xjwsforChrist

LOZ SAID

Shelby, as you can imagine I'll need to pray and ask and meditate on these things. One question springs to mind immediately though...in Job 38:7 it speaks of " all the sons of God began shouting in applause " - who do you understand these sons to be?

Loz x

AGUEST SAID

That verse does refer to angels, dear Loz (peace to you!)... as does the two in Job (1:6 and 2:1)... but it exists that way because the scribes (Greeks) believed that ALL angels were gods and if gods, then sons. That is not accurate, though. Gods (little g) are "divine," yes, because they are "of God"... but that one is "of God" does not necessarily make them a son. The beasts are of God, yes?

As the writer of the letter to the Hebrews tried to clarify:

"To which of the ANGELS did He (God) ever say, 'You are my SON'?"

Although there has been a PROMISE for more sons (by means of holy spirit), only our dear Lord... and Adham... are/were sons.

The Adversary is an angel, dear one. He, too, was present at the creation and he, too, took his station before the Most Holy One of Israel. Do you think he is God's son? My understanding is that he is the son... of Destruction (Abaddon/Apollyon... Death)... who is God's enemy.

But yes, please... DO... ASK. By ALL means. I have no doubt that you will receive what you ask for, either.

Again, peace to you!

YOUR servant, sister, and fellow slave of Christ,

SA, who thanks dear tec (peace!) for saving my eyesight - LOLOL!

AGUEST SAID

Excluding the above books, can you just show m TWO examples you find in the Bible that you would say have become blatantly untrue and false?

I can, dear Lar (peace to you!):

1. The account where two she bears killed 42 children. Never happened. How do we KNOW? Look at/listen to Christ. He said he did NOTHING of his own initiative, but only as he observed the Father doing and as he learned from the Father. So, now, imagine if you will, some children taunting him - do you truly think he (you?) would just stand there, given your powers to, what, control the wind, water, animals, trees... and let two bears rip ONE child, let alone 42 apart? WOULD you?

2. Where Uzzah reached out to catch the Ark when it was falling. The claim is that he was struck dead right then and there. Again, looking to Christ... and knowing not only was there no intent on this man's part to PROFANE the Ark or disrespect God... but to the contrary, to keep a sacred utensil from falling to ground (which was less sanctified than dear Uzzah - remember, Moses had to take off his shoes just to be in JAH's presence!... do you REALLY think the Most Holy One of Israel would have just arbitrarily struck this man dead? Would Christ? Would YOU?

And there are many more instances. But think on this: if YOU would have mercy in this instances... you, existing in sin and unrighteousness... how could the MOST Holy of Israel Himself not do so? Surely Christ would have and if HE would have, he who asked forgiveness NOT for some folks merely taunting him, but putting him to DEATH... so would His Father, the One who taught HIM how TO forgive.

This is why HE said:

"I came... to bear witness to the TRUTH."

The truth about WHAT? The truth about the Most Holy One of Israel... as to the LIES that were being told about Him by the false prophets and false christs, etc.

See the HOLY, dear one... which One is Christ... and you might be able to see your way "into" the MOST Holy! 'Cause you gotta go through the first... to access the second. Right?

I hope this helps and, again, peace to you!

A slave of Christ,

SA

[quote]LARSINGER SAID

AGuest:

Thanks so much for your examples, which I requested, of where you think the Bible is contradictory or not true. I'm so glad I asked.

Those two passages are presented in the Bible as history, so I wouldn't be able to debate on them. My position as a "Biblicist" is that every historical event presented as such is true. My only comment is that I can no more prove through any evidence those events took place no more than you can disprove they happened.

But a difference of opinion is all that is here. So my "opinion" that the Bible is true is thus that, an opinion. But your opinion that some things in the Bible are not true, simply based on your concept of why it shouldn't have happened doesn't mean the bible is untrue. It just means your opinion is that these parts of the Bible are untrue.

But this is a dangerous territory. Once a person starts to cherry pick what they want to exclude from the Bible, then they can come up with practically anything they want to, I would think.

Anyway, glad I asked. It's not my position to dismiss any of this historical events from the Bible as being false. But thanks for sharing this, I certainly can understand you better now.
_________________
The Bible is true and God is alive!

LARSINGER SAID

Aguest: UNDERSTANDING WHO GOD IS

Your comments above regarding dismissing those historical events with the she-bears and the man who touched the ark causes me to reflect on some who thought that God's ways were not adjusted right. But they were reminded that God's ways are higher than man's ways. This is reflected on how God judges people.

EZEKIEL 18:



Interesting, it is whatever you're doing or whomever you are at the last minute (when Christ arrives?) that counts.

The grapes of wrath produce blood that rises to the bridles of horses. So many who are first chosen will fail to get into the kingdom. That's the bitter part of Christ's mission.
_________________
The Bible is true and God is alive!

AGUEST SAID


The Bible does say that the stylus of the secretaries "works in sheer falsehood" (Jeremiah 8:, and Christ did say "Woe to you... scribes, hypocrites" (Matthew 23:13, 15, etc.) and that he "came to bear witness to the truth." Why would the secretaries' stylus be false, if the Bible is truth? Why would Christ condemn the works of the scribes? What works? What truth did he come to bear witness to... and why, if the Bible was already the truth? Why not just leave the people with that... until he came to do what he was REALLY was born to do? Why come twice?

I did not choose these two examples, dear one; heck, how would I know what occurred or did not? I am no different or better than you; I DON'T know. And so, long ago... I had to ask these questions: what was true? What was false? What works was he condemning and why? What is the Bible? Is it completely true? And more...

And many, many times, when my Lord would tell me something that seemed tp contradict what I read he would say to me:

"All that I tell you is written... but not all that is written is what I will tell you."

He meant that everything he tells those who belong to him is written... somewhere, but not necessarily in the Bible. And all that is written in the Bible is not necessarily what he would tell me... he... the Truth.

The Bible is not even in truthful order, dear one. Nor does it contain all scripture. What, for example, of Paul's FIRST letter to the Corinthians? I mean, you know that 1 and 2 Corinthians are his 2nd and 3rd letters... right?

Let me ask you: what is your understanding of John 5:39, 40?

Seriously, dear Lar... I did not lie to you nor did I make it up. I have no problem if you cannot receive what I shared - I probably wouldn't either, were I you. But I have to because I know the One from whom I received it. And his mouth speaks truth. ALL the sayings of HIS mouth are upright. He have never lied to me... and I have faith that he didn't in this.

Again, peace to you!

A slave of Christ,

JUST MOM SAID

Good morning to all

I have a question?

Isn't "THE LAW" supposed to be written on our hearts and not on a stone tablet which the Bible would fall in this category.....

When we rely on what is written in the Bible and not listen to the voice of our master to teach us to look at him, isn't that sorta returning to the elementary things of the world?

And putting ourselves back under Law? And putting ourselves at risk of putting others as well back under?

If Christ really is on our heart and dwells in us why would we NEED anything else? There is truth in the Bible yes of course, inspiration as well. But it has ALL been tampered with and the safest place to be so as not to be misled again is to look at what and how Christ taught. His demonstration of a truly selfLESS life, merciful, foregiving, compassionate, non judgeing way of LOVE surpasses anything that is written anywhere.

Our lord made it much more simpler than man. We just complicate it ourselves.

Love to you all
justmom

AGUEST SAID

If you are in the NEW Covenant that God is concluding with Israel, yes, dear 'Mom (the greatest of love and peace to you, my sister!)... the Law would be written on your heart. And you would not need the Bible... nor any man... to be teaching you to know JAH... because you would know Him yourself.

The mediator of that Covenant is His Son, the Holy One of Israel. One must go THROUGH him in order to even "enter"... so as to gain acces to agree TO such Covenant.

I hope this helps and, again, peace to you!

YOUR servant, sister, and fellow slave of Christ,

SA

ANNEB SAID

OK, I'm reading this thread "late", after many have posted. I'm going back to the subject line (marriage and two becoming one flesh) and addressing only that part, not anythiing else that people have posted...

A couple of years ago I read in "Discovery" that any sharing of body fluids (alllll of them) shares proteins, and that proteins are called the building blocks of life. The proteins are in all body fluids, so any "sharing" passes the building blocks of one person to the other. It's not just blood, it's saliva, and, ermmmm, other body fluids.

Following that line of thought and tying it to this thread, it seems that when Eve was formed, it was from Adam. Adam was literally split into two persons. Doesn't it seem natural, then, that the two would crave a "rejoining"? Each was missing something (that was present in the other). It also seems to make good sense that "your craving shall be for your husband" was simply a statement of truth, not a condemnation or punishment.

The "marriage" wasn't a legal joining, it was a physical joining; the two becoming one flesh, again, literally. Over time, with the exchanges, each one would become more and more like the other because they were literally becoming one another through the protein exchange. On a side note: how many times have people commented about married couples that the longer they stay together the more they start to look like one another? I don't know if it's a universal truism, but there are some pretty good examples of it in the experiences of some of us! These days it's rare to find couples married 60 or 70 years or more, but not long ago (in my lifetime!) it was not unusual. That's when I heard the expression most frequently, long years ago, which might bear out what I'm trying to express.

Now, how does this go with the notion of a spiritual application? Well, didn't Jesus say to his disciples that they needed to eat his flesh and drink his blood? And isn't that a sharing of "proteins"? He was telling them they needed to form an intimate relationship with him. Even though the biology may not have been as well understood in those days, it still existed the same as it does now. Jesus knew what he was talking about even if they didn't! What they lacked in scientific-style knowledge they more than made up for in human observation; they would have seen many more long-lasting marriages and the resultant physical effects than we see today.

"The two will become one flesh" seems to happen by sharing, intimate sharing, over the course of time. It also seems to demand an exclusive relationship (no "adultery"), because adding any others into the sharing would be like adding the "little leaven", the original relationship would crumble and the "one" relationship being formed would not be according to purpose or plan.

As I see it, this is the way that marriage on a physical level mirrors the spiritual. There is a rejoining, a wholeness, a fulfillment of original purpose.
_________________
Everything that I believe today is subject to change as I acquire knowledge, perspective, and direction. I'm on a journey and this is a journal...

ANNEB SAID

Oops! One more thing...

As far as the statement concerning a man leaving his father and mother and sticking to his wife: there are the proteins again! The child bears the shared qualities of its father and mother, but once joined to a wife (or husband), changes into a new sort of creature, developing along different lines than either parent.

Isn't that what happens in the spitual marriage as well? There is a leaving behind of what one came from and the creation of a new entity?


OK....that's enough about proteins for now!
_________________
Everything that I believe today is subject to change as I acquire knowledge, perspective, and direction. I'm on a journey and this is a journal...

LEANN SAID

Shelby,

Loving your thoughts. the importance of the bride is undebatable and the very foundation of jeruselam., and yes, why would he ever let such precious cargo go unguared. All creations groans my sister.

As a side thought to your thoughts about the sons of our Father. Recall that sons is interprative in how it relates to humans. It is about restoration and completion and understanding a divine relationship, the pulling into the bosom.

Angels are sons but not as the sons of of isreal or of other creation. Each type of creation has their own 'anatomy' but all are birthed from love, and even though created they are silimar to a beautiful piece of artwork. When we make something from ourselves, we can call it our little baby. So in the same way that cain was jealous of Abel, so too was Satan of Adam.. and was in fact brother killing brother.

Much love and peace
LeAnn

AGUEST SAID

Wow, dear LeAnn (the greatest of love and peace to you, dear one!): I've never thought of it that way... but makes total sense to ME! I mean, my husband and I call the puppies "the kids/children" (well, I usually call them "the people" - LOL!)... because they are LIKE our kids/children! And I love them as much: I could not hurt, nor bear to have hurt, the spirit of one of them any more than I could my own flesh and blood children!

My point was that angels are not "beget" as a son is beget... but I still get (and my spirit fully bears witness with) YOUR point, my dear sister ().

Thank you for that additional outlook... and peace to you and your dear family (my love and regard to dear J!).

YOUR servant and fellow slave of Christ,

SA

LOZ SAID

LeAnn, I found your post very interesting. For some time my understanding of the joining of the man and the woman becoming 'one flesh' has been of interest to me. (Not in any sexual way, and certainly not in any connection to homophobia, I just want to clarify that point.)

The fact that Eve was made from Adam intrigues me when I consider the differences between the sexes. Women are emotional/ men are logical etc etc and that leads me to understand that when you put a man and a woman together what you get is ONE whole person. The attributes of each join and make a whole ONE. Meant to be inseparable, that no one should divide, re 'marriage'.

I ponder on the spiritual aspects of this when I relate it to Christ and his bride? I invite any thoughts....

Loz x

PSACRAMENTO SAID

Anyone here read Paradise lost?
The conversation that Adam has with the angel Raphael reminds me of this one.
Raphael explains that angels don't have "genders" like humans that they are both "male and female" ( this was from a question as to whether angels eat and have other bodily functions) and that when they are together it is a spiritual expression of pure light and energy and love.

AGUEST SAID



My understanding is that, for a time, they become one "child," dear Loz (again, peace to you!)... and single entity in spirit, although individual "members". Christ is the Head of that "child," with his Bride being the "Body" (hence, men are to love their wives as their own bodies, as Christ loves the congregation!)

Given some of the revelations of modern science-fiction, coupled with the "group-think" mandates of cults like the WTBTS, this truth becomes difficult for some to accept. Unlike, say, the "Borg" (of Star Trek) and the WTBTS... the Head of THIS Body doesn't force anyone to assimilate, nor is his purpose to kill (either literally or spiritually by shunning) anyone who does NOT assimilate. HIS purpose is to SAVE any who wish to BE saved... BY assimilating them into HIS body. Since all authority has been given to HIM... there is none who can conquer HIM... except the Father. There are those who DO wish to conquer mankind in general, however... those we have a "wrestling" with... and unless one gets into the "Ark" [of the NEW Covenant with God]... which ones does by going THROUGH the Door he is... and coming under the "Cover" of that Ark that he is... one is left vulnerable.

Anyone here read Paradise lost?

I have not, dear P (the greatest of love and peace to you!).



This is true, with the "maleness" the more dominant quality (as with God and Christ), hence the one that manifests more often and displays things like strength and reasoning. The "female" quality manifests in things like wisdom and mercy. Much like what manifests in humans.

This is why our Lord said, in response to the man who asked whose wife the dead woman who had been married several times would be in the recreation, that she would be no one's wife but "like the angels." She would complete in and of herself and so not NEED a "complement."



And while they do not sleep or past waste, burp, cough, etc., dear one, they certainly do eat. Manna... "bread" from heaven - the leaves from the Tree of Life. It was this same "food" that fed Israel in the wilderness... and that feeds those who partake from the Tree... Christ John 6:23-59; 15:1... now:

"... he rained down on them manna to eat and gave them the grain of heaven. Man ate of the bread of the angels; he sent them food in abundance. Psalm 78:25



It is... when they can still receive of JAH's glory (light, energy, and love), yes; however, when they are restricted from that glory... they are in darkness... and it is VERY dark, indeed. In physical terms, it's like the difference between the light and energy of a burning star... which can bring forth life... versus the darkness and anti-energy of a black hole. Which sucks all in it path into it and (seemingly) destroys.

Again, thank you all for YOUR thoughts and reflections (I LOVE that term, dear Lar - peace to you!)... and peace to you!

YOUR servant, sister, and fellow slave of Christ,

SA