The Love of God and the Mark of the Beast

[armylngst]

God NEVER contemplated His elect as sinful nor were they ever unatoned whether in eternity of in the temporal.
He contemplated His elect in His Mind as a holy, righteous, and sinless people.

Then Paul would not have written what he wrote in Ephesians 1. And God did not contemplate. He willed. He determined. There is no contemplation.

When one mentions "foreknowledge" it is here in His Mind, in Himself, which is where God's foreknowledge of His elect is found. God could not create a holy and righteous man in Himself.

Really? Where in the world did you get that idea? I thought you believed God was not the same of man, and was separate from the creation and all. Yet, you limit God as a man here. God is imperfect? Wow. That is quite the statement. It is not that God could not create a holy and righteous man, it is that He determined that He would make man innocent, with the ability to choose (though He determined the outcome), that He might redeem them and bring glory to Himself. That He could express the greatest love.

He could only do it in a lab He called Universe, created with two heavens, an earth, planets, stars, and other objects in space.

See this is where you show that you aren't paying attention to scripture. Pauls speaks of the third heaven. Did God create that? (I am being sarcastic with this pettiness.)

It is only when God created man that man became sinful however He never sees us as sinful but completely atoned, holy and righteous - even as a newly created species on earth. The problem God had was that He could not create a man in Himself - which is eternity. He can only create man into existence, but that man would be sinful (Greek: hamartia = sin.)

That is not true. Again, God, through Paul (the Bible is inspired) said that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. While we were yet in our trespasses and sins. Again, the unfolding of God's plan, and the fulfilling of God's plan is TEMPORAL, because WE are TEMPORAL. We have to live it. Again, if you are right, then Jesus died a needless death. Why would God do that?

What you FAIL to understand is the two perspectives of reality and both are laid out in Scripture.

Um... no. I do. You fail to accept it. Eternal and temporal. They are separate. There is also God's perspective, and OUR perspective. His is eternal, ours is temporal.

You think the "image of God" is a man of the earth, earthy? Adam wasn't created in the image of God.

You just denied what God says He did. You are again, telling God that He didn't do what He said He did.
Genesis 1
26 Then God said, “[ai]Let Us make mankind in Our image, according to Our likeness; and [aj]let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the livestock and over all the earth, and over every crawling thing that crawls on the earth.” 27 So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

It is right there. God is very clear. The biggest debate is what God meant by "image of God". We don't look like God because God is Spirit and we are flesh. However, we do have the capability to think, the capability to reason, etc. All things God can do that animals cannot do. So we have attributes of God's nature at a lesser degree. God can create from nothing, we can make things from what is available. God is sovereign over all creation, Adam was given dominion over creation. (here mentioned as all livign things. Satan took that when Adam sinned. However, notice how Adam was not given dominion over humanity. As such, Satan is going in with the sons/daughters of God to ask permission to torment Job, to which God said, sure.

Saul made a definitive distinction between the first Adam (man) and the last Adam (Christ.) The image of God is not first Adam but second/last Adam. Your position is to make God out into the image of man.

You are making a mistake here. Adam was made in the image of God. Genesis 1 and God is clear. He actually says "Let us make man in our image", and then says (since God may have written Genesis, or perhaps Adam) that that is what He did. Jesus IS God, so there is no issue here. Adam represents the flesh, and Jesus represents the Spirit. Just as Abraham on his own represents the flesh, but Isaac represents the Spirit. That is why covenant Israel that sees itself as descendants of Abraham are lost, while those who are descendants of Abraham through Isaac, are of the Spirit and are blessed. Those who live under the law will die by the law, but those who live by faith in Christ are saved.

God created man sinful in time/space because that's the ONLY WAY man can be created. I've already given you my reason.

Yes, your God is weak. Were angels created in time/space? You do understand that the creation was determined, right? You also know that God is sovereign and all powerful (within the realm of logic). God can create whatever He wants that can continue eternally, however, only God is eternal. That is, everything else has a beginning. Angels were created, so they had a beginning. Satan was created, so He had a beginning. Jesus created, and nothing was created without Him, so He is eternal. (It helps that He is God, so the previous was so unnecessary.)

There is your error in thinking. You quote Peter's words to Jews and Jewish Christians and make them apply to "everybody" alive and who is yet to be born. That's where you err. I will prove it to you. Let's see if you are honest with Scripture. First, Peter writes his epistle/letter to born-again Jews. He is the apostle to the Jews, right? But you claim Peter writes to "everybody." How wrong you are. Peter is writing to Jews in both his letters placed and published in the New Testament. He is NOT writing to "everybody." His two letters are written to Jews.

Peter wrote to everybody. There was the audience of his time, and the audience of the future. One has to understand it as to the audience at the time, which are elect believers. It doesn't matter for much of what he wrote as to whether Jew or Gentile, because a lot/most of his message is universal. That is, it doesn't pertain to a specific people other than believers. That is why we can read what he wrote and understand it. It may not affect everyone, but it has meaning that can be understood by everyone. For instance, don't believe anyone who says that Jesus has already come. That is applicable to everyone. No one should believe them. What you don't seem to understand is that these letters were shared amongst most/all the churches. That was one of the standards used to include letters in the Bible we have today. Was it widespread, and was it accepted by those it was addressed to as actually being written by the author mentioned. There were a lot of books left out because they weren't widespread, or they proved that they were forgeries, or not written by the person claimed in the book.

We almost didn't have the book of James because Martin Luther didn't like it. Why? He didn't understand it. James point on works and faith is that one can say they have faith... now prove it. The works validate the faith because the works come from faith. He is not calling for a works based salvation, but a salvation based in grounded, living faith. It is one thing to say you believe in something, it is another to actually believe in it. As James says, you say you believe in God. You do good. The demons also believe... and shudder. What's the difference? The demons have the appropriate reaction. So many people say they believe in God, but when you look how they act, and without proper fear. No fear behind their eyes. Like you. You don't measure what you say about God, and you get responses like "REPENT". You do great disservice to God in your words. And there isn't a modicum of fear in you when you say it. Not a modicum of respect for God.

 

[jeremiah1five]

Then Paul would not have written what he wrote in Ephesians 1. And God did not contemplate. He willed. He determined. There is no contemplation.

With God to contemplate is to will and to will is to contemplate. He doesn't daydream. He says what He means and means what He says.
What Saul wrote in Ephesians and his other letters is to explain, discuss, share what his studies of the Old Testament was about in light of the Acts of the Holy Spirit taking place among Jewry. He writes to Jews helping them understand the New Covenant era Israel found herself in. And the New Covenant is a covenant between the God of Abraham and the House of Israel and the House of Judah. With these things taking place among the Jews why would he even write anything to uncircumcised, non-covenant, idol-worshiping non-Hebrew Gentiles? They're not in covenant with God.

Really? Where in the world did you get that idea? I thought you believed God was not the same of man, and was separate from the creation and all. Yet, you limit God as a man here. God is imperfect? Wow. That is quite the statement. It is not that God could not create a holy and righteous man, it is that He determined that He would make man innocent, with the ability to choose (though He determined the outcome), that He might redeem them and bring glory to Himself. That He could express the greatest love.

Because God created man sinful man has no free will. Man is in bondage to sin. That is the whole reason why Christ had to come and bind the strong man so He can take his possessions. A good read is "Bondage of the Will" by Martin Luther. Check it out.

Isaiah says, "there is only ONE God, there is NONE like Him, and He gives His glory to NO ONE." God cann ot reduplicate Himself in Himself. The only way man can be created is sinful and fallen short of God's glory. The word for that is "sin." Sinlessness, Holiness, Righteousness, Pure, these are God's Nature and Attributes and He cannot reduplicate Himself in Himself nor can He create a being that possesses all His Nature and Attributes. It is impossible. But create heaven and earth, time and space, and He can create man except man will be sinful.

See this is where you show that you aren't paying attention to scripture. Pauls speaks of the third heaven. Did God create that? (I am being sarcastic with this pettiness.)

In creation there is only two heavens. Third heaven is not a place, but a Person. There is only ONE God, there is NONE like Him, and He gives His glory to NO ONE. That's what Isaiah says and I believe him. Why don't you?

That is not true. Again, God, through Paul (the Bible is inspired) said that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. While we were yet in our trespasses and sins. Again, the unfolding of God's plan, and the fulfilling of God's plan is TEMPORAL, because WE are TEMPORAL. We have to live it. Again, if you are right, then Jesus died a needless death. Why would God do that?

Who are the "us"? They are Israel - the Jews. Christ died in accordance with the Law of Moses. WHO is under the Law of Moses? Israel or Gentiles?

Um... no. I do. You fail to accept it. Eternal and temporal. They are separate. There is also God's perspective, and OUR perspective. His is eternal, ours is temporal.

I know that. And Scripture contains both perspectives to discern.

You just denied what God says He did. You are again, telling God that He didn't do what He said He did.
Genesis 1
26 Then God said, “[ai]Let Us make mankind in Our image, according to Our likeness; and [aj]let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the livestock and over all the earth, and over every crawling thing that crawls on the earth.” 27 So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

The image of God is not Adam. God is not of the earth, earthy. God is the LORD from heaven. The image of God is Christ. When we are born-again we are being conformed into the image of Christ, NOT Adam. Christ is the spittin' image of God and God looked forward in time to the day when Christ is set loose upon His people and these "Christians" (or, little Christ's) are being conformed into the image of Christ, NOT Adam.

15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: Colossians 1:15.

I suggest you spend some quality time under the anointing and study this. Adam is not the image of God, Christ is.
There is no better image of a Father than a Son and Christ 'fits' that image perfectly, not fallen, sinful man.

It is right there. God is very clear. The biggest debate is what God meant by "image of God". We don't look like God because God is Spirit and we are flesh. However, we do have the capability to think, the capability to reason, etc. All things God can do that animals cannot do. So we have attributes of God's nature at a lesser degree. God can create from nothing, we can make things from what is available. God is sovereign over all creation, Adam was given dominion over creation. (here mentioned as all livign things. Satan took that when Adam sinned. However, notice how Adam was not given dominion over humanity. As such, Satan is going in with the sons/daughters of God to ask permission to torment Job, to which God said, sure.

Man is in bondage to sin. There is NOTHING in fallen, sinful man that exudes the image of God. God is not fallen, sinful God so how can a fallen sinful man be in the image of God. Pay attention:

15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: Colossians 1:14–15.

The image of God is Christ, NOT Adam. We are being conformed into the image of Christ who is the image of God. Do you see how that works? Read and study First Corinthians 15. Saul makes the differences between Christ and Adam very clear in that chapter. Christ is the image of God, NOT Adam. You seem to have a man-centered theology you espouse. Believe me, fallen, sinful, man is NOT the image of God: Christ is.

You are making a mistake here. Adam was made in the image of God. Genesis 1 and God is clear. He actually says "Let us make man in our image", and then says (since God may have written Genesis, or perhaps Adam) that that is what He did. Jesus IS God, so there is no issue here. Adam represents the flesh, and Jesus represents the Spirit. Just as Abraham on his own represents the flesh, but Isaac represents the Spirit. That is why covenant Israel that sees itself as descendants of Abraham are lost, while those who are descendants of Abraham through Isaac, are of the Spirit and are blessed. Those who live under the law will die by the law, but those who live by faith in Christ are saved.

As I said, God looked forward in time to the day when man becomes born-again of the Spirit and they become conformed into the image of Christ. THAT is who God was prophesying about when He said, "Let us make the NEW man in our image." Certainly, fallen, sinful, tainted man of the earth, earthy, is NOT the image of God.

Yes, your God is weak. Were angels created in time/space? You do understand that the creation was determined, right? You also know that God is sovereign and all powerful (within the realm of logic). God can create whatever He wants that can continue eternally, however, only God is eternal. That is, everything else has a beginning. Angels were created, so they had a beginning. Satan was created, so He had a beginning. Jesus created, and nothing was created without Him, so He is eternal. (It helps that He is God, so the previous was so unnecessary.)

The angels were created in our realm, before man was created. Some had a ministry on earth, and some had a ministry before God. Cherubs guard earthly holy things and Seraphim's guard heavenly holy things. God cannot reduplicate Himself in Himself. Eternalness is the Nature of God. It is His Attribute and as Isaiah says, "There is only ONE God, there is NONE like Him, and He gives His glory (Eternalness, Holiness, Sinlessness, etc.), to NO ONE."
God cannot reduplicate Himself in Himself. THAT is impossible. You need to study these existential questions before you post on the Internet and show your ignorance of the things of God. Jesus had a beginning, too, or didn't you know that? The Eternal Spirit is Christ, but Jesus the man had a beginning. You should study the doctrine of the Hypostatic Union. There's a reason why Jesus Christ is Alpha and Omega, beginning and end.

Peter wrote to everybody. There was the audience of his time, and the audience of the future. One has to understand it as to the audience at the time, which are elect believers. It doesn't matter for much of what he wrote as to whether Jew or Gentile, because a lot/most of his message is universal. That is, it doesn't pertain to a specific people other than believers. That is why we can read what he wrote and understand it. It may not affect everyone, but it has meaning that can be understood by everyone. For instance, don't believe anyone who says that Jesus has already come. That is applicable to everyone. No one should believe them. What you don't seem to understand is that these letters were shared amongst most/all the churches. That was one of the standards used to include letters in the Bible we have today. Was it widespread, and was it accepted by those it was addressed to as actually being written by the author mentioned. There were a lot of books left out because they weren't widespread, or they proved that they were forgeries, or not written by the person claimed in the book.

The Old Testament Hebrew Scripture of Law, Psalms, and Prophets was written through the Spirit overshadowing God's prophets and they all were Hebrew men who wrote to the Hebrew people. Nothing is changed when Israel enters the New Covenant era. The apostles of whom we have their letters wrote to Jews to help them understand the New Covenant and the New Covenant era Israel overnight found herself in. The New Covenant is THEIR covenant. Someone had to look into the Old Testament text and interpret what was written and prophesied about the New Covenant between God and the House of Israel and the House of Judah so they would not be ignorant - as Saul says repeatedly - in his letters to Jews and Jewish Christians who became born-again. Being a rabbi and Pharisee who knew the Old Testament "above many mine equals" Saul was eminently qualified to explain the New Covenant to the House of Israel and the House of Judah. Jesus did the same thing when He was on the planet:

25 Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:
26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?
27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself. Luke 24:25–27.

Don't be a fool. We have Moses and the Prophets. Moses spoke most about "the Prophet like unto Moses." One cannot become a Christian without that knowledge that's contained in the Law and the Prophets.

In writing to the Jews in Corinth, Ephesus, Philippi, etc., Saul is very clear in his letter to Jews in the Galatian region this:

23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
Galatians 3:23–24.

Saul is clearly writing to Jews. They were the only ones under the Law.

We almost didn't have the book of James because Martin Luther didn't like it. Why? He didn't understand it. James point on works and faith is that one can say they have faith... now prove it. The works validate the faith because the works come from faith. He is not calling for a works based salvation, but a salvation based in grounded, living faith. It is one thing to say you believe in something, it is another to actually believe in it. As James says, you say you believe in God. You do good. The demons also believe... and shudder. What's the difference? The demons have the appropriate reaction. So many people say they believe in God, but when you look how they act, and without proper fear. No fear behind their eyes. Like you. You don't measure what you say about God, and you get responses like "REPENT". You do great disservice to God in your words. And there isn't a modicum of fear in you when you say it. Not a modicum of respect for God.

Works and faith are terms Jews were familiar with. They had the Law, the Psalms, and the Prophets and they looked into these things except without the Holy Spirit of Promise PROMISED TO ISRAEL (Joel), they could only understand the letter of the Law and not the spirit of the Law.

"Demons" are only attitudes. One can have a good attitude or an evil attitude and Christ dealt with both. Our attitudes are important to our walk. Attitudes are powerful. You can't see them but you can "feel" them. I suggest you study these things because all you're doing is giving me textbook responses. Get a clue: the gift of discernment of spirits can discern only three "spirits."

1. the spirit of angels
2. the spirit of man
3. the Spirit of God.

There is no such thing as "demons" in the creative narrative. It is all tied up in "goat-worship." The Old Testament says a few things about this "goat-worshiping" attitude. The concept of "goat-worshipers" in Hebrew theology is not a positive one, but rather a warning against a specific form of pagan idolatry that involved sacrificing to se'irim, or "goat demons." This ancient practice, and the broader symbolism of goats in relation to the wilderness and rebellion, laid the groundwork for the later, more defined Christian and occultic depictions of Satan as a goat-like figure (e.g., Baphomet). In Jewish tradition, however, the goat primarily serves as a symbol of unholy forces and foreign worship that must be rejected in favor of the worship of one God. In the NT Jesus comments about separating His sheep from the goats/goat-worshipers.

I used to believe in those false Constantinian Gentile theologies that you get from Gentile theology books. There came a point in my life whereas a child I believed in childish things as demons you believe in. But when I became a man (of God) I put away those childish things. You should pray God for the anointing to study His Word. But maybe your "measure of faith" is limited and you're not meant to certain knowledge of the things of God. I on the other hand and in conjunction with my spiritual gifts God saw it necessary for me to know things that are founded on Scripture and not upon Gentile theologies. There is still a great many things I don't know and there are things I do know, and demons is one of those things I do know. Before Christ dealt with "demon"-possessed people He had to subdue their attitudes. And our attitudes, or "spirits" are important to our worship. In creation there are only angel and man. There is no such thing as "demons" as a beings God created.

 

[armylngst]

With God to contemplate is to will and to will is to contemplate. He doesn't daydream. He says what He means and means what He says.
What Saul wrote in Ephesians and his other letters is to explain, discuss, share what his studies of the Old Testament was about in light of the Acts of the Holy Spirit taking place among Jewry. He writes to Jews helping them understand the New Covenant era Israel found herself in. And the New Covenant is a covenant between the God of Abraham and the House of Israel and the House of Judah. With these things taking place among the Jews why would he even write anything to uncircumcised, non-covenant, idol-worshiping non-Hebrew Gentiles? They're not in covenant with God.

This makes absolutely no sense. To contemplate and to will are NOT the same thing. If you are saying He doesn't day dream because of the word contemplation, then perhaps you should realize that God doesn't contemplate. He wills/determines. Will is not thought. There is the definition that speaks to desires, but this will is determinant will, as in, it will happen, because God willed it. The reason why Paul would write to these people is because the gospel is also to them. To say it is of the Jews means that it is to all, but it comes from the Jews. I mean, why would Paul write to covenant breaking, law breaking, idol-worshiping Jews? Why would God send them prophets? It is because you don't understand God's purposes, or you outright reject/deny them.

Because God created man sinful man has no free will. Man is in bondage to sin. That is the whole reason why Christ had to come and bind the strong man so He can take his possessions. A good read is "Bondage of the Will" by Martin Luther. Check it out.

God did not create man sinful. God cannot create man sinful. He can create them innocent with the capacity to sin, which is what He did. Again, you yourself should look up what sin means. It is an archery term that means to miss the mark/standard. So are you saying that God aimed to create something good, and failed to reach that standard? Are you claiming God fails? Adam and Eve came into this world not having missed any standard. Sinless. Holy. Pure. Until God set up the target, defined the bullseye, and both Adam and Eve... missed. From that point forward, all humanity fell from grace. (Hence it being called "The Fall".) When it comes to this competition, it doesn't matter if you shoot a perfect game. There is still that first miss. It doesn't go away. For all have shot an imperfect round (archery) and fallen short of a perfect score, in this case, God's perfection/holiness/non-missingness (sinlessness). God cannot sin because God is the standard by which sin is sin. As such, God is incapable of sin.

Isaiah says, "there is only ONE God, there is NONE like Him, and He gives His glory to NO ONE." God cann ot reduplicate Himself in Himself. The only way man can be created is sinful and fallen short of God's glory. The word for that is "sin." Sinlessness, Holiness, Righteousness, Pure, these are God's Nature and Attributes and He cannot reduplicate Himself in Himself nor can He create a being that possesses all His Nature and Attributes. It is impossible. But create heaven and earth, time and space, and He can create man except man will be sinful.

This makes absolutely no sense. It is better to stick to the Bible and not to your own understanding. God creating us in His own image, and in His likeness was NOT duplication. We have attributes of God, ALL that we have are to a lesser degree. Then there are those we do not have, because we are finite beings. (We die). Those would be omnipotence, omniscience, omnipresence, etc. However, that isn't what God was talking about when He said "Let us make man in our own image". It is more like an artist making a self portrait. All it is is a painting that catches appearance, but nothing else. So we bear God's image, but it will always be inferior, for it must be. So stop with this duplication thing. That has nothing to do with it. I'm surprise that you just don't trust that God knows what He was talking about. I mean, I trust Him, and He is the One who did it, and told us He did it. Trust Him. There is absolutely no need to define it. Since you feel the need, we are inferior to Him, and then add the corruption of sin on top of that.

In creation there is only two heavens. Third heaven is not a place, but a Person. There is only ONE God, there is NONE like Him, and He gives His glory to NO ONE. That's what Isaiah says and I believe him. Why don't you?

This is why you should go with the Bible, and not with your own understanding. 2 Corinthians 12:
" It is [a]doubtless not profitable for me to boast. I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord: 2 I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago—whether in the body I do not know, or whether out of the body I do not know, God knows—such a one was caught up to the third heaven. 3 And I know such a man—whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows— 4 how he was caught up into Paradise and heard inexpressible words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter. "

It is a place, in this case, as traditionally understood by the Church and by Jewish people, the third heaven is where God dwells. It is not God. Here Paul calls it paradise.

Who are the "us"? They are Israel - the Jews. Christ died in accordance with the Law of Moses. WHO is under the Law of Moses? Israel or Gentiles?

This is perfect, given what John says in I John 2:2.
"And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world."

So that means the "our" here is Israel - the Jews. So just who is "the whole world"? Looking up the Greek, it is exactly as it says. The whole world. (With all/whole meaning just that.) Which goes back to the one who prepared the way from Jesus by proclaiming, Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. For God so loved the world... For God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. Right along with believers being in, but not of Israel. I mean, in, but not of the world.

I know that. And Scripture contains both perspectives to discern.

So... when will you start discerning?

The image of God is not Adam. God is not of the earth, earthy. God is the LORD from heaven. The image of God is Christ. When we are born-again we are being conformed into the image of Christ, NOT Adam. Christ is the spittin' image of God and God looked forward in time to the day when Christ is set loose upon His people and these "Christians" (or, little Christ's) are being conformed into the image of Christ, NOT Adam.

Again, apparently you don't get it. Why don't you make like Peter and stop trying to withstand God? We are not facsimiles of God. We are made in His image, like an artist painting a self portrait. It isn't going to start talking. We aren't going to be omnipotent, omniscient, or omnipresent. We have attributes of God to a MUCH lesser degree then God. And then there are those attributes we don't have at all. We are, again, not talking duplication. We have the mark of the Creator on us, but we are not Him. Jesus is God. He is the image (visible) of the invisible God. That comes from being the Son of God. Jesus was not made in God's image, because Jesus IS God. We were created in God's image, but there is a lot of meaning in that. I gave up trying to come up with my own understanding, and just trust that God did what He said He did. The fact that you would somehow take that to mean, duplicated himself, or that we are somehow on His level... that automatically does not exist the moment we are called "the created". The image of God in us, in as much as that pertains to us, has been corrupted by sin. Hence we are to conform to the nature/image of Jesus. That is, we are to pursue righteousness, holiness, and above all... humility.

I suggest you spend some quality time under the anointing and study this. Adam is not the image of God, Christ is.
There is no better image of a Father than a Son and Christ 'fits' that image perfectly, not fallen, sinful man.

I prefer just going with what God Himself said. We are all made in the image of God. Adam was the first. It is not duplication. It would be better (read safer) if you just trust that God did exactly what He said He would. (I mean, the opposing option is to believe God lied. You seem so quick to rush at that conclusion.) I most certainly question "your anointing" in that you seem to spend more time attacking God then anything else.

The gospel is for the world. It is of the Jews. There a reason why Jesus says that believers are the light of this world. People should see us and see Jesus in us. Jesus who is the light of this world by Himself. It would make sense that we would be, since we are His body, the church. Every believer is a light to the world, to this world full of darkness. Not the great light that the world saw with Jesus. (I know you would probably conflate this). The light that we should not hide under a bushel, but place on the light stand.

Again, Israel is like those people the Master sent wedding invitations to, and when the day arrived, they rejected and refused to come. So the Master sent out his servants to gather everyone and anyone else from the streets, from the poor on up to come to the wedding. Yet there was one who was kicked out. For many are called, but few are chosen. The gospel is to the world, first to the Jews, and then it moved to the Gentiles. Peter had this to say about it:

".’ 15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them, as upon us at the beginning. 16 Then I remembered the word of the Lord, how He said, ‘John indeed baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ 17 If therefore God gave them the same gift as He gave us when we believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could withstand God?”

Who are YOU that you withstand God? Who or what is this anointing that has you doing that?

 

[armylngst]

"Demons" are only attitudes. One can have a good attitude or an evil attitude and Christ dealt with both. Our attitudes are important to our walk. Attitudes are powerful. You can't see them but you can "feel" them. I suggest you study these things because all you're doing is giving me textbook responses. Get a clue: the gift of discernment of spirits can discern only three "spirits."

1. the spirit of angels
2. the spirit of man
3. the Spirit of God.

There is no such thing as "demons" in the creative narrative. It is all tied up in "goat-worship." The Old Testament says a few things about this "goat-worshiping" attitude. The concept of "goat-worshipers" in Hebrew theology is not a positive one, but rather a warning against a specific form of pagan idolatry that involved sacrificing to se'irim, or "goat demons." This ancient practice, and the broader symbolism of goats in relation to the wilderness and rebellion, laid the groundwork for the later, more defined Christian and occultic depictions of Satan as a goat-like figure (e.g., Baphomet). In Jewish tradition, however, the goat primarily serves as a symbol of unholy forces and foreign worship that must be rejected in favor of the worship of one God. In the NT Jesus comments about separating His sheep from the goats/goat-worshipers.

I used to believe in those false Constantinian Gentile theologies that you get from Gentile theology books. There came a point in my life whereas a child I believed in childish things as demons you believe in. But when I became a man (of God) I put away those childish things. You should pray God for the anointing to study His Word. But maybe your "measure of faith" is limited and you're not meant to certain knowledge of the things of God. I on the other hand and in conjunction with my spiritual gifts God saw it necessary for me to know things that are founded on Scripture and not upon Gentile theologies. There is still a great many things I don't know and there are things I do know, and demons is one of those things I do know. Before Christ dealt with "demon"-possessed people He had to subdue their attitudes. And our attitudes, or "spirits" are important to our worship. In creation there are only angel and man. There is no such thing as "demons" as a beings God created.

I felt the need to deal with this, where you basically proclaim Jesus to be a liar, separately. Demons ARE NOT ONLY ATTITUDES. They are fallen angels. Jesus even makes it clear who they are when the Pharisees declare that Jesus was casting out demons by the power of Beezelbub. He didn't say that there is no such thing as demons, or that he wasn't casting out demons. He said that they were sinning by blaspheming the Holy Spirit. He also basically declared demons to be evil, by calling the pharisees idea as a house divided against itself.

