- This topic has 2,076 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
Hi Mike,
You: Your second verse, Phil 2:7, doesn’t include the past tense “formed”, so it doesn’t even apply.
Me: HA! HA ! HA! READ:
WHAT WOULD YOU PREFER Mike to be KISSED or that someone KISS you?
Philippians 2:5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 Who, being (FORMED A GOD) in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 But MADE himself of no reputation, and (FORMED AS A SERVANT) took upon him the form of a servant, and was MADE in the likeness of men:
HOW ABOUT THAT Mr. Mike?
ARE YOU HAPPY NOW
I AM MORE SO, MORE THAN YOU POSSIBLY THINK
I wonder how many hours you spent looking at verses that contained various combinations of “created”, “made”, “formed” and “established” to find something you thought you could use to make your point.
Me: FIRST AND FOREMOST ACCORDING TO YOU
YOU NEITHER WANT
NOVELS
NOR
SCRIPTURAL EXAMPLES
ISN’T IT THE TRUTH Mr. Mike? I almost forgot!
Mr. MILK!
WITH EVERY RESPECT!
NOW: IT TOOK ME NOT EVEN A MERE MINUTE!
YOU SEE Mike when you organize yourself and you are ALSO subject to the Holy Spirit,
HE WILL MAKE IT EASY FOR YOU,
ALL YOU HAVE TO DO YOU SIMPLY ASK, NOCK, SEARCH, AND SO ON!
You: And after all that time, was Jeremiah 1:5 the ONLY one you could find
Me: Mike but don’t tell me YOU NEVER READ ALL THE OTHER EXAMPLES I POSTED! JUST IN CASE READ:
Romans 1:20 For the invisible things of him, from the CREATION of the world,(GENESIS 1:1 BY THE FATHER THROUGH “THE WORD” ALL SPIRITUAL) are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are MADE; (GENESIS 1:3…. BY “THE WORD” JESUS, THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD, SLAIN LIKE A LAMB…..Rev.13:8) his eternal power also, and divinity: so that they are inexcusable.
NOW READ THE SCRIPTURE YOU YOURSELF PRODUCED WHICH DEFINITELY EXPLAINS WHAT GOD DID WHEN HE MADE USE OF THEM ALL IN
Isaiah 45:18 For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; (GENESIS 1:1BY THE FATHER THROUGH “THE WORD” ALL SPIRITUAL) God himself that formed the earth (OUT OF THE WATER OF THE FLOOD BY LUCIFER) and made it; (FROM GENESIS 1:3…. BY “THE WORD” JESUS, THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD, SLAIN LIKE A LAMB…..Rev.13:8) ) he hath established it, ( PHYSICALLY! Genesis 1:31 And God saw every thing that he had MADE, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.)
he CREATED it (IN GENESIS 1:1 SPIRITUALLY) not in vain, he FORMED it ( IN GENESIS 1:3…. PHYSICALLY) to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.
NOW TO THE LAST ONE AGAIN
WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT
ITS YOUR PIGEON
I’m afraid I have to post again what I posted and YOU SIMPLY IGNORED.
I’ll make it clear to you:
WHEN THE SPERM MEET THE OVUM
A human being is MADE in the FORM of a fetus!
NOT CREATED AS SUCH FROM THE PHYSICAL SIDE POINT OF VIEW, SCIENTIFICALLY!
HUMANS DON’T CREATE AS SUCH!
FROM GOD’S POINT OF VIEW THOUGH, IN THE SAME INSTANT
this human being is CREATED spiritually in the soul, MADE physically in the flesh, FORMED in the fetus, and ESTABLISHED in the womb?
READING THE ABOVE Mr. Mike,
SPECIFICALLY SPEAKING,
THEY ARE PERFORMING THE SAME EXACT THING?
DEFINITELY NOT!
When God in Genesis FORMED MAN OF THE DUST,
IT IS THE SAME EXACT THING AS WHEN GOD CREATED THE HEAVENS AND THE EARTH EX NIHILO? Genesis 1:1
When God said to Solomon “I have made thee king,”
IT IS THE SAME EXACT THING AS WHEN GOD CREATED THE HEAVENS AND THE EARTH EX NIHILO? Genesis 1:1
When God “established His covenant with Abraham”
IT IS THE SAME EXACT THING AS WHEN GOD CREATED THE HEAVENS AND THE EARTH EX NIHILO? Genesis 1:1
IF IN THE ABOVE THEY ARE DEFINITELY A REFERENCE TO SOMETHING ENTIRELY DIFFERENT IN RELATION TO GOD’S OWN TASKS,
WHY ARE THEY NOT ALSO
ENTIRELY DIFFERENT IN RELATION TO OTHER GOD’S OWN TASKS?
Peace and love in Jesus Christ
Berean……Jesus is called the word of God because thats an “ATRUBITE” to Jesus, he is called that not because he is that, but because he “quotes” God the Fathers words to us. I JUST showed you what Jesus “HIMSELF” said about it, you say you believe Jesus right? , well then believe him, If the words he was telling us were “NOT” his words, but the words of him who sent him, and you say, he was the word of God “himself” , then you are denying what Jesus himself said, which would makes you a liar, right?
You Still a novice , WHEN it comes to the word of God, Berean IMO.
Peace and love to you and yours…………gene
Mike…..here is the difference between the two words “is” and “was”.
“is”…. is a “present tense” word, It exists that way now, at the time it was spoken about.
‘was”.. is a “past tence” word, It came be, that way from a past, Before it was being spoken about.
Do we at least agree on that, if not there is no way we could ever resolve this, in my opinion.
Peace and love to you and yours Mike……….gene
Gene
And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
In THE BIGINNING Jesus-Christ was
WITH THE GOD 👉John 17
AND HE WAS GOD.
AND IN THE TIME MARKED BY PROPHECY(Daniel 9:24-27), HE WAS MADE FLESH AND HE DIED FOR OUR SINS.
THIS IS THE ETERNAL TRUTH.
Berean, your caught up in the biggest lies ever fostered on humanity, by Satan the Devil himself, sad for you.
Peace and love to you and yours Berean………..gene
Gene
I believe it’s quite the opposite…. Jesus is not just a man, he is GOD AND MAN,. …. EMMANUEL: GOD WITH US.
Hi Mike,
YOU; FIRST OF ALL, YOU’RE BLATANTLY WRONG…
Let’s begin by pointing out that the phrase “back in the day” has been around since at least the 1940s, and the phrase “back in the days” has been around a lot longer, since the 18th century.
But in those earlier usages, “back in the day” and “back in the days” were part of larger phrases that referred literally to specific periods in the past.
https://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2012/09/back-in-the-day-2.html
Both idioms are acceptable, and both refer to general time periods. The only difference is that in the idiom “back in the day”, the singular word “day” refers to the entire time period. In the idiom “back in the days”, the plural word “days” refers to LITERAL days that together make up the general time period being referenced.
1. “Day” refers to an entire general time period.
2. “Days” refers to LITERAL days WITHIN a general time period.
LET’S READ AGAIN FROM SCRATCH THIS ARGUMENT FROM PAGE 89:
Me: GENESIS 2:4These are the generations of the heaven and the earth, when they were created, IN THE DAY (why not “in the days” He “MADE”them in six days, no?) that the Lord God made (NOT CREATED) the heaven and the earth…
You: Funny you should bring this up since I just addressed it to Proclaimer in our private thread a couple of hours ago…
There are two ways the idiom is used.
Me: Mike, You simply concluded that THE PHRASE “IN THE DAY” in Genesis 2:4, is AN EQUIVALENT IDIOM! AS
BACK IN THE DAY/S
https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/in+the+day
IN THE DAY
Phrase not found in the Dictionary and Encyclopedia.
OK Mike, the phrase: “IN THE DAY” IS NOT EVEN AN IDIOM!
Despite your just argument regarding the mentioned idioms, after all, they have nothing to do with Genesis 2:4 at all so,
YOU’RE BLATANTLY WRONG…
also, your DEVIATION which is quite normal to you, and your argument in relation to Genesis 2:4 are
DEBUNKED
Peace and love in Jesus Christ
Berean……why do you use the term “just a man”, as if mankind was nothing to God, therein lies your error and other false teachers also, go read, no study it “closely”, Heb 2:10-17. Let that sink in. Before you belittle God the Father’s, human sons and daughters creation.
Tell us why did it “behove” Juses, to be made like us, what did he have to gain by being “like” us then if we are just “mere men”. And show us one place in The scriptures where Jesus ever said he was a God, a high preist to God yes but never a God. If you truly believed What Jesus actually said, you would know that Berean.
As i have said your still a novice and have much to learn brother.
Peace and love to you and yours Berean……….gene
Genesis 2:4… This is the account of the heaven and the earth when they were created, when the LORD God made the earth and the heaven.
My question is simple…
CARMEL, IS GEN 2:4 SPEAKING OF TWO DIFFERENT HEAVENS AND EARTHS? YES OR NO PLEASE?
If NO, then your entire “created” vs “made” argument is debunked, right?
Is that why you don’t want to answer the question? Is it because you know that the only honest answer to it eliminates your many novels of BS concerning “created” versus “made” that I’ve already debunked anyway? 😉
Carmel, I’m also waiting for your example of the plural word “days” referring to something other than literal days.
If there is no clear example, then Exodus 20:11 and 31:17 (“in six days Yahweh made”) make it undeniably clear that heaven, earth and everything in them were made in six literal days.
This challenge is also for Gene and Pretender (formerly known as “Proclaimer”).
Gene: Mike…..here is the difference between the two words “is” and “was”.
“is”…. is a “present tense” word, It exists that way now, at the time it was spoken about.
‘was”.. is a “past tence” word, It came be, that way from a past, Before it was being spoken about.
Do we at least agree on that, if not there is no way we could ever resolve this, in my opinion.
I agree that “is” is the present tense form of the verb “to be”, and that “was” is the past tense form of the same verb.
The question is whether or not YOU agree with the bolded part of your own definition when it comes to John 1:1 (“the Word was with God”). Well? Do you agree with your own definition that the Word “came to be with God”? Yes or no?
Hi Mike,
You: My question is simple…
CARMEL, IS GEN 2:4 SPEAKING OF TWO DIFFERENT HEAVENS AND EARTHS? YES OR NO PLEASE?
NOT BEFORE YOU ANSWER MINE WHICH I ASKED WELL BACK ON
APRIL 24, 2022 AT 11:38 AM #931343 PAGE 93
Answer Mike,
DO YOU MEAN THAT GENESIS 1:1 IS A SORT OF SUMMARY OF WHICH TO FOLLOW?
YES OR NO PLEASE:
Peace and love in Jesus Christ
Of course I believe that, Carmel. I not only said it was, but even brought up Gen 2:4 as another example of the same. 🤔🤔🤔
Now answer my questions.
Mike., Yes the word came to be with God because the word was God, just as the word came to be with you because the words you speak are you. Same thing applies with God the Father. God and his word are one and the same thing, just as you and your words are also the same thing. You can not separate you from your words , neither can anyone separate God the Father from his words either, just that simple Mike.
peace and love to you and yours Mike……….gene
Monolatry and Monotheism in the Hebrew Bible
In the present form of the Hebrew Bible, before they constitute a sovereign nation within the land of Canaan, the biblical community of Israel agrees at Mt Sinai/Mt Horeb to worship Yahweh ahead of any other gods and not to make any divine images. A small number of texts, found primarily in the prophetic books, assert that Yahweh is the only god who exists and is to be worshipped by all nations, but these are a minority; the majority of texts impose the strict worship of Yahweh alone on Israel but seem to acknowledge that other deities exist and can be legitimately worshipped by other groups and nations. The minority position can be labelled ‘monotheism’, while the majority position is usually termed ‘monolatry’.
Yet, from the well-intentioned beginnings depicted in the Pentateuch, a story of constant ‘backslidings’ by the people and their leaders unfolds in subsequent books (Joshua–Kings), in which Yahweh is abandoned over and over in favour of ‘other gods’, thereby breaking the terms of the covenant to which their ancestors had agreed.
Yahweh and Asherah: During the time of the two kingdoms, Yahweh was consistently associated with a female deity, Asherah. Together, the divine couple was the main source of animal, agricultural and human abundance. Inscriptions from a way station located in the Sinai desert at Quntillet ‘Ajrud invoke blessings from ‘Yahweh of Samaria and (his?) Asherah’ and from ‘Yahweh of Teman [the south] and (his?) Asherah’. The site dates from ca. 850 bce. A tomb located at Khirbet el-Qom in the Shephelah, within the territory of the kingdom of Judah, from about the same time period as the way station, asks for blessings from Yahweh and (his?) Asherah (Zevit 2001: 359–405)
A wooden symbol of Asherah was part of the official cult conducted in the temple in Jerusalem (2 Kgs 18:4; 23:4, 6) and there was a dedicated staff at the temple that wove in her honour (2 Kgs 23:7). Hundreds of female figurines with prominent breasts have been found in Judah, and it is generally assumed that they represent the efforts of women to petition Asherah for healthy children and an adequate milk supply to ensure their survival (Kletter 1996).
Yahweh, El and Baal: Yahweh is depicted as an El-type deity in various biblical texts. The deities known to the patriarchs in the Book of Genesis are either manifestations of El or represent traits associated with a generic god since ’el can be the common term used to mean ‘a god’: el elyon (Gen. 14:18–20, 22), el roi (Gen. 16:13), el shadday (Gen. 17:1),’el olam (Gen. 21:33), el elohe yisrael (Gen. 33:20) and el bethel (Gen. 35:7). Yahweh is equated individually with most of the various El/els in Genesis and subsequently, with el shadday of the patriarchal stories, in Exod. 6:2–3. He is an aged, patriarchal god who sits on his throne in heaven. He is called ‘the creator’ and ‘father’ and is the source of great wisdom in Job 15:7–8.
Yahweh also is depicted as a Baal-type deity in many biblical texts. Especially noteworthy is the Greek text of Deut. 32:8–9, where el elyon assigns territories to various deities on earth and Yahweh is given Jacob as his portion. Here, Yahweh is one of the younger generation of national gods. Yahweh’s role as the giver of rains is emphasized, particularly in 1 Kings 18, where Yahweh proves his superiority to Baal on Mt Carmel and then sends rains. His status as a divine warrior is widespread in the Hebrew Bible and twice he is depicted as taking his stand on Mt Zion, his holy place, to fight off enemies who will assault the location (Isa.31:4–5; Zech. 14:1–9). His defeat of the cosmic water monster in various manifestations parallels Baal’s defeat of the sea god, Yam. In biblical tradition, Yahweh fights Sea, Leviathan, Rahab, Tannin and the waters. …(taken from the book “Opening the Books of Moses..”)
Gene: Mike., Yes the word came to be with God because the word was God… God and his word are one and the same thing… You can not separate you from your words , neither can anyone separate God the Father from his words either, just that simple Mike.
Poor Gene. I’ve got you speaking out of both sides of your mouth now, trying your best to be “right” when I’ve already exposed your flawed understanding.
These are the two CONTRADICTING things you said…
1. God’s word CAME TO BE with Him.
2. God’s word could never be separate from Him, because God and His word are one and the same thing.
According to #2, God’s word has ALWAYS been with him, since it IS him, and can’t be separated from him. But according to #1, there was a time when God’s word CAME TO BE with him.
Both can’t be true, Gene. So which one is?
Btw, don’t forget you have a question waiting for you in the Hot Seat that MUST be answered before you post anything else anywhere else on this site. Thanks.
Adam: A small number of texts, found primarily in the prophetic books, assert that Yahweh is the only god who exists and is to be worshipped by all nations, but these are a minority; the majority of texts impose the strict worship of Yahweh alone on Israel but seem to acknowledge that other deities exist and can be legitimately worshipped by other groups and nations.
Okay Adam, you posted it, and so now you have to stand and defend it, as per admin, right? So let’s break it down…
A small number of texts, found primarily in the prophetic books, assert that Yahweh is the only god who exists and is to be worshipped by all nations…
There is no text in the Bible that asserts that Yahweh is “the only god who exists”, nor is there any text that asserts he is to be “worshiped by all nations”. Please correct me using scriptures.
…the majority of texts impose the strict worship of Yahweh alone on Israel but seem to acknowledge that other deities exist…
This true of the Bible in its entirety.
…other deities exist and can be legitimately worshipped by other groups and nations.
The bolded part is false, and is nowhere to be found in the scriptures.
Okay Adam, stand and defend the erroneous crap you flood the site with. (More to come…)
Adam: During the time of the two kingdoms, Yahweh was consistently associated with a female deity, Asherah. Together, the divine couple was the main source of animal, agricultural and human abundance.
That is a very misleading statement, as it implies that the Bible itself associates Yahweh and Asherah as “co-gods”. The Bible does no such thing. Correct me if I’m wrong, or acknowledge that I’m right, Adam.
Inscriptions from a way station located in the Sinai desert at Quntillet ‘Ajrud invoke blessings from ‘Yahweh of Samaria and (his?) Asherah’ and from ‘Yahweh of Teman [the south] and (his?) Asherah’. The site dates from ca. 850 bce. A tomb located at Khirbet el-Qom in the Shephelah, within the territory of the kingdom of Judah, from about the same time period as the way station, asks for blessings from Yahweh and (his?) Asherah (Zevit 2001: 359–405)
These inscriptions may be legit, as it is abundantly clear from the scriptures that Yahweh’s people repeatedly worshiped other gods besides Him, and many of them worshiped both Yahweh and other gods. This worship of other gods, with or without simultaneous worship of Yahweh, was explicitly forbidden by Yahweh. So if the point is that many of Yahweh’s people, at many different times throughout scripture, rebelled against Him and worshiped other gods, then the point is true. If the point is that this worship of other gods was an accepted part of the “Abrahamic Religion”, the point is false.
A wooden symbol of Asherah was part of the official cult conducted in the temple in Jerusalem (2 Kgs 18:4; 23:4, 6) and there was a dedicated staff at the temple that wove in her honour (2 Kgs 23:7).
Same as above. God’s people often broke their covenant with Him and ran after other gods. Yahweh condemned those actions repeatedly, and punished His nation on account of those actions many times.
But again, your source makes it sound as if the worship of Asherah along with Yahweh was an accepted part of the covenant. It was not.
Adam, when your sources must word things in such deceptive ways to drive their biases home to their readers, do you really think it’s wise to give the any credibility?
Your claim is that the Hebrew culture and the Bible itself is a hodge-podge of various pagan traditions and beliefs all squished together, and that the “religion of the Bible” slowly evolves and changes over time.
I will tell you point blank that your claim is patently false, and is not supported by anything in the Bible – or ACTUAL EVIDENCE outside of the Bible. Here’s your chance, Adam. I’m calling you out as a spreader of falsehoods. Prove me wrong. Put me in my place. Humiliate me in my arrogance.
Ready, set, GO!
Hi Mike,
You: Of course I believe that,
Me: Mike NOWHERE DURING OUR DISCUSSIONS REGARDING THIS MATTER YOU EVER POSTED AND SAID THAT
GENESIS 1:1 IS A SUMMARY!
I CHALLENGE YOU TO PRODUCE SPECIFICALLY AND CLEARLY SUCH A STATEMENT!
You: Carmel. I not only said it was, but even brought up Gen 2:4 as another example of the same.
NO, Mike, THAT’S NOT QUITE RIGHT I’M AFRAID!
You did bring up Genesis 2:4 ALRIGHT, but only after I posted and made it clear that the conjunction “and” is vital as proof that Genesis 1:1 is not a summary, plus that I compered it with and posted Genesis 5:1 which is a clear example of a type of summary hence, without the vital conjunction “and”
You: Now answer my questions.
Me: Eventually I will do that for sure, but FIRST I must put things
AS CLEAR AS CRYSTAL FOR THE SAKE OF TRUTH!
WITH EVERY RESPECT,
Mike, YOU EITHER DON’T KNOW WHAT THE WORD “SUMMARY” MEANS OR ELSE YOU ARE A STUBBORN PERSON, AND YOU DON’T WANT TO ADMIT THE TRUTH, THE FACT THAT YOU NEVER CLEARLY AND SIMPLY SAID SPECIFICALLY THAT
Genesis 1:1 IS A TYPE OF A SUMMARY!
AS MUCH AS I MADE CLEAR THAT THE INTRODUCTION OF Genesis 2:4
ISN’T A TYPE OF SUMMARY.
EVEN IN THIS POST, YOU DID’T SAY SIMPLY AND CLEARLY DECLARE by making use of
THE THREE-LETTER WORD
YES….
But you said:
“Of course, I believe that!”
Now to believe something is a thing, and to DECLARE is another!
I believe that Adolf Hitler in WW2, as much as Putin today, is the devil in person, but I am not ready to declare and assert what I believe!
ALSO, JUST READ NOW WHAT YOU SAID WELL BACK IN THE FIRST POST CONCERNING THIS MATTER!
Page 89 #931180
You: Carmel, consider the following very carefully…
Gen 1:1… In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
(INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT)
OK, THERE YOU ARE, Mike? YOU DIDN’T COMMIT YOURSELF AND CLEARLY SAY
Genesis 1:1 is a summary!
BUT INSTEAD, YOU CALLED Genesis 1:1 AN INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT?
SO WHAT? AND AS USUAL, YOU DEVIATED FROM THE DISCUSSION, ALSO,
THAT DETERMINES NOTHING! OUR ARGUMENT IS WHETHER Genesis 1:1 AS AN INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT IS A SUMMARY OR NOT. The fact that you never mentioned it specifically!
Read again what I posted please:
If the word “and” had not been there, the first verse might have been taken for a sort of summary of all the rest of the chapter;…..
OK, Mike? I MADE IT EMPHATICALLY CLEAR THAT Genesis 1:1 is not a
SUMMARY of all the rest of the chapter!
NOW YOU, AFTER I POSTED THAT POST, NEVER SAID ANYTHING SPECIFICALLY CLEAR THAT Genesis 1:1 IS A SUMMARY! YOU PURPOSELY FOCUSSED YOUR ARGUMENT ON THE CONJUNCTION “AND”
NOW, ON THE OTHER HAND FROM MY SIDE, IN ORDER TO PROVE THAT Genesis 1:1 IS NOT A SUMMARY, I POSTED Genesis 5:1 WHICH IS NOT JUST ONLY AN INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT, BUT A CLEAR EXAMPLE OF A TYPE OF A SUMMARY hence, without the use of the conjunction “and”!
Thus, I concluded and said:
but that little conjunction precludes such an interpretation.
Hence. Genesis 1:1 IS NOT A SUMMARY AND ALSO SAID:
Compare such statements elsewhere, as for instance, in
Genesis 5:1 This is the book of the generation of Adam.
ON THE DAY that God CREATED man, he MADE him to the likeness of God.
.AS YOU CAN WELL SEE AND READ, THERE’S NO NEED OF THE CONJUNCTION “AND” Mr. Mike, SINCE THE INTRODUCTION, IS AN ABSTRACT/ TYPE OF A SUMMARY OF THE REST WHICH IS TO FOLLOW. Something which
Genesis 1:1 HASN’T GOT!
THUS THE VITAL CONJUNCTION “AND” IS THERE AS A CONFIRMATION THAT Genesis 1:1 IS NOT A TYPE OF A SUMMARY OF ALL THE REST WHICH IS TO FOLLOW.
THAT SETTLED IT. Mike,
GENESIS 1:1 IS NEITHER A TYPE OF SUMMARY NOR PART OF THE SIX-DAY CREATION! IT IS A CONCLUSIVE INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT ON ITS OWN AND NOT SUBJECT TO FURTHER READING FROM THE READER UNLESS THE READER IS MORE INTERESTED TO KNOW AND READ MORE! PLUS THAT
GENESIS 1:3 IS THE FIRST DAY OF THE SUPPOSED SIX-DAY CREATION NOT EX- NIHILO!
ALL MADE!
THUS ALL YOUR ARGUMENTS ARE DEBUNKED!
Peace and love in Jesus Christ
Hi Mike
You: Gen 1:2-31… All the things God made, and the order in which they were made, ie:
Light on day 1…….
Me: NO Mike, NOT QUITE SO!
YOU KEEP ON SAYING THINGS SCRIPTURE SAYS, ON THE OTHER HAND, THESE THINGS HAVE NEVER BEEN SAID
AND IT’S ONLY YOUR CORRUPTED CONCLUSIONS!
ACCORDING TO Genesis 1:2 WITH RESPECT TO WHAT IS WRITTEN, ONLY THE SPIRIT OF GOD IS MENTIONED,
HIS SON, JESUS, “THE WORD” AS A SPIRIT THE BEGINNING OF ALL GOD’S WORK COLOSSIANS 1:18, WHO MOVED OVER THE WATERS.John6:19,
AND FOR SURE GOD HAS NO PART OF THE TOHU VA BOHU STATE AND DARKNESS MENTIONED. THE FACT THAT HE WAS NOT PRESENT NEVER MIND AS YOU SAID
ALL THE THINGS GOD MADE,
WHICH IS NOT THE CASE CONCERNING Genesis 1:2,
AS THERE WAS NOTHING PURPOSELY MADE AT ALL BY GOD, BUT OCCURRED IN A WAY UNEXPECTED. SINCE THE REBELLION AND THE EVENTUAL FLOOD WERE PREDESTINED BY GOD HIMSELF.
WHICH IS WELL IN CONTRAST WITH THE REST OF THE VERSES, WITH THE PARTICULAR EXCEPTIONS OF VERSE 21 AND VERSE 27
WHERE GOD, AGAIN BY “THE WORD” JESUS, AS A SPIRIT
MADE ALL. Hebrews 1:2 from Genesis 1:3….. and throughout the entire process of
THE WORLD MADE!
NOW Again Mike, I AM GOING TO KILL TWO BIRDS WITH ONE STONE! PRECISELY BY
Genesis 5:1This is the book of the generation of Adam.
IN THE DAY that God CREATED man, (GENESIS 2:7……and man became a living soul.) Where Adam was CREATED SPIRITUALLY OK, Mike?
he MADE him to the likeness of God.
Thus, when God the Father CREATED man SPIRITUALLY with His breath, He also MADE him, by “THE WORD” Jesus, as a spirit,
IN THE LIKENESS OF GOD. Attention please:
IN THE LIKENESS OF JESUS CHRIST GODMAN, THE EMBODIMENT OF GOD, PRE-EXISTED IN ONE GLORY WITH THE FATHER, John17:5, Colossians 2:9
GOD Mr. Mike, did two things in one instant when He CREATED man
for the simple reason that the man that was FORMED from the slime, PHYSICALLY, was without life, then when God breathed His breath into his face, the man was CREATED SPIRITUALLY and MADE alive also PHYSICALLY. A LIVING SOUL and was ESTABLISHED in the garden of God!
NOW THAT SETTLED THIS TIME, THE CLARITY WHEN SCRIPTURE PRODUCES THE WORDS
CREATED, MADE, FORMED, and ESTABLISHED.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
