OEC and The New Heavens and New Earth

[Spock]

Hey Shar,

I know you can only speculate, but are you Thinking this civilized system could be Homo Ergaster or Homo Erectus or one of those Homos around two million years ago, or are you thinking Neanderthal man around 500,000 years ago? Or much earlier? Trying to get a time frame here.

Pretty fascinating stuff. Thanks for sharing your research. I'm not sure your conclusions or inferences are right, but it is something worthy of consideration.

Cheers,

Spock out

[Shar]

Hey Shar,

I know you can only speculate, but are you Thinking this civilized system could be Homo Ergaster or Homo Erectus or one of those Homos around two million years ago, or are you thinking Neanderthal man around 500,000 years ago? Or much earlier? Trying to get a time frame here.

Pretty fascinating stuff. Thanks for sharing your research. I'm not sure your conclusions or inferences are right, but it is something worthy of consideration.

Cheers,

Spock out

 

None.  I do not believe in the evolutionary charts you are referencing.  I believe G-d creates and when He does it is complete, beautiful and lacking nothing.  These references of man present him completely otherwise.  I have not seen anything that can lead me to believe present day man ever looked like these ugly representations.

 

None of us can be absolutely right.  G-d questioning Job seems to say it all, but a consideration of this is worth our study.

 

 

[Shar]

OK, This is the third and final posting to support a previous social system before Adam and a restoration of rather than an original creation of earth in Genesis 1.

 

The Judgment of G-d for this sin and rebellion.  This judgment resulted in a flood, different from Noah’s flood.  We will call this flood, Lucifer’s flood.  This resulted in the complete destruction of this world and its social system. 

 

2 Pe.3:5 “But they are ignorant, and forget that long ago by G-ds word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water.  By these waters also the world (social system) of that time was deluged and perished (completely destroyed).  By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the Day of Judgment and destruction of ungodly men

 

Ge. 1:2 - ..and darkness (He. “Choshek” = darkness, misery, death, destruction, obscurity) was upon the face of the deep. 

 

Obscuring the sun and subsequent darkness are always a result of judgment, never of creation.  See Ge. 6-8; Ex. 10:21; Je. 4:23; Joel 2:31, Rev. 6:12; 8:12

 

Ge.1:3 – And G-d said, “Let there be light (He. “owr” = happiness, joy, morning, sun).  He is dispelling misery and death and calling for the good and the light of the existing sun.

 

Now, the account in Ge. 1 becomes the act of restoring, not an original creation.  The word created (He. “Bara” = the formative, creative process).  This is only used in Ge.1 in verse 1 for the creation of the heavens and earth and then not till verses 21 and 27 when G-d creates animals and Adam.  The word G-d uses in the other verses is made (He. “asah” = appoint, bring forth, gather,) or let (He. “hayah” = exist, come to pass, become).  In these other verses, He is calling forth what already existed. 

 

Ge. 1 - What would happen to an earth that had no sun and was covered by water?  It would be a solid frozen ice ball.  And the Spirit of G-d moved (He. “rachaph” = move and shake) upon the face of the waters.  He broke up the ice.  Then, He proceeded to separate the waters (verses 6-8) and then the earth (dry land appeared (verses 9-10).  The literal Hebrew reads “..and let appear the dry land”  the word appear (He. “raah” – behold, look on, appear)

 

The earth was covered by waters as a result of the flood brought about by the judgment of G-d for Lucifer’s sin and rebellion.  This flood, Lucifer’s flood, is different from Noah’s flood in that:

 

The earth was completely laid waste and empty, made totally dark, no light from heaven, all vegetation destroyed, no continual abating of the waters, waters taken off in one day, all fish destroyed, no fowls, no animals left, no social system left, (2 Pe.3:6), no ark made to save life.

 

Conclusion - There are too many more verses that can support a previous social system here on earth before Adam.  There is a case to support this.  Besides, G-d says His nature and His creation testify of Him.  We have science that can show us that the age of the present earth and universe is much greater than 10,000 years.  YE have to ask, “if G-d really is the Creator He claims to be in John 1:1, creating from the beginning, and He calls himself the Ancient of Days, what was G-d doing prior to the last 10,000 years?”  What was He doing for eons and eons and eons and eons?  OE and YE will never agree, but at least we can understand why each of us differs and what can lead to different viewpoints, while still being a believing and loving body.

[enoob57]

This is very imaginative! The first written indications are now imagined as pertaining to that which is not written or rather outside of God's

historical account of His creation of man and that Word given to man to understand and lead man to Himself... this is gnosticism at it's

finest in attempt to lead us to foundations not entered in His Word as though they were. What was before Genesis 1:1 was God and

angels as it is written. To take a reference to flood and make it another not written about but as you indicate infers is that outside of the

written context and that's all satan wants to accomplish is another path not found in His Word but imagined...

 

Here is Scripture that refutes all that you have imagined as the defined purpose of the O.T. 1Cor 10:1-12. as it

is stated Fathers context specific examples to us! Here you have written of that before we were and it is not examples to us- for it is not

written to us but to God and angels that were there! Clever to say the least for the itchy ears..   Love, Steven

[Spock]

This is very imaginative! The first written indications are now imagined as pertaining to that which is not written or rather outside of God's

historical account of His creation of man and that Word given to man to understand and lead man to Himself... this is gnosticism at it's

finest in attempt to lead us to foundations not entered in His Word as though they were. What was before Genesis 1:1 was God and

angels as it is written. To take a reference to flood and make it another not written about but as you indicate infers is that outside of the

written context and that's all satan wants to accomplish is another path not found in His Word but imagined...

Here is Scripture that refutes all that you have imagined as the defined purpose of the O.T. 1Cor 10:1-12. as it

is stated Fathers context specific examples to us! Here you have written of that before we were and it is not examples to us- for it is not

written to us but to God and angels that were there! Clever to say the least for the itchy ears.. Love, Steven

Enoob, i do not see the relevance nor rebuttal to shars post being made by you. But I do see you doing what you always do- bible thumping -with a passage that has nothing to do with the thread conversation. Is it asking to much for you to stick to the thread topic and leave your thumping out? We get it- you think all old earthers are blasphemous and compromising the word of god. You are entitled to your opinion so I don't want to deny you that, but you are like a broken record going on and on and on and on.

You really are not debating or discussing the topics in most of these science threads, so Maybe you should not even bother to visit them if they upset you that much. What do you think?

Spock out

[Shar]

This is very imaginative! The first written indications are now imagined as pertaining to that which is not written or rather outside of God's

historical account of His creation of man and that Word given to man to understand and lead man to Himself... this is gnosticism at it's

finest in attempt to lead us to foundations not entered in His Word as though they were. What was before Genesis 1:1 was God and

angels as it is written. To take a reference to flood and make it another not written about but as you indicate infers is that outside of the

written context and that's all satan wants to accomplish is another path not found in His Word but imagined...

 

Here is Scripture that refutes all that you have imagined as the defined purpose of the O.T. 1Cor 10:1-12. as it

is stated Fathers context specific examples to us! Here you have written of that before we were and it is not examples to us- for it is not

written to us but to God and angels that were there! Clever to say the least for the itchy ears..   Love, Steven

Well Steven, I did not devise this or originally write this.  It was not from my imagination.  There are many, many Christian scholars and believers who dug down into and searched out the scriptures to consider this as a possibility.  If you think 1 Cor. 10:1-12 is the only purpose of the O.T., then you have missed its true purpose.  All of it is the true holy scriptures of G-d.  When Jesus, the Apostles, and Paul referred to scripture and "it is written", they referred only to the O.T.  The N.T. never existed.  You can have the O.T. without the N.T., but you cannot have the N.T. without the O.T.  All throughout the N.T. it makes references back to the O.T. 

 

We, in the church, have neglected a great deal of the scriptures that Jesus, the Apostles and Paul upheld.  The history of the N.T.  shows that it was not brought together until about the 4th century A.D. under a council by Constantine.  Many other books and letters were considered, but this council decided not to include them.  We know from Paul's writings that there is a letter to the Corinthians that was lost.  We have some of Paul's letters, but we have none of the ones the believing communities sent to him.  So we don't get all the complete picture from his letters.  We cannot ignore the O.T.  All of G-d's word is inspired and requires study. 

 

As far as this Pre-Adam possibility being another pathway that Satan would like to accomplish.  This does not take away from G-d's purpose, glory, creation, value of man or His redemptive purpose.  As a matter of fact, this should make you rejoice that you are created in G-d's image and far above any creation He has ever created.  Most of all, He provided a means of redemption for us!

 

I do not, nor do I advocate, people to swallow everything they read or hear, but I am saying do not be afraid to thoroughly study before you make any judgment to its lack of possibility.  Like I said, this theory has been around for hundreds of years.

[enoob57]

Well Steven, I did not devise this or originally write this. It was not from my imagination.

Nor did I claim that you did- I am aware of this teaching and studied it a good many years back

It is to this subject I address imaginative without Scripural support.

 

There are many, many Christian scholars and believers who dug down into and searched out the scriptures to consider this as a possibility. If you think 1 Cor. 10:1-12 is the only purpose of the O.T., then you have missed its true purpose.

Please inform me of what you think the true purpose is!

This is mine:

http://www.gotquestions.org/Old-Testament-theology.html

I also love the O.T. for it's purpose and design. It's purpose is clear to

communicate God, in The Who He is, to fallen man and no one is good enough to stand

in His Presence on their own merrit... hence in the fulness of time Christ

came because the O.T. had completed that task completely! So talking of things that

God and angels have only knowledge of serve no purpose to The Word written to man.

Do they?

 

All of it is the true holy scriptures of G-d. When Jesus, the Apostles, and Paul referred to scripture and "it is written", they referred only to the O.T. The N.T. never existed. You can have the O.T. without the N.T., but you cannot have the N.T. without the O.T. All throughout the N.T. it makes references back to the O.T.

We, in the church, have neglected a great deal of the scriptures that Jesus, the Apostles and Paul upheld. The history of the N.T. shows that it was not brought together until about the 4th century A.D. under a council by Constantine. Many other books and letters were considered, but this council decided not to include them. We know from Paul's writings that there is a letter to the Corinthians that was lost. We have some of Paul's letters, but we have none of the ones the believing communities sent to him. So we don't get all the complete picture from his letters. We cannot ignore the O.T. All of G-d's word is inspired and requires study.

The canonizing of Scripture and the point of what you are making here eludes me

And I can't see where in my post where I said ignore OT writings?

 

As far as this Pre-Adam possibility being another pathway that Satan would like to accomplish. This does not take away from G-d's purpose, glory, creation, value of man or His redemptive purpose. As a matter of fact, this should make you rejoice that you are created in G-d's image and far above any creation He has ever created. Most of all, He provided a means of redemption for us!

You will have to agree when Jesus met with satan for His temptations it was with

Scripture and it was with satan as he perverted the text to indicate something other than

what was written... thus showing us the example of what Our warfare would be like and how to

defeat it! You are taking beginning and not making it beginning but restructuring from

privious judgment of lucifer. A content that the O.T. or N.T. never alludes to as a

directive of God in writing it! Perhaps you could understand the summation of the entire

Bible as this

2 Tim 3:16-17

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine,

for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of

God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

KJV

so tell me how does preadamic state come into purpose with the written purpose of

Scripture?

 

I do not, nor do I advocate, people to swallow everything they read or hear, but I am saying do not be afraid to thoroughly study before you make any judgment to its lack of possibility. Like I said, this theory has been around for hundreds of years.

God warns us about itchy ears... 'that's why I buy q-tips '

seriously it is the wanting of more than what is written or the more of understanding

of that which is not known... for me it is the danger of this type of rational to make

a lot out of very little! Love, Steven

[enoob57]

This is very imaginative! The first written indications are now imagined as pertaining to that which is not written or rather outside of God's

historical account of His creation of man and that Word given to man to understand and lead man to Himself... this is gnosticism at it's

finest in attempt to lead us to foundations not entered in His Word as though they were. What was before Genesis 1:1 was God and

angels as it is written. To take a reference to flood and make it another not written about but as you indicate infers is that outside of the

written context and that's all satan wants to accomplish is another path not found in His Word but imagined...

Here is Scripture that refutes all that you have imagined as the defined purpose of the O.T. 1Cor 10:1-12. as it

is stated Fathers context specific examples to us! Here you have written of that before we were and it is not examples to us- for it is not

written to us but to God and angels that were there! Clever to say the least for the itchy ears.. Love, Steven

Enoob, i do not see the relevance nor rebuttal to shars post being made by you. But I do see you doing what you always do- bible thumping -with a passage that has nothing to do with the thread conversation. Is it asking to much for you to stick to the thread topic and leave your thumping out? We get it- you think all old earthers are blasphemous and compromising the word of god. You are entitled to your opinion so I don't want to deny you that, but you are like a broken record going on and on and on and on.

You really are not debating or discussing the topics in most of these science threads, so Maybe you should not even bother to visit them if they upset you that much. What do you think?

Spock out

Perhaps she saw more than you as her post was much more inviting to reply too Love, Steven

[enoob57]

The theological devastation of a pre-adamic race lies in The de-construction of

what God has written about His Character in this fashion:

Gen 1:31

31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very

good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

KJV

A concluding factor to the review of God in His creative acts- in which

very good cannot be built upon very bad. God did not build Life upon death

and judgment. For The Holiness of God does not allow for this in Scripture

so defined in this passage-

Jude 23

23 And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire;

hating even the garment spotted by the flesh.

KJV

as the Scripture indicates God's Holiness hates that which was next to sin being

the body we are (1st) born-> and have sinned in and also the world in which the sin

reigned in death till Christ's finished work. Now all the second born of Spirit

await the new body and new heaven and new earth wherein eternity dwells and where

sin has never been nor considered! Thus riveting us to this truth in His Word

Matt 20:16

16 So the last shall be first, and the first last:

for many be called, but few chosen.

KJV

A scholar may only conclude the last not being death and hell now swallowed up but the

new heaven and earth being the eternal state 'IS' the last of that which 'IS' written;

Therefore a heaven and earth in the first begin of which we are-> must also be of this

perfection. The first being the last and the last first... verifying The 'Very Good'

of God's descriptive synopsis of all He had made.

Leaving sadly the only and last resolve of in this:

Gen 2:17

17 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.

KJV

Rom 5:12-14

12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world,

and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for

that all have sinned: 13 (For until the law sin was in

the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even

over them that had not sinned after the similitude of

Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that

was to come.

KJV

for any death preexistent to the sin of Adam makes God appear to be a liar- God Forbids!

Love, Steven

[Enoch2021]

 

Well Steven, I did not devise this or originally write this. It was not from my imagination.

Nor did I claim that you did- I am aware of this teaching and studied it a good many years back

It is to this subject I address imaginative without Scripural support.

 

There are many, many Christian scholars and believers who dug down into and searched out the scriptures to consider this as a possibility. If you think 1 Cor. 10:1-12 is the only purpose of the O.T., then you have missed its true purpose.

Please inform me of what you think the true purpose is!

This is mine:

http://www.gotquestions.org/Old-Testament-theology.html

I also love the O.T. for it's purpose and design. It's purpose is clear to

communicate God, in The Who He is, to fallen man and no one is good enough to stand

in His Presence on their own merrit... hence in the fulness of time Christ

came because the O.T. had completed that task completely! So talking of things that

God and angels have only knowledge of serve no purpose to The Word written to man.

Do they?

 

All of it is the true holy scriptures of G-d. When Jesus, the Apostles, and Paul referred to scripture and "it is written", they referred only to the O.T. The N.T. never existed. You can have the O.T. without the N.T., but you cannot have the N.T. without the O.T. All throughout the N.T. it makes references back to the O.T.

We, in the church, have neglected a great deal of the scriptures that Jesus, the Apostles and Paul upheld. The history of the N.T. shows that it was not brought together until about the 4th century A.D. under a council by Constantine. Many other books and letters were considered, but this council decided not to include them. We know from Paul's writings that there is a letter to the Corinthians that was lost. We have some of Paul's letters, but we have none of the ones the believing communities sent to him. So we don't get all the complete picture from his letters. We cannot ignore the O.T. All of G-d's word is inspired and requires study.

The canonizing of Scripture and the point of what you are making here eludes me

And I can't see where in my post where I said ignore OT writings?

 

As far as this Pre-Adam possibility being another pathway that Satan would like to accomplish. This does not take away from G-d's purpose, glory, creation, value of man or His redemptive purpose. As a matter of fact, this should make you rejoice that you are created in G-d's image and far above any creation He has ever created. Most of all, He provided a means of redemption for us!

You will have to agree when Jesus met with satan for His temptations it was with

Scripture and it was with satan as he perverted the text to indicate something other than

what was written... thus showing us the example of what Our warfare would be like and how to

defeat it! You are taking beginning and not making it beginning but restructuring from

privious judgment of lucifer. A content that the O.T. or N.T. never alludes to as a

directive of God in writing it! Perhaps you could understand the summation of the entire

Bible as this

2 Tim 3:16-17

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine,

for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of

God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

KJV

so tell me how does preadamic state come into purpose with the written purpose of

Scripture?

 

I do not, nor do I advocate, people to swallow everything they read or hear, but I am saying do not be afraid to thoroughly study before you make any judgment to its lack of possibility. Like I said, this theory has been around for hundreds of years.

God warns us about itchy ears... 'that's why I buy q-tips '

seriously it is the wanting of more than what is written or the more of understanding

of that which is not known... for me it is the danger of this type of rational to make

a lot out of very little! Love, Steven

 

 

Enoob, sorry of topic....editing question.

 

Your reply is the perfect example....How do you pull individual quotes as above and reply to each of them individually??

 

Newbie