How did Abel know it should be a blood sacrifice? Was this knowledge taught by Adam and Eve? WAs this something God told them? Abels animal sacrifice was the first time mentioned in the OT after the garden of Eden. Was the blood sacrifice in Eden for clothing enough of a covering of their sins that Adam and Eve didn't have to do it? Did they teach Can and Abel to do this? Or did they know this knowledge come from eating of the tree of good and evil?
The everlasting love and mercy of the Almighty God comes into play with Cain. Notice how God protected Cain from being murdered? Who was out there in the land of Nod that would murder him? His family? Now the word doesn't say what kind of mark was put on Cain, but it was enough to know leave this man alone. Cain had a desire to sacrifice, but it was of his own way of doing it. (Law is man's way of doing, is it not?) Evidently the mark was not consigning him to perpetual punishmen, but was a token of God's redemptive compassion. What is comming more and more clear as I read these early scriptures is is everlasting goodness, mercy. love and restoration and redemption of the Almighty God.
I don't have the answers for these questions, so does any person have any opinions on this? calledoutPTL
Interesting called out one. Has anyone noticed how much the church fears knowledge? All of them do. Why? Did God not give Adam (Man) dominion? And did He do this without equipping Man with the knowledge to rule that dominion? What knowledge did Man learn when deceived by satan? For did they not already have God knowledge (good)? What they got (learned) was the knowledge of wrong (evil). And the church only permits you to get its knowledge, if you look for more knowledge outside of it, it labels it evil. Now, is seeking more knowledge good or evil? "Seek ye first the Kingdom of God, and... And what does the church point out to seek first?
"What is false doctrine? - To deny or ignore the cross."
>>And did He do this without equipping Man with the knowledge to rule that dominion? What knowledge did Man learn when deceived by Satan? For did they not already have God knowledge (good)? What they got (learned) was the knowledge of wrong (evil).<<
Vine, as I was reading your post, part of it didn’t make sense to me. See, before Adam and Eve were tempted by Satan, apparently the garden was perfect. Well, if everything was perfect up until the time they ate the fruit, then all the knowledge that they possessed was perfect also. Vine, if all the knowledge that existed was perfect, there could have been no good knowledge because the only way there could have been good knowledge is if bad knowledge had actually existed.
Since good cannot exist without bad, all the knowledge they had before was simply knowledge. It didn’t become good knowledge until bad knowledge entered the garden.
"Since good cannot exist without bad, all the knowledge they had before was simply knowledge. It didn’t become good knowledge until bad knowledge entered the garden."
Kevin, I disagree. God existed and is never changing and is Good. Before satan fell only good existed.
When God looked on what He had created He pronounced it "good", not good and bad, Maybe He just forgot or slipped about the bad? No, good existed without bad. Knowledge that is.
Called out one, I was thinking education knowledge and yes that would include church history.
"What is false doctrine? - To deny or ignore the cross."
Vine, your post reminded me of this. there is no such thing of cold, just the non-existance of heat. There is no such thing as darkness, just the non-existance of light. smile
Kevin, When Satan was thrown out of heaven a third of the angels went with him. Now if your really interested in what the word says about this, read Isaiah 14:11-15, Ezekiel 28:13-19, Rev 12-9. calledoutPTL
>>Kevin, I disagree. God existed and is never changing and is Good. Before satan fell only good existed.<<
Vine, if God has always existed, and has never changed, and is perfect there would be no need to call him good. If God made everything and made it perfectly there would be no bad. In order for something to be good, bad has to exist. If no bad existed, how would you know something was good?
Obviously, if God created everything, he also created bad things. Is that what you believe, Vine? Vine, do you believe that everything God made was perfect? If he did make everything and if he did make everything perfect, how could evil exist?
if God has always existed, and has never changed, and is perfect there would be no need to call him good. If God made everything and made it perfectly there would be no bad. In order for something to be good, bad has to exist. If no bad existed, how would you know something was good?
Obviously, if God created everything, he also created bad things. Is that what you believe, Vine? Vine, do you believe that everything God made was perfect? If he did make everything and if he did make everything perfect, how could evil exist?
I would say, I agree with how you understand the purpose of evil. Satan did not create himself. He also chose. If the possibility of evil did not exist he could not have chosen it.
Any opinions on this verse? Isaiah 46:7 I form light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I am the Lord do all these things. calledoutPTL
>>>Any opinions on this verse? Isaiah 46:7 I form light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I am the Lord do all these things. calledoutPTL<<<
>>Kevin, I disagree. God existed and is never changing and is Good. Before satan fell only good existed.<<
Vine, I disagree. First of all, if only good existed, (which is not possible, since bad needs to exist in order for there to be good) Satan would never have fallen. Do you think Satan created evil? According to Called out, God did.
>>Isaiah 46:7 I form light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I am the Lord do all these things. CalledoutPTL<<
First off, No, I do not believe God created evil. Evil is the result of rebellion. Look at, For a house divided...
Evil can not survive around God. Hence the casting out. God's word explains this to Moses.
Second, There are two Kingdoms, better said two deminsions of God's Kingdom. God created the Heavens. The invisible realm of God. That was satan's home, in God's Kingdom, he was cast to earth. And God created earth, which is the visible realm of God. "...on earth as it is in heaven." Which He gave dominion over.
(Boy am I going to take some heat for what I'm about to write. But hear me out.)
As for evil, look at what is the sin, for we like to "see" evil. Was the fruit evil?
I don't believe so, for God himself said "it (creation) is good." Was the action of eating the sin, that's tricky, again No. For that takes literally "the day you eat of it you shall surly die" They did not "die" that day. The relationship "died" yes but the body kept on for a time. So the "eat" means more than the chewing. So what did satan introduce? Doubt, he deceived by putting doubt into the mind of man. Read what satan says, then read what Jesus teaches: "do not doubt in your heart" "why did you doubt?" "if you have faith as a mustard seed" "I tell you the truth, I have not seen such faith..."
As for Isaiah 45:7 the translation (KJV) notes I have has this to say: "All of this debunks the stupidity of evolution. The phrase, "I create evil," is rendered according to the following: the Hebrew word used here for "evil" is "ra", and is never rendered "sin" but rather "calamity, diversity, distress and trouble." This "evil" is meant to be directed by God at the enemies of His People."
"What is false doctrine? - To deny or ignore the cross."
This message has been edited by Vinekeeper on Mar 31, 2008 6:24 PM
So Kevin, if your right than God shows grace to evil? For satan was once in heaven, and then cast down instead of erased by God. Then why did He send His Son as the only acceptable sacrifice? Does he show more grace to Evil than sinners?
"What is false doctrine? - To deny or ignore the cross."
This message has been edited by Vinekeeper on Mar 31, 2008 6:43 PM
Skeptics love the KJV so much, one would think that they were still back in medieval England. Use of this translation is problematic these days, since it uses an archaic version of modern English, which doesn't necessarily mean the same things today as when it was translated over 400 years ago. In addition, the KJV was produced using a limited number of medieval manuscripts that did not represent the earliest Alexandrian set of manuscripts.
What do the modern translations say?
The One forming light and creating darkness, Causing well-being and creating calamity; I am the LORD who does all these. (Isaiah 45:7, NASB)
I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD, do all these things. (Isaiah 45:7, NIV)
Isaiah 45:7 contrasts opposites. Darkness is the opposite of light. However, evil is not the opposite of peace. The Hebrew word translated "peace" is shâlôm,2 which has many meanings, mostly related to the well being of individuals. Râ‛âh,3 the Hebrew word translated "evil" in the KJV often refers to adversity or calamity. There are two forms of the word. Strong's H7451a most often refers to moral evil, whereas Strong's H7451b (the form used here) most often refers to calamity or distress. Obviously, "calamity" is a better antonym of "peace" than "evil."
Amos 3:6
If a trumpet is blown in a city will not the people tremble? If a calamity occurs in a city has not the LORD done it? (Amos 3:6, NASB)
When a trumpet sounds in a city, do not the people tremble? When disaster comes to a city, has not the LORD caused it? (Amos 3:6, NIV)
Likewise, Amos 3:6 uses the same word, râ‛âh, referring to calamity or disaster. the context (a disaster happening to a city) does not refer to moral evil.
Lamentations 3:38
Is it not from the mouth of the Most High that both calamities and good things come? (Lamentations 3:38, NIV)
Is it not from the mouth of the Most High That both good and ill go forth? (Lamentations 3:38, NASB)
The King James Version of Lamentations 3:38 seems to suggest that God speaks both good and evil. However, if one reads the verse in context, the preceding verses indicate that God does not do or approve of evil.4 The verse following indicates that people should not complain in view of their sins.5 What the verse really is saying that God decrees times of good things and times of judgment. Lamentations was written by Jeremiah during a time of judgment, when Judah had gone off into exile. Jeremiah was chosen by God to be the prophet to tell Judah to reform or be judged. The people did not believe Jeremiah, and, therefore, fell under God's judgment. In Lamentations 3:38, the word translated "good" is tòôb (Strong's H2896).6 The word usually refers to good things5 as opposed to bad things. Again, râ‛âh3 does not refer to moral evil, but calamities, in this verse. Likewise, the Bible commentaries indicate that the verse refers to God's judgment based upon people's sin.7
"What is false doctrine? - To deny or ignore the cross."
How was that a sacrifice, Vine? God knew he was getting his son back. Plus, what was thirty some years to God? A nanosecond?
Kevin, God sent, It is Jesus that is the sacrifice, and He sacrificed Himself because He loves us, and we would never be able to restore our relationship with God. He knew that and loved us so much that He restored that relationship for us. He is indeed King of Kings and Lord of Lords!
"What is false doctrine? - To deny or ignore the cross."
Did God know beforehand that Satan was going to sin and have to be cast out of Heaven?(the first expelling) Why did He put him down here? Ever since man was created we have had to contend with this devil. The first two boys from created man has to quarrel and one kills the other. Why couldn't they have just been one happy family as an example for all future generations? Sometimes when you think about it all it just doesn't make any sense.
The Hebrew word "ra" used in Isaiah 45:7 literally means bad/evil (something not good).
It is the direct opposite of the Hebrew word "tov" which literally means good.
The Hebrew word "ra" used in Isaiah 45:7 is the exact same word used in Genesis 2:9 where it says, "the tree of the knowledge of good (tov) and evil (ra)."
If I wanted to say "I create evil" in Hebrew, I would use the exact same words for create and evil as is used in Isaiah 45:7, and NO other way would be as precise as that.
I reject those English translations of Isaiah 45:7 where the Hebrew word "ra" is rendered as adversity, calamity, or disaster.
The literal Hebrew word for adversity is "tsarah" (adversary would be "tsar"), and the literal Hebrew word for calamity/disaster is "eyd."
Just as the word "bad" in English doesn't mean adversity, calamity, or disaster, neither does the Hebrew word "ra" mean that. Even though adversity, calamity, and disaster are bad things, they are not the definition of bad.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>>Isaiah 45:7 contrasts opposites. Darkness is the opposite of light. However, evil is not the opposite of peace....."calamity" is a better antonym of "peace" than "evil."<<<
Isaiah 45:7 is not contrasting opposites. It is simply stating that the LORD forms light, creates darkness, makes peace, and creates evil. If you want opposites, many can be fond in Ecclesiastes 3:1-8.
A time to love, and a time to hate; A time of WAR, and a time of PEACE (shalom). (Ecclesiastes 3:8)
>>>The King James Version of Lamentations 3:38 seems to suggest that God speaks both good and evil.<<<
That's because God does speak both good and evil.
In Lam. 3:8, "rah-ot," the plural form of "ra-ah" (not the exact same word as used in Isaiah 45:7, but related) is used, and means bad/evil things.
The Hebrew text of Lamentations 3:38 is not saying (nor should it be understood to be saying) anything different than what is found in Jeremiah 16:10-12 where God spoke great evil against the people because they had done worse than their fathers who had forsaken the LORD.
Both blessings and curses proceed from the mouth of the LORD unto man. Blessings are good things (or words) God speaks, and curses are bad/evil things (or words) God speaks.
>>>Amos 3:6 uses the same word, râ‛âh, referring to calamity or disaster. the context (a disaster happening to a city) does not refer to moral evil.<<<
Again, the exact same word is not used in Amos 3:6 as is used in Isaiah 45:7, but it is related to it.
I agree that the word "ra-ah" does not refer to moral evil in Amos 3:6, but it does mean something bad/evil that God made happen, and it could be anything.
So uncle R, you reject NIV and others in favor of What KJV? Or how many others?
What makes KJV so hard to understand for most is that it is written from a Kingdom perspective. But if you look at Jesus as a King and that He has a Kingdom much more can be understood.
I still say evil as understood by the church as sin can not exist with God. That might not be enough for some to understand.
"What is false doctrine? - To deny or ignore the cross."
>>>So uncle R, you reject NIV and others in favor of What KJV? Or how many others?<<<
I checked out NIV years ago and remember not liking it. I actually laugh sometimes at the English in the King James Version, but it's not a bad version if you can adjust to the old English. NASB is not too bad either if you get one with footnotes telling you what the literal text says when NASV go off from it. NKJV isn't too bad either. None of them are without error as far as I am concerned. I have a Hebrew translation NT for my own personal use.
Job 1:6-7 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came among them. 7 And the LORD said to Satan, "From where do you come?"
So Satan answered the LORD and said, "From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking back and forth on it."
NKJV
To ayone who wants to answer. question 1) Did this meeting take place in heaven? 2)Who were the sons of God? If this took place in heaven, then sin (Satan was in heaven) Another interesting thing is that after Jesus made the supreme sacrifice, no more mention of Satan being involved in a meeting. calledoutPTL
Calledout, the meeting took place in heaven, where satan was called before God to account for his actions. See Gen. 6-2 for help in knowing who the sons of God are. They are fallen angels, some of those that followed Lucifer. As for the meeting, this is a look ahead at the judgement of the wicked that reject Jesus.
"What is false doctrine? - To deny or ignore the cross."
Hi Vine. Gen. 6;2 doesn't really explain who the sons of God actually are. It just calls them sons of God just like Job 1:6 does. But if the meeting took place in heaven, then sin was there if there were fallen angels who left with Lucifer. Again, interesting that after the crucifixion, a meeting or sons of God are no longer mentioned. Can angels reproduce? I don't see any scripture saying that angels can. My quesiton has always been who are the sons of God. So far, I haven't found any scripture that answers that completely that I have a definite answer. Just speculateion.I have a different idea, but because I can't prove it either, I don't say. smile calledoutPTL
It's important to remember all that one has been taught over the years. That does present a problem in putting it all together a times. Google "sons of God" and you get a good range of thought!
As for evil being in heaven, Could it be as simple as looking again at the encounter with Moses? Moses was in the Presence of God, but because of the grace of God he was protected. Has God not shown great grace with Lucifer? He could have ended all instead He cast out. Maybe this meeting shows us a glimpse of the grace God expects us to model. At any rate, somehow the sin was covered, like ours is and will be, by the blood.
As for what you hinted but would not say, that is the other argument of the phrase "sons of God", for are "we" not called the sons of God?
Anyone else?
"What is false doctrine? - To deny or ignore the cross."
Vine, did you mean maybe Lucifer is saved when you wrote this: "Maybe this meeting shows us a glimpse of the grace God expects us to model. At any rate, somehow the sin was covered, like ours is and will be, by the blood.:??????? Or did I somehow totally misunderstand that? calleodutPTL
"Did you mean maybe Lucifer is saved when you wrote this: "Maybe this meeting shows us a glimpse of the grace God expects us to model. At any rate, somehow the sin was covered, like ours is and will be, by the blood? Or did I somehow totally misunderstand that?"
Churches have split over less misunderstanding!
CO, No, I thought the Bible is clear on that Lucifer will be cast into the lake of fire. What I was saying is that God expects us to show grace and forgiveness. You know the seventy times seven? But I do believe that God has called satan on his actions from time to time and the only way that that type of meeting can take place is if somehow sin is covered because it could not remain in the presence of God. How many times has the blood covered us this side of the judgement? And yet we all will still be judged and will be covered by the blood on judgement day.
"What is false doctrine? - To deny or ignore the cross."
Or when Jesus made the complete sacrifice was what covered the sin in heaven. Way out HUH???? Someplace and I can't remember exactly where, it sounded like the blood of Jesus covered the mercy seat and that would be in heaven. I don't think anyone entirely understands what the blood of Jesus actually all includes besides sin. But I agree with kingdom living and not church living. smile calledoutPTL
This message has been edited by erv123 on Apr 5, 2008 11:18 AM
>>>Job 1:6-7 Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came among them. 7 And the LORD said to Satan, "From where do you come?" So Satan answered the LORD and said, "From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking back and forth on it." NKJV To anyone who wants to answer. question 1) Did this meeting take place in heaven? 2)Who were the sons of God?<<<
I believe that the meeting took place in heaven. I think Satan's answer itself makes it obvious that it wasn't on earth.
I believe that the "sons of God" mentioned in Job 1:6 are the angels of God. This same expression ("sons of God") is also mentioned in Job chapter 38 when the LORD spoke to Job, saying.....
Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?.....To what were its foundations fastened? Or who laid its cornerstone, When the morning stars sang together, And all the sons of God shouted for joy? (Job 38:4,6,7) NKJV
* This scripture points out that the "sons of God" were around when the LORD laid the foundations of the earth.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, that the SONS OF GOD saw the DAUGHTERS OF MEN, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose. (Genesis 6:1,2)
Hmmm.
There were giants (Hebrew: n'feeleem = fallen ones) on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the SONS OF GOD came in to the DAUGHTERS OF MEN and they bore children to them. (Genesis 6:4)
I believe that these scriptures are talking about fallen angels who took upon flesh and "came in to" the daughters of men who bore their children.
Angels taking upon flesh is not foreign to scripture. The two angels (Gen. 19:1) who visited Lot in Sodom appeared as men (Gen. 19:5), and the men in Sodom told Lot to bring the "men" out so that they could "know them" sexually speaking. These same two angels/men before they came to Sodom had also just eaten food in the presence of Abraham (Gen. 18:8).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The earliest known christian comment I can find on this topic was written by Justin (commonly referred to as "Justin Martyr" because he was put to death for his faith in Jesus). Justin [110-165 AD] was born in Samaria (part of modern day Israel), and lived during the same time period as many of the disciples of the apostles. Justin wrote.....
"God, when He made the whole world, and subjected things earthly to man, and arranged the heavenly elements for the increase of fruits and rotation of the seasons, and appointed this divine law - for these things also He evidently made for man - committed the care of men and of all things under heaven to angels whom He appointed over them. But the angels transgressed this appointment, and were captivated by love of women, and begat children who are those that are called demons." (THE SECOND APOLOGY OF JUSTIN, CHAPTER 5)
Ramus, thanks for your input. But what I don't understand is that if angels have the ability to create, was there re-creation in heaven? Didn't Jesus says there isn't marrying in heaven? And like I said in a previous post, I haven't seen any explanation of the difference of the sons of God and who the sons/daughters of men. And I'm sure there is. Your scriptures mentioned them, but didn't really explain them. In case your wondering why all the off the wall questions I'm asking, in the past I have read the Bible cover to cover many times, this time, I'm searching out the meaning of every name, geographical locations, etc and I'm having the best time!! Also finding many many questions that I hope to find some answers to. Probably take the next ten years or so. LOL But even if I don't, it doesn't change anything for me. Keep on looking for me! smile Oh, I went over your post again, Justin 5, I'm not familiar with that, what is it? And where do you find it? Something on the computor? calledoutPTL
This message has been edited by erv123 on Apr 6, 2008 9:47 AM
>>>But what I don't understand is that if angels have the ability to create, was there re-creation in heaven? Didn't Jesus says there isn't marrying in heaven?<<<
I don't believe it took place in heaven.
Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH, and daughters were born to them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose. (Genesis 6:1,2)
There were giants (Hebrew: n'feeleem = fallen ones) ON THE EARTH in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. (Genesis 6:4)
>>>And like I said in a previous post, I haven't seen any explanation of the difference of the sons of God and who the sons/daughters of men. And I'm sure there is. Your scriptures mentioned them, but didn't really explain them.<<<
The difference is that the sons/daughters of men weren't around when God laid the foundation of the earth, and the sons of God were.
The LORD spoke to Job, saying.....
Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?.....To what were its foundations fastened? Or who laid its cornerstone, When the morning stars sang together, And all the sons of God shouted for joy? (Job 38:4,6,7) NKJV
>>>In case your wondering why all the off the wall questions I'm asking, in the past I have read the Bible cover to cover many times, this time, I'm searching out the meaning of every name, geographical locations, etc and I'm having the best time!!<<<
I have noticed you asking some interesting questions lately!
>>>Oh, I went over your post again, Justin 5, I'm not familiar with that, what is it? And where do you find it? Something on the computor?<<<
I'm sure you've heard people mention "the early christians" before on the forum. Well, Justin is one of the earliest among them. I have his writings in a 10 volume collection of books called "The Ante-Nicene Fathers."
Caution: This forum may contain statements and comments that are offensive. If you are easily offended, please exit this forum now.
By using this forum you agree to be accountable and liable for your post's. All postings are the responsibility of the posting participant. The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the management.
