The Blood of Christ, the Blood of the Lamb.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

TextI think you might have that reversed. Adam's soul and spirit (breath of lives) were created/filled in God's image/shadow. Adam's body was formed from the earth. There are two different Hebrew words distinguishing each instant. I dont remember them at the moment. One is bara, the other is either banah or yatser. I do believe in Trinity, but that is a different conversation. Also, both OT and NT always state that life begins out from the womb, never in the womb. Life at conception is not a Hebrew doctrine, and it really didn't make its way into Protestant theology until the 1960s-70s.

We will never be on the same page. There is nothing in the Hebrew scriptures that postulate that Adam was given multiple spirits (breath of lives). He had one spirit and procreated only the image. Each procreated image is given its own breath or spirit and that spirit is that which is held accountable in death. Adam is not accountable for your sins which your spirit has committed.

Yes there were some sects of Hebrews that rejected spontaneous conception of sperm and egg and approved of both pre and post abortions such as the Sadducee's and those Sadducee's were in power of Temple and nation in the era of Jesus. But Jesus' doctrine forbid the art of murder and James forbid abortion of a child. In fact James forbid the needless slaughter of animals also.

Please read this article which verifies what I have said concerning the spark of life.
www.telegraph.co.uk...

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: Akragon

A fetus has neuro circuitry in the womb which usually responds to the mother's emotions, but biological life does not mean a soul and spirit are present. John was filled with the spirit upon LEAVING the womb. We misunderstand that due to mistranslations fueled by political motives.

Are you saying that a fetus has no soul? The proof that humans have a soul doesn't even exist but if it does exist then it has a soul.

And I will tell you why. Because God knows if that baby is going to make it to term and be born healthy, if it is going to miscarry etc.

He can take a miscarried baby's soul straight to heaven also. It was him who decided sex=sperm+egg=life and that is a living being, a fertilized egg is a life at its genesis. After a 9 month exodus you start learning about life. That is the Leviticus part of life. At a certain point you take stock of your life and it is usually after a life changing lesson and you meet a Balaam and he turns out to be bad, but you learned some really important things from him. This is when you decide to organize your life and please God like the census and the festivals and offerings as instructed. Next is marriage (numbers 30) and life up until the promised land (Joshua) which ends in the salvation of the Benjaminites at the expense of the Israelites who refused God's command to go to war with the Benjaminites, who end up few in number but with forgiveness and a future.

The Torah is life.

originally posted by: Seede
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

TextI think you might have that reversed. Adam's soul and spirit (breath of lives) were created/filled in God's image/shadow. Adam's body was formed from the earth. There are two different Hebrew words distinguishing each instant. I dont remember them at the moment. One is bara, the other is either banah or yatser. I do believe in Trinity, but that is a different conversation. Also, both OT and NT always state that life begins out from the womb, never in the womb. Life at conception is not a Hebrew doctrine, and it really didn't make its way into Protestant theology until the 1960s-70s.

We will never be on the same page. There is nothing in the Hebrew scriptures that postulate that Adam was given multiple spirits (breath of lives). He had one spirit and procreated only the image. Each procreated image is given its own breath or spirit and that spirit is that which is held accountable in death. Adam is not accountable for your sins which your spirit has committed.

Yes there were some sects of Hebrews that rejected spontaneous conception of sperm and egg and approved of both pre and post abortions such as the Sadducee's and those Sadducee's were in power of Temple and nation in the era of Jesus. But Jesus' doctrine forbid the art of murder and James forbid abortion of a child. In fact James forbid the needless slaughter of animals also.

Please read this article which verifies what I have said concerning the spark of life.
www.telegraph.co.uk...

So endowed with life giving power from God, it is even said better to lie with a prostitute than spill your seed on the ground.

A man is punished, killed I believe, by God, for doing that with his brother's widow.

So I would definitely say that conception is the beginning of life. In fact an embryo or fetus requires nutrition and proper environment or it will die. If it can die, a miscarriage for example, it was alive. Alive and of the human species is a good indication that something has a soul.

Outside of time and space, where God resides, a fertilized egg has a moment by moment biography already.

a reply to: Seede

God breathed into Adam the breath of lives nishmat hhayyim. The suffix "im" indicates the plurality of "hhai" which can be both masculine or feminine. This is further corroborated as the Bible does distinguish between soul (nephesh) and spirit (ruahh).

Adam was filled/created (bara) in the image of God, not formed (yatser). So there is no way that Adam's body is related to the image of God, but his soul was formatted after God's image.

Why would Adam be held accountable for my sins??? I never suggested that.

Life does not begin in the womb. The bible does not support life at conception.

Luke 1:15 "For he will be great in the sight of the Lord; and he will drink no wine or liquor, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit from (ek) his mother's womb (koilias).

John the Baptist did not receive the Holy Spirit until he left his mothers womb. The OT uses mibbeten to communicate the same idea, 'from the womb'.

Psalm 22:9 Yet You are He who brought me forth out from the womb (mibbaten);
You made me trust when upon my mother’s breasts.

10Upon You I was cast from birth;
You have been my God out from my mother’s womb (mibbeten)

If we assume that a fetus has a soul, then God was not Jesus' God for the 9 months of pregnancy. That cannot be. Jesus' body was filled with a soul at birth, not conception. It was at birth (away from the womb) that God became Jesus' God.

We wont be on the same page until we look for the answers in the Hebrew and Greek text.

Also, flashes of light which occur when sperm meats egg does not prove soul-life in the womb. It simply indicates a biochemical reaction.

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: Seede

God breathed into Adam the breath of lives nishmat hhayyim. The suffix "im" indicates the plurality of "hhai" which can be both masculine or feminine. This is further corroborated as the Bible does distinguish between soul (nephesh) and spirit (ruahh).

Adam was filled/created (bara) in the image of God, not formed (yatser). So there is no way that Adam's body is related to the image of God, but his soul was formatted after God's image.

Why would Adam be held accountable for my sins??? I never suggested that.

Life does not begin in the womb. The bible does not support life at conception.


Luke 1:15 "For he will be great in the sight of the Lord; and he will drink no wine or liquor, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit from (ek) his mother's womb (koilias).

"From his mother's womb"

The womb is where John is (from) when he gets the Holy Spirit.

So if he is outside of the womb when he gets it, it couldn't have come from the womb.

The meaning is that he has the Holy Spirit in him from the time he was in the womb. No other reason for even saying womb. He was born with the Holy Spirit.

Jesus said he was the greatest man who ever lived. This would seem to coincide with the fact that he had the Spirit from birth, while everyone else has to receive it at baptism. Not infant baptism either.

John the Baptist did not receive the Holy Spirit until he left his mothers womb. The OT uses mibeten to communicate the same idea, 'from the womb'.

Again from does not mean after he left, it means "while in" or "given by."

Never does from refer to a place after you have left it.

"I shouted from the house""I shouted while in the house."

Where was I when I shouted? The house.

He received him from the front door.

Where was he when he received him?

The front door. Case closed.

a reply to: LenatasataneL

I edited my last reply by adding a quote from Psalm 22. You might want to go back and look at it.

In Hebrew, the prefix "mi" literally means to exit or to move away from. If you shout from your house, then the sound of your shout is moving away from your house.

Case closed.

a reply to: Seede

1 Thess 5:23 Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you entirely; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved complete, without blame at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

There it is, spirit, soul, and body, in the order that they need to be saved:

Spiritual regeneration by faith in Christ

Soul cleansing by the Water of the Word of God

Resurrection of the Body as Jesus was resurrected.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

A soul is only the spirit while in the body.

Once the soul leaves the body is now just spirit.

But the Spirit, as in Holy Spirit, is the way you get to have body, soul and Spirit. Until you die and you become a pure spirit.

a reply to: LenatasataneL

That is not what 1 Thess 5:23 says at all. You made that up completely.

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: LenatasataneL

That is not what 1 Thess 5:23 says at all. You made that up completely.

Who cares about Thess? I don't read Paul.

I only do what Jesus says to do because he actually matters. Paul's letters are rubbish.

I read them. "They added nothing to me." God favors no man.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

You're a riot. John had the Spirit while he was in the womb, it is not a struggle for me to see that is what is said.

It is just a struggle for people like you to ever admit they even MIGHT, POSSIBLY EVEN, be wrong. Even something that is in writing, clear as day. Or unprovable.

You would rather fiddle with linguistics to prove a point that can't even possibly be proven and is completely illogical.

A riot.

a reply to: LenatasataneL
If you have a problem with Paul, then you're barking up the wrong tree, and its not my problem that you don't like what the Greek says about John being filled with the Spirit after leaving the womb. Learn some prepositions.

key board problem

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: LenatasataneL
If you have a problem with Paul, then you're barking up the wrong tree, and its not my problem that you don't like what the Greek says about John being filled with the Spirit after leaving the womb. Learn some prepositions.

Heh heh. Prepositions aren't the issues, you know that.

While I am not barking, I do have a problem with the wannabe apostle because of his animosity towards James especially, who he was extremely jealous of and hated passionately enough to trash talk him in a letter because he was so pissed about having to prove his loyalty by Nazirite ritual over the true allegations that he was teaching false doctrines.

And Peter, who he calls allegedly calls a hypocrite with no record of Peter's reply to this spurious allegation. Keep in mind Peter is the true Apostle to the Gentiles and his nemesis after James.

But who cares about or needs that false prophet and enemy of truth who dares claim to teach a better Gospel than the Jesus taught Apostles and curses everyone who teaches anything that he doesn't.

And you like this guy?

That is hilarious.

a reply to: LenatasataneL

If you really think that Paul taught a false gospel, then who yould you find it "hilarious" that anyone follows him? Doesn't seem like a laughing matter to me.

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: LenatasataneL

If you really think that Paul taught a false gospel, then who yould you find it "hilarious" that anyone follows him? Doesn't seem like a laughing matter to me.

It is a dark humor but I can't help it because I know that Paul is not right. First, 12 was a very sacred number as their were 12 (E. and M. had to be half tribes in order to remain at 12 and Benjamin was even relented upon, forgiven and given aid after having been almost entirely decimated by the tribes. To preserve 12) and a 13th apostle is both a violation of the sacred number 12 , which is said 5 times in a description of the heavenly Jerusalem in Revelation ending with the names of the 12 apostles of the Lamb written, and Matthias is number 12 leaving Paul one who says he is an apostle but is not as stated earlier in the book that also convicts him of teaching it was OK to eat meat if it was sacrificed to an idol, a serious as * rule that is one of the 4 instructions from James, don't do it, and Paul flouts it and James and Jesus calls his ass out.


So do you see it is funny because you can not see it now matter what, how, your blind to the deception and yeah, it is funny because you know it and choose not to believe it.

a reply to: LenatasataneL


Nevermind. Sorry if I offended you. Our conversation ends here.

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: LenatasataneL

So do you see it is funny because you can not see it now matter what, how, your blind to the deception and yeah, it is funny because you know it and choose not to believe it.

First of all, everything you just said was heavily distorted.

Secondly, if you truley believe I was decieved, I don't see how you could possibly think it would be funny. I think you are sick.

It wouldn't be funny if nobody told you.

I can't keep from speaking the truth, however distorted it seems to you it is more like denial.

You choose error over correctness knowingly, are even proud of it.

That's hilarious.

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

a reply to: Seede God breathed into Adam the breath of lives nishmat hhayyim. The suffix "im" indicates the plurality of "hhai" which can be both masculine or feminine. This is further corroborated as the Bible does distinguish between soul (nephesh) and spirit (ruahh). Adam was filled/created (bara) in the image of God, not formed (yatser). So there is no way that Adam's body is related to the image of God, but his soul was formatted after God's image. Why would Adam be held accountable for my sins??? I never suggested that. Life does not begin in the womb. The bible does not support life at conception. Luke 1:15 "For he will be great in the sight of the Lord; and he will drink no wine or liquor, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit from (ek) his mother's womb (koilias). John the Baptist did not receive the Holy Spirit until he left his mothers womb. The OT uses mibbeten to communicate the same idea, 'from the womb'. Psalm 22:9 Yet You are He who brought me forth out from the womb (mibbaten); You made me trust when upon my mother’s breasts. 10Upon You I was cast from birth; You have been my God out from my mother’s womb (mibbeten) If we assume that a fetus has a soul, then God was not Jesus' God for the 9 months of pregnancy. That cannot be. Jesus' body was filled with a soul at birth, not conception. It was at birth (away from the womb) that God became Jesus' God. We wont be on the same page until we look for the answers in the Hebrew and Greek text. Also, flashes of light which occur when sperm meats egg does not prove soul-life in the womb. It simply indicates a biochemical reaction.

The Hebrew scriptures that we have today which are translated into English by numerous translators have never even remotely translated life as being lives. I'm disturbed as to where you got this idea that God breathed multiple lives into Adam. You are word playing and word playing is a dangerous game even if you had the autographs to play that game. You should have the certification of translator and interpreter along with autographs in order to override any accepted academia. The accepted translation by numerous translators is that the Spirit God breathed a portion of His life into Adam and gave Adams body life. My understanding is that each procreated child receives his/her spark of life at conception and not a blanket of universal life from one man.

This portion of life which was given to Adam was then stated as being given to his lifeless body. So let us now examine exactly what is involved so far. (1) Lifeless body - (2) Breath of life - (3) living body. -- Now what else is involved in this creation as is explained in Hebrew? Now comes word play. (1) breath of life is spirit - (2) Body is Soul - --

Take a look at -
Matthew_22:37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

You now have Greek thought from Greek philosophy. The additional words of heart, and mind come into play. How then do you resolve this confusion. You now have Spirit, Soul, Body, from Hebrew philosophy and then you have heart and mind in Greek philosophy. And yet you read one section of the scriptures from Hebrew and the other section of scriptures from Greek.

Do you now see just how doctrines are born? Word play without the autographs is our problem.

You stated that "Adam was filled/created (bara) in the image of God, not formed (yatser). So there is no way that Adam's body is related to the image of God, but his soul was formatted after God's image" but you are wrong. Without any autographs you have assumed a third portion in Adams creation and you have not read the scriptures with fairness. You contrived the scriptures to favor your doctrine.

You stated that Adam was not formed and yet Genesis 2:7 states "And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." You have taken away from the scriptures and added another conception of the word soul. You had to do this in order to suit your doctrine that Adams body was not Adam's image. If Adams body was his image then he was formed in the image of his creator. Is not this of which is written - Gen 1:27 "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."You see how you have twisted the scriptures to suit your own ideas? Adam was formed in the image of the Creator and Adam was infilled with the spirit of life.

But then just what is the Creator's image?
John 1:1-4,10
(1) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
(2) The same was in the beginning with God.
(3) All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
(4) In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
(10) He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

This agrees with Moses as is written
Gen 1:26,27
(26) And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
(27) So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Who then is the most High talking to as He said "Let us make man?" Was it not His very own begotten celestial Son? "The Word of God? Adam was formed from the created terrestrial substance in the image of His Creator.

You have also stated that - "Life does not begin in the womb."
Matthew 1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.

Was not the Holy Ghost the life source of Adam? And is not the Holy Ghost the Most High EL? Was not our creator "The Word of EL" who became the Begotten Son Jesus? If not then your doctrine is not that of James.

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: LenatasataneL

So do you see it is funny because you can not see it now matter what, how, your blind to the deception and yeah, it is funny because you know it and choose not to believe it.

First of all, everything you just said was heavily distorted.[quote]

It was actually well researched, studied and is true. It was not distorted. Although if one has an emotional investment in Paul and is confronted with the evidence against him, rather than rebut the evidence with logic and facts a word like "distorted" is used.

It is a cheap trick. Pauline Christianity produces the absolute worst of people, is the reason that Christians are one of the most despised of religious people and lead the way in supporting the terrorist state of Israel because the Jewish media has demonized Islam. Christianity as a whole produces the view that all religions except theirs are of Satan and #1 on the list is Islam.

The smiling face of Joel Osteen is the best example, although extreme, of the crap Christianity can produce. But on a lesser level most Christians are only in name Christians.

When the teachings of Jesus are considered second to anyone's, which is the case with Paul today, and faith considered a greater virtue than morality, behavior, wisdom and good deeds, we are in trouble.

If that is the irrational mentality we assign to God and people are hating other people because of God, going to war over God, they don't know God.

Secondly, if you truley believe I was decieved, I don't see how you could possibly think it would be funny. I think you are sick.

I do think you are deceived. We all are and have been our whole lives.

I don't believe that you will be punished for being another victim of the corruption of deviants. I equally think it is sad that you can claim such belief in Paul and either have not realized how obvious it is that he is a huckster and megalomaniac and not this wise, caring hero who spread the Gospel.

He didn't have a Gospel to spread. He is like Simon Magus, teaching one thing here one thing there, as he admits himself.