Originally Posted by sincerly
Hi Fletch, The English word "dwell" may be translated from both of the Hebrew words. But when GOD stated that HE would "dwell with man"----HE did so.
Sincerly,
What are the Chinese translations of the Hebrew words, maybe that will change things if translations have this much power.
Hi Fletch, I have been out-of-town for awhile therefore, the delay in answering.
Truth in translation would give the same meaning to the message no matter the language.
Thediscrepancyy in the massages of GOD is the result of those who falsify what GOD has said. (as did the serpent to Eve.)
sincerly said:
GOD didn't "dwell" in a language, however, it is a fact, GOD did dwell with the people.
All of the prophet's writings which GOD sent to HIS erring peoples was "pure", It was the disobeying peoples who were following the false gods and being "snared" away from following the True GOD.
[/quote=sincerly] Balaam told Balak correctly as directed by GOD. That principle is still what is seen in this thread. Deut.12:31-32,"Thou shalt not do so unto the LORD thy God: for every abomination to the LORD, which he hateth, have they done unto their gods;
for even their sons and their daughters they have burnt in the fire to their gods. What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.
Isn't that the actions of AHAZ(and the people)? 2Kings 16:3, "But he walked in the way of the kings of Israel, yea, and made his son to pass through the fire, according to the abominations of the heathen, whom the LORD cast out from before the children of Israel."[/quote]
Yes, sacrificing one's son is an abomination to God, even if Ahaz does it. It does show complete and absolute devotion to the false god. God told Abraham to sacrifice his son as a test, repeat only a test, to see if Abraham had that kind of devotion. There never was a chance God would have let him commit the abomination. I don't know what your point about Balaam to Balak was, you will have to be more detailed.
Fletch, did GOD allow Balaam to curse the Israelites? NO. Did Balaam want to do Balak's bidding and secure the offered "reward for doing so"? Yes.
Previously, Abraham had tried to circumvent GOD'S stated "heir"---via Abraham's servant and then via Hagar--But GOD said the "heir" would come by way of Sarah(an impossible means in the eyes of man), But truly came to pass as GOD stated.
The truth concerning the atoning sacrifice was given in that meeting of Adam and Eve and the Serpent just after the disobedience----in the clothing the pair in the "skin of the animal"/Death- the "seed' of the woman.
That principle was seen in the refusal of Cain to offer the "blood sacrifice" which pointed forward to the "fullness of time" when "The SON of GOD" would fulfill that promised event. (Just as 1Peter 1:18-21 has shown)
[/quote=sincerly] Eve concluded that what the serpent was saying was acceptable over what GOD had said.[/quote]
OK, was there suppose to be a point here?
Do you not see that Eve had called GOD a liar rather than the serpent? And in effect, had made the serpent her lord and master?
[/quote=sincerly] Fletch, Did GOD ask for Human sacrifices in the Atonement for sins? NO!, However, a person could bring a specified sacrifice to the Altar and its blood would be offered
for/in place of the person's whose animal it was sin debt.
Notice in that sacrifice scene of "sons and daughters" which were abominations to GOD there was nothing said concerning the SON of GOD.
GOD had instructed Abraham to "Sacrifice Isaac" and Isaac was told that GOD WOULD PROVIDE THE CORRECT AND ACCEPTABLE SACRIFICE----At the appropriate time in earth's history.-----DONE.[/quote]
I agree, it is right there in the text:
Gen 22:13 And Abraham lifted up his eyes, and looked , and behold behind him a ram caught in a thicket by his horns: and Abraham went and took the ram, and offered him up for a burnt offering in the stead of his son.
There is nothing that mankind can offer to satisfy the "penalty for sin which is death". Death is a forfeiture of the life one possesses.
In the sanctuary service, the Day of Atonement was the offering of the Lord's Goat for the "scapegoat"----all the sins of the people were placed upon the "scapegoat".
God has "provided a sacrifice" for the Atonement of those who have repented and submitted to the Will of the Father---Just as Abraham said and believed.
[/quote=sincerly] As with the kingdoms of Israel and Judah, the peoples were being deceived(by the wine of fornication) by such kings who had lead the people into idolatry and away from the Creator GOD.[/quote]
Not sure of the point, but Judah often had greatly good kings.
Fletch, Then why did GOD send the prophets with messages to repent and return to GOD? Read Daniel's prayer recorded in Dan. 9:1-9.
Judah turned from their wicked ways and came back to the land of Judah in Ezra. You and I know from Isaiah that Ephraim will be caught up in a huge
world wide false rest for the weary snare religion right up to the end times.
It would be crazy to think God would change and want to mimic them.
Yes, After the 70 years of captivity in Babylon, the Israelites were freed to return to Judah and rebuild the Temple and Jerusalem.
Where is the "promised land" today? Daniel prophesied correctly(9:24-27) and Jesus wept over the hardness of the people in Matt.23:37-38, "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem,
thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under
her wings, and ye would not!
Behold, your house is left unto you desolate".
sincerly said:
Fletch, had the Israelites remained true/obedient to GOD those dark periods would not have occurred.
Psalms 44 and Isaiah 53 tells of a group that proves your claim wrong.
It appears that you understand what I have written.
sincerly said:
Fletch, That "new covenant" is the agreement to live by---truly have GOD as one's GOD in total submission to the Father's Will. Jesus Christ died for all persons who acknowledge that their disobedience is as GOD Said worthy of death. Jesus paid that death sentence for Me.---I Praise HIM for Loving me.
BTW, did you acknowledge Jer.32:27,? "
Behold, I
am the LORD,
the God of all flesh: is there any thing too hard for me?"
They were not during Daniel's day.
This is what the new covenant says, it is the exact opposite of what you said:
Jer 31:30 But every one shall die for his own iniquity: every man that eateth the sour grape, his teeth shall be set on edge
Fletch, There was no animal sacrifices for sins during the Babylonian captivity. They were in captivity---because of disobedience to the Creator GOD. Daniel only tells about the Three who refused to bow to the golden image.
Take a good look at the above verse and its context following. Re: covenant.
"Jer.31:31-34, Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day
that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD: But this
shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD,
I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more. "
in the translation to bring out its force. It is very likely that Isaiah pointed to a woman who was present at the scene of the prophet’s interview with Ahaz. Isaiah’s address to the “house of David” and his use of second plural forms suggests other people were present, and his use of the second feminine singular verb form (“you will name”