71 replies to this topic

[Copen]

Copen reply to Jor-el:
I'm not being sarcastic, for I am never closed minded to not learn. I hope you show me evidence in the Bible to support that sons of God were also spirits. But don't use any text outside the word God spoke to us through scripture.
God bless Jor-el

[Copen]

Jor-el wrote:
Judges 19:25

But the men would not listen to him. So the man seized his concubine and made her go out to them. And they knew her and abused her all night until the morning. And as the dawn began to break, they let her go.

Genesis 19:4-8


⁴ But before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both young and old, all the people to the last man, surrounded the house. ⁵ And they called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, that we may know them.” ⁶ Lot went out to the men at the entrance, shut the door after him, ⁷ and said, “I beg you, my brothers, do not act so wickedly. ⁸ Behold, I have two daughters who have not known any man. Let me bring them out to you, and do to them as you please. Only do nothing to these men, for they have come under the shelter of my roof.”


Genesis 19:4-8

English Standard Version (ESV)

⁴ But before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both young and old, all the people to the last man, surrounded the house. ⁵ And they called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, that we may know them.” ⁶ Lot went out to the men at the entrance, shut the door after him, ⁷ and said, “I beg you, my brothers, do not act so wickedly. ⁸ Behold, I have two daughters who have not known any man. Let me bring them out to you, and do to them as you please. Only do nothing to these men, for they have come under the shelter of my roof.”
It simply means "sex".

Copen reply to Jor-el:
I stand corrected. Thank you. I forgot about that concubine and thought the homosexuals of Sodom where saying let us have sex with them as if we were marrying them. But, you are right, it just means sex. It is graphic enough, though, to easily see the difference in the sons of God (Jews) marrying the daughters of men (Gentiles) all whom they chose and later when the sons of God just came in unto the daughters of men (Gentiles) and they bore children out of wedlock.

Copying your post makes this rather long. I will start another one. Please remember, my mistake only proves one person cannot be always right and why it took about 120 people working together to find truth with scripture by eliminating all contradictions, which brought on a revival. The husbandman (farmer-Jesus) is not coming until after the early and latter rain. (James 5:7) Peter said Pentecost was Joel's prophecied early rain. Therefore, Jesus is not coming until after another revival.

So, get a group to pray and study for 10 evenings. If nothing happens, you haven't found the truth yet.
God bless Joe-el

[Copen]

Joe-el posted
Psalm 82

God has taken his place in the divine council;
in the midst of the gods he holds judgment:
² “How long will you judge unjustly
and show partiality to the wicked? Selah
³ Give justice to the weak and the fatherless;
maintain the right of the afflicted and the destitute.
⁴ Rescue the weak and the needy;
deliver them from the hand of the wicked.”

⁵ They have neither knowledge nor understanding,
they walk about in darkness;
all the foundations of the earth are shaken.

⁶ I said, “You are gods,
sons of the Most High, all of you;
⁷ nevertheless, like men you shall die,
and fall like any prince.”

⁸ Arise, O God, judge the earth;
for you shall inherit all the nations!

I suggest you look up the term "Divine Council" and how it connects with the term "Sons of God".

Do you notice the bolded part? It is the key here. How can "men" be sentenced to "die like men". That is not a sentence that is logical if we are talking of human beings. We are already condemned to die. It is what all men are condemned to do, so why should this particular phrase be used here? It is only applicable to beings who could not die in the natural order of things (like angels), that is the sense of the verse.

Copen reply to Jor-el:
Psalms 82 -- KJV ---which is older and has produced more revivals

(1.)God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; He judgeth among the gods.
How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked?

(The congregation of the mighty is the Temple on earth. The gods are priests who judge among the congregation. God is saying these priests are judging unjustly and accepting persons who are wicked.  Angels are not given to judge the congregation of the Jews in the Temple.)

(6.)I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the Most High. (7.) But ye shall die like men (Gentiles), and fall like on of the princes.

John 10:34 "Jesus answered them (Jews - from previous verse), Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If He called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken....."

