n2thelight Posted December 15, 2017 Group: Non-Conformist Theology Followers: 2 Topic Count: 48 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 2,139 Content Per Day: 0.69 Reputation: 796 Days Won: 1 Joined: 10/20/2015 Status: Offline Share Posted December 15, 2017 21 minutes ago, brakelite said: We have been informed with much boldness that real Bible scholars take the Bible literally...when it suits them. Because the following has not taken place yet, and because it cannot take place in the new earth, the only option is for it to be fulfilled in the 'millenium'. KJV Jeremiah 4 23 I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light. There are other texts describing a time to come where the earth is empty and devoid of life...in fact so broken down after the 6th plague no life is possible. That happened at the rebellion of satan,it's the reason why we were made flesh. Genesis 1:2 "And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep." Who is that Spirit of God? He is the Holy Spirit, and it is God's Spirit that moved upon the face of the waters. In the Hebrew translation of the word, "was", as used in this verse "...the earth was without form,..."; in the original text it reads "became without form...". This same mistranslation of the word "became", and turning it into the word "was" is also present in Genesis 2:7. It should read there; "..and man became a living soul." was 1961 hayah hayah (haw-yaw); a primitive root [compare OT:1933]; to exist, i.e. be or become, come to pass (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary):KJV - beacon, altogether, be (-come), accomplished, committed, like), break, cause, come (to pass), do, faint, fall, follow, happen, have, last, pertain, quit (oneself-), require, use. void 922 bohuw (bo'-hoo); from an unused root (meaning to be empty); a vacuity, i.e. (superficially) an undistinguishable ruin: KJV - emptiness, void. The correct Hebrew translation from the Massoretic Hebrew text for the words, "without form"is "tohu-va bohu" in the Hebrew Strong's dictionary. So we see that the earth was not "created without form", but it "became [tohu] without form and void". Lets go to Strong's Hebrew dictionary, reference number 1961 to verify the word "was", that we read in this verse. "Yahah, haw-yaw; a prime root, to exit; to become, or come to pass." [#1961] Excerpt from The Companion Bible Appendix 8: The word "without form" (Hebrew tohu) is used of a subsequent event which, we know not how long after the Creation, befell the primitive creation of Genesis 1:1. It occurs in Genesis 1:2. Deuteronomy 32:10. 1Samuel 12:21 (twice). Job 6:18; 12:24; 26:7. Psalm 107:40. Isaiah 24:10; 29:21; 34:11; 40:17, 23; 41:29; 44:9; 45:18, 19; 49:4; 59:4. Jeremiah 4:23. The Hebrew bohu, rendered "void", means desolate, and occurs in Genesis 1:2. Isaiah 34:11. Jeremiah 4:23. The two words together occur in Genesis 1:2. Isaiah 34:11. Jeremiah 4:23. end Companion Bible excerpt "Tohu" of the earth, then means that total destruction had come to pass upon the earth. The second "was" in the verse is in italics type because there is no verb "to be" in the Hebrew language. One of the problems in translating the Hebrew into English is that the verb, "to be" is not distinguished from the verb, "to become". At the end of Genesis 1:1 the first earth age ceased to exist in its previous form. God created the earth to be inhabited, and then He destroyed it. There was an entire earth age that existed between verses one and two of Genesis. This first earth age is spoken of in II Peter, Jeremiah, Proverbs, and Jude. We will look into these Scripture passages and try to understand the deeper meaning of our Father's Word. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missmuffet Posted December 15, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 34 Topic Count: 1,991 Topics Per Day: 0.48 Content Count: 48,689 Content Per Day: 11.81 Reputation: 30,343 Days Won: 226 Joined: 01/11/2013 Status: Offline Author Share Posted December 15, 2017 9 hours ago, n2thelight said: There will be no flesh in the millennium,at the return of Christ,all shall be changed the flesh age will be over. I reject your theology. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n2thelight Posted December 15, 2017 Group: Non-Conformist Theology Followers: 2 Topic Count: 48 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 2,139 Content Per Day: 0.69 Reputation: 796 Days Won: 1 Joined: 10/20/2015 Status: Offline Share Posted December 15, 2017 4 hours ago, missmuffet said: I reject your theology. Okay 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarvestLabourer Posted December 15, 2017 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 4 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 328 Content Per Day: 0.14 Reputation: 114 Days Won: 0 Joined: 11/08/2017 Status: Offline Birthday: 10/27/1957 Share Posted December 15, 2017 13 hours ago, brakelite said: We have been informed with much boldness that real Bible scholars take the Bible literally...when it suits them. Thank you, Brakelite. We have also been informed with much boldness to take the Bible literally... as the Holy Ghost reveals it to us. Just for some examples, the bullocks we bring unto the Lord are literal and real, but they are not physical animals. The Lord's altar is literal and real, but it is not a physical thing in a physical location. The Canaanite tribes God commands His people to kill are literal and real, but they are not tribes of people. The flesh and the blood of Jesus are meat indeed and drink indeed, but we are not eating His physical body, and drinking carnal blood. I believe God is literally speaking about spiritual things. Thank You God Paul But without a parable spake He not unto them: and when they were alone, He expounded all things to His disciples. Mark 4:34 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted December 16, 2017 Share Posted December 16, 2017 On 12/15/2017 at 3:31 AM, brakelite said: We have been informed with much boldness that real Bible scholars take the Bible literally...when it suits them. No, they just take it literally. Quote Because the following has not taken place yet, and because it cannot take place in the new earth, the only option is for it to be fulfilled in the 'millenium'. KJV Jeremiah 4 23 I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light. Actually, that has taken place. If you were at student of Scripture and took the Bible literally, you would know that Jeremiah is describing the desolation of Judah after it was decimated by the Babylonians and those living there taken into captivity. Quote There are other texts describing a time to come where the earth is empty and devoid of life...in fact so broken down after the 6th plague no life is possible. Yes, but in this post you are mixing contexts and not handling the Bible competently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted December 16, 2017 Share Posted December 16, 2017 (edited) 13 hours ago, HarvestLabourer said: Just for some examples, the bullocks we bring unto the Lord are literal and real, but they are not physical animals. No, we don't bring any kind of bullocks to the Lord. Nowhere in the New Testament do we have anything about bringing our "bullocks" to the Lord. That is just more false teaching from you and there is not an ounce of truth to it (as usual). Quote The Lord's altar is literal and real, but it is not a physical thing in a physical location. It was in the OT and it will be in the millennium. It will be a physical altar in a physical location. Quote The Canaanite tribes God commands His people to kill are literal and real, but they are not tribes of people. You mean "commanded." And yes they were real tribes of people. Quote I believe God is literally speaking about spiritual things. No, the sacrifices were real before and will be real in the future, like it or not. Edited December 16, 2017 by shiloh357 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarvestLabourer Posted December 16, 2017 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 4 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 328 Content Per Day: 0.14 Reputation: 114 Days Won: 0 Joined: 11/08/2017 Status: Offline Birthday: 10/27/1957 Share Posted December 16, 2017 10 minutes ago, shiloh357 said: No, we don't bring any kind of bullocks to the Lord. Nowhere in the New Testament do we have anything about bringing our "bullocks" to the Lord. That is just more false teaching from you and there is not an ounce of truth to it (as usual). Thank you, Shiloh. The New Testament doesn't say anything about offering up our bullocks before men either, yet you have no hesitation doing that. And I thank you or it. I am sure you sacrificed a lot of time and thought into making it. But if you haven't offered it up the Lord yet, what makes you think we should eat it? 11 minutes ago, shiloh357 said: It was in the OT and it will be in the millennium. It will be a physical altar in a physical location. As a newbie, when I first offered myself up to Jesus, and He saved me, I figured I somehow found His altar, to do that. Of course, I didn't understand anything much then, but I went out and was able to find His altar again. If one could offer bullocks upon it daily in Moses' day, I knew it wouldn't be that hard to find. 15 minutes ago, shiloh357 said: You mean "commanded." And yes they were real tribes of people. God's commandments still apply. And no, the canaanite nations are not people, but they are the ungodly spirits we must cast out. Else we are saying God commanded His people to kill, after commanding them they shalt not kill. Which was unacceptable to me. Besides that, He was teaching me the war in heaven, and driving those nations out from before me. 19 minutes ago, shiloh357 said: No, the sacrifices were real before and will be real in the future, like it or not. You first said, no, you don't bring any bullocks to the Lord. So God's children of old did it, and His children in the future will do it (like it or not), but you don't do it. Because it isn't in the New Testament. The Jews interpreted the law so, and sacrificed animals, and we are told they did wrong. So we don't have to sacrifice animals. But some future generation of Christians will have to? I believe that would be speaking of the generation that will interpret and do the law correctly. Bless Jesus Paul And he that overcomes, and keeps My works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations: And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of My Father. Revelation 2:26-27 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brakelite Posted December 16, 2017 Group: Senior Member Followers: 8 Topic Count: 23 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 977 Content Per Day: 0.21 Reputation: 641 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/15/2011 Status: Offline Share Posted December 16, 2017 1 hour ago, shiloh357 said: No, they just take it literally. Uh huh. Like for example Romans 6:23. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted December 16, 2017 Share Posted December 16, 2017 1 minute ago, HarvestLabourer said: The New Testament doesn't say anything about offering up our bullocks before men either, yet you have no hesitation doing that. And I thank you or it. I am sure you sacrificed a lot of time and thought into making it. But if you haven't offered it up the Lord yet, what makes you think we should eat it? What? Are you on medication, or is this Marijuana talking again?? Quote As a newbie, when I first offered myself up to Jesus, and He saved me, You are not saved and your posts prove it. Quote And no, the canaanite nations are not people, but they are the ungodly spirits we must cast out. Else we are saying God commanded His people to kill, after commanding them they shalt not kill. Which was unacceptable to me. History confirms that the Canaanites were real people. To deny history is to simply be delusional (or high on drugs). God didn't command against killing; He commanded against murder. God used Israel as an instrument of judgment on Canaanites. If that is unacceptable to you, it doesn't matter, because your erroneous ideas don't matter. Quote You first said, no, you don't bring any bullocks to the Lord. Yep, that is what I said. Quote The Jews interpreted the law so, and sacrificed animals, and we are told they did wrong. No, we are not told that. No one said they were wrong for sacrificing animals. God told them to do so. You are really mixed up and don't know what you're talking about. Quote So we don't have to sacrifice animals. But some future generation of Christians will have to? I am not sacrificing anything in the future. The Levites, Israelites in the restored Israel of the millennium will be sacrificing them as memorials. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted December 16, 2017 Share Posted December 16, 2017 5 minutes ago, brakelite said: Uh huh. Like for example Romans 6:23. Your point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts