• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Gospel of Christ Not Possible in TE Doctrine?

Status
Not open for further replies.

gluadys

Legend
Mar 2, 2004
12,958
682
Toronto
✟39,020.00
Faith
Protestant
Politics
CA-NDP
scripture please which supports this idea. all of scripture talks about Jesus coming to save the Humans who were lost in their sin. the rest of their creation does not have that choice granted to them

Of course, no choice is given to what cannot choose to sin. But Paul connects the subjection of creation to futility and decay with the fall of humanity (not as a cause-but as a decree of God) and the release of creation from that bondage with the revealing of the sons of God. Romans 8:19-23
 
Upvote 0

mindlight

See in the dark
Site Supporter
Dec 20, 2003
14,330
3,032
London, UK
✟1,021,389.00
Country
Germany
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married

Understood but personally i think it takes more faith to be a TE and more effort to justify the position, while being a YEC is actually quite simple.
 
Upvote 0

artybloke

Well-Known Member
Mar 1, 2004
5,222
456
66
North of England
✟8,017.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Politics
UK-Labour
YEC is nothing but pure fantasy and self-deception, as can be seen from the initial post, with its blatant misuse of a passage from Malachi that has no bearing on the creation story except as some allegorical interpretation of a passage from a story.

Yes, you do have to be simple to be a YEC.
 
Upvote 0

gluadys

Legend
Mar 2, 2004
12,958
682
Toronto
✟39,020.00
Faith
Protestant
Politics
CA-NDP
Understood but personally i think it takes more faith to be a TE and more effort to justify the position, while being a YEC is actually quite simple.

One need only have faith the size of a mustard seed to be saved, so the simple position of YEC will certainly be sufficient for salvation. But the one who has greater faith is saved too, n'est-ce pas?
 
Upvote 0

Assyrian

Basically pulling an Obama (Thanks Calminian!)
Mar 31, 2006
14,868
991
Wales
✟42,286.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Thank you for your post.
I would like to direct you to Scriptures in context to show why Malachi 2:15 is speaking of the first ish and ishyah [one Adam kind, made male and female],
The words ish and ishyah are common Hebrew words for male and female or man and wife. Is there any reason these terms refer back to Adam and Eve rather than the husband divorcing the wife of his youth that Malachi is talking about?

Again you probably see some deep significance in the etymology, but is there any reason to think the word is not simply being used as the Hebrew word for residue rather than a reference back to Adam and Eve. The word is never even used in connection with Adam and Eve.

Difficult verse that, usually translated as the Lord forms the spirit of man within him. In fact it looks like you had change the AV there from formeth the spirit of man to formeth the spirit of Adam. It is the Hebrew word adm, but it certainly isn't clear it should be translated Adam here rather than man.

When you say all Adam is one spirit, are you using the name Adam as standing for the human race, or all of 'Man'? Because that is how I think Adam is used in Genesis too, it is the story of God creating the human race and our sinning and falling short of his glory.

Really don't know what you are saying here.
 
Upvote 0

Assyrian

Basically pulling an Obama (Thanks Calminian!)
Mar 31, 2006
14,868
991
Wales
✟42,286.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
It is sad, made perhaps a bit easier by Paul's statement that there must be factions in the church. I think the most important part is how we treat those we disagree with. To paraphrase our Lord, If we just love those who agree with us, what good is that?

As I mentioned to ysm in another post, I think the problem comes when we try to build up a theology of the gospel. In a very real way this is something we should do, and it is made easier by the way the OT is full of pictures pointing forward to Christ and the Cross. The problem comes when the theology of the gospel we have built up runs into someone who reads those OT passages differently. The temptation is to think they are rejecting the gospel itself rather than our own limited and flawed understanding.
 
Upvote 0

Assyrian

Basically pulling an Obama (Thanks Calminian!)
Mar 31, 2006
14,868
991
Wales
✟42,286.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Does the OT ever refer to Adam as ben elohim? I know it come up in Luke, in the genealogy, it is not presented as part of an explanation of the gospel. Yet you see Adam being ben elohim as fundamental to the gospel.

The Gospel of Christ is about the Atonement of the Kinsman Redeemer for the seed of the fallen, former ben Elohym, Adam.
To my understanding, the seed was about the redeemer, not the other way round, that the seed was to be redeemed. Paul seems to take a similar view with the seed of Abraham, pointing out that seed is singular referring to Christ rather than referring to many. Gal 3:16 Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He doesn't say, "To seeds," as of many, but as of one, "To your seed," which is Christ.

When was Adam ever in the assemblies of the (angelic) sons of God? It was God who walked with him in the Garden.

 
Upvote 0

yeshuasavedme

Senior Veteran
May 31, 2004
12,811
779
✟112,705.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Miscommunication there: the Seed is the Redeemer/Kinsman of the dead husband of earth. The Kinsman/Redeemer is the Atonement. He is the Propitiation. His New Man body is the True Mercy Seat typed by Moses; and His blood is the Sin offering offered on the true Mercy Seat. His Living Spirit [which He committed to God when He gave up the Spirit] is the "Ram chosen for YHWH"; and His soul [His New Man Person] is the Ram chosen "for Azazel", who had all the sins and iniquities of the whole world [of the entire age of this present creation], laid upon it by the Father, when He hung upon the cross [Isaiah 53], which soul was then "sent away", to take those sins He bore; "to Azazel".
Azazel is wrongly translated "scapegoat" in the English, because the English translators were descended from those western men in Rome who had long ago "sent away" the book which explained the "foundation" of the meaning of the goat chosen on the Day of Atonement, "for Azazel"; when Azazel, -the fallen Watcher bound under the rock "in the wilderness"- would be given all the sins and iniquities which were confessed over the "elected" goat, on the day of Atonement; which goat would then be sent away "to Azazel", taking those sins and iniquities, "to Azazel", and giving them to him. Azazel is doomed to bear the torments and punishments of them in the lake of fire forever.

That is why one who comes to Jesus confesses their sins to Him and believes that He bore them for them and took them away; left them where He took them; rose from the dead without them; and lives forever. That is why the one who believes, repents, and confesses, will never suffer the punishments of those confessed sins and iniquities; and that they will never be brought up to him by YHWH, ever. -then of course that one who believes is baptized in water in obedience to Jesus, to show their faith in the Hope of the Gospel; which is the resurrection of the body in the image of the New Man.


That is what the signs/the living oracles committed to the namesake people of the New Man name [Israel] teaches about His Person and His Work.
The Goal of the Schoolmaster was to bring us -whosoever will- "to" Christ. No one could get into the Holy of Holies but the High Priest who served in the office of Christ, as a living oracle, by the "Anointing of the Oil", which oil represented the Living Spirit/Christ.

Rom 3:25 Whom God hath set forth [to be] a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
[set forth/protithēmi:
1) to place before, to set forth
a) to set forth to be looked at, expose to view
b) to expose to public view
1) of the bodies of the dead
2) to let lie in state


propitiation/hilastērion:
1) relating to an appeasing or expiating, having placating or expiating force, expiatory; a means of appeasing or expiating, a propitiation
a) used of the cover of the ark of the covenant in the Holy of Holies, which was sprinkled with the blood of the expiatory victim on the annual day of atonement (this rite signifying that the life of the people, the loss of which they had merited by their sins, was offered to God in the blood as the life of the victim, and that God by this ceremony was appeased and their sins expiated); hence the lid of expiation, the propitiatory
b) an expiatory sacrifice
c) a expiatory victim





1Jo 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for [the sins of] the whole world.
propitiation /hilasmos
1) an appeasing, propitiating
2) the means of appeasing, a propitiation



Lev 16:8 And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats; one lot for YHWH, and the other lot for Azazel.
The goat for Azazel has hands laid on him, and all the sins and iniquities of the people of God confessed over him, and is sent away, to Azazel, bearing those sins and iniquities. -http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Lev&c=16&v=10&t=KJV#conc/10





Psa 22:1-Psa 22:31
Mat 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?



Hbr 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.
 
Upvote 0

yeshuasavedme

Senior Veteran
May 31, 2004
12,811
779
✟112,705.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
He was made to ascend to and sit upon the throne of Glory in the heavenlies, when the Royal assemblies were called. He would have, too, if he had passed the test. He would have always represented his seed there. He died in the fall and never ascended to that throne.
You can read about that throne in Enoch, which the Son of Man will sit upon and rule the kingdom from.
Satan wanted that throne. He had a certain "light bearer" all "pumped up" to believe that he could take it, too [Isa 14:13-14 ; and possibly the same Cherub as Eze 28:13-15:].
But Jesus ransomed the earth and got the right to it, though, as the "Son of Man".

We who are redeemed are waiting for the call for our time of assembly in the heavenlies, when we will be gathered to Him at the time of the "laqach"/rapture of us, to be with Him where He is, and we will be rewarded with thrones of glory to sit upon, by Him. -the theme of redemption "back", is "for the Glory".
 
Upvote 0

yeshuasavedme

Senior Veteran
May 31, 2004
12,811
779
✟112,705.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The words ish and ishyah are common Hebrew words for male and female or man and wife.
Actually, the sexual term for male and female is zakar and nĕqebah;. Genesis 1:27; Gen 5:2; and so on and so forth.
The words ish and ishyah first appear in Genesis 2:22,23. YHWH Elohym took a rib from Adam and built an ishyah for Adam. Adam called her "ishyah" for she was taken out f the ish.
IN vs 24, then, an Adam ish shall leave his 'ab and 'em and be joined to his Adam ishyah; they are one/echad basar/flesh/. one kind.

In Hosea 2 YHWH is "not the Ish" of Israel; but then in the same chapter He says that they will call Him "My Ish" when they are brought back and restored to Him, as "His Ishyah".

The "Church" is the Ishyah of Christ. She is personified as Zion of the Spirit; the heavenly Jerusalem; the mother of all the redeemed; the City of God; and she is the one in whom the second Man was "laid" as the Chief Cornerstone of the second temple called "human being".

Being joined to the Living Spirit and being the Ishyah of Christ belongs to the namesake people of the New Man name, "Israel".
All the redeemed are joined to that One Livng Spirit, who is come in flesh, and are joined by the adoption, which is called being "born again"; and which adoption "pertains to Israel" but is offered to all Gentiles [Isaiah 49], and made possible to all Adamkind only by the blood of Atonement, offered once for all, by the Kinsman/Redeemer.
Is there any reason these terms refer back to Adam and Eve rather than the husband divorcing the wife of his youth that Malachi is talking about?
Malachi makes the purpose of marraige a sacred and holy thing from the beginning, when He made them [the male and the female] one/echad, because he sought sons of God =godly seed, for Himself, by that making of the male and female Adam "one" spirit. Marraige itself is for God's purpose of getting the sons of God of the human being kind by the multiplication of the seed created in the loins of the male Adam.
Of course, there is the pleasure of the company that He designed for those who were joined together to do His will and multiply the seed. And of course since the fall, all the seed of the 'em are born dead and are not sons of God.
But they must come forth as they are already written in the Book of Life to be sons of God. But now they come forth needing to be born again into the New Man name to be sons of God. But that is how He now gets the sons He sought for His Glory to indwell, when He made them male and female, in the beginning, and one spirit.
 
Upvote 0

yeshuasavedme

Senior Veteran
May 31, 2004
12,811
779
✟112,705.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Back to the OP-
In TE, there is no creation of Adam as the human being son of God, whose body was formed on day six -days of six evenings and six monings- from the dust of the adamah [ground].
In TE, there is no "Adam son of God" whose body was made in the image of God. -In fact; made in the image of God the Word, who was to come [Romans 5:14].
In TE there is no fall from the glory indwelling the Adam as a human being son of God, and no corruption entering the world [globe] as a direct result of the fall of it's "god", the human being called Adam.

In TE, there is not a fall of Adam and of his dominion, but there is a continous ongoing upward struggle to advance to some state of eternal godhood.

TE has no need for the Gospel of Savlation in the New Man name, because there is no fall of the old man Adam and so no first death entering the world at that fall of Adam.
TE there is no corruption entering Adam's dominion because of that fall, but there is a world corrupt from the beginning, filled with nothing good and glorious, but only of that which is evil and debauched.
 
Upvote 0

gluadys

Legend
Mar 2, 2004
12,958
682
Toronto
✟39,020.00
Faith
Protestant
Politics
CA-NDP

A strange mishmash of misinformation about TE and some rather disturbingly unorthodox theology.

Perhaps it is because creationists affirm the scientific validity of their reading of scripture--and even re-interpret scripture (a la juvie) to incorporate modern science, they assume TEs read evolution into scripture. But that is just what we don't do. Assuming a revelation accommodated to the cosmology of the time, that is what we read in scripture: we don't try to turn evolution into a theology.

But we can trust our creationist brethren to try and do it for us, with exactly the erroneous results seen here.


In TE, there is no creation of Adam as the human being son of God, whose body was formed on day six -days of six evenings and six monings- from the dust of the adamah [ground].

Generally speaking we would see this, as all of the creation story in chapters 2-3 as imagery. But it is still imagery of something real: namely the real creation of humanity by God. And many TEs hold to the creation of a particular human couple who were our first parents.

In TE, there is no "Adam son of God" whose body was made in the image of God. -In fact; made in the image of God the Word, who was to come [Romans 5:14].

That the human body is the image of God is unfortunately a growing modern heresy (and a violation of the 2nd commandment). No material thing is an image of the invisible God who, as Jesus reminds us, is Spirit. For 2,000 years Christians (and Jews for even longer) have clearly taught that the image of God is not a bodily image.

Of course, we still believe that humanity was created in the image of God, but the image of a spiritual Being is necessarily itself spiritual.


In TE there is no fall from the glory indwelling the Adam as a human being son of God, and no corruption entering the world [globe] as a direct result of the fall of it's "god", the human being called Adam.

Sorry, but you are just plain wrong on this one ysm. Most TEs do hold to the doctrine of the fall and of original sin.

What bothers me most is the reference to Adam as a "god". Even in quotation marks it raises the spectre of Mormonism. Adam was created a man, not a god.


In TE, there is not a fall of Adam and of his dominion, but there is a continous ongoing upward struggle to advance to some state of eternal godhood.

This is a typical misunderstanding of evolution as a struggle to achieve a higher status on the Great Chain of Being. That is a false concept of evolution.

TE has no need for the Gospel of Savlation in the New Man name, because there is no fall of the old man Adam and so no first death entering the world at that fall of Adam.

Sin occasions a need for salvation, and Christian TEs agree fully with the biblical doctrines on sin and salvation.

TE there is no corruption entering Adam's dominion because of that fall, but there is a world corrupt from the beginning, filled with nothing good and glorious, but only of that which is evil and debauched.

I do not know on what basis one would describe a world prior to the fall as "evil and debauched". Until humanity sinned, the world was described by its Maker as "very good".

For that matter, I do not know of any scripture which describes the non-human world as "corrupt" even after human sin. Certainly it was no longer a place where humanity felt at home. It resisted human attempts to cultivate the soil, producing thorns and thistles along with grain. Paul describes it as having been subjected to futility and decay. But there is no scriptural description I am aware of that says the natural world is corrupt. Only humanity has experienced the corruption of sin.
 
Upvote 0

yeshuasavedme

Senior Veteran
May 31, 2004
12,811
779
✟112,705.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
 
Upvote 0

Assyrian

Basically pulling an Obama (Thanks Calminian!)
Mar 31, 2006
14,868
991
Wales
✟42,286.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Certainly that is God's plan for us, to be seated together with Jesus Christ in the heavenlies Eph 2:6. I suppose you could read that back into the story of Adam and say he was meant to have taken his seat there too. But that is not a point the bible makes, so it is hard to claim the rejection of your inference here is a rejection of some fundamental aspect of the gospel.

However Paul, was talking about God's plan from before the foundation of the world, for those chosen in Christ and predestined for every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places. Even if Adam is one of the redeemed, God's plan, from before the foundation of the world for him to be seated in the heavenly places, was only after he had been redeemed and raised up by Christ.

Actually, the sexual term for male and female is zakar and nĕqebah;. Genesis 1:27; Gen 5:2; and so on and so forth.
Very true. I was thrown by Gen 7:2 Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female. But that is the only verse that translates ish and ishyah that way. But the point remains ish and ishyah are the common hebrew words for man and wife.

You find that allegorical reading of Genesis in Eph 5:31 "Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." 32 This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. 33 However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband. However just because Paul find a deep allegorical significance, a profound mystery, in the picture of husband and wife in Genesis, it does not mean every time the bible speaks of husband and wife it is talking about Adam and Eve or Christ and the Church. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Malachi was talking about a husband divorcing the wife of his youth, and how much God hates divorce, what basis is there to think God 'making one' refers to Adam and Eve, rather than the man divorcing his wife and destroying the covenant bond?

The passage does not even address the husband as iysh, but speaks to him in the second person, Mal 2:14 ...the LORD was witness between you and the wife of your youth, to whom you have been faithless, though she is your companion and your wife by covenant. It can't even be a picture of Yahweh husband of Israel, because it is the husband who is unfaithful, and in the Yahweh/Israel picture, the husband is Yahweh. The Lord is speaking to men who divorce their wife (ishya) even though 'God has joined them together' Matt 19:6.
 
Upvote 0

gluadys

Legend
Mar 2, 2004
12,958
682
Toronto
✟39,020.00
Faith
Protestant
Politics
CA-NDP

I will comment on corruption later. For the moment let us consider death.

It is an incontrovertible fact that bacteria, protists, fungi, plants and animals died before humans ever existed.

It is a matter of controversy whether the biblical comments on death apply to anything other than humans. And even whether the death which entered human existence with sin was natural death or spiritual death.

So what are we to do with the fact that natural death occurred prior to the existence of humanity? For some, the answer is obvious: clearly the bible must be wrong on this point and so it is not a trustworthy document--we may as well forget it.

But that is not the position evolutionary creationists (TEs) take. We believe in the inspiration, authority and truthfulness of scripture. So we don't chuck out the bible. We go back to it and study it and try to determine what it really says about death.

I believe this question is fundamentally linked with what scripture tells us about creation, and that the fact of natural death of non-human species before humanity's existence is not a theological problem, nor in contradiction with what scripture says about death and sin.



Even the TE-ist think God gave an evolved souless beast which was subject to death and corruption, a soul, and called that beast with soul "Adam" -but that is heresy indeed, for all animals that breathe are souls. [/B]

You don't have an accurate view of what evolutionary creationists believe. I cannot, by a long shot, speak for all of on this point, and I expect there are actually many different views. But I agree with you. I agree that all animals that breathe are souls. The theory of evolution in no way contradicts this theology.

Furthermore one of the pioneers in thinking about evolution theologically also agreed with you--and even went further. Pierre Teilhard de Chardin believed that every scrap of material existence was the outer expression of an inner spiritual existence. IOW, not just animals that breathe, but plants that breathe (for plants do respire as animals do) and all unicellular creatures, and even molecules and atoms and quarks are, in a sense, souls. All have a spiritual as well as a material aspect.

Of course, whether or not one can speak of non-human and even non-living things as being souls is mostly a matter of how one defines "soul".

May I also congratulate you on speaking in terms of being a soul rather than having a soul. A much preferable way of understanding the body-spirit relationship.

So, while I can't speak for everyone, there is no inherent conflict between evolution and your viewpoint on the nature of a soul and who/what is a soul. The theory of evolution does not require that pre-humans be "soulless beasts" in the sense you are using the term "soul".



The "adamah" that all beasts were brought forth from and from which Adam's flesh body is formed was and is cursed. Whatever comes of that Adamah from that time is defiled and subject to decay/corruption
decay is corruption.

But the ground was not cursed when they were created. Nor does scripture say that Adam's body or any animal body was cursed. Further it specifies the nature of the curse on the ground: that it would now require labour on Adam's part to bring food from it (can't just pick fruit from trees any more) and that it would produce unwanted plants--thorns and thistles as well as grain, vegetables and herbs.

The curse described in the story of the fall says nothing about decay being a curse or part of the curse.





If his body was immune to corruption, it wouldn't matter if it was buried for 72 years. But scripture doesn't say his body was immune to corruption. It says he was raised from the dead and Peter confirms that the Psalmist was referring to the resurrection.

Rom 8:21 Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.


So, the KJV uses "corruption" where most translations use "decay". And actually the most common meaning of the Greek 'phthora' is "perishable" which is still more neutral.

We have to be careful not to read back modern connotations into old texts. There are a few places where 'phthora' is used with the moral implications of "corruption" 2 Peter 1:4 is one, where Peter refers to "the corruption [phthora] that is in the world because of lust".

But unless we have such an indication it is probably better to understand the KJV use of the term in a non-moral sense as referring to that which is impermanent. IOW, "corruption" should be given the same meaning as "phthora" not the modern meaning of "evil and debauched" which you attributed to it.



Scripture does not say that Adam's body is made in God's image.

making an image is not forbidden in the commandments

Making a material image of God is.



The Word of God teaches, only, that Adam is made in the physical image of God the Word


You are inserting the word "physical". That is not in the text of scripture. Not even when it refers to Jesus as "the express image of the invisible God".





There is no such doctrine of Adam's body formed from the adamah of this creation being made in some 'spiritual image of an unseen spirit"

Indeed not. Another reason not to consider the earthly body to be the image of God. Commentators have usually equated the "image of God" from the 1st creation story with the "breath of life" in the 2nd creation story, not with the body made from the dust of the earth.
 
Reactions: Mallon
Upvote 0

yeshuasavedme

Senior Veteran
May 31, 2004
12,811
779
✟112,705.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married

He was made to ascend to and sit upon the throne of Glory in the heavenlies, when the Royal assemblies were called. He would have, too, if he had passed the test. He would have always represented his seed there. He died in the fall and never ascended to that throne.
You can read about that throne in Enoch, which the Son of Man will sit upon and rule the kingdom from.
Satan wanted that throne. He had a certain "light bearer" all "pumped up" to believe that he could take it, too [Isa 14:13-14 ; and possibly the same Cherub as Eze 28:13-15:].
But Jesus ransomed the earth and got the right to it, though, as the "Son of Man".

We who are redeemed are waiting for the call for our time of assembly in the heavenlies, when we will be gathered to Him at the time of the "laqach"/rapture of us, to be with Him where He is, and we will be rewarded with thrones of glory to sit upon, by Him. -the theme of redemption "back", is "for the Glory".




 
Upvote 0

yeshuasavedme

Senior Veteran
May 31, 2004
12,811
779
✟112,705.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I will comment on corruption later. For the moment let us consider death.

It is an incontrovertible fact that bacteria, protists, fungi, plants and animals died before humans ever existed.
Bacteria, protists, fungi and plants are created spirits clothed with their own "houses" for the individuals multiplied in the kind to wear, but they are not living souls.
It is blasphemy to lie against the Word of God.
And the beginning of wisdom is the fear of YHWH. Job 28:28 And unto Adam he said, Behold, the fear of the Adonai, that [is] wisdom; ...Psa 111:10 The fear of YHWH [is] the beginning of wisdom:
To fear YHWH is to respect Him and His Word.
He elevates His Word above all His name. Psa 138:2 I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.

No animals died before Adam [the human being kind] existed, as YHWH Elohym made the animals with Adam, on day six. -The days of creation were exactly what days are today; In Genesis 1 an evening and morning ="one day". In Genesis 1 All the animals and Adam were made in one day which was day six of creation weeks evenings and mornings.


Gen 1:24 Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth the living creature according to its kind: cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth, each according to its kind"; and it was so.
Gen 1:25 And God made the beast of the earth according to its kind, cattle according to its kind, and everything that creeps on the earth according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:26 Then God said, "Let Us make Adam in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth."
Gen 1:27 So God created Adam in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.
Gen 1:28 Then God blessed them, and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth."
Gen 1:29 And God said, "See, I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food.
Gen 1:30 "Also, to every beast of the earth, to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given every green herb for food"; and it was so.
Gen 1:31 Then God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good. So the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

yeshuasavedme

Senior Veteran
May 31, 2004
12,811
779
✟112,705.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married


"Commentators equate"? -Ignorance by consensus does not make wisdom revealed. Your "commentators equations" then, are making all animals that breathe to be made in the image of God. Indeed; "professing themselves to be wise, they have become fools".
Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man [of] the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
Gen 6:17 And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein [is] the breath of life, from under heaven; [and] every thing that [is] in the earth shall die.
Gen 7:15 And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh, wherein [is] the breath of life.


"Stories" denigrates the Word of God. Gen 1 & 2 are accurate accounts of the one Creation and in no way make two "stories"

quote yeshuasavedme: Only Jesus' New Man body was not subject to corruption when He willingly gave His life for our redemption and departed His Glorious body and remained absent from it for three days and three nights [72 hours]; because "the prince of this world had nothing in Him" and so His body was not subject to corruption.

[/color][/b]Psa 16:10 For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.
Act 2:31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.
Scripture does indeed say His body of second Man creation was not subject to death and corruption. -And if He had not "taken it back up" it would never, ever, evwer, have decayed, for Satan "possessed nothing in Himf [in His flesh]", which death and corruption do have in "all" Adamkind. The Adam body is called "the body of death".
Jhn 14:30 Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me [has no legal right to my body].

He had Life to give for us because He was not a mortal human being until He willingly and freely gave His Life as our Ransom. If He had any corruption in His flesh or taint of mortality, then we are dead in our sins, because the Atonement was not Acceptable and final.
He tasted our mortality only when He had our sins and iniquities laid on His soul by the Father [Isaiah 53].
At that time, the Father turned from Him.
At that time, He tasted the death which the firstborn of our race,
Adam [our father], suffered in the day he ate the fruit; which death is separation from the Father of Glory.
When He departed His New Man body of flesh it served as the True Mercy Seat which Moses copied, as a shadow, for the Holy of Holies. That copy of the heavenly Mercy Seat was made of solid gold. The body of Christ is that True Mercy Seat, and after He departed it the blood of Atonement was sprinkled upon it. That Atonement was the Acceptable Sacrifice offered on the True Mercy Seat, which no body with corruption in it could ever be used for.

Jhn 10:17 Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again.
Jhn 10:18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again.

Mar 15:34 And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
Hbr 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

Jhn 1:4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

Jhn 11:25 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

gluadys

Legend
Mar 2, 2004
12,958
682
Toronto
✟39,020.00
Faith
Protestant
Politics
CA-NDP
Bacteria, protists, fungi and plants are created spirits clothed with their own "houses" for the individuals multiplied in the kind to wear, but they are not living souls.

Whether they are living souls or not, I couldn't say, but they are living organisms and they die. And many generations of them died before the creation of humanity.

"Commentators equate"? -Ignorance by consensus does not make wisdom revealed. Your "commentators equations" then, are making all animals that breathe to be made in the image of God. Indeed; "professing themselves to be wise, they have become fools".

Yes, I am actually dubious about that equation too. But the main point is that Christians, until about the last decade have always stood against equating "image of God" with bodily form. That we are like God in a special way is not disputed. But that the likeness is one of bodily form has always been firmly rejected.

That is why I call this new teaching--that it is in our bodily form that we are like God--a modern heresy. Why turn 2,000 years of consistent teaching completely on its head?

"Stories" denigrates the Word of God.

Who says? I don't find "story" to be a derogatory word. The bible is full of all kinds of stories. Jesus' primary method of teaching was story-telling. And he claims to do what he sees his Father doing. Stories are a wonderful method of teaching, especially when most of your audience is illiterate. Stories are vivid and memorable--an ideal way of making sure people remember the teaching in them.


I am not going to comment on anything else in your last two posts except to say that I see a great deal more of you in it than I do of scripture.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.