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.
Much could be argued and debated on these sacrifices; there are many verses in scripture that paint a much deeper understanding; I noticed like me you’re using all of Bible to prove your point; and that is how it works. Little to do with the context of the verse; not to say there are valid points in Genesis; but for a total picture do not limit truth to some man made law of context. I think Cain did the best he could do with what he had. Cain became wroth unto God only after his sacrifice was not acceptable; that is where the sin was. The Levitical priest could not wear wool; which speaks of sweatSome People assume that Cain's sacrifice of fruit was defiecient because it did not involve the shedding of blood, which God required for forgiveness of sins (Heb.2:22). But nothing in ch. 4 indicates that Cain and Abel came to God forgiveness; their sacrifices were acts of worship. In the later sacrificial system of israel, God Blessed the presentation of grain offerings alongside the sacrfices of animals (see Leve. 6:14-23). A farmer presented a portion of his produce just as a herbsman presented a sample of his flock. Cain's sacrifice was deficient because Cain did not "do well" (V.7), not because the sacrifice was the "fruit of the ground." Abel's sacrifice was the best that he had to offer--the firstborn and their fat. There are no similar descriptive words for Cain's sacrifice. That is, Cain brought a token gift of his produce to the Lord, but Abel brought the very best. God respected or looked with favor first upon the person, the on his sacrifice (see Ps. 40:6-8). Abel's offering was "more excellent" than Cain's because of Abel's faith in the Lord (Heb. 11:4).
Fine. Dancingurl54 nailed it IN context. Cain and Abel, "in the course of time" brought offerings to the Lord (Genesis 4:3). Without doubt, they were doing this because God had revealed it to them. It is clear that the offering was to be a substitutionary atonement, because we read in Hebrews 11:4, "By faith Abel offered God a better sacrifice than Cain did." When Abel came for worship, it was by faith that he brought his offering, "fat portions from some of the first-born of his flock" (Genesis 4:4). The Lord looked with favor on Abel and his offering, and it was accepted.No actually the spirit of truth not your theological hermeneutics is suppose to lead and guide you into all truth.
To prove you are right about context; explain why Cain sacrifice was not acceptable to Gods and Abels was IN CONTEXT???????
1 Corin 2:9
However, as it is written: "No eye has seen, no ear has heard, no mind has conceived what God has prepared for those who love him"[2] -- 10 but God has revealed it to us by his Spirit.
11 The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the man's spirit within him? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God.
12 We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us. 13 This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words. 14 The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15 The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man's judgment:
Fine. Dancingurl54 nailed it IN context. Cain and Abel, "in the course of time" brought offerings to the Lord (Genesis 4:3). Without doubt, they were doing this because God had revealed it to them. It is clear that the offering was to be a substitutionary atonement, because we read in Hebrews 11:4, "By faith Abel offered God a better sacrifice than Cain did." When Abel came for worship, it was by faith that he brought his offering, "fat portions from some of the first-born of his flock" (Genesis 4:4). The Lord looked with favor on Abel and his offering, and it was accepted.
His brother Cain brought "some of the fruits of the soil as an offering to the Lord" (Genesis 4:3). But on Cain and his offering the Lord did not look with favor. We do not know how He expressed His rejection, but it was evident. In Jude 11, we read, "They have taken the way of Cain," referring to lawless men. This may mean that they, like Cain, disobediently devised their own ways of worship, they did not come by faith. Cains offering, while acceptable in his own eyes, was not acceptable to the Lord. The result was that Cain became very angry, and later, in the field, he killed his brother Abel (Genesis 4:8).
Why did Cain kill Abel? It was premeditated murder, caused by anger, jealousy, and pride. John wrote, "Do not be like Cain, who belonged to the evil one and murdered his brother. And why did he murder him? Because his own actions were evil and his brothers were righteous" (1 John 3:12). The evil in his heart was further revealed when the Lord asked Cain, "Where is your brother Abel?" "I dont know," he replied. "Am I my brothers keeper?" (Genesis 4:9). The Lord brought a curse on Cain, and he went out from His presence.
The use of typology in explaining Cain and Abel sacrifices simplifies the understanding but you still have to take each chapter in context to arrive at a proper answer.
On a different note, your use of 1 Cor 2:9-15 to attempt to prove some kind of point (I am not sure what you are saying) needs some added explanation.
Brother Benini,No actually the spirit of truth not your theological hermeneutics is suppose to lead and guide you into all truth.
Maybe all your all hearing is your religionBrother Benini,
Over the past week or so, you've disagreed with me, chilehead, Hentenza and Dancingurl54.
Is the Holy Spirit confused? Or is it that you are the only one of us who listens to the Holy Spirit?
Maybe. Or could it be you?Maybe all your all hearing is your religion
Sorry I disagree; especially when it comes to the NT; so often Paul or John would refer so often to the OT as types and shadows. Take the simple word signified in Revelation one. The whole Bible is divine; instead of pulling these answer from some long dead church leader; what is so bad about looking in Gods Word to answer the deep questions of Gods Word.
Revelations 1:1
The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:
This one little word is so reverent to the whole book Revelations; signified or signs and symbols. The Book Revelations can only be understood not as a book of prophecy, or literally; but as a very deep and awesome spiritual book by using signs and symbols that can only be found in the Bible.
Example:
The lamp stand was a piece of furniture that was in the Tabernacle in the wilderness as well as both temples. Like all the furniture in the temple there was always a much deeper and awesome meaning. I am just going to touch on a few thought I thought were interesting. So often God hides his glory from carnal man by types, shadows, parables, mysteries and hidden manna.
Lamp stand was made by beaten gold; that is the craftsman would literally beat the gold to desired shape. It takes heat and fire to purify many different precious metals; gold (Devine life); silver (redemption); brass (judgment); iron (will) and many other precious stones that are found in our earth; One Biblical exception is a pearl; the only jewel that comes from life.
1 Corinthians 3:15
If any man's work shall be burned, he shall
suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.
The lamp had seven staffs attached to one staff; symbolic of seven spirits of God in Isaiah 11:2; but one God. Isaiah 11:2. Fire comes from the Greek word pur which we get our English word pure, purify, purge and purgatory and is symbolic of the purging power of Holy Spirit.
Everyday the priest would have to immerse the lamp in olive oil (symbolic of Gods anointing) and light the lamp with fire.
Then the light was placed in the Holy Place for light. The first court or the outer court had no lamp but was lit by the sun by day; but at night there was no lamp. The Holy of Holies also had no lamp either; for Gods Glory would be all the light it needed on the day of atonement.
1 Corin 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for examples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world (age) are come.
Who's pulling answers from some long dead church leader? Have I given you the impression that my answer came from some cookie cutter theology?
Let me give you some flash news. The HS guides me just as much as it guides you.You might want to attempt to explain that little detail that you are overlooking.
You are again going on a tangent with scripture regarding the pur and beaten gold. What does that have to do with the discussion?
Maybe. Or could it be you?
Mmmm.... so you have no religion and/or no preconceived bias but you reject ALL religion. How can you reject all religion and at the same time have no preconceived bias? How can you find the real spiritual church if you reject all churches? How do you know that your rejection is not biased? How do you know that rejecting all churches is not simply an act of bias?I do not know; where do you get your belief; could you be wrong and could you be open enough to admit you are wrong? I have no religion or preconceived bias; I reject all religion. I believe there is a real spiritual Church; I also believe there are also carnal churches, intercultural churches, and intellectual churches and the list goes on. God is a spirit not a brain. BUT what does the Bible say how God choices his anointed?
The bible is clear that Jesus established a church. Are you willing to ignore that fact by rejecting all churches because they are mainly man made religion?
No, David was chosen by God. Read 1 Samuel 16.David was king; He was Gods anointed King; not like Saul who was also anointed by God; but chosen by the people; like many ministries in the church (little c) realm today. David was one of those special people God called, anointed and was anointed as child. Todays ministry is chosen by men. I have found men of God that I know anointed by the deepness of their understanding not because they have been voted in or out by some church committee. David walked for many years and knew He had an anointing; but he kept it to himself and understood that Saul was Gods anointed; that is until the appointed time. I think we are better off to wait for God to anoint Gods chosen vessel then to anoint our own. Also let us not forget Solomon who was also anointed of God; but because of his marring and turning his heart to false idols he became corrupt. Reminds me of all the different religions out there that man has married into; there is only one way; Christ with in.
If you say that today's ministry is chosen by men, aren't you limiting the HS? Are you making the judgment that ALL of today's church leaders are NOT called by God into His service?
The debate here is about did God cause the sin or little innocent Adam. There is no way Adam could do something as big as the sin of man which caused billions to fall into sin and death with out Gods total sovereign will. I have Romans 8 on this; explain that Gods Word is not limited by some human concept of context. I have been trying to show you where context has little to do with scripture.
Context has everything to do with scripture. Heresies are spun from folks that assume incorrect context of scripture. This has been historically proven through out the centuries.
The Word of God has to be read in context. Any other way is twisting His Word into whatever human sinful nature wants it to say and the fastest way to false teachings. Satan is very much alive and well and still is the author of confusion.
I found fifty verses in the New Testament speaking of the new; not the old not the worn out wine skins; but new; here are thirty of those 50 that speak of the new. Is God Old; or is He New; no He is eternal; that is why God desires us to seek the new wine or revelation and not place them in the old wine skins of religion and tradition. I understand that many of you love the old traditions and you limit God to those traditions; but God is speaking by revelation not tradition.
You merely found 50 verses that contain the word "new". Hardly proof. Again, prooftexting verses out of context is just twisting scripture to fit your beliefs. You should try it the other way around.
As far as traditions, as long as they are scriptural how can you deny them? Are you not in fact then limiting revelation by limiting God itself?
Of course David was chosen by God that was my point; Saul was chosen by the people. Why am I limiting the Holy Spirit, I just showed you a spiritual pattern in the OT that just shows you how God has even ordained Baby-lon; which had nothing to do with context. I mean God anointed both David and Saul; BUT because of the peoples spiritual immaturity God let the people choose Saul; and God blessed there choice; just like Baby-lon (God uses Baby-lon)Mmmm.... so you have no religion and/or no preconceived bias but you reject ALL religion. How can you reject all religion and at the same time have no preconceived bias? How can you find the real spiritual church if you reject all churches? How do you know that your rejection is not biased? How do you know that rejecting all churches is not simply an act of bias?
The bible is clear that Jesus established a church. Are you willing to ignore that fact by rejecting all churches because they are mainly man made religion?
No, David was chosen by God. Read 1 Samuel 16.
If you say that today's ministry is chosen by men, aren't you limiting the HS? Are you making the judgment that ALL of today's church leaders are NOT called by God into His service?
Context has everything to do with scripture. Heresies are spun from folks that assume incorrect context of scripture. This has been historically proven through out the centuries.
The Word of God has to be read in context. Any other way is twisting His Word into whatever human sinful nature wants it to say and the fastest way to false teachings. Satan is very much alive and well and still is the author of confusion.
You see the ideal way was let the Holy Spirit choose His anointed; big difference between Saul’s kingship and David’s.
I reject religion; I never said I reject the Church. Which one of the thousand of religion do you call the true church? I have had nothing to do with any religion in over thirty years, and never will have ever again. God is calling thousands of us out of baby-lon.
Isaiah 4
1And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man,
saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let
us be called by thy name, to take away our reproach.
Now that is what religion is all about.
What does the word Church mean? It is a Greek Word “ecclesia” which simply means the called out. There is a true Church and a false Church; Baby lon is the false church; while the true Church is not a building, a system, denomination but Christ with in us, the hope of Glory.
Jeremiah 51:7 Babylon hath been a golden cup in the LORD's hand, that made all the earth drunken: the nations have drunken of her wine; therefore the nations are mad.
God uses Baby lon as shown by the verse above; but there is so much more.
Rev 18:4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues. (KJV)
Actually what I believe in has nothing to do with preconceived bias; it has to do with progressive truth; or present truth.
Wherefore I will not be negligent to put you always in remembrance of these things, though ye know them, and be established in the present truth.
Present truth; in other words as the truth is revealed you move with it.
The reason there are many denominations are for two main reasons; spiritual growth and being opened for truth; as well as spiritual immaturity and closing your spiritual understanding. A choice between hearing God; or hearing man and his tradition; men of God like Luther had a revelation and walked in it; but instead of being opened for more they built their denominational walls made of the hardest material on this earth carnal reasoning, religious dogma, etc.
I show you fifty verses and you call it twisting scripture; attually what I showed you was a scriptural pattern or example.You merely found 50 verses that contain the word "new". Hardly proof. Again, prooftexting verses out of context is just twisting scripture to fit your beliefs. You should try it the other way around.
As far as traditions, as long as they are scriptural how can you deny them? Are you not in fact then limiting revelation by limiting God itself?
1 Corin 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for examples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world (age) are come.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?