Adam and Eve After the Sabbath [Archive]

smyrna

08-20-2006, 08:18 AM

Godchild doesn't figure in that Jubilees, though an interesting book, is not a part of the canon. I cannot speak for the Church councils that had their own methods of deciding what to include in the Canon. How many sisters or brothers Cain or Seth had, or who Cain married does not change the teachings of SC.
SC goes by the canon, and repects books such as Jubilees and Enoch as works associated with the history of the Jewish people, but just like anyone else, cannot attest to the veracity of the entire contents of those works.
As far as comparing Jubilees with Enoch, I don't know of any quotes from Jubilees in the canon, but of course we know that Enoch was quoted in Jude.

As for Godchild's statement: "sc also teaches the 'water' divided in Gen.1 is speaking of 'people', the people from the sixth day creation."
That is complete and utter nonsense, something she dreamed up in her head, like so many other strange things she has come up with in this forum.

godchild

08-20-2006, 06:35 PM

A follower of am said what I stated above at the season, an am/sc website. (While stating am has no affiliation with this site, its moderator stated it was created to lead folks to am/sc.) It was his interpretation of what am taught. Who is to say whether his interpretation is wrong or right? strong's, which is used by scer's, H2416 defines 'water' as alive; hence raw (flesh), (creature, thing), multitude, troop and H4723-, or (of men and horses), a caravan or drove, gathering together.
This isn't the first time a scer has used strongs to totally change the context of Holy Writ. I see it here all the time. They even argue with each other about what 'pm said'. This shows what a botched job am does. So much confusion!

angie0401

08-20-2006, 07:15 PM

Ok, let's just sum up Vivian's various views of the SC:

The SC is a cult. Therefore, all of the SC students are mindless robots who believe whatever they are told, they are required to believe exactly like Pastor Murray teaches and they follow a "man".

SC Students have the nerve to think for themselves and have differing opinions. Therefore, Pastor Murray is doing a "botched job" and there is so much confusion.

This "opinion" from someone who was a member of a bonafide cult (mormons) for 25+ years. After "seeing the light", she visited some other churches, but none of them were "right", so she gets her Biblical knowledge directly from the Holy Spirit (which isn't a bad thing). However, she also feels led to listen to TV preachers, but her favorites were the SDA preachers - at least until she saw the light (again).

I don't consider Vivian the best resource for what SHE believes, much less what anyone else believes.

godchild

08-20-2006, 08:22 PM

Did I say you were mindless robots? No, you did. Did I say you 'have the nerve' to speak for yourselves? No, you did. Did I ever say I saw the light? No.

You end by suggesting I should not be the best resource for what anyone else believes, thereby suggesting you have the right to speak for yourself but I do not. I call that one-sided thinking.

You say you are a Baptist who studies with am/sc. am has made very clear that he thinks, as do his followers, that churches follow the traditions of men, aside from him and you all, because, as you all say, he teaches 'chapter by chapter, verse by verse', from the Holy Bible. Do you agree with him? If you do, why go listen to another pastor? If not, I wouldn't consider you the best resource either.

angie0401

08-20-2006, 09:02 PM

I consider myself the best resource for what I believe. You are a very excellent resource for what YOU believe, as well. I don't tell you what YOU believe - as you have tried to do with us.

Yes, I am a Baptist who studies with Pastor Murray. My pastor also happens to teach chapter by chapter, verse by verse. We finish with the book of Psalm Wednesday and will be starting Revelation the next week. That (teaching chapter by chapter AND teaching Revelation) is drastically different from the majority of churches, which is one reason why I love my local church and all of the congregation. They are aware of the fact that I question many of the manmade traditions that are followed, but love and respect me, as I do them (you should try it).

You should continue to look for a church until you are blessed enough to find one that is similar to the 2 that I call family - the Baptist Church and the Shepherd's Chapel.

smyrna

08-20-2006, 09:42 PM

Ditto Angie!

I am a Catholic who studies with the SC.

I love both Churches, and yes, I have many many friends who belong to them as family.

godchild

08-20-2006, 09:53 PM

How do you respond when your sc brethren says the Catholic church is the whore of Babylon?

angie0401

08-20-2006, 10:04 PM

Pastor Murray doesn't teach that the Catholic church is the whore of Babylon.

smyrna

08-20-2006, 10:10 PM

The post above is a very good example why I won't directly address Godchild.
These sneaky tactics are typical. For the record,
I've studied with the SC for fifteen years. During that time, I've never heard Pstor Murray, or any Chapel bretheren, describe the RCC as "the whore of Babylon"
Rather, I read that nonsense from time to time on whacko fundamentalist websites, you know, the ones who claim the anti-christ will be a pope, and a host of other really crazy, stupid, and far out accusations that would be the envy of any Chapel detractor.
Also for the record, at the end of EVERY Chapel broadcast, Dennis or Arnold Murray always say they teach God's Word in a positive manner, and thus will not answer questions about specific individuals, denominations, or organizations.
In other words, if any SC brethren where to accuse the RCC of being the whore of Babylon, I'd tell them they haven't studied the Book of Revelation well enough to know that cannot be true, and to get with it, lest they appear to be as unlearned as those who do spew such drivel.

abiyah

08-20-2006, 10:15 PM

Vivian WROTE:
-------------------------------------------------
QUOTE: " How do you respond when your sc brethren says the Catholic church is the whore of Babylon ? "
-------------------------------------------------

http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/happy.gifHi There Angie & ALL ! : )

And God bless your heart. Like you Angie, I also have NEVER heard any of my, or rather our fellow labourers IN Christ ever say what Vivian has claimed in her above post regarding the catholic church. Sorry Viv. : )

Vivian, do you know who it is that is the 'whore' of Babylon of the endtimes... I'm simply asking only because if you are in need of understanding I would be more than happy to try to help, just say the word. For that is the reason we are here to edify one another in God's Word. : )

Abiyah

godchild

08-20-2006, 10:39 PM

abi, thank you for your offer.

That's strange. If you look under the thread "Is the catholic church the great whore of Babylon" I read comments by three of you. I'm surprised you didn't notice the posts by your brother. Here are some by c-zeke:

Still, after the deep study on the Harlot....it is not representative of just the Catholic Church but rather all apostate churches. (Sure sounds like he included the catholic church here to me.-gc)

The RCC will, no doubt, head the apostacy, but not with Mary as deity, but rather the Fake Jesus, and I need absolutely no RCC teaching to come to this conclusion...only a basic understanding of Greek and Hebrew and the ability to translate those languages into english. That and the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Peace in Christ
c
The fake Jesus will head the Apostate Roman Catholic Church, and then all other church denominations as well. Headquarters-Rome, destination-Jerusalem

In HIS service
c
--------------------------
Someone started a thread titled "the Pagan Catholic name Jesus =IHS. Now, I don't know who created the thread, but c-zeke put the first post there:

ezekiel_37
Advanced Member
Username: ezekiel_37

Post Number: 792
Registered: 8-2005
Posted From: 69.192.223.192
Posted on Sunday, March 12, 2006 - 1:13 am:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello brother....

And Peace to you.

I have come to the understanding that the name Jesus Christ is the 'acceptable' english translation of the greek 'Iesous'

'ee-ay-sooce'
Of Hebrew origin [H3091]; Jesus (that is, (*Joshua),Jehoshua), the name of our Lord and two (three) other Israelites: - Jesus.

Now, you, I'm sure, already know this

But Jesus Christ(os) as translated IS the ONE called Jesus(Iasous-Yeshewa)the Annointed One

As long as the person realizes to WHOME they are praying, then it's ok with me (as far as names)

It is an impossible task to convince the world that the name Jesus Christ is not the name of the Son of God! And besides that....the whole world does not use the hebrew names for the folks in the bible. If they did, there would be less confusion.

Although I tell people the truth (as I see it) about many mis-informed things like the true english initials and pronunciation of The Almighty Father's name being YHVH (Ya-Ha-VeH) instead YHWH (Yahwey) what many believe the true name of God is, I still won't fault them for believing otherwise. I think that most intelligent people can understand that when they pray in the name of the ONE called Jesus, they are indeed praying to Yeshewa, the Annointed Savior. And besides, this is a language issue which has to do with translation but if you call God, Jehova or Yahwey or God or Father or Creator or any other wonderful names that He has, than that person is still praying to God, the same God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob.

Was God's Savior (Yeshewa's transliteration) the one that most now call Jesus Christ. I think the answer is yes!

Now in my opinion there are many false Catholic traditions and outright lies that are being purpotrated on the public and many of those lies shold be exposed however (in my opinion) the name of Christ is fully accepted and used to worship the true God.
to be cont.

godchild

08-20-2006, 10:48 PM

Just want to finish this:
ezekiel_37
Advanced Member
Username: ezekiel_37

Post Number: 804
Registered: 8-2005
Posted From: 69.192.223.192
Posted on Sunday, March 12, 2006 - 7:26 pm:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peace Brother....

I don't wish to argue with you and I agree that we should be using the Hebrew names for God and His Son and His Spirit.

But if we take this further, we (the world) should be calling all of the biblical characters by their hebrew names and this will not happen.

So, what can we do to further truth.....
We can tell the people about the true meanings behind the names of the characters in the bible and let the public make their minds up about it. Let them decide between the usage of the names for God and others. I will never fault you for bringing truth to the Table.

As the name Jesus Christ, to me, means Yeshewa Messiah, so when I say Jesus Christ, I am refering to the Lord's Savior Yeshewa (and I'm positive that God Himself knows this). As my learning has continued and time has allowed for certain ideals to settle, I have been more and more using the 'official' names for our Father and His Son. My 'conversion' was a mere 2 years ago.

I know the false Catholic doctrines are a personal insult to you (and me) and one of your roles seems to be to expose those false traditions. This is an admirable task, however in my opinion there are higher fish to fry in the system. There are terrible teachings that may very well lead people astray and those people need to be warned and told......

The false Messiah will use the name Jesus Christ among others, including Yeshewa(Yashua)!

God says call me Yah!

I AM THAT I AM (Ya-Ha-VeH)

We must fight the system together but also we must realize that WE cannot win this war and must wait for Yeshewa to return for victory. The world WILL become a one world political system and those that need to be separated for learning and teaching will be so.

Peace
c
ezekiel_37
Advanced Member
Username: ezekiel_37

Post Number: 840
Registered: 8-2005
Posted From: 69.192.223.192
Posted on Wednesday, March 15, 2006 - 2:16 am:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Truth....

I was in the religion of the RCC for 33 years(nice number), but am out of it and in the Word for the last 2 years, and much better for it.
Truth is more important than tradition.....

I don't deny that some good folks can come out from the RCC but that denomination failed for me...

When I dove deep into the Word, I realized that I loved to learn about the end-time prophecies. This is a subject that the Catholic Church avoids, actually skipping those important chapters in Mat Mark Luke, Rev., etc......

It became apparent rather quickly that the RCC was not the place for me.
----------------
I don't mean to pick on zeke. I just find it curious that you've never noticed his views about the catholic church, and never made comments to him about them, even though you post on the same threads. If you folks love 'both churches', why do you only defend am/sc?

angie0401

08-20-2006, 11:08 PM

I guess you haven't read far enough (or just chose to not mention) because there was a discussion on the figtree with someone who slammed the Catholic Church. More than one poster defended the Catholic people.

I still don't see any SC student calling the Catholic Church the "whore of Babylon" - just saying they have traditions of man like MANY OTHER CHURCHES.

smyrna

08-20-2006, 11:21 PM

Ezekiel's comments re the RCC is in no way related to Chapel teachings.
But actually, just because he has negative things to say about the RCC, he does not say, as Godchild claims, that it is the whore of Babylon. he says they are falling away from the Word, as apostacy means, but that is his opinion, and not shared by most of the Chapel students. Do they practice traditions of men? Sure, like so many other Churches. That does not make them the whore of babylon.
As a matter of fact, if any one really wants to know what Pastor Murray has to say about the subject, it is this new world order stuff, and the move away from any organized religion, which will set the stage for a great revival, except that the revival will be led by anti-christ, because so many will think he is the messiah returned.
So on an offical level, the SC in no way relates the RCC with the whore of Babylon.
I also have heard him teach that of the seven Churches described in Revelation, that if one does a deeper study of chapters two and three they will be able to tell what Churches are described by name. certainly the RCC is one of them, but true to his word, he did no go on to identify them by name.
So once again, Godchild is twisting stuff to fit her own agenda, and it's not working, because we set the record straight with truth.
In closing, if anyone wants to go looking for the perfect Church, let me know when you find it.

godchild

08-20-2006, 11:55 PM

angi, smearna, and abi all added to my short statement, that simply asked the question, How do you respond when your sc brethren says the Catholic church is the whore of Babylon? Suddenly everyone jumps in and defends am, when I didn't even mention him. http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/lol.gif

Now, you all can ignore this all you want: Still, after the deep study on the Harlot....it is not representative of just the Catholic Church but rather all apostate churches. You do have problems with comprehension, or you have bigger problems of not knowing how to write what you mean. I don't think it is either in this case, however. I think anytime one of you is exposed, you all feel a need to jump in insisting the words do not say what they do. You built it up to something much bigger than what I intended, and stepped on your own foot. Now, of course, you must put that blame somewhere, and it couldn't possibly be on you, so I am the scapegoat for asking a simple question. http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/yawn.gif Get a grip, guys/gals.

I suppose a Baptist who studies with am could say they are sure one of the two churches am talks about is the Baptist church and a Presbytarian who studies with am could say they are sure the Presb. is one of those churches. But since I mentioned it, we will probably see you all say you agree now one is the Catholic church. You guys are too funny.

terluvire

08-21-2006, 12:16 AM

I didn't read all of this thread but I get the general gist of the last few posts, especially those made by godchild.

Here is a quote of her's:
Now, you all can ignore this all you want: Still, after the deep study on the Harlot....it is not representative of just the Catholic Church but rather all apostate churches. You do have problems with comprehension,

Ummm godchild it is you with the problem of reading comprehension. Zeke is right, the whore of Babylon will be all inclusive of all churches and all religions, not just the RCC. ( I pray that you do notice though that in the 7 churches of Rev., each church has members who do know the truth.) I hope you can comprehend that. The whole world will wonder after the beast. I hope you don't read over that, God said the WHOLE WORLD!

smyrna

08-21-2006, 12:18 AM

We should not allow Godchild to try and take over this thread with any more of her wild speculations.
The thread was intended for addressing the issue of why Adam and Eve were formed on the eigth day, and not the sixth.
I think we were more than gracious in addressing her stupid contention that SC bretheren beleive that the RCC is the whore of Babylon. I'm sure out of the hundreds of thousands of people who watch the SC, there are some with ideas contrary to what the Chapel teaches. End of story. Now how about Adam and Eve on the eighth day?
The reason why people like Godchild and company want to discuss crazy stuff, is that they can't answer these questions.

ezekiel_37

08-21-2006, 04:59 AM

While the cats away, the mouse will play.

How nice of you to use me in your little smear expose godchild....I see that you are still the same soul.

Anyway, I was a Catholic, but now do not attend a Catholic church. I prefer learning with Pastor Murray. I do however miss the fellowship and am searching for a new congregation...with a good band...lol.....and a daycare!

I see's it the way's I see's it.

I'll keep this rather short.

There was no claim that all Chapel students think the same way as I do.

I have never even heard Pastor Murray mention a denomination....EVER....he doesn't mention them at all.

The RCC is unquestionably the largest denomination, with the most influence. It is my contention that the antiChrist will rule ALL denominations, including that one, and have the blessings of the pope......allowing the entire world to accept the fake as the Messiah.

...and that is MY opinion, and not Pastor Murray's nor to my knowledge another Students. Just mine......

I thought I asked you not to use my posts anymore for evil!!!!!!Please stop.

in Christ's Name
c

godchild

08-21-2006, 04:35 PM

zeke, I didn't say all scers think the same way you do. I didn't bring am into it. They did.

You have an idea I choose you as a personal attack on you. It is not. Is is simply that you share a lot of information. If I don't post 'who' wrote what, I am accused of lying. If I do, I am attacked by the person I am quoting. When information is placed on a public forum, it is public information.

By saying the antichrist will rule all denominations must include sc. Just because you and he do not call it a denomination, sc is a denomination by calling it a ministry. If it is not a ministy, it is simply some guy spouting his views. You and I both know that is not his intent. His intent is to convince people of his interpretations, his views, his beliefs; to join with him in it, which you have. So, by making such a statement, you give satan power over God. That is blasphemy, whether intentionally or not. Satan has no power over anyone who does not give him that power. No more than someone becoming offended by personal comments and seeking revenge. That someone has made the choice to let words beget anger. We were chosen from the foundation of the world, and nothing can take us out of His hands. No power, no person, no antichrist, no desire for personal gain.

My question to smearna was out of wondering how you all can so completely defend am/sc, yet not defend another church while claiming to have equal love for them. Go back to the catholic threads and post what you have posted here. You have led people there to believe you stand with those against the catholic church. You have not been honest here or there. Your posts speak for themselves. I bring no evil to them. Take responsibility!

smyrna

08-21-2006, 05:32 PM

Godchild wrote: "My question to smearna was out of wondering how you all can so completely defend am/sc, yet not defend another church while claiming to have equal love for them."

"You all" does not consist soley of Ezekiel. And Godchild doesn't have any clue just how involved with the Catholic Church I am. She also doesn't know my backround, and how I am quite prepared to defend the Catholic faith, and have done so on many occasions. I haven't done so here at Factnet,
because this SC thread takes enough of my time as it is. But through the years I have come to the defense of the RCC many times.

This isn't the right place to do so, but Godchild or anyone else can give it a try, and I'll happily provide an example how I can defend the RCC. Talk about Mary, Transubstatiation, the Saints, hey, go for it.

With that being said, certainly RCC doctrine and Catholic doctrine at times do not harmonize. In those cases,I have an opportunity to do some research. I won't pass judgment on either body. I just pray to the Lord for guidance, and He helps me find the answers. But He does so on His time schedule, not mine.

In the meantime, I do love and defend both Chritian bodies, and really any Church has the right to believe and teach what they may.

That is what separates SC students and even Catholics, from folks like the Fab Six.

Because Chapel students and Catholics don't invade other discussion forums, and start threads that immediately attack what others believe. They don't set up websites and fill them with lies about another Church.

Only mostly independent, whacked out loners come onto forums like Factnet and start all that nonsense.

There isn't one SC sudent here that came here to attack anyone. I came here to defend the garbage being written by critics of the Chapel. So did Watchman, who told me about this forum.

Look at the Fab Six. None of them belong to any denomination, at least they won't tell us which one they belong to. But they sure have plenty to say about those who do, and it ain't too pretty.

In Catholic theology, there is a term called gyrovague.

Gyrovagues wandered from monastery to monastery during the middle ages for the most part, looking not only for free room and board, but also for the perfect community.

I suspect, at least in the case of Godchild, that she is much like the gyrovagues, and since she is still wandering, she protests about those who have found their place.

2pillars

08-25-2006, 06:51 PM

Adam was physically formed/made on the 3rd Day (Gen. 2:7) becoming a natural living soul and only Created Spiritually (“born again”) in the image and likeness of God, together with Eve, on the 6th day – after both have already committed their “original sin” - after Cain had already killed Abel, Gen. 5:1-3

1Corinthians 15
45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. v46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is NATURAL; and afterward that which is spiritual.

Your thought please...

smyrna

08-25-2006, 07:10 PM

2pllars,
You really need to reread Gensis 1-2. Adam was not formed on the 3rd day. You then must go and rephrase your questions based upon your revision.

2pillars

08-25-2006, 09:23 PM

I already did smyrna. I understand that it is just too hard for others to comprehend unless you seek more wisdom and understanding.

Perhaps, you also need to learn how to reconcile the Scripture in order to see the truth. I will be more than happy to help should you allow me.

The physical making of Adam from the dust of the ground becoming a natural living soul (Gen.2:7) was entirely different event from the creation of A&E in the image and likeness of God Spiritually (Genesis 5:1`2).

Adam was formed on the 3rd Day and named the beasts of the Field and Birds, formed from the gounnd at the beginning of the 6th Day, but he was not Created in image and likeness of God, spiritually, until After they have committed their original sin abd After Cain killed Abel- Genesis 5:1-2

smyrna

08-25-2006, 09:36 PM

The races were created on the sixth day. Adam and Eve were formed on the eighth day. There is nothing you can add to your posts that will convince me otherwise, because there is no way you will ever convince me that mankind came from only Adam and Eve.
Adam also did not name every animal on earth, that is ridiculous. No polar bears, penguins, platypus, or octopus.
Same goes for Mr. and Mrs, Noah. Their children did not give birth to whites, blacks, asians, red indians, etc.
I don't watch TBN to get my theology training, and Sunday school is not equivalent to a methodical study of the manuscripts.

2pillars

08-25-2006, 10:01 PM

Clarificatory Questions:

Who told you that "mankind" came only from Adam and Eve? Do you understand the Book of Genesis?

Also, where do you get the idea that Adam named EVERY animal on this planet earth?

Who also told you that Adam was created on the 8th day?

Speaking of the different "race" the you brought forth, who told you that the source of different race of mankind on this earth was Noah?

Thanks

smyrna

08-25-2006, 10:26 PM

Basically, I am replying to your posts from the presumption that you hold a fundamentalist/maximalist view of the Genesis account of the replenishment, as I call it, and the creation of man.
I understand Genesis, but probably not as you do.
Your question regarding Adam being formed on the eigth day leads me also to presume that you, like so many others, see the formation of Adam and Eve as just a reiteration of the creation of man in Genesis 1. I understand the accounts as being two separate events.
Since fundamentalists also believe that the flood account involved a boat that held every living thing, a worldwide inundation, and one man and woman being the parents of all the races, then I assume you were coming at me from that angle, as so many have done here at Factnet. If you have other ideas,I'd love to hear them.

2pillars

08-25-2006, 10:41 PM

Ok then smyrna.

First, we will start with the actual making of Adam PHYSICALLY from the dust of the ground - before he was created in the image and likeness of God, SPIRITUALLY - based on the reconciliation of the Scripture.

"Gen 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God (YHWH or Jesus) made the earth and the heavens, (Plural)

The "Day" is the 3rd Day. One can see this because it is the "Day" in which the "Earth" is made. Gen. 1:9-10 confirms that the "Earth" was made on the 3rd Day.

Heavens is Plural and shows that Jesus also made "Heavens", on the 3rd Day. The 1st Heaven was made on the 2nd Day. Gen. 1:6-8 Gen 2 is showing that on the 3rd Day, Jesus made other "Heavens".

Gen 2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

Further confirmation that these verses are speaking of the 3rd Day, BEFORE the plants, and herbs, which were made on the 3rd Day, according to Gen 1:11-12

Why do you suppose Scripture is going into such detail of the events of the 3rd Day?

Gen 2:6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Gen 2:4-7 is obviously showing us the "Day" (3rd) when Adam was formed, physically - then Adam and Eve were later Created, in God's Image, on the 6th Day. This is the Spiritual Creation of Adam and Eve, at the same time - Gen. 1:27 and Gen 5:1-2

God Bless

Do you want to learn the source of the different race of "mankind" on this planet and how it came about}?

(Message edited by 2pillars on August 25, 2006)

smyrna

08-25-2006, 11:02 PM

2pillars:"Do you want to learn the source of the different race of "mankind" on this planet and how it came about}?"

"Learn" is presumptuous. I would like to hear your 'view' of how the races came about.

2pillars

08-26-2006, 11:22 AM

Dear smyrna,

The source originated on the 5th Day when God created every living creature that moveth, from the water abundantly Gen 1:21-24

This included the making of the sons of God or "prehistoric beings" as referred to by our scientist at times. Genesis 6 tells us that when they married the daughters of Adam, Great and Mighty men, were the offspring.

Cain's descendants were a dead end. After some 1620 years, they were all destroyed in the universal Flood together with their world.

Today's Humans can trace their origin to Adam through Seth. God also called Adam and Eve's name "Adam" (Hebrew-mankind) in the Day they were created in God's Image. Gen 5:2

The source on this Planet was Noah. When Noah arrived, his sons were married, but his grandsons, like Cain, married the Prehistoric people who were here when Noah arrived.

Incest is NEVER part of the blessing of our Lord, in the multiplication process of mankind even during the beginning. The filthy assumption is only based on the imagination of those who cannot understand the Book of Genesis.

The combination of the descendants of the sons of God and Adam's descendants brought Human Intelligence to this "Planet of Apes" (described at times by scientist term). Human Civilization can be traced to Noah's arrival, exactly as God told us more than 3,000 years ago.

NO Evolution was necessary except descent with modification, or MicroEvolution.

smyrna

08-26-2006, 12:27 PM

2Pillars, right off the bat, I disagree, based upon Scripture. The Kenites (sons of Cain) survived the flood. Scripture tells us about them in books Samuel, Chronicles, Numbers, Judges, and even post flood Genesis.
Your comments seem to reflect a dabbling in ancient astronaut theories, especially Zechariah Sitchin, and I have discounted his writings down to the level of the Babylonian priests, who deliberately twisted the knowledge that Cain already began to corrupt after he left the area of Eden. We know much more about Cain than the Bible relates, based upon writings from the same era.
I have spent years studying Scripture and have seen how deceptive writings such as Sitchin's Alan Alford, etc. can be, and my synopsis is not based upon shallow, puritanical, fundamentalist traditions of men.
I am very busy today. But if you stick around, I will explain how what we believe about the past will very much affect what we interpret future events, and how important this knowledge will be to our own existence.

2pillars

08-26-2006, 10:23 PM

smyrna,

There are numerous worlds that are spoken in the Bible. One was completely destroyed; one will be burned; and the 3rd one is where christians will be living after the rapture.

Gen. 1:6-8 documents that the 1st Firmament or Heaven was made on the 2nd Day.

Gen. 2:4-5 documents that the 2nd and 3rd Heavens were made on the 3rd Day.

ll Corinthians 12:2 documents that the Apostle Paul was caught up to the 3rd Heaven.

IOW, Scripture documents that there are 3 Heavens and you say you don't know about another World?

Read ll Peter 3:5-7, and explain why God spoke of the world that THEN WAS, being overflowed with water, which Perished. (Greek-Destroyed, Totally)

Tell us the fate of the Heavens and the Earth WHICH ARE NOW, and explain where Christians will be when this happens.

We both know that this World will be Burned, and you tell me Scripture does not speak of other Worlds?

Read Revelation 21:1 and deny the complete documentation, Scripturally, of other Worlds.

smyrna

08-26-2006, 10:37 PM

This world will not be burned, only the evil rudiments thereof. This world will never pass away, it will only be changed. There will be no rapture, that is stuff for fundamentalists to hope for.
The three heavens indicate three ages (eras) of the earth the age of the dinosaurs, if you will, this present age, and the one to come.
The world that then was (II Peter) was this world, before the destruction which killed the dinosaurs.
Personally, I'd rather live in a future age where not only Christian souls live, but others who lived righteous lives regardless of what they declared themselves to be, as well as children who died before they learned of Christ, as well as those who through illness or handicap also did not learn of Chirst, but were saved by God's love and mercy.
You brand of theology is based on scientfic theory, rather than a sense of the love and mercy of God. It is very distrubing.
I do not doubt the existance of other worlds, but I do doubt that the Bible is concrned with telling the human race about them.

abiyah

08-26-2006, 11:20 PM

http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/happy.gifHi There 2Pillars & ALL !

Well.... Gee, I'm just getting a chance here this evening to read down through some of your posts under THIS thread. So then I'd like to 'try' and respond to some of your above stated comments, as I do not agree with much of what you have put forth, if any at all.

2Pillars WROTE with Regards to the actual making of The man Adam PHYSICALLY from the dust of the ground...., and then you quoted Genesis 2:4 to perhaps document your own beliefs. Your Post No.5
-------------------------------------------------
QUOTE: " The "Day" is the 3rd Day. One can see this because it is the "Day" in which the "Earth" is made. Gen. 1:9-10 confirms that the "Earth" was made on the 3rd Day. "
-------------------------------------------------

I must disagree with you 2Pillars. I think you may be confusing the GENERATIONS of "the heavens" & "the earth" spoken of in Genesis 2:4, with perhaps the generations of man. Also perhaps you are not understanding the earth AGES. First off, God did not "make" and/or create the earth on the third day, as you have stated. Now, please give me a chance and hear me out here. You MUST first recall Genesis 1:1.

Genesis 1:1
" In "THE BEGINNING" God CREATED the heaven and THE EARTH. " Period ! [ Proverbs 8:22-23 ]

So you see then, Genesis 1:1 never tells us exactly how long ago the beginning was. Yet we know that God made/created the earth Millions of years ago. God created ONE earth. Now, we know that the earth that God created in Genesis 1:1 BECAME without form and void, as it is documented in Genesis 1:2.

Genesis 1:2
" And the earth 'was' [ this word 'was' in the Hebrew is Hayah and it means TO BECOME ] without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And The Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. "

This destruction of The EARTH is documented in Jeremiah 4:23.

Jeremiah 4:23
" I beheld THE EARTH, and, lo, it was WITHOUT FORM, AND VOID; and the heavens, and they had no light. "

And it is also spoken of by Peter in II Peter 3:5.

II Peter 3:5 - 6
" For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by The Word of God the heavens WERE OF OLD, and THE EARTH standing out of the water and in the water; Whereby the world that THEN WAS, being OVERFLOWED WITH WATER, perished;" [ Genesis 1:2 ]

However 2Pillars, you stated in your above quote/post No. 5 that THE EARTH was 'made', [which I assume you mean created ] on the Third Day. But, Not so. We see that The LORD said in Genesis 1:9 "... LET THE DRY LAND APPEAR, and it was so ". The EARTH is that DRY LAND and it was ALREADY THERE on The Third Day, but it was covered with the waters from Genesis 1:2, when The EARTH became [ was=meaning became ] without form & void. The EARTH was NOT created void
[ Isaiah 45:18 ], it BECAME that way. The DRY LAND appeared because The LORD gathered the 'waters' unto one place, and called them Seas [ Genesis 1:10 ], and the DRY LAND He called Earth. This He did on the THIRD DAY yes ! And also on the THIRD DAY He said " Let the earth BRING FORTH GRASS, HERB yielding seed, and the FRUIT TREE; And it was on that THIRD DAY that the earth BROUGHT FORTH all that God Commanded it to [ Genesis 1:12 ]. It speaks NOTHING of ANY MAN, NOT ANY MAN being formed, created, made on that THIRD DAY as you have so stated that Adam was. According to God's Word The man Adam was FORMED AFTER God RESTED on The Seventh Day; therefore with a simple count, we know that 'The' Man Adam was formed on the eighth day.

abiyah

08-27-2006, 12:18 AM

2Pillars WROTE:
-------------------------------------------------
QUOTE: " Heavens is Plural and shows that Jesus also made "Heavens", on the 3rd Day. The 1st Heaven was made on the 2nd Day. Gen. 1:6-8 Gen 2 is showing that on the 3rd Day, Jesus made other "Heavens". " END QUOTE
-------------------------------------------------

Good Evening Everyone : )

I hope that each and everyone of you are having a peaceful weekend. 2Pillars... hello there ! : ) With regards to your above stated quote, you do err here.

You have stated that Genesis Chaper Two is showing us that God made "other" Heavens on the third day...NOT SO. : ( I find the comments that you make regarding our Father's Word come from your own heart and not FROM The Bible.

Lets look here. : )

Genesis 1:8
" And God called THE FIRMAMENT HEAVEN. And the evening and the morning were THE SECOND DAY. "

Now let's look together, and see all that God said on The THIRD DAY, there is absolutely no mention of the firmament or heaven with reagrds to the third day.

Genesis 1:9
" And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear; and it was so. "

Genesis 1:10
" And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good. "

Genesis 1:11
" And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. "

Genesis 1:12
" And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good. "

Genesis 1:13
" And the evening and the morning were THE THIRD DAY. "

Please... lets jump to Genesis 2:1.

Genesis 2:1
" Thus THE HEAVENS and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. "

The word 'heavens' here in the Hebrew is 'Shamayim', and the meaning is

1. heaven, heavens, sky

* visible heavens, sky

* as abode of the stars

2. as the visible universe, the sky,
atmosphere, etc.

3. Heaven (as the abode of God)

Abiyah

plow_deep

08-27-2006, 12:50 AM

2pillars said,

"Incest is NEVER part of the blessing of our Lord, in the multiplication process of mankind even during the beginning. The filthy assumption is only based on the imagination of those who cannot understand the Book of Genesis."

Well, atleast I can agree with that.

I dont think Godchild and co. will like it much though.

Peace

(Message edited by plow_deep on August 26, 2006)

smyrna

08-27-2006, 01:28 AM

Abiyah,

As always, you present the Word of God is such a compassionate, patient manner, like a loving mother teaching her children.
I can read your posts all night long.

Maranatha!

plow_deep

08-27-2006, 01:49 AM

I agree, Abiyah has a wonderful gift of communication and makes me think. I agree with much of what she posts.

Not all of what is taught here do I agree with (usually minor points), but for lack of a better explanation, I keep my disagreements to myself and keep plowing.

ezekiel_37

08-27-2006, 10:24 AM

Hello there 2pillars

We at the chapel have learned to take criticism and expect it. You must also see this with your doctrine. Most have never even heard of this 3rd day teaching. I have a few answers to your last post. Feel free to respond.

There are numerous worlds that are spoken in the Bible. One was completely destroyed; one will be burned; and the 3rd one is where christians will be living after the rapture. 

ok, that is your opinion. There is one world, 3 ages....the first age was completely destroyed, but the world itself was not. And I do not mean to be presumptuous but by using the term rapture, do you mean the theory that Christians will be taken away before the antiChrist appears, or do you mean the gathering and the change of the flesh to spirit, that happens at the 7th trump? We that study with the Shepherd's Chapel believe in the 7th trump gathering, and not before.

Gen. 1:6-8 documents that the 1st Firmament or Heaven was made on the 2nd Day. 

We do not know when Heaven and earth were created, Gen1:1. No time is given.

then.....

that age ended.....and the world became a waste, a ruin. You are speaking of the sky....

Gen. 2:4-5 documents that the 2nd and 3rd Heavens were made on the 3rd Day. 

That is speculation, as the Heaven(s) was not created on the 3rd day, but before the first day, as was the planet. See Gen1:1.

ll Corinthians 12:2 documents that the Apostle Paul was caught up to the 3rd Heaven.

Yes it does....and we contend that this is speaking of ages and not different places.

IOW, Scripture documents that there are 3 Heavens and you say you don't know about another World? 

Now your tone has changed. You presume that we do not know something about the Word that is not in the Word. Can you show me where it clearly states that there are other worlds with intelligence on them? You presume heaven to be a planet, while we do not.

Read ll Peter 3:5-7, and explain why God spoke of the world that THEN WAS, being overflowed with water, which Perished. (Greek-Destroyed, Totally) 

This is the katabole, the overthrow of Satan. The Lord destroyed that age and set up this one. The age that was perished, not in Noah's time but before the first man was created....or formed.

Tell us the fate of the Heavens and the Earth WHICH ARE NOW, and explain where Christians will be when this happens.

Christians will be right here. No one leaves and goes anywhere. Christ is coming here and the earth is going to be here forever, changed but here, as all flesh, good and bad, animal and man, get changed into spirit.1Cor15.

We both know that this World will be Burned, and you tell me Scripture does not speak of other Worlds? 

This age is burned up, not the earth, and as smyrna has stated above, only the rudiments, the evil parts are destroyed....

Read Revelation 21:1 and deny the complete documentation, Scripturally, of other Worlds.

New heaven and a new earth are references to time and not physicality. Heaven is where God is, and that is going to be right here forever. God is coming here. This place shall remain forever....albeit changed.

Well, you have the opinion of us here, and we now have yours.

Yours need more explanation and scrutiny. If the teaching that you wish to deliver to us is valid, then it will stand up to the questioning. After all, we all want the truth. So, let's have it. What is next?

in His service
c

smyrna

08-27-2006, 11:00 AM

Ezekiel,

I see you got out the old 2 x 4! Excellent post!

2pillars

08-27-2006, 11:11 AM

Brethren,

Seemingly, like most young earthers, you cannot use Scripture to support your OPINIONS. You can only use your interpretational methods which don't agree with Scripture, Science, nor History. You base your allege "proper interpretation" on your religion's views.

Since, we are covering a lot of grounds on this thread, let us first focus from the beginning where your doctrinal errors seems to start, anyway.

Contray to your church view, the actual creation process did not start on Gen.1:1, as you would like others to believe. Sorry, but your gap theory is flawed and will not pass the test of time.

Here's how I look at it...

Genesis 1:1 is a preface - The Story of the Beginning of Creation.

Genesis 1:2 documents us the CONDITION OF THE DEEP (empty, null & void) BEFORE anything was created or made.

"In the beginning God Created the heaven (Air) and the Earth (Ground). And the Earth (Ground) was without form, (Dust) and void; (Empty) and darkness (Death) was upon the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters."

Genesis 1:3 narrates us the bringing forth of the Light BEFORE the work of old.

The True Light (John 1:9) was brought forth into this physical world - from the invisible realm of the Father - to turn the condition of the deep (empty) from darkness (death) to light (life).

The brightness of the glory of YHWH or Jesus, the Son, WAS the True Ligth that was brought forth when God spoke the "Word" in the beginning and said, "LET THERE BE LIGHT". John 1:1; Gen. 1:3

All things were made through/by him: and without the True Light (Son) was not anything made that was made. Because, in him (Jesus) is Life. John 1:3-4

Genesis 1:4 God divided the Light from the darkness before the start of any creation.

Genesis 1:5 Light Day and Night - the 1st. Day.

IOW, Scripture documents us the first actual formation of heaven ONLY took place on the 2nd Day (Genesis 1:6-8). Our universe were made on the 3rd day - NOT Genesis 1:1 - contrary to your religious view.

God does NOT REPAIR anything that he created good. He rep

Conclusion: Gap theory is flawed and not supported by the Scripture. It is only based on wild imagination or "THEORY" by those who CANNOT support their view with Scripture.

Note: Insertions are mine for clarity of thoughts.

God Bless

smyrna

08-27-2006, 11:26 AM

2pillar's post above shows he is a bit confused as to our understanding of Scripture. He calls us "young earthers" when it has been explained to him several times that Genesis 1:1 states God created the heavens and the earth.
It doesn't say when, and in verse two we read that the earth became void, and without form.

From what we can determine through science, we know the earth is at least millions of years old.
So we know that when the text states the earth became void, we understand that it was heavily damaged due to a destruction that Ezekiel told you was the Katabole, the overthrow of satan, an angelic being that had rebelled against his own Creator.
You really need to wrest yourself from the strangle hold Sitchin's theories have on you. I suggest also that for help in that regard, you read Sargon the Magnificent (artisanpublishers.com)It shows why the Sumerian/Babylonian cylinder seals canot be trusted. And if you can't trust the Sumerian/Babylonian priests, then you can't trust Sitchin.

terluvire

08-27-2006, 12:23 PM

Good Morning Everyone,

Ezekeil and Abiyah, good posts.

Smyrna, Sargon the Magnificent would be a good book for 2 Pillars to read.

2 Pillars,
When you read these verses:
Heb 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

AND

Heb 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

The word "worlds" in the Greek is:
aion
ahee-ohn'
From the same as G104; properly an age; by extension perpetuity (also past); by implication the world; specifically (Jewish) a Messianic period (present or future): - age, course, eternal, (for) ever (-more), [n-]ever, (beginning of the, while the) world (began, without end). Compare G5550.

The word "worlds" is speaking of "ages", dispensation of time, not differnt worlds. Also when you read 2 Peter:
2Pe 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
2Pe 3:6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
2Pe 3:7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

The word "world" in the Greek is:
kosmos
kos'-mos
Probably from the base of G2865; orderly arrangement, that is, decoration; by implication the world (in a wide or narrow sense, including its inhabitants, literally or figuratively [morally]): - adorning, world.

It means an orderly arrangement of that age. That orderly arrangement was destroyed, (not the earth), because of satan's rebellion. Read Jeremiah 24, it speaks of the destruction of the first earth age. But again God did not destroy the planet, only that age.

CONTINUED BELOW

terluvire

08-27-2006, 12:26 PM

CONTINUED FROM ABOVE

Read Job:
Job 40:15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.
Job 40:16 Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly.
Job 40:17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.

God made us the same time he made the dinosaurs. The dinosaurs, as we know, have become extinct. The extinction was caused by the destruction of that first age as written in Jeremiah 24. I do want to add though, we were not flesh in the first age, we were spiritual beings. That is why we find fossils of the dinosaurs and even fossilized human-shaped footprints along with dino prints, but no human fossil remains. That's because we were not flesh but mostly because we didn't die. We have existed since the time God created us.

The earth was created millions or billions of years ago. We've existed with God since the time he created the dinosaurs, but we were not in flesh bodies. God destroyed that first age because of satan's rebellion. He then rejuvinated this age for all to be born innocent of women, to choice between God or satan. God did not and he will not destroy this earth. He said in Isaiah:

Isa 45:18 For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.

Like Smyrna said in another post, I can't blame you for searching and maybe being led in the direction which you have found. You realized this earth is older than most churches teach. And it is sad that most churches offer no resonable explaination. I wish many churches would realize that science and the Bible are compatible. There are no contradiction with Science and God's word.

God bless on your studies.

smyrna

08-27-2006, 12:45 PM

2pillars also wrote:

"God does NOT REPAIR anything that he created good."

I do not see the continuous cycles of regional destructions by natural forces and subsequent loss of plant, animal or human life and the regrowth of same as "repair". In the cosmos, stars die, others are formed in a cycle that is not regarded as any repair.
God set into motion these cycles as part of His creation. And it is good. When this earth age ends, and a new one begins, it is but a continuation of His plan, which is perfect.
I realize that finite, corrupt minds cannot perceive the perfection in God's plan, since we cannot see the entire results of it, since it has yet to come to pass. We trust in His Word that when all is finished, it will be complete and perfect. This is called faith.

terluvire

08-27-2006, 12:57 PM

Good post Smyrna

abiyah

08-27-2006, 03:01 PM

http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/happy.gifGood Afternoon Symrna, Plow Deep, Ezekiel, and Terluvire !

Absolutely loved ALL your posts... The Truth is a wonderful, beautiful thing to receive. I get excited, and my heart is truly filled up with joy to hear Truth FROM The Word of God, that which you all have put forth. I thank The LORD for such fine fellow labourers as yourselves, for truly I feel blessed to know you and to work in the field along side of each of you. Thank You Father, and Thank You for The Son, our Lord, Christ Jesus ! May God 'continue' to bless each of your hearts, and may The Good Shepherd 'continue' to gently lead, guide, and direct you in the wisdom, knowledge, and understanding of His Word. Thank You God ! : )
I have much to get done this afternoon, so I hope to see you all later in the week. : )

Agape,

Abiyah

ezekiel_37

08-27-2006, 03:09 PM

Hello 2pillars
I like your opening word.

Brethren, 

Then you loose it again, speaking as if we are uneducated and you know it all.

Seemingly, like most young earthers, you cannot use Scripture to support your OPINIONS. 

Do you listen to coast to coast.....or are you a trekie? lol ...earthers....right. other worlds. I think that the above post by terluvire covered the words aion and kosmos. Yes! Sometimes the word world means - time/age....

But just so you know, we always use scripture to support our position, and we say whether we each have a different opinion or not!

You can only use your interpretational methods which don't agree with Scripture, Science, nor History. 

We can use those, and scripture, brain power, discernment and common sense led by the Holy Spirit's guidance and prayer. We understand our views to be fully supported by scripture and science and history.

You base your allege "proper interpretation" on your religion's views. 

Most of the Shepherd's Chapel students are not religious, but anti religious. We don't care much for the traditions of man, but we do crave the Word of God. I consider myself non-denominational. Chapter by chapter, verse by verse, and thought by thought.....that's the way to do it!

in His service
c

llm

08-27-2006, 03:26 PM

We don't care much for the traditions of man, but we do crave the Word of God.

...then switch to the lxx

smyrna

08-27-2006, 03:44 PM

I highly doubt llm can read the Septuagint,so what is he doing constantly campaigning for it?

Maybe instead of whining about the LXX and MT, llm can share with us any earth shattering variations which would serve as inconoclasts to those who choose to stay with the KJV or other Biblical versions with a reliance on the MT.

I believe this invitation to put up or shut up will only lead to another one of llm's digressions into subjects such as geocentrism or how Jesus ascended into Heaven.

He still hasn't answered how what he calls "fancy occult math". Here is the point I made on the Three World Ages thread, that llm keeps trying to dodge:

"For LLM to be correct, everyone else must be lying. "Fancy occult math" as he calls astronomical calculations designed to navigate planetary space probes and manned space missions to their respective destinations, would be unable to do so if it is as he describes it.

Notice he completely disregarded that point, which is a typical tactic of the Fab Five."

llm

08-27-2006, 04:11 PM

there are plenty of significant differences between the mt and the lxx. read them for yourself side by side. the lxx was made by 70 true israelites(bc), and the mt was made by the kenites(ad). that should say volumes of difference to you

smyrna

08-27-2006, 05:32 PM

llm calls that answering the question? It doesn't.

The question was: Can he show us any of these differences that can be considered as iconoclastic, earth shattering affronts to either Judaism or Christianity?

Because if he cannot, he has been trying to take advantage of those who have little knowledge of the formation of the Bible, and thus has just been using the LXX vs MT argument as a digression to keep from answering questions that apparently he cannot answer, on any number of subjects.

All this guy does is dodge answering questions.
He really needs to get back to that Three World Ages Thread and answer how space probes can land on other heavenly bodies while using what he calls "Fancy Occult Math" to chart the path of these probes.

I'm going to stay on this guy like varnish on wood until he answers the question.

smyrna

08-28-2006, 09:59 AM

llm Is Finished

llm has had the opportunity to answer three questions and he has repeatedly dodged them.

He won't answer the question: What does the the verse referring to the Third Heaven in II Cor. 12:2 mean to him?

He won't answer the question: If scientists responsible for charting the path of both manned and unmanned missions to the moon and planetary bodies are using "fancy occult math" as he calls it, then how are they able to reach their destinations with such precision?

The third question: Based upon his contention that the MT (Masoretic text)is corrupt and inferior to the LXX (Septuagint), can he supply us with an example of a variation that is servere enough to be labeled iconoclastic to either Christianity or Judaism?

Since he continually dodges these qustions, he really should be cosnidered finished here at Factnet's Shepherd's Chapel oriented forum.

Oh, he can still post his nonsense, but why would anyone pay him any attention? He has shown us, through his obvious ploys intended to divert attention from the fact he has yet to answer the three question above, that he cannot even defend his own positions?

llm is finished. No credibility. He should be treated as a bothersome drunk who babbles incoherently in public.

2pillars

08-28-2006, 09:39 PM

Brethren,

So, I gathered that all of you here (SC validating each other) believe in MACRO-EVOLUTION of the union between the "fallen angels" (without flesh and bones) and humans, would that be a fair statement?

So, SC followers believe that Jesus must have lied to us that creatures are confined to his/their kinds, correct.

Just asking.

smyrna

08-28-2006, 10:44 PM

2pillars,

There are two instances where the fallen angels (nephilim) mated with women and the result were hybird giants. Both instances were recorded, in Genesis 6.

Now we know the giants existed, not just from the Bible, but other ancient texts as well. Josephus wrote of their bones being placed on display during his time, the times when Jesus walked the earth.

Og, the King of Bashan, was said to have a bed that was large enough to fit his giant frame. and the dimensions are recored on Deut. 3:11.

There are other references. These were not merely large humans. Not the nine feet tall estimated.
Do a net search on Biblical Giants ad see what you get.Then come back here and tell us we believe in something called macro-evolution.

ezekiel_37

08-28-2006, 11:44 PM

Do you believe that dna manipulation is possible today? I hope so....

There is more than one way to produce an offspring.....

And I believe that the bible warns us not to cross breed animals....which to me states that it is possible, but God doesn't want us to do it.

So, these fallen angels who we contest mated with adamic women in Gen6, did not need to have sex with them, although it is my current understanding that the angels of the bible were in the form of young men. These angels ate our food, looked like us, were desired sexually by the Sodomites, and we know that manna is angels food and also that God fed the wandering Israelites manna from heaven, and people lived on that food.

We are not all that different as scripture states. As for sexual organs, I betcha they do....but who knows, maybe not. Angels are certainly not whisps of unformed energy, but rather formed individual souls that look exactly like us. Not flesh and blood but substance none the less.

in His service
c

2pillars

08-29-2006, 12:18 AM

smyrna>>>There are two instances where the fallen angels (nephilim) mated with women and the result were hybird giants. Both instances were recorded, in Genesis 6. <<<

Dear Open Minded Readers:

The post above NOT true. Genesis 6 does NOT speak of any "fallen angels (nephilim) mating with women".

That's just a stretch and another product of the wild imagination or assumption of their church.

The "sons of God" being spoken on the text were MANKIND - mating with the daughters of men (HUMANS). The Scriptures document us that creatures are confined to his/their kinds to multiply.

Read and learn...

Genesis 1
20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving CREATURE that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

21 And God created great whales, and EVERY LIVING CREATURE THAT MOVETH, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

These living creatures that moveth and brought forth from the waters included MANKIND -- sometimes called by scientist as prehistoric men but "sons of God" by our Lord.

Now, let us continue reading the text very closely

22 And God blessed THEM (pronoun), saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.

23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.

Question: IF SC followers believe man were created on the 8th day, then, what kind of creature or who do they think God was talking to when He blessed "THEM" (pronoun)and told THEM to be fruitful and multiply on the 5th day -- fallen angels?

Now, that's very funny indeed. ha ha ha :-)

And your answer please....

smyrna

08-29-2006, 02:30 AM

2pillars just discredited himself by denying that the "Sons of God" did not mate with earth women, as it is definitely recorded in Genesis 6. He no longer has any credibility.

I understand that not all interpret the chapter that way. However,other ancient texts, including the highly respected book of Enoch, as well as many other ancient texts, speak of beings that came from the sky and had relations with women.

So he can keep denying the obvious in order to prop up his theories. However, I am not going to believe some guy born in the 20th century over the Word of God and texts that support it.

This guy is so off the wall, he is making llm look like an amatuer. He is so flipped out,he claims mankind was created on the FIFTH day. That's not a small mistake. Just read the first chapter 1:27-31, and you'll see how wrong he is.

angie0401

08-29-2006, 02:35 AM

Mankind was created on the 6th day, Adam was created on the 8th. For someone who presumes to know so much about what we believe, you actually know very little about us, as everyone of your posts shows.

kimberlyfredrick

08-29-2006, 03:13 AM

ANSWER: AQUADIC ANIMALS AND BIRDS. Please re-read Genisis 1:21. The scripture is crystal clear that God created aqatic animals and birds on the 5th day and nothing else. He told them to be fruitful and multiply. Why is it so hard for you to understand that God commanded his animals to reproduce and fill the earth? There is nowhere in that passage of scripture remotely suggesting that mankind was created in the 5th day. Unless to say that you believe that we "Evolved" from aquadic life into your "land-lubbing prehistoric man theory"(LOL) 2Pilars, you really need to be careful what your preaching here. It appears to me that you in fact are calling God a lier. God clearly made mankind on the 6th day, just as he said he did. And Adam on the 8th day. He made Adam out of the dust of the ground, not out of the water to one day "crawl out" and evolve! We are made in the image of God and that image did not evolve into our present day image. And about the Sons of God, smyrna covered that one quite well. Pray over this new teaching and re-read the scriptures. you really need to understand the importance of knowing who the Sons of God are. With love, Kim

ezekiel_37

08-29-2006, 06:09 AM

2pillars seems to believe in more than one kind of man. If I understand him correctly, he contends that there are more than one world, where there are people(that God has created)and that Gen covers the different creations of man, on each of the different worlds....(including Noah who is the first on this planet?)

When he speaks of worlds, he does not mean age, but actual other planets.

So, what now.

Answer:

A fish or a bird can have a pronoun describe them, so that line of thought is out. God is addressing the animals that he tells us he created on that 5th day.

in His service
c

2pillars

08-29-2006, 10:49 AM

EZ37>>>2pillars seems to believe in more than one kind of man. If I understand him correctly, he contends that there are more than one world, where there are people(that God has created)and that Gen covers the different creations of man, on each of the different worlds....(including Noah who is the first on this planet?)

When he speaks of worlds, he does not mean age, but actual other planets. <<<.

***************

Dear ezekiel_37,

Correct, there are numerous earths (literal) being spoken in the Bible including this planet.

Read and learn...

John 14
1 Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me.
2 In my Father's house are MANY MANSIONS: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.

The 1st World, with it Sun, Moon, and Stars was Dissolved in water, totally and completely. It fell and it shall Never rise again. Want Scripture?

The present World or Universe will be Dissolved with Fire. Everything living will be taken to the 3rd World or Heaven. Scripture available.

Thus, both Worlds or Universes, are Dissolved, in the end. The reason, the wickedness of mankind. Humans have the highest intelligence of all creatures but are also the most violent of creatures. Scripture tells us that if Jesus doesn't return, then NO flesh will be spared.

Noah was brought to our Earth when his World was destroyed in the Flood. Human Civilization can be traced to Noah's grandsons, who brought Human Intelligence to this planet of Apes.

In like manner, ALL Christians will be taken to the 3rd Heaven, before our World is Burned. We won't even need an Ark. See, no changes. God's Truth is written in Permanent Ink.

**************

ez37>>>Answer: A fish or a bird can have a pronoun describe them, so that line of thought is out. God is addressing the animals that he tells us he created on that 5th day.<<<

*********************

Oh I see, SO, SC doctrinal faith strongly believes that God was TALKING to the "fish or bird" in Genesis 1:22 when he blessed THEM (pronoun), correct? Please confirm.

Example: God was talking to the fish telling THEM (fish- third party)"LET THE FOWL (BIRDS) MULTIPLY IN THE EARTH" - and vise versa - correct.

Do you happen to be a Stand Up Comedian by any chance, EZ37?

That was very funny indeed. HA HA HA :-)

smyrna

08-29-2006, 12:16 PM

Ezekiel and all,
I for one am just going to ignore this 2pillars character. He's too goofy to discuss anything with. He uses the childish ploy of denying even the obvious, in order to support his positions.
The guy states mankind was created on the fifth day. That alone is enough for me to just sit back and watch the guy rant and rave until he gets tired of his games and moves on.
The longer the rest of you engage him, the longer he will stay here spewing his drivel. They really have some weird people on the internet.

(Message edited by smyrna on August 29, 2006)

2pillars

08-29-2006, 01:24 PM

MANKIND change from “prehistoric” to Human just AFTER Noah arrived on this Planet. Civilization was born just South of the Mountains of Ararat, exactly as God told us.

The reason there is No evidence of Human Civilization before Mesopotamia, is that Humanity was inherited from Noah, a direct descendant of the first Human, Adam. Noah's grandsons married the descendants of the sons of God (Prehistoric Man) and produced those with the intelligence necessary to WRITE their own History.

This event took place some 10,000 + - years ago, and History agrees with Scripture. Evolutionism or macro-evolution (fallen angels and human mixture) is odd man out.

It's simple to know if one's interpretation is correct. If it agrees with God's Holy Word, true Science, and History, it's as close to the One Truth as is Humanly possible.

There's not one truth for scientist and another one for christians. When you find God's truth, it agrees with both or the interpretation is wrong. The fault is Not with God's Truth, but with man's ability to understand it, for His thoughts are far above man's thoughts.

God Bless

terluvire

08-29-2006, 02:02 PM

Hi Everyone,

I stopped in to hi for I am going to be pretty busy today. But I did want to leave this for 2 pillars. This is from the Companion bible appendixes on the "sons of God":
[angels are called "sons of God" in every other place where the expression is used in the Old Testament. Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7. Ps. 29:1; 89:6. Dan. 3:25 (no art.). (*2) We have no authority or right to take the expression in Gen. 6:2, 4 in any other sense. Moreover, in Gen. 6:2 the Sept. renders it "angels".]

I hope that 2 Pillars would check it out.

I don't know why many people's views on angles is the way hollywood portrays them? The bible makes it very clear that angels are very similar to us. They eat, drink, talk, walk, see, hear...ect. Their body is made of a different substance than ours but they have a body like ours in every other aspect.

Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:
The word "God" in the Hebrew is:
elohiym
el-o-heem'
Plural of H433; gods in the ordinary sense; but specifically used (in the plural thus, especially with the article) of the supreme God; occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates; and sometimes as a superlative: - angels, X exceeding, God (gods) (-dess, -ly), X (very) great, judges, X mighty.

The word "image" in the Hebrew:
tselem
tseh'-lem
From an unused root meaning to shade; a phantom, that is, (figuratively) illusion, resemblance; hence a representative figure, especially an idol: - image, vain shew.

The word "likeness" in the Hebrew:
demuth
dem-ooth'
From H1819; resemblance; concretely model, shape; adverbially like: - fashion, like (-ness, as), manner, similitude.

Our flesh bodies were created in the likeness, resemblance of God and the angels. Angels did and can mate with humans.

Here is a link, though I didn't read through all of it, there is a picture of a giant fossil of a man. Here is an excerpt form the link:
""Pre-eminent among the most extraordinary articles ever held by a railway company is the fossilized Irish giant, which is at this moment lying at the London and North-Western Railway Company's Broad street goods depot, and a photograph of which is reproduced here. . . This monstrous figure is reputed to have been dug up by a Mr. Dyer whilst prospecting for iron ore in County Antrim.

The principal measurements are: entire length, 12ft. 2in.; girth of chest, 6ft. 6in.; and length of arms, 4ft. 6in. There are six toes on the right foot. The gross weight is 2 tons 15cwt.; so that it took half a dozen men and a powerful crane to place this article of lost property in position for the Strand magazine artist."

The link is: http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/giants.htm#Giant

2pillars

08-29-2006, 03:24 PM

terluvire>>>I stopped in to hi for I am going to be pretty busy today. But I did want to leave this for 2 pillars. This is from the Companion bible appendixes on the "sons of God":
[angels are called "sons of God" in every other place where the expression is used in the Old Testament. Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7. Ps. 29:1; 89:6. Dan. 3:25 (no art.). (*2) We have no authority or right to take the expression in Gen. 6:2, 4 in any other sense. Moreover, in Gen. 6:2 the Sept. renders it "angels".] <<<

********************************************

The Companion bible you are mentioning is just another in-house publication of your forefathers who hold this same flawed assumption - in vain attempt to support their imaginations. Sorry

The "son of God" mentioned in the book of Job were MINDKIND (not fallen angels)from the first heaven (the world of Adam thru Noah). They were witnessing the finishing touch of our planet earth for inhabitation and singing / shouting for joy.

God Bless

abiyah

08-29-2006, 03:40 PM

Hi There 2Pillars ! : )

2Pillars, I have a question for you. Who taught you these things ? These things in which you share here regarding our Father's Word ? Who told you these things regarding God's Word, which are NOT TRUTH. And let me ask you this.... Do you recall what Christ our Lord taught you about the blind ? The spiritually blind ? 

Luke 6:39
" And He spake a parable unto them, CAN THE BLIND LEAD THE BLIND ? Shall they not BOTH FALL into the ditch ? "

Whom ever it is that taught you these things in which you share here is a BLIND LEADER, blindly leading you... spiritually blind ! TRULY anyone who would listen to your doctrine and believe would be a FOOL.

Deuteronomy 27:18
" Cursed be he that maketh the blind to wander out of the way. And all the people shall say, Amen. "

That's that ! For this is Truth in your case. Who is he that maketh you to wander out of The Way? The Way is Christ, Christ IS The Living Word of God. You brother, do NOT share The Word of God here, because you are a spiritually blind man. Yet, please know and understand that Christ is able to do the same for you spiritually, as He did for this man physically.

Matthew 10:49
" And Jesus stood still, and commanded him to be called. And they call THE BLIND MAN, saying unto him, Be of GOOD COMFORT, rise; He calleth thee.

Matthew 10:50
" And he, casting away his garment, rose, and CAME TO JESUS. " 

Spiritually speaking, have faith and cast away those false teachings that you preach, Christ is The Good Shepherd, Let Him lead you, if you go to Him and ask, He will help you.

Matthew 10:51
" And Jesus answered and said unto him, WHAT WILT thou THAT I SHOULD DO UNTO thee ? THE BLIND MAN said unto Him, Lord, THAT I MIGHT RECEIVE my SIGHT. "

Matthew 10:52
" And Jesus said unto him, GO thy WAY [ Christ The Way ]; thy FAITH [ Do you have FAITH 2Pillars ? ] hath made thee whole. And IMMEDIATELY he RECEIVED his SIGHT, and FOLLOWED Jesus in the way."

abiyah

08-29-2006, 03:40 PM

http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/triangle_right.gif Continued from The above post !

I mean not to offend you 2Pillars, but cannot help but have some compassion on one that is truly lost, BLIND and cannot see. I hope that you will consider the blind man in the above Scriptures and know and understand what he did to receive his sight, and spiritually you can do the same, and SEE, for indeed, Christ our Lord is able.

Abiyah

2pillars

08-29-2006, 03:54 PM

Dear abiyah,

As usual, you like to turn thing around with your blind faith, heh ? Do you have any Scripture to sustain your objection to my post?

The Bible is God's Word. Would you have us take your's, instead?

Present your facts, or other independent readers will see that you are just whistling in the wind.

And let us prove who is blind, really! :-)

smyrna

08-29-2006, 04:05 PM

Abiyah,

Nice try, but this guy won't listen to that. To him,we are listening to a false teacher, and blinded by religion.
I know he gets some of his ideas from Zechariah Sitchin, who bases his theories on unique interpretation of the "Creation Tablets" that are the subject on Appendix 8 of the Companion Bible. Appendix 8 is very brief. But if you do a search on Sitchin, you will quickly find that he claims that a planet that orbits our solar system (like a comet) once every 3600 years, called Nibiru, ios inhabited by the "Annunaki" (there is a form of this term located in Numbers 13:33 "Sons of Anak)

Nibiru is probably the planet that 2pillars thinks Noah came from!

Anyway, Sitchin's theories are based soley on his own interpretation of both the creation tablets and Scripture. He claimed in the past that only 300 people on earth can read the ancient semitic language sometimes called "Sumerian." However, I know of no other of the 300 that ever concurred with Sitchin's interpretations.

In any case, it is good to familiarize yourself with Sitchin's theories, that is, if you wish to continue trying to communicate with 2pillars.

2pillars

08-29-2006, 04:38 PM

smyrna,

Your false accusations are surpassed only by your ability to ambush someone you know nothing about. Do you have anything to say or do you just wish to post ad hominems?

smyrna

08-29-2006, 06:14 PM

2pillars definition of a lie is a statement or set of beliefs that he doesn't agree with.

But he is right. I am desperate. Desperate to find someone that isn't suffering from delusions to discuss Scripture with.

Fifth day man? Yeah, sure. Caveman are the fallen angels? Ok, drink some more Kool-aid.

This 2pillars guy is cut right out of the mold that produced llm. Hundreds, thousands of people must be lying for him to be correct.

His error regarding his claims that the Bible states that mankind was created on the fifth day should tell us he will never admit to being wrong about anything. He was called on it, but refuses to acknowledge this glaring error.

This places him in the same spot as llm. No credibility, not worth even dealing with. I think those who believe they can persuade people like this are deluding themselves.

Don't let your egos make you into slaves to idiocy, those suffering from mental instability, and ultimately, evil.

He writes: "I am waiting for someone to cite even just one Scripture to contradict my stand."

How many times, folks? How many times have you done this already?

All he is going to do is tell you that you are not interpreting the verses you cite "correctly." You want to go round and round and round with this guy like that, go ahead.

I for one will be very dissapointed if you do.

abiyah

08-29-2006, 07:29 PM

2Pillars WROTE:
-------------------------------------------------
QUOTE: " Dear ezekiel_37,

Correct, there are numerous earths (literal) being spoken in the Bible including this planet.

Read and learn...

John 14
1 Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me.
2 In my Father's house are MANY MANSIONS: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.

The 1st World, with it Sun, Moon, and Stars was Dissolved in water, totally and completely. It fell and it shall Never rise again. Want Scripture? " END QUOTE
-------------------------------------------------

http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/happy.gifHi There 2Pillars !

Your own interpretaion of The Scriptures you quoted above do err. As a matter of fact I find your false teachings very confusing.

John 14:1
" Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in Me. "

http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/triangle_right.gif Christ is telling His diciples how that He shall return to The Father. He is comforting His diciples with His Words, instructing them, telling them to be not troubled, why ? God is in control. You do not have anything to worry about. ' believe in God and believe in Christ Jesus '

John 14:2
" In my Father's House are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. "

http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/triangle_right.gif This word 'mansions' as it appears here is the Greek word ' Mone ' and it means to abide or to dwell, and metaphorically speaks of God, The Holy Spirit indwelling believers. Its for one to abide with God today, even now, a resting place and a place of safety.

John 14:3
" And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto Myself; that where I am, there ye may be also. "

http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/triangle_right.gif Again, He comes now in Spirit, through The Holy Spirit.

John 14:4
" And whither I go ye know, and the way ye know. "

http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/triangle_right.gif Do you know whither [ where ] He is...... He is sat down at the right Hand of The Throne of God [ Hebrews 12:12, Psalm 110:1 & Ephesians 1:20 ]; The way..... ? Christ Is The Way [ John 14:6 ].

Abiyah

2pillars

08-29-2006, 07:52 PM

Dear abiyah,

Are you saying Jesus lied to us when he said specifically that he will PREPARE A PLACE for us to live in -- after this world is burned?

Where did you get the idea that Jesus was only speaking metaphorically and there's no such PLACE like Heaven & Hell - based on logic?

See, as I have told before, you can NOT use the Scripture to support your flawed understanding, simply because you don't have the truth.

Try again? :-)

ezekiel_37

08-29-2006, 09:25 PM

I must admit 2pillars,

you are the funniest person that I have met here on factnet. You absolutely take the cake.

I think that overall we have been rather kind to you. You on the otherhand open each post with condescending remarks and an attitude of loftiness....a know it all, whose ideas are totally contrary to what is fact.

I ask you this...does your interpretation of scripture give you any ideas concerning the Tribulation period.....

Are we raptured before the antiChrist gets here, or are we gathered at the 7th trump...Christ's return?

thanks

in His service
c

ezekiel_37

08-29-2006, 09:29 PM

2pillars, how can you think that Jesus lied?

He did not. He was pointing out that in Heaven, go has enough room for all. many, many, many resting places in heaven. Not may worlds. He did not say that He goes to prepare another world, or earth, or planet, or whatever, but rather speaks of rest, which He has ready for those who overcome.

in His service
c

2pillars

08-29-2006, 09:47 PM

Actually it is your church calling Jesus a liar by contradicting his words.

Unless you have your own rendition of the Bible, the Scripture is very clear in documenting us, the New Heavens and New Earth to look forward to -- being prepared for us, literally speaking.

Read and learn...

Isaiah 65:17 For, behold, I create NEW HEAVENS AND A NEW EARTH: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.

Revelation 21
And I saw a NEW HEAVEN and a NEW EARTH: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
2 And I John saw the holy city, NEW Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

Now, try to refute that.

(Message edited by 2pillars on August 29, 2006)

terluvire

08-29-2006, 09:47 PM

Quote:
I must admit 2pillars,

you are the funniest person that I have met here on factnet. You absolutely take the cake.

I agree! LOL

I guess some think that God's kingdom, heaven, is floating out in space somewhere or on another planet.

I'm not going to try any more. 2 Pillars ignored the definition for the word "worlds" which clearly shows it is talking about ages not different worlds. They believe in cavemen. Noah was from another planet...ect. They are not going to convince us otherwise. We stand firmly on the Word of God period.

Smyrna, I'll have to check out that person Stichen?? Is that the name? I'll have to check out the post you had it written on, then I'll check it out for myself. Good work Smyrna. I'm glad you studied up on all these other teachings and history of them.

terluvire

08-29-2006, 10:03 PM

Hi Smyrna,

I found the info on Sitchin's teachings and they certainly do sound like the same stuff that 2 Pillars is promoting. It has some really off the wall stuff. I don't know if you posted the link so I'm going to post it:
http://www.sitchin.com/

The teaching is really way out there! LOL

danispeachy

08-29-2006, 10:29 PM

To my SC friends,

The Term "Don't Argue with Satan" comes to mind. It's good advice for different times and different people. I hope you catch my drift.

plow_deep

08-29-2006, 10:35 PM

"2Pillars, I have a question for you. Who taught you these things ? These things in which you share here regarding our Father's Word ?"

Good question Abiyah.

2pillars, you have yet to answer...is it a secret?

I hope you dont mind, but what Church teaches these things you present here?

Peace

smyrna

08-29-2006, 11:46 PM

2pillars certainly has been influenced by Zechariah Sitchin. Though he won't do it, he really should read Sargon the Magnificent.
Early cultures began to worship the nephilim as gods. Sitchin admits to this. He sees no problem with it. He teaches that the 'gods' came from a planet that was in danger of dying because their atmosphere was deteriorating. Only gold dust sprinkled into the atmosphere would save it.
Somehow, they knew gold was here on earth, so they came here to mine it. Well, the gods really liked to party and were kind of lazy, so they created man to mine the gold.

I'm not making this up, this is what Sitchin teaches and people all over the world, like 2pillars, believe him!

Now I theorize that 2pillars does not really want us to know about his being influenced by Sitchin.
Because some of Sitchin's theories are so far out there, they make 2pillars look like Einstein.
So 2pillars takes what he likes out of Sitchin's material,and comes here preaching some home-spun garbage, telling us all along we don't know what we are talking about.
I've got this guy's number. You all just study that Sitchin site Terluvire posted, and you'll see where this clown is coming from.

angie0401

08-30-2006, 12:45 AM

Ok, so I think I've got it now.
2pillars (correct me if I am misrepresenting your beliefs) believes the following:

www.sitchin.com/designer.htm (http://www.sitchin.com/designer.htm)

As my readers know, what I have said in my books went beyond the common origin of Life (=DNA) on Earth and elsewhere in the Universe. I showed that according to the Sumerian texts (on which the biblical account of Genesis was based), Evolution took its course both on Nibiru and on Earth. Beginning much earlier on Nibiru, it produced the advanced Anunnaki on Nibiru but only early hominids on Earth when the Anunnaki had come here some 450,000 years ago. Then, I wrote, the Anunnaki engaged in genetic engineering to upgrade the hominids to Homo sapiens (to be in their likeness and after their image, as the Bible says).

So 2pillars, you don't believe in the one true God? The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The Alpha and Omega? Or wait, you do, but He didn't actually create Adam, that was the Anunnaki:


www.sitchin.com/vatican.htm (http://www.sitchin.com/vatican.htm)
Advanced "Extraterrestrials” -- the Sumerians called them Anunnaki, the Bible Nefilim -- started to visit our planet some 450,000 years ago; And, some 300,000 years ago, they engaged in genetic engineering to upgrade Earth's hominids and fashion Homo sapiens, the Adam. In that, they acted as Emissaries for the Universal Creator -- God.

You're probably not going to find any takers of that craziness around here. You might try the Scientology thread, though.

angie0401

08-30-2006, 12:47 AM

terluvire

08-30-2006, 01:17 AM

HI Everyone,

Smryna said:
Now I theorize that 2pillars does not really want us to know about his being influenced by Sitchin.
Because some of Sitchin's theories are so far out there, they make 2pillars look like Einstein.
So 2pillars takes what he likes out of Sitchin's material,and comes here preaching some home-spun garbage, telling us all along we don't know what we are talking about.

I think you are right. 2 Pillars' understanding has to come from Sitchin. Everything 2Pillars has said matches completely with Sitchin's teachings.

Babylon has certainly earned it's name. It's amazing how the truth has been twisted into many false religions, gods, and goddesses. I wish people would truly dig into the root of those teachings by checking it out through history and in our Father's word. It would be a great idea if 2 Pillars would seriously consider reading Sargon the Magnificant.

Angie, you said:
You're probably not going to find any takers of that craziness around here. You might try the Scientology thread, though.

lol I was thinking the same thing!

terluvire

08-30-2006, 01:34 AM

HI Angie,

Quote:
So 2pillars, you don't believe in the one true God? The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The Alpha and Omega? Or wait, you do, but He didn't actually create Adam, that was the Anunnaki:

Good question. I hope 2 Pillars answers it.

2pillars

08-30-2006, 01:38 AM

angie0401>>> so I think I've got it now.
2pillars (correct me if I am misrepresenting your beliefs) believes the following: <<<

*******************************

Of course, you are misrepresting my position, so what is new?

It is the favorite defensive tactical maneuvering by SC followers to employ in order to discourage others who questions their religious view, correct?

But don't worry about me, I am not easily discourage!!! In fact, I am having so much fun ticking you guys off by giving you back your own medicine. LOL

BTW, unlike the SC believers, I don't subscribe to any heathen publications. The fact is and the record onb this board will show that I only use the Holy Bible to support my understanding - which unfortunately SC followers, they could not gainsay.

Notice to Other Readers:

Every time SC followers is exposed of their biblical ignorance and could no longer hold on to defend their cultic religious stand, it is very obvious, that they always resort to malicious misrepresentation and character assassination of their opponent, would that be fair assessment? Of course, it is!!!

So sad, isn't it, ladies and gentlemen?

tsk..tsk...tsk... what a shame.

angie0401

08-30-2006, 02:37 AM

2pillars,
If I'm misrepresenting your beliefs, please tell me where I am wrong. Also, I would really appreciate it if you would answer my question:

So 2pillars, you don't believe in the one true God? The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The Alpha and Omega? Or wait, you do, but He didn't actually create Adam, that was the Anunnaki. Do you or do you not believe in God the Creator, the one true God.

You sure are twisting and turning and bobbing and weaving a lot. Why not STATE your beliefs so the "other readers" can have a fair & balanced view. OUR beliefs are on record all over these threads - why not state yours??? Scared?

smyrna

08-30-2006, 10:57 AM

2pillars wrote:

"Notice to Other Readers:

Every time SC followers is exposed of their biblical ignorance and could no longer hold on to defend their cultic religious stand, it is very obvious, that they always resort to malicious misrepresentation and character assassination of their opponent, would that be fair assessment? Of course, it is!!!" "

This guy is using the figure anti-categoria.
Definition: A retort in which one turns the very accusation made by one's adversary back against him.

He also asks and answers his own rhetorical question, a common trick meant to validate the question.

Neither will work in his case, because it is he who is now senselessly attacking the SC students here. It is he who is dodging questions, because it is he who has shown his ignorance all over these threads.

Here is one of his most recent posts:
(terluvire asks the question)

>>>"2Pillars, I have a question for you. Who taught you these things ? These things in which you share here regarding our Father's Word ?" <<<

************************************************** ******************************************
Here is 2pillar's response. He doesn't answer the question, just resorts to attaking the SC:

Well, speaking about the words of your father, I would not be surprise IF (hypothesis) SC followers are actually descendants of Cain, the father of lies -- based on the tactical maneuvering you guys have been doing.

Look...

JOHN 8
44 Ye are of your father (Cain) the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a LIAR, and the father of it.

Repent!!!

From Post #32 on the thread: Who Survived The Flood Of Noah's Time.

2pillars

08-30-2006, 11:22 AM

smyrna,

I have diligently answered all, if not, most of the legitimate questions here, but SC followers refuse and continue to fail answering my simple queery.

If you don't even know what Day it is, how can you expect me to believe you have enough sense or brain capacity to understand my answers?

To ALL SC Followers,

Please explain why the SC support macro-evolution in their doctrinal faith - based on the EVOLUTION of the "nephilim" (fallen angels) becoming human being themselves -- and have sex with the daugthers of men, according to SC doctrinal faith.

I believe the above is a fair and legitimate question.

Thanks

smyrna

08-30-2006, 11:40 AM

Angels do not need to evolve. They have supernatural abilities. They do not need sex organs, but when the fallen angels came to earth and had relations with women,they had the means to do it.

That is our belief, whether you like the answer or not.

Now:

Will you admit you made a mistake in claiming mankind was made on the fifth day?

Will you tell us where you get the idea that Noah came from another planet?

Will you tell us if you have been influenced in any way by the writings of Zecharia Sitchin?

I really think I'm wasting my time,but perhaps if you do what I think you'll do, my time will be well spent in once agin showing you are not really participating in any discussions, only ranting and raving in a completely condescending, arrogant, and spiteful way.

ezekiel_37

08-30-2006, 08:41 PM

I believe that plow deep addressed your claim of macro evolution, and as plow deep understands it, your definition of the phrase is incorrect. I have had many discussions with plow deep, and I respect this posters opinions...and in this case completely agree.

So, it is obvious that the SC teaching and your understanding are far different.

If we could find some common ground then further learning can be accomplished.

so, I have a few questions that are also legitimate and I hope that you answer in honesty.

1....Where did you receive teaching from. I understand that you claim it is scriptural, but who taught you these things...which man did you follow to those conclusions....or are they your own?

2....Do you believe that Satan had a rebellion and that 1/3 of the souls followed him? We contend that this is the reason for the flesh age.

3....Do you believe that in the time before Adam, mankind was not flesh and bone, but spirit with form?

4....Do you think that we will be gathered and taken away before the antiChrist does his thing here?

Thanks in advance.

in His service
c

2pillars

08-30-2006, 09:25 PM

>>>so, I have a few questions that are also legitimate and I hope that you answer in honesty.

1....Where did you receive teaching from. I understand that you claim it is scriptural, but who taught you these things...which man did you follow to those conclusions....or are they your own? <<<

Answer: As I have said repeatedly, I get my teaching from the Holy Bible only. I have no outside influence except it be the Spirit of Truth.

>>>2....Do you believe that Satan had a rebellion and that 1/3 of the souls followed him? We contend that this is the reason for the flesh age.<<<

Answer: Of course, however your assumption of the "flesh age" has nothing to do with those fallen angels. That is only based on your church theory which is flawed.

>>>3....Do you believe that in the time before Adam, mankind was not flesh and bone, but spirit with form? <<<

Answer: Absolutely not! MANKIND always have flesh and bones -- called as a natural living soul.

>>>4....Do you think that we will be gathered and taken away before the antiChrist does his thing here? <<<

Irrelevant question to the topic however...

Answer: There are many antichirst that are already here before you, where have you been?

Now, you have to answer my questions next time.