Gen 3:6 man

[micah7:9]

Hey, ya'll,  in my opinion, should all of you need to have the spirit first before the natural and, in my opinion, consider what Paul stated as not to be so, well then there you  go. The way I see it from my opinion and view you desire something to be what the Bible says it aint. And if this thought and thinking "How were we chosen if we didn't exist?" keeps you up at night, then from my point of view and in my opinion, you will probably not sleep well.  :HeartThrob: :icon_flower: :cloud9: :bigGrin:

[WhiteWings]

Well in my opinion your way of reasoning is in conflict as to what the Bible is very clear on. Paul said it as plain as plain can be put to paper 1Co 15:46  but that which is spiritual is not first, but that which was natural, afterwards that which is spiritual.

Should you, IMHO desire to think that it/man/adam/human being was spirit first, then ok.

What about Jesus?
Spirit --> Man ---> Spirit

[WhiteWings]

And, for our purposes in this thread, we are asking, why the different words for men?

Some are called iysh, enosh and some are called sons of Adam.  Are they diferent groups?  I'd say yes, in that the generations of Adam lead directly to Jesus in an uninterrupted bloodline.

Maybe we first should find the defenition of mankind.

Not every mammal is human; but every human is mammal.
Not every man is Jew; but every Jew is man.
Not every man in gentile; but every gentile is man. Or not.....?

Let's assume Darwinian evolution is 100% correct. (which I don't think). According to that theory there are animals and humans. At some point in evolution there are animals that are almost human and the next mutation the animals officially became human. The criteria for that are not important for this discussion. The main point is that there is something that divides man from beast.
The Bible classifies whales as fish, while science classifies whales as mammals.
Maybe the Bible has a different defenition of man/beast too. For example a beast becomes man when it knows about God?
:dontknow:

They have never found Darwin's missing link, nor will they ever find it.

God's creation is digital not analogue.  Man is defined by his DNA and his very special brain.

You keep picking apart the example but tactically avoid the question. Why?

If the question is---Do you have to be in covenant with God to be considered human,or man,  the answer is NO.

But, I would also say, that all men are by definition in covenant with God--be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth is a covenant.

Another approach. What's the Biblical difference between man and beast?

BTW I use the words Jew and convenant very loosely because for example during Adam's time there were no Jews.

[thinktank]

Hey, ya'll,  in my opinion, should all of you need to have the spirit first before the natural and, in my opinion, consider what Paul stated as not to be so, well then there you  go. The way I see it from my opinion and view you desire something to be what the Bible says it aint. And if this thought and thinking "How were we chosen if we didn't exist?" keeps you up at night, then from my point of view and in my opinion, you will probably not sleep well.  :HeartThrob: :icon_flower: :cloud9: :bigGrin:

I wasn't going to say anything, but since you started it. I feel that you hold dogmatically to your position. So far you have reiterated the same scripture without any wisdom/material to offer, you remind me, pardon me of the ET ist who quotes certain scriptures over again. You have not tempted to understand what I wrote or others, because you have no interest at all in the concept of man being a spirit, or perhaps the entire idea of there being, other spirit beings apart from God, which you also dismiss. I have wrote a lot of material with scientific reason and scriptural wisdom as to my position, I think it is a strong position, dare I say stronger than yours.
May the joy of the Lord be with you.

[Molly]

Another approach. What's the Biblical difference between man and beast?

This is one of those 'buttons' for me, so I don't tend to handle the question very well. 

But, I think I understand what you are asking when I come back from the stratosphere.

I know a lot of leaders throughout history have considered men [other than themselves, of course] just animals, cattle, beasts of burden, and not human [as they themselves are human, of course].   This attitude has showered tragedy after tragedy upon the human race.

Nevertheless, this is why Gen 1 is so important, that man was created in the image and likeness of God, just so those in charge know who they are really dealing with when they deal with man.

And, this is why it's so important to them to convince us we are just glorified monkeys.

[sheila]

1 Cor 15;45,46

      BUT...the first shall be last,and the last shall be first....I am the Alpha and Omega

[WhiteWings]

Another approach. What's the Biblical difference between man and beast?

This is one of those 'buttons' for me, so I don't tend to handle the question very well.

Perhaps because you didn't understand the question. :icon_king:

[thinktank]

Another approach. What's the Biblical difference between man and beast?

This is one of those 'buttons' for me, so I don't tend to handle the question very well.

Perhaps because you didn't understand the question. :icon_king:

In the bible a beast can be eaten, but not a human.

[WhiteWings]

Another approach. What's the Biblical difference between man and beast?

This is one of those 'buttons' for me, so I don't tend to handle the question very well.

Perhaps because you didn't understand the question. :icon_king:

In the bible a beast can be eaten, but not a human.

True; but the question is: What is a human?
For example is a Cro Mag or Neandertahl a human?

[thinktank]

Another approach. What's the Biblical difference between man and beast?

This is one of those 'buttons' for me, so I don't tend to handle the question very well.

Perhaps because you didn't understand the question. :icon_king:

In the bible a beast can be eaten, but not a human.

True; but the question is: What is a human?
For example is a Cro Mag or Neandertahl a human?

Well their human imagination perhaps  :icon_jokercolor:

How many skeletons of these have they found?

If neathandral existed, they would be similar to a gorilla. Gorilla has rights.

[Molly]

Another approach. What's the Biblical difference between man and beast?

This is one of those 'buttons' for me, so I don't tend to handle the question very well.

Perhaps because you didn't understand the question. :icon_king:

In the bible a beast can be eaten, but not a human.

True; but the question is: What is a human?
For example is a Cro Mag or Neandertahl a human?

Well their human imagination perhaps  :icon_jokercolor:

How many skeletons of these have they found?

If neathandral existed, they would be similar to a gorilla. Gorilla has rights.

You can't trust anything these 'scientists' say.

The people who started the theory of evolution created a 50 year hoax called the piltdown man, and they have been lying their heads off ever since.

[WhiteWings]

There is a difference between finding things and using it as proof for evolution.

[thinktank]

There is a difference between finding things and using it as proof for evolution.

So you think they have found many skeletons? only use one or two as proof?

Maybe those skeletons are simply deformed human skeletons. Very possible considering the range of deformities that exist.

[WhiteWings]

There is a difference between finding things and using it as proof for evolution.

So you think they have found many skeletons? only use one or two as proof?

They have found zero missing links.  All so called missing links have proved to be mistakes or big fraud.

Maybe those skeletons are simply deformed human skeletons. Very possible considering the range of deformities that exist.

Could be. But not in all cases.
There is more than one type of evolution. The Darwinian type seems to be the only one known to most people. Dawin was wrong. Others (like haeckel) have turned it into a hoax. Darwin wasn't as convinced of his own theory as many others.