The Fall of Man

[thinktank]

despise the weak? 

Doesn't Goliath despise the weak, because he's a mighty warrior giant?

[Nathan]

If I were to venture a guess to where Claypot was going, I'd say  that he's suggesting because Goliath represents the carnal man, that not only should he lose his head, but we should kill the whole carnal man all together???  But I'll let Claypot clarify.

[claypot]

You did a fine job Nathan saying what I believe but I'm still confused about what tt is trying to say. Go figure, I think I may understand a bit of what God is saying yet I can't figure out tt??!!

cp

[Nathan]

LOL . . .sometimes it's hard for us to write into words the same thoughts going through our minds.  I know a lady in our church that I struggle with in understanding because she "thinks" a sentence and only says the back half . . .so I'm constantly trying to catch up to what the first half was so that the back half will make sense.   In the mean time, she stands their blinking at me waiting for an answer.  Some times, I'm tempted to just talk in tongues and walk away.

[Quaesitor]

Some times, I'm tempted to just talk in tongues and walk away.

:laughing7:

[Cardinal]

 :laughing7: You never know, she might understand that, lol....

[thinktank]

You did a fine job Nathan saying what I believe but I'm still confused about what tt is trying to say. Go figure, I think I may understand a bit of what God is saying yet I can't figure out tt??!!

cp

Do you mean concerning Goliath or my posts in general?

But to clarify here's what you originally said

Goliath's head and Goliath Himself in my way of thinking.

cp

So my question was, do you mean in the sense that you believe you have struggling tendencies similar to Goliath, who despised David the smaller man , i.e are you saying to us what your weaknesses are in your Christian walk? I think we all have weaknesses in certain areas of our lives and I thought maybe you were confessing yours.
I'm not having a go at you, I thought that Goliath is a perfect illustration of someone who despises the weak and/ carnal mentality that tends to look upon outward appearances more than the heart. I think we all have a bit of Goliath in us in that respect.

[claypot]

TT, I'm hearin ya loud and clear now. I see much of the 'Goliath' in me so I agree with you.

I think my coming in the middle of this discussion just caused me a bit of confusion in one of your posts but all is well now.

By the way, and I don't say this in a prideful way, but I see some of the 'David' in me too. I believe these 2 dwell in all people to some degree. We are under God's chisel.

cp

[micah7:9]

Well after all that, I will stay with a Truth, man in no way fell.   For should man have fallen that would mean that God made a mistake, an err in His calculatons, and I believe that to be absurd.
The fall of man is a true injustice to the Word of God. For man to "fall" would have to mean that God, Elohiem did not have it together.
The God I believe in does not make mistakes, God dont make junk.  And man never fell from nothing. Does anyone believe in the "PERFECT WILL OF GOD? Well, if you do then you will know that man never fell from the garden. Now,  man may have fallen in Isa.14

[WhiteWings]

The God I believe in does not make mistakes, God dont make junk. 
...
Well, if you do then you will know that man never fell from the garden.

But still Adam and Eve sinned. They got kicked out. Maybe that can be seen as a lower rank = fallen in rank?
Anyway God that doesn't make junk made Adam and Eve that got tricked by the serpent.
Jesus wouldn't have be tricked by a 1000 serpents.
For me that simply means we are left with 2 choices:
a] God created junk because Adam and Eve that couldn't resist a tempting serpent
b] Or this seemingly flaw has a reason in Father's plan. So that 'fall' is working out perfectly according to plan.

[WhiteWings]

From this .pdf: http://www.thedivinecouncil.com/nachashnotes.pdf

The NOUN spelled nachash in Hebrew can mean: snake / serpent or one who practices of divination. The adjective means "bright, brazen"
That is, Eve was not talking to a snake. She was speaking to an bright, shining upright being who was serpentine in appearance, and who was trying to bewitch her with lies. She was in the presence of one of the sons of God, beings who had free will, who were more powerful than mere angels, whom humanity was created "a little lower" (Psalm 8:4-5; the phrase usually translated as "a little lower than the angels" is actually "a little lower than the elohim in the Hebrew text).3 She was speaking to a member of the divine council who did not share Yahweh's enthusiasm for his new creation, humankind, to whom Yahweh had just given rule over
the planet (Gen 1:26-27). These mere humans were—as the "lesser elohim" had been previously—created as Yahweh's image ("let US"... "OUR" in Gen 1:26-27),

What about the curse of the "serpent"?
....
My view of the curse in simple terms is that, as the nachash desired to vaunt himself above all created things on earth (and above the other created elohim, the "stars of God" – cf. Isa. 14:12-15; Job 38:7-10), and above the apex of that creation, humanity, so God turns the tables on him. He will now be placed under humanity's authority, who also governs the animals. He's going to be put on the bottom of the barrel of created things, so to speak.
Read the whole article...

[micah7:9]

Serpent  H5172
נחשׁ
nâchash
naw-khash'
A primitive root; properly to hiss, that is, whisper a (magic) spell; generally to prognosticate: -  X certainly, divine, enchanter, (use) X enchantment, learn by experience, X indeed, diligently observe.

[micah7:9]

The God I believe in does not make mistakes, God dont make junk. 
...
Well, if you do then you will know that man never fell from the garden.

But still Adam and Eve sinned. They got kicked out. Maybe that can be seen as a lower rank = fallen in rank?
Anyway God that doesn't make junk made Adam and Eve that got tricked by the serpent.
Jesus wouldn't have be tricked by a 1000 serpents.
For me that simply means we are left with 2 choices:
a] God created junk because Adam and Eve that couldn't resist a tempting serpent
b] Or this seemingly flaw has a reason in Father's plan. So that 'fall' is working out perfectly according to plan.

I believe they were sent away rather than "kicked out."C]..there was no fall...  it all worked out as planned. God does not make mistakes, He is God.

[WhiteWings]

Serpent  H5172
נחשׁ
nâchash
naw-khash'
A primitive root; properly to hiss, that is, whisper a (magic) spell; generally to prognosticate: -  X certainly, divine, enchanter, (use) X enchantment, learn by experience, X indeed, diligently observe.

What do you mean by that quote from Strong?

[Molly]

From this .pdf: http://www.thedivinecouncil.com/nachashnotes.pdf

The NOUN spelled nachash in Hebrew can mean: snake / serpent or one who practices of divination. The adjective means "bright, brazen"
That is, Eve was not talking to a snake. She was speaking to an bright, shining upright being who was serpentine in appearance, and who was trying to bewitch her with lies. She was in the presence of one of the sons of God, beings who had free will, who were more powerful than mere angels, whom humanity was created "a little lower" (Psalm 8:4-5; the phrase usually translated as "a little lower than the angels" is actually "a little lower than the elohim in the Hebrew text).3 She was speaking to a member of the divine council who did not share Yahweh's enthusiasm for his new creation, humankind, to whom Yahweh had just given rule over
the planet (Gen 1:26-27). These mere humans were—as the "lesser elohim" had been previously—created as Yahweh's image ("let US"... "OUR" in Gen 1:26-27),

What about the curse of the "serpent"?
....
My view of the curse in simple terms is that, as the nachash desired to vaunt himself above all created things on earth (and above the other created elohim, the "stars of God" – cf. Isa. 14:12-15; Job 38:7-10), and above the apex of that creation, humanity, so God turns the tables on him. He will now be placed under humanity's authority, who also governs the animals. He's going to be put on the bottom of the barrel of created things, so to speak.
Read the whole article...

I find this all so amazing.  It makes so much sense to me.  Eve was talking to a 'god'  --one of the elohiym, who was rebelling against YHWH and trying to destroy YHWH's new creation--Man.

Even though so many malign Adam, he has long been my hero.  He didn't fall, he jumped!   The only other choice was to throw Eve under the bus, and leave her to die on her own in the barren wilderness of the serpent.

Adam... who is the figure of him that was to come.

--Rom 5:14


...but love covereth all sins.

--Prov 10:12


It also makes sense of many other things, as well--why the Hebrews were always 'whoring' after false gods [the rebellious elohiym], why Joshua was ordered to kill every man, woman, and child [the nephilim offspring, seed of the nachash], even the stories of the Greeks and the Romans which concern evil gods always coming against humanity and even creating offspring with them.

There's more...

PS Can you give me the link to where you found this pdf file?

Oh! nevermind--I see it's www.thedivinecouncil.com

[WhiteWings]

Even though so many malign Adam, he has long been my hero.  He didn't fall, he jumped!   The only other choice was to throw Eve under the bus

I think Adam sacrificed himself because of his love for Eve...

and leave her to die on her own in the barren wilderness of the serpent

^KJVGen 4:15  And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.

It also is a possible explanation of who would possibly kill Cain in an world without people besides his little family he left.

[Cardinal]

 :cloud9: I haven't read the article yet, so I'm just throwing a couple things out there that I'm "toying" with. He said in another place, have I not said ye were gods (elohim) and ye die like men......He gave me revelation on that one day, that the issue was we were dying like men, which He was displeased with. How does a god die? No greater love has any man than.....

I don't know where it is now, I found it in the Hebrew 2 weeks ago, but there is a principle in there about "something" having not a dual nature per se, but having the capability to be used for either.

I'm now wondering if this somehow ties in with the elohim part of us, as being the "fallen angel" if it's expressing that nature, or being as Adam was, and dying like a god/elohim.

So now wondering if that elohim nature has capacity to be both, like that Hebrew word and principle I found, and crazy as it seems, were they one and the same in the garden??? I know I'm not expressing this clearly, but it's the best I can at the moment. There's SOMETHING there......Blessings....

[Quaesitor]

Card:

I think Benny Hynn's brother teaches about that, he's been labeled a fool but he said he received a revelation about mankind being gods.

Anyway, my father went to the seminary, not I and I did not really understand what my father said about it (I'm not sure he understood any of it either  :laughing7:)

Interesting stuff about the council of God, somewhat mystic though.

"Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when he appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is."
1 John 3:2-3

[Cardinal]

 :cloud9: Benny Hinn's brother is a Kingdom teacher, knows about UR. Benny listens to his tapes, too (got this from someone close to him).

I knew we were elohim, I just have not had any personal revelation on what that means exactly, and the New Agers have taken it and run with it, and corrupted it. Blessings...

[jabcat]

Things to consider in the discussion;

Elohim (אֱלהִים) is a plural formation of eloah, an expanded form of the Northwest Semitic noun il (אֱל, ʾēl [1]). It is the usual word for "God" in the Hebrew Bible, referring both to pagan deities and to the God of Israel, usually with a singular meaning despite its plural form, but is also used as a true plural with the meanings "spirits, angels, demons," and the like.[2] The singular forms eloah (אלוה) and el (אֱל) are used as proper names or as generics, in which case they are interchangeable with elohim.[3] Gods can be referred to collectively as bene elim, bene elyon, or bene elohim.[4]
...and Elohim created Adam.

For we know that when this earthly tent we live in is taken down (that is, when we die and leave this earthly body), we will have a house in heaven, an eternal body made for us by God himself and not by human hands.  II Cor. 5:1

For we will put on heavenly bodies; we will not be spirits without bodies.  II Cor. 5:3

Yes, we are fully confident, and we would rather be away from these earthly bodies, for then we will be at home with the Lord.  II Cor. 5:8

47 Adam, the first man, was made from the dust of the earth, while Christ, the second man, came from heaven. 48 Earthly people are like the earthly man, and heavenly people are like the heavenly man. 49 Just as we are now like the earthly man, we will someday be like the heavenly man.  I Cor. 15

[WhiteWings]

Elohim (אֱלהִים) is a plural formation of eloah,

It's not plural
It is plural (possibly admitted by writer of the first article.

1. The word EL means God and it is the first part of the word Elohim.
2. The word Eloah, also means God and it is the first part of the word Elohim. Eloah in Hebrew is a three letter root which most Hebrew words contain.
 
Here we already have two singular forms of the word God inside the plural word Elohim. Yet, Mr. Heiser has never mentioned these singular forms inside the plural word. He still insists Elohim is singular knowing well that is already contains two singular words for God.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rense.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Michael Heiser Is Incorrect With His
Analysis Of Elohim & Nephilim

Reply From Zechariah Sitchin's Webmaster

From Erik Parker - Los Angeles
Webmaster for Zecharia Sitchin

via Ted Susu-Mago
smago@ashlandhome.net
8-19-2

Mr. Heiser claims that the word Elohim in Hebrew, meaning "gods" is not a plural word. His main proof is that it says in Hebrew "The Elohim Said" in a singular form not a plural form. This would indicate that the word Elohim was a name and not meaning plural gods. Of course this also could mean that the scribes of the Bible kept it in a singular form to show the monotheistic viewpoint. There are many uses of the plural term of the word Elohim in the Bible. I have listed several plural forms below and it is in fact very hard to find any singular uses of the word.
 
The word Elohim is definitely plural and does indeed mean "gods" and it actually contains two forms of the singular word for God inside of itself.
 
1. The word EL means God and it is the first part of the word Elohim.
2. The word Eloah, also means God and it is the first part of the word Elohim. Eloah in Hebrew is a three letter root which most Hebrew words contain.
 
Here we already have two singular forms of the word God inside the plural word Elohim. Yet, Mr. Heiser has never mentioned these singular forms inside the plural word. He still insists Elohim is singular knowing well that is already contains two singular words for God.
 
The Universal Creator God of the Bible known as Yahweh speaks and is quoted within the Bible. When he spoke to the ancient Hebrews while giving them the 10 commandments, he indeed used the plural word of Elohim meaning gods.
 
3. And God said "You shall not recognize the gods of others in my presence" also translated as "You shall not have other gods in my presence," (Exodus 20:3). Here Yahweh uses the term Elohim to refer to all other gods (plural) that Israel shall not worship or acknowledge. This also means that there were other false gods and they were forbidden to be acknowledged in Yahweh's presence.
 
Mr. Heiser is also incorrect when he refers to the translation of the Nephilim. The Nephilim mentioned in Chapter 6 of Genesis is spoken about right before the destruction of the flood and is implied they are the reason for the flood. It says that "the Nephilim were on the Earth in those days and also afterwards when the Children of the Gods saw the daughters of the Adam (humans) and took them as wives which ever they pleased."
 
4. The word children is used as plural not singular child, and the Elohim are mentioned again in plural as "The Gods" In Hebrew the "hey" letter put in front of the word Elohim means "The", if the letter was left out it would mean "Children of Elohim" meaning Elohim as a name. But with the letter there in front it clearly means "Children of the Gods".
 
Nephilim has the root from the Hebrew word for falling down or to fall, which yields the translations the "fallen ones" and in the context of the Bible they are mentioned as bad characters that have something to do with the Flood disaster.
 
5. Nephilim used to be translated as Giants for many hundreds of years and it comes from a 12th Century commentary known as Rashi that said the Nephilim were giants. But what nobody realized until Sitchin was that the word in Hebrew meaning giants is Anak, or Anakim for plural which is the same root and sounding as Anunnaki in Sumerian. So the Hebrew word for Giant was picked up from a memory of the word used thousands of years before, by the lineage of Abraham to describe their gods which are usually depicted as larger humanoids than humans. And the translation of the word Annunaki means "those who from Heaven to Earth came," and Sitchin's use of the word Nephilim means "Those that have fallen down from above." So Anunnaki has the same sound as the word for Giant in Hebrew and the meaning is the same as the word Nephilim in Hebrew.
 
6. Before the burning bush Moses came to the mountain of the Gods. It says in Hebrew once again "He arrived at the Mountain of the Gods." The Hebrew letter "hey" in front of the word Elohim means "The" as opposed to saying "Elohim mountain" meaning the name of the mountain, it says "the Mountain of the Gods." (Exodus 3:1)
 
 
Erik Parker
Los Angeles
Webmaster for Zecharia Sitchin
 
 
Response From Michael Heiser is here:
 
http://www.facadenovel.com/SitchinsDisciple.htm
 
 
 
Comment
 
From Erik P.
erik70@pacbell.net
8-29-2
 
Behold! Michael S. Heiser Does Admit There Are Mistranslations in the Bible and the Word Elohim Can Be Used as a Plural.
 
Introduction
 
For those of you who have followed the debate on the internet you may know about the personal attacks I have withstood from Michael S. Heiser, in my attempt to honestly debate him regarding the writings and thesis of Zecharia Sitchin. I always choose my words carefully and have never used the word "wrong" when applying it to Mr. Heiser and I have never personally insulted him or his position. The word "wrong" has emotional charge behind it so I try to use "correct/incorrect" to apply to details or facts. I prefer to debate the evidence and the issues and not have a discussion become personal. The purpose, for me, is to increase my understanding of a subject and clarify misunderstandings. My goal is always to add to the body of knowledge and understanding of a complex issue for the readers and myself.
 
As you will see, Mr. Heiser's goal is not to add knowledge and understanding to these issues. His goal, from the beginning, when he came on the web page and speaking scene, was to tear down the work of an established author. He had no name recognition to stand on so he used Sitchin's good name to get attention for himself so he could sell his own book, appear on the radio and get speaking engagements. Mr. Heiser does not think he is a debunker and I will not declare that he is. My purpose is, for the reader, to point out that his tactics and behavioral patterns fit the mold and style of a debunker which includes using personal attacks and ridicule. You can make the decision on your own once you see both sides of the issue. Hopefully, you will reach your own conclusions about his motives.
 
Debunker trick #1, when having no reputation of your own, attempt to destroy the work of an established individual, in the process creating a name for yourself. In fact, the method involves using the name of the person you are attempting to destroy as the springboard for yourself. His first web page that I read was full of insults and uncalled for statements. You would think that a man who claims he has a respected background and career would not want to use someone else's name for his own gain. Wouldn't he want to be recognized for his own individual achievements? This maneuver is a "shifter" strategy made famous in the book, "Atlas Shrugged," by Ayn Rand. This procedure is used to take away from someone the thing you want the most for yourself, thereby "shifting" it away from them and to you. In this case, Heiser wants to take away Sitchin's fame and respect as an author, researcher and speaker.
 
Even at this point, he still wants to debate Sitchin. For what purpose? If it were to add to everyone's knowledge and understanding there would be no need for personal attacks against Sitchin or me. Sitchin does not have a computer, does not browse the Internet and, therefore, has never seen any of Heiser's material nor heard him speak. Why would he agree to go on the radio and be attacked? Why would Sitchin help Heiser increase his name recognition? Sitchin is just too busy writing new books and arranging seminars. You can tell from Heiser's writing style that he is very confrontational -- he uses debunker tactics. His purpose for wanting to debate Sitchin is to employ the attack and ridicule process. This is completely inconsistent with a person that wants to raise up all of society by their knowledge. I don't think there will be a debate with Sitchin, but I still have a few words to say....
 
Full article at
http://erikparker.com/articles/august02.htm

[Molly]

nooo stay away from Zachariah Sitchin.  He is a phoney, a fraud.  He makes stuff up.  He lies.  


www.sitchiniswrong.com  if you must...



From E-Sword

H430
אלהים
'ĕlôhıym
el-o-heem'
Plural of H433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative: - angels, X exceeding, God (gods) (-dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X mighty.

[WhiteWings]

nooo stay away from Zachariah Sitchin.  He is a phoney, a fraud.  He makes stuff up.  He lies.  


www.sitchiniswrong.com  if you must...

First read what I posted Molly.... I posted exactly that link... :laughing7:

From E-Sword

H430
אלהים
'ĕlôhıym
el-o-heem'
Plural of H433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative: - angels, X exceeding, God (gods) (-dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X mighty.

Michael S. Heiser doesn't agree with that. I can be both singular and plural.

[Molly]

Michael S. Heiser doesn't agree with that. I can be both singular and plural.

Not sure what you mean.  What does Mike Heiser say about it?

My eyes started to bleed when I read Sitchin's name and I could read no more. :laughing7:

[WhiteWings]

All 2601 verses with plural Elohim
Plural

More info and vids here