It definitely is a great topic. I find it beautiful that Jesus associated with what the religious upper crust would consider the dregs of society. And his interactions with women definitely went against the cultural prescription of the time. He never treated them as lesser.
Gave my opinion on that 7 days ago https://vigilantcitizenforums.com/threads/true-feminism-by-a-bible-reading-lady.6613/page-2#post-245260
This forum was literally just joined yesterday. I've never joined this forum before under any other name, nor have any other posts ever been made here under any other name.
Yeah, none of that backs up your claim of more than one coming of Christ. Just a bunch of scripture our of context. I'll take his word over yours. Sorry. No answer to the rest of my post?
Thank-you.
It's obvious that you haven't studied what He has to say in depth. So your not putting the full picture into your "open mind". How can you form an unbiased opinion thereby?
You'll have to provide the evidence for that very rude and wild statement.
You're referring to the physical human species. Wouldn't you prefer being the Spirit BEing who doesn't need a human body? human+Being.
Women's carnal more human animal minds are better at cleaning, nurturing human carnal bodies than men; thank God for women with that, who are better at Spirit/ leadership/ disciplne etc. things. It's insane fraudulent government who've taken that role away from men.
It's obvious that you haven't put anything of real substance from it into your "open mind".
Where is He? Exactly; no-one knows where His body is.
This is the correct spelling in that verse, which you will see renders the interpretation then correct https://deuteronomy4verse2.wordpress.com/2019/07/24/christs-2nd-coming-correctly-described-in-the-original-authorised-1611-king-james-bible/
Carcase is a dead animal or human?
All thoroughly interpreted here, and you will see that the prophecy is spot on with now.
Refer to my previous reply about all the details of His return.
To me that's judgement without having investigated. If you want to debunk something you need to delve into it. I invite you to http://JAHTruth.net It's a bit of an encyclopedia.
This gives more details about the 2nd Coming than I gave, if you're interested https://hannahmichaels.wordpress.com/2016/07/15/the-scriptural-marks-of-christ/
I assume you and your ilk on this forum put your best foot forward in representing the cardinal teachings of the Jah truth cult? If so even a glance at what you spout is enough to debunk it. The man extrapolates his own ridiculous interpretation from scripture, even doing so incorrectly. For example, that copy-paste you posted claims men and not women were made in the image of God. That's false.
Without human bodies where would our spirits be? Try existing without a body. The body IS the vessel of the spirit which means that without the means of physical procreation you wouldn't exist. Only once this age ends and Jesus returns will our bodies be exchanged for glorious ones that are not sin-stained by human nature.
Is that why men on average are more easily led astray by matters of the flesh? Youalso completely ignored all the scriptural evidence I gave of women who were considered spiritually-minded enough to be called prophetesses, disciples and judges.
Try providing a real agument and rebuttal intead of gaslightling and deflection.
He ascended into heaven after being raised from the dead. He is at the right hand of the Father.
Referencing from a propaganda site that is authoritative based on . . . .what exactly? The fact it claims to be the correct interpretation? And according to the Greek, "lightning" is correctly derived from the word "astrapé". Its usage covers "a flash of lightning, brightness, luster" but not enlightenment.
Relevance? What are you trying to read into that bit?
Again according a source that asserts its own I terpretative authority because of it says so.
Again.
I think I've seen enough to recognise fraudulence.
I said I'll take Jesus's word over yours. And no, you did not address why God used women the way He did because that is irreconcilable with your cult's stance on how God supposedly considers women less than men.
I'm intrigued. Do you actually take this to mean the human body itself? (head, neck, arms, chest, buttocks, phallus/vagina, legs, feet)
You just outed yourself as a liar.. again.
The BIBLE knows and therefore we ALL know.
Hi @Infinityloop long time no see (virtually speaking).
I dont believe God ever "popped into Earth" as no man has ever seen God and lived.
Well, keeping in mind the distinctions of the two adams, English translations are a bit dicey. It doesn't seem to directly translate to a male pronoun.
Is this you? https://www.linkedin.com/in/alfonso-freeman-409143116
Reply again if and when you believe God wishes you to do so.
I don't hold much validity to the creation story given in Genesis (obviously) but it is indeed a very curious oddity.Hi @Infinityloop long time no see (virtually speaking).
There is an interesting aspect to the creation of mankind. All the way through Genesis 1–3 we have ha-adam and our English Bibles usually translate it as “man” or “the man.”
The Hebrew word adam is translated either as “man” or “Adam” depending on context and on the presence or lack of the definite article (“the” in English, ha in Hebrew). So “ha-adam“ is translated usually as “the man” (referring to either an unspecified man or to mankind as a whole, depending on context), whereas adam (without ha) is translated as “Adam” (referring to the specific man by the name). Genesis 1:26 says “And God said, ‘let us make man [adam, with no ha before it] in our image’” and 1:27 is parallel to verse 26, giving more definition and precision to the statement in verse 26. Verse 27 says “so God created man [ha-adam] in His own image, in the image of God he created him.“ So we are thinking of a single man at this point. But then it adds “male and female he created them“ (plural). So now we see that “man” comes in two forms: male and female.
Also, the Torah states that Eve was created from one of Adam’s “tzela”s (Genesis 2:21). The word tzela means “side” the many other times it’s used in the Torah (e.g. several times in Exodus 26 and Ezekiel 41) – usually referring to the side of a building or structure. It can also mean rib but it seems to more closely be associated with its architectural connotation. I know that there is the opinion in the Talmud (Brachot 61a) that Adam and Eve were initially created as a single being – with male and female halves. While I'm not 100% sure about the specifics surrounding what the physical implications of such an idea is, I do think that the first creature (more accurately translated an adam and not Adam) God created was split into male and female which is why marriage is defined as a man and woman cleaving and becoming one flesh - as they once were. Perhaps that is where God's assessment of homosexuality as sinful comes from -because in keeping with the links between sacred architecture (where tzela represented a side of the temple for example) and the forming and distinction of the sexes who both form a construction of His image -homosexuality is sacrilegious. Its just an idea.
Yeah, of course in your Trinity interpretation would be "nobody has ever seen the Father" etc.
Have you considered that Adam being put to sleep and his bride being created from his rib has an interesting resonance with Jesus (the second Adam), who died and was pierced in his side to allow for the creation of His bride, the Church?
Well both Christianity and Islam do espouse Jesus as being both symbolically and literally as the "second Adam", so that connection isn't out-of-place. Although your specific analogy there didn't specifically occur to me in connection to the topic. I don't think the analogy is complete though, as Jesus was "killed" whereas Adam wasn't.
I don't recall specifically mentioning the literal image . . . If I did feel free to quote it. The projection of the Trinity in those passages is less of a projection and more of a potential inference because language allows it to be so. That's why I mentioned it.
Well it's not my interpretation exactly considering the bible says no one has seen God and each time the Lord appears to people in the Old Testament, the initial reaction tends to be fear of death which reinforces the idea that no man can see God and live.
The English translations definitely are not perfect which is why looking into the original manuscripts and culture at the time helps to traverse the "lost in translation" dilemma. You may believe it childish but I also think, that while increase in knowledge is something to aspire to, God willing, that there's a reason why we're also told that without faith its impossible to please God -I believe that enough was translated faithfully to help those who seek Him out find what they need to. Those of us who have the resources and ability can and probably should look further but I don't doubt that in His faithfulness no core messages vital to salvation would have been altered.
You could make the case that Adam had experienced spiritual death once he ate of the fruit, culminating in a later physical death.