Was There a Pre-Adamic Race?

[squint]

Sad to say, however, there were apparently people listening to the hate preachers and embracing what they were saying. Yep, it works both ways:

"Whites" preaching death to the "blacks"...

"Blacks" preaching death to the "whites"...

Whatever happened to "Love thy neighbor as thyself"?

What a mess!

You may want to board the freight train that shows the more HIS WORD is pronounced, the exponentially worse the world gets.

That is in fact the end game laid out for us.

In staying with the context of this thread, that kind of being GIANTS, and maybe them being pre-Adamic,

Do you think God loved Goliath?

After all you DID cite this:

"Love thy neighbor as thyself"

As you seem to know, whenever we 'invoke' that in our lives, we are usually quickly confronted on 'how' to live that out by various forms of enemies. I could bore with personal details, but you get the picture...

s

 

[bornofGod888]

Agreed. Funny how we leave out the brown which is really the color we are all different shades of.

Yeah, it simply all goes back to the level of melanin which we possess.

I'm out the door...

 

[bornofGod888]

You may want to board the freight train that shows the more HIS WORD is pronounced, the exponentially worse the world gets.

That is in fact the end game laid out for us.

In staying with the context of this thread, that kind of being GIANTS, and maybe them being pre-Adamic,

Do you think God loved Goliath?

After all you DID cite this:

"Love thy neighbor as thyself"

As you seem to know, whenever we 'invoke' that in our lives, we are usually quickly confronted on 'how' to live that out by various forms of enemies. I could bore with personal details, but you get the picture...

s

Why would we even consider that the giants were "pre-Adamic" when Genesis 6 tells us exactly where they came from?

Anyhow, God commands us to not only "Love thy neighbor as thyself", but Jesus taught us to "Love our enemies" as well.

Gotta run...

 

[squint]

Why would we even consider that the giants were "pre-Adamic" when Genesis 6 tells us exactly where they came from?

That's kind of an aside isn't it?

I have no problem accepting that there is a factual historical record of human like beings older than the 6,000 literal years commanded by the literalists. And I might even consider that those who are blocked by literalism to a 6000 year old human race are somewhat ignorant in that sight based on hard evidence to the contrary. And I'd also consider that the text itself does not demand that kind of conclusion, of a 6,000 yr. old creation.

so there...

Anyhow, God commands us to not only "Love thy neighbor as thyself", but Jesus taught us to "Love our enemies" as well.

Gotta run...

aw, you missed the best question...

DID GOD LOVE GOLIATH?

???

s

 

[Fireinfolding]

That's kind of an aside isn't it?

I have no problem accepting that there is a factual historical record of human like beings older than the 6,000 literal years commanded by the literalists. And I might even consider that those who are blocked by literalism to a 6000 year old human race are somewhat ignorant in that sight based on hard evidence to the contrary. And I'd also consider that the text itself does not demand that kind of conclusion, of a 6,000 yr. old creation.

so there...



aw, you missed the best question...

DID GOD LOVE GOLIATH?


s

Feel free to answer your own question since we pretty much know by now that you put forth a question so you can answer it for us

 

[squint]

Feel free to answer your own question since we pretty much know by now that you put forth a question so you can answer it for us

It's a question. Don't make anything more of it than what it is.

Yes, I DO believe God loved Goliath and in fact loves ALL of His Creation.

Fair enough?

 

[Rev Randy]

I can't say a pre-adamic man makes much sense when I consider what Adam means. But this does not mean I'm joining the 6000 year Scofield club.

 

[Fireinfolding]

It's a question. Don't make anything more of it than what it is.

Yes, I DO believe God loved Goliath and in fact loves ALL of His Creation.

Fair enough?

Then you have your answer, it doesnt say God hated Goliath in that similitude, but Esau so its not one that can be directly answered in the same way, had you of asked of Esau then a verse could be thrown up answering that more directly.

So if someone else saw a link somewhere in the later (in this case Goliath) and said otherwise to what you have stated in the end (as seems always the case) the question put forth in ALL CAPS followed by the a typical ??? Shows itself typically when when another is discusted and challenging another to answer what is set forth already, or nothong more then a question coming out of nowhere just to bait for argumemt on what the other believes when you dont really have a sincere question, because you just answered your own question.

So the best question already has the best answer, which is the one you provided, and anything contrary to it would be wrangled over for the next 20 pages

 

[Rick Otto]

 

[squint]

Then you have your answer, it doesnt say God hated Goliath in that similitude, but Esau so its not one that can be directly answered in the same way, had you of asked of Esau then a verse could be thrown up answering that more directly.

I believe God loved both Esau and Goliath, but that both men were used by God to show us more interesting things about ourselves.

So if someone else saw a link somewhere in the later (in this case Goliath) and said otherwise to what you have stated in the end (as seems always the case) the question put forth in ALL CAPS followed by the a typical ???

Caps, colors, who cares?

People who pick at caps and colors are only dancing around the content.

Shows itself typically when when another is discusted and challenging another to answer what is set forth already, or nothong more then a question coming out of nowhere just to bait for argumemt on what the other believes when you dont really have a sincere question, because you just answered your own question.

Inferring ones own imagination of things when they see caps and colors is kinda ridiculous isn't it? After all there are actually words, questions and observations to deal with instead.

So the best question already has the best answer, which is the one you provided, and anything contrary to it would be wrangled over for the next 20 pages

No, you could simply say that God hates everybody that YOU think He hates.

I think it's a little more interesting, that's all.

I think God LOVED the GIANTS who lived on earth too.

s

 

[squint]

I can't say a pre-adamic man makes much sense when I consider what Adam means. But this does not mean I'm joining the 6000 year Scofield club.

If you discount the literalist timeline that is insisted on for Adam, that being generally 6000 years as we understand years, then you are not a strict literalist.

I can't honestly accept the literalist interpretation of human history and believe that an intelligent approach is not against faith.

So when we stack up fossil records and try to claim that neanderthals lived only 6000 years ago or less we come off looking like baboons.

s

 

[Rev Randy]

If you discount the literalist timeline that is insisted on for Adam, that being generally 6000 years as we understand years, then you are not a strict literalist.

I can't honestly accept the literalist interpretation of human history and believe that an intelligent approach is not against faith.

So when we stack up fossil records and try to claim that neanderthals lived only 6000 years ago or less we come off looking like baboons.

s

With striped fannies.

 

[squint]

With striped fannies.

or, wait for it...

ruddy behinds...

 

[Rev Randy]

or, wait for it...

ruddy behinds...

You made me choke on my coffee.

 

[Fireinfolding]

Squint this mobile device leaves me no room under your post to reply. Caps or colors arent really the issue generally because you know full well I use them.

You know full well what I am talking about, your too intelligent to play dumb and pull it off.

The giants were still after the days of the flood obvioudly, whether God loved them as equally as Esau is never really brought up directly as they were being wiped out in various places

wheres the verse God loves Esau?

Dont you constantly quote Satan cometh an taketh away the word?

You will say its a similitude on the one hand, then ask a question about God loving Goliath and say contrary to the scripture according to the similitude that God loves Esau verses God hated Esau, but now loves (not only Esau) but Goliath, all the while reminding folks God spake in similitudes, but speak contrary to how the scriptures speak of them. But copy paste endlessly how Satan taketh away the word, all the while not staying with how the word is written.

Dont get me wrong squint, weve known each other before we posted here, and more then familiar with each others postings, and I do agree with you on some things, other things no, just like with everyone here, theres things I agree with and disagree with.

But honestly, you didnt really have a question needing an answer, doesnt say God loved Esau anymore then it says God loved Goliath. Unless theres a verse which says God loves the giants more then he hated Esau? And jump out of the patern found in scripture, while insisting it be kept.

Thats all ill say you can have the last word.

 

[YeShallTread]

It's a common argument put forward by those who have been listening to false teachers preaching their "White Adam" theology.

-CryptoLutheran

That "racism" thing was what I first warned about. It is ALWAYS used to deny the truth of this topic....ALWAYS.

The racism ploy is "a common argument put forward" by those who can't deal with truth. They fall for the...oh my gosh, I must be a racist to consider that the Israelites were ruddy white people. Silly but there it is.

So, I ask again....what's the big deal if Adam and his line are white? Are you a racist?

 

[YeShallTread]

Hi folks...
I received the following by PM. The messenger doesn't want to post it publicly on the forum so I'm going to throw it in here for those who want to respond to it's contents ... and I'll watch... lol:



That the blood of all the prophets, which was shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation; Luke 11:50From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation. Luke 11:51

Abel was the first to die even as we see in Genesis itself. Both Abel and Zacharias are real beings.

There is of course a great deal more to substantiate the literal reading of Genesis, not only from Scripture, but also history, archeology, etc.

1. Was Abel the first to die or was he the first in the Adamic line to die/be slain?

2. Was all mankind (created before Adam) a prophet for it is "the blood of all the prophets shed" that the Luke passage refers to?

 

[squint]

That "racism" thing was what I first warned about. It is ALWAYS used to deny the truth of this topic....ALWAYS.

The racism ploy is "a common argument put forward" by those who can't deal with truth. They fall for the...oh my gosh, I must be a racist to consider that the Israelites were ruddy white people. Silly but there it is.

So, I ask again....what's the big deal if Adam and his line are white? Are you a racist?

It is only interesting that this has been revealed as an important matter to you.

Fact is the color of a person's skin is irrelevant to their status in Gods Eyes, period.

I'm always surprised when people today have such beliefs attached to skin color.

too bad really. you seemed like such a nice person...

 

[Rev Randy]

That "racism" thing was what I first warned about. It is ALWAYS used to deny the truth of this topic....ALWAYS.

The racism ploy is "a common argument put forward" by those who can't deal with truth. They fall for the...oh my gosh, I must be a racist to consider that the Israelites were ruddy white people. Silly but there it is.

So, I ask again....what's the big deal if Adam and his line are white? Are you a racist?

No big deal if Adam was light, medium or dark. Preaching a white or black Adam, however could be a false teaching. It's a guess at best. If it turns out that he was this or that it changes nothing except perhaps some of our understanding of the word ruddy.

 

[YeShallTread]

It is only interesting that this has been revealed as an important matter to you.

Fact is the color of a person's skin is irrelevant to their status in Gods Eyes, period.

I'm always surprised when people today have such beliefs attached to skin color.

too bad really. you seemed like such a nice person...

I am a nice person. I detest the way some deflect teaching by grabbing onto silliness. I didn't offer the "ruddy" remark until asked...I believe asked by you??? It doesn't matter but it is what it is. Adam and his offspring Jesus were of one line. We are told that was a ruddy line and so it is.

If it doesn't matter then why do some harp on the truth of the matter?

The world has grown so PC they can't even say someone is white without thinking...oh my gosh, someone will think I'm a racist to say that.


So, we should just put that aside and deal with facts, facts about the truth of mankind being on earth before the formation of Adam. Or, someone can wallow around in what doesn't matter until the pigs in the mud....fly. Or, in your previous case...until cows tip over?