Now I can see here in this verse Joh 8:44 Ye, are, of your father—the adversary, and, the covetings of your father, ye choose to be doing. He, was, a murderer, from the beginning, and, in the truth, he stood not; because truth is not in him: Whensoever he speaketh falsehood, of his own, he speaketh; because, false, he is, and, the father of it.
The adversary was a liar from the beginnnig Gen 3:4 And the serpent said unto the woman,—Ye shall not die,
Okay theres the lie, but were is the murder? Unless one looks at that old serpent being the cause of adam to be dying, you shall die, is a murderer or man slayer.
The only murder or man slayer I see is Gen 4:8 And saying is Cain to Abel, his brother, "Go will we to the field. And coming is it, at their coming to be in the field, rising is Cain against Abel, his brother, and killing him.
Is it saying then that it was the devil, the serpent got into Cain to make Cain murder/slay his brother?
I wonder about this stuff. It shows plainly the lie, but the murder is murky for me. Any thoughts?
Murderer of the truth?
He poisoned their mind so God took away their life.
Suggestion: Stop reading Young's. No one else agrees with his translation, and it makes no sense.
Gen 3:4
New International Version (©1984)
"You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman.
New Living Translation (©2007)
"You won't die!" the serpent replied to the woman.
English Standard Version (©2001)
But the serpent said to the woman, "You will not surely die.
New American Standard Bible (©1995)
The serpent said to the woman, "You surely will not die!
GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
"You certainly won't die!" the snake told the woman.
King James Bible
And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
American King James Version
And the serpent said to the woman, You shall not surely die:
American Standard Version
And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
Bible in Basic English
And the snake said, Death will not certainly come to you:
Douay-Rheims Bible
And the serpent said to the woman: No, you shall not die the death.
Darby Bible Translation
And the serpent said to the woman, Ye will not certainly die;
English Revised Version
And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
Webster's Bible Translation
And the serpent said to the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
World English Bible
The serpent said to the woman, "You won't surely die,
Young's Literal Translation
And the serpent saith unto the woman, 'Dying, ye do not die,
Gen 2:17
New International Version (©1984)
but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die."
New Living Translation (©2007)
except the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. If you eat its fruit, you are sure to die."
English Standard Version (©2001)
but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die."
New American Standard Bible (©1995)
but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die."
GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
But you must never eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil because when you eat from it, you will certainly die."
King James Bible
But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
American King James Version
But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you shall not eat of it: for in the day that you eat thereof you shall surely die.
American Standard Version
but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
Bible in Basic English
But of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you may not take; for on the day when you take of it, death will certainly come to you.
Douay-Rheims Bible
But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat. for in what day soever thou shalt eat of it, thou shalt die the death.
Darby Bible Translation
but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it; for in the day that thou eatest of it thou shalt certainly die.
English Revised Version
but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
Webster's Bible Translation
But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest of it thou shalt surely die.
World English Bible
but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you shall not eat of it; for in the day that you eat of it you will surely die."
Young's Literal Translation
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.'
Quote from: Molly on August 18, 2011, 11:12:46 AM
Suggestion: Stop reading Young's. No one else agrees with his translation, and it makes no sense.
What exactly is so wrong about YLT?
It's one of the better translations.
Besides of that all translators seem to agree on this verse.
Quote from: WhiteWings on August 18, 2011, 11:25:10 AM
Quote from: Molly on August 18, 2011, 11:12:46 AM
Suggestion: Stop reading Young's. No one else agrees with his translation, and it makes no sense.
What exactly is so wrong about YLT?
It's one of the better translations.
Besides of that all translators seem to agree on this verse.
forH3588 in the dayH3117 that thou eatestH398 thereofH4480
thou shalt surely die.H4191 H4191 H4191מוּת
mûthmooth
A primitive root;
to die (literally or figuratively); causatively to kill: - X at all, X crying, (be) dead (body, man, one), (put to, worthy of) death, destroy (-er), (cause to, be like to, must) die, kill, necro [-mancer], X must needs, slay, X surely, X very suddenly, X in [no] wise.
God says the word 'die' twice. The literal translation would be, 'you will die die.'
Every other translation but Young's agrees, God is saying the word twice for emphasis. That's why they all translate it --you will
surely die.
What kind of sense does 'dying ye do not die' mean? That's enough to make even Eve go 'hmm.'
In that case YLT is the best translation because it uses the word die twice. (dying and die)
But again, all 20 transaltions I compared express the same idea. They stress the dying part.
Quote from: WhiteWings on August 18, 2011, 11:44:19 AM
In that case YLT is the best translation because it uses the word die twice. (dying and die)
But again, all 20 transaltions I compared express the same idea. They stress the dying part.
If Young's were translating it literally, it would say, 'you will die die.'
Young's doesn't stress the dying part, he changes the meaning. His sentence implies God is telling Adam he is already dying before he eats. That changes the meaning.
Whereas if God is stressing to Adam that he will surely die the day that he eats from the tree--it's a different meaning.
Notice Eve only uses the word die once.
neitherH3808 shall ye touchH5060 it, lestH6435
ye die.H4191 Eve doesn't get how serious the warning from God to Adam was.
PS Did God tell Eve not to even touch the tree? Because he only told Adam not to eat it. Eve says, God said not to eat it or even touch it. That's like the Israelites being told not to even touch the mountain [much less walk up it like Moses did].
Quote from: Molly on August 18, 2011, 11:51:41 AM
Quote from: WhiteWings on August 18, 2011, 11:44:19 AM
In that case YLT is the best translation because it uses the word die twice. (dying and die)
But again, all 20 transaltions I compared express the same idea. They stress the dying part.
If Young's were translating it literally, it would say, 'you will die die.'
And? That makes the other translations even more wrong.
QuoteYoung's doesn't stress the dying part, he changes the meaning. His sentence implies God is telling Adam he is already dying before he eats. That changes the meaning.
Reread Molly!
for in the day of thine eating of it -- dying thou dost die
See, the dying is clearly linked to a certain event. Eating. If they not ate from the tree teh dying would not have taken place.
QuoteWhereas if God is stressing to Adam that he will surely die the day that he eats from the tree--it's a different meaning.
That exactly what YLT and all other versions are translated.
QuoteNotice Eve only uses the word die once.
neitherH3808 shall ye touchH5060 it, lestH6435 ye die.H4191
Eve doesn't get how serious the warning from God to Adam was.
for in the day of thine eating of it -- dying thou dost die
Do you really expect me to overlook those other translations? :winkgrin:
YLT uses the words dying and die. That's pretty close to die die.
Now you show me a translation that uses die die. There is none in your list.
QuoteNotice Eve only uses the word die once.
So do all translations. What's your point?
QuoteNow you show me a translation that uses die die. There is none in your list.
Right. They all say you will
surely die, you will
certainly die. They are taking the word said twice to mean that God is emphasizing the word die. That's why they insert the word 'surely'--that word isn't in the text, but the emphasis is.
Young's changes the meaning. Ask Micah if he thinks Adam was already dying before he ate from the tree, because that is what Young's and only Young's is implying with his translation.
If Adam is already dying, what's the big deal? Satan only makes him die faster.
QuoteSo do all translations. What's your point?
I'm talking about the Hebrew, not the translations. Eve uses muth once, not twice like God.
By the way, Satan quotes God exactly but inserts the word 'not' lol.
Ye shall notH3808
surely die:H4191 H4191 So there is the lying part. That little word 'not'.
And, the murdering part is he knew that if he could convince Eve to eat, then Adam would eat, too. Satan murdered Adam.
Quote from: Molly on August 18, 2011, 12:15:27 PM
QuoteNow you show me a translation that uses die die. There is none in your list.
Right. They all say you will surely die, you will certainly die. They are taking the word said twice to mean that God is emphasizing the word die. That's why they insert the word 'surely'--that word isn't in the text, but the emphasis is.
Young's changes the meaning.
I think it's way past bedtime for you Molly. :winkgrin:
They write surely. True. That NOT in the Hebrew. They all render die die in a different way. None of them badly imo. The all retain the essence of the verse.
But on top of that YLT does it a bit more literal.
About changing the meaning.... you don't have the slightest bit of proof for that because it's a totally false claim.
Come on Molly English isn't my first language but even I know do is emphasis....
Without emphasis: Die you die.
With emphasis: Die you do die.
Do in this case is like an exclamation mark.
And even without do it repeats the word die. That a emphasis on itself.
Do is simply a synonym for certainly in this context.
Do means bring to pass.
QuoteAsk Micah if he thinks Adam was already dying before he ate from the tree, because that is what Young's and only Young's is implying with his translation.
If Adam is already dying, what's the big deal? Satan only makes him die faster.
That's interpretation that has nothing to with this verse.
For example what's the need for a Tree of Life when you are imortal anyway?
QuoteQuoteSo do all translations. What's your point?
I'm taking about the Hebrew, not the translations.
In that case why keep talking about YLT?
Do is an Auxiliary verb.
In linguistics, an auxiliary (also called helping verb, helper verb, auxiliary verb, or verbal auxiliary, abbreviated aux) is a verb functioning to give further semantic or syntactic information about the main or full verb following it.
...
EmphasisThe auxiliaries do, does, and did are also used for emphasis in positive declarative statements in which the verb otherwise contains only one word: "I do like this shirt!", "He does like this shirt", "I did like that shirt".
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learningenglish/grammar/learnit/learnitv298.shtml
What is the difference in use between I believe and I do believe
.....
We do not normally use do or does in affirmative sentences, Ali, but we can use them for emotive or contrastive emphasis when we feel strongly about something:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learningenglish/grammar/learnit/learnitv298.shtml
Do shut up, Georgia, and get on with your homework.
Do write and let me know how you're getting on.
"Can I buy stamps here?" "Well, we do sell them, but we haven't got any at the moment."
He cooks a lot does Alex. He does far more than me.
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/do_3
Etc :happy3:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learningenglish/grammar/learnit/learnitv298.shtml
I can see I'm not explaining myself well here. :msealed: :winkgrin:
Young's Literal Translation
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.'
Translation is more art than science. You are not only translating words from one language to another, you are trying to translate meaning and nuance as well.
The above is a horrible translation. It is not proper English. It does not make sense. You have to guess at what it means. It is awkward.
If I say to you, 'If I put a bullet in your head, you will surely die,' that's a clear meaning.
If I say, "If I put a bullet in your head, dying you will die,' that is confusing.--it's not clear what it means. Does it mean you'll die slowly? Does it mean you were already dying before I put the bullet in your head? Because it's not good English, then--who knows what it means?
Now when you are dealing with the negative, it gets even worse
"If I put a bullet in your dead, dying you will not die."
That sentence doesn't even make sense. If you are dying, why won't you die? Because you know a great surgeon? lol
I don't think even Eve would fall for that.
The other translations do not imply Adam is already dying before he eats from the tree. It's a simple statement--If you eat that, you will surely die.
QuoteAbout changing the meaning.... you don't have the slightest bit of proof for that because it's a totally false claim.
It's not a false claim. The people who quote the Young's translation believe that sentence proves Adam was already dying before he ate from the tree. They quote Young's to prove that--because that is what the Young's translation implies.
QuoteFor example what's the need for a Tree of Life when you are imortal anyway
As long as Adam had full and unfettered access to the tree of life, he wasn't dying. But, that's another discussion. All the other translations do not address whether Adam was already dying-- at all. All the other translations are only concerned with what happens if he eats from the tree. He will die!
Quote from: Molly on August 18, 2011, 01:57:29 PM
QuoteAbout changing the meaning.... you don't have the slightest bit of proof for that because it's a totally false claim.
It's not a false claim. The people who quote the Young's translation believe that sentence proves Adam was already dying before he ate from the tree..
So what? How many different doctrines are based on the KJV?
YLT isn't without flaws but it comes out on top of the list of the best translations. With ease.
QuoteThey quote Young's to prove that--because that is what the Young's translation implies,
It doesn't. I think I gave lots of proof for that.
Besides of all that do you really know what the verse means? Or do you just think you know what it means? Why about this translation.
Douay-Rheims Bible
But of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat. for in what day soever thou shalt eat of it, thou shalt die the death.
See YLT is far above the rest. DRB translates it equally well.
YLT:
- Keeps it literal. That's why it's called a literal translation.
- It does add emphasis. (see the many links I gave)
- And most important it makes far more sense than all others. It brings across the true meaning of the verse.
To use your logic almost all translations write they die instantly "you shall die" (Yeah, I do :winkgrin: know it doesn't mention a timeframe. Just using your logic)
YLT does a better job because "dying thou dost die"
Or more fluenent/modern Englis from DRB "thou shalt die the death"
Those versions show the
process of dying started. And that's correct. The lived for another 900 years.
You said the verse implies they were dying before eating but it's just the other way around. They started dying
after eating.
QuoteThe above is a horrible translation. It is not proper English. It does not make sense. You have to guess at what it means.
In most Bibles you read the doctrinal fantasies of the translators. In literal versions you are closer to the original. You get exactly what you payed for.
Personally KJV, YLT, CLV read equally well for me. Possibly because the structure closer to my own language :dontknow:
BTW there is a difference between translations and versions.
QuoteTo use your logic almost all translations write they die instantly "you shall die" (Yeah, I do know it doesn't mention a timeframe. Just using your logic)
But God does give a time frame.
17But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it:
for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
--Gen 2
And, in fact, we see something happen to them immediately [spiritual death].
7And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.
8And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden. --Gen 3
Hi Micah
re; the serpent enteringCain; God warned him, Genesis 4;7 If youdo what is right,will younot be accepted? ButIF YOU DO NOT DO WHAT IS RIGHT...
SIN IS CROUCHING AT YOUR DOOR,IT DESIRES TO HAVE YOU...BUT YOU....MUST...MASTER..IT.......[contrast Jesus knocking at door..if you open
He will come in and sup with you] two spirits...Good[God] Evil[adversary]
see how sin desires to makeyou it's slave...use you up..kill .....and How it is the desire of God..that we master it....
the next verseshows that sin did enter andmastered Cain...the following scripture shows this...'you are under a curse...and driven from
the ground,which opened it'smouth to receive Abel's blood from your hand...Land to no longer yeild it'scrops...hidden from presence of God
YOU WILL BE A RESTLESS WANDERER ON THE EARTH...the evil generation[scapegoat] that perishes in the wilderness.....
Cain said,it is too much to bear..being a wanderer and whoever finds me will kill me....But the Lord God said, NOT SO... if anyone kills Cain..
he will suffer vengeance seven times over[King Neb mind of beast 7 times].Then the Lord put a mark on Cain,so that no-one who found him would kill him
enmity between the two seeds...Abel/acceptable to God...Cain/unacceptable to God[did not do right]
those that have the 'mark' of the beast can not live in the presence of God[because death has entered in]sin mark must be blotted out
There is another 'mark' in Ezekiel
for those who mourn over all the detestable things done in the temple...again..good/evil contrast.As this is our present exercize in good/evil...
and the good and evil is man ifested in our flesh...putting up with much longsuffering vessels of wrath..to make know the riches of His mercy to vessels of mercy
Quote from: WhiteWings on August 18, 2011, 11:44:19 AM
In that case YLT is the best translation because it uses the word die twice. (dying and die)
But again, all 20 transaltions I compared express the same idea. They stress the dying part.
You bet! It is the only one that translates it properly. Thank you WW's :grin: :thumbsup:
YLT Gen 2:16 And Jehovah God layeth a charge on the man, saying, `Of every tree of the garden eating thou dost eat;
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.'
Dying the death, you willl die
Now that tells me that when man eats of the fruit of the TG and E, man will begin dying...the death. What is it you can see the dying to self (in NT) but you dont see man begin dying the death for his deed?
Nathan you have brought up some good points.
Molly, to your question about Eve being instructed about eating of the tree . . . it wasn't directly from God in the same sense as it was with Adam because at the time God said it, she was still a rib. So . .. she "was" there but yet she wasn't. And there was no command not to touch . . .this whole event is a spiritual picture of how we operate within ourselves. Our anointed man (spirit) carries the truth, and our woman takes what's there and turns it into something it's not. God wasn't trying to instill fear into Adam by declaring he wasn't to touch it, he merely instructed him that life would end at the consumption of the tree's fruit.
Isn't it interesting how we can get all caught up in our discussion over a word or translation, yet does anyone ever question the idea that snakes can talk? Wouldn't a better response from Eve have been to get a big rock and smash the snake? Bad attempt at a little levity.
Seriously, did you also notice that not only was the command given to Adam and not to Eve, but when she "did" eat it, nothing happened. It wasn't until Adam ate it that all hell broke loose.
""If I put a bullet in your dead, dying you will not die." But what is the warning that you gave before you shot me?
That sentence doesn't even make sense. If you are dying, why won't you die? Because you know a great surgeon? lol" Molly
The "dying" you will not, is the death that the serpent tells the woman she will not die.
" for in the day of thine eating of it--dying thou dost die.'
The "dying" you will die, thats the death that the Lord God said you die from.
Any way the "liar from the beginning" is pretty clear I believe. Now how about the "murderer" part, is that as clear for my understanding?
Quote from: NathanMolly, to your question about Eve being instructed about eating of the tree . . . it wasn't directly from God in the same sense as it was with Adam because at the time God said it, she was still a rib. So . .. she "was" there but yet she wasn't. And there was no command not to touch . . .this whole event is a spiritual picture of how we operate within ourselves. Our anointed man (spirit) carries the truth, and our woman takes what's there and turns it into something it's not. God wasn't trying to instill fear into Adam by declaring he wasn't to touch it, he merely instructed him that life would end at the consumption of the tree's fruit.
Yeah. You are talking about spirit [as Adam] versus soul [as Eve], right? We know God told Adam not to eat it, but we are not privy to where Eve might have gotten the idea that she cannot even touch it.
We never see Eve talking to God until after they both eat from the tree. And then He is pronouncing the curse of death on both of them.
It just struck me as curious the parallel to this verse:
12 "Put limits for the people around the mountain. Tell them, 'Be careful that you do not go up the mountain.
Do not even touch the foot of it. You can be sure that all who touch the mountain will be put to death. 13 [Ex 19]
So only the priests [purified spirit?] can go up the mountain, and only the high priest [anointed purified spirit?] can meet God face to face.
From your point of view, would that mean only purified spirit can see God? Like you said, the soul is afraid of God.
But God himself gives the instructions, so maybe the soul is right in fearing God.
Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.[Mat 5:8]
"We never see Eve talking to God until after they both eat from the tree. And then He is pronouncing the curse of death on both of them. " Molly
Just where and when did this pronouncing the curse of death read in the Bible?
The realm we exist in now is the result of that . . .this is a realm of death and decay. No man born in the flesh lives forever in the flesh. Death in this realm is eminant. Just as death is absolute in this realm, "life" is absolute in the spiritual realm.
Interestingly enough, there's no word in the Hebrew language for "spriit". It's either "breath" or "breathe". Both are actions that only the living can experience . . .which for me, means that there's no death in the spriitual realm. No darkness, no pain, no suffering . . .oh . . .except for hell of course!!!
I hate religion. . . .
Quote from: Nathan on August 18, 2011, 09:01:22 PM
The realm we exist in now is the result of that . . .this is a realm of death and decay. No man born in the flesh lives forever in the flesh. Death in this realm is eminant. Just as death is absolute in this realm, "life" is absolute in the spiritual realm.
Interestingly enough, there's no word in the Hebrew language for "spriit". It's either "breath" or "breathe". Both are actions that only the living can experience . . .which for me, means that there's no death in the spriitual realm. No darkness, no pain, no suffering . . .oh . . .except for hell of course!!!
I hate religion. . . .
:thumbsup:
Quote from: Nathan on August 18, 2011, 09:01:22 PM
The realm we exist in now is the result of that . . .this is a realm of death and decay. No man born in the flesh lives forever in the flesh. Death in this realm is eminant. Just as death is absolute in this realm, "life" is absolute in the spiritual realm.
Interestingly enough, there's no word in the Hebrew language for "spriit". It's either "breath" or "breathe". Both are actions that only the living can experience . . .which for me, means that there's no death in the spriitual realm. No darkness, no pain, no suffering . . .oh . . .except for hell of course!!!
I hate religion. . . .
Yep. ......Now "We never see Eve talking to God until after they both eat from the tree. And then He is pronouncing the curse of death on both of them. " Molly
Just where and when did this
pronouncing the curse of death read in the Bible?
Quote from: micah7:9 on August 18, 2011, 07:57:55 PM
"We never see Eve talking to God until after they both eat from the tree. And then He is pronouncing the curse of death on both of them. " Molly
Just where and when did this pronouncing the curse of death read in the Bible?
17And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;
18Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;
19In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.
--Gen 3
3The land shall be utterly emptied, and utterly spoiled: for the LORD hath spoken this word.
4The earth mourneth and fadeth away, the world languisheth and fadeth away, the haughty people of the earth do languish.
5The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant.
6Therefore hath the curse devoured the earth, and they that dwell therein are desolate: therefore the inhabitants of the earth are burned, and few men left.
7The new wine mourneth, the vine languisheth, all the merryhearted do sigh.
--Isa 24
Galatians 3:13
Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:
2In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.
3And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him:
4And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads.
--Rev 22
That aint no answer to the question I asked that you stated. I know what it reads on Gen. 3 and there is no
"We never see Eve talking to God until after they both eat from the tree. And then He is pronouncing the curse of death on both of them. " Molly
17 And unto Adam he said, cursed is the ground for thy sake
I just wanted to know where it says He is pronouncing "the curse of death."
Quote from: micah7:9 on August 18, 2011, 10:18:56 PM
That aint no answer to the question I asked that you stated. I know what it reads on Gen. 3 and there is no
"We never see Eve talking to God until after they both eat from the tree. And then He is pronouncing the curse of death on both of them. " Molly
17 And unto Adam he said, cursed is the ground for thy sake
I just wanted to know where it says He is pronouncing "the curse of death."
That's a run on sentence, Micah. There is no period until the end of verse 19. All three verses are the curse on Adam, ending with dust thou art and to dust thou shalt return. It's the curse of death which Christ reverses.
Um . . .Molly, I'm not so sure that "that's" what God was doing. I don't think he was handing down curses at all. The only place where it says God cursed" was the serpent . . .but not so much with Adam and Eve. What "I" see it to be saying is . . ."Okay guys, because you chose "this" tree to eat from here are the new rules that you need to know and realize. Adam, your identity is going to be connected with labor for your sustenance. (sweat of your face) You're not going to be able to just live off of the fruit of other trees. This realm is much different. Everything is going to require labor.
Eve, down here, in order for you to birth life, you're going to literally go through hell. Reproduction is going to require severe pain. . . ." On and on . . .
Before you argue with that, just think about "this". To say that God is cursing them for what they did would then be saying that God "created" not only the gap, but he also forced the opportunity for Jesus to now have to come and die. Jesus came and reversed the curse . . . God brought the curse . . .Jesus reversed the curse . . .kinda sounds like a divided house there doesn't it?
We know God didn't "bring" the curse upon Adam, but that Adam brought the curse upon himself. But out of LOVE, God took the time to explain some things to them before they went out on their own. Instead of seeing these things as curses, I see them as the Love of the Father extending his wisdom to his kids now they they've fallen.
It'd be like a Father explaining to his child after they fell and broke their leg, how life for them is going to be now . . .they're going to need crutches, it's going to hurt, they're going to need to walk on the leg even though it's gonna hurt. They can't run anymore, they can't play like they used to . . . it's the same principle. The Dad isn't cursing them, he's just passing wisdom on to them of how life is going to be now.
I like some of what you say, but there was another curse. Gen 3:17 And to the man He said, `Because thou hast hearkened to the voice of thy wife, and dost eat of the tree concerning which I have charged thee, saying, Thou dost not eat of it, cursed is the ground on thine account; in sorrow thou dost eat of it all days of thy life,
Also, why do you say..."to his kids now they they've fallen." ??
I see no fall. I have heard teachings that say man fell from grace, that would be impossible for grace is not mentioned until
Gen 6:8 And Noah found grace in the eyes of Jehovah.
"Instead of seeing these things as curses,..." Nathan you are correct in a way, only isnt it just an explanation of how "life" will be from now on "until?"
I say they've fallen because I believe that's what they did . . . they were "driven" out of the garden which for me is out of the spirit realm, out of the heavenly arena where God originally "put" Adam after he created him . . .the natural realm is lower than the spiritual realm. They didn't "choose" to be bound by the lower realm, they "fell". They disobeyed God's word and his original order. Their choices caused them to be lowered to this realm . . .is that better?
And you're absolutely right about the other curse . . .the serpent and the ground . . yup. It's like the moment Adam ate of the fruit, not only did he have to leave the domain of the spirit, but he also popped the bubble and defiled the serenity of the natural as well. We really don't know what this earth was like originally because all we've been about to observe is the curse that still remains.
And the "until" is when ALL THINGS are completed according to the ORIGINAL plan of the Father . .there was no plan "B". This realm is bound by time. When time comes to completion, the curse will be removed completely. Jesus enabled us to over-ride the curse by walking in the spirit . . .but that can only happen through personal relationship, whcih can only manifest through individual invitation . . .which comes to us ONLY by grace.
He does use the word 'curse' Nathan when speaking to Adam.
Because you have done this:
Cursed
1) is the ground for your sake
2) you will eat from it in sorrow
3) you will grow thorns and thistles
4) you will eat herbs
5) you will sweat to produce something to eat [priests in the temple are not allowed to sweat]
6) you will return to the dust of the earth
Period, end of sentence.
All of those results come from the curse, and all of those results are death caused by separation from God.
Jesus reversed the curse.
No more curse
1) for those who live in the Spirit
2)for those won't live by bread alone, God will give us whatever we ask for
3)for the desert will bloom into a beautiful garden for them
4)for those will eat meat
5)for those will enter into God's rest [the promised land]
6)we will never die and live forever
Quote from: Nathan on August 18, 2011, 06:52:48 PMIsn't it interesting how we can get all caught up in our discussion over a word or translation,
False understanding leads to false doctrine.
That's exactly what this verse is (also) about:
ACVMatthew 529 And if thy right eye causes thee to stumble, remove it and cast it from thee, for it is advantageous for thee that one of thy body-parts should perish, and not thy whole body be cast into hell.
Quoteyet does anyone ever question the idea that snakes can talk? Wouldn't a better response from Eve have been to get a big rock and smash the snake? Bad attempt at a little levity.
Two possible answers.
a] It was common to talk to animals
b1] It wasn't a snake at all. It was a man.
b2] An enchanter.
Quote from: wwb1] It wasn't a snake at all. It was a man.
b2] An enchanter.
3)It was a serpentine being of light, the nachash, a divine celestial spirit, also known as Satan, who watched God create Adam and wanted to murder Adam from the beginning.
Quote from: Molly on August 19, 2011, 12:01:51 AM
He does use the word 'curse' Nathan when speaking to Adam.
Because you have done this:
Cursed
1) is the ground for your sake
2) you will eat from it in sorrow
3) you will grow thorns and thistles
4) you will eat herbs
5) you will sweat to produce something to eat [priests in the temple are not allowed to sweat]
6) you will return to the dust of the earth
Period, end of sentence.
All of those results come from the curse, and all of those results are death caused by separation from God.
Jesus reversed the curse.
No more curse
1) for those who live in the Spirit
2)for those who don't live by bread alone, God will give us whatever we ask for
3)for the desert will bloom into a beautiful garden
4)for those who eat meat
5)for those who enter into God's rest [the promised land]
6)we will never die and live forever
The curse was "because" of Adam, Adam felt it's affects, but God didn't directly curse Adam . . . that would be the same as saying God created man and then sent him to hell. I think that's also what Micah was trying to point out. There definitely was a curse, but it wasn't God cursing his image in Adam . . .Adam brought the curse upon the earth and the serpent that ruled it . . .but even more importantly was your conclusion . .the curse has been reversed.
Nathan post #31
I say they've fallen because I believe that's what they did
To have fallen as you say they would have had to be out side of the Lord God's plan, and they were not.
. . . they were "driven" out of the garden which for me is out of the spirit realm,
Man was never in the "spirit" 1Co 15:45 so also it hath been written, `The first man Adam became a living creature,' the last Adam is for a life-giving spirit,
1Co 15:46 but that which is spiritual is not first, but that which was natural, afterwards that which is spiritual.
out of the heavenly arena where God originally "put" Adam after he created him . . .the natural realm is lower than the spiritual realm. They didn't "choose" to be bound by the lower realm, they "fell". They disobeyed God's word and his original order.
In that case God screwed up. He made a malfunctioned creation. Either God had the foreknowledge of mans disobedience or He didnt, I reason that the Lord God caused the circumstances for man to make his choice.
Their choices caused them to be lowered to this realm . . .is that better?
No.
And you're absolutely right about the other curse . . .the serpent and the ground . . yup. It's like the moment Adam ate of the fruit, not only did he have to leave the domain of the spirit, but he also popped the bubble and defiled the serenity of the natural as well. We really don't know what this earth was like originally because all we've been about to observe is the curse that still remains.
The record we have in Genesis IS what this earth was like originally.
And the "until" is when ALL THINGS are completed according to the ORIGINAL plan of the Father . .there was no plan "B".
Now you have that right as rain, there was not plan B, cause everything was going just the way He had intended it to go.
This realm is bound by time. When time comes to completion,
Now where did you get the notion that "time comes to a completion?"
the curse will be removed completely. Jesus enabled us to over-ride the curse by walking in the spirit
Jesus giving His life on the Cross is what did away with the curse. Rom 6:23 for the wages of the sin is death, and the gift of God is life age-during in Christ Jesus our Lord.
And Jesus payed that ransom, He died.
. . .but that can only happen through personal relationship, whcih can only manifest through individual invitation . . .which comes to us ONLY by grace.
Yes, and His grace is working now. Thank you Father!
Im getting real close to that other taboo :sigh:
Quote from: Nathan on August 19, 2011, 12:15:34 AM
Quote from: Molly on August 19, 2011, 12:01:51 AM
He does use the word 'curse' Nathan when speaking to Adam.
Because you have done this:
Cursed
1) is the ground for your sake
2) you will eat from it in sorrow
3) you will grow thorns and thistles
4) you will eat herbs
5) you will sweat to produce something to eat [priests in the temple are not allowed to sweat]
6) you will return to the dust of the earth
Period, end of sentence.
All of those results come from the curse, and all of those results are death caused by separation from God.
Jesus reversed the curse.
No more curse
1) for those who live in the Spirit
2)for those who don't live by bread alone, God will give us whatever we ask for
3)for the desert will bloom into a beautiful garden
4)for those who eat meat
5)for those who enter into God's rest [the promised land]
6)we will never die and live forever
The curse was "because" of Adam, Adam felt it's affects, but God didn't directly curse Adam . . . that would be the same as saying God created man and then sent him to hell. I think that's also what Micah was trying to point out. There definitely was a curse, but it wasn't God cursing his image in Adam . . .Adam brought the curse upon the earth and the serpent that ruled it . . .but even more importantly was your conclusion . .the curse has been reversed.
Ok. I understand. But don't you think the flesh, and having to live in and overcome flesh, is part of the curse?
I think because they ate of the tree, they allowed carnality "in" them . . .that's what the tree "was". Knowledge of good and evil is the essence of carnality. They became a part of what they ate. They weren't created for, or prepared to have to be conformed to it so that's what the "instructional/cursing" part that we're discussing was all about. They "were" clothed in infinity. But that part of then died . . .just as God said it would . . .and so they were driven out of infinity and became a part of carnality. That's where God clothing them in skins comes in. Our flesh is directly linked to carnality. I mean literally linked. Our emotions are influenced by the gravitational pull of the moon just as the ocean is influenced by it. We go through high tide experiences and low tide experiences . . .highs and lows . . .some get so influenced by that, that the highs are unhealthy as are the lows.
People are always looking for ways to reach their highs and lows by direct interventions . .. be it drugs, other partners, driving fast, jumping from planes . ..canoeing . . .on and on, we're always looking for ways to stimulate our selves in this realm. That comes from our natural persons looking for natural means to find fulfillment. But no matter how hard we try in this realm, we can't ever find that "one thing" that would match what we originally had in the beginning . . .so yeah, it's all the effects of the curse.
We've been given a covering that is directly linked to the very thing that deceived Eve. . .flesh is influenced by flesh . . .it's even what keeps us from free-falling in spiritual truths. There's an innate part of us that wants to retain some level of control . . .it's just as God said it would be, our Eve desires after the authority of our Adam. But our Adam is established with the authority to rule over our Eve. We'll ALWAYS have the power in us to over come flesh, but not by fleshly means. I can't make myself overcome anything by will-power alone. There first must be a spiritual awakening within me to release that authority and to bind that carnality that fills me full of lies that keeps me living, but not "alive".
That was good, Nathan.
What do you mean by this?
Quoteit's even what keeps us from free-falling in spiritual truths.
by 'free-falling' [into spiritual truths]?
Quote from: micah7:9 on August 19, 2011, 12:17:56 AM
Nathan post #31
I say they've fallen because I believe that's what they did
To have fallen as you say they would have had to be out side of the Lord God's plan, and they were not.
You're still not hearing me. I never said they fell from grace . . . it was BECAUSE of grace that we see the conversation God had after the effects of the tree was manifesting in them.
. . . they were "driven" out of the garden which for me is out of the spirit realm,
Man was never in the "spirit" 1Co 15:45 so also it hath been written, `The first man Adam became a living creature,' the last Adam is for a life-giving spirit,
sigh . . .
Look up the word "cool" and see what it means . . .God walked with Adam in it.
1Co 15:46 but that which is spiritual is not first, but that which was natural, afterwards that which is spiritual.
out of the heavenly arena where God originally "put" Adam after he created him . . .the natural realm is lower than the spiritual realm. They didn't "choose" to be bound by the lower realm, they "fell". They disobeyed God's word and his original order.
In that case God screwed up. He made a malfunctioned creation. Either God had the foreknowledge of mans disobedience or He didnt, I reason that the Lord God caused the circumstances for man to make his choice.
Whatever . . .
Their choices caused them to be lowered to this realm . . .is that better?
No.
Again . . . "whatever". It's beginning to appear that you just want to argue for argument's sake.
And you're absolutely right about the other curse . . .the serpent and the ground . . yup. It's like the moment Adam ate of the fruit, not only did he have to leave the domain of the spirit, but he also popped the bubble and defiled the serenity of the natural as well. We really don't know what this earth was like originally because all we've been about to observe is the curse that still remains.
The record we have in Genesis IS what this earth was like originally.
And how is that? As we see it now? How was it "before" it was cursed? What record is there in Genesis that explains what the ground was like before ADAM FELL.? Don't just tell me you disagree . . .any Monday-morning quarterback can do that.
And the "until" is when ALL THINGS are completed according to the ORIGINAL plan of the Father . .there was no plan "B".
Now you have that right as rain, there was not plan B, cause everything was going just the way He had intended it to go.
This realm is bound by time. When time comes to completion,
Now where did you get the notion that "time comes to a completion?"
Because this realm as we know it has an end???? Heaven and earth shall pass away . . .
the curse will be removed completely. Jesus enabled us to over-ride the curse by walking in the spirit
Jesus giving His life on the Cross is what did away with the curse. Rom 6:23 for the wages of the sin is death, and the gift of God is life age-during in Christ Jesus our Lord.
And Jesus payed that ransom, He died.
I have no idea what your argument is on that.
. . .but that can only happen through personal relationship, whcih can only manifest through individual invitation . . .which comes to us ONLY by grace.
Yes, and His grace is working now. Thank you Father!
Im getting real close to that other taboo :sigh:
I say they've fallen because I believe that's what they did
To have fallen as you say they would have had to be out side of the Lord God's plan, and they were not.
You're still not hearing me. I never said they fell from grace . . . it was BECAUSE of grace that we see the conversation God had after the effects of the tree was manifesting in them.
Did I say anything about grace???
sigh . . .
Look up the word "cool" and see what it means . . .God walked with Adam in it.
Cool:H7307 rûach wind; That does not mean that man was a spirit in Genesis 3:8
(ASV) And they heard the voice of Jehovah God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of Jehovah God amongst the trees of the garden.
(CLV) And hearing are they the sound of Yahweh Elohim walking in the garden in the windy part of the day. And hiding themselves are the human and his wife from the face of Yahweh Elohim, in the midst of a tree of the garden."
(KJV) And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.
(Rotherham) Then heard they the sound of Yahweh God, walking to and fro in the garden at the breeze of the day,—so he hid himself—the man with his wife, from the face of Yahweh God, amid the trees of the garden.
(YLT) And they hear the sound of Jehovah God walking up and down in the garden at the breeze of the day, and the man and his wife hide themselves from the face of Jehovah God in the midst of the trees of the garden.
Whatever . . .???????????????
Again . . . "whatever". It's beginning to appear that you just want to argue for argument's sake
No sir. What you say is not what the Bible is teaching.
And how is that? As we see it now? How was it "before" it was cursed? What record is there in Genesis that explains what the ground was like before ADAM FELL.? Don't just tell me you disagree . . .any Monday-morning quarterback can do that.
Here you go
Gen 2:8 And Jehovah God planteth a garden in Eden, at the east, and He setteth there the man whom He hath formed;
Gen 2:9 and Jehovah God causeth to sprout from the ground every tree desirable for appearance, and good for food, and the tree of life in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
Gen 2:10 And a river is going out from Eden to water the garden, and from thence it is parted, and hath become four chief rivers ;
Gen 2:11 the name of the one is Pison, it is that which is surrounding the whole land of the Havilah where the gold is ,
Gen 2:12 and the gold of that land is good, there is the bdolach and the shoham stone;
Gen 2:13 and the name of the second river is Gibon, it is that which is surrounding the whole land of Cush;
Gen 2:14 and the name of the third river is Hiddekel, it is that which is going east of Asshur; and the fourth river is Phrat.
Gen 2:15 And Jehovah God taketh the man, and causeth him to rest in the garden of Eden, to serve it, and to keep it.
Gen 2:16 And Jehovah God layeth a charge on the man, saying, `Of every tree of the garden eating thou dost eat;
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.'
Gen 2:18 And Jehovah God saith, `Not good for the man to be alone, I do make to him an helper--as his counterpart.'
Gen 2:19 And Jehovah God formeth from the ground every beast of the field, and every fowl of the heavens, and bringeth in unto the man, to see what he doth call it; and whatever the man calleth a living creature, that is its name.
Gen 2:20 And the man calleth names to all the cattle, and to fowl of the heavens, and to every beast of the field; and to man hath not been found an helper--as his counterpart.
Because this realm as we know it has an end???? Heaven and earth shall pass away . . .
Yes that is true but you said "This realm is bound by time. When time comes to completion,"
Are you not saying time ends?
Psa 102:27 But thou art the same, and thy years shall have no end.
Isa 9:7 To the increase of the princely power, And of peace, there is no end, On the throne of David, and on his kingdom, To establish it, and to support it, In judgment and in righteousness, Henceforth, even unto the age, The zeal of Jehovah of Hosts doth this.
I have no idea what your argument is on that.
Whatever?
"in the cool" [of the day]
H7307
רוּח
rûach
roo'-akh
From H7306; wind; by resemblance breath, that is, a sensible (or even violent) exhalation; figuratively life, anger, unsubstantiality; by extension a region of the sky; by resemblance spirit, but only of a rational being (including its expression and functions): - air, anger, blast, breath, X cool, courage, mind, X quarter, X side, spirit ([-ual]), tempest, X vain, ([whirl-]) wind (-y).
Gen 3:8 And they heard the voice of the Self-Existent Gods walking in the garden in the spirit of the day:
Is that what I'm supposed to read? And if so, just how does that put man in a different realm as they hide from the face[presence] of Self-Existent Gods?
Presence: H6440 pânı̂ym the face (as the part that turns)פ
Quote from: Nathan on August 19, 2011, 12:51:57 AM
I think because they ate of the tree, they allowed carnality "in" them . . .that's what the tree "was". Knowledge of good and evil is the essence of carnality.
Not sure I agree. God surely knows aout good and evil. Is God carnal?
Eve ate from the tree. Although Eve knew about the warning nothing happenend. She sinned but nothing happend
When Adam ate they knew they were naked.
Could it be that Adam was the cover for Eve?
Jesus was the cover for Adam. When adam ate that eve's cover was taken away. So was his. They became naked.
A few verses later God gave them a cover again in the form of animal skin.
Animal skins are sacrifices. Blood (=sacrifice) covers sins.
The need for covering with blood lasted 'till ~31AD
So, right now, my thought is that either:
a] They already were carnal but that was covered.
b] They were not carnal but the cover acted as a perfect shield. When the shield was taken away carnality started to "leak in" more and more. That was was the spiritual side of the process of dying.
But, for me, it's important to know Adam and Eve were immortal befor they ate. (conditional immortality)
1] If they would never have sinned would they become infinitely old?
2] If they stopped eating from the tree of life would they die?
I think crucifixion was the Tree of Life. So I wonder if we are speaking about a real tree in the Garden. Perhaps "the fruit" was a certain teaching?
I think carnal has little to do with sin. Or at leat not in every case it's mentioned.
Why? Because the opposite of carnal is spiritual.
Satan and the demons are spiritual too. And they ain't the good guys....
WW I have brought this up before, "A few verses later God gave them a cover again in the form of animal skin.
Animal skins are sacrifices. Blood (=sacrifice) covers sins." WW
It does not say there was any letting of blood or any sacrifices.
Genesis 3:21
(ASV) And Jehovah God made for Adam and for his wife coats of skins, and clothed them.
(CLV) And making is Yahweh Elohim for Adam and for his wife tunics of skin, and is clothing them.
(KJV) Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them.
(Rotherham) And Yahweh God made for the man—and for his wife—tunics of skin and clothed them.
(YLT) And Jehovah God doth make to the man and to his wife coats of skin, and doth clothe them.
Spiritual:G4152 pneumatikos From G4151; non-carnal
Spirit: G4151 pneuma a current of air, that is, breath (blast) or a breeze; from G4154
G4154 pneō A primary word; to breathe hard, that is, breeze: - blow.
" Because the opposite of carnal is spiritual.
Satan and the demons are spiritual too. And they ain't the good guys..." WW
Satan and his demons may be spirits, BUT they are not "spiritual." You even state it, " Because the opposite of carnal is spiritual."
:grin:
Quote from: ww1] If they would never have sinned would they become infinitely old?
They would not have aged [the same, yesterday, today, and tomorrow]. Aging is part of the death process.
They would not have had children [you will be like the angels in heaven].
Quote2] If they stopped eating from the tree of life would they die?
The tree of life is still present in the New Jerusalem, along with rivers of living water proceeding from the throne of God. Our immortality depends on Christ. It is not independent of him. So yes, I think they would, and I think we would, also.
QuotePerhaps "the fruit" was a certain teaching?
Or a certain spirit? Look what spirit tempts them--the spirit of death.
QuoteSo, right now, my thought is that either:
a] They already were carnal but that was covered.
b] They were not carnal but the cover acted as a perfect shield. When the shield was taken away carnality started to "leak in" more and more. That was was the spiritual side of the process of dying.
Or they were not covered at all, just innocent. Adam has the indwelling Holy Spirit [breath of God] which keeps him from being deceived, but he is powerless [without the covering of power] to prevent Eve from sinning by dispatching Satan the way Jesus did. He is like a lamb to the slaughter in Satan's hands.
Quote from: Nathan on August 18, 2011, 06:52:48 PMIsn't it interesting how we can get all caught up in our discussion over a word or translation, yet does anyone ever question the idea that snakes can talk?
I answered that partly in a previous post but there is so much more people should ask themselfs.
a] Why was Adam created outside the garden an the put in it?
b] Where did the wife of Cain come from?
c] Why did Cain need protection (mark on his head) when he was sent away/into the world?
d] The snake could be the first 'type' being defined. Animal like sheep, goat and eagle mean more than just being an animal. Just like the meanining of numbers. Jesus called people vipers. That was not about their form but their mind. Same for the garden snake :winkgrin:
e] God warned Adam about death. So the concept must have been known.
f] Serpents never ate dust. Yaeh I know the link between man and dust... It's just another hint it's not very literal what happened in Eden.
g] ....
QuoteSeriously, did you also notice that not only was the command given to Adam and not to Eve, but when she "did" eat it, nothing happened. It wasn't until Adam ate it that all hell broke loose.
Who are Adam and Eve right now?
Quote from: micah7:9 on August 19, 2011, 08:22:24 AM
WW I have brought this up before, "A few verses later God gave them a cover again in the form of animal skin.
Animal skins are sacrifices. Blood (=sacrifice) covers sins." WW
It does not say there was any letting of blood or any sacrifices.
That's true Micah.
But the Bible gives a few hints.
Sins can ONLY be covered by blood. They sinned. Blood=cover
To get a skin an animal must die. Ok I admit you can also take a skin of an animal that died of old age.
When Adam and Eve left the garden they just lived near it's gate. Remeber they (Abel) did farming.
The dwelt east of the garden. Dwelt means hang around. Not travel a 1000 miles.
Another word for dweling is Tabernacle.
Cain and Abel brought offering to God.
All that combined tells me that made sacrifices at the gate of the Garden. In the Temple sacrifices also where made at the gate.
For me all that combined at least gives a strong hint those skins where from sacrifices.
a] Why was Adam created outside the garden an the put in it?
He was set apart by God.
b] Where did the wife of Cain come from?
Other humanoids? How about Neanderthal.
c] Why did Cain need protection (mark on his head) when he was sent away/into the world?
He was a son of Adam.
d] The snake could be the first 'type' being defined. Animal like sheep, goat and eagle mean more than just being an animal. Just like the meanining of numbers. Jesus called people vipers. That was not about their form but their mind. Same for the garden snake
He was a divine being, serpentine in shape, 'the shining one.'
.
http://www.thedivinecouncil.com/nachashnotes.pdf
e] God warned Adam about death. So the concept must have been known.
Or God knew what would befall Adam.
f] Serpents never ate dust. Yaeh I know the link between man and dust... It's just another hint it's not very literal what happened in Eden.
See PDF file under d.
Who are Adam and Eve right now?
Jesus and the church.
Quote from: WhiteWings on August 19, 2011, 09:21:19 AM
Quote from: micah7:9 on August 19, 2011, 08:22:24 AM
WW I have brought this up before, "A few verses later God gave them a cover again in the form of animal skin.
Animal skins are sacrifices. Blood (=sacrifice) covers sins." WW
It does not say there was any letting of blood or any sacrifices.
That's true Micah.
But the Bible gives a few hints.
Sins can ONLY be covered by blood. They sinned. Blood=cover
To get a skin an animal must die. Ok I admit you can also take a skin of an animal that died of old age.
When Adam and Eve left the garden they just lived near it's gate. Remeber they (Abel) did farming.
The dwelt east of the garden. Dwelt means hang around. Not travel a 1000 miles.
Another word for dweling is Tabernacle.
Cain and Abel brought offering to God.
All that combined tells me that made sacrifices at the gate of the Garden. In the Temple sacrifices also where made at the gate.
For me all that combined at least gives a strong hint those skins where from sacrifices.
Adam had already made the sacrifice of his life, why kill an animal? God doesn't need to kill an animal to make animal skins. Maybe it was a disguise--
I am sending you out as sheep amongst wolves.Maybe our carnal nature is only skin deep.
That's true Micah.
But the Bible gives a few hints.
Sins can ONLY be covered by blood. They sinned. Blood=cover
There was no law for a blood sacrifice.
To get a skin an animal must die. Ok I admit you can also take a skin of an animal that died of old age.
When Adam and Eve left the garden they just lived near it's gate. Remeber they (Abel) did farming.
The dwelt east of the garden. Dwelt means hang around. Not travel a 1000 miles.
Another word for dweling is Tabernacle.
Cain and Abel brought offering to God.
All that combined tells me that made sacrifices at the gate of the Garden. In the Temple sacrifices also where made at the gate.
For me all that combined at least gives a strong hint those skins where from sacrifices.
Gen 4:3 And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD.
Gen 4:4 And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering:
OFFERING: H4503 minchâh From an unused root meaning to apportion, that is, bestow; a donation; euphemistically tribute; specifically a sacrificial offering (usually bloodless and voluntary): - gift, oblation, (meat) offering, present, sacrifice.
FLOCK: H6629 tsô'n tse'ôn From an unused root meaning to migrate; a collective name for a flock (of sheep or goats); also figuratively (of men): - (small) cattle, flock (+ -s), lamb (+ -s), sheep ([-cote, -fold, -shearer, -herds]).
FAT: H2459 cheleb chêleb From an unused root meaning to be fat; fat, whether literally or figuratively; hence the richest or choice part: - X best, fat (-ness), X finest, grease, marrow
Genesis 3:21 There is no mention of killing any animals. This is just a thought, perhaps "LORD God make coats of skins," maybe Lord God made our very skin.
Quote from: Molly on August 19, 2011, 09:40:05 AM
a] Why was Adam created outside the garden an the put in it?
He was set apart by God.
b] Where did the wife of Cain come from?
Other humanoids? How about Neanderthal.
What's teh difference between Adam and those Neanderthals
Quotec] Why did Cain need protection (mark on his head) when he was sent away/into the world?
He was a son of Adam.
No. It was a mark for protection.
Quotee] God warned Adam about death. So the concept must have been known.
Or God knew what would befall Adam.
That's not my question. Adam knew what death was because otherwise he wouldn't have a clue what the warning was about.
Quote from: micah7:9 on August 19, 2011, 10:27:51 AM
That's true Micah.
But the Bible gives a few hints.
Sins can ONLY be covered by blood. They sinned. Blood=cover
There was no law for a blood sacrifice.
Hebrews 9:22 - And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without the shedding of blood there is no atonement.
Leviticus 17:11 - This is because the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul.
"And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and WASHED US FROM OUR SINS IN HIS OWN BLOOD"
(Revelation 1:5). 1 Peter 1:18,19 "Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; BUT WITH THE PRECIOUS BLOOD OF CHRIST, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot."
1 John 1:7 "But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and THE BLOOD OF JESUS CHRIST his Son cleanseth us from all sin."
etc etc
Quote from: WhiteWings on August 19, 2011, 11:01:34 AM
Quote from: Molly on August 19, 2011, 09:40:05 AM
a] Why was Adam created outside the garden an the put in it?
He was set apart by God.
b] Where did the wife of Cain come from?
Other humanoids? How about Neanderthal.
What's teh difference between Adam and those Neanderthals
There are differences. Do you want me to list them? But I read recently that Neanderthal DNA shows up in the human population. Kind of surprised me.
QuoteQuotec] Why did Cain need protection (mark on his head) when he was sent away/into the world?
He was a son of Adam.
No. It was a mark for protection.
Yes, protection --that's what I meant lol --because he was a son of Adam, God's covenant man.
QuoteQuotee] God warned Adam about death. So the concept must have been known.
Or God knew what would befall Adam.
That's not my question. Adam knew what death was because otherwise he wouldn't have a clue what the warning was about.
I'm not sure what you are looking for here because it would only be speculation on our part. What we do know is that he wasn't deceived by the lies of the nachach.
Quote from: Molly on August 19, 2011, 09:50:00 AM
Quote from: WhiteWings on August 19, 2011, 09:21:19 AM
For me all that combined at least gives a strong hint those skins where from sacrifices.
Adam had already made the sacrifice of his life, why kill an animal?
A sacrifice can never be yourself.
At best Adam could have been a sacrifice for Eve. Not for himself
QuoteGod doesn't need to kill an animal to make animal skins.
No. But that doesn't prove anything. God
can do many thing in a different way. But He only acts according to patterns.
Quote from: WhiteWings on August 19, 2011, 11:15:40 AM
Quote from: Molly on August 19, 2011, 09:50:00 AM
Quote from: WhiteWings on August 19, 2011, 09:21:19 AM
For me all that combined at least gives a strong hint those skins where from sacrifices.
Adam had already made the sacrifice of his life, why kill an animal?
A sacrifice can never be yourself.
At best Adam could have been a sacrifice for Eve. Not for himself
QuoteGod doesn't need to kill an animal to make animal skins.
No. But that doesn't prove anything. God can do many thing in a different way. But He only acts according to patterns.
Good points. Although I know Adam sacrificed himself for Eve...He is a pattern of Jesus.
Quote from: Molly on August 19, 2011, 11:12:22 AM
b] Where did the wife of Cain come from?
Other humanoids? How about Neanderthal.
What's the difference between Adam and those Neanderthals[/quote]
There are differences. Do you want me to list them?[/quote]Yes. And I only accept an answer of one word :winkgrin:
QuoteBut I read recently that Neanderthal DNA shows up in the human population. Kind of surprised me.
I think there is no such research.
The only thing a bit similar is mDNA research and that points to something else.
QuoteQuoteQuotec] Why did Cain need protection (mark on his head) when he was sent away/into the world?
He was a son of Adam.
No. It was a mark for protection.
Yes, protection --that's what I meant lol --because he was a son of Adam, God's covenant man.
No because there were 1000s of other people. Not the standard church stuff about 2 people. (possibly not even in the garden)
If you view Neanderthals as men then Adam wasn't the first at all.
Quote from: Molly on August 19, 2011, 11:20:11 AM
Quote from: WhiteWings on August 19, 2011, 11:15:40 AM
Quote from: Molly on August 19, 2011, 09:50:00 AM
Quote from: WhiteWings on August 19, 2011, 09:21:19 AM
For me all that combined at least gives a strong hint those skins where from sacrifices.
Adam had already made the sacrifice of his life, why kill an animal?
A sacrifice can never be yourself.
At best Adam could have been a sacrifice for Eve. Not for himself
QuoteGod doesn't need to kill an animal to make animal skins.
No. But that doesn't prove anything. God can do many thing in a different way. But He only acts according to patterns.
Good points. Although I know Adam sacrificed himself for Eve...He is a pattern of Jesus.
I can accept that. But if Jesus would have sinned just once He would have been a valid sacrifice for us. And He Himself would sitill be in His tomb.
Quote from: MicahThis is just a thought, perhaps "LORD God make coats of skins," maybe Lord God made our very skin.
That's a good point, too.
[coats]
"of skins"H5785
עור
‛ôr
ore
From H5783;
skin (as naked); by implication hide, leather: - hide, leather,
skin.
"Comparisons with DNA from modern humans show that some Neanderthal DNA has survived to the present."
"Researchers compared the Neanderthal genome with the genomes of five living people: one San from southern Africa, one Yoruba from West Africa, one Papua New Guinean, one Han Chinese and one French person. Scientists discovered that 1% to 4% of the latter three DNA samples is shared with Neanderthals — proof that Neanderthals and early modern humans interbred. The absence of Neanderthal DNA in the genomes of the two present-day Africans indicates that interbreeding occurred after some root population of early modern humans left Africa but before the species evolved into distinct groups in Europe and Asia."
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1987568,00.html#ixzz1VShCZiiH
I'm not saying you are wrong about other humans out there, but this is another possibility. There was a reason why Cain was afraid.
I don't view Neanderthals as imagers of God men like homo sapiens sapiens [Adam]--but there you have it--there was some intermixing of the species.
That should mean that none of the female branches was succesful. Otherwise it would contradict mDNA research.
Mitochondrial Eve
mtDNA has now been used to trace back through all of these natural mutations to the origins of all modern human existence to a woman known poetically as 'Mitochondrial Eve', who lived around 150,000 years ago.
'Mitochondrial Eve' is most recent common ancestor of all humans alive on Earth today with respect to our matrilineal descent. Note that this does not necessarily mean that she was the only woman alive at that time. Presumably there were other females alive at that time, but her lineage is the only female lineage to have survived through to the modern day. Since then, as people have migrated across and out of Africa (see Ancient Migrations), their mtDNA has changed slightly owing to very occasional mutations in the genetic structure, offering us the wealth of different mtDNA types now.
The concept of 'Mitochondrial Eve' is in some sense a purely mathematical fact. Consider the number of all women living on earth today, 'A'. Now consider the number of the mothers of all women living on earth today, 'B'. Obviously, B is either the same size or less than A. As you go back through the generations, B reduces, ultimately to one woman. That woman is popularly referred to as Mitochondrial Eve.
http://www.cambridgedna.com/genealogy-dna-genetic-genealogy.php
ACVGen 3
20 And the man called his wife's name Eve, because she was the mother of all living.
Something I just noticed and could be relevant to first human.
(http://www.cambridgedna.com/images/slide1.png) (picture from the mDNA article)
L0 is the very first (sub)human. L0 branches out into L1. But L0 also migrates to Israel.
The arrows point to a cave 75 miles north of Eden)
L0 is the south-west corner of Lake Victoria. (headwater of the Nile)
L0 is at: 31.68 longitude, 3.168 latitude
Gematria of "Lord Jesus Christ" = 3168
:mblush:
Quote from: WhiteWings on August 19, 2011, 12:30:10 PM
Something I just noticed and could be relevant to first human.
(http://www.cambridgedna.com/images/slide1.png)(picture from the mDNA article)
L0 is the very first (sub)human. Then you see L0 branch of into L1. But L0 also migrates to Israel. (arrows point to 75 miles north of Eden)
L0 is the south-west corner of Lake Victoria. (headwater of the Nile)
L0 is at: 31.68 langitude, 3.168 latitude
Gematria of the Lord Jesus Christ = 3168
:mblush:
:mshock:
Quote from: Molly on August 19, 2011, 01:50:51 AM
That was good, Nathan.
What do you mean by this?
Quoteit's even what keeps us from free-falling in spiritual truths.
by 'free-falling' [into spiritual truths]?
It's the essence of what faith really is all about. Believing in what can't be seen . . .it's a total release of what my logic and reasoning say is unimaginable. Instead of avoiding the unimaginable, I do the opposite, I believe "that's" how the principles of the kingdom really are. They are the opposite of what logic and reasoning project. Understanding is directly linked to control. When I "understand" the source of something, or the operations of something, or even the direction of something, I gain control over it. But when I can't understand it, I have no say over it, I have no control . . .so from logic and reason, if it can't be controlled, it shouldn't be activated. Why? Because something or someone could be damaged by it . . .in other words . . .because of "fear". and "that" as they say in the poker industry, is a "tell". The fact that fear is what is motivating the whole thought process tells me that it's my carnality that's making the argument, not my spirit.
Everything spiritually oriented speaks of total freedom, no strings attached, no limitations, total infinity. . .it's "free-falling" in spiritual truths. Ezekiel touched on this with the progressive depths of the river he was called out into. What was the last one? Did it get up to his neck and then God backed off? Or . . .did God continue to call him until his feet left the surface of the earth . . .the moment my feet can no longer touch the ground, my perception of where I am is greatly affected by that. My reaction is, to try to get my feet back on land due to my fear of drowning. I can't control my walk if my feet aren't on something. God calls us "from" the deep. Paul talks about coming into the depths of his love, the height, the width . . . it's infinity . .my mind can't relate to infinity.
When I get to the end of my mind, I know I'm getting close to where I need to be.
What about this thought?
Gen 1:26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."
Millenia pass....
Gen 2:15 The LORD God placed the man in the Garden of Eden to tend and watch over it.
Quote from: WhiteWings on August 19, 2011, 09:06:45 AM
Quote from: Nathan on August 18, 2011, 06:52:48 PMIsn't it interesting how we can get all caught up in our discussion over a word or translation, yet does anyone ever question the idea that snakes can talk?
I answered that partly in a previous post but there is so much more people should ask themselfs.
a] Why was Adam created outside the garden an the put in it?
b] Where did the wife of Cain come from?
c] Why did Cain need protection (mark on his head) when he was sent away/into the world?
d] The snake could be the first 'type' being defined. Animal like sheep, goat and eagle mean more than just being an animal. Just like the meanining of numbers. Jesus called people vipers. That was not about their form but their mind. Same for the garden snake :winkgrin:
e] God warned Adam about death. So the concept must have been known.
f] Serpents never ate dust. Yaeh I know the link between man and dust... It's just another hint it's not very literal what happened in Eden.
g] ....
QuoteSeriously, did you also notice that not only was the command given to Adam and not to Eve, but when she "did" eat it, nothing happened. It wasn't until Adam ate it that all hell broke loose.
Who are Adam and Eve right now?
I can tell you only my perspective, but how much of what I share is being received and how much of it is being dissected by logic and reasoning?
a] Why was Adam created outside the garden an the put in it?
As I stated before . . .because the garden of Eden is a spiritual realm and Eden is the natural
b] Where did the wife of Cain come from?
To think it was from any other being is to say that Adam and Eve were not the origin, through which sin came into the world . . .so you're saying Cain slept with sinlessness . . .even though he's the one that murdered his own brother? I don't think so. I think our minds want to argue things that are just what they say they are.
c] Why did Cain need protection (mark on his head) when he was sent away/into the world?
Because he murdered a familiy member . . .they were all related to Abel . . .vengence for killing a family member, the mark of God could be anything . . God could have made the first black man for all we know. Look, just because the Bible doesn't list every female child doesn't mean they didn't have a ton of other kids. Can anyone name Abraham's other kids that he had AFTER Sarah died? No? Know why? Because the Bible doesn't emphasize things that don't pertain to the seed of promise . . . It's not that they don't exist, it's just that the emphasis of the message is in another direction.
d] The snake could be the first 'type' being defined. Animal like sheep, goat and eagle mean more than just being an animal. Just like the meanining of numbers. Jesus called people vipers. That was not about their form but their mind. Same for the garden snake :winkgrin:
Which has been my point all along in that the serpent in Genesis and satan . . .and the devil . . .and the dragon in Revelation are ALL connected with the carnal mind IN all of us.
e] God warned Adam about death. So the concept must have been known.
Yup.
f] Serpents never ate dust. Yaeh I know the link between man and dust... It's just another hint it's not very literal what happened in Eden.
I'm glad you wrote "very literal" and not just "literal" because yes, it is a literal story but no, our emphasis shouldn't be on the story itself because every story is a sign pointing to something greater . . .build your house on that which is greater, the thing the sign is pointing to, don't build your house by using the signs themselves.
Gematria of LORD JESUS CHRIST
http://www.garone.net/tony/gematria.html
Quote from: WhiteWings on August 19, 2011, 04:28:14 PM
What about this thought?
Gen 1:26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."
Millenia pass....
Gen 2:15 The LORD God placed the man in the Garden of Eden to tend and watch over it.
I know what you're saying. Adam is the first set apart, covenant man.
He is al Adam, God's Man or god Man.
I happen to think he is the first man to have modern language, given to him fully formed by God. We have a large part of our brains that is devoted to language. Gen 1 and Gen 2 are describing different events. That's obvious.
Adam was created [not born] some 6000 years ago. After that, civilization explodes out of nowhere in the region of Eden.
Quote from: Nathan on August 19, 2011, 04:36:54 PM
I can tell you only my perspective, but how much of what I share is being received and how much of it is being dissected by logic and reasoning?
a] Why was Adam created outside the garden an the put in it?
As I stated before . . .because the garden of Eden is a spiritual realm and Eden is the natural
Isn't the natural a pattern of the spiritual? So doesn't that means the garden exist both literally and spiritually?
Quoteb] Where did the wife of Cain come from?
To think it was from any other being is to say that Adam and Eve were not the origin, through which sin came into the world . . .so you're saying Cain slept with sinlessness . . .even though he's the one that murdered his own brother? I don't think so. I think our minds want to argue things that are just what they say they are.
I don't undestand that reply...
Adam and Eve are were the parents of Cain so they are his origen. They sinned before the got Cain.
Quotec] Why did Cain need protection (mark on his head) when he was sent away/into the world?
Because he murdered a familiy member . . .they were all related to Abel . . .vengence for killing a family member, the mark of God could be anything . .
I think that's not right.
After God told Cain to go away Cain got scared. If he was afraid of his family he would have been in more danger staying home then going away. Yet, he felt more secure at home.
Now you are under a curse and driven from the ground, which opened its mouth to receive your brother's blood from your hand.
When you work the ground, it will no longer yield its crops for you. You will be a restless wanderer on the earth."
Cain said to the LORD, "My punishment is more than I can bear.
Today you are driving me from the land, and I will be hidden from your presence; I will be a restless wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me.".
Quotef] Serpents never ate dust. Yaeh I know the link between man and dust... It's just another hint it's not very literal what happened in Eden.
I'm glad you wrote "very literal" and not just "literal" because yes, it is a literal story but no, our emphasis shouldn't be on the story itself because every story is a sign pointing to something greater . . .build your house on that which is greater, the thing the sign is pointing to, don't build your house by using the signs themselves.
We seem to nearly agree on this one.
Literal for me means 100% exactly as written. + the possibility of it being on or more patterns for spiritual and wordly things. Eden is a spiritual pattern but for example alse for the Temples.
Almost literal for me means the same as literal but some elements are figure of speech. It's raining very hard. I say it's raining cats and dogs. Is that a literal statement?
I think Revelation is te very best example of that. Revelation for example could picture Amerika as an eagle and Russia as a bear going to war. Real war. But the animals just represent the national symbol.
Or the dragon kills the bear. China invades Russia. That line of thinking.
And that's why you always see me messing around with numbers and stuff. I believe if the natural pattern is understood that can be used as a ladder to reach the spiritual pattern. :2c:
For people wishing to confirm their Jewish priestly descent, the Y test is also relevant. The priestly caste of the Cohanim are thought to have the same Y chromosome as the biblical Moses, because Aaron, Moses' brother, founded this priesthood, whose duties traditionally pass from father to son. The Cohanim Y type identified in groundbreaking analysis by the team of Prof. David Goldstein and colleagues agrees with the biblical tradition, and a simple Y test using our database search can confirm whether a Cohen male indeed carries the Cohen Y type.
http://www.cambridgedna.com/genealogy-dna-genetic-genealogy.php
ww Where did you get the longitude and latitude of L0?
Did you work that out by hand?
Quote from: Molly on August 19, 2011, 05:34:50 PM
ww Where did you get the longitude and latitude of L0?
Did you work that out by hand?
Check this Google Maps link - Green arrow (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=-3%C2%B010'4.80,31%C2%B040'48.00%22&hl=nl&ie=UTF8&ll=-2.910125,31.662598&spn=11.741609,19.215088&sll=-3.168,31.68&sspn=0.367477,0.600471&vpsrc=6&doflg=ptk&t=h&z=7)
I just noticed that L0 is near Lake Victoria. Last week I wrote about it HERE (http://www.tentmaker.org/forum/discussions_universal_salvation/grab_bag_various_ur_points_thoughts_questions..._9889.msg126982.html#msg126982)
Quote from: WhiteWings on August 19, 2011, 06:12:43 PM
Quote from: Molly on August 19, 2011, 05:34:50 PM
ww Where did you get the longitude and latitude of L0?
Did you work that out by hand?
Check this Google Maps link - Green arrow (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=-3%C2%B010'4.80,31%C2%B040'48.00%22&hl=nl&ie=UTF8&ll=-2.910125,31.662598&spn=11.741609,19.215088&sll=-3.168,31.68&sspn=0.367477,0.600471&vpsrc=6&doflg=ptk&t=h&z=7)
I just noticed that L0 is near Lake Victoria. Last week I wrote about it HERE (http://www.tentmaker.org/forum/discussions_universal_salvation/grab_bag_various_ur_points_thoughts_questions..._9889.msg126982.html#msg126982)
Is there any link online to the exact location of L0--rather than a general location? Because this is a very specific number.
Quote from: Molly on August 19, 2011, 06:28:49 PM
Quote from: WhiteWings on August 19, 2011, 06:12:43 PM
Quote from: Molly on August 19, 2011, 05:34:50 PM
ww Where did you get the longitude and latitude of L0?
Did you work that out by hand?
Check this Google Maps link - Green arrow (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=-3%C2%B010'4.80,31%C2%B040'48.00%22&hl=nl&ie=UTF8&ll=-2.910125,31.662598&spn=11.741609,19.215088&sll=-3.168,31.68&sspn=0.367477,0.600471&vpsrc=6&doflg=ptk&t=h&z=7)
I just noticed that L0 is near Lake Victoria. Last week I wrote about it HERE (http://www.tentmaker.org/forum/discussions_universal_salvation/grab_bag_various_ur_points_thoughts_questions..._9889.msg126982.html#msg126982)
Is there any link online to the exact location of L0--rather than a general location?
Not that I know of. Things are often based on certain thing they found. If nothing remained on that spot or they simply never looked there...
QuoteBecause this is a very specific number.
Yeah it's part of the equation of the spot of Jesus baptism.
But thar belongs in another thread.
Yes, as should most of the replies in this post, at least that is my :2c: :laughing7:
Quote from: micah7:9 on August 19, 2011, 10:04:04 PM
Yes, as should most of the replies in this post, at least that is my :2c: :laughing7:
I thought we already answered the question of the thread--Satan lied to Eve in order to murder Adam. He was a liar and a murderer from the beginning [of the story].
Quote from: Molly on August 20, 2011, 04:24:41 AM
Quote from: micah7:9 on August 19, 2011, 10:04:04 PM
Yes, as should most of the replies in this post, at least that is my :2c: :laughing7:
I thought we already answered the question of the thread--Satan lied to Eve in order to murder Adam. He was a liar and a murderer from the beginning [of the story].
Yeah. So how did it get where it did? Just wondering :happy3:
Quote from: micah7:9 on August 20, 2011, 05:30:38 AM
Quote from: Molly on August 20, 2011, 04:24:41 AM
Quote from: micah7:9 on August 19, 2011, 10:04:04 PM
Yes, as should most of the replies in this post, at least that is my :2c: :laughing7:
I thought we already answered the question of the thread--Satan lied to Eve in order to murder Adam. He was a liar and a murderer from the beginning [of the story].
Yeah. So how did it get where it did? Just wondering :happy3:
As with any murder mystery, there's lots to talk about. :dontknow:
well ok maybe we did get a little off track.. :happygrin:
Quote from: Molly on August 20, 2011, 06:05:15 AM
Quote from: micah7:9 on August 20, 2011, 05:30:38 AM
Quote from: Molly on August 20, 2011, 04:24:41 AM
Quote from: micah7:9 on August 19, 2011, 10:04:04 PM
Yes, as should most of the replies in this post, at least that is my :2c: :laughing7:
I thought we already answered the question of the thread--Satan lied to Eve in order to murder Adam. He was a liar and a murderer from the beginning [of the story].
Yeah. So how did it get where it did? Just wondering :happy3:
As with any murder mystery, there's lots to talk about. :dontknow:
well ok maybe we did get a little off track.. :happygrin:
:laughing7: Yup, Yup, uh-huh, uh-huh :happy3: