Author Topic: Murder,kill,destroy  (Read 6605 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Online eik

  • Awarded Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 300
  • Gender: Male
  • Welcome our New Member
Re: Murder,kill,destroy
« Reply #112 on: April 09, 2021, 06:37:49 PM »

Welcome to the Biblical and Theology Section of 1Faith

[Raise a Debate] @ 1faith

Your post will be answered shortly

Raise a Debate - by posting bait !
Hi eik
Thank you for your reply you said

As God said mankind in his image it means Adam and Eve could not be just two people.
In the KJV the Hebrew word translated "mankind" means "of the male sex" in modern English, and "womankind" means "of the female sex" in modern English. The first use of "mankind" in the KJV is not until Lev 18:22, but the first use of the Hebrew words for mankind & womankind is in Gen 1:17, where they are correctly translated as "male" & "female."

The parsing of the Hebrew for "man" in Gen 1:27 is

Speech:    Noun
Type:    Common
Gender:    Masculine
Number:    Singular
State:    Absolute

with the Definite Article Particle.

Thus each individual man is in the image of God.

The way you are reading it as, "God created mankind in his own image" is clearly not correct.

The Hebrew per the KJV could be translated Thus "God create 'the man' (masculine singular) in his own image, in the image of God he created him (masculine singular), mankind and womankind he created them."

The way I read it is that the man (male) is spiritually in the image of God, and the woman only so because she is spiritually derived from the man.

   44  It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body     

Good verse you have chosen supports my contention that Israel is the first man in Gods Image the man of flesh comes first then the man of Spirit which is Christ.
Clearly what you say isn't true because both in the days of Adam and of Noah man was regarded as being in the image of God (Gen 1:27, Gen 9:6).

Now we are entitled to assume that there are different qualities of image and different aspects of likeness in which the image may be conjured. I believe the OT aspect of "image" may be rendered "glory" (cf 1 Cor 11:7).

We know that Christ is especially in the image of God, by way of facsimile of being Heb 1:3.

Yet we also know that other man are too 1Co 11:7 "For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God."

That is to say, just because Christ is in the image of God, in a special way, doesn't preclude every man also being in the image of (i.e. the glory of) God.

As for 1 Cor 15: the context is the perishable being clothed with the imperishable. So plainly it is referring to the resurrection into the spiritual (imperishable) body, unless you are firmly in the JW camp I suppose where men just remain men for all time.

We see this in Christ he came into the world as a man and after his resurrection he became a man of spirit and when he is united with his bride and they become one we will have the end of creation mankind in the image of God.
I don't agree that Christ "became a man of spirit." Rather he ascended to "where he was before"  Jhn 6:62, which is at the right hand of God. He is no longer man, but God (we need to make a clear distinction between man and God).

You will only believe Christ became a "man of spirit" if you are an Arian, i.e. a JW.

Be cause the bible tells us that God the Father rested on the 7th day and as The Father has been working from the beginning it means his rest is a future event and I say its the last day of this creation Christs millennial reign.
Yet you ignore the bible, and you have recourse to invention.

Nowhere is the "millennium" associated with a "sabbath rest" in the bible. That's just your idea.

If God stopped working completely then so would the Holy Spirit. That means even during your "millennium" no-one would have the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit would be on strike. Prayer would not be answered as God would be on strike.

 Gen 2:2 "By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work."

Gen 2:3 "Then God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had [accomplished]."

In Gen 2:2  the Hebew for "he rested" is parsed as the Qal sequential imperfect, being translated as "and he rested."  In Gen 2:3, the Hebew for "he rested" is parsed as the Qal sequential perfect, being translated as "and he will continue to rest."

It is the universal consensus that God's sabbath took place on the seventh day of creation, and in token of which he created the human sabbath.

So you seem to entire reject the concept of the human sabbath being modelled on God's sabbath.


     32  Behold, the hour cometh, yea, is now come, that ye shall be scattered, every man to his own, and shall leave me alone: and yet I am not alone, because the Father is with me. note

 33  These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world         


All Christ is saying is what will happen with his arrest and crucifixion

    2  For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.

 3  For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape     


The verse you gave is speaking of the time of the return of our Lord the day of the Lord is the millennial the time leading up to it will be a time of fribulation but when the millenium begins satan will be bound for 1000 years so the millenium will be a time of peace.
Why is millennium a time of peace? Just because satan is bound doesn't prevent people from worshipping satan. Men are "deceived"

2Ti 3:13 "evildoers and impostors will go from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived."

2Th 2:10 "and all the ways that wickedness deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.

Th 2:11 "For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie"

2Th 2:12 "and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness."

So it is saying that it is God who deceives mankind because of his wickedness, even the angels of wrath (see Revelation).

There is nothing to suggest that the "millennium" will be a time of peace. Rather it is perfectly consistent with a time of wickedness by mankind, who are deceived by their own wickedness, quite irrespective of Satan being bound.


I'll let St Paul answer this.

         1  Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. note

 2  Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.

 3  For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:

 4  For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.

 5  Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.

 6  For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.

 7  Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.

 8  Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law       

Well then, you contradict yourself. On the one hand you assert that it is wrong to wage war, but on the other you say  "rulers are the ministers of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil."

So for you, a total contradiction of your own position.

Welcome to the Biblical and Theology Section of 1Faith

[Raise a Debate] @ 1faith

Your post will be answered shortly

Raise a Debate - by posting bait !

Offline davetaff

  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 3427
  • Gender: Male
  • New :God is Love
Re: Murder,kill,destroy
« Reply #113 on: April 10, 2021, 04:44:47 PM »
Hi eik
Thank you for your reply as I have said before I don't believe in changing the words of scripture I also believe the God who loves us wants us to understand what he is saying even us who are uneducated I don't believe that only college academics can understand scripture so what dose the scripture say.

      26  And God said, Let us make man 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, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth       

Take note of IN OUR IMAGE AND LET THEM it is pretty obvious to me That God is speaking of more than one man.

Quote
     jClearly what you say isn't true because both in the days of Adam and of Noah man was regarded as being in the image of God (Gen 1:27, Gen 9:6         

Depends on what man God is speaking about an ordenary man or man in the image of God the first man in Gods image was Israel who killed his younger brother Jesus and as a result Israel as a nation died.

Quote
     I don't agree that Christ "became a man of spirit." Rather he ascended to "where he was before"  Jhn 6:62, which is at the right hand of God. He is no longer man, but God (we need to make a clear distinction between man and God
       

After his resurrection Christ became a spiritual being at the right hand of God the Father he was a God because he is the son of God.

Quote
      Yet we also know that other man are too 1Co 11:7 "For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God.       

The man spoken of here is Christ he is the only one in scripture who is said to be the image of God.

Quote
      Yet you ignore the bible, and you have recourse to invention.

Nowhere is the "millennium" associated with a "sabbath rest" in the bible. That's just your ideam         

I do not ignore the bible I believe every word it says and don't change the words as you seam to like doing.

The millenium as Gods sabbath rest is what I believe it fits in perfectly with my creation theory as Christ will reign for 1000 years the Farther dose not need to work as for the holy spirit it has been given to those who believe as an indwelling spirit.

     2  And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made       

I'm only saying what the bible says this creation began with Noah it would take 7 days including Gods sabbath each day would be 1000 years long at the end of 6 days Christ would return for his bride the church and we would have the end of the creation man in the image of God and God would rest and hand everything over to Christ and at the end of the 7th day Christ would hand everything back to the Father who would begin a new creation.

Quote
     
So you seem to entire reject the concept of the human sabbath being modelled on God's sabbath     

On the contrary I support it.

Quote
          Why is millennium a time of peace? Just because satan is bound doesn't prevent people from worshipping satan. Men are "deceived     

I think you are forgetting that all those who are in the first resurrection will be believers who are waiting and wanting peace.

Quote
    Well then, you contradict yourself. On the one hand you assert that it is wrong to wage war, but on the other you say  "rulers are the ministers of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil."

So for you, a total contradiction of your own position             

When mans laws oppose Gods laws then we obey Gods laws and in a nut shell Gods laws says we shall Love him love our neighbours and Love our enemies you can't love someone and then go and kill him so if the powers that be tell you to go and kill you must refuse.

      8  Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law         

Love and Peace
Dave

Online eik

  • Awarded Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 300
  • Gender: Male
  • Welcome our New Member
Re: Murder,kill,destroy
« Reply #114 on: April 11, 2021, 03:49:28 AM »
Hi eik
Thank you for your reply as I have said before I don't believe in changing the words of scripture I also believe the God who loves us wants us to understand what he is saying even us who are uneducated I don't believe that only college academics can understand scripture so what dose the scripture say.

      26  And God said, Let us make man 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, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth       

Take note of IN OUR IMAGE AND LET THEM it is pretty obvious to me That God is speaking of more than one man.
Yes and No. What you have omitted to note is the sing. and plural uses of words. Singular is used for "man" in "man in our own image." Plural is used for "let them have dominion." Thus the grammar is the exact opposite for what you contend for. The "image of God" is NOT vested in mankind only in a corporative sense, but individually.

Furthermore I have not "changed the words of scripture." It is you who are changing the words by your insistence that "man" means "mankind" in Gen 1:26, and not grasping which Hebrew words are singular and which are plural.

Moreover you have failed to grasp that if Christ can be in the image of God in a special sense, so can each individual male, in respect of himself. If this were not so 1 Cor 11:7 would make no sense.

Your corporative view is a communist view, a political view. I believe you have a political agenda which is to try to socialize the gospel, to use it to justify the communist state even where the majority are delinquents and driven only by politics.

Such a corporative approach to scripture is nonsense. Scripture is primarily interested in those who "do not bow their knee to the image of ba'al" in any event. Rom 11:4. The rest of mankind are inconsequential to God, made for "common use" Rom 9:21, 2 Tim 2:20.

The ba'al worshippers have surrendered their birthright, and their eternal right to be viewed as in the image of God.

Thus you are trying to re-write scripture by preaching a social gospel (IMO). I do not believe that there is any society, State or country that currently reflects the  corporate kingdom of God on earth, or that there ever will be.

Depends on what man God is speaking about an ordenary man or man in the image of God the first man in Gods image was Israel who killed his younger brother Jesus and as a result Israel as a nation died.
Teaching what is clearly in opposition to scripture is heresy. Are we here to study the bible, or your own theories? Israel as a nation didn't die, because citizenship of Israel was conferred on the church: Rom 11:17-23.

Israel was not the first "man in the image of God." That is heresy.

After his resurrection Christ became a spiritual being at the right hand of God the Father he was a God because he is the son of God.

The man spoken of here is Christ he is the only one in scripture who is said to be the image of God.
Christ is the only one who is the facsimile of God's being in Heb 1:3. Otherwise Paul makes it clear that every male is individually the image of God 1 Cor 11:7.

Again you deny scripture.

I do not ignore the bible I believe every word it says and don't change the words as you seam to like doing.
You haven't yet grasped the true scriptural narrative, for yours is a meta narrative, a social narrative, and a corporative narrative. Such a narrative is not ultimately scripture's. In respect of Israel, the corporative view appears due to the nature of the enterprise of God choosing a whole nation.  Yet with Christ we return to the individual narrative of scripture i.e. "Teach me to do thy will" Psa 143:10.

The difference between Christ and the Pharisees was that Christ was willing to apply scripture indivdually both to himself, and to others, whereas the Pharisee view was a corporative meta narrative concerning Israeli supremacy, which ultimately failed, and its proponents went to hell.

The millenium as Gods sabbath rest is what I believe it fits in perfectly with my creation theory as Christ will reign for 1000 years the Farther dose not need to work as for the holy spirit it has been given to those who believe as an indwelling spirit.
The Holy Spirit is divine and from heaven. If God were to cease so would the Holy Spirit, and so would God's rule. Your millennium theory of a Sabbath rest for God is scriptural nonsense. The Sabbath was instituted in respect of the end of creation specifically (Gen 2:2) and not linked to his salvific work.

God exists outside of time. Even God's Sabbath only has reference to his creation work in this world, and not to God himself construed as in an unchanging and timeless heaven. Thus I believe your view of God is somewhat phoney.

     2  And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made       

I'm only saying what the bible says this creation began with Noah it would take 7 days including Gods sabbath each day would be 1000 years long at the end of 6 days Christ would return for his bride the church and we would have the end of the creation man in the image of God and God would rest and hand everything over to Christ and at the end of the 7th day Christ would hand everything back to the Father who would begin a new creation.
Sounds mormon to me. Again not sanctioned by scripture: just meta theory on your part.

On the contrary I support it.

I think you are forgetting that all those who are in the first resurrection will be believers who are waiting and wanting peace.

When mans laws oppose Gods laws then we obey Gods laws and in a nut shell Gods laws says we shall Love him love our neighbours and Love our enemies you can't love someone and then go and kill him so if the powers that be tell you to go and kill you must refuse.
Again unsanctioned by scripture. There is love even in killing, for as Christ said in Matt 18:6, and Mark 9:42, paraphrasing, there is a fate even worse than death for those whom cause or will cause others to sin. It is why the nations of Canaan could be destroyed, because their very existence was a cause of sin to future generations.

Again you champion the corporative view of scripture, that it all about not harming societies.

      8  Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law         
You don't love your neighbour by allowing his enemy to kill him or cause him to sin.

Offline davetaff

  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 3427
  • Gender: Male
  • New :God is Love
Re: Murder,kill,destroy
« Reply #115 on: April 11, 2021, 02:08:54 PM »
Hi eik
Thank you for your reply you said

Quote
   Yes and No. What you have omitted to note is the sing. and plural uses of words. Singular is used for "man" in "man in our own image." Plural is used for "let them have dominion." Thus the grammar is the exact opposite for what you contend for. The "image of God" is NOT vested in mankind only in a corporative sense, but individually       

I keep telling you I don't do grammar I just believe what the bible says without dissecting every word and changing them.

Quote
     Furthermore I have not "changed the words of scripture." It is you who are changing the words by your insistence that "man" means "mankind" in Gen 1:26, and not grasping which Hebrew words are singular and which are plural     

I don't insist on anything I just give my opinion of how Gods word speaks to me
As for Hebrew I don't understand and if God wanted us to understand his word in Hebrew every one would speak it and not be reliant on academics.

Quote
       Moreover you have failed to grasp that if Christ can be in the image of God in a special sense, so can each individual male, in respect of himself. If this were not so 1 Cor 11:7 would make no sense     

What you fail to grasp is man in the image of God is man and woman joined as one as we will see when Christ is united with his bride.

As for being a communist I have never been and will never be I have no political preference and would prefer it if you refrained from accusing me of such.

Quote
     Teaching what is clearly in opposition to scripture is heresy. Are we here to study the bible, or your own theories? Israel as a nation didn't die, because citizenship of Israel was conferred on the church: Rom 11:17-23         

So you are the only one who can interpret the scriptures and is always right the you give a quote from Romans that has nothing to do with the RC church you add words to scripture that aren't there.
What Paul is speaking about is the body of believers who are the body of Christ.

Quote
       
Israel was not the first "man in the image of God." That is heresy       

I never said that what I did say was Israel was the first Adam of this creation that began with Noah.
There was a Adam before the flood who was destroyed in the flood and then we have Christ the last Adam so all told there are 3 Adams.

Quote
     Christ is the only one who is the facsimile of God's being in Heb 1:3. Otherwise Paul makes it clear that every male is individually the image of God 1 Cor 11:7.

Again you deny scripture       

No individual man is in the image of God as I have said and the bible says in Genesis is man in the image of is man and woman united as one which will happen at Christs return.

Quote
      The Holy Spirit is divine and from heaven. If God were to cease so would the Holy Spirit, and so would God's rule. Your millennium theory of a Sabbath rest for God is scriptural nonsense. The Sabbath was instituted in respect of the end of creation specifically (Gen 2:2) and not linked to his salvific work       

The bible states categorically that God will rest when man in his image is created this will happen when Christ returns for his bride this is man in Gods image.

Quote
       Sounds mormon to me. Again not sanctioned by scripture: just meta theory on your part           

I take it from that answer you don't have one.

We have a command to kill but its through baptism this is how we are to kill the unbeliever so that can be reborn into the body of Christ and have eternal life.

Love and Peace
Dave

Online eik

  • Awarded Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 300
  • Gender: Male
  • Welcome our New Member
Re: Murder,kill,destroy
« Reply #116 on: April 12, 2021, 09:50:23 AM »
Hi eik
Thank you for your reply you said

I keep telling you I don't do grammar I just believe what the bible says without dissecting every word and changing them.
The bible is ambiguous in its English form. It can be read in different ways. That's why we need to do grammar, and why you need to do grammar if you posit a controversial interpretation. Mere ambiguity doesn't give anyone the right to start creating  their own theories. In any case, many ambiguities are removed by checking for internal consistency. It is clear as daylight from 1 Cor 11:7, that "image of God" is of application to a singular man to the exclusion of women, directly controverting your attempt to define it as applying to "mankind" in only a collective sense and including both sexes.

It is also the case, if you look in the concordances, that the same Hebrew word can and often is translated in different ways according to the best sense of the translator. This includes Adam. What you're getting in the KJV is the translator's best sense, but sometimes it is seen to be not the best sense by future generations. I don't necessarily say that "man" was the best word to use for Adam, just because it is inherently ambiguous as to what the Hebrew conveys. I think sometimes Adam is being used as a proper noun or name, comparable with Eve, and so Adam which is the Hebrew word could have been transliterated into the English proper name "Adam" 

If you look at the first few chapters of Genesis, Adam is usually referring to the one man called "Adam." But if you then look at other uages of "Adam" beyond the Adam and Eve story, then the context can become wider to include more than one man, i.e. the descendants of Adam, collectively called Adam. So it makes sense to see in the initially reference to Adam being the one man called Adam, created in the image of God, and then later references to Adam, to the one man Adam and all of his descendants, being also God's people.

I do agree that the context does define the meaning of Adam in the Hebrew to an extent, but what you seem to be suggesting is that Adam can only ever mean "all men." I don't believe you can make this out of a singular Hebrew noun, or the context of Gen 1 and  2.

In English "man" can mean "mankind," which today usually includes womankind, but in the KJV "mankind" also means "any and all males" to the exclusion of womankind. So even in English there is a high degree of ambiguity in the usage of both "man" and "mankind" which we should not try to pretend is unambiguous or exploit for personal reasons.


I don't insist on anything I just give my opinion of how Gods word speaks to me
As for Hebrew I don't understand and if God wanted us to understand his word in Hebrew every one would speak it and not be reliant on academics.

What you fail to grasp is man in the image of God is man and woman joined as one as we will see when Christ is united with his bride.
I don't accept it. It is clear contrary to 1 Cor 11:7. You mistake English ambiguities for biblical meaning.

As for being a communist I have never been and will never be I have no political preference and would prefer it if you refrained from accusing me of such.
I wasn't stating your politics, but the nature of your theology. The bible distinguishes between the male and the female, between the collective and the individual. These distinctions have to be maintained, and not subject to a kind of theological anamorphosis as is the currect trend in pseudo-Marcionite theological circles, and amongst liberal theologians whom are invariably socialist (i.e. communist) in theology and well as in politics.

So you are the only one who can interpret the scriptures and is always right the you give a quote from Romans that has nothing to do with the RC church you add words to scripture that aren't there.
What Paul is speaking about is the body of believers who are the body of Christ.
The body of Christ is called Israel in the bible. That is orthodox apostolic teaching.

I never said that what I did say was Israel was the first Adam of this creation that began with Noah.
There was a Adam before the flood who was destroyed in the flood and then we have Christ the last Adam so all told there are 3 Adams.
No. There is only one Adam, because "Adam" is always singular. It has no plural. It means "Adam and his descendants." What is meant by the unique phrase "last Adam" is Adam in respect of being a divinely appointed potentate to rule God's kingdom, as e.g. the high priests were deemed to be, and also certain Israelite rulers such as David and his mighty ones. The OT is a history of potentates set up by God to rule his kingdom on earth. So "last Adam" directly opposes the claims of the Pope to be vice-regent of Christ on earth. Christ was the "last Adam," the last ruler of the kingdom of God on earth, the last high priest.

No individual man is in the image of God as I have said and the bible says in Genesis is man in the image of is man and woman united as one which will happen at Christs return.
What you state is not what you prove. You have to prove what you say, otherwise why should we believe you?

The bible states categorically that God will rest when man in his image is created this will happen when Christ returns for his bride this is man in Gods image.
I disagree. The state of God's rest was only not entered due to disobedience. The Israelites never did get around to fully obeying God in the OT. There is nothing to prevent anyone from obeying God today.

Heb 4:11 "Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one will perish by following their example of disobedience."

If we can't enter God's rest due to it being a future event, then for what purpose was Heb 4:11 written? As Christ said the "kingdom of God is within you." Luke 17:21.

I take it from that answer you don't have one.
I don't have to give an answer to
Quote
" would take 7 days including Gods sabbath each day would be 1000 years long at the end of 6 days Christ would return for his bride the church and we would have the end of the creation man in the image of God and God would rest and hand everything over to Christ and at the end of the 7th day Christ would hand everything back to the Father who would begin a new creation."
as it is meta theory, the sort of thing that cults go in for; and I've no idea where you got this from, or what its provenance is. I'm not interested in what can't be proved, just because it is not provable, and I can't find it in any of my orthodox bible commentaries. If you can't prove it, why ask me to credit it? You don't have the benefit of a reversed standard of proof, just because you've read the bible a bit in a foreign tongue not the original biblical language. This kind of thing is what the JWs are renowned for.

We have a command to kill but its through baptism this is how we are to kill the unbeliever so that can be reborn into the body of Christ and have eternal life.
That's quite true, but we do not love our brother by seeing him being led into sin and standing idly by.

Offline davetaff

  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 3427
  • Gender: Male
  • New :God is Love
Re: Murder,kill,destroy
« Reply #117 on: April 12, 2021, 04:15:01 PM »
Hi eik
thank you for your reply but I have this very silly idea that God actually loves us and wants us to know who he is what he has done what he is doing and what he will do in the future.
when Christ came into the world it was the poor and uneducated that understood and believed him the academics of his day crucified him the English bible or any bible in any language is good enough for his purpose if not all bibles would be printed in Hebrew or Greek.

1Co 11:7  For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.        

I keep saying this the only man in scripture is Jesus Christ.

Heb_1:3  Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;         

This is said of no other only Christ.

Quote
The body of Christ is called Israel in the bible. That is orthodox apostolic teaching     

Rom_11:17  And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;     

that the church is Grafted into Israel's tree it not in dispute

 
Quote
No. There is only one Adam, because "Adam" is always singular. It has no plural. It means "Adam and his descendants." What is meant by the unique phrase "last Adam" is Adam in respect of being a divinely appointed potentate to rule God's kingdom, as e.g. the high priests were deemed to be, and also certain Israelite rulers such as David and his mighty ones. The OT is a history of potentates set up by God to rule his kingdom on earth. So "last Adam" directly opposes the claims of the Pope to be vice-regent of Christ on earth. Christ was the "last Adam," the last ruler of the kingdom of God on earth, the last high priest.     

sorry eik but the first Adam was destroyed in the flood the next Adam Israel was destroyed when the killed our Lord and the last Adam Jesus Christ will live forever

Quote
What you state is not what you prove. You have to prove what you say, otherwise why should we believe you?     

Eph_5:31  For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.

 Gen_2:24  Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.   


So man and woman joined as one is the image of god.

Quote
as it is meta theory, the sort of thing that cults go in for; and I've no idea where you got this from, or what its provenance is. I'm not interested in what can't be proved, just because it is not provable, and I can't find it in any of my orthodox bible commentaries. If you can't prove it, why ask me to credit it? You don't have the benefit of a reversed standard of proof, just because you've read the bible a bit in a foreign tongue not the original biblical language. This kind of thing is what the JWs are renowned for.     

Everything I say comes from the bible its the story of creation from Genesis in a different time frame a day for a 1000 years as confirmed by St Peter
the end of creation is Man in the image of God and the only one who fits the bill is Jesus Christ at his second coming.
The bible proves everything I say but you seam to want the word of man I keep telling you I have not got it from anyone its how Gods word speaks to me and to me it makes perfect sense may be its to simple for you sorry about that.

We don't need the bible in its original language any language is good enough otherwise everyone would have to learn Hebrew Greek and Aramaic would the God who loves us make life so difficult that hardly anyone could understand his word must we be totally dependant on academics to understand what God has to say.

Love and Peace
Dave

Online eik

  • Awarded Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 300
  • Gender: Male
  • Welcome our New Member
Re: Murder,kill,destroy
« Reply #118 on: April 12, 2021, 08:08:36 PM »
Hi eik
thank you for your reply but I have this very silly idea that God actually loves us and wants us to know who he is what he has done what he is doing and what he will do in the future.
when Christ came into the world it was the poor and uneducated that understood and believed him the academics of his day crucified him the English bible or any bible in any language is good enough for his purpose if not all bibles would be printed in Hebrew or Greek.
That's a good point, but he also told the poor this: James 3:1 "Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly."

Just because you believe, or you think you believe, doesn't give you any automatic right to teach the word of God. That has to come from a special calling. Eph 4:11 "And it was He who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers."

And then some were given none of these things, but perhaps are just plain Christians. Exactly what education do you have personally?

Why do you think that someone who refuses to make the effort to understand the ancient languages and their grammar is qualified to teach theology, but not even conventional theology, but the theology that is not even found in bible commentaries written by people who do understand the ancient languages?

1Co 11:7  For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.         

I keep saying this the only man in scripture is Jesus Christ.
Paul was instructing the Corinthian church, not Jesus Christ, and speaking of those in the Corinthian church.

Heb_1:3  Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;         

This is said of no other only Christ.
Exactly so, but that doesn't stop man being in the image of God to a lesser degree.

Rom_11:17  And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;     

that the church is Grafted into Israel's tree it not in dispute

sorry eik but the first Adam was destroyed in the flood the next Adam Israel was destroyed when the killed our Lord and the last Adam Jesus Christ will live forever
Not found in the bible. Noah and his sons were not destroyed.

Eph_5:31  For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.

 Gen_2:24  Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.   


So man and woman joined as one is the image of god.
That's a mormon teaching, that man and woman are spiritually united, for the bible only knows of a flesh union. Genesis 2:24. Mormonism had its origins in the occult.

Everything I say comes from the bible its the story of creation from Genesis in a different time frame a day for a 1000 years as confirmed by St Peter
Peter did not say one day = one thousand years. He said it is like a thousand years. μία ἡμέρα παρὰ κυρίῳ ὡς χίλια ἔτη. You seem to have overlooked the preposition "ὡς" which means "as." One day is "as" a thousand years. It's just a figure of speech. You extend it to the point of absurdity, in exchanging 1000 years every time you see "day" in prophecy.

the end of creation is Man in the image of God and the only one who fits the bill is Jesus Christ at his second coming.
Christ at his second coming is nowhere stated to appear as a man.

The bible proves everything I say but you seam to want the word of man I keep telling you I have not got it from anyone its how Gods word speaks to me and to me it makes perfect sense may be its to simple for you sorry about that.
If you're so clever, then why do so many bible commentaries not take the same point of view as you? Show me one that does.

We don't need the bible in its original language any language is good enough otherwise everyone would have to learn Hebrew Greek and Aramaic would the God who loves us make life so difficult that hardly anyone could understand his word must we be totally dependant on academics to understand what God has to say.
The trashing of intellectuals is the kind of thing that cults do. All cults spring from enthusiasts who generally have very limited academic training and think that the word of God can be bent to their own persuasion. That is why the JWs, the Closed Brethren and many given over to elaborate meta narratives or just plain enthusiasm are seldom people who make a worthwhile contribution to overall advancement of faith in the nation, despite spending so much of their lives on their own peculiar doctrines. And if they do evangelize, they tend to preach enslavement to doctrines, not freedom because of their doctrines. Doctrine that brings intellectual enslavement is not Christian.Gal 4:26 "But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother."

The Closed Brethren became side tracked by dispensationalism, and by their exclusivity, their letters of recommendation etc, and the JWs by false prophecy as well as by inherent theological heresies.

I feel that your own doctrinal teaching is preaching enslavement to a particular point of view, where it is hard and demanding and rigid and frankly of no provenance in the 2000 year old history of the church, and wierd also, because I've never heard of it before in decades of online discussion, I fear for you that you are setting yourself up to fail.

Offline davetaff

  • Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 3427
  • Gender: Male
  • New :God is Love
Re: Murder,kill,destroy
« Reply #119 on: April 13, 2021, 02:06:07 PM »
Hi eik
Thank you for your reply you said

Quote
     That's a good point, but he also told the poor this: James 3:1 "Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly       

I have said before I do not intend to teach anyone what I am here for is to discuss Gods word with like minded and hopefully help one another to understand God's word.

Quote
      Just because you believe, or you think you believe, doesn't give you any automatic right to teach the word of God. That has to come from a special calling. Eph 4:11 "And it was He who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers     

All the teachers we need are found in scripture I don't believe we need anymore.

Quote
     And then some were given none of these things, but perhaps are just plain Christians. Exactly what education do you have personally     

I left secondary modern school aged 15 if that answers your question.

Quote
     Why do you think that someone who refuses to make the effort to understand the ancient languages and their grammar is qualified to teach theology, but not even conventional theology, but the theology that is not even found in bible commentaries written by people who do understand the ancient languages     

Like I  have said I don't think the God who loves us would make life so complicated English is good enough.

Quote
    1Co 11:7  For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.         

I keep saying this the only man in scripture is Jesus Christ.

Paul was instructing the Corinthian church, not Jesus Christ, and speaking of those in the Corinthian church       

And the church is the woman the bride of Christ his helper as Eve was Adam's helper not hard to understand.

Quote
      Heb_1:3  Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;         

This is said of no other only Christ.

Exactly so, but that doesn't stop man being in the image of God to a lesser degree           

There is no lesser degree Christ is the end of creation man in the image of God as stated in Heb 1-3

I never said Noah and his family were destroyed there were saved through the flood so That God cold finish his creation.

Quote
     That's a mormon teaching, that man and woman are spiritually united, for the bible only knows of a flesh union. Genesis 2:24. Mormonism had its origins in the occult     

Maybe the Mormons are right  about this you seam to enjoy putting down other Christian groups.

What Peter said was

       But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
2 Peter 3:8 ESV
https://bible.com/bible/59/2pe.3.8.ESV     


As I see it Peter Peter gave this as a fact not as a figure of speech  he said for a very important reason.

I am not trying to trash intellectuals the problem I have is there are so many of them dissecting every word of scripture and giving different interpretations that ordenary people can't make head nor tail of the bible.
We have all the teachers we need in the bible we don't need any more.
Like I have said many times before we need to get back to what God says in his word not what men say including me.

Love and Peace
Dave
https://bible.com/bible/59/2pe.3.8.ESV

Welcome to the Biblical and Theology Section of 1Faith

[Raise a Debate] @ 1faith

Your post will be answered shortly

Raise a Debate - by posting bait !
 


SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal