User Tag List

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 76

Thread: Things To Know

  1. #31
    Over 4000 post club 1Mind1Spirit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    4,579
    Thanks
    520
    Thanked 926 Times in 743 Posts

    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    569116
    Quote Originally Posted by Ask Mr. Religion View Post

    Some serious hermeneutical hopscotch is needed to deny the literal meaning of days in Exodus 20:11.

    The ordinance of the Sabbath is now doubtful if six days is not literal.


    AMR
    Who said it's not literal?

  2. #32
    LIFETIME MEMBER jamie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    11,181
    Thanks
    1,369
    Thanked 1,213 Times in 1,070 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    35 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    315279
    Quote Originally Posted by WeberHome View Post
    Hard-core Bible thumpers insist the days of creation were 24-hour calendar days in length; but scientific dating methods have easily proven that dinosaurs preceded human life by several million years. So then, in my estimation, the days of creation should be taken to represent epochs of indeterminable length rather than 24-hour calendar days.
    "Then God said, 'Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to divide the day from the night and let them be for signs and seasons and for days and years'" (Genesis 1:14)

    According to the celestial bodies how long does it take for the earth to make one revolution on its axis?

    According to the celestial bodies how long does it take for the earth to make one revolution around the sun?

    Are you sure science does not agree on these issues?

  3. #33
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Carmarthenshire
    Posts
    7,456
    Thanks
    147
    Thanked 712 Times in 630 Posts

    Blog Entries
    6
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    171978
    Quote Originally Posted by 1Mind1Spirit View Post
    When from 1999 till now was Christ fully formed in you?

    Did you feel like he was tryin' to trap yuh?
    Bearing in mind I'm not a Galatian and I was not converted under Paul's direct ministry. Then considering I was not approached by Judaizers insisting I be circumcised....what do you think?
    I know Him, correctly, as Messiah whom you call Christ. Yah Shua whom you call Jesus. Messianists who you call Christians.

    "Touch not mine anointed, and do my prophets no harm".

    I refuse, point blank, to speak peace to the unregenerate, hypocrites, religious dogma lovers and those that oppose the following statement:
    A regenerate man trusts in the evangelism of salvation conditioned on the atoning blood and imputed justness of Messiah alone.
    If you are fully persuaded, by experience, of this delightful, beautiful and life giving doctrine then I love you as a brother.

    Anyone who thinks that salvation is conditioned on anything a man thinks, does or says is atheist. I cannot and will not speak peace to him or her.

    I don't make statements online that I wouldn't repeat in front of my Maker, my grandmother or a judge.

  4. #34
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Carmarthenshire
    Posts
    7,456
    Thanks
    147
    Thanked 712 Times in 630 Posts

    Blog Entries
    6
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    171978
    Quote Originally Posted by nikolai_42 View Post
    Was it a used bible in which a previous owner stuck the article in looseleaf or a bible to which Lane contributed?
    This is a link to Amazon where they sell this particular Bible. It's also got the First Person quotes in red in the OT which is a superb quick reference.

    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Sword-Study...rd+study+bible
    I know Him, correctly, as Messiah whom you call Christ. Yah Shua whom you call Jesus. Messianists who you call Christians.

    "Touch not mine anointed, and do my prophets no harm".

    I refuse, point blank, to speak peace to the unregenerate, hypocrites, religious dogma lovers and those that oppose the following statement:
    A regenerate man trusts in the evangelism of salvation conditioned on the atoning blood and imputed justness of Messiah alone.
    If you are fully persuaded, by experience, of this delightful, beautiful and life giving doctrine then I love you as a brother.

    Anyone who thinks that salvation is conditioned on anything a man thinks, does or says is atheist. I cannot and will not speak peace to him or her.

    I don't make statements online that I wouldn't repeat in front of my Maker, my grandmother or a judge.

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to Truster For Your Post:

    nikolai_42 (September 11th, 2017)

  6. #35
    Over 500 post club WeberHome's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    577
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 44 Times in 37 Posts

    Blog Entries
    288
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    19301

    Post Re: Things To Know

    -
    Day And Night

    Gen 1:4b-5a . . God separated the light from the darkness. God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night.

    Day and Night simply label two distinct, and opposite, conditions-- the absence of light, and/or the absence of darkness. Defining those conditions may seem like a superfluous detail, but when analyzing the chronology of Christ's crucifixion and resurrection, it's essential to keep days and nights separate. When people attempt to define "day" as a twenty-four hour amalgam of light and darkness, they invariably come up with some rather convoluted interpretations of Matt 12:40.

    Gen 1:14 . . God said: Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to distinguish Day from Night

    On the first day; God defined Day as a condition of light; and defined Night as a condition of darkness. Here, it's further defined that Day, as pertains to life on Earth, is when the sun is up; and Night is when the sun is down.

    These definitions occur so early in the Bible that they easily escape the memories of Bible students as they slip into the reflexive habit of always thinking of Days as 24-hour events. That's okay for calendars but can lead to gross misunderstandings when interpreting biblical schedules, predictions, and/or chronologies.

    Gen 1:15-18a . . God made the two great lights, the greater light to dominate the day and the lesser light to dominate the night, and the stars. And God set them in the expanse of the sky to shine upon the earth, to dominate the day and the night, and to distinguish light from darkness.

    That passage not only defines "day" as when the sun is up, and "night" as when the sun is down; but it further defines night as when the stars are out; and yet people still don't think God means it.

    Christ defined Day and Night as they were practiced when he was here.

    John 11:9 . . Jesus answered: are there not twelve hours in the day? A man who walks by day will not stumble, for he sees by this world's light.

    "this world's light" is the sun; which Christ defined as "by day". So if Christ's "day" was defined as when the sun was up; then Christ's "night" had to be defined as when the sun was down.

    So then, when Christ predicted his death to last for three days and three nights, he obviously meant the hours of daytime and nighttime as they were understood when he was here rather than some other era otherwise the people in his own time wouldn't have known when to expect his crucified body to come back to life.

    NOTE: Daytimes divided into twelve divisions were regulated by what's known as temporal hours; which vary in length in accordance with the time of year. There are times of the year at Jerusalem's latitude when daytime consists of less than 12 normal hours of sunlight, and sometimes more; but when Christ was here; the official number of daytime hours was always 12 regardless.

    I don't know exactly why the Jews of that era divided their daytimes into twelve divisions regardless of the seasons, but I suspect it was just a convenient way to operate the government and conduct civil affairs; including the Temple's activities (e.g. the daily morning and evening sacrifices)

    /

  7. #36
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Carmarthenshire
    Posts
    7,456
    Thanks
    147
    Thanked 712 Times in 630 Posts

    Blog Entries
    6
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    171978
    Quote Originally Posted by WeberHome View Post
    -
    Day And Night

    Gen 1:4b-5a . . God separated the light from the darkness. God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night.

    Day and Night simply label two distinct, and opposite, conditions-- the absence of light, and/or the absence of darkness. Defining those conditions may seem like a superfluous detail, but when analyzing the chronology of Christ's crucifixion and resurrection, it's essential to keep days and nights separate. When people attempt to define "day" as a twenty-four hour amalgam of light and darkness, they invariably come up with some rather convoluted interpretations of Matt 12:40.

    Gen 1:14 . . God said: Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to distinguish Day from Night

    On the first day; God defined Day as a condition of light; and defined Night as a condition of darkness. Here, it's further defined that Day, as pertains to life on Earth, is when the sun is up; and Night is when the sun is down.

    These definitions occur so early in the Bible that they easily escape the memories of Bible students as they slip into the reflexive habit of always thinking of Days as 24-hour events. That's okay for calendars but can lead to gross misunderstandings when interpreting biblical schedules, predictions, and/or chronologies.

    Gen 1:15-18a . . God made the two great lights, the greater light to dominate the day and the lesser light to dominate the night, and the stars. And God set them in the expanse of the sky to shine upon the earth, to dominate the day and the night, and to distinguish light from darkness.

    That passage not only defines "day" as when the sun is up, and "night" as when the sun is down; but it further defines night as when the stars are out; and yet people still don't think God means it.

    Christ defined Day and Night as they were practiced when he was here.

    John 11:9 . . Jesus answered: are there not twelve hours in the day? A man who walks by day will not stumble, for he sees by this world's light.

    "this world's light" is the sun; which Christ defined as "by day". So if Christ's "day" was defined as when the sun was up; then Christ's "night" had to be defined as when the sun was down.

    So then, when Christ predicted his death to last for three days and three nights, he obviously meant the hours of daytime and nighttime as they were understood when he was here rather than some other era otherwise the people in his own time wouldn't have known when to expect his crucified body to come back to life.

    NOTE: Daytimes divided into twelve divisions were regulated by what's known as temporal hours; which vary in length in accordance with the time of year. There are times of the year at Jerusalem's latitude when daytime consists of less than 12 normal hours of sunlight, and sometimes more; but when Christ was here; the official number of daytime hours was always 12 regardless.

    I don't know exactly why the Jews of that era divided their daytimes into twelve divisions regardless of the seasons, but I suspect it was just a convenient way to operate the government and conduct civil affairs; including the Temple's activities (e.g. the daily morning and evening sacrifices)

    /
    A day was defined in 1st of Genesis. And the evening and the morning became the first day and so on. This was set in place before the sun and the moon along with the heaven host of stars were created...
    I know Him, correctly, as Messiah whom you call Christ. Yah Shua whom you call Jesus. Messianists who you call Christians.

    "Touch not mine anointed, and do my prophets no harm".

    I refuse, point blank, to speak peace to the unregenerate, hypocrites, religious dogma lovers and those that oppose the following statement:
    A regenerate man trusts in the evangelism of salvation conditioned on the atoning blood and imputed justness of Messiah alone.
    If you are fully persuaded, by experience, of this delightful, beautiful and life giving doctrine then I love you as a brother.

    Anyone who thinks that salvation is conditioned on anything a man thinks, does or says is atheist. I cannot and will not speak peace to him or her.

    I don't make statements online that I wouldn't repeat in front of my Maker, my grandmother or a judge.

  8. #37
    Over 500 post club WeberHome's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    577
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 44 Times in 37 Posts

    Blog Entries
    288
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    19301

    Post Re: Things To Know

    -
    The Image And Likeness Of God

    Gen 1:26a . . And God said: Let us make Man in our image, after our likeness.

    Because of the terms "image and likeness" there are some who believe that man's creator is a human being; or at least resembles one. But according to Christ, creation's God is non physical.

    "God is spirit" (John 4:24)

    Spirit isn't solid. (Luke 24:36-39)

    Moses instructed Yhvh's people to avoid making any kind of mannequin, figurine, totem pole, or statue representing God since no one has any true concept of what creation's God actually looks like in person. (Ex 4:10-19)

    There exists absolutely nothing in nature physically resembling its creator; except maybe the air in front of your face-- neither Man, nor beast, nor plant, nor bird, nor bug, nor reptile nor anything out in the void (Rom 1:21-23). Concepts that portray creation's God as a human being are purely fantasy. (Rom 1:25)

    Gen 1:26b . . let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.

    Humanity's right to dominate the earth is where we find its image and likeness of God. In other words: Man's image and likeness of God is all about sovereignty, power, control, and authority. (cf. Gen 44:18)

    The word for "rule" is from radah (raw-daw') and means: to tread down, i.e. subjugate; specifically: to crumble off.

    I saw a pretty interesting bumper sticker some time ago that went like this:

    We are not above the Earth;
    We are of the Earth.

    Well . . I respect the Native American cultural feelings behind that statement; and must admit that I agree with it whole-heartedly. But creation's creator decreed that though Man is of the earth; he is very definitely above it too, and has the God-given right to subjugate every living thing on the planet including its forests, its grasses, its rivers, its seas, its soil, its rocks, its air, its minerals, its mountains, its valleys, and even its tectonic plates and the earth's very atmosphere itself. And that's not the end of it. According to Heb 2:8, humanity is on track to take control of even more.

    /
    Last edited by WeberHome; September 13th, 2017 at 10:46 AM.

  9. #38
    Over 500 post club WeberHome's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    577
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 44 Times in 37 Posts

    Blog Entries
    288
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    19301

    Post Re: Things To Know

    -
    Big Daddy

    The Phylogenetic Tree Of Life is an interesting scientific diagram that traces all forms of life back to a singular genetic heritage regardless of species. In other words; if you started with a raccoon, and followed it's branch down the tree far enough, you'd eventually intersect with another branch that you could then trace to mushrooms. The tree is sort of the equivalent of a Big Bang of living things.

    The branch on that tree that interests me the most is the one that traces human life. According to the diagram; any two people you might select-- no matter what their age, race, or gender --if traced back far enough, can eventually be linked to a common ancestor; which of course is no surprise to Bible students.

    Gen 2:21-23 . .Yhvh God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh at that place. And the God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man. And the man said: This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.

    The Hebrew for "rib" in that passage is tsela' (tsay-law') and Gen 2:21-23 contains the only two places in the entire Old Testament where it's translated with an English word representing a skeletal bone. In the other twenty-nine places, it's translated "side"

    In other words: Eve wasn't constructed directly from the dust of the earth as was Adam. She was constructed from a human tissue sample amputated from Adam's body; ergo: Eve's flesh was derived from Adam's; consequently any and all human life produced by Eve's flesh is biologically traceable to Adam's flesh.

    Gen 3:20 . . Adam named his wife Eve, because she would be the mother of all people everywhere.

    Acts 17:26 . . He made from one man every variety of mankind to live on all the face of the earth

    It was apparently the creator's deliberate design that all human life be biologically related to a sole source of human life-- the one and only human life that God created directly from the earth's dust; viz: Adam.

    So then; it is not quite accurate to say that Christ didn't have a human father because if Christ was biologically related to his mother, and if his mother was biologically related to Eve, then Christ is biologically related to Adam just like everybody else.

    /

  10. #39
    Over 500 post club WeberHome's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    577
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 44 Times in 37 Posts

    Blog Entries
    288
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    19301

    Post

    -
    Why Adam Didn't Drop Dead

    Gen 2:15-17 . .The Lord God took the man and placed him in the garden of Eden, to till it and tend it. And the Lord God commanded the man, saying: Of every tree of the garden you are free to eat; but as for the tree of knowledge of good and bad, you must not eat of it; for in the day you eat of it, you shall die.

    That passage has always been an embarrassment for Bible thumpers because Adam didn't drop dead the instant he tasted the forbidden fruit. In point of fact, he continued to live outside the garden of Eden for another 800 years after the birth of his son Seth. (Gen 5:4)

    So; is there a reasonable explanation for this apparent discrepancy?

    Well; first off let me point out that in order for the threat to resonate in Adam's thinking; it had to be related to death as Adam understood death in his day, rather than death as the Bible thumpers understand it in their day. In other words: Adam didn't expect to die spiritually. No, he expected to die normally; viz: physically; like as in pass away.

    How can I be so sure that God meant normal death instead of spiritual death? Because according to Gen 3:19 that's how it worked out; and to make sure Adam stayed normally dead, God blocked his access to the tree of life. (Gen 3:22-24)

    Anyway; the trick is: Adam wasn't told he would die the instant he tasted the fruit. God's exact words were "in the day"

    Well; according to Gen 2:4, the Hebrew word for "day" is a bit ambiguous. It can easily indicate a period of time much, much longer than 24 hours' viz; the "day" of Adam's death began the moment he ate the fruit.

    That was a milestone in human history. Up till Adam tasted the fruit, the only days on record were the six of creation, and the one when God ceased creating. Adam inaugurated a new day by tasting the fruit-- the day of death.

    "Sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men" (Rom 5:12)

    Well; like Jack Palance's character Curly in the movie City Slickers said: "The day ain't over yet"

    Ecc 7:2 . . It is better to go to a house of mourning than to go to a house of gaiety, for death is the destiny of every man; the living should take this seriously.

    /

  11. #40
    Over 500 post club WeberHome's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    577
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 44 Times in 37 Posts

    Blog Entries
    288
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    19301

    Post Re: Things To Know

    -
    Why Everyone Has To Die At Least Once

    Prior to Moses an official code of divine law, containing lethal consequences, had yet to be issued.

    Rom 5:13-14 . . Before the law was given, sin was in the world. But sin is not taken into account when there is no law. Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam.

    The answer is: they all had to die not because of breaking an official code of divine law; but because of Adam breaking just one rule (Gen 2:16-17). His disobedience in the matter of the forbidden fruit effected his entire posterity: both the good and the bad; the young and the old.

    This is really difficult for some people to get their heads around. Nevertheless, it's very important to accept it whether one understands it or not because Paul applies this principle in his effort to explain why it is that believers never have to worry about being condemned for their sins. (Rom 5:12-21)

    NOTE: Opponents are often quick to point out that Ezek 18:20 says that children don't share their father's guilt. But hey, which came first? Adam or Ezekiel? So then, since Adam's incident came along many years before Ezekiel's prophecy, then God was at liberty back then to reckon Adam's posterity as joint principals in his act of disobedience.

    Rom 5:12 . . Sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin; and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned.

    "all sinned" has no reference to all's own personal sins; just Adam's, i.e. his sin became everyone's sin, even everyone yet to be born.

    /

  12. #41
    LIFETIME MEMBER jamie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    11,181
    Thanks
    1,369
    Thanked 1,213 Times in 1,070 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    35 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    315279
    Quote Originally Posted by WeberHome View Post
    And the Lord God commanded the man, saying: Of every tree of the garden you are free to eat; but as for the tree of knowledge of good and bad, you must not eat of it; for in the day you eat of it, you shall die.
    Adam was told he would die twice.

    A "day" can be defined as a thousand years.

    Jesus was on the cross for six hours.

    I take this to indicate a thousand years for each hour.

    In other words, six millennial days of salvation.

  13. #42
    Over 500 post club WeberHome's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    577
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 44 Times in 37 Posts

    Blog Entries
    288
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    19301

    Post Re: Things To Know

    -
    Why Cain Was Rejected

    Gen 4:2b . . Abel became a keeper of sheep, and Cain became a tiller of the soil.

    Both men worked at honorable professions and their skills were essential to the Adams' survival. Humans at this time were vegetarians so Cain farmed and raised the family's food; while Abel kept them clothed and shod by tending flocks for leather; and possibly fleece too.

    Gen 4:3-4a . . In the course of time, Cain brought an offering to The Lord from the fruit of the soil; and Abel, for his part, brought the choicest of the firstlings of his flock.

    There's no indication in this scene suggesting that the items they brought were sacrifices for sin. The Hebrew word for "offering" is from minchah (min-khaw') and means: to apportion, i.e. bestow; a donation; euphemistically, tribute; specifically a sacrificial offering (usually bloodless and voluntary).

    Since the offerings were minchah type offerings-- which are essentially gifts rather than atonements --it would be wrong to insist Abel slew his firstling and/or burned it to ashes. In point of fact, holocaust offerings are indicated by the word 'olah (o-law') instead of minchah; for example Gen 8:20 and Gen 22:2.

    Ancient rabbis understood the brothers' offerings to be a "first fruits" kind of oblation.

    T. And it was at the end of days, on the fourteenth of Nisan, that Kain brought of the produce of the earth, the seed of cotton (or line), an oblation of first things before the Lord; and Habel brought of the firstlings of the flock. (Targum Jonathan)

    Seeing as how Cain was a farmer, then in his case, an amount of produce was the appropriate first fruits offering, and seeing as how Abel was an animal husbandman, then in his case a head of livestock was the appropriate first fruits offering.

    I think it's safe to assume the brothers were no longer boys, but rather, responsible men in this particular scene because God treated them that way. This incident is not said to be the very first time they brought gifts to God. The brothers (and very likely their parents too), probably had been bringing gifts for many years; ever since they were of age. And up to this point, apparently both men were doing everything right and God was just as much pleased with Cain and his gifts as He was with Abel and his gifts.

    But where did they get this religion of theirs? Well; wasn't Abel a prophet?

    "Therefore this generation will be held responsible for the blood of all the prophets that has been shed since the beginning of the world, from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who was killed between the altar and the sanctuary." (Luke 11:50-51a)

    It's evident then that the offerings were a legitimate part of a God-given religion rather than a pagan ritual. (cf. Heb 11:4)

    Gen 4:4b-5a . .The Lord paid heed to Abel and his offering, but to Cain and his offering He paid no heed.

    The language and grammar of that verse indicate that God not only snubbed Cain's offering; but also Cain himself; so that his offering wasn't the only issue: Cain himself was an issue too.

    Cain was of a good family. He wasn't the product of poverty or an inner city barrio or dilapidated public housing. His mother wasn't cruel and/or thoughtless, nor did she neglect or abandon him. He wasn't in a gang, didn't carry a church key, a shank, an ice pick, or a gun; didn't smoke weed, drink, snort coke, take meth, gamble or chase women.

    Cain worked for a living in an honest profession. He wasn't a thief, wasn't a predatory lender, wasn't a Wall Street barracuda, a dishonest investment banker, or an unscrupulous social network mogul. He wasn't a cheap politician, wasn't a terrorist, wasn't on the take, wasn't lazy, nor did he associate with the wrong crowd. He was very religious and worshipped the exact same God that his brother worshipped, and the rituals he practiced were correct and timely.

    The man did everything a model citizen is supposed to do; yet he, and subsequently his gift, were soundly rejected. What?

    Well; for one thing; at this point in his life, in spite of appearances; Cain was actually impious. (1John 3:12)

    In what way was he impious? Well, my first guess would be friction between him and his brother. It is unacceptable to worship God while the worshipper's relationship with their brother is dysfunctional.

    "Therefore if you bring your gift to the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar, and go your way. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift." (Matt 5:23-24)

    Gen 4:5b-7a . . Cain was much distressed and his face fell. And the Lord said to Cain: Why are you distressed, and why is your face fallen? If you do what is right, will you not be accepted?

    Cain knew the drill; viz: it's conduct first and worship second. That can be readily seen played out in the first chapter of Isaiah where Yhvh's people are depicted practicing their God-given worship to perfection. They were attending Temple on a timely basis, praying up a storm, offering all the correct sacrifices and offerings, observing the Sabbath, and all the holy days of obligation. But God soundly rejected all of that because their conduct was unbecoming.

    Bottom line is: Abel and his offering were acceptable because Abel's conduct was acceptable; while Cain and his offering were unacceptable because Cain's conduct was unacceptable. So then, from Cain and Abel we learn that the key to acceptable worship is acceptable conduct. The two are joined at the hip; so to speak. And that being the case; I'd have to say that there are a number of Christians attending church every Sunday morning who really ought to stay home and not come back until they clean up the things in their lives that they know very well are rubbing God the wrong way.

    1John 1:5-6 . . This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth

    /

  14. #43
    LIFETIME MEMBER jamie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    11,181
    Thanks
    1,369
    Thanked 1,213 Times in 1,070 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    35 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    315279
    Quote Originally Posted by WeberHome View Post
    And that being the case; I'd have to say that there are a number of Christians attending church every Sunday morning who really ought to stay home and not come back until they clean up the things in their lives that they know very well are rubbing God the wrong way.
    Do you mean such as Sunday observance?

  15. #44
    Over 500 post club WeberHome's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    577
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 44 Times in 37 Posts

    Blog Entries
    288
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    19301

    Post Re: Things To Know

    -
    Why God Didn't Execute Cain For Murder

    Gen 4:12-13 . . If you till the soil, it shall no longer yield its strength to you. You shall become a ceaseless wanderer on earth. Cain said to the Lord: My punishment is too great to bear!

    Cain's punishment was relatively lenient. In point of fact, it wasn't punishment at all, it was discipline. It's true that Cain would struggle to survive; but at least he was allowed to live. His kid brother was dead. How is that fair?

    Q: How did Cain get off with only a slap on the wrist? Why wasn't he executed for murder since God himself mandates capital punishment for murderers as per Gen 9:5-6, Ex 21:12-14, Lev 24:17, Lev 24:21, and Num 35:31-34? Does God practice a double standard?

    A: Murder is intrinsically wrong, yes; and it's intrinsically a sin, yes; however; it hasn't always been a capital sin. According to Deut 5:2-4, Rom 4:15, Rom 5:13, and Gal 3:17, law enacted ex post facto is too late; viz: law can't be enforced until after it's enacted, not even divine law; which is precisely why God didn't have to execute Cain for murder.

    /

  16. #45
    Over 500 post club WeberHome's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    577
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 44 Times in 37 Posts

    Blog Entries
    288
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    19301

    Post Re: Things To Know

    -
    From Whence Cain Got A Wife

    Adam was created directly from the dust of the earth. Not so Eve. She was constructed from a human tissue sample amputated from Adam's body. In other words: Eve's flesh was biologically just as much Adam's flesh as Adam's except for gender; viz: Eve wasn't a discrete species of human life, rather; she was the flip side of the same coin.

    After God created Adam and Eve, He wrapped the work and has been on a creation sabbatical every since.

    According to the Bible, all human life thereafter came from Eve's flesh.

    Gen 3:20 . . Adam named his wife Eve, because she would become the mother of all the living.

    It was apparently the creator's deliberate design that all human life descend from a solo specimen.

    Acts 17:26 . . From one man He made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth.

    The Greek word for "nation of men" is ethnos (eth'-nos) which pertains to racial diversity.

    Bottom line: The flesh of Cain's wife descended from his mother's flesh.

    An even more convincing example of prehistoric incest is Noah and his three sons and their wives. Nobody else survived the Flood; ergo: Shem's, Ham's, and Japheth's children all married amongst themselves.

    Gen 9:18-19 . . Now the sons of Noah who came out of the ark were Shem and Ham and Japheth. These three were the sons of Noah; and from these the whole earth was populated.

    Obviously the human genome was very pure back in those days. The proof of it is pre-historic human life's amazing longevity-- Adam lived to be 930, and Noah to 950.

    Now as to the "sin" of incest; according to Deut 5:2-4, Rom 4:15, Rom 5:13, and Gal 3:17; God doesn't enforce His laws ex post facto: viz: they are not retroactive. So then, it would be a gross miscarriage of justice to prosecute pre-historic people for incest because it wasn't prohibited in their day; and wouldn't be until later in Moses'.

    /

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us