Can you explain?

[rosered]

Well, the man is your spirit, the woman is your mind . . .the woman is to remain silent so the spirit can receive the Word of Truth and then, as the mind is in submission to the spirit . . .the original order of our Genesis, Truth can then be birthed into our understanding . . .my mind is my womb

simply put bro...

women are likened to the Church and Man to Christ..Adam first , theN Eve.....NOT CALLED TO USURP THE AUTHORITY OF THE man....

The woman (representative of the church) must give BIRTH, by which a "man" is born into the world, SAVED bY CHILDBEARING...



But In Christ there is No male or Female. we are all equal......THIS ALL SPEAKS VERY MUCH AFTER THE SPIRITUAL.

Later bro

  GOOD ONE TAFF !
   I so agree its the SPIRIT OF GOD     speaking  through the  new/old wineskins /bags vessels etc .  as Paul told us  in the   other posts on page 8 lol ..
  you guys are so fast .   whew! 
peace rr

[Taffy]

GOOD ONE TAFF !
   I so agree its the SPIRIT OF GOD     speaking  through the  new/old wineskins /bags vessels etc .  as Paul told us  in the   other posts on page 8 lol ..
  you guys are so fast .   whew! 
peace rr

hey sis..so pleased to hear you in good spirits..and even more so to see back posting a little :HeartThrob:

[rosered]

GOOD ONE TAFF !
   I so agree its the SPIRIT OF GOD     speaking  through the  new/old wineskins /bags vessels etc .  as Paul told us  in the   other posts on page 8 lol ..
  you guys are so fast .   whew! 
peace rr

hey sis..so pleased to hear you in good spirits..and even more so to see back posting a little :HeartThrob:

  here is  something along them lines again   for page 9 lol ... hee hee
1Cr 6:9, 10 11

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God?

Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God

.And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified/set apart, but ye are justified/ judged  in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

I so Love His Spirit /WORD it is truth   .  thanks matey   :girlheart:
   peace rr

[Roy Monis]

Mat 19:19  Honor thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.


As long as a world of evil "out there" is your focus and perception; it continues to be a reflection of your "inner man" you have not yet embraced and loved.     

The "world out there" is "in you".  Learn to love yourself, and the world changes. 

Hi! Laren

I used to love myself, brother, till I realized how truly rotten I was, a total lack of love for others, only selfishness and worldly greed. Now I don't love myself anymore, I love Him who is within me above life itself. So your advice is wrong, to love yourself is to love the world because that is what the human self's desire is, carnal. I have changed, I love you now, and him, and her, I love my neighbour more than myself, but I love God most of all. The first will be last, that is the order for me now. In the beginning self was first and God last, neighbour inbetween. Now it's God first, neighbour (you brother) and myself last.

Peace!

RoyUK(http://dl4.glitter-graphics.net/pub/1176/1176424t4nufen6go.gif) 

[Nathan]

Isn't it a bit difficult to love others if you can't even love yourself?  It's got nothing to do with loving worldly things, it's simply applying the same grace to your own shortcomings as God does.  If his image is in you, and if you're to see others as he sees them, being blind to the failures of sin and others is what it's all about.

If I love others and can't stand myself . . .it that not hypocracy?

What is your description of false humility?

[laren]

delete

[WhiteWings]

Roy,

Do you agree Jesus loved many that surrounded Him?
They where as rotten as you are.
Was Jesus wrong in loving them?
So if Jesus loves it, its likely ok to love it...

[Roy Monis]

Hi! Taffy

Your lovely quote, I just love it, brother, "I am declaring my total belief in the first number 1. The only Begotten Son of God. All I ask is which of the two is your choice? Only then can we continue or we'd be at cross purposes and it will just lead to confusion." fellow Britt. At last we're on the same wavelength, now we've removed the sand foundation and replaced it with the Rock let us build on it, Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour. Amen.

Peace! Should we put this in for Willie's sake? 
(http://dl9.glitter-graphics.net/pub/786/786729g5n5q7a7lf.gif)
Roy

John 17:5 And, now, glorify Me thou, Father! with Thyself, with the glory which I had, before the world's existence, with Thee


Jhn 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared [him].

compare this now with the meaning of Elohim, a small excerpt shared by sister onanother forum while discussing Honour THY Father and Mother( with  promise)


Eloah or Eloh is the feminine singular part of Elohim

the "im" is the masculine plural in Hebrew

so Eloh + im can point to the male and female attributes within God...

this, of course, is already known but I thought it was cool that it was contained in the word Elohim and this could be why it is seemingly plural....

...God IS mother AND father...

it is also interesting to note that until Moses asked Elohim his name (Exo 3:13) God was commonly referred to as El Shaddai...

and some scholars have linked "shaddai" to "breasts"....this would make sense then that for the initial period of human history God would have been known by his more female/mothering/nuturing characteristics...just as when babies are first born the mother is the primary caregiver and provides the most essential mother's milk...

by the God of your father who will help you, by the Almighty (shaddai) who will bless you with blessings of heaven above, blessings of the deep that crouches beneath, blessings of the breasts (shad) and of the womb.
Genesis 49:25


just to add Roy

Sgs 4:5 Thy two breasts [are] like two young roes that are twins, which feed among the lilies.


Job 21:24 His breasts are full of milk, and his bones are moistened with marrow


PS.

Willie H wont be around for a season, hes under going surgery within the next couple of weeks

Thanks Taffy

That was just great. I knew Elohim was male/female or giving birth wouldn't be too practical, but of course with God all is possible, I got that from a Hebrew translation of the word. But you opened my eyes with your reference to Songs of S, no not SOS, and Job. I'll have to give them both a good look over. That never entered my dull head to be honest, but it's brilliant. Twins could account for the exact image in the Scriptures.

Sorry to hear about Willie, what's that lovely guy been up to? I've only just met him and am beginning to miss him. Strange old world this, give him my love and wish for a speedy recovery if you're in touch.

Thanks again.(http://dl2.glitter-graphics.net/pub/311/311492icz767qx0t.jpg)

Love to self and the better half.

Peace!

Roy

[Molly]

Isn't it a bit difficult to love others if you can't even love yourself?  It's got nothing to do with loving worldly things, it's simply applying the same grace to your own shortcomings as God does.  If his image is in you, and if you're to see others as he sees them, being blind to the failures of sin and others is what it's all about.

If I love others and can't stand myself . . .it that not hypocracy?

What is your description of false humility?

I think we all start out loving ourselves--it's the carnal nature of man--flesh doesn't want to die--flesh loves itself.

Self love is normally called self interest.  The question is will people go against their own self interest to save another? Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. (Jn 15:13)

I loved myself first until I found someone who so eclipsed me that He became my first love...

[Nathan]

Maybe our definition of loving is what is messing this up.

How about . . .can we "accept" ourselves for who we are?  Why would you hate what God created?  If I see only darkness in myself . .then how can I reflect light into others?  How can I "be" light to others?  "It's not I, but Christ in me . . ."  Yeah, I get that, but it involves "you". 

I think if God went so far as to release his son into this earth to bring me life . . . I must be pretty special. 

Without Christ . . .I am nothing . . .

Are you then saying you are without Christ?  You are far from nothing, you are kings and priests, God delights in you.  He's loved you before you even were aware of him.  Forget loving the world . . .you are not the world.  You are a spirit, you are not flesh.  You're flesh is simply a temporary dwelling place . . . your identity is Christ . .to love yourself . .is to love Christ.

The Bible says to love your neighbor as yourself . . . again . . .how can you love someone else if you first don't love yourself.  Who told you, that you were naked?  You've not been listening to the voice of Truth.  Truth says you are righteous.  Why would you not love righteousness?  I do love me.  I'm finding a few more aches as the days go by, but I figure if God loves me, then there must be "some" worth there.

I'm again surprised.  God is love . . .love is God.  God is in me, love is in me.  Love loves me .  .I love me.

[Molly]

Yes, Nathan--I agree--but first, like Adam and Eve,  we must see ourselves as naked, before we can see Him, the one who would cloth us in righteousness.

[laren]

Love your enemies.

How, do yu love your enemies if there is only evil in him?  Is there Christ in the enemy to love??

So how do you love your enemies, if Christ isn't in them??

or is the mystery revealed, Christ is in all of us?  

Many just don't see it when there perceptions are on "the good branch", or "bad branch" of the tree where no life is revealed.  

Know no man after the flesh??  why and how??

[Molly]

The mystery has been revealed to the Gentiles, but even if you don't know that, you know the simple command which can be acted on in obedience by the smallest child--

Love your enemies.

Love is first and foremost--an action.

[Molly]

Let me put this another way--

If the 200 million Christians of the most powerful country on the planet instructed their elected officials to follow these directives of their God--Love your enemies, Love your neighbor as yourself--

How would the world change overnight?'

[CHB]

I will agree, there is a created Christ . . .it's one that my head has formulated.  And there is a born of God Christ . .it's one that my heart has imulated.  Now, which one we choose to follow is up to us.

I choose both because they are one and the same.

(Col. 1:15) "Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature".

If Christ is the firstborn of every creature that means he was created.