When Adam and Eva had their eyes opened and received the knowledge of good and evil, God said, "...the man is become AS one of US, to know good and evil..." What was "US"? God!!!!That's exactly what the serpent said would happen. "Ye shall not surely die; for God doth know that in the day ye eat there, then your eyes shall be opened and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil."He didn't think that through. In their blind sinful state had they eaten the fruit of the Tree of Life, then they would have never died and sin would have continued and increased. God never intended Adam and Eva to live forever physically. If He had God would have instructed them to go eat from that tree. The serpent manipulated with the truth. Whereas, Eva was deceived because Adam LIED to her and said if she touched the fruit, that same day she would die. She TOUCHED it and did not die and she could look at the fruit and see it would make one wise so she ate.

God never lies. He said the same day they ate the fruit they would die --- not begin to die. And they did die that same day they ate the fruit. Their souls (minds, emotions) died to sin when their eyes were opened. And they became gods (priests).

They handed down, orally, the burnt offering sacrifices to Cain and Abel. Jews are the only ones who have ever been given charge of the word (sons of God - John 10:34) and the sacriffices.

God set the boundaries of the inheritance of nations, when He separated the sons of Adam according to the number of the children of Israel. (Deuteronomy 32:8) That says that the sons of Adam have the same set boundaries as of children of Israel because Adam was the first Jew.
God bless us all is my prayer.

[Copen]

If God is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow, and He says incest is a sin, and God blessed male and female to multiply, then Cain did not marry a sister. He married a Gentile. And that's why Cain was afraid to go among them. When God blesses someone that blessing is never removed and replaced with a curse. That's why Noah couldn't curse his son Ham. God had already blessed Ham. So Noah cursed Ham's son, Canaan, who by his name indicates he was a descendant of Cain on his mother's side.
God bless us all is my prayer.

[Jor-el]

Copen, on 10 January 2013 - 01:03 AM, said:

IamsSon posted:
since when is sexual intercourse without marriage cause for God judging mankind with a flood? Give me a time when this never happened? Never!!!

Copen reply to IamsSon:
God says it is a sin to have sex outside marriage, and tells that this was beginning to happen, and that children were being born of them. --- It marks the beginning of the moral slide downward of communities. I don't believe we could stand to read the gross evils that took place. It is mentioned after the flood that cannibalism was forbidden. So that must have been happening before the flood, too. One of the signs in Noah's day, to be repeated in the last days, is marrying and giving unto marriage. Shows a lot of legal switching of partners, marrying, divorcing and re-marrying.

God bless IamsSon

I posted that, not Iamson.

Either way. Yes it is a sin to have sex without marriage, but contrary to waht you claim, the verses of Genesis state beyond a shadow of a doubt that marriage was directly involved. They were not having sex outside of marriage!!!

6 When man began to multiply on the face of the land and daughters were born to them, ² the sons of God saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose.

The only way the word "wives" can be used is if there was marriage.

So you have contradicted yourself. At 1st it is because unbelieving women were marrying believers of the line of Seth, now they are not marrying at all but living in sin.

In either of these views you grossly ignore the obvious usage of the term "sons of God", You ignore the fact that the children are giants, not normal human beings... what else are you ignoring? Think about that.

Edited by Jor-el, 10 January 2013 - 07:17 PM.

[Jor-el]

Copen, on 10 January 2013 - 01:07 AM, said:

Copen reply to Jor-el:
I'm not being sarcastic, for I am never closed minded to not learn. I hope you show me evidence in the Bible to support that sons of God were also spirits. But don't use any text outside the word God spoke to us through scripture.
God bless Jor-el

Yes he did and guess what?

People over the miilenia also wrote down how they viewed that scripture... and your view is a direct result of believers twisting scripture to fit their prejuduces and doctrines.

The Sethite view actually did not come about until 5 centuries after Christ’s resurrection and ascension. The view that these beings were fallen angels having intercourse with women was taught and understood for centuries by both the ancient rabbis and the Early Church fathers, yet is completely excluded. Most seminary students do not even know there are two views.

Celsus and Julian the Apostate used the traditional "angel" belief to attack Christianity. Julius Africanus resorted to the Sethite interpretation as a more comfortable ground, rather than defending the Word of God, and what had been taught for centuries. Cyril of Alexandria also repudiated the orthodox "angel" position with the "line of Seth" interpretation. Augustine also embraced the Sethite theory and thus it prevailed into the Middle Ages. It is still widely taught today among many churches who find the literal "angel" view a bit disturbing. There are many outstanding Bible teachers who still defend this view.

The Sethite view basically teaches that the “sons of God” in Genesis 6 were not fallen angels, but rather were the “godly line of Seth.” And that the “daughters of men” were the “wicked daughters of Cain.” There a number of problems with this view, however.

For one, it was clearly, when you read the text, the "sons of God" who initiated this union. The "daughters of men" were clearly the victims. If this was the "line of Seth," it doesn't go to far in showing they were godly. Also, they would have had to seek out the these women if they were the daughters of Cain. Remember, Genesis 4:12, God told Cain he would be a wanderer, and verse 16, Cain went out to the land of Nod (which means the land of wandering). If this is the line of Seth, they aren't appearing to be too godly.

Also, Genesis 4:26 states that, "To Seth, to him also a son was born, and he called his name Enosh. Then men began to call upon the name of the Lord." The Hebrew term here for "call upon" means "to defile." This was not "calling upon the name of the Lord" in a godly way, but rather defiling His name. Such taking His name in vain or using it as a curse word. This was Seth's own son, Enosh. That's not too godly, and by the way, the name Enosh means "mortal, frail, weak, sickly, or incurable."

Then, one has to remember that if the "sons of God" were the sons of Seth, then a lot of godly and good people perished in the flood. Remember, it was only Noah and his family who were allowed onto the Ark. So, if they were so godly, why did they not get to go aboard the Ark and be saved?

One argument people make against the "sons of God" being fallen angels is they say that Jesus said in Matthew 22 that angels do not have sex. But, this is not what the text says.

Jesus said in Matthew 22, verse 30, “For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.”

Now, let’s look at the context of this verse. The Sadducees came to Jesus and asked Him who a certain woman, whose husband died, would be married to in heaven if she remarried. They never say anything about sexual relations, but only marriage. In Jesus’s response, He never says anything about sex, but He speaks exclusively of marriage.

He never says the angels do not have the capability of sex, but only that they do not marry in heaven. Also, notice that it says, “angels IN HEAVEN.” The angels in heaven do not marry, and therefore choose not to have sex. This is not talking about fallen angels.

It’s also interesting that Jesus would make this distinction between angels by stating the “angels in heaven.” If no angel ever had sex, why did He not just say that we would be like the angels? Because the fallen angels do not abide by the same rules that angels in heaven abide by. That’s kind of why they are fallen.

The Hebrew term for "sons of God" in Genesis 6 is "Bene HaElohim" which is consistently used in the Old Testament to mean angels. It literally means a "direct creation of God." In our natural state, we are not sons of God, but instead, sons of Adam. Adam was a direct creation of God, and besides Jesus Himself, Adam is the only man referred to as a "son of God."

The term used for "daughters of men" in Genesis 6 is "Benoth Adam" or "daughters of Adam." This is not a segment of humanity (e.g. Cain), but rather humanity as a whole that the sons of God were creating hybrid offspring (giants, "Nephilim") with.

In Job 38:1-7, we read that "when [God] laid the foundation of the earth... the sons of God (Bene HaElohim) shouted for joy." Obviously they could not be humans, as at this point, Adam had not even been created.

Source: http://biblestudynow...cs/show/3133886

[Jor-el]

Copen, on 10 January 2013 - 02:17 AM, said:

Copen reply to Jor-el:
Psalms 82 -- KJV ---which is older and has produced more revivals

(1.)God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; He judgeth among the gods.
How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked?

(The congregation of the mighty is the Temple on earth. The gods are priests who judge among the congregation. God is saying these priests are judging unjustly and accepting persons who are wicked.  Angels are not given to judge the congregation of the Jews in the Temple.)

Copen, I am sorry but I must strongly disagree with you on this issue.

The text CLEARLY does not say angels, it says gods (elohim).

And if as you say the "gods" are "priests who judge among the congregation" then you are saying God doesn't know who he is addressing. Are you saying god is dumb?

The very same text also states:

I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are sons of the most High.  But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.

Don't you think it blatantly stupid to be addressing "men" and then saying But ye shall die like men?

I mean he his talking to human beings, what kind of judgement is that? We are already sentenced to die!!! All of us without exception, goof or bad, young or old, men or women, we are all under the sentence of death!

What kind of judgement is it that gives us what we are already given. It's like me saying "here take these clothes, I got them for you" and then when you turn your back  I take them away and then give them to you again...

You see, your difficulty lies in believing that there are only angels in heaven, there are other beings as well, we call them angels as a blanket designation, but the bible speaks of them as "sons of God". They are the Gods of the ancient poytheistic religions, the gods of the nations. It says so quite clearly in the bible. These are the sons of God, a number of beings who make up the "Divine Council", which God rules. The only difference between them and God is that they are as created as the angels, they are immortal, but they are not eternal, just like the angels. God is the only elohim who is without beginning and an end. They are divine beings, they are called elohim, they are called gods, they are called the sons of God.

These are the beings being directly addressed by God in Psalm 82, they are not human beings, the text as much as says that much quite clearly, unless one turns a blind eye to the words there.

Quote

(6.)I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the Most High. (7.) But ye shall die like men (Gentiles), and fall like on of the princes.

John 10:34 "Jesus answered them (Jews - from previous verse), Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If He called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken....."

An interesting passage which apparantly has been misinterpreted many times over the centuries... It is interesting enough that i will copy the relevent text in full so that you can see the context here...

    Further Conflict Over Jesus’ Claims

²² Then came the Festival of Dedication^[b] at Jerusalem. It was winter, ²³ and Jesus was in the temple courts walking in Solomon’s Colonnade. ²⁴ The Jews who were there gathered around him, saying, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Messiah, tell us plainly.”

²⁵ Jesus answered, “I did tell you, but you do not believe. The works I do in my Father’s name testify about me, ²⁶ but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. ²⁷ My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. ²⁸ I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. ²⁹ My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all^[c]; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. ³⁰ I and the Father are one.”

³¹ Again his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him, ³² but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?”
³³ “We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”

³⁴ Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’^[d]? ³⁵ If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside— ³⁶ what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’? ³⁷ Do not believe me unless I do the works of my Father. ³⁸ But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.” ³⁹ Again they tried to seize him, but he escaped their grasp.

⁴⁰ Then Jesus went back across the Jordan to the place where John had been baptizing in the early days. There he stayed, ⁴¹ and many people came to him. They said, “Though John never performed a sign, all that John said about this man was true.” ⁴² And in that place many believed in Jesus.

Question: What is the conflict about?
Answer, Jesus Divinity

What do the Jews say about Jesus Divinity?
Answer: That there is only ONE God and that Jesus was claiming to be God.

Who is the "Them" in the phrase: "I have said you are “god? If he called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside— what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world?"
Answer: Since this is a direct reference to Psalm 82:6, then it cannot be talking about human beings for the simple reason laid out above (unless you are implying God can't get his phrasing right). The "them" can only refer to beings that are not human.

I would suggest that what first needs to be done is to comes to terms with what is meant by “the word of God” and who it is that receives that word in Psalm 82:6–7:

Nowhere in Psalm 82 do we have any hint of the Mosaic law, Sinai, a Jewish nation, or the canonical revelation given to the Jews. Every element in the commonly held view must be inserted into the passage. It is Jesus, who just said he and the Father were one, quoting Psalm 82:6 in defense of his divine nature, reminding his Jewish audience that there were in fact other ĕlōhim besides the God of Israel, and those ĕlōhim were his sons. Because he calls himself the son of God in the next breath, this at the very least puts him in the class of the sons of the Most High of Psalm 82:6—divine ĕlōhim. It doesn't stop there, Jesus is quite specific, that he is the unique son of God (his only begotton son). He is the an elohim in a class by himself.

Nowhere does this verse refer to human beings being "gods", that many do take that interpretation means that they have not read the verses in question as clearly they might think.

Quote

When Adam and Eva had their eyes opened and received the knowledge of good and evil, God said, "...the man is become AS one of US, to know good and evil..." What was "US"? God!!!!That's exactly what the serpent said would happen. "Ye shall not surely die; for God doth know that in the day ye eat there, then your eyes shall be opened and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil."He didn't think that through. In their blind sinful state had they eaten the fruit of the Tree of Life, then they would have never died and sin would have continued and increased. God never intended Adam and Eva to live forever physically. If He had God would have instructed them to go eat from that tree. The serpent manipulated with the truth. Whereas, Eva was deceived because Adam LIED to her and said if she touched the fruit, that same day she would die. She TOUCHED it and did not die and she could look at the fruit and see it would make one wise so she ate.

God never lies. He said the same day they ate the fruit they would die --- not begin to die. And they did die that same day they ate the fruit. Their souls (minds, emotions) died to sin when their eyes were opened. And they became gods (priests).

I can only reply in utter amazement!!!

Go read the text in the Hebrew, study your history and then compare what you learn to what you are saying now. I'm not going to repeat myself ad naseum.

Quote

They handed down, orally, the burnt offering sacrifices to Cain and Abel. Jews are the only ones who have ever been given charge of the word (sons of God - John 10:34) and the sacriffices.

God set the boundaries of the inheritance of nations, when He separated the sons of Adam according to the number of the children of Israel. (Deuteronomy 32:8) That says that the sons of Adam have the same set boundaries as of children of Israel because Adam was the first Jew.
God bless us all is my prayer.

Not only is that wallowing in error, but you can't seem to admit it. The correct text does NOT say "children of Israel", but the "sons of God", go figure. You can keep the masoretic text, but what does the Septuagint say, what do the Dead Sea scrolls say? Texts that are much more ancient than the masoretic text, that agree with one another, that prove that the masoretic texts was fiddled with.

The entire Greek orthodox Church reads the Septaugint, are you saying they are not in posession of Gods word? The entire early christian church read accepted the Septuagint, until the Vulgate became available. Are you saying that they were not in possesion of Gods word?

To me its amazing the ammount of denial some believers have that they can't face the truth. Admitting the truth does not make one less of a believer, it does not make your position weaker, quite the opposite. Being stubborn about demonstrated facts, that weakens you.

Edited by Jor-el, 10 January 2013 - 09:55 PM.

[Jor-el]

Copen, on 10 January 2013 - 02:25 AM, said:

If God is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow, and He says incest is a sin, and God blessed male and female to multiply, then Cain did not marry a sister. He married a Gentile. And that's why Cain was afraid to go among them. When God blesses someone that blessing is never removed and replaced with a curse. That's why Noah couldn't curse his son Ham. God had already blessed Ham. So Noah cursed Ham's son, Canaan, who by his name indicates he was a descendant of Cain on his mother's side.
God bless us all is my prayer.

Of course he did, from one pair all others came, there were not two sets of humans, there was only one, we are all descendents of Adam and Eve.... every single one of us, otherwise we would not be suffering under the same curse, every single one of us... If you can prove to me that there are a group of people who do not suffer death because of the fall, I'll give in and say you are right.

[IamsSon]

Copen, on 10 January 2013 - 01:03 AM, said:

IamsSon posted:
since when is sexual intercourse without marriage cause for God judging mankind with a flood? Give me a time when this never happened? Never!!!

Copen reply to IamsSon:
God says it is a sin to have sex outside marriage, and tells that this was beginning to happen, and that children were being born of them. --- It marks the beginning of the moral slide downward of communities. I don't believe we could stand to read the gross evils that took place. It is mentioned after the flood that cannibalism was forbidden. So that must have been happening before the flood, too. One of the signs in Noah's day, to be repeated in the last days, is marrying and giving unto marriage. Shows a lot of legal switching of partners, marrying, divorcing and re-marrying.

God bless IamsSon

Thank you for the blessing, and I gladly return it; but although that is probably something I would say, that was not me, it was Jor-el.

Look, the initial idea you're proposing is one that seems to be taught by many churches: that the "Sons of God" were humans.  So, it is understandable that you would have accepted it despite the fact that you have to ignore a great deal of what is actually written in order to accept the idea as Scriptural.  But the idea you've added that they were "gentiles" is not in any way supported by the Bible, since the Scriptures clearly show that the Jews are Abraham's descendants.  The additional idea that the flood was a punishment for sex outside of marriage is also not supported by Scripture.

[Copen]

Jor-el:
Job 38:1-7 The Lord is asking Job not Adam where were you when the foundations of the earth were laid. In the beginning God created the heaven (singular) and the earth. Then God gave Lucifer for a covering of the earth. The next verse says the earth was confusion and emptiness and God the Spirit moved upon the face of waters and saw darkness upon the face of the deep waters and the earth was submerged. That was the beginning. The devil is the author of confusion. So confusion was already evident. The devil was a murderer from the beginning. I don't know who he murdered but this was the beginning. Please notice it was FROM the beginning. Sometime after the beginning. The foundations were laid afterwards in the six day creation.

When God saw darkness, confusion, emptiness and the earth submerged in deep water, He starts laying a plan, the first sting operation. He does not execute judgement on just what He knows. There must be two witnesses. He holds Himself to the same standards He required of the Jews. God starts laying the foundations of the earth. And day six gentiles were spoken into existence. Day eight Adam was created.  Gentiles are being referred to as "men." The Septuagint which was the only Old Testament Bible available when the New Testament Church started. And it said, "Let us make men in our image. Male and female made He them." The Hebrew and other ancient translations had long disappeared. There is no original Hebrew Old Testament to compare with the Septuagint. The Greek Septuagint was the only translation because the majority of all peoples spoke Greek.

Psalms 82 is talking to priests (sons of God) of the temple of the Jews who knew good and evil and were judging among the congregation. God is warning these Jewish priests that if their judgments were not just they will fall like ungodly "men" (Gentiles). You may remember Genesis 2: 12 "And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and onyx stone." There is much spiritual gold that has been mined from Israel. The bdellium (the same color as manna - white) and onyx (black) stones were inside the high priest's vest. The color he drew out determined his judgement - - pro or con.

God did not place a curse on anything because Eva ate the fruit. He cursed the ground where the tree stood where the serpent was. It is the same cursed place where Jesus paid for sin.
Sin was already covering the earth sometime after Lucifer was given charge. The serpent was cursed above all other animals. That curse is still here today. A person will shutter and curse a picture of a serpent and have no reaction to one of a lion or tiger, etc.

God does not curse someone He has already blessed. God blessed male and female (Gentiles) to multiply. He did not turn around and curse them.

Two of the same produce the same. Eva had the exact same DNA as Adam. She was the first clone. She even had his exact same blood type (bone of his bone where blood is manufactured). Very very black parents only have very very black offspring. The only way for an offspring with lighter variable skin color is through introduction other than very very black parent.
God bless us all is my prayer.

Edited by Copen, 02 February 2013 - 05:41 AM.

[Copen]

Question: God is the same yesterday (that means way back when the foundations of the earth were being laid), today and forever, AND God does not change; and what is a sin today has always been a sin. Also, God does not tempt anyone to sin; when Cain married a sister and that was all that was available to marry, then did God force INCEST? Incest was a sin way back
when the foundations were laid yesterday, today and tomorrow.

Another Question: Does God not know that a woman ate the fruit first? He said, "By one man (not two people) sin entered." When the woman ate the fruit first did the all-knowing God not know it was a woman? I'll give you a hint. The one man was Lucifer when he was given for a covering of the earth before the foundations were laid.

Another Question: Since God spoke everything into being the first six days or creation and animals were created before male and female by God ("Elohim" implied Triune) and that is how Gentiles have mostly known Him; and Adam was NOT spoken into being but was molded like a potter with clay by God (Jehovah - One) and that is how Jews mostly know Him PLUS only domestic animals were created after Adam but before Eva - - - - was God contradicting Himself when He dictated to Moses how this all happened?
God bless.

[Jor-el]

Copen, on 02 February 2013 - 05:38 AM, said:

Jor-el:
Job 38:1-7 The Lord is asking Job not Adam where were you when the foundations of the earth were laid. In the beginning God created the heaven (singular) and the earth. Then God gave Lucifer for a covering of the earth. The next verse says the earth was confusion and emptiness and God the Spirit moved upon the face of waters and saw darkness upon the face of the deep waters and the earth was submerged. That was the beginning. The devil is the author of confusion. So confusion was already evident. The devil was a murderer from the beginning. I don't know who he murdered but this was the beginning. Please notice it was FROM the beginning. Sometime after the beginning. The foundations were laid afterwards in the six day creation.

I'm trying to figure out what the above has got to do with the debate...

When I quoted Job earlier on in my posts I was specifically referencing that the text mentions the "sons of God" in Job 38:7. A fact that comes directly from Gods own wording. And the context absolutely and clearly puts them present at the time of the creation of the universe, which signifies that in no way can they be human beings in this text or any other where the term is used in the Old Testament.

Quote

When God saw darkness, confusion, emptiness and the earth submerged in deep water, He starts laying a plan, the first sting operation. He does not execute judgement on just what He knows. There must be two witnesses. He holds Himself to the same standards He required of the Jews. God starts laying the foundations of the earth. And day six gentiles were spoken into existence. Day eight Adam was created.  Gentiles are being referred to as "men." The Septuagint which was the only Old Testament Bible available when the New Testament Church started. And it said, "Let us make men in our image. Male and female made He them." The Hebrew and other ancient translations had long disappeared. There is no original Hebrew Old Testament to compare with the Septuagint. The Greek Septuagint was the only translation because the majority of all peoples spoke Greek.

Two things here...

1st The Septuagint was NOT the only Old Testament bible available. The Hebrew was also available. It was used for example in Israel right up to the end of the 1st Century, the Aquila translation of the bible for example used the very same Hebrew texts and that was in 135 C.E. The Hebrew from which our modern day Old Testament is translated was available and we have examples of that in the Dead Sea Scrolls, which have scrolls of most of the Old Testament. In most cases they are exactly the same, in others they vary demonstrating that later scribes mistakenly or purposefully altered the text to fit their preconceptions.

2nd, the text DOES NOT say men, it says man. There is not a single translation of the the bible that says "men". Not the Septuagint, not the King James, not a single one. The New Living Translation, which is a paraphrase, instead of an actual translation, has "people"..

Interestingly enough the actual Hebrew word used here is אדם, which means "Adam", it is the very same word that is later used for Adams' name. That does not leave any room for doubt that we are talking of the very same thing. "Man" and "Adam" mean exactly the same thing. One cannot say that one means gentiles and the other means Jews, the word is the very same word for both in the Hebrew.

As for the Greek, the word is ἄνθρωπον, which means "human".

Quote

Psalms 82 is talking to priests (sons of God) of the temple of the Jews who knew good and evil and were judging among the congregation. God is warning these Jewish priests that if their judgments were not just they will fall like ungodly "men" (Gentiles). You may remember Genesis 2: 12 "And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and onyx stone." There is much spiritual gold that has been mined from Israel. The bdellium (the same color as manna - white) and onyx (black) stones were inside the high priest's vest. The color he drew out determined his judgement - - pro or con.

No and NO!!! I have demonstrated this at least 3 times in this thread.

Quote

God did not place a curse on anything because Eva ate the fruit. He cursed the ground where the tree stood where the serpent was. It is the same cursed place where Jesus paid for sin.
Sin was already covering the earth sometime after Lucifer was given charge. The serpent was cursed above all other animals. That curse is still here today. A person will shutter and curse a picture of a serpent and have no reaction to one of a lion or tiger, etc.

God does not curse someone He has already blessed. God blessed male and female (Gentiles) to multiply. He did not turn around and curse them.

Two of the same produce the same. Eva had the exact same DNA as Adam. She was the first clone. She even had his exact same blood type (bone of his bone where blood is manufactured). Very very black parents only have very very black offspring. The only way for an offspring with lighter variable skin color is through introduction other than very very black parent.
God bless us all is my prayer.

There is a basic difference between cursed and punished... as for the last how would you know, did you per chance test their blood? When God made Eve are you telling me he didn't know that they would reproduce and thus did not make any alterations?

The fact that women are so different from men in so many ways beside the obvious demonstrates that he knew what he was doing...