Prophecy about DNA: Good and Evil Seed

Sep 3, 2009
12,402
5,049
113
Florida
Actually trying to follow this thread is giving me a real headache!

'When the perfect comes'............. Consider a sheaf of wheat or any other reaped grain. The cord around it ties together what is above and what is below it and what is within..
So it is with 1 Cor 13:10,............it ties or gathers those points before it and those points that follow. EG. Paul ties together the fact that speaking in tongues will pass with the idea that childishness and immaturity will pass. That is not to say that speaking in tongues is a sign of immaturity of those who do it, but rather it is a sign for an immature Church
It is there in black and white for anyone to read. He is not talking about anything external to us.
Yes sir, I agree with you totally. It is right there in the black and white of the wrtten Word of God.

It is not brain surgery!!!!
 
Sep 3, 2009
12,402
5,049
113
Florida
I find the whole idea of DNA being good or evil completely unsustainable.
If Adam and Eve's DNA was changed through their rebellion, then it follows that DNA would be changed (back) by obedience. And since the act of rebellion took only a second or so, it should follow that an act of obedience need only last a second or so to completely reverse the DNA change.......No such proof, no such evidence, no such truth.
Have a care...good/bad DNA/genes are used by Satan to make homosexuality, rape, murder, theft and any one of countless irregularities in human behavior completely innocent and unaccountable for. That is Satan at his lying best.
When mankind rebelled against the Lord's authority, our DNA did not change, it was our relationship with the Lord that changed.
Through the Grace and Mercy of the Lord Jesus Christ, our relationship with the Lord will be fully restored at the resurrection, it has in part been restored already, but our DNA remains as it is, and will remain so till our bodily decomposition for we are made from dust and we will return to dust..DNA not exempted.

I believe the revelation of God is complete for the time up to His return with Power and Glory. Even the two witnesses will have nothing new to reveal, only that those who mock them will be toast.
AMEN!
 

GBzone

Inactive
Nov 4, 2014
348
61
28
70
DNA is more complicated. Scripture tells us that eating the fruit caused a fatal change that no amount of "We'll be good now" could change - thus all living things die. They have looked for dna causes for such as homosexuality and have thus far failed. Which leads to the conclusion that no flesh is born that way. But propensities for certain problems have been theorized - like alcoholism runs in families - or witness Angelina Jolie having extreme surgery to avoid cancer. Last I looked - researchers had found that all human beings(male & female) come from ONE female (oh and she wasn't an ape). I dunno but they were working then on the genetics of the male and haven't looked to see where they have gotten to. There are numerous attempts throughout scripture of Satan trying to mess with the patriarchal bloodlines. Do you have any doubt that your dna is a map extending back to your ancestors? Whether we were aware of dna from the beginning or not - the Creator knew of it. And if you look in scripture - you can see it there. There are 254 matches to seed in the KJV with 57 in Genesis alone. There are 205 matches for child and there are (separately from child) 1822 matches for children.
Just saying


PS. don't accept any dna upgrades - mark of the beast

What then do you make of Pauls warning not to get embroiled in "genealogies"?

To the Jews they could be counted as important insofar as they are an unbroken line and witness to the laws and the prophets even as they are to Abraham and him to Noah and him to Adam. Hence the reason why so many 'solutions' to destroy and break their unspoken witness of Gods dealings with man and the unbroken line of the Bible .
Nevertheless "not all are Jews" and some Jews who the scriptures said " believed on Him" were declared to be children of the devil.
Are we to think that it is to do with mans DNA no.
Because ALL men whether Jew or Gentile are "sold unto sin" as argued by Paul in Romans . Who then can boast ? Either in their DNA or not?
For not even Saul of Tarsus who was more qualified than most being a "Hebrew of the Hebrews " and according to the law "blameless" was found to be justified and all his "righteousnesses was as filthy rags in Gods sight"
Now if a man is BORNagain of what dna do you think he is? Of Adam? No. For by nature and natural birth we are all born as "children of wrath" and" children of disobedience" It is no use having ANY confidence in the flesh for God "condemned sin in the flesh".and "in my flesh there is no good thing"
The body is therefore still subject to sin and death. For mortal has not yet put on immortality and" corruption incorruption" But if we are His the body has been redeemed "yet to be revealed" It is the Spirit then that must rule and reign so that we do not let sin reign in our mortal bodies.
For the body is dead and if the body is dead "through sin" of what use is the DNA of it?
For is it not soon to pass away?
it is not the dna that is cleansed but the soul .
and pray tell of what 'dna' then are we if we are BORN again not of corruptible seed but of the incorruptible seed which is the word of God?
if I am a NEW man and a new creation . Then the old man and the old creation has or is about to pass away.

