I cannot what ?

The Bible is The Lord's interpretation.

If we continue to alter the words, then we are essentially saying that words can mean whatever we want them to mean, and if we carry this to it's logical conclusion then words don't have any real meaning at all.

Of course, for some reason, we don't read newpaper articles this way. We don't exchange the position of the subject of the newpaper article for ourselves,

So why do so many people think it's ok to make that violation of grammar when reading THIS particular Book? And then justify it? And rejustify the behavior adinfinitum?

Like, well, someone else did it and I liked how they did it, so it's ok to abandon the self proclaimed truth of The Lord and...and...and...

I have never seen any Scripture supporting that, rather, I find Scriptures saying completely different things, such as Words the Holy Spirit teacheth, and, that we cannot stand on our own creature strength (in this matter) but ONLY upon EVERY Word which proceedeth out from the mouth of The Lord, &c &c &c.

Our interpretation is of no value. If we desire to know that is His interpretation then we are going to have to learn something about words, grammar, Hebraisms, Figures of Speech used in The Bible, and as it is written, 'hold fast the form of sound words'.

Very true, grammatically we can pin certain things down, in ch.1 we have no article for God creating 'man'. This is significant, it's like asking for a glass without the article, meaning a glass out of more than one, just any old generic glass. However, when we add the grammatical article, we would ask for that glass, or my glass, or the glass. Without the article, we have, God created mankind, not just man.

So in ch.1 we find God made mankind male and female. Chapter 2:1 we find that all the hosts were created, that is, all the different races from chapter 1 were created. Gen.2:7, in the Hebrew gives us the definate article as well as the particle, eth ha adam, or, the man adam.

Now when Cain was being banished he was worried about other people harming or killing him.

Gen 4:14 Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me.

Then he left and married.

Gen 4:15 And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.
Gen 4:16 And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.
Gen 4:17 And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived

Cain married one of the other created peoples from some other race, one of the 6th day creations. The significance of the man adam is that it was through this particular bloodline of whom Christ, the Hebrew Messiah, would be born.

Quote me where I used the words 'true path to God' or any equivalent, if I am being accused of something then please state the facts? Did I write something about the subject of this thread that is not accurate or something? Please tell me so I can correct it.

What does this Book say ? Many paths to God, or is it the few who find it ? And how does it say this path you mention is to be found? Organized religion or by His Words alone? Or some other way ?

Please do check out those links and see how the word is used in Scripture. It's quite instructive, and, after all, we are reading His Interpretation when we look it up and study them. At least that is the claim made about the Words in this Book.

Here are a list of where to find the word and it's Biblical usage 'hell':

Search and see:


http://www.angelfire.com/nv/TheOliveBranch/append35.html

http://www.angelfire.com/nv/TheOliveBranch/append131.html

Satan's one great goal is keep Christ from His rightful position, and he can quote Scripture quite well, hence all the division of man while The Bible instructs unity.

I am not judging that any particular religion, merely stating some facts that were brought up on this thread. Although The Lord does state he believes blaspheme to be subjective, He does state that
Man has the 'right' to blaspheme, you can read it while addressing the leadership of the Jews:

Mat 12:31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.

The context was that Christ's healing works were from Satan and not from the Holy Spirit. So we even get a Biblical definition of Blasphemy here.



Point is, I don't think I am blaspheming anyone group, merely pointing out what they themselves declare, and yes, they got some things correct. Most every Christian religion finds parts of the truth.

They got a couple of things right, hell is merely the grave, same word is translated hell, grave, and pit in the OT. Paul only used the word once, & that would be in 1 Cor.15.

They do not believe in one Lord. They do not believe that Christ is God manifest in the flesh fulfilling OT Scripture.

They do not believe they are overcomers who are to inherit the heavenly city, even though they quote the number of overcomers as being 144,000. They don't have an answer for having more than 144,000 members either.

