregnated her, and began his own genealogical offspring and seedline on this earth that is part of us today. Before Adam even had a chance to consummate his relationship with Eve, she was already pregnant with Lucifer's child, Cain. And that is what the Illuminati bloodlines of the New World Order don't want you to know. They are Cain's seed, of the wicked one. And it is these bloodlines of Cain and Esau working together through the control of vast wealth around the world that are bringing the Antichrist to power. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I thought it was interesting, too. When you look at it as Lucifer as the enlightened one. Could not the Illuminati be the enlightened ones. When you look at the dollar bill you will see 'In God We Trust' and you also see the pyramid with the 'all seeing eye'. It can make one wonder especially when you read the scripture, "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's." It can make one think that even the dollar bill is a contradiction. Going back to Genesis to where it says their eyes were opened. It is like they were blind before especially when you read the verse, "Who told thee that thou was naked?" Before that it was like they were animals. I mean can an animal sin? It makes me think one can be borne into sin without ever sinning.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sharpshooter.....Nowhere in scripture does it say ANY of this stuff you just wrote here, about satan being intimate with adam and eve. Nowhere. Maybe you were just kidding..but if you were not..... well then, the "interpretation " of scripture that you just gave here , is a prime example of what is known as just man's interpretation (which is nothing more than just man's opinion)..... versus the Holy Spirit given interpretation of scripture...which is the only right way to interpret scripture..... otherwise, man can make scripture say any old thing man wants scripture to say. Sharpshooter, Incorrect Answers like you just presented here, are a result of not being led of the Holy Spirit, and not rightly dividing and studying the Word of God . Sorry. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You gotta add a comment!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sharpshooter.....Nowhere in scripture does it say ANY of this stuff you just wrote here, about satan being intimate with adam and eve. Nowhere. Maybe you were just kidding..but if you were not..... well then, the "interpretation " of scripture that you just gave here , is a prime example of what is known as just man's interpretation (which is nothing more than just man's opinion)..... versus the Holy Spirit given interpretation of scripture...which is the only right way to interpret scripture..... otherwise, man can make scripture say any old thing man wants scripture to say. Sharpshooter, Incorrect Answers like you just presented here, are a result of not being led of the Holy Spirit, and not rightly dividing and studying the Word of God . Sorry. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
MorningSong
on
Sat 09/13/08 05:52 PM
|
|
I was say this one last time////
UNLESS man is TRULY BORN AGAIN and has the HOLY SPIRIT in Him, he will NOT be able to interpret scripture properly.... no matter how much he THINKS he is able to....... and as a result, he will make scripture say any old thing he wants it to say..... Nuff said. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sharpshooter.....Nowhere in scripture does it say ANY of this stuff you just wrote here, about satan being intimate with adam and eve. Nowhere. Maybe you were just kidding..but if you were not..... well then, the "interpretation " of scripture that you just gave here , is a prime example of what is known as just man's interpretation (which is nothing more than just man's opinion)..... versus the Holy Spirit given interpretation of scripture...which is the only right way to interpret scripture..... otherwise, man can make scripture say any old thing man wants scripture to say. Sharpshooter, Incorrect Answers like you just presented here, are a result of not being led of the Holy Spirit, and not rightly dividing and studying the Word of God . Sorry. There is a guy at work who believes the same thing. I thought he was a nice guy until I learned this. I can't speak for SharpShooter, but the guy at work believes that white people are the descendants of Adam and Eve while the other races are the descendants of Satan and Eve. What's truly scary is that there is absolutely no supporting material in the Bible to support this theory, but some people believe it whole heartedly. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sharpshooter.....Nowhere in scripture does it say ANY of this stuff you just wrote here, about satan being intimate with adam and eve. Nowhere. Maybe you were just kidding..but if you were not..... well then, the "interpretation " of scripture that you just gave here , is a prime example of what is known as just man's interpretation (which is nothing more than just man's opinion)..... versus the Holy Spirit given interpretation of scripture...which is the only right way to interpret scripture..... otherwise, man can make scripture say any old thing man wants scripture to say. Sharpshooter, Incorrect Answers like you just presented here, are a result of not being led of the Holy Spirit, and not rightly dividing and studying the Word of God . Sorry. Cain, The Serpent's Seed But before we get to Esau, let's talk about Cain. In Genesis 3:15a He said, "And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed." Enmity means mutual hatred. He is saying there is mutual hatred between the seedline of Satan's and the seedline of Eve's. So there are two seedlines. The serpent seed started with Cain and Adam's seed started with Seth. No matter how they have tried to cover it up in the KJV, the Dead Sea Scrolls and even verses such as Gen. 3:15 make it clear that Satan had his own seedline and it started back with Eve. Many of you are hearing this for the first time. Because if you have sat in church programming all of your lives you haven't heard the truth even though it is right there in the Bible. The apple was figurative for sexual relations masked with the terminology "Eve was beguiled by Satan" and until people accept it as the truth it is, they will stay blind to the real war going on today which is between the serpent seedline and the rest of the human race. Beguiled used in this text is the same as "seduced." Furthermore, Scripture says Cain "was of that wicked one" he was a son of Satan's through the seduction of Eve. The term "of" is the same that means offspring. Neither is Cain listed anywhere in the descendents of Adam which strongly indicates Cain was not his son. The official beginning of the wheat and the tares began with Eve. The wheat AND the tares. Most church pastors today will pull out Genesis 4:1 which reads, "And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the Lord." There are many omissions and translation errors throughout the Bible. The Dead Sea Scrolls confirm that Genesis 4:1 was tampered with. In fact the passage should read: And Adam knew his wife Eve, who was pregnant by Sammael (Satan), and she conceived and bare Cain, and he was like the heavenly beings, and not like the earthly beings, and she said, I have gotten a man from the angel of the Lord. Now we know that anything of the Lord is confirmed elsewhere. IF Cain was indeed Satan's son, we wouldn't have to count on just one passage to prove it. In fact there are many: I John 3:12 "Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his (half) brother.." Here the word "of" in Greek is #1537 in the Strong's Concordance. When used implying a person, it means "a son of or offspring." Compare this with other translations: The New Testament in Modern English: "We are none of us to have the spirit of Cain, who was a son of the devil.." Living Bible: "We are not to be like Cain, who belonged to Satan.." New English Bible: "..unlike Cain who was a child of the evil one.." New Century Bible: "Do not be like Cain who belonged to the Evil One." New Jerusalem Bible: "..not to be like Cain, who was from the Evil One.." And the popular commentaries confirm the same thing: The Wycliffe Bible Commentary page 1473: "He (Cain) is said to have belonged to the family of the wicked one." Matthew Poole's Commentary on the Holy Bible, volume 3, page 936. "Which showed him (Cain) to be of that wicked one, of the serpent's seed: so early was such seed sown, and so ancient the enmity between seed and seed." Matthew Henry's Commentary, volume 6 page 1077: "It showed that he (Cain) was as the firstborn of the serpent's seed.." In John 8:44 Jesus was speaking to the Pharisees and proclaimed, 'Ye are of your father the devil.." The term "of" meaning generation, offspring. They were of the physical seed of their father the devil. Trees are often used as metaphors in regards to people. Jesus was the "tree of life." We also find: Mat 3:10 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Mat 7:17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. Mat 7:18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither [can] a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Mat 7:19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Mat 12:33 Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by [his] fruit. Now back to the Garden of Eden. In Genesis 2:16 we read: And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, "Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. In Genesis 3:3 Eve says to Lucifer the snake, And the woman said unto the serpent, (Nahash), We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. Adam and Eve had been commanded not to eat of or touch the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. In Genesis 3:13: "And the Lord said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat." In Strong's, #398 the term "eat" means to eat, also to lay. The term "touch" in Strong's is #5060 which means naga, to touch, also to have sexual intercourse. Both terms had and have sexual connotations to them. The tree of knowledge was the means to sexual knowledge. Knowledge is to "know." Knowing means to perceive, experience, learn. It is also used as an euphemism of "to know someone" sexually as when Adam "knew" his wife. The terms eat, touch, and know are often used in Biblical lingo for sexual relations. Lucifer was the way of knowing good and evil. He was the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil because through him they would learn evil, they would perceive evil, and they would experience it. Who was the tree of life in the Garden of Eden? Yahshua was. Who was the tree of the knowledge of good and evil? Lucifer. How do we 'eat of the tree of life?" We commune with Him. We are never to commune with Lucifer, and in this instance he seduced Eve, impregnated her, and began his own genealogical offspring and seedline on this earth that is part of us today. Before Adam even had a chance to consummate his relationship with Eve, she was already pregnant with Lucifer's child, Cain. And that is what the Illuminati bloodlines of the New World Order don't want you to know. They are Cain's seed, of the wicked one. And it is these bloodlines of Cain and Esau working together through the control of vast wealth around the world that are bringing the Antichrist to power.  
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
MirrorMirror
on
Sat 09/13/08 06:13 PM
|
|
I was say this one last time//// UNLESS man is TRULY BORN AGAIN and has the HOLY SPIRIT in Him, he will NOT be able to interpret scripture properly.... no matter how much he THINKS he is able to....... and as a result, he will make scripture say any old thing he wants it to say..... Nuff said. Thats right. The Chosen One said; "He that believeth in me ........."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was say this one last time//// UNLESS man is TRULY BORN AGAIN and has the HOLY SPIRIT in Him, he will NOT be able to interpret scripture properly.... no matter how much he THINKS he is able to....... and as a result, he will make scripture say any old thing he wants it to say..... Nuff said. That is just propaganda. It makes no sense at all. You cannot be "born again" unless you are a believer in the scripture and you cannot be a believer in scripture if you can not interpret it properly. Unless you are just brainwashed by the spoken doctrine of the church and your accepted authority, your pastor or church. What you are saying is that you must blindly believe that the scripture is the Word of God, and not question that, and hence give over your body mind and soul to an unknown doctrine and then believe in Jesus Christ, whom you can only know about by reading this scripture that you can't interpret yet, and then after you do that, and after you believe you are born again, then you claim that you can then interpret scripture accurately. This is an impossibility, because after you swear your mind, body and soul in service to this imaginary savior and this unknown and uninterpreted scripture you are then totally committed and obligated to believe everything you read no matter what. You are already brainwashed and probably swept away by the emotional charges you get from your spiritual peers. You can repeat this nonsense as many times as you wish but it is only true to you. It is not true to others. JB |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was say this one last time//// UNLESS man is TRULY BORN AGAIN and has the HOLY SPIRIT in Him, he will NOT be able to interpret scripture properly.... no matter how much he THINKS he is able to....... and as a result, he will make scripture say any old thing he wants it to say..... Nuff said. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You gotta add a comment!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was say this one last time//// UNLESS man is TRULY BORN AGAIN and has the HOLY SPIRIT in Him, he will NOT be able to interpret scripture properly.... no matter how much he THINKS he is able to....... and as a result, he will make scripture say any old thing he wants it to say..... Nuff said. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
back in a few, gotta do a weather check, howlin winds and all, got spared from most of Ike, just tropical winds right now and rain, rain, rain,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
God cannot look upon sin...sin and God don't mix...and disobedience is sin. If god created ALL... God created sin. If a polar opposite of this "perfect" and absolute good exists, one would gather that the one who created it COULD in fact look upon it. It would seem it would have to serve some purpose in natural balance. Besides, how could disobedience, according to one particular doctrine, make it so Universally? Actually - God did not "create" sin, because sin is the absense of Good, and truth. In effect - it only exists as a negative or falling short of the expected. Which is perfection. The same can be said of black (the absense of color - or light) Cold (the steady decline of heat.) These are only concepts that measure the absense of what is being measured. Sin the absence of good? No. Sin is disobedience of the Biblical God. The word "sin" is only defined within the confines of religious doctrine. Outside of that, it has no meaning. By insisting that his servants obey him, and implying that to disobey is "sin" then The Biblical "God" did actually create "sin" in that context. JB |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
UNLESS man is TRULY BORN AGAIN and has the HOLY SPIRIT in Him, he will NOT be able to interpret scripture properly.... Morning Song, my question is, how do you know you've TRULY been born again? Is it not all on faith that you've ACTUALLY "received" the HOLY SPIRIT? Is this not simply YOUR individual interpretation of what "faith" feels like? Yes... I know that millions agree with interpretations based on this particular religious doctrine. Mass agreement doesn't make it so. Who is to say that this mass agreement is actual "proper" interpretation? By insisting that his servants obey him, and implying that to disobey is "sin" then The Biblical "God" did actually create "sin" in that context. JB I concur completely. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I also think there is a good argument for the case of "spiritual death" - for it can be seen all through scripture that sin separates one from God, and that it was intended that they have eternal lif - but no longer do. (Thus the guarding of the tree of life.) I believed that interpretation of Genesis 2:17 until I did a word study to find what it actually means. The literal meaning is what I have posted. I believe that spiritual death is an underlying theme in Genesis 2:17, but the obvious message is about physical death. no the "OBVIOUS" message for them dieing that "DAY" [24 hr.] is one of spiritual death, not physical death, that is what i meant from the beginning and what me and eljay had talked of before, did it also cause a physical death ? well the results show that it did so that cannot be argued, but the death they recieved that "DAY" was definitely one of spiritual in type. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was say this one last time//// UNLESS man is TRULY BORN AGAIN and has the HOLY SPIRIT in Him, he will NOT be able to interpret scripture properly.... no matter how much he THINKS he is able to....... and as a result, he will make scripture say any old thing he wants it to say..... Nuff said. That is just propaganda. It makes no sense at all. You cannot be "born again" unless you are a believer in the scripture and you cannot be a believer in scripture if you can not interpret it properly. Unless you are just brainwashed by the spoken doctrine of the church and your accepted authority, your pastor or church. What you are saying is that you must blindly believe that the scripture is the Word of God, and not question that, and hence give over your body mind and soul to an unknown doctrine and then believe in Jesus Christ, whom you can only know about by reading this scripture that you can't interpret yet, and then after you do that, and after you believe you are born again, then you claim that you can then interpret scripture accurately. This is an impossibility, because after you swear your mind, body and soul in service to this imaginary savior and this unknown and uninterpreted scripture you are then totally committed and obligated to believe everything you read no matter what. You are already brainwashed and probably swept away by the emotional charges you get from your spiritual peers. You can repeat this nonsense as many times as you wish but it is only true to you. It is not true to others. JB Truly. It's utter nonsense to claim that only believers can understand the Bible. If that were true then no one should believe it. How can you believe something before you even understand it. That's utterly absurd. That's really no different than saying that you have to be saved before you can be saved. It's utter nonsense.  There was a time when I believed in the Bible. The more I realized that it can't possibly be true. So this is proof positive to me that this little bit of propaganda is total hogwash. In fact, there were many Christians who once believed and then came to their senses. So it's common for believers to realize that they've been duped. If the opposite were true then no believer would ever leave the religion and there would be no such thing as an 'ex-Christian'. I got news for you. There are a LOT of ex-Christians in this world! These are people who turned to the religion in good faith believing that they were turning to God only to discover later that the biblical text is ultimately ungodly. They didn't turn away from God. They turned away from what they ultimately recognized to be a manmade myth. |
|
|
|
|