In Christ
gerald
Again.....I guess it is just me, but I am unable to process all of your comments.. You seem to be unable to stay focused on the conversation and wind up all over the place.

Your comment of.........
"Though you have asserted that by your understanding of Greek it cannot be so . That in my view is not enough . Nor convincing."

That my friend is an untenable position. You are making yourself "unteachable" and that is dangereous. You seem to be unable to grasp that the fact that every language has "gramatical" stipulations in it and those things are not able to be be ignored or rejected because we do not like them.

In the English language the "gramatics" stiulate that it is I BEFORE E EXCEPT AFTER C.
That can not be rejected because you do not like it. IT is what it is and not what we want it to be.

May the Lord bless you and I am stepping away from the conversation with you as it is not profitable for you.
Yet by your understanding of Greek you say that Prophecy does not include the foreseeing of events but have reduced it to speaking forth.
I would ask speak what forth?
I then pointed out beyond dispute that things ARE foretold in scripture . Both in old and the New testament and that principally you assertion by your understanding of the Greek then is either wrong or the Greek is wrong . For the clear teaching of scripture is more than it is just" speaking forth "
if then I am right by the teaching of scripture and you are wrong by the teaching of Greek. Then I must conclude either the Greek is wrong or your understanding of it is . For I do not hold that the teaching of scripture is .

You are of course free to step back from the conversation.
Even as I am free to dispute the overreliance on ones own understanding of Greek.
You would need then to resolve what the scripture teaches and what you understand of the Greek . For as things stand they contradict each other , Insofar as while it may well indeed (not disputed) mean "speaks forth" etc but that if the Greek is correct then it means more than your understanding of it .

in Christ
gerald
 

GBzone

Inactive
Nov 4, 2014
348
61
28
70
"Is it not written "the voice of the Lord walked in the cool of the evening " " No it is not!
Gen 3:8. And they heard the sound of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God among the trees of the garden. Esv

Gen 3:8. 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. Kjv.
Please note that walking has an entirely different meaning than walked within the context of the passage.
You are trying to say that the voice of the Lord walked, whereas the Text says the sound/voice (ie noise) of (ie. made by) the Lord walking....
Please consider what you are doing with Scripture. Though the rest of your post seems fairly right.
As Spike Milligan of the Goons said. "it's all rather confusing really":)
I will accept the correction that "and they heard the voice of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day"

I had misquoted and said
'The voice of the lord walked in the cool of the evening"

It was the VOICE of God that walked . I did not therefore change the meaning at all . In the cool of the day is when? if not the evening?

I do not accept the ESV as an accurate translation at all.
But one simply 'translated' to fit mens thinking of what is written.

'They heard the sound of the Lord walking in the cool of the evening ' is VERY different .

the sound of a person walking is not the same as the voice of the Lord walking .

You will have then to ask yourself what is a VOICE?

A person walking in a garden can be heard by their FOOTSTEPS and body brushing the vegetation.
But it does not say that . It says the voice of the Lord .

Walking and walked in what way are they different other than the tense of an action of he who walks ?
You would have to explain how they have entirely different meanings in the context .

Jonah fled from the presence of the Lord when he rebelled against the Word of God given to him to prophecy against Ninivah (take note those who say it has nothing to do with foreseeing or foretelling of events )
Adam and Eve fled from the presence of the Lord when they heard the voice of the Lord walking in the garden in the cool of the day.
Who can flee from the presence of God?
For as David pointed out ".......... if I made my bed in hell you are there..........." and so on.

is it not written "man shall not live (by every tree that was good to eat ) by bread alone ,but by every word that proceedeth from the mouth of God " or that which God spake as to what was good to eat and what was evil to eat?
Tell me if the Word that goes forth from God is it that not then the Voice of God?
But a voice is what you hear before the words are understood ? or a voice is a word without a body .
It is the sound of one speaking . Not the words always heard .

"My Word that goeth forth out of my mouth ............." needs must be also the voice the audible sound of the one who speaks as it were .

So I will unless convinced biblically otherwise that it was the Lord who walked in the cool of the day and has an implication that was His custom to do so and to talk and have fellowship with Adam and Eve that was only broken when they sinned . Yet he had not changed and sought them out who were now lost and hiding in the dark as it were .
Thus he called them from their darkness into His presence that was and is light where all was revealed what they had tried to hide .

The Voice then was the Lord before he received a body to suffer in. "A body hast thou prepared for Me"

in Christ
gerald
 
May 19, 2012
3,956
1,297
113
68
Regarding DNA.....did you skip the begats of scripture? DNA was created by Whom? There are 225 matches of begat including 15 such references in Matthew. This is how we know where Christ came from. What context is Paul talking about? And how does your understanding of what Paul said rack up against the rest of scripture? Further @GBzone - why do you put typed words on my keyboard that I did not type? I did not say that one needs to cleanse their DNA - that was the OP - not mine. I did say that all life on the planet has DNA - including people. It carries information. God created it and I would guess (sarcasm) He can read it. We were made in the image of God. Do you suppose that might be recorded in our DNA? Or do you doubt that the Adversary has attempted over and over again to break the line down to Jesus. If so you need to read the OT again.

You seem to like to cherry pick to discard any thought that doesn't agree with your own.
 
May 19, 2012
3,956
1,297
113
68
What correction did you stand then if you continue to think God's voice walked of an evening with Adam & Eve? His custom was prior to the Fall. They knew and walked with God and you pick a bizarre reading of one verse to think otherwise.
 

GBzone

Inactive
Nov 4, 2014
348
61
28
70
Regarding DNA.....did you skip the begats of scripture? DNA was created by Whom? There are 225 matches of begat ou including 15 such references in Matthew. This is how we know where Christ came from. What context is Paul talking about? And how does your understanding of what Paul said rack up against the rest of scripture? Further @GBzone - why do you put typed words on my keyboard that I did not type? I did not say that one needs to cleanse their DNA - that was the OP - not mine. I did say that all life on the planet has DNA - including people. It carries information. God created it and I would guess (sarcasm) He can read it. We were made in the image of God. Do you suppose that might be recorded in our DNA? Or do you doubt that the Adversary has attempted over and over again to break the line down to Jesus. If so you need to read the OT again.

You seem to like to cherry pick to discard any thought that doesn't agree with your own.
I always endeavour to reply or answer any objection to what I have written. My apologies to misquote you .
Adam was CREATED in the image of God .
All that followed were BORN in the image of Adam . and thus we are "shapen in iniquity"
and why in part the great need and "must be BORNagain"
"not of the corruptible seed which is of the first Adam but of the incoruptable seed which is the Word of God"
Thus the DNA if you wish to put it like that of the first Adam is of no good at all and cannot be remedied .
if then you are NOT born again I would argue that a man can be read like a book or God can do so.
As I said before when my first born son was born I saw and recognised that he bore my image. He bore my image because he came forth from me and I was his father . If he had not come from me then he would have born the image of his true father .
The image of God was lost or marred when men fell and became subject to sin and death .
Jesus came to seek and to save that which was lost and he being the "express image of the invisible God" came not only to destroy the wolrds of the devil .But to be the second or last Adam .
A second in that he is likened unto the first but that after the first there was no other since or before like the first till Jesus came . The last Adam in that he is likned unto the first but that after Him there are no others .
Thus it is written that "Levi was in the loins of Abraham when he gave tithes to Melchesidech" if then Levi being a Jew was in the loins of Abraham .Then I was in the loins of Adam when he disobeyed God and became subject to sin and death .
if then I was bound by the law IN the first Adam . Then I am free In the last .
For while by his disobedience I was under the curse IN him.
In Christ I was blessed "IN Him from before the foundations of the world."
If then he who receives Christ " receives Him that sent him " Then I am received by Him for they thyat honour me I will honour.
If then I am born of that incorruptable seed which is the Word of God .Then the image of God is now IN me and thus recognisable by the father as a Son.
For a man is not so much rejected because he has sinned fro have not all sinned?
But God has made it simple and a mans eternal destiny is determined by his acceptance or receiving and honouring of Jesus Christ .
Both as a remedy and remission for sin but also by his resurrection our justification and adoption as sons .

DNA then has nothing to do with it .

Unless you think that God has DNA? I see nowhere in scripture to suggest such a thing .

and while Jesus was BORN of a woman and thus fully man.
He was not of the seed of Adam .
and His blood was not of Mary but of His father . Who is God .
I don't underdstand the hows and wherefores of it .Save that the blood that coursed through his veins was not of Adam and therefore not of the 'life' of Adam But of God .
For "the life is in the blood"
and in that regard eternal life coursed through His veins .

in Christ
gerald
 

GBzone

Inactive
Nov 4, 2014
348
61
28
70
What correction did you stand then if you continue to think God's voice walked of an evening with Adam & Eve? His custom was prior to the Fall. They knew and walked with God and you pick a bizarre reading of one verse to think otherwise.
I did not in my first quote stretch the verse out of its meaning . I simply did not accurately quote it . fair enough .

But it simply says what it says . I do not accept the ESV as anything like an accurate translation of that verse . and gave my reasons for saying so .
 
Jul 22, 2010
3,147
1,274
113
74
Australia
I will accept the correction that "and they heard the voice of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day"

I had misquoted and said
'The voice of the lord walked in the cool of the evening"

It was the VOICE of God that walked . I did not therefore change the meaning at all . In the cool of the day is when? if not the evening?

I do not accept the ESV as an accurate translation at all.
But one simply 'translated' to fit mens thinking of what is written.

'They heard the sound of the Lord walking in the cool of the evening ' is VERY different .

the sound of a person walking is not the same as the voice of the Lord walking .

You will have then to ask yourself what is a VOICE?

A person walking in a garden can be heard by their FOOTSTEPS and body brushing the vegetation.
But it does not say that . It says the voice of the Lord .

Walking and walked in what way are they different other than the tense of an action of he who walks ?
You would have to explain how they have entirely different meanings in the context .

Jonah fled from the presence of the Lord when he rebelled against the Word of God given to him to prophecy against Ninivah (take note those who say it has nothing to do with foreseeing or foretelling of events )
Adam and Eve fled from the presence of the Lord when they heard the voice of the Lord walking in the garden in the cool of the day.
Who can flee from the presence of God?
For as David pointed out ".......... if I made my bed in hell you are there..........." and so on.

is it not written "man shall not live (by every tree that was good to eat ) by bread alone ,but by every word that proceedeth from the mouth of God " or that which God spake as to what was good to eat and what was evil to eat?
Tell me if the Word that goes forth from God is it that not then the Voice of God?
But a voice is what you hear before the words are understood ? or a voice is a word without a body .
It is the sound of one speaking . Not the words always heard .

"My Word that goeth forth out of my mouth ............." needs must be also the voice the audible sound of the one who speaks as it were .

So I will unless convinced biblically otherwise that it was the Lord who walked in the cool of the day and has an implication that was His custom to do so and to talk and have fellowship with Adam and Eve that was only broken when they sinned . Yet he had not changed and sought them out who were now lost and hiding in the dark as it were .
Thus he called them from their darkness into His presence that was and is light where all was revealed what they had tried to hide .

The Voice then was the Lord before he received a body to suffer in. "A body hast thou prepared for Me"

in Christ
gerald
Well, have you considered that the cool of the day could also be early morning? I can recall camping out and the mornings when there was a fog, were pretty cool I can tell you.
Gen 2:6. But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground. Kjv.
As for voice, it can mean sound and indeed sometimes does EG.:
Exo 19:16. And it came to pass on the third day in the morning, that there were thunders and lightnings, and a thick cloud upon the mount, and the voice of the trumpet exceeding loud; so that all the people that was in the camp trembled. Kjv.
check out the Strong's dictionary and compare with
( Gen 3:10. And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself.Kjv.) to see if I am mistaken.
 

GBzone

Inactive
Nov 4, 2014
348
61
28
70
Well, have you considered that the cool of the day could also be early morning? I can recall camping out and the mornings when there was a fog, were pretty cool I can tell you.
Gen 2:6. But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground. Kjv.
As for voice, it can mean sound and indeed sometimes does EG.:
Exo 19:16. And it came to pass on the third day in the morning, that there were thunders and lightnings, and a thick cloud upon the mount, and the voice of the trumpet exceeding loud; so that all the people that was in the camp trembled. Kjv.
check out the Strong's dictionary and compare with
( Gen 3:10. And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; and I hid myself.Kjv.) to see if I am mistaken.
I cant think what else a voice is accept the sound of one speaking . If you can think of another meaning .Id like to hear it .
I have to say I had not thought of the morning and you might even say "My voice wilt thou hear in the morning" has or might have some bearing on it . But when is the morning ? When you count what a day is in Genesis .
"and evening and morning was the first day"
The sun in the morning warms up does it not? and the evening as the sun sets is when it cools down . It is not critical to the' argument' as to the voice of the Lord God.

in Christ
gerald
 
Sep 3, 2009
12,402
5,049
113
Florida
What then do you make of Pauls warning not to get embroiled in "genealogies"?

To the Jews they could be counted as important insofar as they are an unbroken line and witness to the laws and the prophets even as they are to Abraham and him to Noah and him to Adam. Hence the reason why so many 'solutions' to destroy and break their unspoken witness of Gods dealings with man and the unbroken line of the Bible .
Nevertheless "not all are Jews" and some Jews who the scriptures said " believed on Him" were declared to be children of the devil.
Are we to think that it is to do with mans DNA no.
Because ALL men whether Jew or Gentile are "sold unto sin" as argued by Paul in Romans . Who then can boast ? Either in their DNA or not?
For not even Saul of Tarsus who was more qualified than most being a "Hebrew of the Hebrews " and according to the law "blameless" was found to be justified and all his "righteousnesses was as filthy rags in Gods sight"
Now if a man is BORNagain of what dna do you think he is? Of Adam? No. For by nature and natural birth we are all born as "children of wrath" and" children of disobedience" It is no use having ANY confidence in the flesh for God "condemned sin in the flesh".and "in my flesh there is no good thing"
The body is therefore still subject to sin and death. For mortal has not yet put on immortality and" corruption incorruption" But if we are His the body has been redeemed "yet to be revealed" It is the Spirit then that must rule and reign so that we do not let sin reign in our mortal bodies.
For the body is dead and if the body is dead "through sin" of what use is the DNA of it?
For is it not soon to pass away?
it is not the dna that is cleansed but the soul .
and pray tell of what 'dna' then are we if we are BORN again not of corruptible seed but of the incorruptible seed which is the word of God?
if I am a NEW man and a new creation . Then the old man and the old creation has or is about to pass away.

In Christ
gerald


Yet by your understanding of Greek you say that Prophecy does not include the foreseeing of events but have reduced it to speaking forth.
I would ask speak what forth?
I then pointed out beyond dispute that things ARE foretold in scripture . Both in old and the New testament and that principally you assertion by your understanding of the Greek then is either wrong or the Greek is wrong . For the clear teaching of scripture is more than it is just" speaking forth "
if then I am right by the teaching of scripture and you are wrong by the teaching of Greek. Then I must conclude either the Greek is wrong or your understanding of it is . For I do not hold that the teaching of scripture is .

You are of course free to step back from the conversation.
Even as I am free to dispute the overreliance on ones own understanding of Greek.
You would need then to resolve what the scripture teaches and what you understand of the Greek . For as things stand they contradict each other , Insofar as while it may well indeed (not disputed) mean "speaks forth" etc but that if the Greek is correct then it means more than your understanding of it .

in Christ
gerald
Your comment was.................
"Then I must conclude either the Greek is wrong or your understanding of it is . For I do not hold that the teaching of scripture is ."

Then the 3rd option would be that YOU are wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Silk
Jul 22, 2010
3,147
1,274
113
74
Australia
Rev 1:10. I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, Kjv
Rev 1:15. And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters. Kjv.
Seems a variety of noises can be called a voice, and that is not looking beyond scripture.
If I was a gun slinger of the old west, I would no doubt let my colt 45 talk for me.
I guess I could go on and on, but suffice to say that Adam became aware of the approach of the Lord and tried to hide. It makes no difference to the matter if the Lord was being accompanied by 76 trombones or a town crier or if He just had a megaphone. That is not important, Adams guilt is.
 

GBzone

Inactive
Nov 4, 2014
348
61
28
70
Your comment was.................
"Then I must conclude either the Greek is wrong or your understanding of it is . For I do not hold that the teaching of scripture is ."

Then the 3rd option would be that YOU are wrong.
You simply assert that I am wrong .
Yet you claim that by your understanding of Greek Prophecy does NOT mean foretelling of future events but only of "speaking forth"
I have asked you two things.
One . What do they speak forth?
and if all the prophecies of the coming of the Lord the first time was long foreseen and prophesied by the prophets as well as Jonah who prophesied the destruction of Ninevah and so many other infallible proofs of scripture .
How then do you say the Greek does not allow that prophecy cannot speak of future events .
This you have not addressed at all or indeed sought to answer or resolve .

You may assert then that I am wrong . But the scriptures say and prove your understanding of Greek is wrong .

in Christ
gerald
 

GBzone

Inactive
Nov 4, 2014
348
61
28
70
You simply assert that I am wrong .
Yet you claim that by your understanding of Greek Prophecy does NOT mean foretelling of future events but only of "speaking forth"
I have asked you two things.
One . What do they speak forth?
and if all the prophecies of the coming of the Lord the first time was long foreseen and prophesied by the prophets as well as Jonah who prophesied the destruction of Ninevah and so many other infallible proofs of scripture .
How then do you say the Greek does not allow that prophecy cannot speak of future events .
This you have not addressed at all or indeed sought to answer or resolve .

You may assert then that I am wrong . But the scriptures say and prove your understanding of Greek is wrong I would go further and say either the Greek allows far more than what you have asserted .or else the Greek you have chosen to 'translate ' is itself the wrong word.
I leave it to you to ascertain which and anybody else who understands Greek.

in Christ
gerald
 
May 19, 2012
3,956
1,297
113
68
*Please note the black type is GBzone*

"I always endeavour to reply or answer any objection to what I have written. My apologies to misquote you ."
And I will try to do the same.

"Adam was CREATED in the image of God .
All that followed were BORN in the image of Adam . and thus we are "shapen in iniquity"
You are saying here that only Adam was created in the image of God and this would be in contradiction to the rest of scripture. And if we all share Adam's genealogy, which scripture says we do then we also are born with that image. All our cells die because of the Fall.

"and why in part the great need and "must be BORNagain"
"not of the corruptible seed which is of the first Adam but of the incoruptable seed which is the Word of God"
My understanding of the need to be born again is to cleanse our soul/spirit of sin so that we may be rejoined with God. These statements of yours sounds suspiciously like you think we can cleanse the flesh which would concur with cleansing DNA. I understand your metaphor of seeds and I have no problem of conforming flesh to the Word. But that has to be done while actually in the corruptible flesh. The born again part is solely part of soul/spirit.

"Thus the DNA if you wish to put it like that of the first Adam is of no good at all and cannot be remedied .
if then you are NOT born again I would argue that a man can be read like a book or God can do so."
Funny, I said the same in post#65 -"It carries information. God created it and I would guess (sarcasm) He can read it." Whether one be born again or not, I'll wager. I'm also guessing that believers get new bodies because the old carry sin genes. One difference - obviously our sin state can be remedied but only in one way - becoming part of the body of Christ. Newsflash: That is why the Gospel was written.

"As I said before when my first born son was born I saw and recognised that he bore my image. He bore my image because he came forth from me and I was his father . If he had not come from me then he would have born the image of his true father .
The image of God was lost or marred when men fell and became subject to sin and death ."
Woe to the son who looks like your wife then or her father. You like this phrase and have used it repeatedly. And you seem to not realize that it is the passing of DNA that causes this. The image of God was imprinted in all man and cannot be "marred" but it can be buried. The "unseen" part of us is His image and everyone of us is gifted with it. And God does not take back His gifts. We can reject it.

"Jesus came to seek and to save that which was lost and he being the "express image of the invisible God" came not only to destroy the wolrds of the devil .But to be the second or last Adam .
A second in that he is likened unto the first but that after the first there was no other since or before like the first till Jesus came . The last Adam in that he is likned unto the first but that after Him there are no others ."
Jesus was before Adam and second to none. I agree that Christ came to destroy the Devil but to save the world.

"Thus it is written that "Levi was in the loins of Abraham when he gave tithes to Melchesidech" if then Levi being a Jew was in the loins of Abraham .Then I was in the loins of Adam when he disobeyed God and became subject to sin and death .
if then I was bound by the law IN the first Adam . Then I am free In the last ."
You do realize you are talking about DNA/flesh with Adam? And the body of Christ is spiritual and it is that which sets you free?

"For while by his disobedience I was under the curse IN him.
In Christ I was blessed "IN Him from before the foundations of the world."
If then he who receives Christ " receives Him that sent him " Then I am received by Him for they thyat honour me I will honour.
If then I am born of that incorruptable seed which is the Word of God .Then the image of God is now IN me and thus recognisable by the father as a Son.
For a man is not so much rejected because he has sinned fro have not all sinned?
But God has made it simple and a mans eternal destiny is determined by his acceptance or receiving and honouring of Jesus Christ .
Both as a remedy and remission for sin but also by his resurrection our justification and adoption as sons ."
PLease stop preaching to the choir with rambles

"DNA then has nothing to do with it ."
You did skip the OT. It's all about the breeding of the Patriarchal line to produce Christ. The flesh that was to house God Himself.

"Unless you think that God has DNA? I see nowhere in scripture to suggest such a thing ."
All created beings have DNA. Was God created? No. Does He have cells? I have no idea - do you?
"and while Jesus was BORN of a woman and thus fully man.
He was not of the seed of Adam .
and His blood was not of Mary but of His father . Who is God .
I don't underdstand the hows and wherefores of it .Save that the blood that coursed through his veins was not of Adam and therefore not of the 'life' of Adam But of God .
For "the life is in the blood"
and in that regard eternal life coursed through His veins ."
The scramble of ramble.
 
Jul 22, 2010
3,147
1,274
113
74
Australia
*Please note the black type is GBzone*
<<SNIP>>
"Unless you think that God has DNA? I see nowhere in scripture to suggest such a thing ."
All created beings have DNA. Was God created? No. Does He have cells? I have no idea - do you?
"and while Jesus was BORN of a woman and thus fully man.
He was not of the seed of Adam .
and His blood was not of Mary but of His father . Who is God .
I don't underdstand the hows and wherefores of it .Save that the blood that coursed through his veins was not of Adam and therefore not of the 'life' of Adam But of God .
For "the life is in the blood"
and in that regard eternal life coursed through His veins ."
The scramble of ramble.
Not to confuse Silk's word with those (many) of GBzone's::: GBzone said,
"He was not of the seed of Adam .
and His blood was not of Mary but of His father . Who is God ."

This in fact is very wrong.
IF Jesus was not of the seed of Adam then He did not represent Adam's seed...'us' and we are still dead in our sins.
If He, Jesus was not one with the Father, then the Father is without representation and His wrath is still not satisfied.
Luke 3:38. the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God. part of Jesus' geneology

If one wants to be pedantic, Jesus was of Eve's seed, yes, and Eve was actually a sinner before Adam was.
But as the God appointed head of the human race, all guilt responsibility fell to Adam.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Silk

GBzone

Inactive
Nov 4, 2014
348
61
28
70
Not to confuse Silk's word with those (many) of GBzone's::: GBzone said,
"He was not of the seed of Adam .
and His blood was not of Mary but of His father . Who is God ."

This in fact is very wrong.
IF Jesus was not of the seed of Adam then He did not represent Adam's seed...'us' and we are still dead in our sins.
If He, Jesus was not one with the Father, then the Father is without representation and His wrath is still not satisfied.
Luke 3:38. the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God. part of Jesus' geneology

If one wants to be pedantic, Jesus was of Eve's seed, yes, and Eve was actually a sinner before Adam was.
But as the God appointed head of the human race, all guilt responsibility fell to Adam.
I am quite surprised by both posts .
and where does one start to answer both and all your objections?

I will count them as one post for they are clearly of the same mind .

and thus will answer each objection in turn.
if you are offended by the length of my posts then you should not be as glib answers and vain assertions cannot be given in rebuttal of error .
it is not therefore I think the length fo the post but the measure of your appetite that needs to be attended to.
For I believe that you should as far as it is possible deal thoroughly and as completely as is needful both to uphold the truth or prove it as it is needful to rebut an error of a misunderstanding of scripture .
I will answer then in a short while.

I would though like to restate that my rebuttal of the idea that Prophecy does not include foretelling future events has still not been answered and resolved by those who say they understand Greek enough to rebut my argument .

in Christ

gerald
 
May 19, 2012
3,956
1,297
113
68
I, personally, have no problem with the length of a post and that was not my objection. It seems to me that you will type a point I agree with as foundation for the next sentence that either does not logically follow or I totally disagree with. If you are surprised at my post, I attempted to show how what you say appears to me. And I did so, as a hunt and peck typist, who has carpel tunnel in both arms, with fibromyalgia which cause me pain 24/7 (yes I'll have a little cheese with that whine) to try to show how unclear your posts are to me. I can see you love God and scripture and I admire that. But sometimes your posts seem like you are arguing points no one has made or contrast agreement as disagreements. If my post is hard to answer it is because fully half of it is your quotes.
I just want to understand what you are trying to say. I'm sure it is worthwhile.
God Bless
Silk
 
Jul 22, 2010
3,147
1,274
113
74
Australia
I don't like long wordy posts. They are so very hard to treat with justice unless they are structured very proficiently (which mostly they are not).
Gerald, if you have a problem with Major and you do seem to, why not take the time to address your concerns in a post directed at him?
However, on the matter of prophesy and Greek, let me observe that for the most part, Greek is New Testament and Prophesy in the New Testament is mostly not telling the future, but forth telling scripture.
Prophesy in the Old Testament which is usually Hebrew, is still forth telling of God's word, though often it has an element of future revelation.
I am wondering if you and Major are talking about different things?