DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Religious Convictions
HTML https://religiousconvictions.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Religious Discussions
*****************************************************
#Post#: 454--------------------------------------------------
Re: Covenants
By: A nonny mouse Date: December 15, 2014, 10:16 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Hi Danger Mouse,
I can but admire the way that you have 'your faith' all set out
with such detailed and careful emphasis.
However, for my part, I incline more to a 'Creator God' who was
God of the entire universe from the point of creation rather
than a God who the 'Bible' seems to project as have little
interest in other than the Jews until Paul came along.
#Post#: 455--------------------------------------------------
Re: Covenants
By: Kerry Date: December 15, 2014, 11:27 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=A nonny mouse link=topic=38.msg454#msg454
date=1418703367]
Hi Danger Mouse,
I can but admire the way that you have 'your faith' all set out
with such detailed and careful emphasis.
However, for my part, I incline more to a 'Creator God' who was
God of the entire universe from the point of creation rather
than a God who the 'Bible' seems to project as have little
interest in other than the Jews until Paul came along.
[/quote]Perhaps I should slow down on forum life and write a
book about God's plan for the Gentiles. I think it might take a
book, maybe a little one, to cover it all.
Someone asked once how many trees were there in Eden? I
thought about it and thought, "Seventy, of course." I hesitated
to write that on my own authority so did a little research. I
was pleased to find that the Talmud also said seventy. Why?
The same reason seventy souls went into Egypt (that explains my
objection to Acts saying it was seventy-five). The same reason
the Sanhedrin had seventy members and Israel encountered the
seventy palm trees and twelve wells at Elim. All that shows me
God's plan for the Gentiles.
I could go to discuss Cain and why he was born. Why, if he was
a rotten son, did Eve say she had gotten a man from the LORD?
Why was God so merciful to him? Why was Cain's seed preserved
by the marriage of Naamah with Noah? Some also say Ham married
a descendant of Cain.
Think of all the Gentile women that married into the Messianic
line. I could discuss Isaiah 56. I could discuss how God
protected the Edomites by forbidding Israel to take an inch of
land from them. I could discuss why it was important that Lot
go to Sodom and marry there.
It's there but it's concealed.
Of course, I'd also have to discuss being born elect, with God
knowing you before you're born. It's not what the Calvinists
think. It's not an easy pass to Paradise. No, it means
suffering for others so they will be saved. All the 144,000
mentioned in Revelation agreed to suffer so that large multitude
we see on the sea of glass could be there. Paul will continue
to mystify people if they have the wrong ideas about
"predestination."
Ephesians 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the
foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without
blame before him in love:
5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus
Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
It was Paul's job as a Jew to see to it that Gentiles found God.
That was known from the time of Eden. It was not however known
to Paul until he was "called." It cost him his life, his
earthly life anyway.
9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according
to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:
10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might
gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in
heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
Is it still a mystery? It was declared to the prophets:
Revelation 10:7 But in the days of the voice of the seventh
angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should
be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.
As I see it, the problem with Christians is they aren't willing
to give up their preconceived notions. They read one or two
passages from the Bible and reach a conclusion that may be right
or wrong. If they run into other passages later that contradict
their interpretations of the first passages, they aren't willing
to abandon their first conclusions. They either say, "Oh, that's
a mystery" or "We'll understand that later." They don't want to
know; they want to believe they already know and are right.
That is a glaringly true statement; and the truth of it can be
seen by how so few people alter their views in discussions.
They argue, but few ever change their minds. Is Scripture
profitable for reproof and correction? It should be; but
people don't use it that way. It's used to "prove" what they
already think they know is true.
At times, translators are so sure they know the truth, they're
willing to corrupt the Bible. Take this passage:
Jeremiah 7:22 For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded
them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt,
concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices:
The NIV translators were so certain this had to be wrong, they
added the word "just" to the text, altering the meaning
entirely:
22 For when I brought your ancestors out of Egypt and spoke to
them, I did not just give them commands about burnt offerings
and sacrifices,
If they had understood Israel's role as intercessor for
Gentiles, they would not corrupted that text.
#Post#: 456--------------------------------------------------
Re: Covenants
By: Alfie Date: December 16, 2014, 2:14 am
---------------------------------------------------------
DON'T TEASE ME
this is the kinda conversation i have been looking for
[quote author=Danger Mouse link=topic=38.msg455#msg455
date=1418707650]
Perhaps I should slow down on forum life and write a book about
God's plan for the Gentiles. I think it might take a book,
maybe a little one, to cover it all.
Someone asked once how many trees were there in Eden? I
thought about it and thought, "Seventy, of course." I hesitated
to write that on my own authority so did a little research. I
was pleased to find that the Talmud also said seventy. Why?
The same reason seventy souls went into Egypt (that explains my
objection to Acts saying it was seventy-five). The same reason
the Sanhedrin had seventy members and Israel encountered the
seventy palm trees and twelve wells at Elim. All that shows me
God's plan for the Gentiles.
Think of all the Gentile women that married into the Messianic
line. I could discuss Isaiah 56. I thought about it and
thought, "Seventy, of course." I hesitated to write that on my
own authority so did a little research. I was pleased to find
that the Talmud also said seventy. Why? The same reason
seventy souls went into Egypt (that explains my objection to
Acts saying it was seventy-five). The same reason the
Sanhedrin had seventy members and Israel encountered the seventy
palm trees and twelve wells at Elim. All that shows me God's
plan for the Gentiles.
I could go to discuss Cain and why he was born. Why, if he was
a rotten son, did Eve say she had gotten a man from the LORD?
Why was God so merciful to him? Why was Cain's seed preserved
by the marriage of Naamah with Noah? Some also say Ham married
a descendant of Cain.
Think of all the Gentile women that married into the Messianic
line. I could discuss Isaiah 56. I could discuss how God
protected the Edomites by forbidding Israel to take an inch of
land from them. I could discuss why it was important that Lot
go to Sodom and marry there.
It's there but it's concealed.
Of course, I'd also have to discuss being born elect, with God
knowing you before you're born. It's not what the Calvinists
think. It's not an easy pass to Paradise. No, it means
suffering for others so they will be saved. All the 144,000
mentioned in Revelation agreed to suffer so that large multitude
we see on the sea of glass could be there. Paul will continue
to mystify people if they have the wrong ideas about
"predestination."
Ephesians 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the
foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without
blame before him in love:
5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus
Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
It was Paul's job as a Jew to see to it that Gentiles found God.
That was known from the time of Eden. It was not however known
to Paul until he was "called." It cost him his life, his
earthly life anyway.
9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according
to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:
10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might
gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in
heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
Is it still a mystery? It was declared to the prophets:
Revelation 10:7 But in the days of the voice of the seventh
angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should
be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.
As I see it, the problem with Christians is they aren't willing
to give up their preconceived notions. They read one or two
passages from the Bible and reach a conclusion that may be right
or wrong. If they run into other passages later that contradict
their interpretations of the first passages, they aren't willing
to abandon their first conclusions. They either say, "Oh, that's
a mystery" or "We'll understand that later." They don't want to
know; they want to believe they already know and are right.
That is a glaringly true statement; and the truth of it can be
seen by how so few people alter their views in discussions.
They argue, but few ever change their minds. Is Scripture
profitable for reproof and correction? It should be; but
people don't use it that way. It's used to "prove" what they
already think they know is true.
At times, translators are so sure they know the truth, they're
willing to corrupt the Bible. Take this passage:
Jeremiah 7:22 For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded
them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt,
concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices:
The NIV translators were so certain this had to be wrong, they
added the word "just" to the text, altering the meaning
entirely:
22 For when I brought your ancestors out of Egypt and spoke to
them, I did not just give them commands about burnt offerings
and sacrifices,
If they had understood Israel's role as intercessor for
Gentiles, they would not corrupted that text.
[/quote]
Perhaps I should slow down on forum life and write a book about
God's plan for the Gentiles.
shouldn't we first discuss "JEWS" 'GENTILES' and "HEATHENS "
and thou we may not be on the same page yet:
intuitively you have hit on the target !!! ; with the subject of
"CAIN"
I could go to discuss Cain and why he was born.
CAIN and the subject of gentiles in the same conversation
yep; thou they are not the same thing
they would be no gentiles without the actions of CAIN
all that made it through the flood are effected by the birth of
CAIN
Some also say Ham married a descendant of Cain.
In the weirdest way , HAM was a descendant out of the birth of
Cain
we all are
I could discuss how God protected the Edomites by forbidding
Israel to take an inch of land from them. I could discuss why
it was important that Lot go to Sodom and marry there.
and that is what your next piece {below} is all about
* what a conversation we could have !
It's there but it's concealed
please don't tease me
* what a conversation we could have !
Think of all the Gentile women that married into the Messianic
line. I could discuss Isaiah 56.
i could discuss Matthew one verses 1-6 and tell that story with
just those four women whom it is said
whose mother was
[quote author=A nonny mouse link=topic=38.msg454#msg454
date=1418703367]
Hi Danger Mouse,
I can but admire the way that you have 'your faith' all set out
with such detailed and careful emphasis.
However, for my part, I incline more to a 'Creator God' who was
God of the entire universe from the point of creation rather
than a God who the 'Bible' seems to project as have little
interest in other than the Jews until Paul came along.
[/quote]
it is in this whose mother was part ; where it is seen; GOD was
interested in those other than Jews
it is the story of ...
why David
why Jesus had to be a JEW
The CAIN & ABEL story
and so much more
Someone asked once how many trees were there in Eden? I
thought about it and thought, "Seventy, of course." I hesitated
to write that on my own authority so did a little research. I
was pleased to find that the Talmud also said seventy. Why?
The same reason seventy souls went into Egypt (that explains my
objection to Acts saying it was seventy-five). The same reason
the Sanhedrin had seventy members and Israel encountered the
seventy palm trees and twelve wells at Elim. All that shows me
God's plan for the Gentiles.
70 number of trees or was it these 70 and those 2 trees ; tree
of life and tree of knowledge of good and evil ?
75 [ -3; Joseph and his two sons that became tribes making ... ]
72 the number of sons of Japheth Shem and Ham
I'll listen
I'll add
as of now ; i don't know
Of course, I'd also have to discuss being born elect, with God
knowing you before you're born. It's not what the Calvinists
think. It's not an easy pass to Paradise. No, it means
suffering for others so they will be saved. All the 144,000
mentioned in Revelation agreed to suffer so that large multitude
we see on the sea of glass could be there. Paul will continue
to mystify people if they have the wrong ideas about
"predestination."
Ephesians 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the
foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without
blame before him in love:
5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus
Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
It was Paul's job as a Jew to see to it that Gentiles found God.
That was known from the time of Eden. It was not however known
to Paul until he was "called." It cost him his life, his
earthly life anyway.
9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according
to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:
10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might
gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in
heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
Is it still a mystery? It was declared to the prophets:
Revelation 10:7 But in the days of the voice of the seventh
angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should
be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.
please don't tease me
As I see it, the problem with Christians is they aren't willing
to give up their preconceived notions. They read one or two
passages from the Bible and reach a conclusion that may be right
or wrong. If they run into other passages later that contradict
their interpretations of the first passages, they aren't willing
to abandon their first conclusions. They either say, "Oh, that's
a mystery" or "We'll understand that later." They don't want to
know; they want to believe they already know and are right.
That is a glaringly true statement; and the truth of it can be
seen by how so few people alter their views in discussions.
They argue, but few ever change their minds. Is Scripture
profitable for reproof and correction? It should be; but
people don't use it that way. It's used to "prove" what they
already think they know is true.
lol; i would use this as my signature line
but it is a little long
At times, translators are so sure they know the truth, they're
willing to corrupt the Bible. Take this passage:
Jeremiah 7:22 For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded
them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt,
concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices:
The NIV translators were so certain this had to be wrong, they
added the word "just" to the text, altering the meaning
entirely:
22 For when I brought your ancestors out of Egypt and spoke to
them, I did not just give them commands about burnt offerings
and sacrifices,
If they had understood Israel's role as intercessor for
Gentiles, they would not corrupted that text.
[/quote]
great post
but ;
PLEASE DON'T TEASE ME
#Post#: 477--------------------------------------------------
Re: Covenants
By: Amadeus Date: December 16, 2014, 10:00 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Although my method of searching is certainly different than
yours and my held beliefs are not always easy for me to discuss,
what you have said here moves toward the place where I have
found myself standing:
[quote]Danger Mouse: As I see it, the problem with Christians is
they aren't willing to give up their preconceived notions. They
read one or two passages from the Bible and reach a conclusion
that may be right or wrong. If they run into other passages
later that contradict their interpretations of the first
passages, they aren't willing to abandon their first
conclusions. They either say, "Oh, that's a mystery" or "We'll
understand that later." They don't want to know; they want to
believe they already know and are right. That is a glaringly
true statement; and the truth of it can be seen by how so few
people alter their views in discussions. They argue, but few
ever change their minds. Is Scripture profitable for reproof
and correction? It should be; but people don't use it that
way. It's used to "prove" what they already think they know is
true. [/quote]
[font=courier]"Preconceived notions" is a real culprit for many.
I grew up building such notions from what I heard from others
and then later added to them from my own reading/study of
scripture. Even when I came to recognize that I had such
notions, it was hard for to allow that maybe most or even all of
my notions with regard to the things of God were preconceived.
For me, years were to pass before some of the notions were
pierced and other possibilities explored. Still when it comes
down to it, what do I have now that is right as God see right?
Are they all still mysteries? I know that they not all mysteries
to all people, but too many people, myself most certainly
included, do not know many things that God wants us to know. The
search must continue while our time to search continues.
Stopping on a plateau in the things of God will stifle us
because it is stifling (quenching the Spirit?) the Holy Ghost
which is to lead us (if we will be led).
I tire sometimes and I stumble sometimes, but I cannot ever
quit. To quit is to go back and partake of my own vomit. To quit
is to go the way of Lot's wife.[/font]
#Post#: 484--------------------------------------------------
Re: Covenants
By: Kerry Date: December 16, 2014, 4:27 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Al link=topic=38.msg456#msg456 date=1418717667]
Think of all the Gentile women that married into the Messianic
line. I could discuss Isaiah 56.
i could discuss Matthew one verses 1-6 and tell that story with
just those four women whom it is said
whose mother was [/quote]And Matthew omits some of Jesus'
colorful ancestors like the woman from the "cursed" tribe of
Ammon that Solomon married and like Jezebel whose daughter also
married into the Messianic line.
[quote]70 number of trees or was it these 70 and those 2 trees
; tree of life and tree of knowledge of good and evil ?
[/quote]I'd say they were all meant to be one. The number
depends on your perspective. The Tree of Life and the Tree of
the Knowledge of Good and Evil were meant to be one. The error
was separating them. Of having two instead of making the two
one. They made that error just as Adam and Eve did not obey
immediately the wish of God that they come together and become
one with each other.
They were told they could eat of "every tree." That would
include the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. They were
also told not to eat of that one -- meaning to me not by itself.
Some things are poisonous by themselves like the two elements
that make salt. Salt is a sacred symbol, useful for life; but
sodium and chlorine which make it are dangerous by themselves.
Only when used together (yes, I'm driving at the two becoming
one or covenants) are they useful for life.
The seventy and the two were also meant to be one, just as Jew
and Gentile are.
If they had understood Israel's role as intercessor for
Gentiles, they would not corrupted that text.
[quote]PLEASE DON'T TEASE ME [/quote]First, let me ask if you
accept the concept of "original sin" that Augustine invented?
Catholics do of course and many Protestants do too. The
Orthodox Church doesn't, and the Jews don't. Are babies born
"guilty" of sin?
Then there is this hard question of what to do with these
passages. The first:
Numbers 14:18 The Lord is longsuffering, and of great mercy,
forgiving iniquity and transgression, and by no means clearing
the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the
children unto the third and fourth generation.
Is it forgiving and merciful to punish children for the sins of
their ancestors? Can we read it that way? Some do. Then we
have this:
Ezekiel 18:19 Yet say ye, Why? doth not the son bear the
iniquity of the father? When the son hath done that which is
lawful and right, and hath kept all my statutes, and hath done
them, he shall surely live.
20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear
the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the
iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be
upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.
The problem is how both passages can be true.
#Post#: 485--------------------------------------------------
Re: Covenants
By: Kerry Date: December 16, 2014, 4:36 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Amadeus link=topic=38.msg477#msg477
date=1418745623]
"Preconceived notions" is a real culprit for many. I grew up
building such notions from what I heard from others and then
later added to them from my own reading/study of scripture. Even
when I came to recognize that I had such notions, it was hard
for to allow that maybe most or even all of my notions with
regard to the things of God were preconceived. For me, years
were to pass before some of the notions were pierced and other
possibilities explored. Still when it comes down to it, what do
I have now that is right as God see right? [/quote]
I came to the realization one day that I knew nothing of any
value. I asked myself that. I had lots of facts and knowledge
and even more opinions; but what did I know that was really
helpful? My honest answer was nothing.
I did my best to ditch everything I thought I ever knew and
started off fresh. Eventually I got around to reading the
Bible; and I had no idea if it was true or not. I wasn't going
to assume anything. It took years before I could see the value
of books like Esther. I wasn't sure about them, didn't know.
#Post#: 488--------------------------------------------------
Re: Covenants
By: Amadeus Date: December 16, 2014, 9:30 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Danger Mouse link=topic=38.msg485#msg485
date=1418769372]
I came to the realization one day that I knew nothing of any
value.[/quote]
I [font=courier]have come to plateaus of realization such as
that. I remember clearly many, many, years ago recognizing the
need to set aside, or at least carefully sift through things I
learned in college, which I had come to believe were so good.
They weren't.[/font]
[quote] I asked myself that. I had lots of facts and knowledge
and even more opinions; but what did I know that was really
helpful? My honest answer was nothing.[/quote]
[font=courier]I was almost there, but not really. I thought it
was all nothing until God convinced that there really was
something... even if I was not able to recognize it as such.
[/font]
[quote]I did my best to ditch everything I thought I ever knew
and started off fresh.[/quote]
[font=courier]My problem was trying to get rid of everything
when some what I had I needed. [/font]
[quote]Eventually I got around to reading the Bible; and I had
no idea if it was true or not. I wasn't going to assume
anything. It took years before I could see the value of books
like Esther. I wasn't sure about them, didn't know.
[/quote]
[font=courier]I was sold on the Bible many years before I had
ever read it at all. Essentially that has not changed although
now I have read it many times. I used to think I would
eventually find all that I needed and all that could be found by
continuing to read and study scripture. God showed me that I was
wrong by taking away some of my ability to reason and to
remember. It was after that that some of the Truth I was missing
was revealed to me. Much is still missing and some only comes to
me at times. I do continue now to give God the glory.[/font]
#Post#: 489--------------------------------------------------
Re: Covenants
By: Kerry Date: December 16, 2014, 11:29 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Let me add another passage into the mix:
Deuteronomy 7:9 Know therefore that the Lord thy God, he is God,
the faithful God, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them
that love him and keep his commandments to a thousand
generations;
Revelation speaks about the saints ruling for a thousand years.
If we take a generation to be 25 years, Deuteronomy is saying
the person who keeps covenant with God would have influence with
God for up to 25,000 years.
I think that helps clear up:
Exodus 2:23 And it came to pass in process of time, that the
king of Egypt died: and the children of Israel sighed by reason
of the bondage, and they cried, and their cry came up unto God
by reason of the bondage.
24 And God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant
with Abraham, with Isaac, and with Jacob.
25 And God looked upon the children of Israel, and God had
respect unto them.
#Post#: 499--------------------------------------------------
Re: Covenants
By: Alfie Date: December 17, 2014, 9:29 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Danger Mouse link=topic=38.msg484#msg484
date=1418768871]
First, let me ask if you accept the concept of "original sin"
that Augustine invented? Catholics do of course and many
Protestants do too. The Orthodox Church doesn't, and the Jews
don't. Are babies born "guilty" of sin?
Then there is this hard question of what to do with these
passages. The first:
Numbers 14:18 The Lord is longsuffering, and of great mercy,
forgiving iniquity and transgression, and by no means clearing
the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the
children unto the third and fourth generation.
Is it forgiving and merciful to punish children for the sins of
their ancestors? Can we read it that way? Some do. Then we
have this:
Ezekiel 18:19 Yet say ye, Why? doth not the son bear the
iniquity of the father? When the son hath done that which is
lawful and right, and hath kept all my statutes, and hath done
them, he shall surely live.
20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear
the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the
iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be
upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.
The problem is how both passages can be true.
[/quote]
================================================================
===================
First, let me ask if you accept the concept of "original sin"
First, let me ask if you accept the concept of "original sin"
that Augustine invented?
yes i believe in original sin
that Augustine invented?
but like the rapture said to be Darby's invention
i didn't learn of their concepts or arguments from either
original sin from Augustine nor the rapture from Darby
Catholics do of course and many Protestants do too. The
Orthodox Church doesn't, and the Jews don't.
like i said ; i don't care who said --- but more of what was
said
Are babies born "guilty" of sin?
before i answer this
i will ask a question --- it goes to the issue of what i am
saying
in genesis six ; if angels mated with women
and then the angels killed the offspring instantly --- would it
go to heaven?
--- did it sin ?
original sin
Adam and Eve left the family of GOD
they hid from GOD
but did they hide from each other? * we today always think in
terms after the fall and not before
JESUS came to "make" children of God
JOHN ONE 12 Yet to all who did receive him, to those who
believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of
God— 13 children born not of natural descent, nor of human
decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.
IF YOU HAVE TO "MAKE"; then what it was wasn't what you make *
kinda kills the elect formula
now back to are babies born with sin?
was your daughter in law born as part of your family ?
she had to be "made" your family
so ; a child from parents out of the family of GOD
ARE STILL outside the family of GOD WHICH IS WHAT ORIGINAL SIN
IS ALL ABOUT --- "Imo"
so yes ; they are born sinners thou they themselves haven't
committed a sin * like those offspring of the angels and
women
*
will they automatically go to heaven?
*
will anyone go to heaven without Jesus and what he did?
Then there is this hard question of what to do with these
passages. The first:
[b]Numbers 14:18 The Lord is longsuffering, and of great mercy,
forgiving iniquity and transgression, and by no means clearing
the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the
children unto the third and fourth generation.
Is it forgiving and merciful to punish children for the sins of
their ancestors? Can we read it that way? Some do[/b]
when it comes to the old man "out of the family of GOD"
ALL SHARE THE SAME FATE
the long-suffering, merciful, forgiving iniquity and
transgression is for that "new ( man) creation "
NOT THE MOST IN DEPTH ANSWER ; but it the best i have on this
subject
Then we have this:
[b]Ezekiel 18:19 Yet say ye, Why? doth not the son bear the
iniquity of the father? When the son hath done that which is
lawful and right, and hath kept all my statutes, and hath done
them, he shall surely live.
20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear
the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the
iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be
upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon
him.[/b]
20. ok; all ( the old man) have sinned
but any son that has become that "new( man) creation" does not
reason: its the old man who sins
----------------------------------------------------- requires a
different conversation
but we can say there is a difference between what was ( the old
man) and what Jesus came to "make"
The problem is how both passages can be true.
concept : old man vs. new creation
like i said ; not the most in depth answers but the best short
answers i have
#Post#: 500--------------------------------------------------
Re: Covenants
By: Amadeus Date: December 17, 2014, 9:32 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[font=courier]God always does or is prepared to do his part in a
covenant with men. When a man moves rightly for his part, God is
on top of the situation and covenant between and that one is
begun or further strengthened. The timelines suggested by DM
(whether taken literally or not) show us how long-lasting the
tie between us and God can be. 25,000 years for our finite minds
may seem to be infinite or eternal.
All of the little pieces of the puzzle, when God gives to us and
shows us their proper place, will bring to us more clearly a
completed picture (vision) of what He has for us. In a perfect
and unending (or 25,000 year long) covenant with Him will then
our vision be, or seem to be, the "face to face" of which Paul
wrote?[/font]
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page