Indentured Servant

Within that first created man was every descendant, including everyone who lives today. Even scientists tell us the entire human race is descendent from one man and one woman, (which came from man, Gen 2).

Please elaborate... To what people from Genesis 1 are you referring?

Yes, siblings, nieces, nephews, children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren, etc. Adam, Eve, and their offspring were concerned with populating the earth, and establishing communities, villages, towns, etc. The locale of where Cain was sent could have been made up of descendants of himself, his brother, and of his parents. The Bible alludes to this, but it was not necessary for God to document the lineage to explain this. Consider this: the story of the Tower of Babel included the descendants of Noah, but Scripture did not expound on how they became residents of Babel. Ya' just have to understand that God's primary focus was to "populate the earth."

That does not jive with the creation narrative of Scripture, but you are, of course, entitled to a simpler interpretation.

One of the primary tasks for Adam and Eve was to reproduce and populate the earth. Cain and Able could have been as old as 200 years at the time. Adam and Eve had daughters also, as well as other sons; however, God chose to document only the children who were important to the bloodline to Jesus. (Based on Eve's statement about Seth replacing Able, it is likely that she understood that he was a chosen son, not that she hadn't had any other children.) If reproduction was as early as fifteen years of age, one could reasonably consider that every fifteen years, or so, there would be exponential population growth. It's conceivable that within 200 years, (or less), that there were thousands of people who descended from Adam and Eve and had been carrying on the task of populating the world, and building towns, etc.

It's not sinful, but they had given no thought of being naked, until after they ate the fruit, and gained awareness awareness of that fact, and felt ashamed. The image of God is defined in Scripture. In Scripture, (OT & NT), this image is reflected in numerous passages, providing numerous examples of how it applies to Mankind; however, it is so difficult for people to understand, (or even accept), because it has been misunderstood and mistaught for so long.

"Then the survivors from all the nations that have attacked Jerusalem will go up year after year to worship the King, the LORD Almighty, and to celebrate the Festival of Tabernacles." -Zechariah 14:16

Even out of context, your paraphrase of this verse doesn't match with what it actually says. -You removed Christ as the other recipient of the promises, (were those same promises made to Christ fulfilled in Christ also?) -You added the word fulfilled. -To validate your statement, you should provide scriptural references to the specific promises made to Abraham and his "seed," and how they were fulfilled. I took the liberty to read it in context, and in the light of biblical prophecies and the stated promises, and still, nothing fits your interpretation. I thank you for contributing to this thread.

My apology. I suppose you may have offered good information, but I couldn't understand the point you were making in view of the topic Scripture.

That's contrary to every scripture posted in this thread. You are more than welcome to believe that, but I can't deviate from what God actually said. He never said that. So, "7000" actually means 7 x 10 x 10 x 10... So, when I see a number, such as 7000, I should break down 7000 by taking the first number, "7," and multiplying it by the cubed root of 1000... And then, when I see 7(10 x 10 x 10), I should automatically understand, by virtue of that mathematical series, that this is only to be understood as a reference to Divine Completeness multiplied by Completeness... Do the men represent Divine Completeness multiplied by Completeness, or just their number, (which obviously isn't the number given)? What Scriptural reference(s) will define this numerology you've used in interpreting this example?

So, is that equating being lost as being "under the law?" (Jesus said "the lost," you rephrased it as "those under the law.") I apologize if there is a connection you're trying to to get me to see, but I just can't find scripture that precedes that conclusion. I understand that, if someone in the lineage of Jacob comes to Christ, he is no longer under the law, and no longer belongs to the Israel that will be punished... But why would a gentile claim the name and promises of a nation, "Israel," who will be judged under the law?

Oh, as well with me. I suppose what I was trying to convey, is that asking a general audience about a term that only people of certain denominations have been exposed to, the answer may only be limited to certain denominations. If asked, what do you find in Scripture that assures you of salvation when you die, others can answer without the limitation of a term not used in their conversation. Perhaps, you may have intended it for a more specific group, and, if that's the case, please forgive my intrusion. My view of Scripture may not offer a welcomed response to a theological stated question. I appreciate your understanding.

I agree on this. “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.” -Jesus "For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.” -Jesus I find in referring to the so-called "Lost" Tribes that the word "Lost" is a nothing more than a moniker that people have given to the Ten Tribes, but Scripture speaks nothing of them as "lost tribes." Numerous times in the Prophets, God specifically included both, (10 tribes and Judah) in a promise to return to them.

I really like the way you stated that... Very insightful!

"You will be faithful to Jacob, and show love to Abraham, as you pledged an oath to our ancestors in days long ago." -Micah 7:20

"I will give them a heart to know me, that I am the LORD. They will be my people, and I will be their God, for they will return to me with all their heart." -Jeremiah 24:7 “ ‘Return, faithless Israel,’ declares the LORD, ‘I will frown on you no longer, for I am faithful,’ declares the LORD, ‘I will not be angry forever." -Jeremiah 3:12 "Who is a God like you, who pardons sin and forgives the transgression of the remnant of his inheritance? You do not stay angry forever but delight to show mercy." -Micah 7:18

“ ‘You adulterous wife! You prefer strangers to your own husband! -Eze 16:32 "Therefore tell the people: This is what the LORD Almighty says: ‘Return to me,’ declares the LORD Almighty, ‘and I will return to you,’ says the LORD Almighty." -Zechariah 1:3 "A remnant will return, a remnant of Jacob will return to the Mighty God." -Isaiah 10:21 "In that day the Lord will reach out his hand a second time to reclaim the surviving remnant of his people." -Isaiah 11:11 "For out of Jerusalem will come a remnant, and out of Mount Zion a band of survivors. The zeal of the LORD Almighty will accomplish this." -Isaiah 37:32

"Did Israel not understand? First, Moses says, “I will make you envious by those who are not a nation; I will make you angry by a nation that has no understanding. -Romans 10:19 "They made me jealous by what is no god and angered me with their worthless idols. I will make them envious by those who are not a people; I will make them angry by a nation that has no understanding." -Deuteronomy 32:21

Perhaps one might consider, rather than trying to define a theological term not found in Scripture, to seek Scriptural assurance of what qualifies one to be assured of eternal life.

There was a man who had two sons. He went to the first and said, ‘Son, go and work today in the vineyard.’ “ ‘I will not,’ he answered, but later he changed his mind and went. “Then the father went to the other son and said the same thing. He answered, ‘I will, sir,’ but he did not go. “Which of the two did what his father wanted?”

If people are consistently told that the OT and Jews are no longer significant to God, they might not think it's necessary to understand God's covenant with the descendants of Jacob. Knowing exactly what God promised to them can cause them to doubt what they've been taught. No one wants to doubt their church's teaching. When someone of a different interpretation, who also trusts what they've been taught, are often viewed as trying to change a person's beliefs. Debates and arguments typically develop out of this.

Michael, I absolutely agree. If it is a reasonable request to also delete my post that you replied to. I am a bit embarrassed that I allowed someone to irk me to the point that I'd made such a comment. I believe the topic was hijacked, even though I stand by the scripture presented without interpretation. I allowed the topic to be soiled by my own reactions, and am appropriately repentant as a result. Thank you for keeping me in check, brother.

I wouldn't have worded it that way, but I am familiar with events over the years that may fit that idea.

Yes, that's often used when the word cannot be translated into a English word or phrase with clarity, or won't fit with our English grammar. I think it's funny that a latin transliteration is used to get the English word "rapture," instead of the transliteration of the Greek word of the same meaning, harpazo... because an English transliteration of it already exists... "harpoon." It just wouldn't sound right for people awaiting the Harpooning of the Church.

My upbringing taught me inappropriate anger. I saw a slogan from someone titled: MY Math... PTSD + CCW = RIP The world is filled with anger triggers, (yeah, I did that intentionally), and many people lack negotiation skills to combat that.