In my view by 10,000 BC homo sapiens had already populated the planet. They were here They we're the first to use seeds to grow food.God created humans on day 6, then rested on day 7.Adam comes along in chapter 2. Weather God created all the earth in 6 days or four billion years is irrelevant to me. It's no way of knowing some things. The biblical message does not hinge on Adam. Many people reject the the Bible because of traditional interpretation of Genesis.
Civilization first began in Mesopotamia over 5 thousand years ago. I will not go into all That history. But 1Corinth. 15:45 Adam is clearly called the first man , which clearly steps all over archeology. In my view Adam was the first man created with a spirit consciousness. I know this is a huge jump, but I don't think the humans before him were fully conscious beings. Let me pause and let some of you choke.
I have seen estimates as old as 336,000 BC. Fossil finds of humans at Jebel Inbound , Morocco.
That's a long time ago.
Quote from: Mickiel on April 23, 2022, 02:36:23 AM
I have seen estimates as old as 336,000 BC. Fossil finds of humans at Jebel Inbound , Morocco.
That's a long time ago.
[/quote
So how do we square this with scripture?]
1 want to say I believe in Neanderthal man, and this is how they differed from Adam. Adam was made from the dust of the ground, God breathes into his nose the breath of life, and he became a living soul , and the first human like that. Gen. 1:7- I don't think "Cave men", as were call them were created like Adam was. Adam had a full blown thinking consciousness After Adam, civilization takes a huge left turn and suddenly civilizations start booming. God kept Adam and Eve in the garden because he had things for them to do.
Not being made in God's image is how the humans created before Adam were made. They we're not in God's image, God's image means his consciousness , we can think and reason and have a beginning knowledge of good and evil. We have a "Spirit" in us that cromagnon did not have. Only the children of Adam were civilized in very high stages. The Neanderthal and Cromagnon had very high instincts, no doubt about it. The only book I would suggest reading on could there have been a race of humans who had no consciousness is Julian Jaynes excellent work on consciousness, it changed my thinking entirely.entitled " The origin of consciousness in the breakdown of the bi-cameral mind." A stunning work , easily the best book I have ever read. He was an intellectual and writes like one, ( I warn you). Some may find it boring, I think it is explains why Adam is called the first man, he was the first that God personally blew into him the breath of a differing life than those humans before him. God changed the world through Adam. Now there is a spirit in every human.
Pre-Adamite humans is a theological belief that humans before Adam were a lower level humanoid. Did they evolve? Yes I think so , but notice from the intellectual life of a man, his culture and history, religion and science , is different from anything else we know of in the universe. That is a fact. It's as if all life after Adam, evolved to a certain point , and then After Adam our consciousness turned at a right angle and simply exploded in a different direction. But we were never continuous with the idiotic lineage of non speaking ape's. Science may find that insulting, so do I.
We have to consider ancient Egypt , 3150 BCE
Indus Valley 3300BC
Norte Chico Era 4000BCE
Mesopotamia 6,550
Jiahu 7000 BC
And Ghazal 720
So I believe Adam and Eve were created prior to the Egyptian civilization. I am not sure, I am no Gary Amirault, he was a brilliant biblical historian. I am trying to establish when Adam was created, because one of the things God used him to do, was to establish civilization.
Adam was the first Man with a full consciousness.. he was the first man God spoke to. He was the first man created in God's image. He was the first man , and only man , that God took one of his ribs and made him a wife. He was the first and only man that God married to a woman himself. He was the first man to meet Satan. So Adam was first in many areas, these areas are why scripture calls him the first man.
Why God created the early Cromagnon and Neanderthal man I am unsure. They could have been experiments . Prototypes perhaps. Learning experience which God actually learned. ???
.
In Romans 5:14 Death reigned from Adam to Moses, this may be where salvation begins , so early man may not be included in salvation. 1 Corinth. 15 : 22 As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive So salvation begins with Adam , more biblical evidence that early humans were not like us.
Quote from: Mickiel on April 23, 2022, 09:37:59 PM
Adam was the first Man with a full consciousness.. he was the first man God spoke to. He was the first man created in God's image. He was the first man , and only man , that God took one of his ribs and made him a wife. He was the first and only man that God married to a woman himself. He was the first man to meet Satan. So Adam was first in many areas, these areas are why scripture calls him the first man.
We believers need to move traditional errors out of our belief, because it's hurting unbelievers. Like the universe and earth was made in 7 - 24 hour days. My goodness, no wonder Atheist laugh at religion. Those creation days could have lasted thousands of years. Why are you rushing it? God could have taken millions of our years, but the universe was not created using human time tables. Did you know the universe is some 13.8 billion years old? They measure time by looking for the oldest stars , and measure the rate of expansion of the universe . The earth is 4.543 billion years old , how silly the 7 day creation must look to these scientists. And then there is Noah's flood.. why In the world of reason would God flood totally uninhabited areas? Whew. We got this all messed up. Who knows what to believe?
So as In Adam all die, that evil knowledge that he consumed in the garden of Eden, is the root cause of how sin got into this world, into our churches, into our educational systems , and got in-between us and God. Adam was not deceived but he sinned, he did things God told him not to do,like eat off the tree.Now we are naked and must begin our growth there. In Genesis 3:13 Eve tells God that the serpent beguiled me and I did eat. Beguiled means the serpent charmed her and enchanted her in a deceptive way. But this works out well for adam , he gains control of his wife and coming children. Before the curse Eve had to be aggressive and perhaps bossy and manipulative of Adam. So God changes all that and makes Eve submissive.Effectly changing the course of human history to a man's world.
Because of Adam we men sweat when we do work , and we must eat whatever we can. Hard work , and work the ground because much of what we eat will come from the ground.Thorns and thistles will cut and bruise us. The modern world has made this easier with the ushering in of Mesopotamia, Ancient Egypt ,ancient China and ancient. India. Men took the submissive curse of women and ran with it, causing much pain for females.
Genesis 3:20 is further evidence that early humans will not be included in our resurrection and salvation , because Eve was not the mother of these uncanny humanoids .Notice Eve was the mother of "All living ", and as history shows, these strange humanoids we're all died off distinguished.. Discontinued. As if it was a plan of God's, he even discontinued the strange animals that roamed the earth. Their archaeology shows some of them were big and dangerous.
So we need to figure why they were here and gone?
One thing God wanted Adam to do is bare many sons and daughters , as he did in Genesis 5:4, Adam lived 930 years and begat sons and daughters.Adam learned an important lesson , in Genesis 3:22 God speaking, "The Lord God said" behold the man is become as one of us , knowing good and evil. So Adam was the first man to know evil and the Bible never shows sin defeating Adam again . Adam was still
different , Adam knew good and evil while he was still living in Eden. So he was spiritually wise but I have never seen him given the holy spirit.
Researchers have found the oldest Homo Sapiens remains on record in Morocco at at archaeological site in Morocco near the Atlantic coast, finds of skull, face, and jaw bones. Dated to about 315,000 years ago. The dead sea scrolls are 2000 years old. Manuscripts from associated Judean Desert sites dated as early as the 8th century and as late as the 11th century CE.
So Adam had nothing to do with the Bible being written or discovered.Paul viewed him as a forerunner to Christ. "A type of the one who was to come." Adam initiated human life on earth, so Christ initiates the new life of humanity. Romans 5:12. So Adam is the first human to be used in the Bible. Beyond his use as the name of the first man, he was used in the Bible as a pronoun, individually as a "Human", and in a collective sense as "Mankind".
The name Adam means "Son of the red earth." It also refers to the reddish color associated with human skin. So Adam was not a white man , as he so often has been drawn. Without a picture of him we have to guess ,so we can eliminate certain races if we go by the clue " Reddish". Esau and David were "Ruddy", white people have to blush, I their skinned is rubbed harshly or brushed.Solomon and the Nazarites we're reddish. Or ruddy. British Israelism and Christianity has pushed that Adam was white. This has deception all in it. Ruddy in scripture, 1Sam.16:12, 17:42 describes David. Song of Solomon 5:10, Lamentations 4:7, Genesis 25:25. The color more fits what we call "Light Skinned Blacks" who were more olive skin tone in the Middle East. Science consistently classifies ruddy as brown. So more likely than not, Adam was a fair skinned black man, and Eve, and from the melatonin here , Eve could have began all the races color in time, since they were living 900 years back then. Color and skin tone had little importance back then, until racism got into the bloodstream of humanity. The Hebrew word translated as brown in scripture was, "Shachar", ( Strong's #7835). It's short definition and exhaustive definition is "Dark" or black. Ruddy has nothing to do with white. That is one reason I left many churches, because they were too racist in their doctrines. They never even taught black presence in the Bible. Everybody good was white, and the bad people were black and cursed, like Cush or Ham or Ethiopian. I spent many years being angry at how my people were being influenced by so much racism.
We are all descendants of Adam and Eve. So why don't we all look alike? Genesis 11, describes a time when humans rebelled against God by settling at Babel.Refusing to spread out into the world. Because of this God confused their language, and groups separated and moved away from each other. God restrained them and they became genetically isolated , meaning they married and had offspring primarily within their group. As the years passed each group developed its own culture and ways of doing things. Genetically isolated , certain physical traits became more prominet In each group. Those ethnic characteristics were wrongly considered racial characteristics, there is only one race. All of these people were simply people.
So Adam began all races and cultures , the color of each group began as"Melanin." Skin tones began to vary. The two forms of melanin are eumelanin ,( brown to black ) , and pheomelanin , ( red to yellow). Their proportion determines skin tone.
All this concerns Adam and Eve's influence on race and cultures. This is a side bar God wanted. Humans living in regions near the equator became darker , protecting them from intense sunlight. People in higher latitudes , less sunlight had lighter skin to produce vitamin D. People with dark skin had children with dark skin. However , people with middle brown skin have offspring with a much wider range of skin tones. In my view , Adam and Eve were created "Middle Brown" when those two complexion of skin tones mate, a much wider range of skin tones will result. And I am suspecious of Eves womb having a magnificent genetic variability with regard to skin tone. I think God did something to Eves womb.
God knew Adam and Eve would sin if left alone with Satan. It served his purpose In bringing Jesus into the game to score for all of humanity , to die in the place of sinners and rise again to offer eternal life freely to everybody.God had already drew his conclusions , and concluded all humans in unbelief , so he could have mercy on them all. Adam had to experience paradise , paradise lost , and in the end paradise That God and his creative crew remodeling heaven.
Adam falling into sin displays the mercy of God by not killing him on the spot.
Just knowing how God is, he holds a special place in his heart for Adam. He didn't demand perfection from Adam , but Adams reaction to God searching for him in the garden is revealing as to what sin can do to a human. Adam and Eve had a beautiful home in a special garden. Plenty of food to eat , no threat coming from any animals, just their love. Adam must have really loved Eve, to join her in disobeying God. They hid themselves out of shame and fear. Both of which were emotional damage quickly done in them by sin.
Failure and shame can be toxic in intimate relationships. Satan no doubt had his voice in their ears, "Your not good enough", which triggers feelings of inadequacy, worthlessness and inferiority. This hits men harder than women , so Satan was thinking ahead of how he would continue after Adam and his generate.
God's search for Adam was short, God called his name and asked where are you? Adam said he heard him and hid himself because he was naked and afraid. God responds , who told you that you were naked, have you eaten from the tree? Adam blames Eve by telling God he ate because the woman you gave me bid me to eat.
Now the stage is set.
Quote from: Mickiel on April 26, 2022, 11:04:34 PM
God's search for Adam was short, God called his name and asked where are you? Adam said he heard him and hid himself because he was naked and afraid. God responds , who told you that you were naked, have you eaten from the tree? Adam blames Eve by telling God he ate because the woman you gave me bid me to e
Now the stage is set.
God. Escorts Adam and Eve out of Eden and sin is escorted into the world.
Believing that Adam was not the first man , may be unbelievable , and believing the cave men were not conscious beings is a stretch of imagination , we must explain why Adam was not the first man outright , the obvious archaeology we have discovered -along with overwhelming fossil evidence , why God created the cavemen , we need to stop telling the world the wrong interpretation of scripture.
This is why I know Adam was not the first man. So my opinion I have offered was Adam was the first man that God created with consciousness.The archeology and fossils are reliable discoveries. Adam was the first man in all the areas I listed earlier. Adam was the first man that God spoke to. If the cave men were of vast importance , scripture would revealed it. So could a whole race of humans exist and not be conscious beings? I think so. Most of the things I do in a day, I unconsciously do it. I wake up , go to the bathroom , wash and shave, dress myself, turn on the TV , brush my hair, and I am willing to believe that I unconsciously do most of those things. I get in my car, begin driving while I turn on the radio, I drive straight because we cannot hit the curve concrete separating the car from the sidewalks. I do all this while brushing my hair and keeping my eyes on the road ,all while I steer the car. Much of this we unconsciously do. So I can conceive a whole race of humans that God had on automatic existence , having very high instincts.
The seven NT scriptures that mention Adam, are of little importance to human salvation. Adam was like Bookend , he stood in his spot , and Jesus took it from there. That's about as much as I can offer on Adam.
Began in Medopotamia.. :thumbsup:
But I tend to think 6OOO years are set for letting things run their course.. From that so visibke option in Eden, of straying/imperfection. .. :Chinscratch: And if it had not been there, thinking would?ve had to be absent as well?
So things are running their course, then is a 7th millennium, a Sabbath. And then! Another one, an ?8th?! As Rev.20:5 tells us that after the resurrection/rising of all believers at the Lord?s return ?the rest of the dead don?t rise until after the thousand years?.
And He had said - ?these (not yet saved/still wild weeds/goats) will rise into aionion-kolasis/eonian-correction? Mt.25:46. So when else can that be?
I believe man has regressed not progressed. There?s good scientific minds that find no reason to disagree with the simple and straightforward ?morning and an evening, one day? and each one summarized that way.
I actually did quite a bit of study kn that whole topic. Then after a while got tired of that ?debate? as folks can get so rude (regressive not progressive, lol).
My thought is when our Father does the (btw, fiery) ReGenesis of Rev.21:1-5 (w/ 2Pet.3:12-13) will it be by trial and error? Or wll it take him thousands or millions of years?
:Peace2:
Quote from: Mickiel on April 29, 2022, 02:28:06 AM
?That's about as much as I can offer on Adam.
:Chinscratch: Actually quite a bit I see.. haha, I can relate! Right now I have 800 ?notes? (study things) written on my iphone. :laughing7:
Quote from: marie glen on May 03, 2022, 12:48:32 AM
Quote from: Mickiel on April 29, 2022, 02:28:06 AM
?That's about as much as I can offer on Adam.
:Chinscratch: Actually quite a bit I see.. haha, I can relate! Right now I have 800 ?notes? (study things) written on my iphone. :laughing7:
Share some of them with us.
Quote from: marie glen on May 03, 2022, 12:44:57 AM
Began in Medopotamia.. :thumbsup:
But I tend to think 6OOO years are set for letting things run their course.. From that so visibke option in Eden, of straying/imperfection. .. :Chinscratch: And if it had not been there, thinking would?ve had to be absent as well?
So things are running their course, then is a 7th millennium, a Sabbath. And then! Another one, an ?8th?! As Rev.20:5 tells us that after the resurrection/rising of all believers at the Lord?s return ?the rest of the dead don?t rise until after the thousand years?.
And He had said - ?these (not yet saved/still wild weeds/goats) will rise into aionion-kolasis/eonian-correction? Mt.25:46. So when else can that be?
I believe man has regressed not progressed. There?s good scientific minds that find no reason to disagree with the simple and straightforward ?morning and an evening, one day? and each one summarized that way.
I actually did quite a bit of study kn that whole topic. Then after a while got tired of that ?debate? as folks can get so rude (regressive not progressive, lol).
My thought is when our Father does the (btw, fiery) ReGenesis of Rev.21:1-5 (w/ 2Pet.3:12-13) will it be by trial and error? Or wll it take him thousands or millions of years?
:Peace2:
L
On Matt.25:46 is basically saying people are going to be punished , in an inordinate amount of time , basically for being selfish unbelievers.And those kinds of people perhaps constitutes most of created humanity. In my view it is impossible to be a Universalist and accept people being punished for long periods of time, like a thousand years. And anywhere , anybody in scripture who states something like that, I don't believe it. It does not square with God's ways as I understand them. This millennium belief is just another thing in scripture that I do not believe. And I see no where in scripture that condnemns me for not believing every little thing in the Bible that I cannot see or understand.
I believe everything in scripture that is of serious importance , and punishment for not believing I think is something that can get out of hand. Why should anyone be condemned for not believing in the millennium? Or lengthy sour punishment
. Anything that happens in scripture either God is involved and it must lead to salvation , and if not , then I have to see it explained to me. I don't have to blindly believe it. I can't explain long drawn out punishments that God supposedly has ordained , or a second era of Satan deceiving saints who have lived with God 1000 years. That exposure to him tells me something is wrong with this millennium belief. To be personally exposed to Christ and God for 1000 years , then be duped by Satan to turn against God , my goodness no.
I offer my apology to anyone this offends , but the picture this paints out , and involving God and Christ. No , I can't get to it.
Mikiel, the phrase is eonian correction - surely(?) just as we are being corrected now. Where do the images of fierce punishment come from? Not from God who is LOVE. We are very agreed on that.
We must get rid of the strange pathways of thinking in terms of an angry and vengeful god - we know who that one is.
An aion/eon of correction/straightening out veRy strongly implies no humans in the regenesis lake of fire - Rev.21:1-5, 2Pet.3:12-13 ..ALL purified by His loving Spirit/Presence before all are made new/pure/perfected. Three vivifications are listed in 1Cor.15:21-24,28. The barley harvest, wheat harvest and grape HARVEST. :banana:
Most afterlife scenarios believed are rather crazy. Either the tired punishment view or the wicked don?t worry about it, go on deciding good and evil for yourselves, hitlers, etc will be magically transformed at resurrection - what in the world would they ever learn by that? And if that were a way approved by God, why are we being corrected now? Instead of merely magically transformed?
Did you think I meant an eon in literal fire? How strange communication can be, lol :gsmile: on this side of the ages.
p.s. there are mortal survivors of apocalypse.. and thus during the millennium.. so births, generations, even deaths.. And the resurrection of all the rest of humanity not resurrected at Jesus? return, occurs ?after the thousand years? which thousand years cannot be the age of correction/education/straightening.. as those not yet ?corrected? are still in their graves.. they rise after the Sabbath millennium, and logically after the final (fiery) defeat of the adversary, also in Rev.20.
Jesus said, ?All those in the tombs/graves will hear His voice and will come forth? (from the graves/tombs) ?some in the resurrection of life.? (quote - ?this is the first (therefor not the only) resurrection? rising into what has been called THE millennium following Jesus? return.) ?And some, the rest of humanity/God?s children (rise) into the resurrection of judgment? (Jn.5:28-29) - which elsewhere, He calls aionion/eonian-kolasis ?agelasting-correction? (Mt.25:46) NoT punishment - like we believers are being corrected now.. Why wouldn?t ALL correction be the very same process for every human? - which to me seems to be of logic (root word logos). :gsmile:
Thus an ?8th? day a ?last great day? (Jn.7:37 being a glimpse and shadow of..) which an 8th day/eon/aion pretty much proves UR/CU - as logically, who would be so hard headed as to refuse to bend the knee and deny reality all that while? What patience our Father has! Letting straying run its course for 6000 years (6 days).. Why? As some may think, some sort of error occurred beyond God?s control? and foresight? :doh: :laughing7: I think of this 6000 years as the parable of the rotten apple (of apocalypse, which began at the first disobedience, unavoidably apocalypse because God is Life, and ?is perfect? - Good news! Life hAs to be perfect!) Once the apple begins decomposition (imperfection) can it change course back to perfection? He has left the decomposing apple (imperfection - hamartia - ?missing the mark?/sin) on the counter (or table? lol) for all to plainly see. Proving to all, His point. Straying/imperfection can only ever result in apocalypse (both individual and collective). Thus proving once and for ?all? Good from evil/notGood. Life from its opposite, notLife.
He repeats the msg over and over.. It?s why circumcision was done on an infants 8th day..
Interesting, this belief in two ressurections. But if the millennium is acceptable, then so is two ressurections. I do see it differently Marie. As in 2Thess.1:9-10 , he mentioned everlasting destruction, but I don't believe that is for humans, but I do see Jesus coming for all saints "In that day." And I believe all of humanity will be in that day. I can see how many believe as you seem to , I wonder why they cannot believe as I do? :laugh: Just kidding. This is how people can create this belief in a rapture , they make sperate ressurections , the saints get caught up and hosted away for 1000 years , I don't know where , but it has to be on earth in the Kingdom and I guess all of humanity are in graves until this second ressurection. Whew I just cannot see that. There are saints on earth before Christ comes who have his holy spirit that Satan cannot deceive , Matt.24:24 I don't see it possible to deceive a saint of who is a spirit being in the Kingdom of God for 1000 years. Ohh we :eek: goodness no.
Quote from: Mickiel on May 03, 2022, 06:31:45 PM
Interesting, this belief in two ressurections. But if the millennium is acceptable, then so is two ressurections. I do see it differently Marie. As in 2Thess.1:9-10 , he mentioned everlasting destruction, but I don't believe that is for humans, but I do see Jesus coming for all saints "In that day." And I believe all of humanity will be in that day. I can see how many believe as you seem to , I wonder why they cannot believe as I do? :laugh: Just kidding. This is how people can create this belief in a rapture , they make sperate ressurections , the saints get caught up and hosted away for 1000 years , I don't know where , but it has to be on earth in the Kingdom and I guess all of humanity are in graves until this second ressurection. Whew I just cannot see that. There are saints on earth before Christ comes who have his holy spirit that Satan cannot deceive , Matt.24:24 I don't see it possible to deceive a saint of who is a spirit being in the Kingdom of God for 1000 years. Ohh we :eek: goodness no.
I guess that's one of the things that bothers me , for the millennium to be true, then that means thousands of saints will betray God and Christ after living with them for 1000 years, and in Matt. 24:24 showing the elect in the flesh cannot be turned against God, "If it were possible , to fool the very elect." I think Christ here provides proof that the elect in the flesh cannot be turned away from God. My goodness, if a believer in the flesh cannot be deceived , how can you' square with that by suggesting a spirit being in the Kingdom can be deceived after being exposed to God for 1000 years?
I have to be honest , I have never seen a scripture that mentions a second ressurection. It's certain lts certainly implied, so I understand the confusion. In John 5:28-29 Jesus teaches that a time is coming when ALL that are in graves shall come forth in what he calls"The ressurection of Life". And the ressurection of damnation. We cannot accept there is a damnation ressurection and be Universalist. But then we have Rev. 20:4 where beheaded believers were killed then Jesus brings them to life and they rule 1000 years.5-9 clearly shows a thousand year period.Satan is loosed in vs.7. In vs 8 he goes to every nation on earth and deceives thousands. Who are these deceived idiots? Either they are spirit beings or fleshly humans. If they're human , then you are teaching there will be flesh in the Kingdom , which I do not accept as truth. Teaching this 1000 year period , I think needs more scripture to help me understand it. I cannot see the use of it, in my view it is a waste of time. And I just cannot see God as a waster of time. The Kingdom of God is going to suffer this violence?
I look at verses like Acts 24:15; Having a hope in God that there shall certainly be a ressurection of both the righteous and the wicked. Some may see two separate ressurections in this, I only see one for the both of them together having the same future. In John 6:39 Jesus claims that the will of the Father who sent him, that all the humans God has given him that he will not loose any of them but raise them all up at the last day. We know in John 17:2 that the Father gives Jesus all humans. I view this as one ressurection. So millennials need two ressurections for their belief to make some kind of sense. That would be a very dynamic sad event in my view, Satan again for the second time is allowed into a holy place of God, into his kingdom and to the very gates of the holy city , with deceived spirit beings, or flesh humans not yet transformed; hey, stop! All this does is open things up to a lot more confusion. Well at least it does to me.
I am very superstitious about the scripture saying Satan is bound for one thousand years and then loosed on a mission of mystery by God to deceive the residents of heaven , the number of people deceived is " As the sands of the seas," which is the biblical way of saying billions of people. Rev.20:8 there are billions of sand grain in the sea. So this belief has to supply Satan with billions of people who came from where? This means they were already ressurected and placed in the Kingdom . In Rev. 20:10 the devil and the false prophet were dealt with; well now the false prophet, so religion was in on all this ?
Even more mystery in Rev.19: 19 there is a war between Christ and his angels , and the armies of earth. Satan and the false prophet is among them , leading them . Then Satan is captured along with the false prophet and thrown into the lake of fire.. the armies are killed. Satan is then taken from the fire and thrown into a great pit and bound. He then is loosed after 1000 years , he immediately deceives billions of saints I suppose , spirit believers in heaven, or humanoids , I don't know, it's weird to me.Now another war. Satan and all the humanoids or decieved saints are slaughtered except Satan I guess, he is put back into the lake of 🔥 fire. The there is a great ressurection and all are saved ; I guess this is how it goes?
Yes I certainly do not believe in two ressurections , or two "Days of the Lord", why? Well because it's not in scripture. I am not a believer that sees some kind of rapture in scripture neither. The Bible very plainly mentions "The first ressurection", I have seen that in scripture , but I have never seen any mention of a second ressurection. Don't you think if the Bible has no secrets or signals or implications of there being a first ressurection , why would it not even once mention a second ressurection? I mean if there were two, it would mention two , you know. No hidden meanings or vague implications. Matthew 24th chapter helps , 29th verse says immediately after the tribulation Jesus shall come in great glory , his elect gathered from all over the world, verse 34 states that generation of humans on earth shall not pass until all these things be for filled . No other tribulations , no more wars with Satan, and no more ressurections. This makes sense to me , but I guess it does not to others.
I think one reason many believe in a second ressurection, is because of the scripture mentioning a second death. So this use of "A second" in scripture we tend to overlap them. Even the second death is not humans dying , as I learned from Gary Amirault years ago, the second death is the death of the first death. This second death being tossed into the lake of fire is either highly symbolic , or it could be some kind of angelic being designed to be death itself, which I tend to favor, but I really don't know; and it may sound cold, but I don't care either.
We build today on what we built yesterday. That principle can be applied to scriptures. We cannot advance in knowledge of God by building on deceptive work. Examine Jesus in John 6:39 ",This is the Father's will, that All he has given him he should raise the up " AT" the last day." We know from John 17:2 that the Father gave him ALL of humanity. We all will be AT the last day. No other place or day.
.
.
As I have stated that the belief in two ressurections opens up all kinds of confusion. Consider this: John 11:25-26 , " Again Jesus, I am the ressurection and the life, he that believeth in me , though he were dead , yet shall he live." " And whoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Do you believe this, Jesus asked. Listen if you look closer at this, when he taught in vs 25 though he were dead , yet shall he live again is the first ressurection , then Jesus teaches that these ressurected shall never die, in vs 26. Obviously Jesus did not teach that those humans that are ressurected will have to die yet again. But this two ressurections belief seriously contradicts Jesus. If you accept two ressurections , then there will be billions of resurrected humans who have to die again and Jesus teaching must be removed from the Bible. What billions you may ask? Well Rev. 20:8, Gog and Magog , attacks the holy city IN the Kingdom of God, 1000 years INTO the Kingdom of God, Satan decieves enough kingdom residents , the Bible describes them as being numbered as the sands of the sea, obviously billions, they are slaughtered and killed, that means they died a second time in direct violation of Jesus teaching that they shall never die again. Those billions can only be true if there are two ressurections and Jesus needs to be informed of this glaring insult of his prophecy
Quote from: Mickiel on May 05, 2022, 07:15:12 PM
As I have stated that the belief in two ressurections opens up all kinds of confusion. Consider this: John 11:25-26 , " Again Jesus, I am the ressurection and the life, he that believeth in me , though he were dead , yet shall he live." " And whoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Do you believe this, Jesus asked. Listen if you look closer at this, when he taught in vs 25 though he were dead , yet shall he live again is the first ressurection , then Jesus teaches that these ressurected shall never die, in vs 26. Obviously Jesus did not teach that those humans that are ressurected will have to die yet again. But this two ressurections belief seriously contradicts Jesus. If you accept two ressurections , then there will be billions of resurrected humans who have to die again and Jesus teaching must be removed from the Bible. What billions you may ask? Well Rev. 20:8, Gog and Magog , attacks the holy city IN the Kingdom of God, 1000 years INTO the Kingdom of God, Satan decieves enough kingdom residents , the Bible describes them as being numbered as the sands of the sea, obviously billions, they are slaughtered and killed, that means they died a second time in direct violation of Jesus teaching that they shall never die again. Those billions can only be true if there are two ressurections and Jesus needs to be informed of this glaring insult of his prophecy
You may ask how did I miss this, if you now see it for the first time? Well it's being revealed to you by God's Spirit , the same way your other beliefs were. The second death does not mean we have to die twice. The second death , is death itself and the grave - which symbolize death, will be eliminated in Rev.20:14 But if the millennium is true, it then opens up Rev.20:8 to be true, Needs 20:8 to be truth. Which will mean Paul's teaching in 1Corinth.15:50 is false that no flesh will be in the Kingdom of God. And you have to teach that those billions that Satan deceives in God's kingdom were human flesh, unless you dare teach that they were spirit beings and residents now being deceived and killed in heaven. Oh Jesus help us to see and believe what is the truth.
Of interest is the biblical use of the word ressurection. The term in many versions is used around 41 times . The phrase "First ressurection" , is used only twice , in Rev.20: 5-6. The phrase 'Second ressurection " is never used in scripture. So again the more times phraseology is used in scripture , the more verses there are on the same subject or topic , then I think the more we can pull doctrines from it. Does that make sense? Do you think it makes sense to formulate a doctrine from one verse in the Bible? If you make a decision to formulate doctrine from one biblical verse, whew you'd better be right. Is it possible , I doubt it but I am willing to look at it if you are willing to share it. This is not a challenge, rather it's a chance to learn.
It's different if you're studying names or characters listed in the Bible , it's all kinds of people out there offering their own study of it, the lists can vary from hundreds to almost 3000. A professor named Lawrence Mykytiuk has an interesting study where he claims 53 biblical characters can be verified.
I have a request for anyone here who could explain the belief in a second resurrection , or if you believe it can you show me why. I hold no interest in changing anyone's mind or arguing the topic.
Blow your trumpet Lord and awake those of us who are sleep. We need that ressurection for sure. The ressurection of motivation and inspiration , along with a thrist for righteousness. A ressurection of righteousness. People create doctrines of a Trinity , when it is never mentioned in scripture. They feel it's religious and righteous for a mother to kill her unborn child , and mask it behind a woman rights to decide death. Here on mother's day , the nation is reeling over a court ruling that would stop the killing. How any believer could stand for abortion , is again the wiles of Satan. Trying to make it biblical and moral to murder an unborn child. There is no biblical support for that. The example In scripture is Mary being impregnated against all those righteous people who would have killed her if they knew. She did not abort our Savior. They would have cut her head off and rip Jesus out of her womb and split Jesus unborn body into.
There is a doctrine called the second ressurection , which again is no where found in scripture. I call it "Magical doctrines." like pulling a rabbit out of a hat , things are being pulled out of the Bible that are not really in there. Deception is being wrong but not being conscious of being wrong.
Quote from: Mickiel on May 06, 2022, 11:10:40 PM
I have a request for anyone here who could explain the belief in a second resurrection , or if you believe it can you show me why. I hold no interest in changing anyone's mind or arguing the topic.
I guess no one here believes in the second ressurection or cares to show it to me in scripture.