The do not believe in taking the context of Scripture into account if it goes against their beliefs. They don't believe what Paul wrote, that with the revelation of the mystery (secret) that God's Word was completed. They believe that God does have more to say but only to them, so although they will quote Paul when it suits them, they don't believe what Paul writes anyways. And so they need to by default also dismiss what the other apostles wrote, seeing as how they upheld Paul's status as an apostle sent from God.

In other words, they contradict both themselves as well as Scripture.

The Bible says that all will be resurrected, the just and the unjust. Some into age long shame and some to age long life. During this coming agetime, in resurrection, all those who were not able to hear and to acknowledge the Word of God will sit down at The Lord's table to eat of His truth, and ruled with a rod of iron.

That every knee shall bow, and even includes provisions for those who wish to visit their family members for encouragement.

If we believe all that is written, then what we find is a loving forgiving God who is Lord of Lords and King of Kings, one whose judgment is that the sinner is set free. Of course this does not state that because of this anyone is at liberty to go against the great and mighty God, rather, that there is an additional reward for those who understand and acknowledge what the will of The Lord is.

So there is a reward in view, also referred to as a prize. This reward is something that can be lost, moreover, those who lose it have their reward here in this life, whether that be their ego, their gold, their whatever, that is the only reward they will get if they do not seek The Lord and His understanding of what is going on.

And what is going on can be summed up in one word: redemption.

Christ came to save sinners.

BIOCOSM is just one of several alternative scientific theories.



My posts are really not for me to engage in arguing with either believers in The One Lord or non believers. I can merely submit Biblical statements in hope that some might look them up in hopes that The Lord might open the eyes of their understanding.

Specifically for non believers though, I would add that only one book in The Bible is written to non believers, and that, so that they might have life in His Name. The Gospel of John is the only Biblical book written for non believers.

The carnal mind cannot understand that which is spiritual, it must be imparted.

The Introduction to Genesis (and to the whole Bible) Gen. 1:1-2:3, ascribes everything to the living God, creating, making, acting, moving, and speaking. There is no room for evolution without a flat denial of Divine revelation. One must be true, the other false. All God's works were pronounced "good" seven times, viz. Gen. 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31. They are "great," Ps. 111:2. Rev. 15:3. They are "wondrous," Job 37:14. They are "perfect," Deut. 32:4.

Man starts from nothing. He begins in helplessness, ignorance, and inexperience. All his works, therefore, proceed on the principle of evolution. This principle is seen only in human affairs: from the hut to the palace; from the canoe to the ocean liner; from the spade and ploughshare to machines for drilling, reaping, and binding, &c. But the birds build their nests to-day as at the beginning. The moment we pass the boundary line, and enter the Divine sphere, no trace or vestige of evolution is seen. There is growth and development within, but no passing, change, or evolution out from one into another. On the other hand, all God's works are perfect.

In the Introduction to Genesis (ch. 1:1-2:3) forty-six times everything is ascribed to direct acts and volitions on the part of God as the Creator:--


God (or He) created
6 times
1:1, 21, 27, 27, 27; 2:3

God moved
1 once
1:2

God said
10 times
1:3, 6, 9, 11, 14, 20, 24, 26, 28, 29

God saw
7 times
1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31

God divided
2 twice
1:4, 7

God (or He) called
5 times
1:5, 5, 8, 10, 10

God (or He) made
7 times
1:7, 16, 25, 31; 2:2, 2, 3

God set
1 once
1:17

God blessed
3 times
1:22, 28; 2:3

God ended
1 once
2:2

God rested
2 twice
2:2, 3

He sanctified
1 once
2:3

Evolution is only one of several theories invented to explain the phenomena of created things. It is admitted by all scientists that no one of these theories covers all the ground; and the greatest claim made for Evolution, or Darwinism, is that "it covers more ground than any of the others."

The Word of God claims to cover all the ground: and the only way in which this claim is met, is by a denial of the inspiration of the Scriptures, in order to weaken it. This is the special work undertaken by the so-called "Higher Criticism", which bases its conclusions on human assumptions and reasoning, instead of on the documentary evidence of manuscripts and Textual Criticism does.

I want to appologize to anyone that I have offended by posting some rather scientific based studies refuting the possibilities of life starting by some random events, but a special thanks goes out to my new friend (you know you and who you are...)

THANK YOU SO MUCH - and I anticiipate your entegrity in that matter with even more great and wonderful THANKS ! ! !

I can only add the following



Eph 2:14 For he is our peace...

The point of focus I would like to bring to mind will be on the verb 'is'.

When we read the Bible in the English, we are apt to read somewhat with blinders on; much is out of our mind's eye.

In the Greek we have a more exacting language, and here, we should first note that the order of the words differ. We read it thus:

He for IS THE PEACE of-us...

I like the way Paul always puts Christ first. This is His rightful position, and His position in my life.


In the Greek we have the 'case' being the 3rd person Singular Present Indicative Active form of the verb.

The importance of this cannot be overstated. This verb in this particular form has only forty two occurrences in the NT.

The Singular directing us immediately back to the noun, HE is placed FIRST. The Present being emphatic that right now He IS our peace. The Indicative being the action is presented finished in time, right now. Active being that the verb remains active of the subject in perpetuity. The subject is Him, Christ.

He is not only our peace right now but the idea of using this particular grammatical form means that He is our peace, not just a one time event, but always in an ongoing outpouring of ever present continuance, AND that only He is.



The word 'peace', eire¯ne¯, taken from Ephesians chapter two, For He is our peace... While there is not much agreement among lexicographers and etymologists concerning this word eire¯ne¯, we should find light shed on from the Hebrew, so that we may be able to appreciate more fully the Lord's legacy of love.

Shalom, the Hebrew word "peace", is derived from shalam, "to make whole, complete, perfect". In Exod. 21 and 22, Moses sets before the people in connection with the settling of disputes. In chapter 21 we have the case of a man who opens a pit, and fails to cover it, and so causes the loss of an ox or an ***. The judgment is that "the owner of the pit shall make it good (shalam)" (Exod. 21:34). Another case is that of an ox, hurt so badly by another man's ox that it dies. If it was known that the ox was dangerous and the owner had neglected to keep it in, the judgment is that "he shall surely pay (shalam) ox for ox" (Exod. 21:36). Again in Exod. 22:1, "He shall restore"; 22:3, "He shall make full restitution"; and, further on in the chapter: "restore", "pay", "make good" (Exod. 22:4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15).

>From the OT renderings we find that Peace is impossible without "making amends". "The work of righteousness shall be peace." In Lev. 51:6 we read: "He shall make amends for the harm that he hath done." Here again the word is shalam. We also find it translated "requite" in Judges 1:7, "finish" in I Kings 9:25, "recompense" in Isa. 45:6, and "perfect" in Isa. 42:19. As an adjective shalem is translated "full" (Gen. 15:16), "whole" (Deut. 27:6), and "just" (Prov. 11:1).

It was the custom of the world to include the word "peace" in its salutations. Heathen kings used this form of salutation, as we find in Ezra and Daniel (Ezra 4:17; 5:7; Dan. 4:1; 6:25), but it was not in their power to establish true peace either among men, or with God. In contrast is John 16, where we find that the Saviour adds to His bequest the words:
"Not as the world giveth, give I unto you" (John 16:27).

True peace is the result of satisfactory settlement, and when used in connection with God and man necessitates the sacrificial work of Christ.

We find "peace" is naturally contrasted with "war":

"I am for peace; but when I speak, they are for war" (Psa. 120:7).
"I came not to send peace, but a sword" (Matt. 10:34).

It is also contrasted with evil, and compared with good:

"Depart from evil and do good: seek peace and pursue it" (Psa. 34:14).
"Thoughts of peace, and not of evil" (Jer. 39:11).
"Peace" is also placed in contrast with "anxiety":
"Be anxious for nothing . . . . . and the peace of God . . . . . shall keep your hearts and
minds through Christ Jesus" (Phil. 4:6, 7).

Moreover, "peace" enables the believer to endure without being offended
(Matt. 11:2-6):

"Great peace have they which love Thy law, and nothing shall offend them"
(Psa. 119:165).

Maybe, but not really. I mean, it could be that way if (please excuse my matter of fact way of writing) If, we simply disregard language and change the meaning of words to mean what we want them to mean. However, on the other hand, if words mean anything at all then we must acknowledge that they mean what they mean, and, Biblically, it is a 24 hour period in the Hebrew, page one of the opening page, with the figure of speech being employed called, Polysyndeton - which means one thing right after another in succession (indicated by many 'and' s at the beginning of a clause), and here in the opening chapter we find in the 34 verses of this Introduction, each one of 102 separate acts are emphasized, and the important Word of God in vs.1 is carried like a lamp through the whole of this Introduction;



Po'ly-syn'de-ton; or, Many Ands
(Genesis 22:9,11. Joshua 7:24. Luke 14:21). The repetition of the word "and" at the beginning of successive clauses, each independent, important, and emphatic, with no climax at the end (Compare Aysndeton and Luke 14:13).


Each time we find the words in the Bible, where, the people went out and reasoned amongst themselves, a judgment was handed down. Never a good one either.

In the above provided mathematical examples, we have seen that even if an entire generation of perfect altered accelerated genes were attained, at the rate of one generation every second, the science you are depending upon has revealed that the universe simply is not that old yet.

And we don't have one generation every second. It's simply beyond the realm of possibilities as far as I can comprehend. I think we read that man has always wanted to fly, but I have not heard of anyone growing wings. Darwin wrote that it would be impossible to have an eye evolve under his theory unless there was scientific proof. He spoke the truth when he wrote that.

Bless.

Arcamedees,

I have to guess here, so let me just ask then: Are you wanting me to apologize for not taking as much stock in cartoons as you do or what ?

Pahleeeeeze !

After having viewed only a few of your other posts, well, everyone here can easily see that you like to pick battles rather than other things. Your words against me and others most certainly say something more about you than they do anyone else.

Returning to the real and true subject of this thread, perhaps someone might wish to look into this side of nature, and, putting it forward now, that I don't really require extrabiblical applications because I believe that which IS written:

Let us look at random events

Since random events within nature are supposed to be responsible for the spontaneous beginning of life and of all living things, let’s evaluate “randomness.” The tool used to evaluate randomness is the mathematical concept of probability.

The basic principle of probability is simple: If you have a coin with two sides, heads and tails, and toss it into the air, each side has a 50 percent chance of being on the top when the coin lands. This is the probability of a random event limited by two possible outcomes.

Now, imagine a pair of four-sided dice. The probability of any certain side landing in the bottom position when one of the pair is tossed is one in four, or 25 percent. Add the second of the pair, and there are 16 possible combinations (four times four). Add a third and there are 64 possible combinations (four times four times four). The probability of getting any certain combination in one toss of three dice would be 64 to one. The more possible combinations, the less the probability of any one specific result.

Evolution is hypothesized to occur when there is an alteration to the genetic material of a plant or animal, and the change produces offspring with a better chance to survive. In animals, the changes take place in the genome, the genetic material of the sperm or egg cells of a parent, and are passed on to the next generation.

In the human genome, there are four possible combinations of amino acids called nucleotides, but, instead of three dice, there are 3.2 billion nucleotides. The possible combinations would be four times four times four—repeatedly multiplying by four a total of 3.2 billion times.

The Human Genome Project, a joint international effort to unravel the structure of genetic material of humans, has determined that a genetic mutation of one billionth of a genome is always fatal. That means for a human, a random change of three nucleotides is fatal, thereby ending any further possibility of evolution for that individual’s offspring.

Evolutionists claim that chimpanzees are the closest living relatives to man, with a difference of about 48 million nucleotides. This means at least 48 million random events must have occurred in exactly the right order for the evolutionary gap between man and his hypothesized common ancestor with chimpanzee to have been spanned. Three changes in the genome during one generation would be FATAL and stop the process. Therefore this number of changes would require a minimum of 24 million generations to achieve, assuming two changes happened during each generation.
These changes must happen in exactly the proper order, and each step must produce either no noticeable change or provide the offspring with some sort of advantage. Any negative change would stop or prolong the process. Each change must occur in a gene that is passed on to an offspring, and the offspring must survive and must undergo some further sort of change and have offspring and so on for each of the 48 million genetic changes.

Next, since there are 3.2 billion nucleotides in the human genome, the probability of one particular nucleotide being altered is 3.2 billion to one. To determine the mathematical probability of the genetic changes necessary for the hypothesized “evolution” between chimps and people, it is necessary to multiply 3.2 billion times 48 million.

The probability against the evolution from a common ancestor with chimps to modern man, using these figures, is 153 quadrillion (153 followed by 15 zeros) to one.

The scope of 153 quadrillion is incomprehensible. To illustrate the size of this number: If one number is counted every second (1, 2, 3, 4, etc.), it would take over 200 million years longer than the estimated age of the Earth to reach 153 quadrillion.
Though this number seems mind-boggling, it is only the tip of the iceberg. This example assumes all changes to genetic material would be positive when, in reality, fewer than 1 percent of genetic changes are beneficial. This example assumes each offspring would be successful in producing more offspring and that each generation would have two genetic “improvements.” It does not include any of the factors like mortality of offspring, unsuccessful reproductive attempts, the order of changes and many more variables, each of which would increase the odds against evolution by millions of times.

If a change anywhere in the chain of events proves to be detrimental, the entire process comes to a halt. For example, if a saber-tooth tiger eats one of the young prehistoric genetically altered monkey-men before it becomes a parent, the process is interrupted—the entire chain of events leading to that child comes to an end.

This represents only the changes that must occur starting with the supposed common ancestor of men and chimps and ending with the first modern man. What about the number of changes necessary to get from the first single cell, which is hypothesized to have taken life in the primordial ooze, until it evolved into this hypothetical chimp-like pre-man?

Here’s a better question: How many multiple millions of times greater would be the probability AGAINST such “evolution”?

Bless.

In that, we read of the only parable, we must learn what that word means if we want to be able to dig deeper, the only parable where there is an instruction to 'learn' it.

So when we see the fig tree, Israel, coming back into view (He both scatters and gathers), The Lord's view, we can dig back and see what kind of figs there are. And we find both good and bad figs. And this has to do, also, with Israel becoming a nation again in one day. That happened only one time since they were set aside at the end of Acts, 1958.

Isa 66:8 Who hath heard such a thing? who hath seen such things? Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children.

Perhaps the question might now be, how long is a Biblical generation?

The Lord is The Heart Knower, so the answer is a definite yes.



Jer 17:10 I the LORD search the heart, I try the reins, even to give every man according to his ways, and according to the fruit of his doings.

Heb 4:13 Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do.

Gal 6:7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.

Jud 1:16 These are murmurers, complainers, walking

Jud 1:18 How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts.

Pro 17:3 The refining pot is for silver, and the furnace for gold: but the LORD trieth the hearts.

Rev 2:23 And I will kill her children with death; and all the churches shall know that I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to your works.

You are not far off actually, for even the Lord in His earthly ministry was very much against religion, calling them scripture doctors (lawyers). If one were to read and follow the grammatical subject and object through towards it's completion in Mathew 23, we see a merciless railing against those in charge wherein the people were listening to.

Bless

Sorry you have trouble with basic grammar Arcamedees. Many of us have this type of trouble.

Bless.

proof of God means that God doesn't exist?

That's doublespeak if I ever heard any.

And then a personal attack to boot?

Ohhhh Arcamedees, that is just so terribly sad.



"Fraud and Falsehood only dread examination. Truth invites it" - Thoomas Cooper (1759-1839)

Obutse?

Contrarily, the pattern and usage of Words in this Book are very exact, however, being spirit, He has to step down and use baby words that we can understand. We simply cannot climb up to Him at His level, so God stoops down to ours; and we do the same for our children too - I mean, we don't explain quantum physics or molecular biology to infants because they would not understand the words, rather, we begin with tiny simple words, like: this is your nose, this is your finger, &c &c.

And they do not immediately understand either, they are infants in a world that is simply much larger than they can grasp. The Lord understands this and uses simple Words. He then defines them for us so we don't have to guess. It's hard for us, it is for me at least.

This Book is meant to be understood by the Words He teaches, not words that other people teach.

There are no mixed metaphors in this Book, it is in the event of human affairs that the meaning of His Words receive other forms of interpretation, moreover, if we want understanding of His Words, then we have to learn that our interpretation is of little or no value.

This is where acknowledgment comes into view.

He is giving us His interpretation of something very bad that has happened, remember that that great spiritual foe and fallen angel was already fallen and in the garden within the first few pages. And there is this plan to fix it. This is a process which may be summed up in one word:

Redemption.

Bless

English was invented in the 1500's.

The Bible was written in Hebrew, Chaldian (also known as Aramaic), & Greek. And about 3 centuries BC the OT, called the Septuagint, abbreviation being LXX, was written by Hebrews because of their being in captivity for so long they were forgetting their language. So this Greek translation is one to be trusted.

Anti, in the Greek, means 'instead of'. The apostles are speaking of the instead of Christ. There were already plenty of people coming to them at the time of NT writings, saying that Christ was Christ, but we also read that they were not teaching the same things the apostles were teaching.

We find Biblical support for this instead of Christ coming to the earth claiming to be Christ in additional passages.

SharpShooter10 has stated a fact in the immediately above post, as far as my research acknowledges.

Bless.

on subject: first, lets put it in its own context:

Isa 45:6 That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else.
Isa 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.
Isa 45:8 Drop down, ye heavens, from above, and let the skies pour down righteousness: let the earth open, and let them bring forth salvation, and let righteousness spring up together; I the LORD have created it.
Isa 45:9 Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands?

That they may know...there is none else
I form...all these things
Drop down...I the LORD have created it
Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker...What makest thou?


there is a wide variety of Hebrew possibilities as they are used with this word 'create', or bara.

here it means 'bring about'.

better for our English mind, is to find its own concept:

God doesn't create evil, but does create the reprocussions of participating in that which is evil.

it is called righteous indignation.

here, create, affords the Poel Participle of subject, which, with, and requires the rendering 'bring about'. this is not in the same form as in vv8, 12, or v18 in connection with the earth. in Jer 18:11 it is the verb yazar, to frame, to mold. in Amos 3:6 it is the verb ashah, to bring about.

Evil, is never rendered sin. God brings calamity about as the inevitable consequence of sin. it is rened 'calamity' in Ps. 141. 5 'adversity' in 1 Sam. 10:19, Ps 94:13, Ecc. 7"14; 'grief' in Neh 2:10,...; 'affliction' in Num. 11:11,

elsewhere rendere misery, hurt, noisesome, sore, wretchedness, harm, and mischief.

so God is not and has not and does not create evil, it is a figure of speech, an idiom, an Hebraism. God does bring about the reprocussions of mans (moral) inventions.

What is an idiom?
“An accepted phrase or expression having a meaning different from the literal meaning”.