(Col 1:18) And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning

Christ was the beginning of the creation.

(Rev. 3:14) These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God.

CHB

Hi! CHB

You have quoted incorrectly, brother. Your quote: (Col. 1:15) "Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature".

Where does it say that, I don't see it in any of the three Bibles I can afford, the Interlinear Hebrew/English/Greek, the KJV or the NASV. The correct translation is: "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation." (1Col.1:15). Now look up the meaning of firstborn in the centre column and it will take you to 2Cor.4:4 which tells you that the firstborn is the Image of the glory of Christ not the first created image of the creature.

Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif)

Roy  UK

Hi Roy,

In my KJV it is worded exactly like I said it was. In the YLT it says "firstborn of all creation".

I noticed you didn't say anything about the other verses I gave.

If Christ was the beginning and he said he was, then He had to have been the first thing that was created.
The "beginning" is the first person or thing in a series.

CHB

[Taffy]

Let me put this another way--

If the 200 million Christians of the most powerful country on the planet instructed their elected officials to follow these directives of their God--Love your enemies, Love your neighbor as yourself--

or Molly ,,,IF my AUNTIE had a set of genitals, she be me Uncle..... :laughing7:

sorry couldnt resist :icon_flower:

[Molly]

well, I can hope--because that's what it's going to take.

What is it about 'Love your enemies' you don't understand, Christians?

Is that a difficult sentence?  Are you all braindead?

This is the danger of the antichrist who leads the sheep astray, to scatter and devour them.

[WhiteWings]

Let me put this another way--

If the 200 million Christians of the most powerful country on the planet instructed their elected officials to follow these directives of their God--Love your enemies, Love your neighbor as yourself--

How would the world change overnight?'

Surely the world would change. The USA would be a 3rd world country in a very short time.
Just look what and who supports your economy.
Yes it's very sad. But I fear it's even more true.

[Roy Monis]

Isn't it a bit difficult to love others if you can't even love yourself?  It's got nothing to do with loving worldly things, it's simply applying the same grace to your own shortcomings as God does.  If his image is in you, and if you're to see others as he sees them, being blind to the failures of sin and others is what it's all about.

If I love others and can't stand myself . . .it that not hypocracy?

What is your description of false humility?

Hi! Brother Nathan

I didn't say I hated myself, now did I?  I didn't love the person I was, I love Him within me more than my life itself and I love my neighbour (you brother) more than myself, the "I" comes last. Yes, I grant you my old self was a hypocrite because, if the truth be known, my love for you (my neighbour) wouldn't have stood an earthly chance if challenged by the lures of the world, greed. God of course wouldn't have entered the equation. But now it's different, I have at last found my First Love  "But I have this against you, that you have left your first love." (Rev.2:4).

Having found Him I have also found myself, I have consumed Him and He has consumed me, now I live for Him and not myself, there is no hypocrisy in it now. The "I" no longer exists it is He that controls everything, the Captain of this humble ship. A big ocean and me in a small ship needs a Captain such as the Lord. This, then is my description of true humility, does it answer your description of it as a false humility? Or is it your humility that's in doubt?

Peace!(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif)[/url

Roy   UK

[Nathan]

Yes, Nathan--I agree--but first, like Adam and Eve,  we must see ourselves as naked, before we can see Him, the one who would cloth us in righteousness

Nope, nope, nope . . . that may very well be what people do and have done, but that's not the order that God originally established.  Nakedness is not bad.  Walking in the spirit is walking in innosence.  Adam's nature did not come into the fallen state until "after" he chose knowledge over life.

This "knowledge" did nothing for his awareness of who God was.  It didn't illuminate God's love, mercy . .grace . nothing . .all it did was reveal that Adam was naked.  That's all law ever does, it illuminates the fallen state of me and others.  Seeing myself as naked is not something God instills in us, it's the thing that law instils . . the carnal mind, the religious thinking person.

That's why that's such a profound question God posed to Adam . ."Who told you that you were naked?  Because knowing nakedness is the evidence of carnal knowledge.  Human reasoning can not enter into the kingdom of heaven.  All it can do is identify with the fallen state of man.  That's what sparked this conversation in the first place, the idea that I can't love myself for that would be loving the carnal earth . . . the ego of man would love for all men to dwell there . .because living in that state of mind will distract you from coming into the full knowledge of who you are in Christ.

"That's" why Proverbs says not we're not to lean on our own understanding.  When I think I've got the whole understanding of something, I start building walls at the boundaries of that understanding.  Then when other's come with difference of perspectives, we retract and defend rather than openly enter into the new ideas, because to accept something new would mean I must first admit that what I have is incomplete . . . egos hate admitting to stuff like that.

Do I think we can change the world?  I think if we first let Truth into my personal world, my earth . .my mind . . ."then" that which is changed from within, will have a greater affect on that which is without.

[laren]

how do we love our enemy if we are not to love the things of the world??

[laren]

Yes, Nathan--I agree--but first, like Adam and Eve,  we must see ourselves as naked, before we can see Him, the one who would cloth us in righteousness

Nope, nope, nope . . . that may very well be what people do and have done, but that's not the order that God originally established.  Nakedness is not bad.  Walking in the spirit is walking in innosence.  Adam's nature did not come into the fallen state until "after" he chose knowledge over life.

This "knowledge" did nothing for his awareness of who God was.  It didn't illuminate God's love, mercy . .grace . nothing . .all it did was reveal that Adam was naked.  That's all law ever does, it illuminates the fallen state of me and others.  Seeing myself as naked is not something God instills in us, it's the thing that law instils . . the carnal mind, the religious thinking person.

That's why that's such a profound question God posed to Adam . ."Who told you that you were naked?  Because knowing nakedness is the evidence of carnal knowledge.  Human reasoning can not enter into the kingdom of heaven.  All it can do is identify with the fallen state of man.  That's what sparked this conversation in the first place, the idea that I can't love myself for that would be loving the carnal earth . . . the ego of man would love for all men to dwell there . .because living in that state of mind will distract you from coming into the full knowledge of who you are in Christ.

"That's" why Proverbs says not we're not to lean on our own understanding.  When I think I've got the whole understanding of something, I start building walls at the boundaries of that understanding.  Then when other's come with difference of perspectives, we retract and defend rather than openly enter into the new ideas, because to accept something new would mean I must first admit that what I have is incomplete . . . egos hate admitting to stuff like that.

Do I think we can change the world?  I think if we first let Truth into my personal world, my earth . .my mind . . ."then" that which is changed from within, will have a greater affect on that which is without.

a friend of mine wrote this, thought i'd throw it out there for thought:


"My thought is that to be clothed in Christ's righteousness is to be naked and unashamed. Now how's that for logic, lol!

Seriously, the hebrew word translated "naked" is "arowm". Its' "parent root" is "aram" which means "crafty". Now get this ..

Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. (Gen 3:1)

The word translated "subtil" is "aruwm". It is the past participle of "aram". The serpent "was" crafty (or subtil). That doesn't mean that the serpent was crafty yesterday, it just means that the writer is staying true to his tense in the story. If they didn't, it would be akin to "I is running".

To be naked, was to have your "aram" uncovered. To say that your craftiness is uncovered is sort of a flirtatious language in the literal sense -- or (and?) could be very much like our childrens' saying that their "privates" are covered.

They had their craftiness uncovered and were not ashamed because their eyes were not "opened". Iow, they were unconsciously naked.

This can also be seen metaphorically - having craftiness uncovered yet not being conscious and therefore ashamed or fearful.

Literal nakedness probably relays a sense of vulnerability, especially to people who lived waaay long ago.

Their eyes being opened could be their having become aware of their own craftiness.. what they were capable of. It is knowledge itself becoming unveiled to them.

Any fear or shame would be based on judgements that they passed upon owning/internalizing that new knowledge.

The righteousness of Christ though is God clothing us with unconditional love. We can be naked/exposed and be loved regardless"

[Nathan]

BINNNNNNGO!!!! :bgdance: :bgdance:

[Roy Monis]

Roy,

Do you agree Jesus loved many that surrounded Him?
They where as rotten as you are.
Was Jesus wrong in loving them?
So if Jesus loves it, its likely ok to love it...

Dear WhiteWings

I agree Jesus loved all the multitude that surrounded Him and I agree that they were all not just rotten but dung like me, but you forgot to mention does that include you or not? Maybe you're special, I should have thought of that, I'm sorry, please forgive me.

No He loved them all, as He has commanded me to love you. Whether Jesus was wrong to love them or not is up to Jesus, I be thinking, you'd best ask Him seeing you're so righteous. He really loved self-righteous people, Pharisees especially!

Peace brother, I love  :boyheart: :boyheart: :boyheart: :boyheart: :boyheart: :boyheart:you.(http://dl3.glitter-graphics.net/pub/913/913823shy6qui595.gif)[/url
Roy   

[Taffy]

BINNNNNNGO!!!! :bgdance: :bgdance:

Nice post Laren.. :icon_flower:
and Nathan, less of the jigging..a man your age :laughing7:..youll do ya self an injury :laughing7: