Could we get personal about UR

[eaglesway]

I think Ded said He knew it before intellectually (meaning, IN THE MIND OF GOD) and experienced it in time with Abraham- that is what I got right off, I think you need to re-read it ALL slowly and thoroughly :o)

In addition Ded explained himself in a subsequent post, so I will let this be my last response to the matter, No offence intended, Peace out, John

I know what he said, I'm querrying whether that is an explanation, or a retraction.  Not all explanations work for all people.  Assuming I should think like you and be persuaded by what persuades you is a bit black and white don't you think.

You can't speak clearly enough for someone determined not to hear you.

[VineBranch]

You can't speak clearly enough for someone determined not to hear you.

Since reply #52 you have been taking shots at me and using ad hominem arguments; you've ambushed me and generally used nahnahnah booboo replies, apparently because I disagree with ded.  Are you sure you're a moderator?

[eaglesway]

Actually Vine Branch, I haven't been taking any shots at you. It seemed to me you misinterpreted Deds post, I was simply attempting to respond ideologically.

You insisted Ded was saying thus and so....I am saying, essentially,"That's not what I got out of it, maybe you should take another look." It is that simple.

If you are wondering whether or not I am a moderator, well, yes, I am and I think you still need to take another look, because you seem determined to engage in an unnecessary conflict.

This is a blog. We have differing ideas. We discuss them. There is nothing personal about it and no need to make it so.

[omantodd2000]

I believe if I am understanding you Vinebranch that I agree with you that God is all knowing in everyway. I don't think God knows things intellectually beforehand but then has to have others experience them, for him to experientially know them if that makes sense. We as people may have to experience things in that way but we are man not God. I would not think that God is in any respect similar to man. He is the only power, he is eternal, all things come from him. There is nothing that can be added or taken away from him. We as man have nothing to offer him that could possibly increase his knowledge in anyway. Free Will is simply an illusion, man is a creature of circumstances, how we will behave is predictable, especially to one who knows the hearts of man.

[ded2daworld]

This is the simplest way I can think of it.:
I know my 4 month old grandson will sin. I haven't experienced this yet but I know he will. My knowledge that he will does not cause him to do it.
I know I'm going to physically die. I haven't experienced it yet but my knowledge of my death certainly does not cause me to die.
God knows everything intellectually. He knew that the shooting at the elementary would take place in Conneticut. His knowledge did not cause it to happen. He knew it experientially while/after it happened. IMO, God could not have known it experientially until it happened even though he already knew it intellectually.
If God knew everything in everyway and Christ was slain before the foundation of the world, why go through the experience? God surely could have figured out a way to reconcile others to himself, he makes the rules.
God cannot do everything. He cannot sin, he cannot lie, he cannot NOT love, he can't make an object so heavy that even he can't lift it

[micah7:9]

Personally and in my opinion believe and understand that
Gen 2:17  and of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou dost not eat of it, for in the day of thine eating of it--dying thou dost die.'

Was the first step into the reconciliation of ALL things unto Him. When circumstances happen in each of a human beings life, there is nothing to do but eat (Gen.3:6 and James 1:14), until a human being is drawn by the Father to Jesus Christ, thus is man...."for in the day of thine eating of it--dying thou dost die.'"
I don't see a choice, until man has a change of mind(Rom. 8:20), then the mind of Christ will chose[still, that mind must mature] to make the good choice.

[sheila]

aMEN,mICAH!

    THE WHOLE CREATION CAN NOT BE MORE THAN WHAT HE MAKES OF IT..WHETHER A VESSEL

  FITTED FOR DESTRUCTION OR PREPARED BEFOREHAND FOR MERCY AND GLORY.

   YOU CAN DO NOTHING OF YOURSELF[REMAIN IN HIM]...

[omantodd2000]

This is the simplest way I can think of it.:
I know my 4 month old grandson will sin. I haven't experienced this yet but I know he will. My knowledge that he will does not cause him to do it.
I know I'm going to physically die. I haven't experienced it yet but my knowledge of my death certainly does not cause me to die.
God knows everything intellectually. He knew that the shooting at the elementary would take place in Conneticut. His knowledge did not cause it to happen. He knew it experientially while/after it happened. IMO, God could not have known it experientially until it happened even though he already knew it intellectually.
If God knew everything in everyway and Christ was slain before the foundation of the world, why go through the experience? God surely could have figured out a way to reconcile others to himself, he makes the rules.
God cannot do everything. He cannot sin, he cannot lie, he cannot NOT love, he can't make an object so heavy that even he can't lift it

Everything that happens must be in Gods plan. When God created man he knew exactly where it was going to go and that was his plan. Like it says "For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all." As for the other things, I believe you are thinking of God in human terms. He can not lie or sin because he is not flesh, he is spirit. He has the ability to create beings that lie and sin and in a way he creates the concept of lies and sins.  Personally I think when you are sovereign as God is you control everything.

[Lloyd]

Seems like some of you are making it sound like God exists within time, so that God does something one moment, then something happens, then God does something else and so on. But that would make time God. I believe time exists within God, not God within time. We may not be able to understand that well, but it certainly seems ruled out that God could be dependent on or subservient to time or anything else. It seems likely that time (as well as space) is somewhat of an illusion, or unclear experience.

[eaglesway]

God is everywhere in and out of time. He is over all in all and through all. He is self existent and uncreated(fathom that) and everything that exists along with every sentient being that ever was, is or will be has come forth from Him and will return to Him.
A part of the process by which He has determined all these things to become one in Him is called Time. We live in it and He is living in it with us but He is not subject to it in anyway beyond what ever self restraints He has chosen for Himself in order to teach us how to BE like Him, the I AM. God is surprised by nothing, but, in my opinion takes joy in EXPERIENCING the growth of His creation and His communion with it as it emerges from chaos, into universal harmony- resulting in universal freedom. All this is through the cross of Jesus, the sacrifice Lamb and the shed blood of the Son of God.

Ain't it wonnerful :o)

[sheila]

YES IT IS!!

[eaglesway]

Glory!!!

[eaglesway]

IN THE beginning God (prepared, formed, fashioned, and) created the heavens and the earth.
The earth was without form and an empty waste, and darkness was upon the face of the very great deep. The Spirit of God was moving (hovering, brooding) over the face of the waters.
And God said, Let there be light; and there was light.
And God saw that the light was good (suitable, pleasant) and He approved it; and God separated the light from the darkness.
And God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.

(Gen 1:1-5)

And God SAW THE LIGHT AND APPROVED IT. What does this mean? Did God experience something? Surely He knew before He SPOKE what the light would be IN HIS MIND but the actual creation of it initiated a VISCERAL RESPONSE FROM GOD. Did God create the universe only for us? or for Himself also?

Blessed is the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who did bless us in every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, according as He did choose us in him before the foundation of the world, for our being holy and unblemished before Him, in love, having foreordained us to the adoption of sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will, to the praise of the glory of His grace, in which He did make us accepted in the beloved, in whom we have the redemption through his blood, the remission of the trespasses, according to the riches of His grace, in which He did abound toward us in all wisdom and prudence, having made known to us the secret of His will, according to His good pleasure, that He purposed in Himself, in regard to the dispensation of the fulness of the times, to bring into one the whole in the Christ, both the things in the heavens, and the things upon the earth--in him;
(Eph 1:3-12)


O depth of riches, and wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable His judgments, and untraceable His ways! for who did know the mind of the Lord? or who did become His counsellor? or who did first give to Him, and it shall be given back to him again? because of Him, and through Him, and to Him are the all things; to Him is the glory--to the ages. Amen.
(Rom 11:33-36, YLT)

[omantodd2000]

IN THE beginning God (prepared, formed, fashioned, and) created the heavens and the earth.
The earth was without form and an empty waste, and darkness was upon the face of the very great deep. The Spirit of God was moving (hovering, brooding) over the face of the waters.
And God said, Let there be light; and there was light.
And God saw that the light was good (suitable, pleasant) and He approved it; and God separated the light from the darkness.
And God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.

(Gen 1:1-5)

And God SAW THE LIGHT AND APPROVED IT. What does this mean? Did God experience something? Surely He knew before He SPOKE what the light would be IN HIS MIND but the actual creation of it initiated a VISCERAL RESPONSE FROM GOD. Did God create the universe only for us? or for Himself also?

Blessed is the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who did bless us in every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, according as He did choose us in him before the foundation of the world, for our being holy and unblemished before Him, in love, having foreordained us to the adoption of sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will, to the praise of the glory of His grace, in which He did make us accepted in the beloved, in whom we have the redemption through his blood, the remission of the trespasses, according to the riches of His grace, in which He did abound toward us in all wisdom and prudence, having made known to us the secret of His will, according to His good pleasure, that He purposed in Himself, in regard to the dispensation of the fulness of the times, to bring into one the whole in the Christ, both the things in the heavens, and the things upon the earth--in him;
(Eph 1:3-12)


O depth of riches, and wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable His judgments, and untraceable His ways! for who did know the mind of the Lord? or who did become His counsellor? or who did first give to Him, and it shall be given back to him again? because of Him, and through Him, and to Him are the all things; to Him is the glory--to the ages. Amen.
(Rom 11:33-36, YLT)

The God in the Genesis account is  אלהים 'ĕlohı̂̂ym, "God." The noun אלוה 'elôah or אלה 'eloah. I believe this is Plural and referring to the Elohim or mighty ones, angels who do Gods will.  So that explains why the emotions are expressed in a human type fashion. If you look closely at Genesis 1:26 in any bible "Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness" You can see it is "Our" image also plural but still using the word eloah translated God. The actual YHWH is not mentioned till later, I believe when it is YHWH Eloah, something along the lines of I will be in mighty ones, although that may not be a correct translation it is something probably close to that.

"The Divine Name, Yahweh, is composed of the elements of the verb "to become." Yahweh is "I am that I am," or literally, "I am becoming Who I am becoming" (Ex.3:14). In Revelation 1:8 John seems to give the meaning of the Name for His Greek readers: Who is and Who was and Who is coming (cf 1:4; 4:8 and 11:17; 16:5 where the future is omitted)." (www.concordant.org)

The fact they have not translated these things correctly makes it more complicated than it should be. We know there is only one God so it is impossible that eloah and our image can be referring to God directly. It therefor must refer to the angels who did the actual creating, at Gods Command of course.

[eaglesway]

"It therefore must" and "of course" I would definitely disagree with :o)

[Lazarus Short]

Me too.  I had subscribed to the orthodox Trinity, and then one day I saw in the Revelation a mention of the seven Spirits of God.  Hmmmmmm...Seven + Father + Son = nine member of the Godhead, a Trinity of Trinities.  How about that? 

[eaglesway]

omantodd -Actually, I don't disagree that the angelic hosts may have participated in the creation, in which case, "In the beginning" refers to the creation of the present cosmos out of the chaos of the last or some such theory. I kind of subscribe at present to the idea that the "days" were very long and the angels were created along with the heavens as the "waters above were separated from the waters below", but I have no fixed position on it.

My objection to your conclusion is only because Elohiym is used over 2000 times in the OT, over 200 times in Genesis alone, so the idea that it was DEFINITELY the angels "seeing the light and approving that it is good" is no absolute by any means.

One does not need to go to far through the occurences of Eloyhim to see that many(most) of them must refer to the One and Only- altho perhaps highlighting the aspect of Him as sitting in counsel, such as in Psalms, "Elohiym reigns over the assembly of Elohiym." God rules over the assembly of the gods, or, as I read it, the Mighty One rules over the assembly of the Mighty Ones.

I would love to go through them all, but 2,601 is just TOO many :o)

[eaglesway]

Hey Laz, I have permission to open up a "Godhead Thread". I have been a little too busy to do it but at some point after the holidays, I am going to lob it up there and see who swings ;o) Should be fun.

[omantodd2000]

omantodd -Actually, I don't disagree that the angelic hosts may have participated in the creation, in which case, "In the beginning" refers to the creation of the present cosmos out of the chaos of the last or some such theory. I kind of subscribe at present to the idea that the "days" were very long and the angels were created along with the heavens as the "waters above were separated from the waters below", but I have no fixed position on it.

My objection to your conclusion is only because Elohiym is used over 2000 times in the OT, over 200 times in Genesis alone, so the idea that it was DEFINITELY the angels "seeing the light and approving that it is good" is no absolute by any means.

One does not need to go to far through the occurences of Eloyhim to see that many(most) of them must refer to the One and Only- altho perhaps highlighting the aspect of Him as sitting in counsel, such as in Psalms, "Elohiym reigns over the assembly of Elohiym." God rules over the assembly of the gods, or, as I read it, the Mighty One rules over the assembly of the Mighty Ones.

I would love to go through them all, but 2,601 is just TOO many :o)

Hebrew 13:2 Do not forget to entertain strangers, for by so doing some people have entertained angels without knowing it. This shows we resemble the angels. If they created us in their image that would make sense to me.

Elohim is used thousands of times in the bible, sometimes Yehweh Elohim, I believe that would referring directly to God. I think each use requires context and what else is attached to the word. When it is directly followed by "our" though, a pluaral I think it is clear we are dealing with a plural eloah and not a singular God.

As far as the creation days go I think they were literal days but the creation of the of the Heavens and Earth were not included in the first day simply as it says in the beginning they were created.  If the plants were created on the third day, the Sun and moon not set in place till the 4th and insects like bees required to pollinate the plants till the 5th day. Well the plants would not last to long without proper sunlight and pollination for flowering plants, so how far apart could the days be? As for the creation of angles the bible does not say so I have no opinion.

