Being Born Again Spiritually.

[hiramabbi2]

Not everybody is created in the image and likeness of God, unless your born again spiritually.

Surely, Cain who was a murderer from the beginning and a liar was not created in the image or likeness of God. He was just a natural living soul without the Spirit of God.

In the day Adam & Eve were created in their image and likeness, Cain had already killed Abel. Gen. 5:1-3 Cross Gen. 1:26-27

Do you agree?

[hiramabbi2]

Esoteric will go to extremes to try to show his false assumption, that the forming of Adam from the dust of the ground (Gen.2:7), is the same event as the creation of Adam & Eve spiritually (Gen. 1:26-27).

This INCLUDES, according to Esoteric, the breath of spirit, the knowledge of Good and Evil to help A&E make the right decision (free will) to choose their way of living, separate from God.

The only reason to believe such distorted assumption is in vain effort to support of their ancient and traditional false theories of the “Fall” or “Original Sin”. The verses Esoteric posted, were taken out of context and deny their false assumption or fables.

In order for Esoteric to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that his objection is based on a solid foundation, he must first show us that this event (Gen. 2:7; 1:26-27) are the same -- by reconciling the text or providing additional Scriptural proof text to support his assumption not his doctrinal fables.

To date, I believe Esoteric tried miserably in doing so only to fall short of the requirements needed in prove his case.

Therefore, in effort not to continue flooding this thread with unnecessary diversion (EI’s tactics), I will only respond to the relevant issue directly. I will also cite Esoteric’ false assumptions, inadequacy and conclusion of his objection based upon his own latest argument.

a) Esoteric Example Defining "spirit":
Genesis 2:7 – God breathed in “neshama” The same word (neshama) is used in Genesis 7:22. Neshama also directly corresponds to the Hebrew word “ruwach.” as seen throughout the OT, but most specifically in Isaiah 57:16. The Greek word for spirit is “pneuma.”

Esoteric False Assumption: Changing of the actual meaning of the text by substituting the actual word used in the Scripture (the breath of Life) with “the breath of spirit” would work to his advantage. Such is not the case!

Esoteric Inadequacy: Unfortunately for Esoteric, the text is crystal clear - Gen. 2:7 does not speak of the “breath of spirit” (neshama) as he would like us to believe, but, the Breath of LIFE (chay) as given to all creatures that hast life - formed with nostrils Gen. 7:22.

Even trained dogs would, at times, disregard any direct command of their master. IF so, would this be already equating to the dog's choosing a separate life away from his master, based upon Esoteric fables and religious view? Of course not! Even our constitution (U.S.) presume all animals to be innocent of the spirit of knowledge to do good and evil, are they not?

Adam and Eve were innocent of the spirit good and evil until they ate the fruit of the Tree of Knoweldge. It was only then, they learned about shame and guilt of what they have done. However, I don't believe that this offense equates to Adam & Eve actually choosing a separate life away from the Lord -- as Esoteric would like you to believe.

Going back to Gen. 2:7 the text' actual usage of the definite article “THE” to describe THE BREATH OF LIFE (not neshama) should have served as a hint to Esoteric that their theory is flawed and distorted. Had it been the case, it was the breath of spirit that is being given to Adam, the Scripture would have specifically described it so, as clearly documented in John 20:22

Conclusion: Esoteric Objection DENIED

Reasons: Purely based on assumption and the contamination of the verse; lack of direct contextual reconciliation or biblical proof text to prove Gen. 2:7 vs. Gen. 1:26-27 is the same event based upon Esoteric contention.

b) Esoteric Argument of 1Corinthian 15:45-46 it is written: "The first man Adam became a living being"; the last Adam, a lifegiving spirit. 46The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual.”

Esoteric False Assumption: “The Last Adam is (Jesus), a life giving Spirit” and not the actual creation of Adam Spiritually, after he had sinned, Genesis 5:1-3.

Esoteric Inadequacy: Nowhere in the Scripture that would indicate to us, the last Adam was a another source of “lifegiving spirit”. The verses suggested that Adam was a natural living soul before he was MADE a quickening spirit -- not a lifegiver of spirit which you insinuated.

The Scripture also does not mentioned anything that would directly suggest to us, the Last Adam is Jesus, "THE" source of lifegiving Spirit.

If we follow Esoteric illogical and distorted assumption then, we could honestly conclude that the First Adam who committed the “original sin” in the beginning, is no other than Jesus Christ himself- being the same as the last Adam, accordingly.

The narrative of Genesis 5:1-3 clearly indicating to us the generations of Adam IN THE DAY (timing) they were created in the likeness of God. And that was the TIME, when Seth was born and Men begun calling upon the name of the Lord, re-establishing their direct relationship with God. (Gen. 4:26).

This is in harmony to the requirement of being Born Again spiritually. This is also why it supports the creation of man in the image and likeness of God after Adam had already sinned. ( Gen. 5:1-3, 1:26-27)

Conclusion: Esoteric Objection DENIED.

Reasons: Text taken out of context; contradiction of the thought; hearsay and irrelevancy of the original objection to the above.

c) Hiramabbi2 (on Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:53 pm) has also tried to tie in John 14:16-17 with Genesis 1:26. However, John 14:16-17 is specifically talking about the permanent indwelling of the Holy Spirit hiramabbi2 cannot apply John 14:16-17 to Adam and thus posit that Genesis 1:27 occurs after the Fall.

Esoteric False Assumption: John 7:38-39 tells us this indwelling of the Spirit was not available to those who lived prior to Christ’s resurrection. Therefore, hiramabbi2 cannot apply John 14:16-17 to Adam and thus posit that Genesis 1:27 occurs after the Fall.

Esoteric Inadequacy: Covering up his misleading statement of the cited text (John 7:38-39). TONS of passages in the Old Testament that speak of indwelling of the Spirit of God to his chosen people, even, before the coming of Christ serving his purpose.

Even David, himself, was praying to God, as documented in the Book of Psalms, not to take away the Spirit that was given to him, was he not?

2Peter1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

On the contrary, John 7:39 was a clarification of what Jesus had said in v38 and what would they expect after Jesus died and resurrected -- the permanent indwelling of the Holy Spirit would come AFTER Jesus had already ascended to his Father.

The temporary Spirit (not the permanent indwelling) given to the followers of Christ (John 7:38-39) is specifically described in John 20:22 READ....

John 20:22 “And when he had said this, HE BREATH ON THEM, and saith unto them, "RECEIVED YE THE HOLY GHOST:”

Ironically, Esoteric’ blatant perversion of Genesis 2:7 by subtituting the breath of life (Heb. chay) as spirit (Heb. neshama) in now clearly exposed when reading John 20:22.

As everybody could see now, the text was very specific (red color) in detail describing what kind of breath that is being given to avoid Esoteric's confusion.

Conclusion: Esoteric Objection DENIED.

Reasons: False Assumption; Misleading Statement; Lack of foundation to support the Objection; Lack of knowledge of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the Old Testament.

Finally, I still find Esoteric knowledge of Scripture to be distorted and woefully lacking in spiritual understanding. Perhaps he should concentrate reading the Bible Again, instead of listening to others or his ancestors, who hold the same distorted views.

ECCLESIASTES 7:25 I applied mine heart to know, and to search, and to seek out wisdom, and the reason of things, and to know the wickedness of folly, even of foolishness and madness: v 29 Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man upright; but THEY HAVE SOUGHT OUT MANY INVENTIONS.

Let me say it again, Esoteric cannot use the Scripture to support his opinions. He can only use his interpretational methods which don't agree with Scripture nor History. Therefore, Esoteric can only base his "interpretation" of the Scripture to his own religion's views.


Note: I will respond to the other post ASAP. I am very busy this weekend.


God Bless

[hiramabbi2]

Was Adam created on the third day?

On the Day Jesus made the Earth, Day 3, before the plants and herbs, Day 3, and AFTER the rain, Jesus made Adam. If Adam had not been made on the 3rd Day, then he would have not been present to name the animals, from the ground, which Jesus made at the beginning of the 6th Day. Gen. 2:18-20

EI’s objection:
Adam wasn't alone. Genesis 1:24-26 gives a chronological account. Genesis 2 presupposes the chronology of Genesis 1. In Genesis 2:19, the KJV translates the word "yatsar" (formed) in present tense. Other translations, such as the NIV, translate yatsar as "had formed" - the past tense. The past tense is consistent with Genesis 1:24-26, which tells us animals were created BEFORE man. hiramabbi2 and the KJV translation of yatsar create a contradiction between Genesis 1:24-26 and Genesis 2:19. Therefore there is no need to explain why Adam was alone because he wasn't alone. I also noted that nowhere in the chronological Genesis 1 account do we find any animals created AFTER man was created.

Hmmmm… Why don’t we let the Scripture speaks for itself and find out the actual chronological order of the event in questioned -- who came first, the animals or Adam?

GENESIS 2
19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

As we could see, common sense dictates that Gen. 2:19 comes first before verse 20, is that not true? If so, then, I see no basis for any objection, unless, Esoteric’ NIV Bible rendition documented Gen. 2:19-20 (vise versa) otherwise.

The deatail account of Genesis 2:19-20 obviously shows that all of the animals were brought to Adam. I don't know why Esoteric continue not to see even on just plain reading of the text. What more can I do?

Therefore, Adam was made first and named all the creatures that was brought to him by the Lord.

Note: Esoteric has no right or business passing the blame to the Publisher of the KJV Bible of his inability understanding the Scripture, spiritually.

Hiramabbi’s problem is that he is trying to reconcile Genesis 1 off of Genesis 2. That is where the contradiction arises. Genesis 2 presupposes Genesis 1. We use Genesis 1 to interpret Genesis 2, not the other way around. This also is how hiramabbi2 argues that the Fall and Cain and Abel came before Genesis 1:27.

Who said I could not? Not like you, I have no problem reconciling Genesis 2&1 in chronological order of events that are in harmony and contextually together. The reconciliation or proof text is strictly based on the Scripture, NOT like your own flawed traditional view.

Was Cain the seed of Satan(serpent)?

Additionally, you objected when I asked if you were saying Cain is Satan and told me to show where you said such a thing.
On your Fri Sep 10, 2004 3:54 pm post:

Is that right? Let us see - below is my related quote of “Fri Sep 10, 2004 3:54 pm post.

Quote: Fri Sep 10, 2004 3:54 pm
It was also Jesus Christ himself who revealed and proclaimed this TRUTH about Cain in the NT, in order to cast down other's wild imagination like yours. For you additional learning, please READ the text below.(insertion is mine for clarity)

JOHN 8 44 Ye are of your father (Cain) the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. HE WAS A MURDERER FROM THE BEGINNING, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

IF you don’t believe Jesus made that assertion then please show our readers where we can find in the Scripture that Satan or any Devil was accused of being a murderer from the beginning and lied about it?

Furthermore, nowhere in the scripture you’ll find Cain was part of the genealogy of Adam’s generation IN THE DAY they were created in the likeness of God spiritually.

Now Esoteric, IF you can not prove your malicious assertion then are you going apologize distorting my quotes and position?

Either you’re blatantly lying to our readers or you’re trying hard to cover up your inability to support your flawed understanding of the Scripture, in my expense? Which one?

So much so blaming the KJV rendition, right?

Quote: Fri Sep 10, 2004 3:54 pm
Furthermore, nowhere in the scripture you’ll find Cain was part of the genealogy of Adam’s generation IN THE DAY they were created in the likeness of God spiritually.

EI's objection:
It's quite simple: Genesis 4:1 - "Adam lay with his wife Eve, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain." You replied with this:

Quote:

Sorry, the verse did not say what you assume it to be, but rather, only documenting us that Adam knew his wife.... and Eve's claim that she had gotten a man from the Lord – not from Adam.

ISAIAH 45 7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and CREATE EVIL: I the LORD do all these things

Perhaps, you need to read where the Lord told Sarai (abraham’s wife) that she would have a baby even of her old age. Compliment by our Lord, was it not?

When it says, “Adam knew his wife” in this context of the Hebrew word “yada”, it bluntly means they had sex. Just look at: Genesis 4:17 and 4:25. Genesis 4:25 is blatantly obvious: (KJV) “And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth” - the NIV: “Adam lay with his wife again, and she gave birth to a son and named him Seth,”

Seemingly, Esoteric likes to continue arguing about things I was not even contesting for, husband and wife having “sex”.

What Esoteric failed to comprehend is the fact, there are other couples in spite of having sex all the time, doesn’t necessarily mean they would automatically have a child!

Even the NIV rendition specifically mentioned Eve’ making such testimony -- "With the help of the LORD I have brought forth a man." – Why Esoteric continue to object to our Lord intervention to serve his purpose and to fulfill his prophesy is beyond my imagination.

I can’t believe you think my "assumption" that Adam begot Cain is out of line. Especially when the same context is used when Adam begets Seth and Cain begets Enoch!

In my original quote above, I cited Abraham and Sarai case as an example, wherein, a couple living together and having “sex” for almost century, yet, could not have a Baby until our Lord directly intervened helping them to have one.

Do you want me to show you the chapter and the verse, Esoteric? Or you just don't believe that the Lord can intervine anytime He pleases and fulfill his purpose? Which one?

That certainly is a much safer “assumption” than you make when you assert Cain is the devil.

Perhaps, what Esoteric failed to comprehend, unfortunately, is the fact that I made the assertion that John 8:44 ALLUDES to Cain as the devil (simile) the murderer from the beginning and the father of lies.

I have also provided contextual analysis of John 8:44 to support my position, as well as referring Esoteric to the Book of Genesis -- where we could find the Scriptural documentation that Cain MURDERED his brother Abel and LIED about it to our Lord, didn't I?

What was the reason you edited the thrust of my quote regarding the matter, Esoteric? Why did you intentionally ignore it? Is it more convenience just to dodge the issue and pretend it was not brought forth?

Here deal with it -- Cain, not only was a murderer but also the first human to LIE to our Lord, becoming the father of lies as Jesus asserted in John 8:44.

Seemingly, Esoteric would go to the extreme, even to the point of distorting quotes or misrepresenting other's position, just to cover up his inability to support his assumption with Scripture.

However, this always happen and expected to those who can no longer hold on to their distorted religious faith when confronted with the truth -- because, they don't have solid ground to even stand up.

Again Esoteric, for the nth times, do you have any Scriptural support to justify your continued objection of Jesus assertion of John 8:44?

The rest of Esoteric complain about Cain is just based on his fallacious argument, therefore, does not merit additional response.

I believe in the Gap of Genesis that occurs between Genesis 1:1-2. It is at this time where I believe the fall of angels occurred. The time that occurred between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2 could have been any amount of time for what we know. The fall of the angels effectively destroyed God’s [original] creation and Genesis 1:2 picks up as the literal recreation account that focuses specifically on man, whom God picked to rule on the earth over this new creation.

You can believe whatever you want Esoteric. Although, I'll suggest to keep it to yourself if you don't want to be questioned.

This Gap Theory another distorted fables that is not supported by the Scripture! God do not re-create (repair) any of his creations. Your own assumption of “good=perfect” refutes that fables.

Also, FYI Genesis 1:1-2 is a summary story of the condition of the DEEP in the beginning before any creation ever made! It narrates how the creation took place in the beginning.

The Light that was brought forth in the beginning (Gen. 1:3) was the Word (Jesus) himself, the Son of the Invisible God. Without the Word (Light) was not anything made that was made. Jesus or YHWH, the Son, is the physical manifestation and the image of the Invisible God Father.

Hiramabbi2 also asked me to then explain how then this account could be in literal 24-hour days. In the very first day (Genesis 1:3-5) God had created “light” and “darkness” as well as morning and evening. We know from this moment there was already a rotation between light/dark, morning/evening on the first day. Who are you to say this rotation wasn’t 24 hours? Now on the fourth day (Genesis 1:14-19) God forms the sun and the moon to govern this rotation! The rotation was already established, the sun and moon were created to serve as the governors of this rotation. The light and darkness already existed. God effectively placed light under control of the sun. As you see, it isn’t very difficult to reconcile the 24-hour days of Genesis with that apparent contradiction.

While there was a period of time before the creation of our sun and moon to rule our own universe, Genesis 1 is not based on our 24 hrs/ day earth’ rotation -- simply because they are LIGHT DAYS (Heb. Yowm).

How long did it take the 1st World (Earth) to revolve upon its axis, in the 1st Universe, no one knows, not even you Esoteric!?

How could you say now that it was based on 24 hours earth time when in fact, our earth was not even made until the 3rd day?

The measurement of 24 hours only applies to our present Earth. The Un-Scriptural idea, that the 6 Creative Days and the 1-Day of Rest, are 24-hour periods of Time, is refuted by Scripture. The 7th Day has no End.

I must admit, it has been time immemorial since your forefather has been promulgating this doctrinal invention and wild imagination. However, it’s time for others to know the truth.

Ok sorry, if you don’t like the term “forefather”, then, how about your ancestors who hold the same belief as yours? Would that be fair now?

I will ask this question again:

"WHO is my forefather/ancestor?" Call it what you want hiramabbi2, I just want to know what you mean by that. Who are you talking about?

Why don’t your read my quote again to answer your repeated question? This time do it very s-l-o-w-l-y (in red color) please. I believe I have answered your question, but somehow, you failed to notice it, because of your rage, perhaps?


God Bless

[Ami]

Hi, I'm new here. Glad to meet you all.

Now.

GENESIS 2
19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

As we could see, common sense dictates that Gen. 2:19 comes first before verse 20, is that not true? If so, then, I see no basis for any objection, unless, Esoteric’ NIV Bible rendition documented Gen. 2:19-20 (vise versa) otherwise.

Well, in the NIV, gen 1. 24 says; Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds; livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, and each according to it's kind.' And it was so. No mention of Adam

Gen 2 19 says; Now the lord God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and the birds of the air. <--fullstop.
I think it was just a statement that God formed the animals from the ground
continues....... He brought them to the man to see what he would name them.
It doesn't necessarily mean that God brought them to man immediately after he formed them. But I suppose, one may see it that way if one wishes.

Seemingly, Esoteric likes to continue arguing about things I was not even contesting for, husband and wife having “sex”.

What Esoteric failed to comprehend is the fact, there are other couples in spite of having sex all the time, doesn’t necessarily mean they would automatically have a child!

Even the NIV rendition specifically mentioned Eve’ making such testimony -- "With the help of the LORD I have brought forth a man." – Why Esoteric continue to object to our Lord intervention to serve his purpose and to fulfill his prophesy is beyond my imagination.

I can see your point of view. But here's a question; What about Cain's three sisters? Mentioned in the Talmund? Could Adam and Eve have been having one of them?

Not everybody is created in the image and likeness of God, unless your born again spiritually.

Surely, Cain who was a murderer from the beginning and a liar was not created in the image or likeness of God. He was just a natural living soul without the Spirit of God.

So.. uh......... pardon my misunderstandings, but what does it mean to be born again spiritually? Could other people after that time, today, be born again spiritually, in the image of God, but if your a murderer and a liar, you're not? Just please clarify this for me?

Gen. 1:30 is also future and will be fulfilled when Jesus Returns to this Planet, and the Lion eats Straw as the Ox. Isaiah 11:7

Really? Then please explain to our audience the prophecy of Gen. 1:30 (every beast would eat every green herb as meat) and show us where the lion eats Straw as the ox (Isaiah 11:7).

8) Ah. Anyways, that's a prediction of the future, the same as any other. Eg. The seventh seal was broken, or the trumpet signalled the apocalypse, etc. None of those prophecies have been fufilled yet, and that one about lions eating grass hasn't been either.

While there was a period of time before the creation of our sun and moon to rule our own universe, Genesis 1 is not based on our 24 hrs/ day earth’ rotation -- simply because they are LIGHT DAYS (Heb. Yowm).

How long did it take the 1st World (Earth) to revolve upon its axis, in the 1st Universe, no one knows, not even you Esoteric!?

How could you say now that it was based on 24 hours earth time when in fact, our earth was not even made until the 3rd day?

Well I can see that point. true

[hiramabbi2]

Welcome Ami!

Seemingly, Esoteric likes to continue arguing about things I was not even contesting for, husband and wife having “sex”.

What Esoteric failed to comprehend is the fact, there are other couples in spite of having sex all the time, doesn’t necessarily mean they would automatically have a child!

Even the NIV rendition specifically mentioned Eve’ making such testimony -- "With the help of the LORD I have brought forth a man." – Why Esoteric continue to object to our Lord intervention to serve his purpose and to fulfill his prophesy is beyond my imagination.

I can see your point of view. But here's a question; What about Cain's three sisters? Mentioned in the Talmund? Could Adam and Eve have been having one of them?

The Scriptures document us that incest is abomination to our Lord and is unacceptable. Therefore, I don't believe that "incest" was a part of the process of human multiplication, in the beginning.

Gen. 6:1-5 document us the sons of God married the daughter of man (Adam), and their offspring were mighty men of old.

Gen. 1:21 says that "Every Living Creature that Moveth" was brought forth from the water on Day 5.

The sons of God are the Beings also created from the water on Day 5. Cain married one of the descendants of the sons of God, and so did Cush. Their offspring are what we today, call humans.

This, of course agrees with Science, which says that we all originated, in the water. Today's Humans have BOTH Human Intelligence, and the DNA of Prehistoric Beings.

Our scientist called them Prehistoric Beings, but, called sons of God by the Lord.

Not everybody is created in the image and likeness of God, unless your born again spiritually.

Surely, Cain who was a murderer from the beginning and a liar was not created in the image or likeness of God. He was just a natural living soul without the Spirit of God.

So.. uh......... pardon my misunderstandings, but what does it mean to be born again spiritually? Could other people after that time, today, be born again spiritually, in the image of God, but if your a murderer and a liar, you're not? Just please clarify this for me?

YHWH/Christ, the Son, is the image of the Invisible God.

To be created in the image and likeness of God is to be Born Again in the image of YHWH/Christ, spiritually.

Being Born Again, is re-establishing your personal relationship with our Lord YHWH, the Son of the Invisible God - who made the promise of eternal life to those who believe.

The narrative of Genesis 5:1-3 clearly indicating to us the generations of Adam IN THE DAY (timing) they were created in the likeness of God (Born Again Spirtually). And that was the TIME, when Seth was born and Men begun calling upon the name of the Lord, re-establishing their direct relationship with God. (Gen. 4:26).

According to the Scripture, Jesus will have mercy and compassion on whom he wishes to -- serving his purpose….

ROMANS 9
v13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.v14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. v15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

On the other hand, if you are one of the elect serving his purpose, you are not judge according to your deeds but by Grace.

ROMANS 9
v11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth.)

Example: Saul, before he was Born Again in the Spirit of Christ as the pre-ordained Minister of the Gentiles, was considered a murderer by many Christians.

Yet, Saul (better known as Paul) served Christ purpose, preaching the Light to the Gentiles and the righteousness and Grace of the Lord.


God Bless

[Ami]

Ami wrote:
Quote:
Seemingly, Esoteric likes to continue arguing about things I was not even contesting for, husband and wife having “sex”.

What Esoteric failed to comprehend is the fact, there are other couples in spite of having sex all the time, doesn’t necessarily mean they would automatically have a child!

Even the NIV rendition specifically mentioned Eve’ making such testimony -- "With the help of the LORD I have brought forth a man." – Why Esoteric continue to object to our Lord intervention to serve his purpose and to fulfill his prophesy is beyond my imagination.


I can see your point of view. But here's a question; What about Cain's three sisters? Mentioned in the Talmund? Could Adam and Eve have been having one of them?


The Scriptures document us that incest is abomination to our Lord and is unacceptable. Therefore, I don't believe that "incest" was a part of the process of human multiplication, in the beginning.

Gen. 6:1-5 document us the sons of God married the daughter of man (Adam), and their offspring were mighty men of old.

Uh, that wasn't what I was saying. I thought that you meant that when Adam and Eve where said to have had sex, it may not mean that they would automatically have a child. It does say that Seth was born afterwards in the bible though. So it's easy to assume that Seth was the result though. I was pointing out however that Seth, Cain and Abel were not the only offspring of this couple. Adam and Eve had girls, too. they just weren't noted.

According to the Scripture, Jesus will have mercy and compassion on whom he wishes to -- serving his purpose….

Ah. Sorry if I misunderstood. Nothing wrong there

[Esoteric_Illuminati]

First, I’d like to comment on your “debate” skills hiramabbi2. In your posts directed to me, you've come across as arrogant and self-righteous.
1 Peter 2: 15But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect,
I don’t see how anyone who is aware of this passage would debate like you do. I’ve honestly never been subject to so many subtle insults and snide remarks in a debate thread than this one here. Not only that, but you intentionally avoid many of my questions. You attack me with ad hominem and strawman arguments, while continually posting your own arguments which beg the question. I don’t see how someone with such a blatant disregard for the principles of debate and logic would ever be swayed by any argument anyways.

That said, keep in mind that the majority of my replies are meant more for benefit of others reading this thread than for you. This thread has taken up a good deal of my time spent on debate forums. Consider this my last responsive post for the purposes of debate here. I’ll graciously give you the last word (b/c no doubt you’ll reply to this post) on this debate. Consider any lack of reply to your subsequent comments from here on out to the notion that we’ll have to agree to disagree. I’d like to spend my time debating other topics here as well.

Esoteric will go to extremes to try to show his false assumption, that the forming of Adam from the dust of the ground (Gen.2:7), is the same event as the creation of Adam & Eve spiritually (Gen. 1:26-27).

Yes, I have gone to extremes. Going back to the original Hebrew text is very extreme I know.

This INCLUDES, according to Esoteric, the breath of spirit, the knowledge of Good and Evil to help A&E make the right decision (free will) to choose their way of living, separate from God.

Where did I say that this? We have free will. Our own spirit (neshama/ruwach/pneuma) is like the control center for our thoughts/actions. In other words, our spirit is the faculty that manifests our free will. Our spirit determines our thoughts and actions. Without this spirit, we are nothing more than animals.

In the Garden of Eden, God gave Adam and Eve a command – not to eat from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil OR they will die. Such a command presupposes some things.
1.) Adam and Eve had free will. Otherwise God wouldn’t have to make commands (commands of obedience to either instinctual animals or robots are meaningless).
2.) Adam and Eve were rational human beings. God’s command meant something, rather than nothing. It is pointless telling an animal/robot not to do something or it will die. Also, since death did not exist prior to original sin, only a rational being could understand such a concept.

It is for these reasons, I believe Adam and Eve had a special spirit (ruwach) – a rational mind and moral conscience – that could appreciate God’s commands.

What hiramabbi2 doesn’t understand is this spirit is NOT bonded directly to God’s Will. If it were, then Adam and Eve did not have free will. If Adam’s spirit was bonded with God’s Spirit, then Adam could not have sinned. A&E did not have a permanent indwelling of the Holy Spirit. But that does not mean they didn’t have a spirit of their own! A&E were given knowledge directly from God – the command not to eat from the Tree or they would die. Satan contradicted this knowledge, telling them they would not die. A&E were given a choice of the free will.

What I’m trying to get Hiramabbi2 to understand that is if they did not have a spirit (ruwach), then they didn’t have free will – they would have been like animals. Can animals sin? NO! They don’t have the faculty in which to sin. That faculty, which I’ve been trying to explain to hiramabbi2, is the SPIRIT of man, contextually defined in Scripture as neshama/ruwach/pneuma.

God breathed life (neshama) into Adam, the same as He did to all animals. BUT the breath of life God gave Adam INCLUDED a spirit (ruwach/pneuma) which serves as the rational human mind. Animals do NOT have this spirit.

The only reason to believe such distorted assumption is in vain effort to support of their ancient and traditional false theories of the “Fall” or “Original Sin”. The verses Esoteric posted, were taken out of context and deny their false assumption or fables.

That’s just a baseless assertion. Prove it.

In order for Esoteric to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that his objection is based on a solid foundation, he must first show us that this event (Gen. 2:7; 1:26-27) are the same -- by reconciling the text or providing additional Scriptural proof text to support his assumption not his doctrinal fables.

I did. I argued that the KJV mistranslates the word yatsar in Genesis 2:19. You say I’m wrong basically “because the KJV says so.” You repeatedly beg the question by using the KJV to prove that the KJV is accurate! Why do you think I’ve been using the original Hebrew/Greek in my arguments?

Therefore, in effort not to continue flooding this thread with unnecessary diversion (EI’s tactics), I will only respond to the relevant issue directly. I will also cite Esoteric’ false assumptions, inadequacy and conclusion of his objection based upon his own latest argument.

How convenient that you only respond to what you yourself define as relevant. That’s the first sign of dishonest debate tactics.

a) Esoteric Example Defining "spirit":
Genesis 2:7 – God breathed in “neshama” The same word (neshama) is used in Genesis 7:22. Neshama also directly corresponds to the Hebrew word “ruwach.” as seen throughout the OT, but most specifically in Isaiah 57:16. The Greek word for spirit is “pneuma.”

Esoteric False Assumption: Changing of the actual meaning of the text by substituting the actual word used in the Scripture (the breath of Life) with “the breath of spirit” would work to his advantage. Such is not the case!

Esoteric Inadequacy: Unfortunately for Esoteric, the text is crystal clear - Gen. 2:7 does not speak of the “breath of spirit” (neshama) as he would like us to believe, but, the Breath of LIFE (chay) as given to all creatures that hast life - formed with nostrils Gen. 7:22.

What are you talking about? “neshama” is used in Genesis 2:7! In the context of Gen 2:7 and 7:22, “neshama” (the breath of God) gives both life (chay – to man and animals) and spirit (ruwach – man alone). Please read the definition of “neshama” I provided in a link.

God created man different from animals – that is, with free will. How did Adam sin in the first place if he had no spirit (w/rational mind) to sin? If we do not have a spirit (until we’re born again as you posit), then how are we held accountable for our sins? That implies we don’t have free will, a rational mind, and a moral conscience! Our human spirit is the faculty in which free will, rationality and morality reside and are manifest!

Even trained dogs would, at times, disregard any direct command of their master. IF so, would this be already equating to the dog's choosing a separate life away from his master, based upon Esoteric fables and religious view? Of course not! Even our constitution (U.S.) presume all animals to be innocent of the spirit of knowledge to do good and evil, are they not?

I don’t know what you’re talking about here.

Adam and Eve were innocent of the spirit good and evil until they ate the fruit of the Tree of Knoweldge. It was only then, they learned about shame and guilt of what they have done. However, I don't believe that this offense equates to Adam & Eve actually choosing a separate life away from the Lord -- as Esoteric would like you to believe.

If they were so innocent, why did God punish them? They were NOT innocent because God had commanded them not to eat from that Tree! They directly disobeyed God and were punished.

Going back to Gen. 2:7 the text' actual usage of the definite article “THE” to describe THE BREATH OF LIFE (not neshama) should have served as a hint to Esoteric that their theory is flawed and distorted. Had it been the case, it was the breath of spirit that is being given to Adam, the Scripture would have specifically described it so, as clearly documented in John 20:22

“The” is what you rest your case on? The Hebrew phrase is “neshama chay.” So don’t try to pretend like neshama isn’t there. It doesn’t matter since your argument doesn’t refute anything I said. John 20:22 is NOT the same concept – the human spirit is completely different than the Holy Spirit. You are once again begging the question, since you’re using your conclusion (humans don’t have a spirit) as a premise in your argument and using John 20:22 as a corollary.

Conclusion: Esoteric Objection DENIED

Reasons: Purely based on assumption and the contamination of the verse; lack of direct contextual reconciliation or biblical proof text to prove Gen. 2:7 vs. Gen. 1:26-27 is the same event based upon Esoteric contention.

b) Esoteric Argument of 1Corinthian 15:45-46 it is written: "The first man Adam became a living being"; the last Adam, a lifegiving spirit. 46The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual.”

Esoteric False Assumption: “The Last Adam is (Jesus), a life giving Spirit” and not the actual creation of Adam Spiritually, after he had sinned, Genesis 5:1-3.

I’ve already responded to this, several times, at length. Image of God = body, soul, and spirit. Adam was created with a body, soul, and spirit. Prove me wrong. Given the definition of the human spirit, that ultimately requires that you prove that Adam did not have free will.

Esoteric Inadequacy: Nowhere in the Scripture that would indicate to us, the last Adam was a another source of “lifegiving spirit”. The verses suggested that Adam was a natural living soul before he was MADE a quickening spirit -- not a lifegiver of spirit which you insinuated.

What do you think quickening means? Where does it say that Adam was made a quickening spirit? You say, “the verses suggest…” First, I completely disagree with that assumption as you already know. Second, why do you make these assumptions and then criticize me for apparently doing the same thing. Can you not see you’re being a hypocrite when you do so?

The Scripture also does not mentioned anything that would directly suggest to us, the Last Adam is Jesus, "THE" source of lifegiving Spirit.

It doesn’t? So you’re saying Jesus Christ is not the way to receive eternal life? How do we receive the indwelling of Holy Spirit?

If we follow Esoteric illogical and distorted assumption then, we could honestly conclude that the First Adam who committed the “original sin” in the beginning, is no other than Jesus Christ himself- being the same as the last Adam, accordingly.

No, you cannot conclude such a thing. That is a really weak strawman.

The narrative of Genesis 5:1-3 clearly indicating to us the generations of Adam IN THE DAY (timing) they were created in the likeness of God. And that was the TIME, when Seth was born and Men begun calling upon the name of the Lord, re-establishing their direct relationship with God. (Gen. 4:26).

Adam was created in the image and likeness of God. Unfortunately, you ignore the entire chapter of Genesis 3, in which A&E ate from the tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. How do you conclude that calling on the name of the Lord (Gen 4:26) is a DIRECT relationship with God? If we had a direct relationship with Him, then we wouldn’t have to call upon His name would we? We would be in one perfect mind with Him, which also means there would be absolutely no sin within us.

I’m still wondering if you believe people that are born again are perfect sinless beings?

This is in harmony to the requirement of being Born Again spiritually. This is also why it supports the creation of man in the image and likeness of God after Adam had already sinned. ( Gen. 5:1-3, 1:26-27)

You beg the question of what it means to be born again spiritually: Adam was born again spiritually because he had the image/likeness of God and Adam had the image/likeness of God because he was born again spiritually. Now who’s being illogical?

Conclusion: Esoteric Objection DENIED.

Reasons: Text taken out of context; contradiction of the thought; hearsay and irrelevancy of the original objection to the above.

c) Hiramabbi2 (on Tue Sep 07, 2004 5:53 pm) has also tried to tie in John 14:16-17 with Genesis 1:26. However, John 14:16-17 is specifically talking about the permanent indwelling of the Holy Spirit hiramabbi2 cannot apply John 14:16-17 to Adam and thus posit that Genesis 1:27 occurs after the Fall.

Esoteric False Assumption: John 7:38-39 tells us this indwelling of the Spirit was not available to those who lived prior to Christ’s resurrection. Therefore, hiramabbi2 cannot apply John 14:16-17 to Adam and thus posit that Genesis 1:27 occurs after the Fall.

Esoteric Inadequacy: Covering up his misleading statement of the cited text (John 7:38-39). TONS of passages in the Old Testament that speak of indwelling of the Spirit of God to his chosen people, even, before the coming of Christ serving his purpose.

No they don’t. There is a stark difference between the permanent indwelling of the Holy Spirit and the empowering ministry of the Holy Spirit in the OT. The Holy Spirit came upon OT believers to perform specific functions. The indwelling of the Holy Spirit is where He becomes literally bonded with our human spirit – making us a new creation. Contrast a born again Christian who is baptized in Christ with the OT prophets - very different works of the Holy Spirit.

Even David, himself, was praying to God, as documented in the Book of Psalms, not to take away the Spirit that was given to him, was he not?

Uh huh – Psalm 51:11. If the Holy Spirit was permanent in the OT, why would David have to pray to God for Him to keep it? The Holy Spirit empowered David. Prior to Christ’s resurrection, the Holy Spirit was NOT given in the manner it now does to believers after Pentecost. John 20:22 fits perfectly with that concept. Christ empowered the disciples with the Holy Spirit until Pentecost, upon which they received the permanent indwelling of the Spirit. In John 20:22, the disciples were empowered with the Holy Spirit in the same way OT believers (i.e. David, Saul, the prophets, etc.) were empowered with Him. Saul, for example, had the Holy Spirit, and He lost it (1 Sam 16:14). It is a contradiction with John 7:38-39 to believe the Holy Spirit permanently dwelled within believers prior to Christ’s resurrection/glorification.

Ironically, Esoteric’ blatant perversion of Genesis 2:7 by subtituting the breath of life (Heb. chay) as spirit (Heb. neshama) in now clearly exposed when reading John 20:22.

This is silly since you’re trying to debate OT Hebrew words (neshama & chay) with the Greek NT. Let’s talk about it though.

Jesus “breathed on them” – the Greek is “emphusao” – ironically, the ONLY other time this phrase is used, is in the Septuagint verse of Genesis 2:7 – when God breathed (neshama) life (chay) into Adam! It’s very simple. Adam was given a spirit in Genesis 2:7 by God. By receiving a spirit (rational mind w/free will), in addition to a body, Adam became a living soul in the image and likeness of triune God. A man’s soul, body and spirit are in the image of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. However, Adam’s spirit became corrupt at original sin – he lost that perfect image/likeness of God since his spirit from that point functioned independently from God. After Christ accomplished His work, Holy Spirit comes to indwell with believers baptized in Christ – permanently. The Holy Spirit indwells within believers to restore the fuctioning of our spirit, thus the image/likeness of God. That is what holy baptism is all about! Such a baptism did not exist in the OT because the Holy Spirit did not permenantly indwell within believers.

Finally, I still find Esoteric knowledge of Scripture to be distorted and woefully lacking in spiritual understanding. Perhaps he should concentrate reading the Bible Again, instead of listening to others or his ancestors, who hold the same distorted views.

Give me a break. Perhaps you should concentrate more on answering my arguments directly than on ad hominem attacks on me. You know absolutely nothing about me or about the way I’ve come to understand Scripture.

ECCLESIASTES 7:25 I applied mine heart to know, and to search, and to seek out wisdom, and the reason of things, and to know the wickedness of folly, even of foolishness and madness: v 29 Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man upright; but THEY HAVE SOUGHT OUT MANY INVENTIONS.

Let me say it again, Esoteric cannot use the Scripture to support his opinions. He can only use his interpretational methods which don't agree with Scripture nor History. Therefore, Esoteric can only base his "interpretation" of the Scripture to his own religion's views.

What was your point with the part that you had in all-caps? The passage simply says God created man upright, BUT man has abandon God to pursue his own ways (inventions/schemes).

On the Day Jesus made the Earth, Day 3, before the plants and herbs, Day 3, and AFTER the rain, Jesus made Adam. If Adam had not been made on the 3rd Day, then he would have not been present to name the animals, from the ground, which Jesus made at the beginning of the 6th Day. Gen. 2:18-20

Hmmmm… Why don’t we let the Scripture speaks for itself and find out the actual chronological order of the event in questioned -- who came first, the animals or Adam?

GENESIS 2
19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

As we could see, common sense dictates that Gen. 2:19 comes first before verse 20, is that not true? If so, then, I see no basis for any objection, unless, Esoteric’ NIV Bible rendition documented Gen. 2:19-20 (vise versa) otherwise.

The deatail account of Genesis 2:19-20 obviously shows that all of the animals were brought to Adam. I don't know why Esoteric continue not to see even on just plain reading of the text. What more can I do?

Therefore, Adam was made first and named all the creatures that was brought to him by the Lord.

Note: Esoteric has no right or business passing the blame to the Publisher of the KJV Bible of his inability understanding the Scripture, spiritually.

Here’s the prime example of you begging the question. I have questioned the translation of the word “yatsar” in Genesis 2:19. The KJV translates it as “formed”, the NIV translates it as “had formed.” You are begging the question of what is the proper translation of yatsar, by arguing under the premise that the KJV is correct in it’s translation, therefore the word ought to be “formed.”

Genesis 1:24-25 says God created animals. Genesis 1:26 then says God created man to rule over the animals. Ergo in Genesis 2:19 “yatsar” ought to be translated as “had formed” - God brought the animals he had formed to Adam to be named. The chronology works like this: God created animals, then God creates man, then God brings the animals he had formed to man to be named, then God creates woman.

You’re basing the apparent contradiction between man and animals off the KJV translation of the word “yatsar.” There is no contradiction IF you interpret Genesis 2:19, based on the Genesis 1:24-26 account that tells us man was created AFTER animals. If Genesis 2 presupposes Genesis 1, why do you build Genesis 1 off of Genesis 2?

You also seem to try and raise a new question (contradiction) between Gen 2:19 and Gen 2:20. You conclude that since there was “no suitable helper for Adam”, Adam was created before animals. However, the purpose of Genesis 2:20 was to let us know that God showed Adam that none of the animals were a suitable helper (mate) for him, henceforth bestiality is WRONG and that woman was to be his suitable helper. That is the common sense taught in Gen 2:20 – all the animals God had formed were not suitable for Adam’s biological needs.

Finally, I’m not claiming the translators of the KJV did not understand Scripture or the KJV itself isn’t doesn’t serve as God’s Word. I’m saying that the KJV is written in an archaic form of the English language that fails to translate Scripture as accurately in English as the NIV does. That’s why I’ve been more than willing to debate with the original Hebrew/Greek.

Is that right? Let us see - below is my related quote of “Fri Sep 10, 2004 3:54 pm post.

Quote: Fri Sep 10, 2004 3:54 pm
It was also Jesus Christ himself who revealed and proclaimed this TRUTH about Cain in the NT, in order to cast down other's wild imagination like yours. For you additional learning, please READ the text below.(insertion is mine for clarity)

JOHN 8 44 Ye are of your father (Cain) the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. HE WAS A MURDERER FROM THE BEGINNING, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

IF you don’t believe Jesus made that assertion then please show our readers where we can find in the Scripture that Satan or any Devil was accused of being a murderer from the beginning and lied about it?

Furthermore, nowhere in the scripture you’ll find Cain was part of the genealogy of Adam’s generation IN THE DAY they were created in the likeness of God spiritually.

Now Esoteric, IF you can not prove your malicious assertion then are you going apologize distorting my quotes and position?

Either you’re blatantly lying to our readers or you’re trying hard to cover up your inability to support your flawed understanding of the Scripture, in my expense? Which one?

So much so blaming the KJV rendition, right?

Quote: Fri Sep 10, 2004 3:54 pm
Furthermore, nowhere in the scripture you’ll find Cain was part of the genealogy of Adam’s generation IN THE DAY they were created in the likeness of God spiritually.

There’s nothing to apologize for. You’re asserting that Cain is the devil (diabolos) in John 8:44. I want you to prove that. I already told you why Cain’s line wasn’t included in any genealogies. Genesis 5:3 tells us Seth was in Adam’s own image and likeness. This means, 1.) Seth had a body, soul, and spirit and 2.) Seth’s spirit was like Adam’s spirit; it functioned independent from God. That’s why Seth and subsequent believers had to call upon the Lord for knowledge and understanding.

Quote:
Sorry, the verse did not say what you assume it to be, but rather, only documenting us that Adam knew his wife.... and Eve's claim that she had gotten a man from the Lord – not from Adam.

ISAIAH 45 7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and CREATE EVIL: I the LORD do all these things

Perhaps, you need to read where the Lord told Sarai (abraham’s wife) that she would have a baby even of her old age. Compliment by our Lord, was it not?

Seemingly, Esoteric likes to continue arguing about things I was not even contesting for, husband and wife having “sex”.

What Esoteric failed to comprehend is the fact, there are other couples in spite of having sex all the time, doesn’t necessarily mean they would automatically have a child!

Even the NIV rendition specifically mentioned Eve’ making such testimony -- "With the help of the LORD I have brought forth a man." – Why Esoteric continue to object to our Lord intervention to serve his purpose and to fulfill his prophesy is beyond my imagination.

So what’s your point?
Ecclesiastes 12: 7 and the dust returns to the ground it came from,
and the spirit returns to God who gave it.
God gives all of us life. He is the sustainer of life. Read Acts 17:25. If it weren’t for God, there would be no life. Eve, Sarai, and every other woman owe thanks to God for the blessing of new life.

You’re saying then that since Eve acknowledges God as the source of life (and evil) then Cain is the seed of the serpent. That’s a non sequitur. The same logic you use is analogous to those who equate God with Satan. Isaiah 45:7 has absolutely nothing to do with Genesis 4:1, other than acknowledging that God is the source of practically everything. Bottom line here is the same word, “knew/yada” in the KJV, is used in Genesis 4:17 and 4:25 – both in the exact same context of Genesis 4:1.

In my original quote above, I cited Abraham and Sarai case as an example, wherein, a couple living together and having “sex” for almost century, yet, could not have a Baby until our Lord directly intervened helping them to have one.

Do you want me to show you the chapter and the verse, Esoteric? Or you just don't believe that the Lord can intervine anytime He pleases and fulfill his purpose? Which one?

CONTEXT CONTEXT CONTEXT

Perhaps, what Esoteric failed to comprehend, unfortunately, is the fact that I made the assertion that John 8:44 ALLUDES to Cain as the devil (simile) the murderer from the beginning and the father of lies.

So do you believe Cain the devil or not? First you put Cain in parenthesis indicating that you believe he IS the devil. Now you say it’s a simile, which is to say Cain is “like” the devil.

I have also provided contextual analysis of John 8:44 to support my position, as well as referring Esoteric to the Book of Genesis -- where we could find the Scriptural documentation that Cain MURDERED his brother Abel and LIED about it to our Lord, didn't I?

So what? Cain was a liar and murderer. That doesn’t mean he IS the devil, therefore John 8:44 is not talking about Cain. That’s another non sequitur.

What was the reason you edited the thrust of my quote regarding the matter, Esoteric? Why did you intentionally ignore it? Is it more convenience just to dodge the issue and pretend it was not brought forth?

I didn’t ignore it or edit it. I just didn’t quote the entire thing to save space in that post. I’m obviously not taking the same spacing saving attempts in this post to avoid that complaint again. Anyway, what difference does quoting the entire thing or just “JOHN 8 44 Ye are of your father (Cain) the devil,...” make? The way it reads, it’s obvious you’re equating Cain with the devil there (not a simile).

Here deal with it -- Cain, not only was a murderer but also the first human to LIE to our Lord, becoming the father of lies as Jesus asserted in John 8:44.

If only Noah’s family was spared in the flood, how then is Cain the father of these people Jesus is talking about? If Jesus is being symbolic, why not agree with what I said in my last post where I explained the “children of the devil”? Sure, Cain was a child of the devil, but he was not literally begotten by the devil (seed of the serpent).

Seemingly, Esoteric would go to the extreme, even to the point of distorting quotes or misrepresenting other's position, just to cover up his inability to support his assumption with Scripture.

However, this always happen and expected to those who can no longer hold on to their distorted religious faith when confronted with the truth -- because, they don't have solid ground to even stand up.

Again Esoteric, for the nth times, do you have any Scriptural support to justify your continued objection of Jesus assertion of John 8:44?

Been there, done that.

The rest of Esoteric complain about Cain is just based on his fallacious argument, therefore, does not merit additional response.

Another baseless assertion. Prove it.

You can believe whatever you want Esoteric. Although, I'll suggest to keep it to yourself if you don't want to be questioned.

This Gap Theory another distorted fables that is not supported by the Scripture! God do not re-create (repair) any of his creations. Your own assumption of “good=perfect” refutes that fables.

No it doesn’t.

Also, FYI Genesis 1:1-2 is a summary story of the condition of the DEEP in the beginning before any creation ever made! It narrates how the creation took place in the beginning.

The Light that was brought forth in the beginning (Gen. 1:3) was the Word (Jesus) himself, the Son of the Invisible God. Without the Word (Light) was not anything made that was made. Jesus or YHWH, the Son, is the physical manifestation and the image of the Invisible God Father.

If God is light, and only God existed, why was there darkness (Gen 1:2)? Darkness would not exist in such a case would it?

While there was a period of time before the creation of our sun and moon to rule our own universe, Genesis 1 is not based on our 24 hrs/ day earth’ rotation -- simply because they are LIGHT DAYS (Heb. Yowm).

How long did it take the 1st World (Earth) to revolve upon its axis, in the 1st Universe, no one knows, not even you Esoteric!?

How could you say now that it was based on 24 hours earth time when in fact, our earth was not even made until the 3rd day?

The measurement of 24 hours only applies to our present Earth. The Un-Scriptural idea, that the 6 Creative Days and the 1-Day of Rest, are 24-hour periods of Time, is refuted by Scripture. The 7th Day has no End.

You’re begging the question again. You say that I cannot claim “light days” were 24-hour days. But that presupposes that you KNOW how long they were. How do you know Genesis 1 is not based on 24-hour days?

Here’s the definition of ”yowm”

The Hebrew word for “day” doesn’t refute my argument any. I don’t claim to know how old the heavens and the earth are. But neither can you make such a claim. I do believe the days were 24-hr days based on my previous argument on the rotation between light/darkness and evening/morning. It’s both logical and reasonable to believe. Additionally, you base your assertion off the premise that the “it’s unScriptural that the 6-day creation and 7th day rest are 24 hours.” Says who? You? You haven’t proven that argument to me so I reject that conclusion, which you use as a premise here. Again, you beg the question.

… I must admit, it has been time immemorial since your forefather has been promulgating this doctrinal invention and wild imagination. However, it’s time for others to know the truth.

Ok sorry, if you don’t like the term “forefather”, then, how about your ancestors who hold the same belief as yours? Would that be fair now?

Why don’t your read my quote again to answer your repeated question? This time do it very s-l-o-w-l-y (in red color) please. I believe I have answered your question, but somehow, you failed to notice it, because of your rage, perhaps?

lol – no rage. I refer you to my avatar on the top left corner by my name for a more appropriate emotion I’ve experienced throughout the course of this thread. Nevertheless, you STILL failed to answer my question:
WHO IS MY ANCESTOR?
Who is it that holds the same belief I do – because I have personally found no one? Why do you keep avoiding a direct answer to my question? Who is my ancestor? Who has been “promulgating this doctrinal invention and wild imagination?" Is he Joseph Smith? Martin Luther? John Calvin? Augustine? Mary Poppins? Bill O’Reilly? Maybe even *gasp* Cain???? I just wanted to know whom you were specifically referring to when you made that comment since you seem to know so much about my beliefs.

Fin

[hiramabbi2]

First, I’d like to comment on your “debate” skills hiramabbi2. In your posts directed to me, you've come across as arrogant and self-righteous.
1 Peter 2: 15But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect,
I don’t see how anyone who is aware of this passage would debate like you do. I’ve honestly never been subject to so many subtle insults and snide remarks in a debate thread than this one here. Not only that, but you intentionally avoid many of my questions. You attack me with ad hominem and strawman arguments, while continually posting your own arguments which beg the question. I don’t see how someone with such a blatant disregard for the principles of debate and logic would ever be swayed by any argument anyways.

That said, keep in mind that the majority of my replies are meant more for benefit of others reading this thread than for you. This thread has taken up a good deal of my time spent on debate forums. Consider this my last responsive post for the purposes of debate here. I’ll graciously give you the last word (b/c no doubt you’ll reply to this post) on this debate. Consider any lack of reply to your subsequent comments from here on out to the notion that we’ll have to agree to disagree. I’d like to spend my time debating other topics here as well.

Dear Esoteric:

English is my second language, therefore, being a straight shooter as I am, I call it as I see it! Perhaps, not like you, there’s no hypocrisy here. Therefore, don’t expect me to emulate a nice spin -- everytime I disagree -- like the way you do it with mental equivocation.

It doesn’t matter to me whether you like my debating style or not, as long I get the message across. I would suggest that you are fast to judge, but slower to refute the Truth of God, with Scripture.

Since you have contaminated this thread with so many unrelated issues that are not even part of my contention, I will also agree to disagree with your distorted assumption and flawed religious view.

Again, like most young earthers, you do add quite a bit to what Scripture actually says, in vain attempt to support your own religious belief.

I do not consider the position articulated, by you, to be Scriptural, and therefore not worthy of rebuttal at this time.

The arrogant, unsupported, views of people who cannot show us Scripturally, their flawed understanding, are not worthy of any true study of God's Holy Word.

BTW, you seem to be asking for respect which you don't deserve --by way of perversing the Scripture, misrepresenting my I stand and distorting my quotes. Therefore, you don't deserve one, really!

I would rather extend my respect to others than you. And I could not be more blantly straight forward than that, sorry.



God Bless.

[Corvus]

Esoteric, I apologise that no one noticed this sooner. I recommend using the exclamation mark on the top right hand corner of a post to report it to the moderators if you are ever subjected to this sort of thing.

First, I’d like to comment on your “debate” skills hiramabbi2. In your posts directed to me, you've come across as arrogant and self-righteous.
1 Peter 2: 15But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect,
I don’t see how anyone who is aware of this passage would debate like you do. I’ve honestly never been subject to so many subtle insults and snide remarks in a debate thread than this one here. Not only that, but you intentionally avoid many of my questions. You attack me with ad hominem and strawman arguments, while continually posting your own arguments which beg the question. I don’t see how someone with such a blatant disregard for the principles of debate and logic would ever be swayed by any argument anyways.

That said, keep in mind that the majority of my replies are meant more for benefit of others reading this thread than for you. This thread has taken up a good deal of my time spent on debate forums. Consider this my last responsive post for the purposes of debate here. I’ll graciously give you the last word (b/c no doubt you’ll reply to this post) on this debate. Consider any lack of reply to your subsequent comments from here on out to the notion that we’ll have to agree to disagree. I’d like to spend my time debating other topics here as well.

Dear Esoteric:

English is my second language, therefore, being a straight shooter as I am, I call it as I see it! Perhaps, not like you, there’s no hypocrisy here. Therefore, don’t expect me to emulate a nice spin -- everytime I disagree -- like the way you do it with mental equivocation.

It doesn’t matter to me whether you like my debating style or not, as long I get the message across. I would suggest that you are fast to judge, but slower to refute the Truth of God, with Scripture.

All right, that is quite enough. It does matter to other people whether they like your debating style or not, especially we moderators. We would have gotten to this sooner but sometimes we cannot keep up with the sheer volume of new posts that are generated by this board, especially when they are as lengthy as the previous ones. My personal position on this is irrelevant - I really don't understand it at all, nor do I want to understand it, and I feel no desire to sit by the Torah with a Hebrew - English dictionary. That said, I do not need to understand the topic in order to see the contempt with which you are treating Esoteric Illuminati.

Since you have contaminated this thread with so many unrelated issues that are not even part of my contention, I will also agree to disagree with your distorted assumption and flawed religious view.

Again, like most young earthers, you do add quite a bit to what Scripture actually says, in vain attempt to support your own religious belief.

I do not consider the position articulated, by you, to be Scriptural, and therefore not worthy of rebuttal at this time.

The arrogant, unsupported, views of people who cannot show us Scripturally, their flawed understanding, are not worthy of any true study of God's Holy Word.

BTW, you seem to be asking for respect which you don't deserve --by way of perversing the Scripture, misrepresenting my I stand and distorting my quotes. Therefore, you don't deserve one, really!

I would rather extend my respect to others than you. And I could not be more blantly straight forward than that, sorry.

Hiramabbi2, every member of our forum deserves respect. In fact, this is codified in the last, but not the least important, of our rules;

13. In general, all members are to be civil and respectful

Consider this a formal warning, Hiramabbi2. By all means, debate what Esoteric has said - or don't, the choice is up to you - but do without the condescension and contempt. That sort of thing can escalate into a situation we could all do without.

[hiramabbi2]

BTW, you seem to be asking for respect which you don't deserve --by way of perversing the Scripture, misrepresenting my I stand and distorting my quotes. Therefore, you don't deserve one, really!

I would rather extend my respect to others than you (a wish). And I could not be more blantly straight forward than that, sorry.

Hiramabbi2, every member of our forum deserves respect. In fact, this is codified in the last, but not the least important, of our rules;

13. In general, all members are to be civil and respectful

Consider this a formal warning, Hiramabbi2. By all means, debate what Esoteric has said - or don't, the choice is up to you - but do without the condescension and contempt. That sort of thing can escalate into a situation we could all do without.

Dear Moderator:

I honestly don't believe I have express my disrespect to Esoteric personally himself, but, only to his method of deception and malicious attempt to distort my stand -- which I don't have any respect for.

And, If this is the prize to pay for such notice of my dissatisfaction, then, I am so satisfied for being able to have opportunity expressing my view!!!

Your warning is dully noted. I humbly apologize to others who might think otherwise.


God Bless.