Where did life begin? (Merged)

[Orangeslice13]

I would still like to hear your thoughts on Isa 9:6.

Ok this is what I believe.
It’s the results of many years of thought pray and study.
If you think I’m nuts that’s ok.
If you think I’m wrong that’s ok.
If you whole heartedly disagree ......that’s ok.

My biases.
I’m of Jewish decent on my fathers side.
My father was an atheist most of my childhood. His beliefs are similar to mine. My mother was raised southern Baptist. She attempted to raise me that way. She is now more in line with my beliefs than that of her upbringing. My dads father who died before my journey began attended a Methodist church but kept the Jewish Feast’s. He talked to me as a child some but I was uninterested. I do know that his view on G-d was similar to what I’ve come to believe but I missed a real opportunity to learn from a great thinker because I was a stupid uninterested kid.

So......
To me it all starts with the name.
Naming is important to Jewish people.
For example I call Messiah by his Hebrew name.
I do not think anyone calling him Jesus is doing anything wrong. The power is in the guy not what you call him. However Yeshua means YHWH is salvation. And Jesus doesn’t mean anything. When you read the vs “and you shall call his name Yeshua because he will save his people from their sins” it adds meaning to an otherwise meaningless exchange.

I believe that Yeshua is the one and only begotten Son of YHWH. I believe that he was in Torah in both prophecy and as the angel of the lord.
In Exodus 23 we read this.

0 Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared.

21 Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him.

G-d says “his name is in him”
That’s significant in that the angle has the authority of G-d.

(1)

 

[Orangeslice13]

As the begotten of G-d he has the rights to all things of G-d. If G-ds name is in him it’s all his names and status. Yeshua was not created. He was begotten. And everything that he claims about himself is true.

He can say before Abraham was I Am and be absolutely correct that he has the exestance status without claiming to be YHWH. In fact he never claims to be YHWH. He claims to be the Actual Son of YHWH and Devine but never YHWH. He actually on several occasions clarified his position.
“Don’t cling to me because I haven’t ascended to my father and your father my G-d and your G-d”. Yeshua has a G-d. He said his power was of G-d and could do nothing of his own. He didn’t know the timing of the end only the father knows ect.

So when it comes to Isiah all those names attributed to Yeshua can be true threw inheritance without him being YHWH

(2)

 

[Orangeslice13]

We are presented with several visions and scenes in scripture where G-d and Yeshua are both present at the same place as separate beings the revelations “worthy is the lamb to open the scroll” is a classic example of this.

Throughout scripture greetings are addressed as Greetings from G-d and from Messiah whom he sent.

Example

1This is the revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show His servants what must soon come to pass. He made it known by sending His angel to His servant John, 2who testifies to everything he saw. This is the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Chris

And

And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

And finally in first Corinthians 15 we get this.
Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.

25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.

26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.

27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that He is excepted, which did put all things under him.

28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

In vs 27.
All things are put under Yeshuas feet. But all things doesn’t include He (G-d) who put all things under Yeshua.
Vs 28
The Son is subject to G-d so that G-d may be all in all



It’s reasonable to believe Yeshua is everything he claims and still realize that YHWH is his G-d.


Shalom

 

[JHuntVols]

This, of course, presupposes that the assertions made by Aquinas are correct.

We know objects bounded by three sides exist--their properties can be demonstrated through mathematical proofs. We have no way of demonstrating the truth of these assertions about the nature/properties of God or non-contingent entities.

The intention was to point out the incoherence of asking such a question when the definition of a triangle is presented and used in Euclidean geometry.

The obvious purpose of the Five Ways is to be a proof of God's existence. It's a proof that is no less logically certain than that of anything in mathematics; there is nothing special about putting an argument in mathematical terms. If the premises are true and the deduction correct, then the conclusions are certainly true. Certain here needs to be emphasized in the strongest use of the word, which is to say epistemologically certain.

I'm still not following how any of this precludes the possibility of the existence of necessary beings that are nothing like the one Aquinas defines, unless you presuppose the principles of causation as we know them are constant throughout spacetime.

You'd have to be a lot more precise in your question, especially when using the term "necessary," before I am able to confidently provide an answer to whichever meaning you assign to the term. In the context of providing an explanation of existence, then Aquinas goes into very detailed specifics of why his conception of a single God is the only logical possibility. That is because the relevant usage of the term "necessary" refers to metaphysical necessity, and his metaphysics immediately eliminates the possibility of "necessary beings." That again goes back to the pure actuality discussion in this thread.

Aquinas's principle of causality is fundamentally different from the modern formulation of causality you probably have in mind here when using the term. I'd be comfortable defending the premise that everything in this universe, which is what I'm presuming you mean by "spacetime", has a cause.

 

[BigO95]

We are presented with several visions and scenes in scripture where G-d and Yeshua are both present at the same place as separate beings the revelations “worthy is the lamb to open the scroll” is a classic example of this.

Throughout scripture greetings are addressed as Greetings from G-d and from Messiah whom he sent.

Example

1This is the revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show His servants what must soon come to pass. He made it known by sending His angel to His servant John, 2who testifies to everything he saw. This is the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Chris

And

And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

And finally in first Corinthians 15 we get this.
Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.

25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.

26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.

27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that He is excepted, which did put all things under him.

28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

In vs 27.
All things are put under Yeshuas feet. But all things doesn’t include He (G-d) who put all things under Yeshua.
Vs 28
The Son is subject to G-d so that G-d may be all in all



It’s reasonable to believe Yeshua is everything he claims and still realize that YHWH is his G-d.


Shalom

Thank you for the carefully explaining that to me. Now I at least have a little insight about what goes on in that messy little head of yours. 😁 Blue font intended from the word now of course.

 

[Orangeslice13]

Ecc 1:

9 What has been will be again,
what has been done will be done again;
there is nothing new under the sun.

Ecc 12: (conclusion)

13 Now all has been heard;
here is the conclusion of the matter:
Fear God and keep his commandments,
for this is the duty of all mankind.
14 For God will bring every deed into judgment,
including every hidden thing,
whether it is good or evil.


Shalom

 

[UT-Rex]

As the begotten of G-d he has the rights to all things of G-d. If G-ds name is in him it’s all his names and status. Yeshua was not created. He was begotten. And everything that he claims about himself is true.

He can say before Abraham was I Am and be absolutely correct that he has the exestance status without claiming to be YHWH. In fact he never claims to be YHWH. He claims to be the Actual Son of YHWH and Devine but never YHWH. He actually on several occasions clarified his position.
“Don’t cling to me because I haven’t ascended to my father and your father my G-d and your G-d”. Yeshua has a G-d. He said his power was of G-d and could do nothing of his own. He didn’t know the timing of the end only the father knows ect.

So when it comes to Isiah all those names attributed to Yeshua can be true threw inheritance without him being YHWH

(2)

slice,

read John 10:13 -- ""We are not stoning you for any good work," they replied, "but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.""

The very Jewish leaders who watched over everything Jesus did and said did not doubt who Jesus claimed He was, so you/we do not need to doubt either -- i.e. they recognized/acknowledged/ knew who He claimed to be.

Matt 1:20-23 -- "an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, "Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us (as a child / "mere man" per John 10:13 ^).""

 

[UT-Rex]

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigO95 View Post
LV it all boils down to this do you believe the Bible or not? Either it is God's word to live by or it simply is not.
I believe wholeheartedly it is words to live by!

so you ride an ass to work, don't eat pork, don't use any modern conveniences etc etc? Gone riding inside a literal whale? Talked to plants?

fwiw, even though you won't hear it, I do believe it is God's word to live by. I am not so worried about the letter of the word, just the spirit of it.

LV,

the fact that non-Jewish Christians are not required to refrain from eating pork, does not mean that Jonah was not literally in the fish.

The body of Jesus was in the tomb 3 days, and Jesus believed Jonah was in the fish -- "(and Jesus proclaimed) For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth" (John 12:40).

The "spirit of it" is, in part, proved by the signs and miracles.

 

[Orange_Crush]

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigO95 View Post
LV it all boils down to this do you believe the Bible or not? Either it is God's word to live by or it simply is not.
I believe wholeheartedly it is words to live by!



LV,

the fact that non-Jewish Christians are not required to refrain from eating pork, does not mean that Jonah was not literally in the fish.

The body of Jesus was in the tomb 3 days, and Jesus believed Jonah was in the fish -- "(and Jesus proclaimed) For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth" (John 12:40).

I've never understood that.

As a Christian, I believe Jesus died on a cross, lay dead in a tomb for three day in Jerusalem heat, rose again to life three days later... But a donkey talking to a prophet, or Jonah kept alive in a giant fish should be too much for me.

 

[UT-Rex]

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigO95 View Post
Tomb is still empty!
The Disciples of the Lord Jesus sealed it with their blood, thanks saw the resurrected Lord firsthand and died horrible deaths because they would not deny it.
We could only conclude that they were either lunatics or Jesus is the Risen Lord!!! 😀

Which is more likely: that they were lunatics, or that someone dead for three days came back to life?

How do you know the empty tomb is the one Jesus was buried in?

How do you know the disciples were given the opportunity to save their own lives by denying their beliefs?

How do you know the things about evolution/science -- by your own authority, or by what others have told you?

And, Who do you choose to believe, that which how you know?

"It is written" / they said it.

For example, It is written, that Thomas doubted that Jesus was then-alive/had risen from the grave, and it is written that Thomas then-touched the nail prints and pierced side, and it is written that he then-believed, and it is written that many (to come) will believe even though they do not physically touch.

 

[UT-Rex]

Quote:
Originally Posted by UT-Rex View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigO95 View Post
LV it all boils down to this do you believe the Bible or not? Either it is God's word to live by or it simply is not.
I believe wholeheartedly it is words to live by!



LV,

the fact that non-Jewish Christians are not required to refrain from eating pork, does not mean that Jonah was not literally in the fish.

The body of Jesus was in the tomb 3 days, and Jesus believed Jonah was in the fish -- "(and Jesus proclaimed) For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth" (John 12:40).

I've never understood that.

As a Christian, I believe Jesus died on a cross, lay dead in a tomb for three day in Jerusalem heat, rose again to life three days later... But a donkey talking to a prophet, or Jonah kept alive in a giant fish should be too much for me.

Does Scripture say that Jonah was "kept alive" in the giant fish? It says, the big fish spit him upon dry land (And the LORD commanded the fish, and it vomited Jonah onto dry land).

Do you also believe / that Didn't Jesus resurrect a few people from their death (from actual death)? Did not these people (per Scripture) also die again (and were buried, just as King David)?

Note: Jesus died, was buried, then rose, and ascended to heaven (without going into the grave, again, as King David, who remained buried and never rose physically).

 

[Orangeslice13]

slice,

read John 10:13 -- ""We are not stoning you for any good work," they replied, "but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.""

The very Jewish leaders who watched over everything Jesus did and said did not doubt who Jesus claimed He was, so you/we do not need to doubt either -- i.e. they recognized/acknowledged/ knew who He claimed to be.

Matt 1:20-23 -- "an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, "Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us (as a child / "mere man" per John 10:13 ^).""

1) he did claim to be the Son of G-d which is just as much a blasphemy as claiming to be YHWH. Yeshua clarifies the claim in that very exchange.
2) Yeshua has rights to those names threw inheritance.

 

[Orangeslice13]

Quote:
Originally Posted by UT-Rex View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigO95 View Post
LV it all boils down to this do you believe the Bible or not? Either it is God's word to live by or it simply is not.
I believe wholeheartedly it is words to live by!



LV,

the fact that non-Jewish Christians are not required to refrain from eating pork, does not mean that Jonah was not literally in the fish.

The body of Jesus was in the tomb 3 days, and Jesus believed Jonah was in the fish -- "(and Jesus proclaimed) For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth" (John 12:40).



Does Scripture say that Jonah was "kept alive" in the giant fish? It says, the big fish spit him upon dry land (And the LORD commanded the fish, and it vomited Jonah onto dry land).

Do you also believe / that Didn't Jesus resurrect a few people from their death (from actual death)? Did not these people (per Scripture) also die again (and were buried, just as King David)?

Note: Jesus died, was buried, then rose, and ascended to heaven (without going into the grave, again, as King David, who remained buried and never rose physically).

You and I agree on Jonah

 

[Orange_Crush]

Does Scripture say that Jonah was "kept alive" in the giant fish? It says, the big fish spit him upon dry land (And the LORD commanded the fish, and it vomited Jonah onto dry land).

Do you also believe / that Didn't Jesus resurrect a few people from their death (from actual death)? Did not these people (per Scripture) also die again (and were buried, just as King David)?

Note: Jesus died, was buried, then rose, and ascended to heaven (without going into the grave, again, as King David, who remained buried and never rose physically).

Jesus did, and they died again.

I'm, not sure the purpose of the question. It does not say that he was kept alive. That is an assumption on my part. The assumption is that in chapter 2, Jonah prayed from within the fish that God would keep him alive, and then Jonah praised God for keeping him alive, and then the fish vomited him up at God's command.

So, I still believe the assumption to be the clearest reading of the story.

Is the import of the question just to correct my precision, or something else?

:hi:

 

[Orangeslice13]

Rex

Before we go further I would like to point out some seem to think that my opinion somehow belittles Messiah. G-d says he’s worthy so he’s worthy. I’m only seeking truth and accuracy. If you disagree with me it’s ok. I don’t think the Christian view of G-d being inaccurate (in my opinion) means I think they’re going to Hell.

As support for why the Jews think the Son claim is as much blasphemy as the claim to be YHWH you can take a look at the Genesis story of the first recorded wrestling match.

That night Jacob got up and took his two wives, his two female servants and his eleven sons and crossed the ford of the Jabbok. 23 After he had sent them across the stream, he sent over all his possessions. 24 So Jacob was left alone, and a man wrestled with him till daybreak. 25 When the man saw that he could not overpower him, he touched the socket of Jacob’s hip so that his hip was wrenched as he wrestled with the man. 26 Then the man said, “Let me go, for it is daybreak.”

But Jacob replied, “I will not let you go unless you bless me.”

27 The man asked him, “What is your name?”

“Jacob,” he answered.

28 Then the man said, “Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel,[a] because you have struggled with God and with humans and have overcome.”

29 Jacob said, “Please tell me your name.”

But he replied, “Why do you ask my name?” Then he blessed him there.

30 So Jacob called the place Peniel, saying, “It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared.”

31 The sun rose above him as he passed Peniel,[c] and he was limping because of his hip.

Here Jacob says he saw G-d face to face.
Clearly it’s not YHWH as no one has ever seen G-d.

1 John 4:12.

No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us.

There are different words that mean different things that are all translated God in English.
It complicates things.

 

[UT-Rex]

from earlier: "As a Christian, I believe Jesus died on a cross, lay dead in a tomb for three day in Jerusalem heat, rose again to life three days later... But a donkey talking to a prophet, or Jonah kept alive in a giant fish should be too much for me."

Jesus did, and they died again.

I'm, not sure the purpose of the question. It does not say that he was kept alive. That is an assumption on my part. The assumption is that in chapter 2, Jonah prayed from within the fish that God would keep him alive, and then Jonah praised God for keeping him alive, and then the fish vomited him up at God's command.

So, I still believe the assumption to be the clearest reading of the story.

Is the import of the question just to correct my precision, or something else?

:hi:

Ok, apologies: I thought when you (believing in the Christ who himself claimed Jonah was in the fish), were earlier saying ("I believe Jesus died on a cross" then) "But" ... "or (that) Jonah (was) kept alive in a giant fish should be too much for me" meant (as in, "too much" for me to believe) that you were saying that you did not believe that Jonah was ever actually in a fish (i.e. I thought that you were saying that the story of Jonah in the fish was not literal).

That Jonah remained alive, or did die, in the fish -- either, I believe, is acceptable.

 

[Orange_Crush]

from earlier: "As a Christian, I believe Jesus died on a cross, lay dead in a tomb for three day in Jerusalem heat, rose again to life three days later... But a donkey talking to a prophet, or Jonah kept alive in a giant fish should be too much for me."



Ok, apologies: I thought when you (believing in the Christ who himself claimed Jonah was in the fish), were earlier saying ("I believe Jesus died on a cross" then) "But" ... "or (that) Jonah (was) kept alive in a giant fish should be too much for me" meant (as in, "too much" for me to believe) that you were saying that you did not believe that Jonah was ever actually in a fish (i.e. I thought that you were saying that the story of Jonah in the fish was not literal).

That Jonah remained alive, or did die, in the fish -- either, I believe, is acceptable.

Cool. Thx

 

[UT-Rex]

Rex

Before we go further I would like to point out some seem to think that my opinion somehow belittles Messiah. G-d says he’s worthy so he’s worthy. I’m only seeking truth and accuracy. If you disagree with me it’s ok. I don’t think the Christian view of G-d being inaccurate (in my opinion) means I think they’re going to Hell.

As support for why the Jews think the Son claim is as much blasphemy as the claim to be YHWH you can take a look at the Genesis story of the first recorded wrestling match.

That night Jacob got up and took his two wives, his two female servants and his eleven sons and crossed the ford of the Jabbok. 23 After he had sent them across the stream, he sent over all his possessions. 24 So Jacob was left alone, and a man wrestled with him till daybreak. 25 When the man saw that he could not overpower him, he touched the socket of Jacob’s hip so that his hip was wrenched as he wrestled with the man. 26 Then the man said, “Let me go, for it is daybreak.”

But Jacob replied, “I will not let you go unless you bless me.”

27 The man asked him, “What is your name?”

“Jacob,” he answered.

28 Then the man said, “Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel,[a] because you have struggled with God and with humans and have overcome.”

29 Jacob said, “Please tell me your name.”

But he replied, “Why do you ask my name?” Then he blessed him there.

30 So Jacob called the place Peniel, saying, “It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared.”

31 The sun rose above him as he passed Peniel,[c] and he was limping because of his hip.

Here Jacob says he saw G-d face to face.
Clearly it’s not YHWH as no one has ever seen G-d.

1 John 4:12.

No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us.

There are different words that mean different things that are all translated God in English.
It complicates things.

slice,

From earlier, you said this: "He can say before Abraham was I Am and be absolutely correct that he has the exestance status without claiming to be YHWH. In fact he never claims to be YHWH. He claims to be the Actual Son of YHWH and Devine but never YHWH. He actually on several occasions clarified his position.
“Don’t cling to me because I haven’t ascended to my father and your father my G-d and your G-d”. Yeshua has a G-d. He said his power was of G-d and could do nothing of his own. He didn’t know the timing of the end only the father knows ect.""

Now, my initial response was in the line-of-thinking that you were claiming, that as Jesus never said he was God that therefore he was not (in as much, that such a claim might convince others that Jesus was not / is not God IN THE FLESH / on earth among us). Apologies, if you were not saying this (I suppose you were just confirming that Jesus never actually claim it -- but the Jews claimed it).

Let me ask you: (in light of the Jews, in that day, saying "you claim to be God") in general, do the orthodox Jews, of today (i.e. those of Jewish descent who are not Christians), believe that Jesus was God?

John 1 --

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2. He was with God in the beginning."

"The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us."

John, I believe, was a Jew-turned-Christian, and he confessed (by Inspiration) that Jesus was God, in the flesh, who dwelt among us.

 

[Orangeslice13]

slice,

From earlier, you said this: "He can say before Abraham was I Am and be absolutely correct that he has the exestance status without claiming to be YHWH. In fact he never claims to be YHWH. He claims to be the Actual Son of YHWH and Devine but never YHWH. He actually on several occasions clarified his position.
“Don’t cling to me because I haven’t ascended to my father and your father my G-d and your G-d”. Yeshua has a G-d. He said his power was of G-d and could do nothing of his own. He didn’t know the timing of the end only the father knows ect.""

Now, my initial response was in the line-of-thinking that you were claiming, that as Jesus never said he was God that therefore he was not (in as much, that such a claim might convince others that Jesus was not / is not God IN THE FLESH / on earth among us). Apologies, if you were not saying this (I suppose you were just confirming that Jesus never actually claim it -- but the Jews claimed it).

Let me ask you: (in light of the Jews, in that day, saying "you claim to be God") in general, do the orthodox Jews, of today (i.e. those of Jewish descent who are not Christians), believe that Jesus was God?

John 1 --

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2. He was with God in the beginning."

"The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us."

John, I believe, was a Jew-turned-Christian, and he confessed (by Inspiration) that Jesus was God, in the flesh, who dwelt among us.

1) being begotten of the father instead of actually being the father does not in any way diminish the power and authority of Yeshua to be ELOHIM in any way.

As far as the Orthodox Jews in my family. No they do not believe Jesus to be G-d. They do not believe Jesus to be Messiah. They do not believe Jesus to be a prophet. They do not believe he is of YHWH.
Although......I’m wearing them Down.

I’ve been waiting on the John 1 for a while.
This is the perfect example of what I’m talking about.
In the original two different words are used for God.

Theos and Ton Theon. Both translated to God.
Depending on your thoughts on translation it could just as easily read.

In the beginning was the saying(action word) and the saying was with G-d and the saying was Devine.

Neither belief frustrates the Grace of the most high.


I love these conversations but I’m very busy with work. Would love to continue later.

Shalom

 

[LouderVol]

What you are saying is nowhere to be found in the Bible. You are trying put a theory into the Bible and trying to make it say something the Bible plainly does not teach.

no. The only theory the Bible covers is that God created life.

science attempts to explain how it was done, by God. Sorry its not as satisfying as "poof" life, but I like understanding a little bit more about the powers of God. To me it is more impressive for God to work through evolution, and makes sense with free will, than it does if he "poofed" us here.

 

[UT-Rex]

1) being begotten of the father instead of actually being the father does not in any way diminish the power and authority of Yeshua to be ELOHIM in any way.

As far as the Orthodox Jews in my family. No they do not believe Jesus to be G-d. They do not believe Jesus to be Messiah. They do not believe Jesus to be a prophet. They do not believe he is of YHWH.
Although......I’m wearing them Down.

I’ve been waiting on the John 1 for a while.
This is the perfect example of what I’m talking about.
In the original two different words are used for God.

Theos and Ton Theon. Both translated to God.
Depending on your thoughts on translation it could just as easily read.

In the beginning was the saying(action word) and the saying was with G-d and the saying was Devine.

Neither belief frustrates the Grace of the most high.


I love these conversations but I’m very busy with work. Would love to continue later.

Shalom

Hmm. Ok,

1) which translation actually says it as you've written it, as "In the beginning was the saying(action word) and the saying was with G-d and the saying was Devine"

and

2) you're using some English word (in noun form) which you're spelling as "Devine" which I'm not sure is even a proper English word.

Just to be sure, the English definition of "devine" (and I suppose D or d) is: "a frequent misspelling of divine."

Please send me your definition and source of and English word "Devine" (/ "devine").

Otherwise, maybe that was an oversite/mispelling based on phonetics; then to be clear,

if you're saying the English word/translated as "Devine" equals the word "God" of the "God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob" (of Matt 22:31-32), then we know WHO we're referring to in John 1, and therefore,

it could just as easily read (as it does in several translations):

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" (NIV) or "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" (KJV).

Also, "Theos and Ton Theon" seem to refer to "the creator" of the universe (i.e. God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob -- the father of the Hebrew nation / "the Word (Jesus is the Word) was God" > right back to what John is saying, written in English).

No need to respond this morning (please wait until you have a moment later, if you'd like).

 

[Orange_Crush]

no. The only theory the Bible covers is that God created life.

science attempts to explain how it was done, by God. Sorry its not as satisfying as "poof" life, but I like understanding a little bit more about the powers of God. To me it is more impressive for God to work through evolution, and makes sense with free will, than it does if he "poofed" us here.

Have you considered that there are theological issues as well for some when they considen this?

 

[UT-Rex]

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigO95 View Post
What you are saying is nowhere to be found in the Bible. You are trying put a theory into the Bible and trying to make it say something the Bible plainly does not teach.

no. The only theory the Bible covers is that God created life.

science attempts to explain how it was done, by God. Sorry its not as satisfying as "poof" life, but I like understanding a little bit more about the powers of God. To me it is more impressive for God to work through evolution, and makes sense with free will, than it does if he "poofed" us here.

Ok,

but, the premise behind (the theory of) "evolution" is that mankind evolved from ape-like creatures (as the drawings show), and, in-short, this is generally why Christians deny the plausibility of the theory of "evolution" in general (i.e we, in general, reject the "scientific" notion behind the theory that God did not create mankind on Day 6 / that God did not create mankind on another, literally-different day than the literal-day He created the animals/ apes and other mammals, etc).

 

[LouderVol]

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigO95 View Post
LV it all boils down to this do you believe the Bible or not? Either it is God's word to live by or it simply is not.
I believe wholeheartedly it is words to live by!



LV,

the fact that non-Jewish Christians are not required to refrain from eating pork, does not mean that Jonah was not literally in the fish.

The body of Jesus was in the tomb 3 days, and Jesus believed Jonah was in the fish -- "(and Jesus proclaimed) For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth" (John 12:40).

The "spirit of it" is, in part, proved by the signs and miracles.

my point wasn't to dismiss anything in the bible.

we were talking about the lessons of the Bible, and the things it teachs/tells us. I was trying to figure out, with some tongue in cheek questions, if O95 was as serious as he made out to be. presumption was that he didn't and had made some moves past the Bible at least as far as what it says.

not trying to make it a gotcha point, or make anything "wrong". I believe it is up to the individual to determine their relationship with God. If they want it to be a literal translation of the bible to their life, so be it, power to them. I do take exception to when they broadcast their way as the only way.

 

[BigO95]

no. The only theory the Bible covers is that God created life.

science attempts to explain how it was done, by God. Sorry its not as satisfying as "poof" life, but I like understanding a little bit more about the powers of God. To me it is more impressive for God to work through evolution, and makes sense with free will, than it does if he "poofed" us here.

If God wanted to use evolution and let us know he used evolution, don't you think that he would have said something in his word?