[eaglesway]

"Elohim is used thousands of times in the bible, sometimes Yehweh Elohim, I believe that would referring directly to God. I think each use requires context and what else is attached to the word. When it is directly followed by "our" though, a pluaral I think it is clear we are dealing with a plural eloah and not a singular God."

Perhaps, but this would not preclude the One and Only from speaking in the eloah. Nor would it preclude the possibility that "And God saw the light and that it was good and approved it" referring to His experience in the event as well as those with Him in it- thus, my objection to "therefore it must" and  "of course" :o)

[sheila]

GOD AS THE GREATER ABRAHAM CREATED THE CELESTIAL BODIES/BEINGS ON THE FOURTH DAY

  GENESIS 1;14      YOUR  SEED AS THE STARS IN THE HEAVENS AND SANDS OF THE SEA =

CELESTIAL AND TERRESTIAL IN HIS IMAGE

[eaglesway]

Yea that rings true with me Sheila. I just like to speak of things seen through a glass darkly with "mystical respect" because I think if God was so concerned about us getting "the exact dope" on it, He would have written more about it..... but thas jus me :o)

I can't wait to see the movie that explains it all clearly during our "orientation" into the Melchizedek priesthood :O)

[omantodd2000]

"Elohim is used thousands of times in the bible, sometimes Yehweh Elohim, I believe that would referring directly to God. I think each use requires context and what else is attached to the word. When it is directly followed by "our" though, a pluaral I think it is clear we are dealing with a plural eloah and not a singular God."

Perhaps, but this would not preclude the One and Only from speaking in the eloah. Nor would it preclude the possibility that "And God saw the light and that it was good and approved it" referring to His experience in the event as well as those with Him in it- thus, my objection to "therefore it must" and  "of course" :o)

Well I tend to look at things in the most reasonable and logical way and draw conclusion. If you put into the equation anything is possible then it really gets you nowhere in the long run. The eloah spoken is spoken of as a plural on day 6 of creation, if keeping the reading in context it would give me no reason to assume it is a singular eloah a few verses before doing the other. Also shortly after that YHWH Elohim is spoken of and I take that to be the first time the Singular Yehweh God is spoken of. You can disagree with that but personally I have no reason or evidence to believe otherwise, it seems clear. If you have Biblical evidence to the contrary please let me know.

[eaglesway]

Maybe you are missing my point:o)  I am not trying to disagree with your statement about the eloah. I am saying there is not enough empirical evidence in that to exclude the voice of YHWH from the response to the creation of light and limit it to the angels.

In my post, that you responded to, I was introducing the question/idea, "Did God experience anything in the creation". My point was directed to whether, as some seem to infer, that everything is such a foregone conclusion that God does not experience anything as that which is finished in His mind, "becomes real" in time.

My point with you has been STRICTLY LIMITED as to whether or not the plural use of elohiym somehow affects that in some way. I don't think it does.

[VineBranch]

"Actually Vine Branch, I haven't been taking any shots at you. It seemed to me you misinterpreted Deds post, I was simply attempting to respond ideologically."   (Eaglesway, Reply #77, December 17, 2012, 09:11:19 AM)

Are you serious?  You left a paper trail.  Seriously dude, denial is a lie and not an option.  Allow me to refresh your memory.

"You are misundrstanding what ded said. All black and white, eh? There are many levels to the mysteries of the scriptiures, you have to read what people say and try to understand what they are saying.....not jump off the cuff with assumptions." (Reply #52)  First you interpret what I say and instead of calling it different, you call it wrong (I didn't understand it correctly), then you take my thought processes to task (accusing me of seeing things only in black and white).  Thirdly you accuse me of not trying to understand the post and then jumping of a cuff (I have no idea what that means).

"I think Ded said He knew it before intellectually (meaning, IN THE MIND OF GOD) and experienced it in time with Abraham- that is what I got right off, I think you need to re-read it ALL slowly and thoroughly :o)" (Reply #59)  You don't think that condescending, using yourself as the paragon of understanding and giving remedial advise to one who saw it differently?


"You can't speak clearly enough for someone determined not to hear you." (Reply #75)  You actually placed this right after a direct quote from me.

I would advise you to re-read reply 73 by Lazarus short (if you read it at all) .   I got what he said right away, but the fact that you continued to keep this going after he posted his reply shows me you didn't.  In order for you to have the right understanding, you might want to re-read it slowly and thoroughly:  I know how you hate it when people don't do that.