The Theology of Semen.

Deeje said:

I demand that my teachers will teach me God's word as directed by the holy spirit. It must agree with all that is written and follow one harmonious story from start to finish. Unless you have the big picture, how do you know where all the pieces fit? It is my experience that the majority have no big picture at all, and therefor have lots of pieces that they have collected from other sources that don't fit at all.

Click to expand...

Which comes first, the whole (big picture) or the parts (the individual narratives)? In other words, how can you get the big picture before you know the parts that make up the big picture? And if you need to first get the parts, and put them together to form the big picture, then how can you use the big picture as criteria for interpreting the parts correctly?

If we know the puzzle is a picture of Martin Luther, it's much easier to put the pieces together (especially if we know what he looks like). But if we don't know the puzzle is a picture of Martin Luther, then its going to take some time and work to put the pieces together for the big reveal.


John

Deeje said:

All I can say about that is why on earth would you believe something so far fetched.....and unsupported by the Bible's overall theme.

Click to expand...

. . . I'm not sure what you're referring to since everything in the message in question is factual? And since every bit of the message is factual, the question is only why you assume it's opposed to your personal understanding of the scriptures involved? If I stated facts, and I did, then they shouldn't be opposed to your theology (and I doubt they are) such that it's more likely the case that you don't necessarily see how they segue with your beliefs and theology even though they probably do.

So far I don't disagree with your theology or how you've presented it. I see things much as you do except that I know how the facts I stated in the message in question mesh with my beliefs and theology whereas you may not how they mesh with your beliefs and theology even though our beliefs and theology, so far, don't appear to be that different.

I challenge you to point out one statement in the message being referred to that you don't think is factual? And if it can be shown to be factual, then it probably fits into your theology even though it might need a little shove. <s>



John

You present a scenario then ask the questions...

John D. Brey said:

Say an alien from the other side of the universe showed up on earth and had all knowledge and all power in comparison to we puny humans. Say before he arrived he memorized the Bible, and took the persona of the risen Jesus of Nazareth.

Say he could raise the dead (using super advanced science) and even manufacture living beings at will.

How would you know he wasn't Jesus? What litmus test would you use

Click to expand...

....but you answer it here...

John D. Brey said:

I'm always wanting to bring more knowledge of scripture, science, and truth in general (to include reason, and logic, though they must be subject to the spirit)

Click to expand...

Regarding God’s spirit...if one had it, the qualities mentioned @ Galatians 5:22-23, would be exhibited. Easily observed.

Take care, my cousin.

John D. Brey said:

Which comes first, the whole (big picture) or the parts (the individual narratives)? In other words, how can you get the big picture before you know the parts that make up the big picture? And if you need to first get the parts, and put them together to form the big picture, then how can you use the big picture as criteria for interpreting the parts correctly?

If we know the puzzle is a picture of Martin Luther, it's much easier to put the pieces together (especially if we know what he looks like). But if we don't know the puzzle is a picture of Martin Luther, then its going to take some time and work to put the pieces together for the big reveal.

Click to expand...

This is why Bible study is necessary. It’s not something you can do in 5 minutes. When you read a book, and you come to the last page, you mentally put the whole story together to form a satisfying conclusion. The story had a beginning and a conclusion that everything in the middle contributed to bringing them together.

This is what the Bible does too IMV.

What we see in the beginning is an ideal start to the creation story up to the end of the 6th creative period. Each period (definitely not 24 hour “days”) had certain achievements that God accomplished successfully in each of those timeframes. He expressed his satisfaction after each period concluded. After the 6th period and the creation of humans, his expression changed.....we have to wonder what “very good” means as opposed to just “good” to a Being with such incredible power.

At the beginning of the 7th day (when God rested from his creative works) we see God stepping back and allowing his creatures to experience his wonderful creation and to follow his directive to “fill the earth and subdue it”. I see no declaration to end the 7th day successfully, so according to other scripture, I believe it is still running. And when it concludes, all will again be “very good”. God cannot fail and what he starts, he finishes. (Isaiah 55:11)

So, how could things go so wrong with such an idyllic beginning? Enter a villain.....

A rebel spirit took advantage of the situation to fulfill a selfish ambition. He wanted to be a god and he hijacked the humans, who were the only intelligent creatures who could give him what he wanted.....and the rest of the scriptures inform us about how the Creator dealt with that rebellion which came to include other spirit sons as well as the newly created humans, all denying God his rightful Sovereignty.

How this issue was solved, allowing all of God’s children to show their loyalty to their Creator in a world handed over to a ‘pretender’ who wanted to be it’s god and ruler, is nothing short of genius.....what else would we expect of a Being with such immense power, tempered with superlative love and infinite wisdom? But his agenda is not easily seen on the surface of it. It requires study of his word, not just a cursory reading.
Jesus said at John 17:3 that we need to “know God and the one he sent forth”.....how well do people “know” God and his son, as opposed to knowing “about” them?

At the end of this period, God is seen to provide a way to redeem fallen humanity who remained faithful to him, to test out his angelic sons, and to bring the human race and planet earth back to what he purposed at the outset by means of the Kingdom....a governmental arrangement that will bring all things full circle. The resurrection is involved in that as well. And precedents are set that will apply for all eternity to come. It all fits and the big picture is brilliant from my perspective.

Do you have a big picture?

It took me two solid years of study to see this picture clearly and I was awe struck in examining the outcome, and the way God implemented his purpose and carried out his will over thousands of years of human history. Unless you can connect the dots and see what he has been accomplishing over time, nothing will make much sense IMO.

That’s how I see it....

Here was your first premise.....

John D. Brey said:

In an earlier thread I noted that ha-adam and Eve are originally, identical twins; Eve is a clone of ha-adam. The novelty of the penis/phallus is that it's the first incarnation of the beguiling serpent who has his way with human history after the rise of the phallus and the fall of the identical nature of nature’s original human twins (ha-adam and Eve). The factuality of this statement, where the Hebrew text of the scripture is concerned, leads to a theological pearl of immeasurable value when we realize it demands that, having come so far as to understand that ha-adam and Eve are female clones, we think about the perceived nature of the original firstborn of creation as he would exist in profound contradistinction to the usurper Cain who’s conceived not by the breath, or blood, of God (the masculine source of ha-adam and Eve's genesis), but by the novel flesh (and the newfangled seed that testifies to its violent, degenerate, genesis), which (the novel flesh), proposes to pose as a new truth created wholesale in Genesis 2:21.

Click to expand...

So let’s start there....

John D. Brey said:

I challenge you to point out one statement in the message being referred to that you don't think is factual? And if it can be shown to be factual, then it probably fits into your theology even though it might need a little shove.

Click to expand...

Show us scripturally how this bizarre conclusion is reached....without “shoving”.

Over to you......

Deeje said:

This is why Bible study is necessary. It’s not something you can do in 5 minutes. When you read a book, and you come to the last page, you mentally put the whole story together to form a satisfying conclusion. The story had a beginning and a conclusion that everything in the middle contributed to bringing them together.

This is what the Bible does too IMV.

What we see in the beginning is an ideal start to the creation story up to the end of the 6th creative period. Each period (definitely not 24 hour “days”) had certain achievements that God accomplished successfully in each of those timeframes. He expressed his satisfaction after each period concluded. After the 6th period and the creation of humans, his expression changed.....we have to wonder what “very good” means as opposed to just “good” to a Being with such incredible power.

At the beginning of the 7th day (when God rested from his creative works) we see God stepping back and allowing his creatures to experience his wonderful creation and to follow his directive to “fill the earth and subdue it”. I see no declaration to end the 7th day successfully, so according to other scripture, I believe it is still running. And when it concludes, all will again be “very good”. God cannot fail and what he starts, he finishes. (Isaiah 55:11)

So, how could things go so wrong with such an idyllic beginning? Enter a villain.....

A rebel spirit took advantage of the situation to fulfill a selfish ambition. He wanted to be a god and he hijacked the humans, who were the only intelligent creatures who could give him what he wanted.....and the rest of the scriptures inform us about how the Creator dealt with that rebellion which came to include other spirit sons as well as the newly created humans, all denying God his rightful Sovereignty.

How this issue was solved, allowing all of God’s children to show their loyalty to their Creator in a world handed over to a ‘pretender’ who wanted to be it’s god and ruler, is nothing short of genius.....what else would we expect of a Being with such immense power, tempered with superlative love and infinite wisdom? But his agenda is not easily seen on the surface of it. It requires study of his word, not just a cursory reading.
Jesus said at John 17:3 that we need to “know God and the one he sent forth”.....how well do people “know” God and his son, as opposed to knowing “about” them?

At the end of this period, God is seen to provide a way to redeem fallen humanity who remained faithful to him, to test out his angelic sons, and to bring the human race and planet earth back to what he purposed at the outset by means of the Kingdom....a governmental arrangement that will bring all things full circle. The resurrection is involved in that as well. And precedents are set that will apply for all eternity to come. It all fits and the big picture is brilliant from my perspective.

Do you have a big picture?

It took me two solid years of study to see this picture clearly and I was awe struck in examining the outcome, and the way God implemented his purpose and carried out his will over thousands of years of human history. Unless you can connect the dots and see what he has been accomplishing over time, nothing will make much sense IMO.

That’s how I see it....

Click to expand...

I see the general picture much like you. But in the Hebrew there are some pretty tough nuts to crack (similar to you asking what "very good" means versus "good").

I subscribe to the "chaos" theory of Genesis 1:2 that notes that in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth complete, and perfect, such that between the first and second verse, the fall of Satan occurs, such that now, suddenly, unexpectedly (and who's cause is unremarked on in the text), the earth is without form and void (Hebrew words that imply imperfect, chaotic, and even broken).

The seven days of so-called creation are, in the chaos theory, the seven days of restoration, whereby the damage wrought by the fall of Satan is repaired to start Satan's appeal trial which takes place throughout human history.

Which is to say, Satan is thrown out of heaven, to the earth (turning earth into a dung heap), but is released from his prison until his appeal trial (human history) is completed. Earth is restored as part and parcel of Satan's appeal.

There are many sound arguments for the chaos theory. But the main argument states that God doesn't create anything incomplete, or chaotic. Those particular words imply sin and imperfection.

Which segues into Genesis 2:21, where ha-adam, who was created perfect from the start, just as God intended her, is changed so that the false god of this world, who is on trial, looks at her after the world's first sex change operation, and says, after the operation, "He looks very good."

I disagree. I agree with Dante. That she, now a he, is sporting demonic serpent-flesh which I'm so glad God inspires Abraham to take a blade to for our edification about what God thinks about the re-engineering that takes place in Genesis 2:21, and the re-engineering that takes place in Genesis chapter one.

God creates everything perfect, ex nihilo, which is to say from the get-go. He doesn't need practice. And he isn't amazed after the fact since he knows the beginning from the end, and the end from the beginning.



John

John D. Brey said:

I see the general picture much like you. But in the Hebrew there are some pretty tough nuts to crack (similar to you asking what "very good" means versus "good").

Click to expand...

We know what the difference between "good" and "very good" is to the human way of reasoning but from God's perspective, "good" would have been better than we could imagine.....so, I'm thinking that "very good" would surpass our wildest imaginings. This was the start he gave to the human race because this statement was directly after Eve's creation....the end of the 6th "day". They received a 'blueprint' in the garden that God had planted, and it says that he told them to have children and fill the earth with them....they were also to "subdue" the wilderness outside the garden, spreading the boundaries of their paradise home all over the planet. The humans were endowed with God's qualities because he assigned them to be caretakers of this planet whilst he would keep a watchful eye upon them. They were to have dominion over the earth and the animals but not over each other. They were to look to their Creator for the wisdom to decide between good and evil. Exercising power over others just leads to corruption.

I subscribe to the "chaos" theory of Genesis 1:2 that notes that in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth complete, and perfect, such that between the first and second verse, the fall of Satan occurs, such that now, suddenly, unexpectedly (and who's cause is unremarked on in the text), the earth is without form and void (Hebrew words that imply imperfect, chaotic, and even broken).

The seven days of so-called creation are, in the chaos theory, the seven days of restoration, whereby the damage wrought by the fall of Satan is repaired to start Satan's appeal trial which takes place throughout human history.

Click to expand...

That does not fit the model that I am seeing in the scriptures at all. There is no chaos in God's creation, and with the creation of humans everything was seen to be "very good" in his estimations.

What I see is the universe in its raw state. The potential for life to exist in the entire universe is contained in Genesis 1:1 IMO. But the problem of free will had to be addressed first. It was very risky giving creatures with power, free will. There had to be a starting point where all the "bugs" were ironed out....much like a prototype. What sense does God's declaration after each creative day make, if there was not potential for some form of dissatisfaction?

Humans as we know, were not God's first intelligent creation. But a spirit creature featured prominently as the first being to abuse his free will, rebelling against his rightful Sovereign and convincing the humans that they needed what God was withholding from them......Satan was a "covering cherub" in the garden of Eden. (according to Ezekiel 28:14-17) A position of trust and authority. The cherubs were the guardians.

"I assigned you as the anointed covering cherub.
You were on the holy mountain of God, and you walked about among fiery stones.

You were faultless in your ways from the day you were created
Until unrighteousness was found in you. . . .

Your heart became haughty because of your beauty.
You corrupted your wisdom because of your own glorious splendor."

So he was on assignment in Eden and desiring the worship that these lesser beings were giving to God.
His ambitions were fed and he stepped out of his place, and into God's. This was after the creation of the humans so I cannot see how your theory fits.

I do not see chaos between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. I see that God made everything perfect, but in its raw state, ready to carefully prepare other worlds for habitation in the future as he had carefully prepared this one. He is a creator, not a magician. His attention to detail in nature is awe inspiring...a true craftsman.

John D. Brey said:

Which is to say, Satan is thrown out of heaven, to the earth (turning earth into a dung heap), but is released from his prison until his appeal trial (human history) is completed. Earth is restored as part and parcel of Satan's appeal.

Click to expand...

Oh dear...that is not the message that I glean from the scriptures at all. Satan presented himself to the humans as a substitute god and influenced them to disobey a command that carried the death penalty. Think about that....he lied to the woman about the penalty, knowing full well that their decision would end in death, and he didn't care....but he approached the woman to get to the man. Seeking to divide his loyalties...."divide and conquer" is still a good strategy in war.

Each ate of the fruit but for totally different reasons. It didn't matter. the penalty still applied and they had no valid excuse for their disobedience.

Satan's eviction out of heaven is not seen until Revelation which was yet future when John wrote it at the end of the 1st century.
We believe that 1914 saw that eviction portrayed in Revelation 7:7-12. First the devil is cast out of heaven to the earth and then after the separation of the sheep from the goats and their judgment is complete, he is thrown into an abyss with his angels for 1,000 years, during which time the Kingdom of God is active in bringing humankind back into reconciliation with God. (Revelation 20:1-3)

John D. Brey said:

There are many sound arguments for the chaos theory. But the main argument states that God doesn't create anything incomplete, or chaotic. Those particular words imply sin and imperfection.

Click to expand...

Sin and imperfection only came about after the fall of man. (Romans 5:12) The chaos theory sounds as convincing as the theory of evolution, which I consider to be absolute nonsense.

John D. Brey said:

I disagree. I agree with Dante. That she, now a he, is sporting demonic serpent-flesh which I'm so glad God inspires Abraham to take a blade to for our edification about what God thinks about the re-engineering that takes place in Genesis 2:21, and the re-engineering that takes place in Genesis chapter one.

Click to expand...

Sorry but that just sounds like some demo-sci-fi movie plot. There is nothing in scripture to even suggest such a thing. "Male and female he created them".....its not a complicated statement, is it?

John D. Brey said:

God creates everything perfect, ex nihilo, which is to say from the get-go. He doesn't need practice.

Click to expand...

"In the beginning God created".....and we know that he was not alone. (Genesis 1:26) His firstborn son was used as the agency "through" which all other things were created. (Colossians 1:15-17) So how do you see creation through that lens? I see God the Father as the one who produced all the raw materials and his son as the "master worker" who, working at his Father's side, fashioned it into what God wanted it to be. (Proverbs 8:30-31)

And he isn't amazed after the fact since he knows the beginning from the end, and the end from the beginning.

Click to expand...

I believe that God's foreknowledge is selective. It would be like a master locksmith having a key that could unlock every lock in existence.....would he have to unlock every lock just because he could? God can know whatever he chooses to know......sometimes he chooses not to to know where things will gravitate...he lets them play out naturally.

Endowing his creatures with free will, God has allowed them to make their own decisions with minimal interference from himself.....and to learn from those choices.
It is apparent that humans are not good at doing as they are told...they have to actually "see" the error of their ways to avoid repeating their mistakes.They have always 'reaped what they have sown' and they still do.....it amazes me how often we collectively forget the lessons of history and are therefore doomed to repeat them....again and again. The Bible is full of such lessons if only we are paying attention.

Deeje said:

That does not fit the model that I am seeing in the scriptures at all. There is no chaos in God's creation, and with the creation of humans everything was seen to be "very good" in his estimations.

Click to expand...

The proper way to look at it seems to depend on whether Genesis 1:1 is a completed statement that God created the heaven and the earth perfect, and complete, such that something happens between that creation, and verse 2 of Genesis, which brings chaos and imperfection (תהו and בהו: formless and void) into the picture?

Throughout the great Hebrew exegesis of the text, the sages point out that those two words (formless and void) are used exclusively in the scripture to speak of evil, sin, imperfection.

Ergo, either God created the world imperfect and broken from the start (so that it could be repaired, or perfected), or else something not discussed in the text, a mystery perhaps (Rom. 16:25), occurs between verse one and two of Genesis.


Anyone who studies Jewish texts daily becomes aware that they're all interlinked and interlaced. A statement in Midrash Rabbah is related to a statement in the Talmud. A statement in the Zohar is related to a statement in Midrash Rabbah. They're all dealing with the same problems, the same ideas; they're all struggling to unify the concepts in order to bring light from the tohu and bohu, the darkness, of the written text.

The Hirsch Chumash claims tohu and bohu represent an expression of "pain," an "undesirable situation . . . full of contradiction and struggle." ----God does not originally create something a sewer, or a garbage dump, undesirable and full of pain and struggle. These represent the state of the creation after the Fall.

Genesis 1:2 begins with a disjunctive clause, "but," mistranslated in the KJV "and." The disjunctive clause is followed by a Hebrew verb, הָיְתָ֥, ("became") in the qal perfect: "But the earth became . . . " (see Bruce Waltke and M. O'Connor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, p. 650-651). Which is to say the Lord God (YHVH-Elohim) did not create the earth a "nest of refuse," or a "desert wasteland" (תֹ֙הוּ֙ וָבֹ֔הוּ), or anything of the sort.

It was created perfect. Like Adam was created perfect, already circumcised (no phallus needing to be symbolical bled out of the picture, brit milah). ------It "became" הָיְתָ֥ a desert wasteland when a particular angel separated the name Elohim from the Name YHVH, and therein became the instigator of the Fall from grace and perfection.

Which is to say that the god of this world, Satan, took not the whole Name of God, Yahweh-Elohim ("Lord God") but only the name Elohim.

In the first chapter where the restoration takes place, after the Fall (into chaos), the name used is Elohim, while in Genesis 2, which is actually the origin of chapter one, the original creation, the full Name of God Yahweh-Elohim is present.


To the person who would exclaim that surely the first creation isn't in the second chapter, and the second creation (in truth a restoration) in the first chapter, we could point out that the first letter in Genesis, the beit ב, is the second letter in the Hebrew alphabet, and that the first letter in the Hebrew alphabet, the alef א, is hidden (made secret, Rom. 16:25) in the middle of the first word in Genesis, which started with the second letter in the alphabet, the beit, rather than the first letter, the alef; and perhaps it does so precisely to inform the careful exegete to be careful about assuming too much about the symmetry or asymmetry of the narrative (say for instance, which is first, origin, and which is second?) since we're reading a revelation delivered through what the pen-is, and represents, in a written revelation (merely the outer revelation, which is secondary, particularly if it comes through what the pen-is in both revelation and procreation).



John

John D. Brey said:

. . . In the so-called "old testament" only special prophets or men of God had one-on-one communication with the spirit of God. But after Christ's death, the ability to commune with the spirit of God personally, not just communally, has been opened up to all takers.

Click to expand...

Which is exactly what Moses wished would happen. (Numbers 11:29)

John D. Brey said:

hen God spoke personally to Abraham, Moses, David, or Isaiah, he revealed hidden mysteries, secrets, that weren't common, or communal, knowledge.

Click to expand...

Correct and everyone has different gifts. Not all will receive great revelations or understanding of mysteries but some will.

John D. Brey said:

Today God speaks personally to all who can receive him.

Click to expand...

Yes

John D. Brey said:

To Dejee's point, it can appear that speaking personally to so many persons could create chaos, or disunity, disagreement, and thus be problematic to the family of God. And we know that David wasn't always beloved of those he ruled. Nor was Moses; or Isaiah. In fact, all three of the mentioned men were subjected to attempted murder by their own people, the very persons they were serving.

Click to expand...

Actually it creates unity from those who are listening to the same Spirit of God. However, there are counterfeit spirits that some listen to unfortunately. But it's easy to tell them apart once you know enough. (Hebrews 5:14)

John D. Brey said:

Nevertheless, God's spirit vouchsafes the safety of those who don't misuse the Word he incarnates inside them; and it's the same to this very day.

Click to expand...

Yes

John D. Brey said:

. . . I meant to imply that he was conceived apart from its use in the conception: his mother's pregnancy was a circumcised pregnancy where brit milah is understood to symbolize emasculation. The demon flesh was cut out of the process that conceived his mother's pregnancy through which he was born.


John

Click to expand...

Thank you for that clarification.

Deeje said:

God has never allowed his worshippers to be without appointed 'shepherds'. Never have his worshippers been allowed to formulate their own rules or to practice their worship according to their own inclinations.
As we know, Jesus is called "the Fine Shepherd" because he is the one leading all of his disciples who have a willingness to comply with his instructions.

Click to expand...

Those who follow the Spirit should know more and more how to figure things out for themselves. Especially as they grow and mature in Christ. Unless they turn away from God and don't follow His guidance anymore.

2 Corinthians 13:5 Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?

The epistle was written to those with the Spirit of Christ in Corinth.

Deeje said:

But "Houston, we have a problem"......Jesus said that the "weeds" of false "Christianity" were going to be sown in the same "field" as the "wheat". Both were growing together in the world, right up to the end. So how do we identify the "weeds" so that we are not consumed by their falsehoods? How do we identify a clever counterfeit? By knowing the genuine article very well. If we know what Jesus taught and how it conforms to the scripture that he himself used, then we will understand how far removed today's "Christianity" is, and that it does not reflect the teachings of Christ at all. We can't pick and choose only what is comfortable.

Click to expand...

According to Jesus it's not really our job to separate the wheat from the tares because we also could do damage to the good wheat in the process. Isn't that what He taught? Tares should be distinguished from false prophets by the way.

Deeje said:

Jesus has appointed his shepherds and we are to comply with their teaching and direction. (Hebrews 13:17)
The problem is that satan has his own shepherds who will lead the sheep down a wrong path by appealing to their own selfish inclinations. (an old tactic) Those choosing an easy way to practice their Christianity, are on the wrong road. (Matthew 7:13-14) The road to life is "cramped and narrow", so many find the restrictive nature of true Christianity to take them out of their comfort zone....so, they seek an easy way, but that road is a dead end.

Click to expand...

That verse alone doesn't make a religion true. Some Hindus believe they should sit in filth all day and never bathe. Other people come up with various other crazy things they have to do to be saved. One Hindu man is "famous" because he held his arm up so long it withered to a stick. But none of that pleases God. Remember that the ancient Israelites got in trouble because they kept thinking that sacrificing one of their own children would please the gods. But that "strictness" wasn't from God either. Many well meaning Christians make sacrifices they think please God but it doesn't and really it's pointless.

Jesus said come unto me all you who labor and are heavy laden and I will give you rest. (Matthew 11:28) I believe this was spoken to those who were overburdened by the various religions of man. (Luke 11:46)

The true way that is "cramped and narrow" is the way that most closely adheres to Jesus' teaching according to how the Spirit leads and guides into all truth. And everyone who is on that way is on a different stage of that path so we can't really compare ourselves to one another. Because if you walk in the light continually then as the light moves you'll move also. So you'll never walk in darkness. And yes the way is narrow. But that won't necessarily mean the same thing to everyone.

John D. Brey said:

The proper way to look at it seems to depend on whether Genesis 1:1 is a completed statement that God created the heaven and the earth perfect, and complete, such that something happens between that creation, and verse 2 of Genesis, which brings chaos and imperfection (תהו and בהו: formless and void) into the picture?

Click to expand...

From the OJB it reads....
"In the beginning Elohim created hashomayim (the heavens, Himel) and haaretz (the earth).

2 And the earth was tohu vavohu (without form, and void); and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Ruach Elohim was hovering upon the face of the waters." (OJB)

What picture is this painting? Conditions on earth were described here as "without form and void" which could be interpreted to mean unprepared for life. If the entire planet was covered in water and a thick band of clouds prevented the sun's light from penetrating, this to me suggests that the earth in its earliest stages, was not yet prepared to support life as we know it.

The account goes on to report how God did prepare it and its most primitive forms of life were vegetation....inanimate life, fodder for the animate creatures to come, but still life. It goes without saying that microscopic life, necessary for the breakdown of dead vegetable matter was already in existence but did not rate a mention because humankind would not invent microscopes for many thousands of years. Science would catch up with that later.

John D. Brey said:

Throughout the great Hebrew exegesis of the text, the sages point out that those two words (formless and void) are used exclusively in the scripture to speak of evil, sin, imperfection.

Click to expand...

I'm not a great one to rely on "great Hebrew exegesis", TBH. In Jesus' day the religious leaders had departed from the spirit of the scriptures by nit picking every legalistic aspect and relying more on their traditions than on God's word. What has changed?
I am more interested in reading scripture and allowing it to tell me what it means. The Jews were hardly an excellent source of expert opinion on anything, hence the saying...'ask 10 Jews a question and you will get 10 different answers...and they'd all be right'...(or words to that effect).....that does not inspire me with confidence, nor does their track record indicate that they got things right a good deal of the time.

John D. Brey said:

Ergo, either God created the world imperfect and broken from the start

Click to expand...

Which begs the question...why would he?

(so that it could be repaired, or perfected), or else something not discussed in the text, a mystery perhaps (Rom. 16:25), occurs between verse one and two of Genesis.

Click to expand...

Sounds like very Jewish reasoning to me. The "sacred mystery" was about the Kingdom, not the creation of the planet.

If God purposed something wonderful for the life he placed here, indicated by his closing declaration at the end of the 6th day, why would he deliberately sabotage it?

In human practice, when an earthly monarch builds a palace on a site of sewers, dunghills, and garbage, if one says, "This palace is built on a site of sewers, dunghills, and garbage," does he not discredit it? Thus whoever comes to say that this world was created out of tohu and bohu and darkness, does he not indeed impair [God's glory].

Click to expand...

But is that what it actually says in Genesis? Or is that a meaning implied by twisting the meaning of the text?

Genesis tells us exactly what caused the fall of man....the very reason for the Messiah's coming into the world.
There was not a mention of any trouble in paradise until the devil decided to make his move.

The Messiah was to be a redeemer, or repurchaser, (something well known in Jewish culture).
I refer back to the story of Ruth and Naiomi (both widows) and their reliance on Boaz to "repurchase" what they had lost. A repurchaser (Hebrew, go·ʼelʹ) is a kinsman (a brother, or other male blood relative) with the right to recover, redeem, repurchase or buy back the person, property or inheritance of the next of kin. For instance, he can buy a hereditary tract of land before it is placed on the public market and thus keep it within the family. By chance Ruth has lighted on the field of Boaz and he was a repurchaser, a man of Elimelech’s family. (Naomi's husband)

The Messiah was to repurchase or redeem the human race because our first parents couldn't keep one simple command (that caused them no deprivation whatsoever) that was made to appear to be a vital flaw in God's handling of matters.

What we lost in Eden was our perfection....what we inherited from Adam was sin and death (Romans 5:12).....what we gained back by the Messiah's sacrifice was a way back into God's first purpose. Perfect, sinless life in Paradise on earth.....with no sickness suffering or death, ever again. (Revelation 21:2-4)

John D. Brey said:

Anyone who studies Jewish texts daily becomes aware that they're all interlinked and interlaced. A statement in Midrash Rabbah is related to a statement in the Talmud. A statement in the Zohar is related to a statement in Midrash Rabbah. They're all dealing with the same problems, the same ideas; they're all struggling to unify the concepts in order to bring light from the tohu and bohu, the darkness, of the written text.

Click to expand...

That is because they do not have God's spirit. They are no longer directed by him because they proved that they could never do as they were told...they still can't apparently. They were serial covenant breakers. Once God had fulfilled his end of the Abrahamic covenant, he abandoned them to their own devices. Then he chose a new nation and called them "the Israel of God". (Acts 15:14; Galatians 6:16) He simply changed the definition of what it meant to be "Jewish", thus keeping the covenant in force. (Romans 2:25-29) Both Jewish and Gentile Christians would now become a new nation.

The Jews arrogantly relied on their lineage to Abraham but did not actually obey God or imitate Abraham's faith at all. John the Baptist told it like it was...(Matthew 3:7-12)

John D. Brey said:

Genesis 1:2 begins with a disjunctive clause, "but," mistranslated in the KJV "and." The disjunctive clause is followed by a Hebrew verb, הָיְתָ֥, ("became") in the qal perfect: "But the earth became . . . " (see Bruce Waltke and M. O'Connor, An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax, p. 650-651). Which is to say the Lord God (YHVH-Elohim) did not create the earth a "nest of refuse," or a "desert wasteland" (תֹ֙הוּ֙ וָבֹ֔הוּ), or anything of the sort.

Click to expand...

That is not how the Tanakh reads at all IMO. It indicates that the earth was initially in a state of unpreparedness....nothing was visible from the human standpoint, that appeared to be able to sustain life...it was immersed in water and a thick cloud cover prevented light from penetrating.....but little by little the landscape was modified, and life appeared gradually and in proper sequence....habitats were created before the creatures who would inhabit them. Later, the salty waters of the ocean provided the means to keep land dwellers alive by means of precipitation.
By the end of the 6th day everything was "very good"....just as God had declared. The earth is perfect...its the humans on it that aren't.

The story only starts to unravel at the beginning of the 7th day. We are still in the 7th day.....it had no declaration because I do not believe that it is finished yet. The 7th day will see all things on track as God intended all along. The problem of free will is solved and precedents are set for all time to come so that the issues raised can never be raised again.
What God starts, he finishes...(Isaiah 55:11)

John D. Brey said:

It was created perfect. Like Adam was created perfect, already circumcised (no phallus needing to be symbolical bled out of the picture, brit milah). ------It "became" הָיְתָ֥ a desert wasteland when a particular angel separated the name Elohim from the Name YHVH, and therein became the instigator of the Fall from grace and perfection.

Which is to say that the god of this world, Satan, took not the whole Name of God, Yahweh-Elohim ("Lord God") but only the name Elohim.

Click to expand...

The pretender hijacked the human race by deception and lies.....he is still recruiting his worshippers by the same means down to this day.

No one does anything without God's (Yahweh"s) permission. If the devil is the god and ruler of this world as the scriptures say that he is (1 John 5:19; 2 Corinthians 4:3-4).....it it with God's permission. Why would God give his permission, knowing what the outcome would be? The story of Job answers that question. Why did Yahweh allow the most faithful man on earth to undergo such a devastating test of his integrity?

Here was the accusation...."the Adversary answered the Lord and said, "Does Job fear God for nothing?
10 Haven't You made a hedge around him, his household, and all that he has on all sides? You have blessed the work of his hands, and his livestock has spread out in the land.
11 But now, stretch forth Your hand and touch all that he has, will he not blaspheme You to Your face?"

So there was man's integrity being called into question.....what is man's motive in serving God? Was it just for the blessings? If the hedge was taken away, would he still love God or curse him? The first devastating test over, Job reeled in mourning but still did not blame God for any of it.

Round 2....

Job 2:3-4...."And the Lord said to the Adversary, "Have you paid attention to My servant Job? For there is none like him in the earth, a sincere and upright man, God-fearing and shunning evil, and he still maintains his sincerity. Yet you enticed Me against him."

Now the Adversary replied to the Lord and said, "Skin for skin, and whatever a person has he will give for his life."
Is this just about Job? What is the adversary implying...? ..."whatever a person has he will give for his life".
This test of Job is a test for all of us too.....if the devil tries any of those things on us, how will we make a reply to him? (Proverbs 27:11) Do we have what it takes to stand up and be counted when there is no "hedge" of God's protection around us?
Job endured more trials....an equally devastated wife who could not stand to see more suffering told him to just "curse God and die"......and three so called "comforters" made Job feel guilty because they suggested that these trials were a punishment from God because of some secret sins that he was hiding......but nothing would make this man curse God. His account is in the Bible for a very important reason.

Jesus also made a reply to the devil when he tried to tempt him away from his mission.
Luke 4:5-8.....
"So he brought him up and showed him all the kingdoms of the inhabited earth in an instant of time. 6 Then the Devil said to him: “I will give you all this authority and their glory, because it has been handed over to me, and I give it to whomever I wish. 7 If you, therefore, do an act of worship before me, it will all be yours.” 8 In reply Jesus said to him: “It is written, ‘It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.’”

Look at the devil's admission.....“I will give you all this authority and their glory, because it has been handed over to me, and I give it to whomever I wish.".....who alone could hand world rulership over to the devil?
Are you beginning to see a picture now?

In the first chapter where the restoration takes place, after the Fall (into chaos), the name used is Elohim, while in Genesis 2, which is actually the origin of chapter one, the original creation, the full Name of God Yahweh-Elohim is present.

Click to expand...

Rabbit holes (or Rabbi holes).....don't go down them. The scriptures explain themselves, which is why we must study them and allow God to tell his own story, not the ones concocted by those who are not guided by him and for the most part, never were.

74x12 said:

Those who follow the Spirit should know more and more how to figure things out for themselves. Especially as they grow and mature in Christ. Unless they turn away from God and don't follow His guidance anymore.

Click to expand...

This applied individually but it also applies collectively. Jesus' disciples must of necessity all be in unity. There cannot be conflicting beliefs and practices because if God's spirit is backing them, they would all believe and act alike.

"2 Corinthians 13:5 Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?

The epistle was written to those with the Spirit of Christ in Corinth.[/QUOTE]

Yes, it was written to anointed Christians who needed to prove to themselves that they were a cohesive brotherhood. Christianity was never about "I think"....it was about "Christ taught". If the spirit is operative then unity of thought and belief will be the result. Is that what we see in Christendom?
Jesus told Peter to "feed his sheep" but all we see in Christendom now is one colossal food fight.

74x12 said:

According to Jesus it's not really our job to separate the wheat from the tares because we also could do damage to the good wheat in the process. Isn't that what He taught? Tares should be distinguished from false prophets by the way.

Click to expand...

Jesus will separate the wheat from the weeds, but unless we can tell the difference, we might just find ourselves on the scrapheap instead of in the barn. We have to know what Jesus taught and follow it.....not just the convenient bits, but all of it.

74x12 said:

Jesus said come unto me all you who labor and are heavy laden and I will give you rest. (Matthew 11:28) I believe this was spoken to those who were overburdened by the various religions of man. (Luke 11:46)

Click to expand...

It was spoken to the "lost sheep of the house of Israel"....these were loaded down with unnecessary burdens imposed by the Pharisees and therefore their worship was not refreshing at all...it was a heavy load to carry.
Jesus lightened the load by inviting them to come under his yoke with him.....if you understand what he was saying, he was volunteering to share the load with his disciples, rather than to carry it all for them, or to expect them to carry it alone.

74x12 said:

The true way that is "cramped and narrow" is the way that most closely adheres to Jesus' teaching according to how the Spirit leads and guides into all truth. And everyone who is on that way is on a different stage of that path so we can't really compare ourselves to one another.

Click to expand...

I agree, we should never compare ourselves with anyone else....but we nonetheless have to carry the load we were assigned. Each one is given their "talents" according to their ability....so at that level they are expected to perform.

Because if you walk in the light continually then as the light moves you'll move also. So you'll never walk in darkness. And yes the way is narrow. But that won't necessarily mean the same thing to everyone.

Click to expand...

We have to shake the idea that we are just to practice our "Christianity" any way we wish and believe whatever suits us.....we have to prove ourselves acceptable to our God and his Christ and follow the way as Jesus instructed. We are not to go the way we think is appealing.

Isaiah 30:20-21....
"Though Jehovah will give you bread in the form of distress and water in the form of oppression, your Grand Instructor will no longer hide himself, and you will see your Grand Instructor with your own eyes. 21 And your own ears will hear a word behind you saying, “This is the way. Walk in it,” in case you should go to the right or in case you should go to the left."

No deviation will be tolerated....wandering off in your own direction will not get you to the desired destination.

Deeje said:

The Jews were hardly an excellent source of expert opinion on anything,

Click to expand...

Though in spirit I agree with the basics of your religious orientation, I couldn't disagree with the statement above more strongly.

I would say that the statement above implies that you, like many Christians, misunderstand the dept all non-Jews have to Jews, and Judaism, as the source, foundation, and as the undeniable experts, in almost everything we know about the bible, to include Christ.

There's literally no place to even begin to speak of how bankrupt Christianity is without Judaism, how incompetent and incomplete our Christian understanding is without Judaism.

I don't think it's an exaggeration in any way to say there is no Christianity without Judaism; and that the weakest and most inept strains of Christianity strain to understand the deeper things of biblical truth precisely because of an inherent antisemitism, or because the scholars are to un-scholarly to appreciate, and incorporate, the unapproachable brilliance of Jewish scholarship.

I would tend to believe that any Christian who thinks Jews have nothing to contribute to his or her faith, and his or her understanding of scripture, will never have access to anything but the outer bark of the Tree of Life. They'll be cutting their teeth on that right strawy material for all eternity and still not be sharp enough to cut through to the deeper truth.



John

the tohu va bohu part is a curiosity, isn't it, since it has the nuance of blown to atoms, stuff pounded apart till it is utterly dust, all light gone .....which implies a work of restoration in the act of the great being, who came in, found the construct blown to flinders, and first thing....restore power, get the lights and environmental controls running again....and so on

Deeje said:

We have to shake the idea that we are just to practice our "Christianity" any way we wish and believe whatever suits us.....we have to prove ourselves acceptable to our God and his Christ and follow the way as Jesus instructed. We are not to go the way we think is appealing.

Click to expand...

There are many instructors instructing the way they say Jesus instructed. And not many agree on much but perhaps the most basic points of faith.

Every time I read a verse of scripture it speaks something new to me based on the other verses of scripture, or the other studies I've done, since the last time I read the same words to be saying something less informed.


John

John D. Brey said:

Though in spirit I agree with the basics of your religious orientation, I couldn't disagree with the statement above more strongly.

I would say that the statement above implies that you, like many Christians, misunderstand the dept all non-Jews have to Jews, and Judaism, as the source, foundation, and as the undeniable experts, in almost everything we know about the bible, to include Christ.

Click to expand...

I think you misunderstand my meaning...there was nothing wrong with the Jewish faith as it was introduced to a willing nation by their God. The Law was perfect, but the people were not. Paul said that the Law was given "to make sins manifest".....IOW if there was no Law, there would be no basis for judgment. But the Law was there in great detail, but still the Jews needed to nit pick every aspect and enlarge its meaning, making something relatively simple into something unnecessarily complex. If God gave them the Law through Moses, it was clear enough, but the countless additions just made it burdensome.

It was not the Torah that was at fault...it was the interpretation. As Jesus said....the Jewish rabbis expounded on every detail of these laws. It is suggested that each cause for impurity would be subjected “to questioning concerning the circumstances in which it may be contracted, how and to what extent it may be transmitted to others, the utensils and objects capable and incapable of becoming unclean, and finally, the means and rituals required for purification.”

Jesus’ opponents asked him: “Why do your disciples not observe the tradition of the men of former times, but they eat their meal with defiled hands?” (Mark 7:5) Those religious critics were not referring to the taking of sanitary measures. As a ritual, the rabbis required that water be poured over their hands prior to eating. It is also debated which vessels were to be used for the pouring, which kind of water was suitable, who should pour, and how much of the hands should be covered with water....it got that ridiculous.

Jesus’ reaction to all these man-made laws was simple. He told the first-century Jewish religious leaders: “Isaiah aptly prophesied about you hypocrites, as it is written, ‘This people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far removed from me [Jehovah]. It is in vain that they keep worshipping me, for they teach commands of men as doctrines.’ You let go of the commandment of God and cling to the tradition of men.” (Mark 7:6-8)

There's literally no place to even begin to speak of how bankrupt Christianity is without Judaism, how incompetent and incomplete our Christian understanding is without Judaism.

Click to expand...

No one could argue with that, but Jesus' response to the way the religious leaders had treated the "lost sheep" and how they had misinterpreted the Law, brought into question how Judaism was viewed at that time by God himself.

Jesus' expressions at Matthew 23 are damning. He sentenced those self-righteous Pharisees to "Gehenna".
Jesus led the lost sheep out of that corrupted religious system into a new pasture that still featured all the things that the Hebrew scriptures taught, but free from the additions that had corrupted God's worship.

I don't think it's an exaggeration in any way to say there is no Christianity without Judaism; and that the weakest and most inept strains of Christianity strain to understand the deeper things of biblical truth precisely because of an inherent antisemitism, or because the scholars are to un-scholarly to appreciate, and incorporate, the unapproachable brilliance of Jewish scholarship.

Click to expand...

I hear about anti-semitism, but have never witnessed it as we do not have any Jewish people where I live in a small rural town in Australia.....there are no synagogues here away from the city where Jews tend to congregate. I have seen them on TV with their distinctive garb and ritualistic practices, which seem very out of place in today's world.

Still I have to refer to Jesus and his words at Matthew 23:37-39....
"Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the killer of the prophets and stoner of those sent to her—how often I wanted to gather your children together the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings! But you did not want it. 38 Look! Your house is abandoned to you. 39 For I say to you, you will by no means see me from now until you say, ‘Blessed is the one who comes in Jehovah’s name!’”

Why did so many of the Jews reject Christ? Was it really because he did not fulfill Messianic prophesies?....or was it because he castigated the Pharisees at every opportunity? Was Jesus anti-Semitic? Or was he simply telling an inconvenient truth? The practicers of Judaism had lost the plot, and with the death of Christ at their behest, the only thing left for God to do, after fulfilling his part of the covenant, was to "abandon" them and to choose a new nation, (Acts 15:14) made up of both Jews and Gentiles.....”the Israel of God” (Galatians 6:16) ...a people who could follow his instructions without wanting to either pad it out.....or water it down.

The door was never shut to them however, because all they had to do to come back into God's favor was to
"bless the one who came in Jehovah's name".....something they have never done as a nation for about 2,000 years. Individuals have certainly done that however, as there are Jewish congregations of Jehovah's Witnesses even in Israel.

John D. Brey said:

I would tend to believe that any Christian who thinks Jews have nothing to contribute to his or her faith, and his or her understanding of scripture, will never have access to anything but the outer bark of the Tree of Life. They'll be cutting their teeth on that right strawy material for all eternity and still not be sharp enough to cut through to the deeper truth.

Click to expand...

The Jews of today have nothing to contribute to MY faith.....the Jewish nation as Abraham's descendants, contributed to the producing of the Messiah, whom they rejected and silenced. How did God feel about that do you think?

When Jesus asked his Father to forgive the ones who put him to death, he was not talking about the Jewish leaders.....these knew full well what they were doing....Jesus said that they had always done this....killing the prophets whom God sent to correct them.

Deeje said:

It was not the Torah that was at fault...it was the interpretation.

Click to expand...

. . . Imo, this gets to the heart of everything. I.e., the relationship between the Torah text, or the text of the Gospels and Apostolic writing, versus the way they're interpreted.

Many people, yourself included, seem to speak as though interpretation is almost optional. Almost as though it's better to just stick with what the text says (you seem to have implies this more than once) rather than interpreting it.

But the text says absolutely nothing without interpretation. Interpretation isn't a layer laid on top of what the text says. The text says absolutely nothing without interpretation. And interpretation is as much an art as a science. There's no rule of interpretation that weeds out the biases, or the presuppositions, of the interpreter, since there's no interpretation that can occur without infusing the text with the interpreter's presuppositions or pretext.



John