Archive for nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Nglreturns is a forum to discuss religion, philosophy, ethics etc...

NGLReturns Daily Quiz - Play here!
 



       nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> Christian chat
LeClerc

Bernie's question

Hi All

bnabernard wrote:
When God breathed life into Adam, was it a created life He breathed in?

bernard (hug)


The neshamah of His ruwach.

LeClerc
Honey 56

Re: Bernie's question

LeClerc wrote:
Hi All

bnabernard wrote:
When God breathed life into Adam, was it a created life He breathed in?

bernard (hug)


The neshamah of His ruwach.

LeClerc


Hi Bernard,
I thought we agreed that life is within YHWH?

Honey
cyberman

Re: Bernie's question

LeClerc wrote:
Hi All

bnabernard wrote:
When God breathed life into Adam, was it a created life He breathed in?

bernard (hug)


The neshamah of His ruwach.

LeClerc


What does that mean?
bnabernard

Did God breath life into the lilly?

bernard (hug)
Honey 56

bnabernard wrote:
Did God breath life into the lilly?

bernard (hug)


Do you believe that when Messiah Yeshua said 'behold the lily' that He was refering to Himself?

Or are you commenting that a lily is a created thing without a spirit, but still living?

Honey
bnabernard

Re: Bernie's question

cyberman wrote:
LeClerc wrote:
Hi All

bnabernard wrote:
When God breathed life into Adam, was it a created life He breathed in?

bernard (hug)


The neshamah of His ruwach.

LeClerc


What does that mean?


LeClerc likes to speak inn greek.

Beware of greeks bearing gifts.

bernard (hug)
Honey 56

ed  

From the Rev.6. Thread.

Quote:
bnabernard wrote:
Gen 6:2   That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose

What are sons of God?

bernard (hug)



The sons of God are anyone that God has created and adopted into His family, as opposed to His only begotten, who was not created.

I think you are referring to the Nephilim again Bernard, and the rather dubious theory of the WTBTS that these are the offspring of fallen angels and human women.

This theory does not really hold up though Bernard, when we consider that the scriptures say that the Nephilim were on the earth both before and after the flood. It make far more sense in that case that these Nephilim are descendents of Noah and his sons, rather than evil half angel/humans who should presumably have been destroyed in the flood, but were not, acccording to scripture.

I hope you won't mind me asking, but do you think that these Nephilim are somehow relevant to Revelation 6? if so, I am very interested to know how.
Thank you Bernard.

Honey
bnabernard

dubious theory of the WTBTS

What has this got to do with me?

bernard (hug)
Honey 56

bnabernard wrote:
dubious theory of the WTBTS

What has this got to do with me?

bernard (hug)


I don't know Bernard, something? nothing? everything?
(Does anyone else other than the WTBTS actually believe it?)

What I do know is I am really interested in your response to my questions, any chance of one?

Honey
bnabernard

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sons_of_God

Just 'a' link to give some more depth to when and where the sons of God have come under scrutiny.

bernard (hug)
LeClerc

Re: Bernie's question

Hi Bernie

bnabernard wrote:
cyberman wrote:
LeClerc wrote:
Hi All

bnabernard wrote:
When God breathed life into Adam, was it a created life He breathed in?

bernard (hug)


The neshamah of His ruwach.

LeClerc


What does that mean?


LeClerc likes to speak inn greek.

Beware of greeks bearing gifts.

bernard (hug)


It's Hebrew Bernie.

LeClerc
Honey 56

Quote:
bnabernard wrote:
Did God breath life into the lilly?

bernard (hug)


Do you believe that when Messiah Yeshua said 'behold the lily' that He was refering to Himself?

Or are you commenting that a lily is a created thing without a spirit, but still living?

Honey
Farmer Geddon

Honey 56 wrote:
...............


The sons of God are anyone that God has created and adopted into His family, as opposed to His only begotten, who was not created. ..............

Honey


Really?

If that was the case, then surely he would have appeared fully formed without all this stuck in the womb of his mother for many months?
bnabernard

Honey 56 wrote:
Quote:
bnabernard wrote:
Did God breath life into the lilly?

bernard (hug)


Do you believe that when Messiah Yeshua said 'behold the lily' that He was refering to Himself?

Or are you commenting that a lily is a created thing without a spirit, but still living?

Honey



There is what we call living and life, we call the plants as having life, the animals having life, and man as having life.

All those mentioned exist because of the law and are perishable/mortal.

The life that was in the son was the life that was in the Father, his Father and that life is immortal imperishable.

Therefore as he is in the Father and the Father in him so the immortal Father/life is in the son the son is immortal, to be one with the son and one with the father then we must be born again of the spirit of immortal life that just as the Father is in the son the Father is in all who recieve Him through the testimonie of the son.

So it is that one has faith that the immortal Father is in the son, hears the testimony of the son, and become imitators of the son.


bernard (hug)
Farmer Geddon

Yeah - blah, blah, blah Bern...

I'm more interested in how the immaculate conception isn't something "God" created:

Honey 56 wrote:
...............


The sons of God are anyone that God has created and adopted into His family, as opposed to His only begotten, who was not created. ..............

Honey


Really?

If that was the case, then surely he would have appeared fully formed without all this stuck in the womb of his mother for many months?
bnabernard

sorry  farmer never saw your post, I mean lets face it, nine months of creative work wasted because it's not created, then like it wieghs what, 8lb and starts to put on uncreated flesh.

Mind boggle and boy scouts woggle


bernard (hug)
LeClerc

Hi Farmer

Farmer Geddon wrote:
Honey 56 wrote:
...............


The sons of God are anyone that God has created and adopted into His family, as opposed to His only begotten, who was not created. ..............

Honey


Really?

If that was the case, then surely he would have appeared fully formed without all this stuck in the womb of his mother for many months?


Matthew 22
41 Then, turning to the assembled P’rushim, Yeshua put a sh’eilah to them: 42 “Tell me your view concerning the Messiah: whose son is he?” They said to him, “David’s.”

LeClerc
LeClerc

Morning Bernie

bnabernard wrote:
Honey 56 wrote:
Quote:
bnabernard wrote:
Did God breath life into the lilly?

bernard (hug)


Do you believe that when Messiah Yeshua said 'behold the lily' that He was refering to Himself?

Or are you commenting that a lily is a created thing without a spirit, but still living?

Honey



There is what we call living and life, we call the plants as having life, the animals having life, and man as having life.
bernard (hug)


There is a difference Bernie

Do the plants you refer to have the neshamah of His ruwach ?

LeClerc
Honey 56

Farmer Geddon wrote:
Honey 56 wrote:
...............


The sons of God are anyone that God has created and adopted into His family, as opposed to His only begotten, who was not created. ..............

Honey


Really?

If that was the case, then surely he would have appeared fully formed without all this stuck in the womb of his mother for many months?


Hi Farmer.

Yes really.

Look up the words for created, begat and only begotten, you will see they are all completely different words or phrases with different meanings.
Messiah Yeshua was the only begotten of YHWH (making Him uniquely one off). He was not a created being (as the Word/Logos, He was the creator).

Having asked the people who say He was a created being to supply a scripture that even hints of this, they have so far failed to do so.

Human beings beget life, they cannot create it, only YHWH can do that.

Messiah Yeshua, according to scripture, took on flesh and was born a human being, this was essential, a perfect human being (The Christ) to pay the price for humanity's sins which entered the world through an imperfect human being (Adam)

Honey
Honey 56

bnabernard wrote:
sorry  farmer never saw your post, I mean lets face it, nine months of creative work wasted because it's not created, then like it wieghs what, 8lb and starts to put on uncreated flesh.

Mind boggle and boy scouts woggle


bernard (hug)


One scripture Bernard, that says that The Messiah Yeshua was a created being, just one.

What's that about laughing last?

Honey
Honey 56

Hi Bernard.

You said...

Quote:
........... to be one with the son and one with the father then we must be born again of the spirit of immortal life that


So when one becomes 'born again' which part of the human becomes immortal?

Honey
bnabernard

What was Adam?

bernard (hug)
Honey 56

bnabernard wrote:
What was Adam?

bernard (hug)


Adam was a created being, created by El-O-Him but.........


2By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work. 3And God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done.

Was there any more creating after this time?

How did the rest of humanity (besides Eve) come about?
bnabernard

There you go running up the road again.

Adam was created, created out of the dust, what was his state, was he in possession of the life God as in immortal, or was he in possession of a mortal life, i.e. aware like an animal, or perhaps living according to rules like a plant.

What was his state of existence in having life?

bernard (hug)
Honey 56

To Bernard......

So when one becomes 'born again' which part of the human becomes immortal?

Honey
bnabernard

Does any part become immortal?

bernard (hug)

Edit:- It might help to consider if Yeshua died. And who are asleep.
Honey 56

bnabernard wrote:
Does any part become immortal?

bernard (hug)

Edit:- It might help to consider if Yeshua died. And who are asleep.


11And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. 12He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life.
13I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life
Romans  2


Isn't eternal life, immortality?

Honey
bnabernard

Surely, God alone lives.

bernard (hug)
Honey 56

We are made alive (to live) through Messiah Yeshua

9You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ. 10But if Christ is in you, your body is dead because of sin, yet your spirit is alive because of righteousness. 11And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit, who lives in you.


He gives eternal life to our spirits now and eternal life to our mortal bodies when we are raised from death or changed in the twinkling of an eye, depending on whether we are alive or dead physically when Messiah returns.

Honey
bnabernard

he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit, who lives in you.

So christ did not raise himself from the dead it is the spirit that reside in you.

Now if that is the case then it is the 'you' that needs attention not the spirit.

Now then how can that that is you alter to conform to the spirit and be like the that that was he that had the spirit in him?

bernard (hug)
Honey 56

[quote]
Quote:
[quote="bnabernard:81722"]he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit, who lives in you.

So christ did not raise himself from the dead it is the spirit that reside in you.

Now if that is the case then it is the 'you' that needs attention not the spirit.


Messiah Yeshua absolutely did raise Himself up.

I think it is you who needs to give attention to the scriptures Bernard.

Honey
bnabernard

he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit, who lives in you.

Me pay attention to scripture    it speaks of another that raised Yeshua from the dead, look, he who raised the christw I do take it that you believe that Yeshua was the christ?

So Yeshua died he was raised up by a he who can give life to mortal body.

So if Yeshua was dead then it was his body that died, HIS CREATED BODY, but because he had been obedient death had no hold over his body and it was raised up by the spirit which is the invisible immortal life.

Just so the body dies in sin because it is not obedient, the life does not stay with the corrupt and perishable body that enters the grave, and the body perishes.

So the obedient body is not abandoned but is rescued from death by the life force/spirit that is immortal.
The disobedient body perishes and is not rescued because the disobedient body continues in disobedience.

Therefore the bodies sleep in the ground and await resurection to be acounted/judged according to their deeds, those that reform of their ways and walk in obedience have the life given to their mortal bodies.

Today you will be with me in paradise.

bernard (hug)
bnabernard

Sins forgiven go and sin no more.

bernard (hug)
Farmer Geddon

Honey 56 wrote:
Hi Farmer.

Yes really.

Look up the words for created, begat and only begotten, you will see they are all completely different words or phrases with different meanings.
Messiah Yeshua was the only begotten of YHWH (making Him uniquely one off). He was not a created being (as the Word/Logos, He was the creator).



Exactly.

If Jesus was an only begotten son then surely there has to be have some procreation involved?

Now the writer of john, in the famous line, uses μονογενής AKA monogenes -  which is an adjective compounded of μονος “only” and γενος “species, race, family, offspring, kind.”

Basically it refers to an only son (or daughter) whose parents are of the same "kind".

When used in reference to a son the meaning of μονογενής  is, the son is the only offspring of the parents.

How is that possible?

**ETA**

Queue Wuckfit to add his distillation of the facts...
bnabernard

Makes you wonder dunnit. was God saying 'the rest of you don't recognise me, out of the whole shambles of you this is the only one I care to aknowledge.

Son of man or son of God, the son that is aknowledged by God say's ''call no-one Father but your Father that is in heaven' sons of the spirit innit?

Sons of man, well they would not regard the heavenly Father, they would be busy accountable to themselvs, congratulating each other and praising their own devices, of their own making. and giving thanks through/to gods of their own making which have no life. Or as Abram is said to have said to his father, 'these wooden gods are powerful anough to boil a kettle.


bernard (hug)
Honey 56

And yet Bernard.
It was you in a recent post who referred to Messiah yeshua as 'God in the flesh'
Was that your own opinion?, did you learn this from the scriptures? did you post it by mistake?

What in fact did you maen when you said 'Jesus is God in the flesh"?
bnabernard

Honey 56 wrote:
And yet Bernard.
It was you in a recent post who referred to Messiah yeshua as 'God in the flesh'
Was that your own opinion?, did you learn this from the scriptures? did you post it by mistake?

What in fact did you maen when you said 'Jesus is God in the flesh"?


Find God in yourself and you will know.

bernard  
Honey 56

And BTW Bernard, perhaps you will believe Jesus' own words.....

18Then the Jews demanded of him, “What miraculous sign can you show us to prove your authority to do all this?”
19Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.”
20The Jews replied, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and you are going to raise it in three days?” 21But the temple he had spoken of was his body. 22After he was raised from the dead, his disciples recalled what he had said. Then they believed the Scripture and the words that Jesus had spoken.
John 2.


And if you keep on insisting that Yeshua Messiah is a created being, then presumably you can prove this theory of yours with a scripture, just one Bernard, then we will understand whether what you actually believe is in line with God's word or not.
Honey
Honey 56

bnabernard wrote:
Honey 56 wrote:
And yet Bernard.
It was you in a recent post who referred to Messiah yeshua as 'God in the flesh'
Was that your own opinion?, did you learn this from the scriptures? did you post it by mistake?

What in fact did you maen when you said 'Jesus is God in the flesh"?


Find God in yourself and you will know.

bernard  



God searches our hearts Bernard, He knows the truth.

Honey
bnabernard

God searches our hearts Bernard, He knows the truth.


If the sons of man did the same for themselves they to would know the  truth.
However what will man find when he has his heart hardened to the truth, where will he find God among the worms of mans teaching.
It is not simple anough to be a hearer one must be a doer and to be a doer one must follow an example set and have faith.
Is man more important than God, ask that of ourselfs next time we have to choose.

Now find God in ourself and be liberated from the flesh that holds tightly with it's sinful grasping that drags the son of man down into the grave not knowing it's creator.

Keep seeking and we will find and having found, remain, not like others who find and turn to go their own way.

So as you say Honey God reads the heart, especialy when he is invited as then He rejoices that He has been found.


bernard (hug)
Honey 56

Quote:
[quote="Farmer Geddon:81731"]
Honey 56 wrote:
Hi Farmer.

Yes really.

Look up the words for created, begat and only begotten, you will see they are all completely different words or phrases with different meanings.
Messiah Yeshua was the only begotten of YHWH (making Him uniquely one off). He was not a created being (as the Word/Logos, He was the creator).



Exactly.

If Jesus was an only begotten son then surely there has to be have some procreation involved?


Yes, but not procreation as we understand it, the Holy Spirit overshadowed Mary and she conceived, and before you ask for an explanation, I cannot give you one, this is something that is not explained in the scripture and if believed must be taken on faith.    Except the scriptures also indicate that like Yeshua, the Holy Spirit is also part of the Godhead, or in other words possesses the divine quality or essence.
But Messiah Yeshua's human line can be traced back through (Mary's line) to King David (as prophesied)
Messiah Yeshua was required to take on human flesh in order to pay the ransom for humanity's sin, and so just as sin entered the world through one imperfect human being, so only a perfect human being could redress the balance. God in the flesh (Immanuel) was that perfect sinless human being.

Quote:
Now the writer of john, in the famous line, uses μονογενής AKA monogenes -  which is an adjective compounded of μονος “only” and γενος “species, race, family, offspring, kind.”

Basically it refers to an only son (or daughter) whose parents are of the same "kind".

When used in reference to a son the meaning of μονογενής  is, the son is the only offspring of the parents.

How is that possible?


The best explanation I have ever seen came from CS Lewis, he said something like- Animals beget animals, humans beget humans and, God begets God, each to their own kind. Messiah Yeshua is God's only begotten son, making Him uniquely one of a kind. Almighty God has many other kinds of sons, but they were all created originally by God (El-O-Him[plural], through the Word/Logos [who went on to become Yeshua/saviour in a human life and who is the creator not the created] Genesis 1 and John1 and 1John1)
It is indicated in the scriptures and is widely believed, that after Mary gave birth to the Messiah she and Joseph went on to have other children, but Joseph did not 'know' Mary in the biblical sense until after Yeshua was born. Although Mary was very honoured and blessed to be chosen by God as the Mother of His Son, I believe she was just the carrier of this precious child and not the Mother of God as some believe her to be.

I am sorry Farmer, call me naieve or even stupid, but I can't respond to the last bit of your post (as I am embarassed to say Ididn't really understand it [honey moment!]   )

I have rambled just a bit, hope you can undersatnd the gist of it though.

Honey
Farmer Geddon

Sorry..

So what you are trying to do is rewrite the "Gospels" to fit what you believe?

Is that how "Christianity" works?
LeClerc

Hi Farmer

Farmer Geddon wrote:
Honey 56 wrote:
Hi Farmer.
Yes really.

Look up the words for created, begat and only begotten, you will see they are all completely different words or phrases with different meanings.
Messiah Yeshua was the only begotten of YHWH (making Him uniquely one off). He was not a created being (as the Word/Logos, He was the creator).



Exactly.

If Jesus was an only begotten son then surely there has to be have some procreation involved?

Now the writer of john, in the famous line, uses μονογενής AKA monogenes -  which is an adjective compounded of μονος “only” and γενος “species, race, family, offspring, kind.”

Basically it refers to an only son (or daughter) whose parents are of the same "kind".

When used in reference to a son the meaning of μονογενής  is, the son is the only offspring of the parents.

How is that possible?

**ETA**

Queue Wuckfit to add his distillation of the facts...


In the beginning the Logos came forth from YHWH. The Logos came forth but at this time was not begotten. It was through the Logos all that has been created was created.

John 1 NWT
2This one was in [the] beginning with God.3All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence

The Logos in becoming flesh was begotten of woman by YHWH's Ruach haKodesh.

John 1 NWT
14So the Word became flesh and resided among us, and we had a view of his glory, a glory such as belongs to an only‐begotten son from a father; and he was full of undeserved kindness and truth.

When the Logos came forth from the womb of Mary we have according to the scripture the ''only begotten God''.

John 1 NWT
18No man has seen God at any time; the only‐begotten god who is in the bosom [position] with the Father is the one that has explained him.

Begotten in the sense that the Logos became flesh through the womb of Mary by YHWH's Ruach haKodesh.

Where did the 46 chromosomes come from which formed the flesh of the Logos who was called Y'shua, who those who know Him, is Israel's Messiah.

They could not have come from Mary or Joseph since the DNA of both contains the sin nature, which would have been inherited, unless you hold to the teaching that Mary was sinless.

LeClerc
Honey 56

Farmer Geddon wrote:
Sorry..

So what you are trying to do is rewrite the "Gospels" to fit what you believe?

Is that how "Christianity" works?


Do you really think I have tried to rewrite the gospels?

Please show me how, I will try to provide the scriptures that you think I have rewritten.
Is that fair enough?

Honey
Honey 56

And LeClerc,
Your explanation, using the scriptures, is spot on    

Thank you.  

Honey
Honey 56

Hi Farmer,
After a lot of searching, I have finally found this.....


monogenés: only begotten
Original Word: μονογενής, ές
Part of Speech: Adjective
Transliteration: monogenés
Phonetic Spelling: (mon-og-en-ace')
Short Definition: only, only-begotten, unique
Definition: only, only-begotten; unique.


monogenḗs (from 3411 /misthōtós, "one-and-only" and 1085 /génos, "offspring, stock") – properly, one-and-only; "one of a kind" – literally, "one (monos) of a class, genos" (the only of its kind)

compare....

gennaó: to beget, to bring forth
Original Word: γεννάω
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: gennaó
Phonetic Spelling: (ghen-nah'-o)
Short Definition: I beget, bring forth, give birth to
Definition: I beget (of the male), (of the female) I bring forth, give birth


The difference between, 'only begotten' and 'to beget'

and created....

ktizó: to build, create
Original Word: κτίζω
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: ktizó
Phonetic Spelling: (ktid'-zo)
Short Definition: I create, form, shape, make
Definition: I create, form, shape, make, always of God.



2936 ktízō – properly, create, which applies only to God who alone can make what was "not there before" (Latin, ex nihilo, out of nothing,



Honey
bnabernard

Well we seem to be getting somewhere, we are finding that a father exist's before a son, that a son did not at one time exist, and that before becoming a father the Father was not a Father.
Perhaps the father was neither father or mother, perhaps He was neither dark nor light, perhaps He was neither He nor Her, perhaps He was niether big nor small,

Perhaps that which exist's of it's own cannot be compared to anything as anything does not exist.
Perhaps it is what it is and will be what it will be.

bernard (hug)
LeClerc

Hi Bernie

bnabernard wrote:
Well we seem to be getting somewhere, we are finding that a father exist's before a son, that a son did not at one time exist, and that before becoming a father the Father was not a Father.
Perhaps the father was neither father or mother, perhaps He was neither dark nor light, perhaps He was neither He nor Her, perhaps He was niether big nor small,

Perhaps that which exist's of it's own cannot be compared to anything as anything does not exist.
Perhaps it is what it is and will be what it will be.

bernard (hug)


Perhaps Bernie, you should read the scriptures.

1 John 1
1That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. 2 The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us.

Then maybe you will understand why what you have posted above cannot  be the truth.

LeClerc
bnabernard

I might be inclined to agree accept that it is said that we inherit sin from the father.
Under those circumstances sin is not passed on by the mother though the mother inherits sin.
It then become a case of the mother not being without the inheritence but unable to pass it on.

If one looks at the bigger picture and how the evil spirits work, then we will see that in an atttempt to create a body that does not die there is as we speak trails to creat life from the mother alone from her bone marrow.
A fartherless child,  

Adam was the responsible one and humanity was to be cleaned up and have a new father, a new Adam, as we can't be born lest there is an original source.

We cannot have a new god/ruler less the present ruler is usurped.

Post flood the offspring of the fallen angels were allowed to remain in spirit form, without bodies, they like the children of Adam were not responsible for their actions and are given a time to become obedient to the Almighty the invisible God and Father of all.

The son speaks for both the spirit and the flesh and offers for the both.

Note from your understanding that there was one flood and eight righteous souls saved, yet we have another term where it appears as a carbon copy of the previous term.

Then another term follows of a thousand years for man and spirit alike to see the truth of Gods rule.

Then comes make your mind up time when the rebelious angels who would not change from their own minds attempt to draw as many as they can into there own mided thinking.

Potted but there u go.

Can the rebelious spirits get anough votes to get their own earth?

bernard (hug)
LeClerc

Hi Bernie

bnabernard wrote:
I might be inclined to agree accept that it is said that we inherit sin from the father.
bernard (hug)


Said by whom and is there scripture confirming this ?

LeClerc
bnabernard

Rom 5:12 ¶ Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:  


Rom 5:13   (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.  


Rom 5:14   Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

Bernard (hug)
bnabernard

I shall try to go further for you.

God is head of the man and man is head of the woman.

In the case of Adam and Eve Adam was the head, Eve was to take her lead from her husband and was under mans law, Adam takes his lead from God and is under Gods law.

Eve heard a voice that was neither her husband or God, she disobeyed her husband.
Adam however when aproached by Eve, did not punish/rebuke Eve but took it upon himself to disobey God.

The husband is the head, Adam recieving his punishment was followed by Eve out of the Garden and received for herself the woes imparted to her for the disobedience to her husband and as Adam was the head, Eve was to follow in his lead and as his lead was into death then Eve received that which her husband received.

Eve however has no power as in the case of commiting man as man is her head.

bernard (hug)
LeClerc

Hi Bernie

bnabernard wrote:
Rom 5:12 ¶ Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:  
Bernard (hug)


First question Bernie

The word men, which I have placed in bold, does it include male and female of man of just male of man ?

LeClerc
bnabernard

It's a simple as what I said if you read it.

bernard (hug)
LeClerc

Hi Bernie

bnabernard wrote:
It's a simple as what I said if you read it.

bernard (hug)


I did read it that is why I asked the question.

Male was never head of female before the fall this only happened after the fall.

Do you know what the Hebrew word ezer means.

Genesis 2
18 And YHWH God said, "It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper (ezer) comparable to him."

bnabernard wrote:
Rom 5:12 ¶ Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:  
Bernard (hug)


First question Bernie

The word men, which I have placed in bold, does it include male and female of man of just male of man ?

Still waiting

LeClerc
bnabernard

Leclerc

Are you missing the point? the point is who you inherit sin from and who passes on inheritence.


bernard (hug)
LeClerc

Morning Bernie

bnabernard wrote:
Leclerc

Are you missing the point? the point is who you inherit sin from and who passes on inheritence.


bernard (hug)


From what you are saying Bernie if one were to clone a female human being, that female human being, being a female clone, would never die naturally.

LeClerc
Honey 56

Dear Bernard,
If you read Genesis chapter 3., you will see that Eve was tempted by satan into sinning, and Adam chose to sin. They were both disobedient to YHWH, not to each other.
When Eve was created for Adam she was intended to be his helper.
Eve was put in subjection to Adam as part of her judgement for her disobedience.

But, according to scripture………
26You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, 27for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.
Galatians 3

All are equal in Messiah Yeshua.


Honey
Honey 56

LeClerc wrote:
Hi Bernie

bnabernard wrote:
Rom 5:12 ¶ Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:  
Bernard (hug)


First question Bernie

The word men, which I have placed in bold, does it include male and female of man of just male of man ?

LeClerc


Hi LeClerc,

It is the word for all of humankind, not just the males. It is where we derive the word 'anthropology' from.
Honey  
LeClerc

Hi Honey

Honey 56 wrote:
Dear Bernard,
If you read Genesis chapter 3., you will see that Eve was tempted by satan into sinning, and Adam chose to sin. They were both disobedient to YHWH, not to each other.
When Eve was created for Adam she was intended to be his helper.
Eve was put in subjection to Adam as part of her judgement for her disobedience.

But, according to scripture………
26You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, 27for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.
Galatians 3

All are equal in Messiah Yeshua.


Honey


Amen Sis  

LeClerc
LeClerc

Hi Honey

Honey 56 wrote:
LeClerc wrote:
Hi Bernie

bnabernard wrote:
Rom 5:12 ¶ Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:  
Bernard (hug)


First question Bernie

The word men, which I have placed in bold, does it include male and female of man of just male of man ?

LeClerc


Hi LeClerc,

It is the word for all of humankind, not just the males. It is where we derive the word 'anthropology' from.
Honey  


Absolutely sis.

So who is the one man Paul is referring to Romans 5 verse 12 where he writes

Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin;

LeClerc
Honey 56

Hi LeClrec,
The one man is commonly believed to be Adam, but, through this one man sin has spread to all of humankind (male and female) It is interesting to note that it was before Eve was formed when YHWH instructed Adam in the ways to behave in the garden, so she was truly misled by satan into disobedience.
But I don't think it is correct to say that only males inherit the sin nature and pass it on, because when the sin nature is referred to in the scriptures it is always pertaining to humankind. And I don't think it is like a genetic disease that we have no power over. The scriptures talk about struggling against it and putting it to death and not encouraging it. The work that Messiah Yeshua did on the cross was to reconcile us back to YHWH and as a covering for our sin, but we still have the nature, we are  washed clean of past sins, our hearts are circumcised and then Messiah Yeshua helps us to overcome this nature when we choose to follow Him. So we die to our sinful nature and are born again into a new life with the power to overcome the sinful nature.

Honey
LeClerc

Hi Honey

Honey 56 wrote:
Hi LeClrec,
The one man is commonly believed to be Adam, but, through this one man sin has spread to all of humankind (male and female) It is interesting to note that it was before Eve was formed when YHWH instructed Adam in the ways to behave in the garden, so she was truly misled by satan into disobedience.
But I don't think it is correct to say that only males inherit the sin nature and pass it on, because when the sin nature is referred to in the scriptures it is always pertaining to humankind. And I don't think it is like a genetic disease that we have no power over. The scriptures talk about struggling against it and putting it to death and not encouraging it. The work that Messiah Yeshua did on the cross was to reconcile us back to YHWH and as a covering for our sin, but we still have the nature, we are  washed clean of past sins, our hearts are circumcised and then Messiah Yeshua helps us to overcome this nature when we choose to follow Him. So we die to our sinful nature and are born again into a new life with the power to overcome the sinful nature.

Honey


I agree the one man is commonly believed to be Adam so why does the writer of Romans not use the Greek word for Adam.

If we turn to 1 Timothy 2 we read
14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

Here the writer does use  Ἀδάμ

Therefore could the one man in the following verse

Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin;

be the one flesh of Genesis 2

Genesis 2
24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Where the Hebrew for man is iysh and the Hebrew for wife is ishshah.

All of mankind is under the curse of physical death because of the transgression of the first male and female, but Y'shua came to set ''man'' free from not only from the curse of physical death but also from the curse of spiritual death (eternal separation from YHWH)

Paul in Romans 7 explains how through the death and resurrection of The Messiah, Y'shua, those who repent and believe the Gospel are born again, and are set free from the curse of spiritual death, no longer being under the curse of the Law, since through the death of Messiah we have died to the Law, but this does not mean the Law has been abolished, especially for those who do do not repent and believe the Gospel who will be judged by the Law since having not repented of their sins and believed in the Only Begotten Son of YHWH, they are still under it.

Through the power of the indwelling Holy Spirit believers through the Spirit of YHWH can live a life not under subjection to the sinful nature.

The Son of YHWH truly came to set mankind free, not only from the curse of death, physical and spiritual, but also to impart freedom from bondage to the sinful nature.

Praise YHWH.

All believers still taste physical death, except for those believers who are alive when The Messiah, Y'shua, returns.

Maranatha.

LeClerc
bnabernard

Would one be wrong to say that by one man woman entered the world?

bernard (hug)
bnabernard

Honey 56 wrote:
Hi LeClrec,
The one man is commonly believed to be Adam, but, through this one man sin has spread to all of humankind (male and female) It is interesting to note that it was before Eve was formed when YHWH instructed Adam in the ways to behave in the garden, so she was truly misled by satan into disobedience.
But I don't think it is correct to say that only males inherit the sin nature and pass it on, because when the sin nature is referred to in the scriptures it is always pertaining to humankind. And I don't think it is like a genetic disease that we have no power over. The scriptures talk about struggling against it and putting it to death and not encouraging it. The work that Messiah Yeshua did on the cross was to reconcile us back to YHWH and as a covering for our sin, but we still have the nature, we are  washed clean of past sins, our hearts are circumcised and then Messiah Yeshua helps us to overcome this nature when we choose to follow Him. So we die to our sinful nature and are born again into a new life with the power to overcome the sinful nature.

Honey


At what point is it uneccessary for the woman to pass on the, or more to the point, at what time is it essential that the woman does not pass it on?

bernard (hug)
bnabernard

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/a...-babies-men-claim-scientists.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/1431489.stm

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/a...96/How-women-make-babies-men.html

This article might be of interest, it points out some of the possibilities and some of the dangers such as abnormal deformaties. (and I won't mention nephlin     )


bernard (hug)
bnabernard

Y Chromosome 'Fatally Flawed'

The Y chromosome is passed from father to son, it's what makes babies into boys. Basically the human template is a female: the Y chromosome kicks in a few weeks after conception and makes a boy. "Men are genetically modified women," explained Sykes. But unlike other chromosomes, the Y chromosome can't repair itself and will, says Sykes, disappear altogether in about 125,000 years.

"Every generation one percent of men will have a mutation which reduces their fertility by 10 percent," explained Sykes. Unlike most chromosomes, the Y does not travel through the generation in pairs, so can never repair itself from a mirror. Flaws are never repaired. "So if that goes on for generation after generation," Sykes argued, "eventually there are no functioning Y chromosomes left."

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Story?id=4725121&page=1

Came accross this one and pasted the bit that struck me as relevent.

bernard (hug)
LeClerc

Morning Bernie

bnabernard wrote:
Y Chromosome 'Fatally Flawed'

The Y chromosome is passed from father to son, it's what makes babies into boys. Basically the human template is a female: the Y chromosome kicks in a few weeks after conception and makes a boy. "Men are genetically modified women," explained Sykes. But unlike other chromosomes, the Y chromosome can't repair itself and will, says Sykes, disappear altogether in about 125,000 years.

"Every generation one percent of men will have a mutation which reduces their fertility by 10 percent," explained Sykes. Unlike most chromosomes, the Y does not travel through the generation in pairs, so can never repair itself from a mirror. Flaws are never repaired. "So if that goes on for generation after generation," Sykes argued, "eventually there are no functioning Y chromosomes left."

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Story?id=4725121&page=1

Came accross this one and pasted the bit that struck me as relevent.

bernard (hug)


Quote from the article you linked too

Quote:

"Within the next few years you will get two women having a child who is the biological child of both of them," Sykes said. "And entirely normal in every respect, but always female."


According to your reasoning Bernie the above child will never die a natural death.

LeClerc
Honey 56

[quote="bnabernard:81863"]



Quote:
At what point is it uneccessary for the woman to pass on the, or more to the point, at what time is it essential that the woman does not pass it on?

bernard (hug)


Hi Bernard,
I think you may be referring to Mary, Yeshua's mother. Mary was special and blessed by YHWH to be the carrier of this special child,  but in order for Yeshua to be sinless (and this was necessary) He could not inherit anything from either of His earthly parents. Yeshua was not conceived in the conventional way, that is obvious from the scriptures, and to make absolutely certain of this, Joseph was instructed by YHWH not  to have any relationship with Mary until after Yeshua was born. After which the scriptures indicate that they went on to have other children together.

Mary carried Yeshua and both of His earthly parents were trusted with His upbringing, but He was YHWH's only begotten Son, and  not in the true sense, theirs.
Yeshua was aware of who His true Father was from a very young age and made many references to this throughout His life..

Honey
LeClerc

Hi Honey

[quote="Honey 56:81877"]
bnabernard wrote:




Quote:
At what point is it uneccessary for the woman to pass on the, or more to the point, at what time is it essential that the woman does not pass it on?

bernard (hug)


Hi Bernard,
I think you may be referring to Mary, Yeshua's mother. Mary was special and blessed by YHWH to be the carrier of this special child,  but in order for Yeshua to be sinless (and this was necessary) He could not inherit anything from either of His earthly parents. Yeshua was not conceived in the conventional way, that is obvious from the scriptures, and to make absolutely certain of this, Joseph was instructed by YHWH not  to have any relationship with Mary until after Yeshua was born. After which the scriptures indicate that they went on to have other children together.

Mary carried Yeshua and both of His earthly parents were trusted with His upbringing, but He was YHWH's only begotten Son, and  not in the true sense, theirs.
Yeshua was aware of who His true Father was from a very young age and made many references to this throughout His life..

Honey




LeClerc
bnabernard

Are we saying that the son was sown/planted in Marys womb as a spirit without a soul?

bernard (hug)
LeClerc

Morning Bernie

bnabernard wrote:
Are we saying that the son was sown/planted in Marys womb as a spirit without a soul?

bernard (hug)


The Nephesh, which is the Logos, has always existed Bernie, that Nephesh became flesh.

LeClerc
Honey 56

bnabernard wrote:
Are we saying that the son was sown/planted in Marys womb as a spirit without a soul?

bernard (hug)


Why would you think that Bernard?

The spirit of a man is what returns to YHWH after he dies.......

and the dust returns to the ground it came from, and the spirit returns to God who gave it.
Eccelsiastes. 12


A soul is a living being........

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.
Genesis 2.


The Holy Spirit is part of the Godhead, and was responsible for Yeshua’s conception.......

18This is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about: His mother Mary was pledged to be married to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit..

22All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: 23“The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel”d—which means, “God with us”
Matthew 1


Honey
bnabernard

http://ecclesia.org/truth/nephesh.html

While tou continue to use the multifaceted hebrew word Nephesh perhaps it would be reasonable to indicate what facet you are expeting to be understood when using the greek logos another multifaceted word which again could use a bracketed meaning.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logos

If you are going to discuss with this particuler english man then english would be a greater enhancement to the discussion rather than some airy fairy romantic waffle that I presume generates it's own feel good factor by the user while adding zilch to the conversation.


So did the spirit that was planted in Marys womb have any other previous existence than that of the invisible spirit, did it exist of its own, ie have it's own sensibilities, did it have a form of appearance, did it have any tangible operation prior to becoming implanted in Mary.
Did it have the power to put on it's own flesh ot was it dependent on Mary to clothe it in flesh, did it have any sensibilities and awarenes while it was being clothed in the womb, did it require the fruits/food of the earth to increase it's state of existence in the flesh, where was it's life when it was in the flesh.
Was it in any way like an angel that appears as light while having the appearance of man?

some simple starters that perhaps might be answered in the simple explanation of how you regard the nephesh and the greek logos?

bernard (hug)
Honey 56

To Bernard.

One person's airy fairy is another person's biblical truth.
The answers you seek are all in this scripture.....



The Word Became Flesh

1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning.

3Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4In him was life, and that life was the light of men. 5The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understooda it.

6There came a man who was sent from God; his name was John. 7He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all men might believe. 8He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light. 9The true light that gives light to every man was coming into the world.b

10He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. 11He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. 12Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13children born not of natural descent,c nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.

14The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only,d who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

15John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’” 16From the fullness of his grace we have all received one blessing after another. 17For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only,e,f who is at the Father’s side, has made him known.


John 1.

If you choose not to believe the inspired word of YHWH, then there is nothing more to say except that, if you do not have the faith to believe, YHWH says that He will give you the faith, if you sincerely desire it.
If you do not understand it, Messiah Yeshua said there is a helper who will guide us into all understanding, The councillor, the Holy Spirit, this is also ours for the asking, if we ask in humility and trust.
Honey
bnabernard

Well I see nothing there to do with nephesh or logos, I see light does that have some point?

bernard (hug)
Ketty

bnabernard wrote:


If you are going to discuss with this particuler english man then english would be a greater enhancement to the discussion . . .


I agree with this point.  It is a barrier to understanding if we do not speak in the language of the reader/hearer.  Campaign for real English
bnabernard

Ketty wrote:
bnabernard wrote:


If you are going to discuss with this particuler english man then english would be a greater enhancement to the discussion . . .


I agree with this point.  It is a barrier to understanding if we do not speak in the language of the reader/hearer.  Campaign for real English


no wot u mean innit  

Bernard (hug)  
Ketty

innit tho blud.

bnabernard



You temptress Ket I was on the brink of replying in like, yo.
However I reckon between us we could make more sense than so far  

bernard (hug)
Ketty



So long as it doesn't go as far as txt spk 'cos that turns me off more than thee's and thou's and anything else that's all Greek to me.  
bnabernard

Lets see if we can unravel some wool.

The Word Became Flesh
Now I percieve from elswhere that the word of God was the son of God.

So:-
1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning.

This therefore reads In the beginning was the son of God, and the son of God was with God, and the son of God was God
Does not make sense, untill we see the son of God speaking at a distance from God and admitting to not knowing anything other than he has been taught, then we can see that there is realy a reference to two Gods or a God and a god, as a son is always considered less knowledgeble and in need of teaching by his Father it would be wise to consider God two, the son, an inferior and a subordinate, and use a lower case to destinguish him as in god.



3Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4In him was life, and that life was the light of men. 5The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understooda it.

Brain ache ahead, Through him? is that meaning because of him or that he was all the component parts, the material?
without him nothing was made that has been made,
That would appear to sum it up, he was all material things and spiritual things, however the re could be a dispute here because spirit was there before the material, one presumes?


6There came a man who was sent from God; his name was John. 7He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all men might believe. 8He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light. 9The true light that gives light to every man was coming into the world.b

Here we have the cousin of Yeshua who was either sent by his cousin the god the son, or he was sent by God the Father.
He was to bear witness to the true light that gives light to every man coming into the world,
I'll leave that and see what the consencus is on the light, generaly its truth or answers, as I'm minded of the light at the and of the tunnle, (which oft turns out to be someone with a torch and lots more problems) but could be a reflection of angels who are bright in appearance, only having seen kids born/coming into the world I've yet to see a light, else it could mean another world.

10He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. 11He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. 12Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13children born not of natural descent,c nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.

This would seem to clear things up, the world was made through him but the world did not recognise him, so the world must meen the people, at least we know the world was not spirits cos they recognised him, he came to his own, so the world becomes smaller because his own would be Isreal, but hang on that would mean his dad did not lead the Israelites?
Still must be his because they would know his name Yeshua.

14The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only,d who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

The word became flesh, so the word being the son of God the Father, the son that seems to be all the material thing become 'a' material thing in the form of flesh, or the son that is not all material things becomes flesh, however as the material things become flesh as in grows becomes eaten and is converted to flesh by the human program, or being as he is the material in the first place he does not eat.

15John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’” 16From the fullness of his grace we have all received one blessing after another. 17For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only,e,f who is at the Father’s side, has made him known.

John 1.


Yes I've along with anybody else who read this, lost the will to live.

bernard (hug)
LeClerc

Hi Ketty

Ketty wrote:
bnabernard wrote:


If you are going to discuss with this particuler english man then english would be a greater enhancement to the discussion . . .


I agree with this point.  It is a barrier to understanding if we do not speak in the language of the reader/hearer.  Campaign for real English


To gain an understanding of the Herbraic mindset of scripture we sometimes need to return to the original language otherwise we fall in the trap of translation bias.

LeClerc
bnabernard

Didn't I hear something about  adultery and divorce?

bernard (hug)
Ketty

LeClerc wrote:


To gain an understanding of the Herbraic mindset of scripture we sometimes need to return to the original language otherwise we fall in the trap of translation bias.



I don't disagree, but I feel strongly that unless we're talking to academics, 'technical' language should always be put in terms that can be understood by the ordinary Bernie or Ket in the street.  Otherwise there can be a danger of talking 'white noise' at people, rather than fully engaging with them where they are.  
LeClerc

Hi Bernie

bnabernard wrote:
Lets see if we can unravel some wool.

The Word Became Flesh
Now I percieve from elswhere that the word of God was the son of God.

bernard (hug)


Has the Logos always been called The Son ?

LeClerc
LeClerc

Hi Ketty

Ketty wrote:
LeClerc wrote:


To gain an understanding of the Herbraic mindset of scripture we sometimes need to return to the original language otherwise we fall in the trap of translation bias.



I don't disagree, but I feel strongly that unless we're talking to academics, 'technical' language should always be put in terms that can be understood by the ordinary Bernie or Ket in the street.  Otherwise there can be a danger of talking 'white noise' at people, rather than fully engaging with them where they are.  


Since when was another language technical, it is the natural language(s) of the scriptures.

LeClerc
bnabernard

LeClerc wrote:
Hi Bernie

bnabernard wrote:
Lets see if we can unravel some wool.

The Word Became Flesh
Now I percieve from elswhere that the word of God was the son of God.

bernard (hug)


Has the Logos always been called The Son ?

LeClerc


Depends if you are refering to an expectation?

bernard (hug)
LeClerc

Hi Bernie

bnabernard wrote:
LeClerc wrote:
Hi Bernie

bnabernard wrote:
Lets see if we can unravel some wool.

The Word Became Flesh
Now I percieve from elswhere that the word of God was the son of God.

bernard (hug)


Has the Logos always been called The Son ?

LeClerc


Depends if you are refering to an expectation?

bernard (hug)


John 16
26 In that day you will ask in My name, and I do not say to you that I shall pray the Father for you; 27 for the Father Himself loves you, because you have loved Me, and have believed that I came forth from God. 28 I came forth from the Father and have come into the world. Again, I leave the world and go to the Father.”

Which coming forth is being referred too here ?

LeClerc
Ketty

LeClerc wrote:


Since when was another language technical, it is the natural language(s) of the scriptures.



Another language is always 'technical' to speakers of other languages.  If we want to be fully understood, if we truly want the other person to understand, we need to communicate in simple terms, and in the other person's own language.  

If I'm talking to a person who speaks only Chinese, I can talk in English until I'm blue in the face, it doesn't help his understanding of what I am saying, and it also does not reflect well on me.

I submit that the natural language of the Scriptures is any language that can be understood by the 'hearer'.  It is the word, for all men, for all time, on all continents, in all four corners of the earth.
LeClerc

Hi Ketty

Ketty wrote:
LeClerc wrote:


Since when was another language technical, it is the natural language(s) of the scriptures.



Another language is always 'technical' to speakers of other languages.  If we want to be fully understood, if we truly want the other person to understand, we need to communicate in simple terms, and in the other person's own language.  

If I'm talking to a person who speaks only Chinese, I can talk in English until I'm blue in the face, it doesn't help his understanding of what I am saying, and it also does not reflect well on me.

I submit that the natural language of the Scriptures is any language that can be understood by the 'hearer'.  It is the word, for all men, for all time, on all continents, in all four corners of the earth.


But this is the problem Ketty how many English words do the translators use for the Hebrew word Nephesh.

If this word was transliterated instead of translated there would not be the confusion that exists today.

LeClerc
bnabernard

Which coming forth is being referred too here ?

How many options have I got and which would you prefer?

bernard (hug)
LeClerc

Hi Bernie

bnabernard wrote:
Which coming forth is being referred too here ?

How many options have I got and which would you prefer?

bernard (hug)


The only option is the truth contained in the scripture.

LeClerc
bnabernard

Ok I'll go with that one,

bernard (hug)
Ketty

LeClerc wrote:


But this is the problem Ketty how many English words do the translators use for the Hebrew word Nephesh.

If this word was transliterated instead of translated there would not be the confusion that exists today.



I'm not so sure about that Leclerc.  Confusion would still abound because men are what they are.

If I'm explaining to my mum about my 'Crockpot', I'll call it a 'slow cooker', or a 'an electronic casserole dish that cooks things really slowly so that the meat is very tender', then she'll have more understanding.  Despite all those words used in explaining, it's still a Crockpot.

However, technical men and academics sometimes find it difficult to get out of their technospeak, so confusion will always further abound for the ordinary masses when the geeks are not able to communicate in language that is understood.  It is what it is.    
bnabernard

Er inndoors said she's got a crockpot, I said, ''oh that ole slow cooker in the garage''
She said ''no'', nothing more just looked and looked away. Cant think what she might mean?


bernard (hug)
LeClerc

Hi Ketty

Ketty wrote:
LeClerc wrote:


But this is the problem Ketty how many English words do the translators use for the Hebrew word Nephesh.

If this word was transliterated instead of translated there would not be the confusion that exists today.



I'm not so sure about that Leclerc.  Confusion would still abound because men are what they are.

If I'm explaining to my mum about my 'Crockpot', I'll call it a 'slow cooker', or a 'an electronic casserole dish that cooks things really slowly so that the meat is very tender', then she'll have more understanding.  Despite all those words used in explaining, it's still a Crockpot.

However, technical men and academics sometimes find it difficult to get out of their technospeak, so confusion will always further abound for the ordinary masses when the geeks are not able to communicate in language that is understood.  It is what it is.    


The problem with the translation of Nephesh into English is that the translators choice of an English word is often the result of the translators doctrinal bias. Not in all case but in some.

I understand that the first time the translators of the New International Version translate Nephesh as soul is in Deuteronomy 4.

LeClerc
bnabernard

This is why it is incumbent on you to say what your bais is.
This in turn will curry agreement or dissagreement.

If we turn back then I said that the spirit was put into Mary without a soul, and when I have refered to spirits without souls I have meant spirits without bodies .

Now a spirit without a soul in the comparrison to flesh is a living being having it's own self awarenes, this is highlighted an common knowledge regarding the spirits cast out and known as legion.

Legion: recognised the son of God, legion did not have a bodie of their own yet would appear to have self awareness having knowledge of each other and knowledge of the son,
Legion had an expectency, they asked if the son had come to torment them before their time.
Legion were cast out,: they had no compulsion in being cast into the adjacent swine, they had knowledge of being in an animals form.
Legion: appear to have problems roving around in the atmosphere, they did not offer to beat a hasty retreat as in waft away.

There are some hard nosed spirits that won't do as they are asked, they require prayer, the big guns.


Ok, back to the son, he came forth from the Father, do any of these fit the bill
Originally a word meaning "a ground", "a plea", "an opinion", "an expectation", "word," "speech," "account," "reason,"[1][2] it became a technical term in philosophy, beginning with Heraclitus (ca. 535–475 BC), who used the term for a principle of order and knowledge.[

If we select word, then word has to be defined, if one gives their word he creates an expectation if a person themself has an expectation then they give their word according to what they expect to happen.

If in the beginning God had an expectation then :-
In the begining was the expectation and the expectation was with God and the expectation was God.

Then what came forth from God was what was expected and the fullfilment of His word, his word became flesh.

bernard (hug)
LeClerc

Hi Bernie

bnabernard wrote:
This is why it is incumbent on you to say what your bais is.
This in turn will curry agreement or dissagreement.

If we turn back then I said that the spirit was put into Mary without a soul, and when I have refered to spirits without souls I have meant spirits without bodies .

Now a spirit without a soul in the comparrison to flesh is a living being having it's own self awarenes, this is highlighted an common knowledge regarding the spirits cast out and known as legion.

bernard (hug)


If we take what you have just posted then read Zechariah 11 verse 8

8 Three shepherds also I cut off in one month; and my soul (nephesh) lothed them, and their soul (nephesh) also abhorred me.

We learn that YHWH refers to ''my Nephesh''.

How does this shape our understanding of the meaning of the Hebrew word Nephesh ?

LeClerc
Honey 56

bnabernard wrote:
Lets see if we can unravel some wool.

The Word Became Flesh
Now I percieve from elswhere that the word of God was the son of God.

So:-
1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning.

This therefore reads In the beginning was the son of God, and the son of God was with God, and the son of God was God
Does not make sense, untill we see the son of God speaking at a distance from God and admitting to not knowing anything other than he has been taught, then we can see that there is realy a reference to two Gods or a God and a god, as a son is always considered less knowledgeble and in need of teaching by his Father it would be wise to consider God two, the son, an inferior and a subordinate, and use a lower case to destinguish him as in god.



3Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4In him was life, and that life was the light of men. 5The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not understooda it.

Brain ache ahead, Through him? is that meaning because of him or that he was all the component parts, the material?
without him nothing was made that has been made,
That would appear to sum it up, he was all material things and spiritual things, however the re could be a dispute here because spirit was there before the material, one presumes?


6There came a man who was sent from God; his name was John. 7He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all men might believe. 8He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light. 9The true light that gives light to every man was coming into the world.b

Here we have the cousin of Yeshua who was either sent by his cousin the god the son, or he was sent by God the Father.
He was to bear witness to the true light that gives light to every man coming into the world,
I'll leave that and see what the consencus is on the light, generaly its truth or answers, as I'm minded of the light at the and of the tunnle, (which oft turns out to be someone with a torch and lots more problems) but could be a reflection of angels who are bright in appearance, only having seen kids born/coming into the world I've yet to see a light, else it could mean another world.

10He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. 11He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. 12Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13children born not of natural descent,c nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.

This would seem to clear things up, the world was made through him but the world did not recognise him, so the world must meen the people, at least we know the world was not spirits cos they recognised him, he came to his own, so the world becomes smaller because his own would be Isreal, but hang on that would mean his dad did not lead the Israelites?
Still must be his because they would know his name Yeshua.

14The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only,d who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

The word became flesh, so the word being the son of God the Father, the son that seems to be all the material thing become 'a' material thing in the form of flesh, or the son that is not all material things becomes flesh, however as the material things become flesh as in grows becomes eaten and is converted to flesh by the human program, or being as he is the material in the first place he does not eat.

15John testifies concerning him. He cries out, saying, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’” 16From the fullness of his grace we have all received one blessing after another. 17For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only,e,f who is at the Father’s side, has made him known.

John 1.


Yes I've along with anybody else who read this, lost the will to live.

bernard (hug)


So Bermard you are content to follow another god besides  YHWH?

Honey

       nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> Christian chat Page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 1 of 4
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum