Jesus in Genesis: The Gospel in the genealogies of Adam.

reply to post by Awen24

. . . it was completely new information, and quite the revelation . . .

Oh, you mean dabbling in the occult is now a "revelation"?
And this avatar of yours, is that part of your occultism that you picked up from Misslerism?

The symbol of the phoenix, the bird that is reborn from its ashes, is extremely important to occult secret societies and, consequently, to the occult elite.
While the phoenix represents spiritual rebirth on an individual level, it can also represent the rebirth of the entire world from its ashes – as a New World Order.
occult symbolism

Missler seems to be part of the "cryptic elite" with a professional background in cryptology and working for the Defense Department and the UN.
He has no formal training in theology and is not an ordained minister.
What he seems to be is a New World Order disinformation agent to suck Christians into the worship of the Kabbalah.

Originally posted by Awen24
What the Bible says, in essence, is that we can't reach God, or godhood. Ever. "Your sins have separated you from God", and we can't close that gap in and of ourselves.

Thank you all for your thoughts and interactions here, this thread is very interesting and I enjoy reading your ideas and beliefs, for they allow me to strengthen my own. There is much material here, but I would like particularly to respond to this point, to the idea that we are somehow separate from what you term as "God", but with whom I am more comfortable terming, "The Infinite Creator".

I will pose a question which I hope will draw us closer to what I perceive as truth...

Is God Infinite?

spurious,

(838.3) 74:8.11 When the Jewish priests returned to Jerusalem, they had already completed the writing of their narrative of the beginning of things. Soon they made claims that this recital was a recently discovered story of creation written by Moses. But the contemporary Hebrews of around 500 B.C. did not consider these writings to be divine revelations; they looked upon them much as later peoples regard mythological narratives.

(838.4) 74:8.12
>>This spurious document, reputed to be the teachings of Moses, was brought to the attention of Ptolemy, the Greek king of Egypt, who had it translated into Greek by a commission of seventy scholars for his new library at Alexandria. And so this account found its place among those writings which subsequently became a part of the later collections of the “sacred scriptures” of the Hebrew and Christian religions. And through identification with these theological systems, such concepts for a long time profoundly influenced the philosophy of many Occidental peoples.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by Awen24

 

. . . it was completely new information, and quite the revelation . . .

Oh, you mean dabbling in the occult is now a "revelation"?
And this avatar of yours, is that part of your occultism that you picked up from Misslerism?

The symbol of the phoenix, the bird that is reborn from its ashes, is extremely important to occult secret societies and, consequently, to the occult elite.

*sigh*

Seriously dude?

Couple of things.

1) nobody has said anything about the occult. You've made a whole bunch of accusations throughout the thread here, but said nothing at all that backs any of it up. Like I said earlier, if you have some kind of evidence that what Chuck Missler teaches isn't consistent with the Bible, then please do post it. Otherwise, this is really all just hot air.

2) My avatar has nothing to do with the occult, nor with the elite or the illuminati. It comes from my own life and personal experience. Given that you seem to be quite interested in such things, I'll indulge you. I was married once before. My ex-wife was abusive. Very abusive. Aside from the physical violence, which was something I dealt with every single day for 5 years, she was extremely emotionally abusive. Not pleasant. Anyway, the whole thing came to an end one day when she punched our 2-year old daughter in the face... and I took my daughter and left.

At that point, I felt pretty much dead. Not only because I'd left my marriage (something I had never wanted to do), but because... the abuse had left me a shell of a human being.

The phoenix represents the fact that I'm getting my life back.
...that simple.


So... now that you've managed to extract from me one of the more personal and revealing stories of my life, how about you save your criticism and rudeness for people that actually deserve it? Or, on the other hand, stick to the facts. If you have a doctrinal issue with anything I've posted, then feel free to share it here. Otherwise, try being civil. It goes a long way.

reply to post by Awen24

Seriously dude?

Yes . . "seriously".

. . . nobody has said anything about the occult.

That is what your thread is about, you don't have to use that word because the thing that is the topic of the thread is by definition, occult, which means 'hidden'.
I never noticed a hidden code in the genealogy, because it is 'hidden' and is what someone adept in the occult would know.

. . . if you have some kind of evidence that what Chuck Missler teaches isn't consistent with the Bible, then please do post it.

I think I did. What did I miss?

My avatar has nothing to do with the occult, nor with the elite or the illuminati.

Anyone who studies the occult would disagree, with the phoenix bird being one of the most fundamental symbols, as mentioned in the article I quoted.

reply to post by Awen24


I will repost my question from several posts earlier, for you perhaps missed it.

Originally posted by Awen24
What the Bible says, in essence, is that we can't reach God, or godhood. Ever. "Your sins have separated you from God", and we can't close that gap in and of ourselves.

Thank you all for your thoughts and interactions here, this thread is very interesting and I enjoy reading your ideas and beliefs, for they allow me to strengthen my own. There is much material here, but I would like particularly to respond to this point, to the idea that we are somehow separate from what you term as "God", but with whom I am more comfortable terming, "The Infinite Creator".

I will pose a question which I hope will draw us closer to what I perceive as truth...

Is God Infinite?

reply to post by ExquisitExamplE


It depends on your perspective of god and what information you've been exposed to.


There's god, the father like deity that is very fickle and jealous. ( arguable that this is NOT god )
There's god, the source code for everything in a simulated universe
There's god, the alledeged creator of everything in the universe that is present in everything
There's god, a being from a race of aliens that created us for his amusement in a simulated universe while putting in his own personal dna from which to construct everything.


Just depends...really.


If space = time = god, then sure I'd say god is infinite, if you asked is this source code infinite, I'd probably be swayed to say yes. If you were to say after we're all gone that time will still exist then in that frame of mind it's infinite too.

ExquisitExamplE
reply to post by Awen24

 

I will repost my question from several posts earlier, for you perhaps missed it.

Originally posted by Awen24
What the Bible says, in essence, is that we can't reach God, or godhood. Ever. "Your sins have separated you from God", and we can't close that gap in and of ourselves.

Thank you all for your thoughts and interactions here, this thread is very interesting and I enjoy reading your ideas and beliefs, for they allow me to strengthen my own. There is much material here, but I would like particularly to respond to this point, to the idea that we are somehow separate from what you term as "God", but with whom I am more comfortable terming, "The Infinite Creator".

I will pose a question which I hope will draw us closer to what I perceive as truth...

Is God Infinite?

Wow, sorry... yes, I did miss your post. ...and obviously I haven't been back in here in quite some time!

To answer your question:


Put simply... yes. God is infinite. That's the short answer.
The longer answer, however, relates more strictly to the nature of that which is "infinite".
What does it mean for something to be infinite?

Well, if we're talking in numerical terms, something 'infinite' has definite form and structure; it is composed of clearly definable 'things' (in this case, numbers). This would be what I'd term quantifiable infinity.

When we're talking about God, however, we're not talking about Him being quantifiably infinite. We're talking about Him being *qualitatively* infinite, which isn't the same thing. What that means is that there is no boundary, no limit to how gracious God is, or how powerful God is, or how loving God is, and so on. Each of those characteristics is composed of a SINGLE thing, as opposed to a string of clearly definable 'things' as you might find in a numerically infinite sequence.

Now, what does that mean in terms of your question?

Your implication is that (and correct me if I'm wrong), an infinite God would be inherently part of, and within, us.
The Biblical argument is that... you're absolutely right. That's exactly how things SHOULD be. Scripture, though, presents a different picture. As I quoted earlier, "your sins have separated you from God" (Isaiah 59:2).

What this means isn't that man has wrestled power away from God, or somehow taken away from His infinite nature.
What that verse suggests isn't that man is physically separated from God. Obviously an omnipresent and infinite God is here, and with us, all the time. Man and God are not separated by sin in physical terms - after all, God has had Satan himself in His presence (Job 1:6), so the Biblical implication isn't that God and sin can't be present in the same sphere.

The implication is, however, that God will not dwell with that which is sinful. This is both choice on God's part, and in some respects a necessary demand made by God's own character. God cannot and will not tolerate sin.

This, then, creates a conflict: God cannot and will not tolerate sin, but God is also infinitely loving, infinitely forgiving, infinitely gracious.

How are those two things reconciled?
God's own standard says that "without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sin." (Hebrews 9:22)
We see this in Scripture EVERYWHERE... from the Mosaic law, to the garden of Eden (who took the life of a lamb to clothe Adam and Eve? God did - Genesis 3:21!), to Abraham's sacrifice of Isaac (where, notably, Abraham says "God Himself will provide the lamb for the sacrifice". God didn't provide a lamb, however, He provided a RAM. Why...? Because the Lamb of God was still to come - Isaiah 53).

God, then, to satisfy His own innate requirement for justice, and His own desire for grace, took the righteous judgement for the sin of man upon Himself - sending His own Son, the third person of the trinity, to bear the punishment for sin and to reconcile man and God. Thus God, being in nature both infinitely holy and infinitely good, remained both the righteous judge, and the infinitely forgiving Father.

reply to post by Awen24

This, then, creates a conflict: God cannot and will not tolerate sin, but God is also infinitely loving, infinitely forgiving, infinitely gracious.

How are those two things reconciled?
God's own standard says that "without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sin." (Hebrews 9:22)

"God's own standard" is to me an odd way to put this, and one that I don't think was meant by the writer of the book of Hebrews in the New Testament.
You are stating this as if there is this eternal universal truth out there that everyone accepts, that before sins can be forgiven, there has to be blood involved.
Verse 18 says,

This is why even the first covenant was not put into effect without blood.

with "the first covenant" being the one that Moses put in place.

So where you inserted "God's own standard", the actual text is talking about according to 'the former and now defunct old covenant', where the current writer is talking about the new covenant, and going back to the old for references about blood in order to show that the inclusion of blood in the establishment of the new covenant is not exactly a novel idea.

What happens is that the theorists will take that saying (as it seems that you are copying) as if it means that every sin has to have blood somehow entered in before it can be forgiven, which is not what the author of Hebrews meant.

The general topic that the writer of Hebrews was discussing in this section was how the covenant was like a will where in goes into effect after someone dies, because he is trying to explain how it was necessary for Jesus to die, that this is how the covenant was put into effect.
The actual new covenant itself is not about forgiving sins, that was the old covenant. The new one is about mankind being drawn towards God by the desire for those individuals under that new system to be like God, with the administrator of that system for our example of how to become righteous.
When people have repented and have gone into a condition of doing good things, the former bad deeds are not remembered.

"Likewise He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood, which is shed for you" (Luke 22:20)

You say that the old covenant was about taking away sin - yet Hebrews says "it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sin" (Hebrews 10:4). Likewise Hebrews says that "we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all" (10:10).

The entirety of the first 10 chapters of Hebrews is about this very concept - that "what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin." (Romans 8:3).

This is why the author of Hebrews spends so much time talking about the old covenant - because the old covenant, far from being an entirely different relationship between God and man, was a FORESHADOWING of the relationship that was yet to come. This is the dichotomy of Christ the High priest - "for the law appoints as high priests men who have weakness, but the word of the oath, which came after the law, appoints the Son, who has been perfected forever." (Hebrews 7:28).

More than that, your post completely ignores the truth of Hebrews 9:22-28.

And according to the law almost all things are purified with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no remission.

23 Therefore it was necessary that the copies of the things in the heavens should be purified with these, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. 24 For Christ has not entered the holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us; 25 not that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood of another— 26 He then would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. 27 And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment, 28 so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation."

This second element flows from the first - that "without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sin", yet Christ, "being in very nature, God" does not need to "offer Himself often", because His sacrifice, that sacrifice sealed in blood, "the new covenant in my blood", is sufficient to "put away sin", as "christ was offered once to bear the sins of many".

This is a covenant sealed between man and God - and sealed in the blood of Christ...
for that which the law was powerless to do through the blood of lambs and goats, Christ was powerful and able to accomplish through His own sacrifice. This is the heart of the gospel.

reply to post by Awen24


I just wanted to thank you for your detailed and well-described response. Yes, you were right in assuming what I was trying to imply with the question "Is God Infinite?"

I appreciate you attempting to explain the apparent paradoxical nature of some of the issues that I'm sure many intelligent thinkers have noticed occur within the bible. I think it's quite good that you're aware of such things and that you put some thought into attempting to resolve them within your paradigm of understanding. Of course, I disagree with a you a bit and I prefer a more New-agey, Gnostic-type approach that isn't quite so heavily constricted by dogmatic particulars, and so I resolve things within my own paradigm of understanding.

I'm glad to have read your response and I'm going to save it to text for further analysis later. Thanks and be well.

"Often you have desired to hear these sayings that I am speaking to you, and you have no one else from whom to hear them. There will be days when you will seek me and you will not find me."

His followers said, "Show us the place where you are, for we must seek it."

Jesus said, "Where there are three deities, they are divine. Where there are two or one, I am with that one."

Jesus said, "If they say to you, `Where have you come from?' say to them, `We have come from the light, from the place where the light came into being by itself, established itself, and appeared in their image.' If they say to you, `Is it you?' say, `We are its children, and we are the chosen of the living father.' If they ask you, `What is the evidence of your father in you?' say to them, `It is motion and rest.'"

Jesus said, "Look to the living one as long as you live, or you might die and then try to see the living one, and you will be unable to see."

"I am the one who comes from what is whole. I was given from the things of my father. For this reason I say, if one is whole, one will be filled with light, but if one is divided, one will be filled with darkness.

Whoever has ears to hear should hear. There is light within a man of light, and it shines on the whole world. If it does not shine it is darkness."

ATS: If "Yahweh" is a positive polarity entity, how is he "wrathful" and "jealous"?
HH: Does Yahweh have Free Will? Would you like to think of yourself as reasonably positive? Can you still be wrathful and jealous at times? Is Yahweh a Macrocosm of you?