"22 And the scribes who came down from Jerusalem said, “He has Beelzebub,” and, “By the ruler of the demons He casts out demons.”

23 So He called them to Himself and said to them in parables: “How can Satan cast out Satan? 24 If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. 25 And if a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand. 26 And if Satan has risen up against himself, and is divided, he cannot stand, but has an end. 27 No one can enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man. And then he will plunder his house."

Notice immediately that Jesus did not disagree with the religious leaders that He was casting out demons. He, in this section (see following verses) clearly states that He casts out demons by the power of the Holy Spirit, and they sin by what they are saying. (Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.)

"28 “Assuredly, I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they may utter; 29 but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is subject to eternal condemnation”— 30 because they said, “He has an unclean spirit.”"

So basically, a demon is an unclean spirit I guess? To think that Beezelbub was summed up by Jesus as simply being an unclean spirit.

Matthew 8
"28 When He had come to the other side, to the country of the [c]Gergesenes, there met Him two demon-possessed men, coming out of the tombs, exceedingly fierce, so that no one could pass that way. 29 And suddenly they cried out, saying, “What have we to do with You, Jesus, You Son of God? Have You come here to torment us before the time?”

30 Now a good way off from them there was a herd of many swine feeding. 31 So the demons begged Him, saying, “If You cast us out, [d]permit us to go away into the herd of swine.”

32 And He said to them, “Go.” So when they had come out, they went into the herd of swine. And suddenly the whole herd of swine ran violently down the steep place into the sea, and perished in the water.

33 Then those who kept them fled; and they went away into the city and told everything, including what had happened to the demon-possessed men. 34 And behold, the whole city came out to meet Jesus. And when they saw Him, they begged Him to depart from their region."

Demons are real. They are NOT like, oh, here you have the demon of lust, or the demon of lying. That is not it. Everyone sins in and of themselves. Lead us not into temptation for we are perfectly capable of getting there on our own...

If you want an interesting take on it, there is a book called "Alien Intrusion" by Gary Bates that talks about Aliens and UFOs. They are real, however, they are not ETs. They are very much domestic. One of the people who was very much into ufology got very upset with the group/organization because they refused to consider demonology. The best closest guess with this is that these ETs are interdimensional. (Demons are). They are very much here, and around us. One thing the research led to is that in all cases of so called alien abduction, there is not a single case that affects a born again Christian. ZERO. Every case is an unbeliever. And, in one case, the person was in bed, said the house or room (it's a while since I read the book) was shaking and all kinds of weird things happening. The moment he cried out to Jesus to save him, it all stopped. Right at that moment. And it isn't just one such case.

So, demons are real, but they are not something to fear as a believer. They have no power over beleivers because they are sealed by God with the Holy Spirit. God possesses the believer, so a demon has no right or ability to possess a believer on top of God. That does not mean that they can manipulate things, but possession... no. Temptation, possibly.

So yes, demons exist. Apparently when they are called unclean, that means that particular demon is really evil and immoral. There is at least a couple of times where the demon Jesus is dealing with is particularly evil. The thing to notice is that people cast out/exorcise demons, where Jesus, by His sheer presence, commanded them to leave. Full authority. Some were already trying to leave. All recognized Him, and on occasion asked if He was there to torment them before the time.

You need to start believing the Bible. The Bible is clear, and as PAUL (that is what he wrote in his letters) says, the Bible is perfect.

 

[jeremiah1five]

This makes absolutely no sense. To contemplate and to will are NOT the same thing. If you are saying He doesn't day dream because of the word contemplation, then perhaps you should realize that God doesn't contemplate. He wills/determines. Will is not thought. There is the definition that speaks to desires, but this will is determinant will, as in, it will happen, because God willed it. The reason why Paul would write to these people is because the gospel is also to them. To say it is of the Jews means that it is to all, but it comes from the Jews. I mean, why would Paul write to covenant breaking, law breaking, idol-worshiping Jews? Why would God send them prophets? It is because you don't understand God's purposes, or you outright reject/deny them.

God contemplates and God wills what He contemplates. It's not hard. God knows all things in a single moment. Everything that is both possible and impossible is considered by God is a moment in time. And as for your belief that the gospel/good news is also for non-Hebrew Gentiles is a false Gentile lie. The whole mechanism for Israel's salvation is the substitutionary sacrificial animal who was slain on Yom Kippur to atone temporarily for one year the sins of the children of Israel. Nowhere in the Law was the sacrifice meant for anyone other than the children of Israel. Try learning who this sacrifice was meant for before you go and begin making up lies about the lamb under the Law of Moses also included Gentiles because nowhere did the high priest make these sacrifices for anyone other than the children of Israel. Jesus Christ KNEW His sacrifice was meant for the children of Israel only. So, why are you going to make His sacrifice to apply to non-Hebrew Gentiles when Gentiles were never under the Law of God and the mechanism God instituted within the Law to atone for those who were under the Law? You force Jesus Christ through your false belief of destroying the Law, to make His sacrifice apply to anyone else rather than the children of Israel.
SHOW ME in the Law of Moses where God instructed the high priest to purpose the sacrificial lamb to be used to atone for non-Hebrew Gentiles. That's all you got to do is just show me in the Law where God says the animal that was sacrificed was meant for anyone other than Israel. Otherwise, if you can't prove your belief through the Law then you are believing is a false theology about the lamb of God.

God did not create man sinful. God cannot create man sinful. He can create them innocent with the capacity to sin, which is what He did. Again, you yourself should look up what sin means. It is an archery term that means to miss the mark/standard. So are you saying that God aimed to create something good, and failed to reach that standard? Are you claiming God fails? Adam and Eve came into this world not having missed any standard. Sinless. Holy. Pure. Until God set up the target, defined the bullseye, and both Adam and Eve... missed. From that point forward, all humanity fell from grace. (Hence it being called "The Fall".) When it comes to this competition, it doesn't matter if you shoot a perfect game. There is still that first miss. It doesn't go away. For all have shot an imperfect round (archery) and fallen short of a perfect score, in this case, God's perfection/holiness/non-missingness (sinlessness). God cannot sin because God is the standard by which sin is sin. As such, God is incapable of sin.

Innocent and sinful are two different things. You are blurring the lines between truth and lie and trying to make a lie into truth. The bottom line is God CANNOT reduplicate Himself in Himself. Isaiah says unequivocally that there is only ONE God, there is NONE like Him, and He gives His glory to NO ONE. The only way God can create a man is to create a man who "missed the mark" and fallen short of the glory that is God. God aimed to create man and to create that man "to specification." This is what the word "good" means. The only way God can create a man is within the realm of time and space. God created time and space in order to create man within time and space. And the only way that man will come out is fallen short of God's glory. The reason why Adam sinned is because he was created sinful ("missing the mark.") Sin comes from sinner. The distinction Saul makes in First Corinthians 15 between the first Adam and the last Adam is the difference between light and darkness. But you try to make darkness into light and this in and of itself is a lie. You are literally teaching and believing in a lie.

This makes absolutely no sense. It is better to stick to the Bible and not to your own understanding. God creating us in His own image, and in His likeness was NOT duplication. We have attributes of God, ALL that we have are to a lesser degree. Then there are those we do not have, because we are finite beings. (We die). Those would be omnipotence, omniscience, omnipresence, etc. However, that isn't what God was talking about when He said "Let us make man in our own image". It is more like an artist making a self portrait. All it is is a painting that catches appearance, but nothing else. So we bear God's image, but it will always be inferior, for it must be. So stop with this duplication thing. That has nothing to do with it. I'm surprise that you just don't trust that God knows what He was talking about. I mean, I trust Him, and He is the One who did it, and told us He did it. Trust Him. There is absolutely no need to define it. Since you feel the need, we are inferior to Him, and then add the corruption of sin on top of that.

God possesses the Attributes of God. God is Sinless, God is Eternal, God is Holy, God is Omniscient, God is Omnipotent, God is Omnipresent. Adam was not created with any of these attributes of God. In order for Adam to be without sin is to be the last Adam who is Sinless, is Eternal, is Holy, and is without sin and HE IS the One who possesses the image of God:

14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: Colossians 1:14–15.

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;
3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, Hebrews 1:2–3.

The Son of God is the One that is the image of God the Father. Saul makes it clear that one flesh (Adam) is NOT the same flesh of God the Son.

38 But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body.
39 All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds.
40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another. 1 Corinthians 15:38–40.

The body of the terrestrial (Adam) is NOT the same body of the celestial (Christ.)

47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven. 1 Corinthians 15:47.

Do you see the differences between the first Adam (Adam) and the last Adam (Christ)? The first Adam is of the earth, earthy. The second Adam is the Lord from heaven. Each originates from two different origins. One is of the earth, and the other is NOT. He is from heaven. Adam was created sinful because that is the ONLY WAY man can be created. God did not give, copy, reduplicate, or share any aspect of His glorious Nature nor His Deific Attributes to man. It is impossible for God to do that.

13 Thou art of purer eyes than to behold evil,
And canst not look on iniquity:
Habakkuk 1:13.

As a created sinful man God could not look upon sinful man in his creation. He was only able to express longsuffering upon His creation only through the completed work of the Son of God.

Pay attention:

3 For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God. Colossians 3:2–3.

You have such a very low concept of the Almighty. Your God is made in the image of man. Your sinfulness has blinded you as you look through a glass, darkly. You have brought God down to your level of understanding rather than allow God to elevate your understanding to the level of God.
LOOK at Habakkuk 1:13 again and try to understand what he is saying, even as a sinful man in salvation covenant with God. "Thou art of purer eyes than to behold evil, And canst not look on iniquity."

You think this speaks about man being a sinner, or man being a sinner saved through the Spirit? There is more to it than that. Even as a born-again, "new creation" in Christ we NEED a Mediator because God cannot look upon us and has to do this through Jesus Christ our Mediator. This is why we are HID with Christ ("Anointing.") Even as saved, glorified human beings God still cannot look upon us at all without Christ as the lens, or should I say, as a shroud. We may get to heaven as born-again, sanctified, and glorified human beings but even in this glorified condition our flesh is NOT the flesh that is of the God-man Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ can stand blameless before a Holy, Glorified God on His own, but our flesh is NOT the same flesh as the God-man Jesus Christ. God cannot look upon us because we are still, of the earth, earthy, and are NOT as pure as God is pure. Throughout eternity we are hid with Christ and the only way God can look upon us is through the Anointing of the Son. God is able to "put up" with our condition in both states of existence, whether as an unatoned sinner, or as an atoned sinner. Our flesh is by-product of the earth. It is NOT from above. The ONLY REASON how God can "put up" with a creation that falls short of His glory is through what was done in the Heavenly Tabernacle in God BEFORE He created anything which now exists.

9 Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds;
10 And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him:
Colossians 3:9–10.

Anything and everything that exists in creation is created by and through the Son, or the Word. It is the Word that holds all things in place.

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;
3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high
Hebrews 1:2–3.

Again, Scripture identifies Christ as being in the "express image of His (God's) Person." The Holiness that is of Christ is not equal to our holiness as born-again, sanctified, and glorified creatures who have obtained salvation through His blood. God can set His eyes upon the Slon and upon His Spirit, but He cannot look upon us without our Mediator who is the Son. Everything could be said and done and all those who obtained salvation through the Son is in "heaven" but even as holy, sanctified, and glorified beings God cannot look upon us because His eyes are purer, because He is Purer. We still possess the elements of the earth - earthy. The Lord is from heaven. One flesh is terrestrial and the other celestial. What God the Father performed in the Heavenly Tabernacle was of the same ritual the high priest performs to prepare him to step inside the Holy of Holies and the Presence of God. Although the blood of the sacrifice allowed the high priest to enter the Holy of Holies there was still a shroud that protected God's eyes from looking direct on upon a created man who after all the washings and other rituals, STILL had to have the Presence of God shrouded by smoke in the Tabernacle. The high priest could have performed all the rituals instructed by God and he could have done a perfect job in doing so, but even with all those washings and cleansings the smoke of His Presence shrouded and protected God's eyes from looking directly upon the man, the high priest. Although there is some mystery to is still, what God did in the Heavenly Tabernacle in the slaying of a lamb allowed Him a temporary reprieve and a sacrifice through which God instead of smoke looks upon us through the shrouded flesh of the Son of God. THAT'S how much God is of purer eyes than to behold evil and to look upon the iniquity of the flesh of man. Our flesh might be atoned along with our sin, but from that day forward God had to have a middle wall or a shroud - even the shroud of the flesh of the Son of God through which God the Father is able to look upon us ONLY through the sanctified, holy flesh of the Son of God. He is our Mediator through which when God wants to see us can ONLY see us through the anointing of the Son of God. Without the Anointing we can never stand before a Holy God expecting or thinking that our glory as sanctified, holy beings is equal to His. Far from it.

This is why you should go with the Bible, and not with your own understanding. 2 Corinthians 12:
" It is [a]doubtless not profitable for me to boast. I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord: 2 I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago—whether in the body I do not know, or whether out of the body I do not know, God knows—such a one was caught up to the third heaven. 3 And I know such a man—whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows— 4 how he was caught up into Paradise and heard inexpressible words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter. "

It is a place, in this case, as traditionally understood by the Church and by Jewish people, the third heaven is where God dwells. It is not God. Here Paul calls it paradise.

Third heaven is NOT a place. It is a Person. The whole goal of God the Father is not to save us and place us at a location for eternity. Locations are not eternal. God is. And the same argument that Adam did not and could not possess any of the Deific elements of eternalness is the same that goes for the eternal Himself who is God.
Eternalness is a glory that is God. The Father is Eternal, the Son is Eternal, and the Spirit is Eternal. God cannot and does not give His Eternalness to a location. When God first in Trinity contemplated creating man He knew us. And because God cannot give or share His glory with anyone or anyplace, He does not plan for us to be anywhere except with Him and in Him through the Eternal Son, Jesus Christ. We began in Trinity and when all is said and done, will return back into Trinity but with sanctified and glorified bodies that are hid/shrouded in Christ the Anointing Spirit. Full circle. The ONLY WAY God the Father can have a people joined with Him is through His Son. This is why we are hid with Christ and NOT hid with the Father. God the Father cannot serve as Mediator but He delegated that function and purpose to the Son and as a result glorified Him above all things. What an honor. But it's going to cost something. The cost - which is temporary - was suffering as part of the human race and suffering experienced through a cross that leads to His death. But you cannot kill God. Christ's suffering was real. He experienced an Eternal abandonment in His human flesh but NOT in His Eternal Spirit. The separation He experienced when He cried, "My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me" did not affect His Eternalness, but it did affect His body. Christ experienced a physical death and the suffering culminated in three hours what His Holy flesh experienced from the day of His birth into this world until He died physically with a separation from God the Father in His flesh, but His Eternal Spirit never lost contact with His Father. God cannot die. But His Hypostatic Union of flesh and Spirit it was the Eternal Spirit that was a "setting under" of His flesh - the exact meaning of the word "hupostasis" - whereby He died physically while His Eternal Spirit was ever in contact with God.

This is perfect, given what John says in I John 2:2.
"And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world."

So that means the "our" here is Israel - the Jews. So just who is "the whole world"? Looking up the Greek, it is exactly as it says. The whole world. (With all/whole meaning just that.) Which goes back to the one who prepared the way from Jesus by proclaiming, Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. For God so loved the world... For God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. Right along with believers being in, but not of Israel. I mean, in, but not of the world.

These words which may seem in general if taken out of the context of Israel's covenant with God would seem to mean everyone who ever lived and died, but this is not the case. As was with the animal sacrifice made under the Law, which sacrifice was made to atone for the sins of the children of Israel, so, too, was Christ sacrificed for the sins of the children of Israel as instructed and commanded under the Law of Moses. Saul states this clearly in these following passages:

4 Who are Israelites;
to whom pertaineth the adoption,
and the glory,
and the covenants,
and the giving of the law,
and the service of God,
and the promises;
5 Whose are the fathers,
and of whom as concerning the flesh
Christ came,
who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.
Romans 9:4–5.

and

4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. Galatians 4:3–5.

The animal sacrifice was set in place to redeem through the blood of the sacrifice the children of Israel under the Law and the lamb of God changed nothing but also, as Saul states, offered Himself as sacrifice for the sins of the children of Israel. The blood of the sacrificed animal was sprinkled upon the Hebrew people and the same was accomplished by the sacrifice of Himself for the children of Israel. You cannot now change the Law of Moses after the fact to include Gentiles when Gentiles were NEVER under the Law to begin with. The night before Israel was to leave Egypt God commanded that sacrifice be made for the children of Israel in which the blood of the sacrifice was used to paint the doorframe of every Hebrew household in order for the Angel of Death to Passover the homes of the Hebrew people. But the Gentile Egyptians did not participate. They were not included despite what the movie The Ten Commandments says.

So... when will you start discerning?

Again, apparently you don't get it. Why don't you make like Peter and stop trying to withstand God? We are not facsimiles of God. We are made in His image, like an artist painting a self portrait. It isn't going to start talking. We aren't going to be omnipotent, omniscient, or omnipresent. We have attributes of God to a MUCH lesser degree then God. And then there are those attributes we don't have at all. We are, again, not talking duplication. We have the mark of the Creator on us, but we are not Him. Jesus is God. He is the image (visible) of the invisible God. That comes from being the Son of God. Jesus was not made in God's image, because Jesus IS God. We were created in God's image, but there is a lot of meaning in that. I gave up trying to come up with my own understanding, and just trust that God did what He said He did. The fact that you would somehow take that to mean, duplicated himself, or that we are somehow on His level... that automatically does not exist the moment we are called "the created". The image of God in us, in as much as that pertains to us, has been corrupted by sin. Hence we are to conform to the nature/image of Jesus. That is, we are to pursue righteousness, holiness, and above all... humility.

That attitude has been the downfall of many men, to equate yourself with Deity, with God. We as dirt do not possess any of the Deific Attributes and Nature of God "to a lesser degree." We possess NONE of God. We are not "lesser god's" we are not God at all. Only Jesus could claim to be Deity and get away with it. He did not claim to be a "lesser God", He claimed equality with God, and this was used unjustly to accuse Him and by it kill Him.

If we have "some" attributes of God but not others, what happens when you put us up against God? Will we be equal to God? And IF we have some Deific Attributes of God and not others do you think we would be equal to God or lesser? If lesser, then we are fallen short of God's total glory. The word for that is "sin."

I prefer just going with what God Himself said. We are all made in the image of God. Adam was the first. It is not duplication. It would be better (read safer) if you just trust that God did exactly what He said He would. (I mean, the opposing option is to believe God lied. You seem so quick to rush at that conclusion.) I most certainly question "your anointing" in that you seem to spend more time attacking God then anything else.

The gospel is for the world. It is of the Jews. There a reason why Jesus says that believers are the light of this world. People should see us and see Jesus in us. Jesus who is the light of this world by Himself. It would make sense that we would be, since we are His body, the church. Every believer is a light to the world, to this world full of darkness. Not the great light that the world saw with Jesus. (I know you would probably conflate this). The light that we should not hide under a bushel, but place on the light stand.

Again, Israel is like those people the Master sent wedding invitations to, and when the day arrived, they rejected and refused to come. So the Master sent out his servants to gather everyone and anyone else from the streets, from the poor on up to come to the wedding. Yet there was one who was kicked out. For many are called, but few are chosen. The gospel is to the world, first to the Jews, and then it moved to the Gentiles. Peter had this to say about it:

".’ 15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them, as upon us at the beginning. 16 Then I remembered the word of the Lord, how He said, ‘John indeed baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ 17 If therefore God gave them the same gift as He gave us when we believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could withstand God?”

Who are YOU that you withstand God? Who or what is this anointing that has you doing that?

The "gospel is for the world?"

Show me in the Law where God commands the sacrifice for sin be for anyone else other than the Jews.

IF the world was to be part of the animal sacrifice during the Passover then Jesus should have as High Priest prayed for the world, but He didn't. This means the world is prayerless and unatoned.

9 I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine. John 17:9.

Jesus is about to get arrested and condemned and sacrificed on this Passover for the sins of the children of Israel just as the animal that was sacrificed and its blood painted upon the doorframes of every Hebrew home and house so that the Angel of Death PASSOVER these Hebrew homes and kill every firstborn son of the Egyptians. The Egyptians were Gentile, and their firstborn sons were killed off by God. But the blood of the sacrifice atoned for the sins of the Hebrew people and now that event is observed by every Hebrew home even to this day. Show me where Gentiles escaped the judgment of God? Show me in the Law of Moses where the high priest sprinkled the blood of the sacrifice upon Gentiles and other non-Hebrews.

Where's the Scripture?

 

[jeremiah1five]

I felt the need to deal with this, where you basically proclaim Jesus to be a liar, separately. Demons ARE NOT ONLY ATTITUDES. They are fallen angels. Jesus even makes it clear who they are when the Pharisees declare that Jesus was casting out demons by the power of Beezelbub. He didn't say that there is no such thing as demons, or that he wasn't casting out demons. He said that they were sinning by blaspheming the Holy Spirit. He also basically declared demons to be evil, by calling the pharisees idea as a house divided against itself.

"22 And the scribes who came down from Jerusalem said, “He has Beelzebub,” and, “By the ruler of the demons He casts out demons.”

23 So He called them to Himself and said to them in parables: “How can Satan cast out Satan? 24 If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. 25 And if a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand. 26 And if Satan has risen up against himself, and is divided, he cannot stand, but has an end. 27 No one can enter a strong man’s house and plunder his goods, unless he first binds the strong man. And then he will plunder his house."

Notice immediately that Jesus did not disagree with the religious leaders that He was casting out demons. He, in this section (see following verses) clearly states that He casts out demons by the power of the Holy Spirit, and they sin by what they are saying. (Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.)

"28 “Assuredly, I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they may utter; 29 but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is subject to eternal condemnation”— 30 because they said, “He has an unclean spirit.”"

So basically, a demon is an unclean spirit I guess? To think that Beezelbub was summed up by Jesus as simply being an unclean spirit.

Matthew 8
"28 When He had come to the other side, to the country of the [c]Gergesenes, there met Him two demon-possessed men, coming out of the tombs, exceedingly fierce, so that no one could pass that way. 29 And suddenly they cried out, saying, “What have we to do with You, Jesus, You Son of God? Have You come here to torment us before the time?”

30 Now a good way off from them there was a herd of many swine feeding. 31 So the demons begged Him, saying, “If You cast us out, [d]permit us to go away into the herd of swine.”

32 And He said to them, “Go.” So when they had come out, they went into the herd of swine. And suddenly the whole herd of swine ran violently down the steep place into the sea, and perished in the water.

33 Then those who kept them fled; and they went away into the city and told everything, including what had happened to the demon-possessed men. 34 And behold, the whole city came out to meet Jesus. And when they saw Him, they begged Him to depart from their region."

Demons are real. They are NOT like, oh, here you have the demon of lust, or the demon of lying. That is not it. Everyone sins in and of themselves. Lead us not into temptation for we are perfectly capable of getting there on our own...

If you want an interesting take on it, there is a book called "Alien Intrusion" by Gary Bates that talks about Aliens and UFOs. They are real, however, they are not ETs. They are very much domestic. One of the people who was very much into ufology got very upset with the group/organization because they refused to consider demonology. The best closest guess with this is that these ETs are interdimensional. (Demons are). They are very much here, and around us. One thing the research led to is that in all cases of so called alien abduction, there is not a single case that affects a born again Christian. ZERO. Every case is an unbeliever. And, in one case, the person was in bed, said the house or room (it's a while since I read the book) was shaking and all kinds of weird things happening. The moment he cried out to Jesus to save him, it all stopped. Right at that moment. And it isn't just one such case.

So, demons are real, but they are not something to fear as a believer. They have no power over beleivers because they are sealed by God with the Holy Spirit. God possesses the believer, so a demon has no right or ability to possess a believer on top of God. That does not mean that they can manipulate things, but possession... no. Temptation, possibly.

So yes, demons exist. Apparently when they are called unclean, that means that particular demon is really evil and immoral. There is at least a couple of times where the demon Jesus is dealing with is particularly evil. The thing to notice is that people cast out/exorcise demons, where Jesus, by His sheer presence, commanded them to leave. Full authority. Some were already trying to leave. All recognized Him, and on occasion asked if He was there to torment them before the time.

You need to start believing the Bible. The Bible is clear, and as PAUL (that is what he wrote in his letters) says, the Bible is perfect.

IF demons are fallen angels why do the not call them by the Hebrew "malakh" and the Greek "ángelos"?
Why the need to coin a new word: "daimonion" or "daímōn"?
No, no, attitudes are powerful. They exude from the mental condition of the person. They are not fallen angels.
Besides this there is nothing in the Hebrew Scripture about "demons" the way Medieval Gentile church postulated them and made artwork of them. There is nothing in the OT about "demons." Israel never had to deal with something that's not real. The gift of the discerning of spirits discerns three 'spirits.'
1. the spirit of angels.
2. the spirit of man.
3. the Spirit of God.

As far as creation is concerned God created angels and after He locked them up to await judgment God created man. These are the two 'spirits' in existence.

First, the angels that sinned are all locked up in darkness awaiting judgment.

15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit. Isaiah 14:15.

6 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. Jude 1:6.

4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; 2 Peter 2:4.

"Satan" is a Hebrew word that means "adversary." The word is also used to characterize someone who is an adversary [of God] and man. It is used to describe a man in the Old Testament. I believe "demon" to merely refer to the attitude of someone. It can be an evil attitude - and I'm sure you've run into people like this. They are just evil, overbearing, bullies. But the attitudes can be overcome, conquered, shut down and/or humbled. One example is found here:

22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
Matthew 7:22–23.

When you have false churches out there, they are inert in the spiritual realm. Fake televangelists are powerless. But when one has an 'evil' attitude or a negative attitude - and we find this in everyone - even born-again believers.
We must have the right mind and attitude when we pray or offer song and praise to the Lord. Attitudes are powerful. We can discern such attitudes in a person's countenance. You can walk into a room of people and sense heaviness, or oppression. It's only at least one person in the room with a bad attitude. A person's countenance is very revealing. It reveals the condition of the mind. Isaiah, Peter, and Jude say the same thing about the angels that sinned. They are cast down to "hell" or the pit and locked up in darkness awaiting God's judgment. There are no fallen angels on the planet. There's no 'good' angel and 'bad' angel sitting on either shoulder whispering wicked thoughts to the person and good thoughts. It doesn't work like that. In every person Christ dealt with that had evil spirits they were only maligned attitudes. Before Christ could bless a person, He had to subdue their mind and their attitudes. And it is fitting. Animals can discern the bad attitudes of humans. Those two men in the caves had mental condition and they were most likely Jews. What's a Jew doing in a cemetery? We see Jesus healing limbs, withered hands, all kinds of physical ailments. Mental health is in the New Testament. Where in the New Testament is it recorded Jesus healed a mental condition? Such people did exist throughout history. King Saul had a mental condition that was soothed when David played his instrument and calmed him down. Maybe he was depressed or bi-polar? Schizophrenic? The spirit that troubled him was of his own making and it was a mental condition. Where in the New Testament did Jesus heal a person's mind or mental condition?

28 And when he was come to the other side into the country of the Gergesenes, there met him two possessed with devils, coming out of the tombs, exceeding fierce, so that no man might pass by that way.
29 And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time?
30 And there was a good way off from them an herd of many swine feeding.
31 So the devils besought him, saying, If thou cast us out, suffer us to go away into the herd of swine.
32 And he said unto them, Go. And when they were come out, they went into the herd of swine: and, behold, the whole herd of swine ran violently down a steep place into the sea, and perished in the waters.
Matthew 8:28–32.

A Jew had no business living in the tombs among dead bodies. These two men knew who Jesus was because like everyone else, the heard of Jesus. And how do we interpret verse 28? What did they mean asking Jesus if He was going to torment them "before the time"? What time? Is it said in Scripture Jesus Himself will torment people personally? look at the text. These two Jewish men knew they didn't belong in the tombs and asked Jesus to go from one inappropriate place (tombs) to another inappropriate place (swine.) To get them out of the tombs Jesus said, "Go." and they left the tombs and entered the place where the swine was kept, and the animals got spooked. Again, the power of attitudes. Our attitudes set the course of our walk in life. Many business models address an employee's attitudes at work.

"Demons" are not fallen angels. They are attitudes of the mind. You can't see the attitudes but you can certainly feel them. A miserable attitude loves company. Weep and you weep alone. Laugh and the world laughs with you. All these are attitudes of the mind and as Christians when we became born-again the first thing the Spirit of God corrected was 'your' attitude. One time when living with my mother I had spent serious time in my room studying while on a fast. I came out of the room and my mother asked "what's wrong with you? What's wrong with your face? Your face is glowing."

Just like Moses. Just like Christ. When I became born-again the Lord gave me an attitude adjustment. The burden of sin was lifted from me and was replaced with the love of Jesus beaming from my face.

I don't sensationalize the practical. Just because there is evil in the world I don't automatically blame fallen angels, Satan, or the devil. Most of the world's ills are the result of humans and the sin that they do. And we cannot go out and find Infinity Stones and snap our fingers and the evil attitudes and the ones that came with action go away.
Jesus healed many physical infirmities and physical conditions. Mental conditions are in the Bible.
If you know where to look.

 

[e v e]

The term nations never refers to God's souls and tribes but to demon nations.

Israel the country in this earth is not God's and is not the promised land foreshadowed in the OT. Eden is our promised land, to be restored at rapture.

Christ has always been with His souls. Christianity in that sense existed in eden and among God's hebrew souls in the OT. Meeting and following Christ is not a new thing. What's new is that Christ incarnated here to make it possible for us to return Home to eden paradise and undo what happened when Adam left Christ. To be born again is all of us who are His souls is to die to this world (not physically) and to resurrect, as Christ showed us, when we meet Him on the clouds at rapture.

 

[armylngst]

And as for your belief that the gospel/good news is also for non-Hebrew Gentiles is a false Gentile lie.

Peter had something to say about that. Peter knew he could not, and told the church that he could not withstand God. Yet here you are, getting in God's way and telling Him no. And you have no explicit biblical passage for standing up to God, and in actuality standing ABOVE God and saying no. Whereas, I presented you passages that are EXPLICIT.

The whole mechanism for Israel's salvation is the substitutionary sacrificial animal who was slain on Yom Kippur to atone temporarily for one year the sins of the children of Israel. Nowhere in the Law was the sacrifice meant for anyone other than the children of Israel.

Where in scripture, outside of Hebrews where the author is making the claim that Jesus sacrifice is ABOVE that of the Jewish sacrificial system, and is BETTER then that? John 3:14-15 makes no such claim, and instead, likens Jesus sacrifice to Moses raising the viper on a stake in the wilderness, and that Jesus is the same thing, but before the whole world. Always higher, always greater, where you keep it the same. Limiting God. You actually limit God. You claim God is higher, but you bring Him lower. What did John the Baptist say, as the one preparing the way for Jesus, making paths straight? Behold the Lamb of God (not the Lamb of Israel), who takes away the sins of... the WORLD (not of Israel only). And again, Peter actually stated that for him to say what you are saying would be him withstanding GOD. Why do you do so, without even an iota of fear? You can tell Peter understood what position he would be in if he did the same.

Try learning who this sacrifice was meant for before you go and begin making up lies about the lamb under the Law of Moses also included Gentiles because nowhere did the high priest make these sacrifices for anyone other than the children of Israel. Jesus Christ KNEW His sacrifice was meant for the children of Israel only.

I did not. You need to stop inventing lies about me. Remember what Paul said about liars. No place in the kingdom of God. Jesus sacrifice extended to the whole world, because that was God's intent from the moment God promised it to EVE.

So, why are you going to make His sacrifice to apply to non-Hebrew Gentiles when Gentiles were never under the Law of God and the mechanism God instituted within the Law to atone for those who were under the Law?

Because God made Jesus sacrifice apply to the world, in that He has elect amongst both the Jews and Gentiles. And Paul clearly stated that those under the law will DIE under the law. That speaks to damnation. Those who live in Christ through faith are saved.

You force Jesus Christ through your false belief of destroying the Law, to make His sacrifice apply to anyone else rather than the children of Israel.

Everyone who does not keep the law, Jew or Gentile, dies since it is by the Law that sin is sin. God gave the Law to Israel, and Israel was supposed to take it to the world. The Law, not the covenant. The covenant would still be Israel's and Israel's alone, however, by that covenant the whole world would be blessed. The world would find salvation through Israel, for as scripture said, salvation is OF/FROM the Jews.

SHOW ME in the Law of Moses where God instructed the high priest to purpose the sacrificial lamb to be used to atone for non-Hebrew Gentiles. That's all you got to do is just show me in the Law where God says the animal that was sacrificed was meant for anyone other than Israel. Otherwise, if you can't prove your belief through the Law then you are believing is a false theology about the lamb of God.

Again, that has NOTHING to do with it. The Mosaic covenant is no more. The Jews VIOLATED/BROKE it long ago. Hebrews is clear about this. There would be no need for a second covenant (new covenant) unless the first was flawed/violated.

Innocent and sinful are two different things. You are blurring the lines between truth and lie and trying to make a lie into truth. The bottom line is God CANNOT reduplicate Himself in Himself. Isaiah says unequivocally that there is only ONE God, there is NONE like Him, and He gives His glory to NO ONE.

If God created an exact duplicate of Himself, it would still be inferior. Why? It's a copy. He would forever wear the title "CREATOR", while that copy would forever wear the title "CREATED". Immediately and automatically INFERIOR. God HIMSELF told us what He did, and you are going to God's face and saying "Oh no you didn't!!!" He created them in His image. He didn't stop there. The part you leave out. In His LIKENESS He made them, male and female. I explain more further down.

The only way God can create a man is to create a man who "missed the mark" and fallen short of the glory that is God. God aimed to create man and to create that man "to specification."

Just what do you have against God. If God created a man who "missed the mark" then how can God hold man responsible for missing the mark? God had no specification other than His image and likeness. Again, there is more further down, but if you took a lump of clay and gave it a head with two eyes, two ears, a mouth, a nose with two nostrils, two arms and two legs, you just made it in your likeness. Why doesn't it look like you? It doesn't have to. It is only a likeness.

This is what the word "good" means. The only way God can create a man is within the realm of time and space.

You really need to stop. I mean really. Don't dig the hole any deeper.

God created time and space in order to create man within time and space. And the only way that man will come out is fallen short of God's glory. The reason why Adam sinned is because he was created sinful ("missing the mark.") Sin comes from sinner. The distinction Saul makes in First Corinthians 15 between the first Adam and the last Adam is the difference between light and darkness. But you try to make darkness into light and this in and of itself is a lie. You are literally teaching and believing in a lie.

Adam was not created sinful. He did not have any sin. Unlike Jesus, Adam sinned. Jesus, technically, could have sinned, however that was never going to happen. (Hence "technically".) Jesus was part human, and as part of being the perfect sacrifice, and the perfect mediator between God and man, He had to face temptation and come through it without sin. In consideration, I believe it was the humanity that was being tempted by Satan. The human nature that coexisted with the divine nature in Christ.

God possesses the Attributes of God. God is Sinless, God is Eternal, God is Holy, God is Omniscient, God is Omnipotent, God is Omnipresent. Adam was not created with any of these attributes of God.

I'm not sure why you keep digging deeper holes for yourself. God is God. God possesses attributes. I won't say of God, because there is no other besides Him. He just is, and He just has attributes. Adam has SOME of God's attributes to a lesser degree because He has God's image/likeness. Likeness defining image. Again, example being if I made a lump of clay into something that had two legs, two arms, a head, two eyes, two ears, etc. in proper location, then I made it in my likeness... as a human like "creation" in clay. Or bipedal like I am. Or I made it in the likeness of an ape, if that was my goal and what it looks like. That is just how the word likeness works. That means that there are qualities in the final clay form that are like me. Then there are categories. I gave this weird looking creature two legs because... I have two legs. That is a likeness. I'm not sure how to get you to understand, but I don't think I can go much simpler than elementary school, so please... get it.

In order for Adam to be without sin is to be the last Adam who is Sinless, is Eternal, is Holy, and is without sin and HE IS the One who possesses the image of God:

Again, you don't get it. Adam was sinless up to the moment sin was found in him. That is, up to when he ate the fruit. Then he was sinful, and the Bible spells out A LOT of changes that came about because Adam BECAME sinful. Curses for the serpent, for Eve, and for Adam. If Adam was sinful, then why didn't God cut him off from the tree of life from the beginning?

14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: Colossians 1:14–15.

I can't find the word likeness in there anywhere. Why? Because we are talking about image as in SON. Hebrew definition of image used in Genesis 1:
1. a phantom, i.e. (figuratively) illusion, resemblance
2. (hence) a representative figure, especially an idol

Definition of likeness in Genesis 1:26
"1 likeness, similitude, of external appearance"
Likeness and similitude are the obvious push of hte verse, because by external appearance God is spirit, we are not, so it isn't that part of the definition.

What about Colossians 1:14-15. What is "image" in that verse?
1504 eikṓn (from 1503 /eíkō, "be like") – properly, "mirror-like representation," referring to what is very close in resemblance (like a "high-definition" projection, as defined by the context). Image (1504 /eikṓn) then exactly reflects its source (what it directly corresponds to). For example, Christ is the very image (1504 /eikṓn, supreme expression) of the Godhead (see 2 Cor 4:4; Col 1:15).

"1504 (eikṓn) assumes a prototype, of which it not merely resembles, but from which it is drawn" (R. Trench). 1504 (eikṓn) then is more than a "shadow"; rather it is a replication (F. F. Bruce, Hebrews, 226; see also Lightfoot at Col 3:10 and 2:21).

As you can see, completely different then what God meant in Genesis 1. This specifically shows how you missed it completely. Consider the Hebrew word meaning, a representative figure, especially an idol. How can an idol be a representation of God? They aren't, however, they are representations of "gods" (lower case g). They don't exist, God does. However, because the idols (especially in Israel's case) was said to represent God (Aaron basically said this is the god that delivered them from Egypt), it was supreme sin. Also, with this idea of image, is why the first of the ten commandments is a huge deal. No other God, and no images.

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;
3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, Hebrews 1:2–3.

I'm not sure what translation you used but it is more like this: He is the exact expression of the substance of Him... Quoted from NASB as "3 [d]And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and [e]upholds all things by [f]the word of His power." The Greek word for image is not present in this verse.

The Son of God is the One that is the image of God the Father. Saul makes it clear that one flesh (Adam) is NOT the same flesh of God the Son.

38 But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body.
39 All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds.
40 There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another. 1 Corinthians 15:38–40.

Paul was clear what he meant, and it doesn't say that Adam is not the same flesh of God the Son. When the word flesh is used in relation to Jesus it is to say Jesus is human. We are human. The flesh is the same, which is why Jesus could die for us. However, Jesus was also God. In that way, He was not like us. We are ONLY human.

The body of the terrestrial (Adam) is NOT the same body of the celestial (Christ.)

You still don't get it. Jesus became one of us to dwell with us, so He was human. Yet, He was also God, divine and spiritual. In that way He was different. Your point here is invalid, though correct. You left out half the truth.

47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven. 1 Corinthians 15:47.

Speaking to Jesus divine nature.

Do you see the differences between the first Adam (Adam) and the last Adam (Christ)? The first Adam is of the earth, earthy. The second Adam is the Lord from heaven. Each originates from two different origins. One is of the earth, and the other is NOT. He is from heaven. Adam was created sinful because that is the ONLY WAY man can be created. God did not give, copy, reduplicate, or share any aspect of His glorious Nature nor His Deific Attributes to man. It is impossible for God to do that.

I never had any issues between the first Adam and the last as you seem to. Adam was made in God's image. That did not mean Adam is divine. It speaks to God's LIKENESS, so similar in ways and in likeness. We are not spirit, but flesh. He is spirit. So that isn't it. God can reason, we can reason. Okay, there is a likeness. It's like that. (pun not intended). Similar, but not the same. Whereas the word used for Jesus speaks to not similar, but exactness.

13 Thou art of purer eyes than to behold evil,
And canst not look on iniquity:
Habakkuk 1:13.

As a created sinful man God could not look upon sinful man in his creation. He was only able to express longsuffering upon His creation only through the completed work of the Son of God.

Yet God looked upon Adam, so Adam could not have been sinful at the start. That was a likeness until the point that Adam sinned. It is not a total likeness because God cannot sin... ever.

Pay attention:

3 For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God. Colossians 3:2–3.

That is only Colossians 3:3. However, it actually says, you have died, because in Christ the believer has died. Our life is in Christ, not ourselves. It speaks to being dead to the world/sin.

You have such a very low concept of the Almighty. Your God is made in the image of man. Your sinfulness has blinded you as you look through a glass, darkly. You have brought God down to your level of understanding rather than allow God to elevate your understanding to the level of God.

Another lie. You don't seem to be trying to hard to avoid heaven. If you had the slightest clue (you do not) of how I view God, you would ask how I could believe that I or anyone else could ever have a relationship with Him. And that's the thing. We can't. It is impossible. I can't understand how you can stand there and attack God, and claim you hold Him up high. There is no fear in you whatsoever as you just stand there and claim such evil of God. You never consider once, what if you are wrong? What are you left with? Only what you have said of God, and what you have said is evil. If you were to consider what you were saying, you would leave God out of anything you say where you could possibly be left with only what you have said of God. You would treat Him with the respect He deserves as God.

LOOK at Habakkuk 1:13 again and try to understand what he is saying, even as a sinful man in salvation covenant with God. "Thou art of purer eyes than to behold evil, And canst not look on iniquity."

You think this speaks about man being a sinner, or man being a sinner saved through the Spirit? There is more to it than that. Even as a born-again, "new creation" in Christ we NEED a Mediator because God cannot look upon us and has to do this through Jesus Christ our Mediator. This is why we are HID with Christ ("Anointing.") Even as saved, glorified human beings God still cannot look upon us at all without Christ as the lens, or should I say, as a shroud. We may get to heaven as born-again, sanctified, and glorified human beings but even in this glorified condition our flesh is NOT the flesh that is of the God-man Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ can stand blameless before a Holy, Glorified God on His own, but our flesh is NOT the same flesh as the God-man Jesus Christ. God cannot look upon us because we are still, of the earth, earthy, and are NOT as pure as God is pure. Throughout eternity we are hid with Christ and the only way God can look upon us is through the Anointing of the Son. God is able to "put up" with our condition in both states of existence, whether as an unatoned sinner, or as an atoned sinner. Our flesh is by-product of the earth. It is NOT from above. The ONLY REASON how God can "put up" with a creation that falls short of His glory is through what was done in the Heavenly Tabernacle in God BEFORE He created anything which now exists.

You need to simplify this greatly. PSA. Penal Substitutionary Atonement. Jesus took our penalty for our sin to the cross. Our sin was imputed to Him, and His righteousness was imputed to us. What God looks upon us, His children, He sees His Son. As long as we are on Earth, we cannot stand in His presence. Christ is our advocate and mediator.

9 Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds;
10 And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him:
Colossians 3:9–10.

Anything and everything that exists in creation is created by and through the Son, or the Word. It is the Word that holds all things in place.

You should take these words to heart and stop lying about me. It is clear from what you write that you have absolutely no idea what I believe, and yet you claim you do. (And everything you have said has been wrong, which means a lie.) I don't know what you believe, hence I point things out and do not simply make claims. When you make it clearer, or simply clear what you believe, that gets push.

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;
3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high
Hebrews 1:2–3.

Again, Scripture identifies Christ as being in the "express image of His (God's) Person."

I never said He wasn't. I never said that we were. If you bothered looking up what the word in Hebrew is for image, and for likeness, and compared that to the word eikon in Greek, you will see that they are NOT the same. As I have been telling you that they are not the same, but you refuse to see. God did not lie, as you claim He did. And you did by saying God did not create man in His image, when God HIMSELF says it in Genesis 1. You place YOURSELF above God. What you should be doing is looking at what it means. Just what is it saying. There is a reason why scholars don't have issues with the passage, and that is because they actually know what it is saying/means.

The Holiness that is of Christ is not equal to our holiness as born-again, sanctified, and glorified creatures who have obtained salvation through His blood.

It is, BUT only because His holiness became our holiness. Again, didn't you just say we are hid in Christ.

God can set His eyes upon the Slon and upon His Spirit, but He cannot look upon us without our Mediator who is the Son. Everything could be said and done and all those who obtained salvation through the Son is in "heaven" but even as holy, sanctified, and glorified beings God cannot look upon us because His eyes are purer, because He is Purer. We still possess the elements of the earth - earthy. The Lord is from heaven. One flesh is terrestrial and the other celestial. What God the Father performed in the Heavenly Tabernacle was of the same ritual the high priest performs to prepare him to step inside the Holy of Holies and the Presence of God. Although the blood of the sacrifice allowed the high priest to enter the Holy of Holies there was still a shroud that protected God's eyes from looking direct on upon a created man who after all the washings and other rituals, STILL had to have the Presence of God shrouded by smoke in the Tabernacle. The high priest could have performed all the rituals instructed by God and he could have done a perfect job in doing so, but even with all those washings and cleansings the smoke of His Presence shrouded and protected God's eyes from looking directly upon the man, the high priest. Although there is some mystery to is still, what God did in the Heavenly Tabernacle in the slaying of a lamb allowed Him a temporary reprieve and a sacrifice through which God instead of smoke looks upon us through the shrouded flesh of the Son of God. THAT'S how much God is of purer eyes than to behold evil and to look upon the iniquity of the flesh of man. Our flesh might be atoned along with our sin, but from that day forward God had to have a middle wall or a shroud - even the shroud of the flesh of the Son of God through which God the Father is able to look upon us ONLY through the sanctified, holy flesh of the Son of God. He is our Mediator through which when God wants to see us can ONLY see us through the anointing of the Son of God. Without the Anointing we can never stand before a Holy God expecting or thinking that our glory as sanctified, holy beings is equal to His. Far from it.

Until we are resurrected with glorified bodies, we will always be bodies of flesh, that is, simply mortal humans. We come to God through the Holy Spirit.

Third heaven is NOT a place. It is a Person. The whole goal of God the Father is not to save us and place us at a location for eternity. Locations are not eternal. God is. And the same argument that Adam did not and could not possess any of the Deific elements of eternalness is the same that goes for the eternal Himself who is God.

Again, God, through Paul, is clear that it is a place. However, to be honest, it never really mattered. Third heaven is the name given for the place where God dwells outside creation. first heaven, earth, second heaven sky/space, third heaven, the place where God dwells.

Eternalness is a glory that is God.

No. It is an attribute of God. Look up the definition of glory. Being eternal means God has no beginning and no end. We are not eternal, but we will be immortal. We will have eternal life, which does not mean that we are eternal, it just means that our life will have no end. It doesn't speak to a beginning. We know we have a beginning, but speaking of eternal life doesn't even deal with it. We just know, and it is understood. The unspoken part.

The Father is Eternal, the Son is Eternal, and the Spirit is Eternal. God cannot and does not give His Eternalness to a location...

The above means nothing. Your beliefs are skewed, and should be straightened. None of this is necessary.
For "My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken Me", the best understanding I can reach is that these words were the cry of the flesh, that is Jesus' humanity (flesh simply meaning humaness), where fellowship with the Godhead was cutoff by the sin borne by the Christ on the cross. You have already stated that God cannot look upon sin/sinfulness. The idea being, the Godhead never left, but the communion/fellowship that existed between the human nature and the Godhead was interrupted by the sin borne. It's the best (and imperfect) way that I can try to express how it wasn't God separated from God, and takes into consideration God's incapability of fellowshipping with sin. And no, it did not effect the Son's eternalness. Again, somehow it had everything to do with Jesus' fleshiness, the human nature/humanity. God cannot look upon sin, much less bear it upon Himself. That is completely incomplete (like that?), and does not represent any full belief or understanding of the situation for me. It is but a shadow that is trying to reconcile all the surrounding context to the rest of scriptural context. For instance, in the sacrifice of atonement there are basically three parties. The high priest, the sacrifical lamb, and the scapegoat.

The "gospel is for the world?"

Yes, the gospel is for the world, but it is OF the Jews. That seems to be the part you don't get. I'm not sure why you can't, since the Bible is so clear. You have ignored a huge swath of scripture.

Show me in the Law where God commands the sacrifice for sin be for anyone else other than the Jews.

I already did. Again, it has nothing to do with the covenant, and everything to do with the promise that God made to Abraham. In his seed (which Hebrews says is JESUS), all the nations of the world will be blessed. We benefit from Abraham showing faith, through faith.

IF the world was to be part of the animal sacrifice during the Passover then Jesus should have as High Priest prayed for the world, but He didn't. This means the world is prayerless and unatoned.

9 I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine. John 17:9.

"13 But now I am coming to You; and these things I speak in the world so that they may have My joy made full in themselves. 14 I have given them Your word; and the world has hated them because they are not of the world, just as I am not of the world. 15 I am not asking You to take them out of the world, but to keep them away from [e]the evil one. 16 They are not of the world, just as I am not of the world. 17 Sanctify them in the truth; Your word is truth. 18 Just as You sent Me into the world, I also sent them into the world. 19 And for their sakes I sanctify Myself, so that they themselves also may be sanctified in truth.

20 “I am not asking on behalf of these alone, but also for those who believe in Me through their word, 21 that they may all be one; just as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us, so that the world may [f]believe that You sent Me.

You leave so much out. Is it because it proves you wrong? The passages I gave you show that Gentiles (non-Hebrew) are amongst those who believe in Jesus through the words of Paul.

 

[armylngst]

IF demons are fallen angels why do the not call them by the Hebrew "malakh" and the Greek "ángelos"?
Why the need to coin a new word: "daimonion" or "daímōn"?

You would have to ask Jesus and the Jews. And why would it be considered a "new word"? It's greek.

No, no, attitudes are powerful. They exude from the mental condition of the person. They are not fallen angels.

So please, for the crowd. Just say it. Jesus lied.

Besides this there is nothing in the Hebrew Scripture about "demons" the way Medieval Gentile church postulated them and made artwork of them. There is nothing in the OT about "demons." Israel never had to deal with something that's not real. The gift of the discerning of spirits discerns three 'spirits.'
1. the spirit of angels.
2. the spirit of man.
3. the Spirit of God.

That is true. However, when you consider how the church postulated them in artwork, it is a reflection of the evil that is attached to them, not a photograph. It doesn't matter that the word does not show up in the Old Testament. There are still angels presented who sinned, and the New Testament mentions them.

As far as creation is concerned God created angels and after He locked them up to await judgment God created man. These are the two 'spirits' in existence.

no. They were imprisoned during the time of Noah, which is obviously after God created man.

First, the angels that sinned are all locked up in darkness awaiting judgment.

For specific sins, and specific angels connected to those sins.

15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit. Isaiah 14:15.

6 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. Jude 1:6.

This is basically the same sin that doomed Sodom and Gomorrah. Yes, sodomy and the like, but also, their pursuit of strange flesh, in this case the angels that came to get Lot and family out of Sodom.

4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; 2 Peter 2:4.

These are not demons, because they are chained up.

"Satan" is a Hebrew word that means "adversary." The word is also used to characterize someone who is an adversary [of God] and man. It is used to describe a man in the Old Testament. I believe "demon" to merely refer to the attitude of someone. It can be an evil attitude - and I'm sure you've run into people like this. They are just evil, overbearing, bullies. But the attitudes can be overcome, conquered, shut down and/or humbled. One example is found here:

Satan, in this case, is connected to the devil/Lucifer, the original fallen angel. You can believe demon to refer mainly to attitudes, but you have Jesus saying something completely different, and you are basically calling Him a liar.

22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
Matthew 7:22–23.

The casting out does not refer to attitudes, but demons/devils. (Depends on who was doing the translating.) They were talking about miracles they were doing as being signs of them being saved. Well, since we could do this, we must be saved right? No. Salvation is by faith in Christ, and that faith results in works not iniquity. Works that show the faith is real. They were never saved in the first place. Their attitude is one of pride.

When you have false churches out there, they are inert in the spiritual realm. Fake televangelists are powerless. But when one has an 'evil' attitude or a negative attitude - and we find this in everyone - even born-again believers.

Yes. However, those are not demons. They have give attitudes and stupid pet sins demonic names, and say they are demons, but they are not.

We must have the right mind and attitude when we pray or offer song and praise to the Lord. Attitudes are powerful. We can discern such attitudes in a person's countenance. You can walk into a room of people and sense heaviness, or oppression. It's only at least one person in the room with a bad attitude. A person's countenance is very revealing. It reveals the condition of the mind. Isaiah, Peter, and Jude say the same thing about the angels that sinned. They are cast down to "hell" or the pit and locked up in darkness awaiting God's judgment. There are no fallen angels on the planet.

Yes there are fallen angels on the planet, however, they are called demons and are different then those locked up.

There's no 'good' angel and 'bad' angel sitting on either shoulder whispering wicked thoughts to the person and good thoughts.

No there is not. However, that is the image of the conscience, and that which battles the conscience.

It doesn't work like that. In every person Christ dealt with that had evil spirits they were only maligned attitudes. Before Christ could bless a person, He had to subdue their mind and their attitudes. And it is fitting. Animals can discern the bad attitudes of humans. Those two men in the caves had mental condition and they were most likely Jews.

So what about the guy who Jesus cast his "attitudes" into 2000 pigs so that those 2000 pigs ran off the cliff and drown themselves in the water? Jesus communicating with "attitudes" that were afraid that Jesus was here to torment them "before the time"? What you are saying makes absolutely no sense, and runs contrary to Jesus' own words. And you say that I am creating a God in my own image. You won't even accept what Jesus said, but turn it into something else. That isn't the true Jesus.

What's a Jew doing in a cemetery?

This speaks to just how bad the demon possession is.

We see Jesus healing limbs, withered hands, all kinds of physical ailments. Mental health is in the New Testament. Where in the New Testament is it recorded Jesus healed a mental condition? Such people did exist throughout history. King Saul had a mental condition that was soothed when David played his instrument and calmed him down.

That isn't what the Bible says. It says that God sent an evil spirit to torment him. David played blessed music which caused the evil spirit to leave, relieving Saul.

Maybe he was depressed or bi-polar? Schizophrenic? The spirit that troubled him was of his own making and it was a mental condition.

So, you deny that God sent the evil spirit like He specifically said He would? Why do you stand in God's face?

Where in the New Testament did Jesus heal a person's mind or mental condition?

28 And when he was come to the other side into the country of the Gergesenes, there met him two possessed with devils, coming out of the tombs, exceeding fierce, so that no man might pass by that way.
29 And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time?
30 And there was a good way off from them an herd of many swine feeding.
31 So the devils besought him, saying, If thou cast us out, suffer us to go away into the herd of swine.
32 And he said unto them, Go. And when they were come out, they went into the herd of swine: and, behold, the whole herd of swine ran violently down a steep place into the sea, and perished in the waters.
Matthew 8:28–32.

So, what is the first thing you notice? Demons are speaking, not attitudes. What is special? While the Jews would not recognize Jesus, and actually considered Jesus calling Himself the Son of God to be blasphemy, and refused to believe it, these demons came right out and said exactly who He is. Jesus is the Son of God. They knew Him. Why? They were in heaven before they fell, and were in His presence. They knew exactly who He was. And they asked Him (why would attitudes ask this), was He there to torment them "before the time"? They also knew that there would come a time of judgment, and that they would face final torment for eternity. They also knew it wasn't then.
Now from what I recall, we are talking about 2000 pigs. Did Jesus cast attitudes into 2000 pigs which caused them all to run down a steep place into the sea to drown? Really?!? Just how irrational is this?

A Jew had no business living in the tombs among dead bodies.

Yes. And it is because they were full of demons who felt perfectly at home living in tombs among dead bodies.

These two men knew who Jesus was because like everyone else, the heard of Jesus.

How? Jesus had never gone there.

And how do we interpret verse 28? What did they mean asking Jesus if He was going to torment them "before the time"? What time? Is it said in Scripture Jesus Himself will torment people personally? look at the text.

Again, you don't get it. It is demons asking if Jesus had come to them to torment them before the time? What time? Their coming final judgment, and the carrying out of sentence. Jesus is the judge. That is what scripture says. So is Jesus here before that final time, to carry it out "before the time".

These two Jewish men knew they didn't belong in the tombs and asked Jesus to go from one inappropriate place (tombs) to another inappropriate place (swine.) To get them out of the tombs Jesus said, "Go." and they left the tombs and entered the place where the swine was kept, and the animals got spooked. Again, the power of attitudes. Our attitudes set the course of our walk in life. Many business models address an employee's attitudes at work.

Wow. You really don't like what the Bible says. Here is the story again. Luke 8:
"26 Then they sailed to the country of the Gerasenes, which is opposite Galilee. 27 And when He stepped out onto the land, a man from the city met Him who was possessed with demons; and he had not put on clothing for a long time and was not living in a house, but among the tombs. 28 And seeing Jesus, he cried out and fell down before Him, and said with a loud voice, “[o]What business do You have with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I beg You, do not torment me!” 29 For He had already commanded the unclean spirit to come out of the man. For it had seized him many times; and he was bound with chains and shackles and kept under guard, and yet he would break the restraints and be driven by the demon into the desert. 30 And Jesus asked him, “What is your name?” And he said, “Legion”; because many demons had entered him. 31 And they were begging Him not to command them to go away into the abyss.

32 Now there was a herd of many pigs feeding there on the mountain; and the demons begged Him to permit them to enter [p]the pigs. And He gave them permission. 33 And the demons came out of the man and entered the pigs; and the herd rushed down the steep bank into the lake and was drowned.

34 Now when the herdsmen saw what had happened, they ran away and reported everything in the city, and in the country. 35 And the people came out to see what had happened; and they came to Jesus and found the man from whom the demons had gone out, sitting down at the feet of Jesus, clothed and in his right mind; and they became frightened. 36 Those who had seen everything reported to them how the man who had been demon-possessed had been [q]made well."

It is very clear here. The man's name wasn't Legion, that was the name of the demons, and Luke spells that out. Legion, because the man was full of many demons. Why would an attitude beg not to be sent into the abyss? What is the abyss? Jesus spoke of that elsewhere. You need to take God at His word, instead of making it out to be lies. What is one thing to note here? Supernatural strength. Even being chained up, the man simply broke the chains.

"Demons" are not fallen angels. They are attitudes of the mind. You can't see the attitudes but you can certainly feel them. A miserable attitude loves company. Weep and you weep alone. Laugh and the world laughs with you. All these are attitudes of the mind and as Christians when we became born-again the first thing the Spirit of God corrected was 'your' attitude. One time when living with my mother I had spent serious time in my room studying while on a fast. I came out of the room and my mother asked "what's wrong with you? What's wrong with your face? Your face is glowing."

Just like Moses. Just like Christ. When I became born-again the Lord gave me an attitude adjustment. The burden of sin was lifted from me and was replaced with the love of Jesus beaming from my face.

I don't sensationalize the practical. Just because there is evil in the world I don't automatically blame fallen angels, Satan, or the devil. Most of the world's ills are the result of humans and the sin that they do. And we cannot go out and find Infinity Stones and snap our fingers and the evil attitudes and the ones that came with action go away.
Jesus healed many physical infirmities and physical conditions. Mental conditions are in the Bible.
If you know where to look.

They were demons. However, there are places in scripture where bad attitudes are mentioned. Guess what isn't mentioned there? Demons. What is wrong are those people who say that demons are attitudes, or petty sins, they are not. Demons are serious business. I don't think they are nearly as present today as they were in the past. However, I don't know much about places outside of where I have been. It is quite possible that they are very active in places, perhaps outside of the US. Aliens and UFOs exist. There has been absolute proof presented. If you look up Walter Martin (unfortunately he died in the 1980s I believe) he founded ICR (I believe that is the right acronym) and was studying UFO activity. One reason why people believed in UFOs more at the time is because his cameraman got one of the only pictures at the time that was vetted. An actual UFO.

In the history of ufology, there were those who wished, and did connect it to demonology. They aren't aliens as we believe, but demons. When you look at the messages these "space bretheren" give, it is rather blatantly obvious. David Hunt and others have written books on the subject back in the day. (1980s). It was connected to the Occult and the New Age movement. The messages were messages of salvation, and an intergalactic "gospel". They came to save us, and guide us to a higher plane. All kinds of weird quasi religious messages.

My friend claimed (years and years ago) to have seen a UFO. Research by a Christian seems to connect aliens and alien abductions to demonic activity. Strange enough, it never affects born again Christians. Demons are real, however, God/Jesus has already defeated them, and there is nothing for the believer to worry about.

However, I must say that you need to stop putting words into God's mouth and changing what the Bible says. There are demons, and, no, the charismatics/pentecostals don't have a clue. Granted, the general thoughts around demons were greatly (gravely) affected by books like Piercing the Darkness, and This Present Darkness. I could tell you that there is a good chance I was tormented by spirits in my youth. (Before knowing what it was, or knowing much about God.) Even an overactive imaginiation as I got older could not recreate what I saw as a child. To not be blatantly wrong, and misdirecting, it was not all tormenting. Only some of it was, but seeing skulls flying at oneself in the middle of the night, lights turning off for no reason, or not turning on unless an adult came in and turned it on... kind of scary. That is only some of what I saw.

 

[jeremiah1five]

Peter had something to say about that. Peter knew he could not, and told the church that he could not withstand God. Yet here you are, getting in God's way and telling Him no. And you have no explicit biblical passage for standing up to God, and in actuality standing ABOVE God and saying no. Whereas, I presented you passages that are EXPLICIT.

IF Gentiles are not included in any of the three Hebrew covenants (Abrahamic, Mosaic, and New), and Jesus said He did not come to destroy/change the Law, then this means that only Israel is recipients of God's deliverance and that "Gentiles" in the New Testament cannot be non-Hebrew Gentiles, especially since over a million of Jews grew up for 29-35 generations in Gentile lands heavily influenced by Greek culture, the culture of Alexander the Great. It seems I am the only one referencing these mixed heritage Hebrews on post and in comment. There were Jews who were prejudiced against Samaritans. Do you know who these Samaritans were? What do you know about these Gentile-raised Jews? They weren't religious, the males weren't circumcised, they grew up as Gentiles.
The Old Testament begins with Abraham's covenant in Genesis 12. From this point onward the biblical record concerns Abraham and his seed. Why are they being ignored? When a remnant returned to Israel in 522 BC from Babylon and king Cyrus, the majority of Jews and mixed heritage Jews remained in Babylon and in Gentile locations in-between. Why do you ignore them? Those that stayed and did not return to Israel were in the millions while only about thirty to fifty thousand Jews went back to Israel on two trips. One with Nehemiah and one with Ezra. Go ahead. Tell me something about these Jews that remained in Gentile lands and were Gentile in their dress, their behavior, their languages, tell me something about these Jews of the Exile/Diaspora that remained in Gentile lands. What do you know without consulting Ai or a book or search engine.

Where in scripture, outside of Hebrews where the author is making the claim that Jesus sacrifice is ABOVE that of the Jewish sacrificial system, and is BETTER then that? John 3:14-15 makes no such claim, and instead, likens Jesus sacrifice to Moses raising the viper on a stake in the wilderness, and that Jesus is the same thing, but before the whole world. Always higher, always greater, where you keep it the same. Limiting God. You actually limit God. You claim God is higher, but you bring Him lower. What did John the Baptist say, as the one preparing the way for Jesus, making paths straight? Behold the Lamb of God (not the Lamb of Israel), who takes away the sins of... the WORLD (not of Israel only). And again, Peter actually stated that for him to say what you are saying would be him withstanding GOD. Why do you do so, without even an iota of fear? You can tell Peter understood what position he would be in if he did the same.

I never said Jesus' sacrifice was less than the sacrificial animal under the Law. What I do say is that Jesus' sacrifice is in obedience to the Law of Moses. The animal sacrifice atoned for the sins of Israel, and Jesus' sacrifice atoned for the sins of Israel. He didn't add Gentiles and He didn't atone Gentiles. If He did He would have prayed them in in John 17:9 as High Priest, but He didn't.

9 I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine. John 17:9.

And so, the world of Gentiles does not have salvation. And the "Gentiles" in the NT are identifying mixed heritage Jews of the Diaspora.

I did not. You need to stop inventing lies about me. Remember what Paul said about liars. No place in the kingdom of God. Jesus sacrifice extended to the whole world, because that was God's intent from the moment God promised it to EVE.

You're the one lying by saying non-Hebrew Gentiles are part of God's salvation. They are NOT. Jesus didn't add them and Jesus did not die for them. He doesn't even pray for them. What does that tell you?

Because God made Jesus sacrifice apply to the world, in that He has elect amongst both the Jews and Gentiles. And Paul clearly stated that those under the law will DIE under the law. That speaks to damnation. Those who live in Christ through faith are saved.

Where's the covenant? If Jesus added Gentiles, then Jesus broke the Law and sinned. The animal sacrifice under the Law was never for Gentiles. Gentiles were never under the Law. Gentiles were never atoned.

Everyone who does not keep the law, Jew or Gentile, dies since it is by the Law that sin is sin. God gave the Law to Israel, and Israel was supposed to take it to the world. The Law, not the covenant. The covenant would still be Israel's and Israel's alone, however, by that covenant the whole world would be blessed. The world would find salvation through Israel, for as scripture said, salvation is OF/FROM the Jews.

The only ones who are in position of not keeping the Law are those to whom the Law was given. Israel.

Again, that has NOTHING to do with it. The Mosaic covenant is no more. The Jews VIOLATED/BROKE it long ago. Hebrews is clear about this. There would be no need for a second covenant (new covenant) unless the first was flawed/violated.

If the Mosaic Covenant is no more then I guess I don't have to obey God's command to not have other gods before me. That's your position. Christians do not have to obey God to not bear false witness, to commit adultery, to kill, to steal. Christians are a people without Law. But what do we tell Saul who kept the Law?

24 Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law. Acts 21:24.

By keeping the Law - which you say is no more - Saul lived in perpetual sinfulness. Why would Saul keep the Law of God you say is no more. Think about that. God's Law are not binding upon His people. Every Christian is antinomian.

If God created an exact duplicate of Himself, it would still be inferior. Why? It's a copy. He would forever wear the title "CREATOR", while that copy would forever wear the title "CREATED". Immediately and automatically INFERIOR. God HIMSELF told us what He did, and you are going to God's face and saying "Oh no you didn't!!!" He created them in His image. He didn't stop there. The part you leave out. In His LIKENESS He made them, male and female. I explain more further down.

There ya go. Inferior to God is sinful. Adam was created sinful. You finally get it.

Just what do you have against God. If God created a man who "missed the mark" then how can God hold man responsible for missing the mark? God had no specification other than His image and likeness. Again, there is more further down, but if you took a lump of clay and gave it a head with two eyes, two ears, a mouth, a nose with two nostrils, two arms and two legs, you just made it in your likeness. Why doesn't it look like you? It doesn't have to. It is only a likeness.

On a sunny day which is the real you? Is it you or the shadow you cast on the ground? And if you're hungry does that mean your shadow is hungry, too? The image of God is Christ NOT man. Man is of the earth, earthy. Is God earthy?
You have a lot to learn.

You really need to stop. I mean really. Don't dig the hole any deeper.

Adam was not created sinful. He did not have any sin. Unlike Jesus, Adam sinned. Jesus, technically, could have sinned, however that was never going to happen. (Hence "technically".) Jesus was part human, and as part of being the perfect sacrifice, and the perfect mediator between God and man, He had to face temptation and come through it without sin. In consideration, I believe it was the humanity that was being tempted by Satan. The human nature that coexisted with the divine nature in Christ.

So, Adam was sinless. He possessed a glory of God. So, by your interpretation Isaiah lied. Your interpretation makes everyone in the Bible a liar including Jesus.

 

[jeremiah1five]

You would have to ask Jesus and the Jews. And why would it be considered a "new word"? It's greek.

So please, for the crowd. Just say it. Jesus lied.

That is true. However, when you consider how the church postulated them in artwork, it is a reflection of the evil that is attached to them, not a photograph. It doesn't matter that the word does not show up in the Old Testament. There are still angels presented who sinned, and the New Testament mentions them.

no. They were imprisoned during the time of Noah, which is obviously after God created man.

For specific sins, and specific angels connected to those sins.

This is basically the same sin that doomed Sodom and Gomorrah. Yes, sodomy and the like, but also, their pursuit of strange flesh, in this case the angels that came to get Lot and family out of Sodom.

These are not demons, because they are chained up.

Satan, in this case, is connected to the devil/Lucifer, the original fallen angel. You can believe demon to refer mainly to attitudes, but you have Jesus saying something completely different, and you are basically calling Him a liar.

The casting out does not refer to attitudes, but demons/devils. (Depends on who was doing the translating.) They were talking about miracles they were doing as being signs of them being saved. Well, since we could do this, we must be saved right? No. Salvation is by faith in Christ, and that faith results in works not iniquity. Works that show the faith is real. They were never saved in the first place. Their attitude is one of pride.

Yes. However, those are not demons. They have give attitudes and stupid pet sins demonic names, and say they are demons, but they are not.

Yes there are fallen angels on the planet, however, they are called demons and are different then those locked up.

No there is not. However, that is the image of the conscience, and that which battles the conscience.

So what about the guy who Jesus cast his "attitudes" into 2000 pigs so that those 2000 pigs ran off the cliff and drown themselves in the water? Jesus communicating with "attitudes" that were afraid that Jesus was here to torment them "before the time"? What you are saying makes absolutely no sense, and runs contrary to Jesus' own words. And you say that I am creating a God in my own image. You won't even accept what Jesus said, but turn it into something else. That isn't the true Jesus.

This speaks to just how bad the demon possession is.

That isn't what the Bible says. It says that God sent an evil spirit to torment him. David played blessed music which caused the evil spirit to leave, relieving Saul.

So, you deny that God sent the evil spirit like He specifically said He would? Why do you stand in God's face?

So, what is the first thing you notice? Demons are speaking, not attitudes. What is special? While the Jews would not recognize Jesus, and actually considered Jesus calling Himself the Son of God to be blasphemy, and refused to believe it, these demons came right out and said exactly who He is. Jesus is the Son of God. They knew Him. Why? They were in heaven before they fell, and were in His presence. They knew exactly who He was. And they asked Him (why would attitudes ask this), was He there to torment them "before the time"? They also knew that there would come a time of judgment, and that they would face final torment for eternity. They also knew it wasn't then.
Now from what I recall, we are talking about 2000 pigs. Did Jesus cast attitudes into 2000 pigs which caused them all to run down a steep place into the sea to drown? Really?!? Just how irrational is this?

Yes. And it is because they were full of demons who felt perfectly at home living in tombs among dead bodies.

How? Jesus had never gone there.

Again, you don't get it. It is demons asking if Jesus had come to them to torment them before the time? What time? Their coming final judgment, and the carrying out of sentence. Jesus is the judge. That is what scripture says. So is Jesus here before that final time, to carry it out "before the time".

Wow. You really don't like what the Bible says. Here is the story again. Luke 8:
"26 Then they sailed to the country of the Gerasenes, which is opposite Galilee. 27 And when He stepped out onto the land, a man from the city met Him who was possessed with demons; and he had not put on clothing for a long time and was not living in a house, but among the tombs. 28 And seeing Jesus, he cried out and fell down before Him, and said with a loud voice, “[o]What business do You have with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I beg You, do not torment me!” 29 For He had already commanded the unclean spirit to come out of the man. For it had seized him many times; and he was bound with chains and shackles and kept under guard, and yet he would break the restraints and be driven by the demon into the desert. 30 And Jesus asked him, “What is your name?” And he said, “Legion”; because many demons had entered him. 31 And they were begging Him not to command them to go away into the abyss.

32 Now there was a herd of many pigs feeding there on the mountain; and the demons begged Him to permit them to enter [p]the pigs. And He gave them permission. 33 And the demons came out of the man and entered the pigs; and the herd rushed down the steep bank into the lake and was drowned.

34 Now when the herdsmen saw what had happened, they ran away and reported everything in the city, and in the country. 35 And the people came out to see what had happened; and they came to Jesus and found the man from whom the demons had gone out, sitting down at the feet of Jesus, clothed and in his right mind; and they became frightened. 36 Those who had seen everything reported to them how the man who had been demon-possessed had been [q]made well."

It is very clear here. The man's name wasn't Legion, that was the name of the demons, and Luke spells that out. Legion, because the man was full of many demons. Why would an attitude beg not to be sent into the abyss? What is the abyss? Jesus spoke of that elsewhere. You need to take God at His word, instead of making it out to be lies. What is one thing to note here? Supernatural strength. Even being chained up, the man simply broke the chains.

They were demons. However, there are places in scripture where bad attitudes are mentioned. Guess what isn't mentioned there? Demons. What is wrong are those people who say that demons are attitudes, or petty sins, they are not. Demons are serious business. I don't think they are nearly as present today as they were in the past. However, I don't know much about places outside of where I have been. It is quite possible that they are very active in places, perhaps outside of the US. Aliens and UFOs exist. There has been absolute proof presented. If you look up Walter Martin (unfortunately he died in the 1980s I believe) he founded ICR (I believe that is the right acronym) and was studying UFO activity. One reason why people believed in UFOs more at the time is because his cameraman got one of the only pictures at the time that was vetted. An actual UFO.

In the history of ufology, there were those who wished, and did connect it to demonology. They aren't aliens as we believe, but demons. When you look at the messages these "space bretheren" give, it is rather blatantly obvious. David Hunt and others have written books on the subject back in the day. (1980s). It was connected to the Occult and the New Age movement. The messages were messages of salvation, and an intergalactic "gospel". They came to save us, and guide us to a higher plane. All kinds of weird quasi religious messages.

My friend claimed (years and years ago) to have seen a UFO. Research by a Christian seems to connect aliens and alien abductions to demonic activity. Strange enough, it never affects born again Christians. Demons are real, however, God/Jesus has already defeated them, and there is nothing for the believer to worry about.

However, I must say that you need to stop putting words into God's mouth and changing what the Bible says. There are demons, and, no, the charismatics/pentecostals don't have a clue. Granted, the general thoughts around demons were greatly (gravely) affected by books like Piercing the Darkness, and This Present Darkness. I could tell you that there is a good chance I was tormented by spirits in my youth. (Before knowing what it was, or knowing much about God.) Even an overactive imaginiation as I got older could not recreate what I saw as a child. To not be blatantly wrong, and misdirecting, it was not all tormenting. Only some of it was, but seeing skulls flying at oneself in the middle of the night, lights turning off for no reason, or not turning on unless an adult came in and turned it on... kind of scary. That is only some of what I saw.

Your interpretation makes Jesus a liar, God a liar, Joel a liar, Jesus a liar, Jesus a liar, Jesus a liar.
That's what your interpretation does. It makes Jesus sin.

 

[e v e]

there are only two groups

esau (corrupt souls) v. jacob (eden hebrew souls)
esau has a different father, did not come from God.

there is no gentile concept ... that was invented by esau.

 

[e v e]

the scroll has been corrupted by esau.

the result of this Daniel calls the sealed vision.

 

[armylngst]

IF Gentiles are not included in any of the three Hebrew covenants (Abrahamic, Mosaic, and New), and Jesus said He did not come to destroy/change the Law, then this means that only Israel is recipients of God's deliverance and that "Gentiles" in the New Testament cannot be non-Hebrew Gentiles, especially since over a million of Jews grew up for 29-35 generations in Gentile lands heavily influenced by Greek culture, the culture of Alexander the Great. It seems I am the only one referencing these mixed heritage Hebrews on post and in comment. There were Jews who were prejudiced against Samaritans. Do you know who these Samaritans were? What do you know about these Gentile-raised Jews? They weren't religious, the males weren't circumcised, they grew up as Gentiles.

You really don't get it do you? Go back to the Bible instead of worshiping yourself. You deny scripture, and you even blatantly change what God has said, adding to scripture, and even removing from scripture. Jesus came to fulfill the Law. Do you know what He didn't mention? Any covenant. Consider the march of the church. First the Jews, and they spoke in tongues with the coming of the Holy Spirit. Then, the non-Jewish Gentiles who also spoke in tongues like the Jews. Then the Samaritans WHO DID NOT SPEAK IN TONGUES like the Jews. Read it. It isn't there. They didn't. Why not? Being Jews, they already spoke in tongues at Pentecost, so these were just Jews coming to Jesus. The tongues were used to show who the members of the church would be. First the Jews, then the Gentiles, and then the Samaritans who were Jews who Jesus Himself actually spoke with though scripture says He avoided the Gentiles. Specifically so. They aren't the Gentiles you are looking for.

The Old Testament begins with Abraham's covenant in Genesis 12. From this point onward the biblical record concerns Abraham and his seed. Why are they being ignored? When a remnant returned to Israel in 522 BC from Babylon and king Cyrus, the majority of Jews and mixed heritage Jews remained in Babylon and in Gentile locations in-between. Why do you ignore them? Those that stayed and did not return to Israel were in the millions while only about thirty to fifty thousand Jews went back to Israel on two trips. One with Nehemiah and one with Ezra. Go ahead. Tell me something about these Jews that remained in Gentile lands and were Gentile in their dress, their behavior, their languages, tell me something about these Jews of the Exile/Diaspora that remained in Gentile lands. What do you know without consulting Ai or a book or search engine.

They are still Jews. Again, only non-Jewish Gentiles are called proselytes, where those with Jewish ancestry, if the choose their Jewish heritage are called CONVERTS, a completely different word. They are not called proselytes.

I never said Jesus' sacrifice was less than the sacrificial animal under the Law. What I do say is that Jesus' sacrifice is in obedience to the Law of Moses. The animal sacrifice atoned for the sins of Israel, and Jesus' sacrifice atoned for the sins of Israel. He didn't add Gentiles and He didn't atone Gentiles. If He did He would have prayed them in in John 17:9 as High Priest, but He didn't.

His sacrifice was not in obedience to the Law of Moses, or you make Jesus subservient to the Law. That is you make GOD HIMSELF subservient to the Law. Jesus sacrifice is higher than the animal sacrifice, and atones for the sins of the world. Even Paul was clear on this. He is the propitiation for our sins, and I'm sure you are clear that our meanst he Jews, but then he says, but not only ours, but for the whole world. You ignore the rest of John 17 such as this:

"20 “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, 21 that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— 23 I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me."
Jesus DID pray for the Gentiles. They are of those who believe by faith in Jesus through the message of the disciples and the church who fulfilled the Great Commission, and Jesus is praying for them here. He even says taht the world will know that the Father sent Him, and that the Father loved them even as the Father loved His Son. That must really irk you. Is that why you completely remove it from the Bible?

9 I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine. John 17:9.

And so, the world of Gentiles does not have salvation. And the "Gentiles" in the NT are identifying mixed heritage Jews of the Diaspora.

No. You really don't get it.

You're the one lying by saying non-Hebrew Gentiles are part of God's salvation. They are NOT. Jesus didn't add them and Jesus did not die for them. He doesn't even pray for them. What does that tell you?

They are. You seem to believe that the plan of reconciliation was born in Abraham, when it was not. It was born in the promise made to EVE. Eve was not Jewish, and neither was Adam. Who was Eve? The mother of the human race, and Adam was the father of the human race. Eve's DNA is still present in our DNA, and science knows her as the mitochondrial Eve. That is because, on the woman side, it is prevalent. There is even a genetic Adam, however, unlike the female side, it is not prevalent. The Adam side of the genetic structure shows the genetic Adam being over a thousand years younger than the mitochondrial Eve. So who is it? Consider the second birth of the human race. The genetic Adam is... NOAH. After the flood, it was Noah, and his genetic offspring, I mean sons. So his is the marker that is present in humans today.

Where's the covenant? If Jesus added Gentiles, then Jesus broke the Law and sinned. The animal sacrifice under the Law was never for Gentiles. Gentiles were never under the Law. Gentiles were never atoned.

Did you bat an eye when you DARED in the presence of a Holy God to even consider calling His only Holy Son a sinner? Was there even an iota of fear in your stance, for the possibility that you could be wrong? There wasn't, was there. Not even an ounce of respect for the Holy One of God. Nice. And you probably didn't even have to pause to think this up, with it already dancing in your mind. You still don't get it. You still deny the Holy Word of God, and trample on His only Son. Please. for the love of all that is holy STOP before you destroy yourself.

The only ones who are in position of not keeping the Law are those to whom the Law was given. Israel.

If the Mosaic Covenant is no more then I guess I don't have to obey God's command to not have other gods before me. That's your position. Christians do not have to obey God to not bear false witness, to commit adultery, to kill, to steal. Christians are a people without Law. But what do we tell Saul who kept the Law?

The Mosaic Covenant is no more. However, the Mosaic Covenant is not the Law. Instituted by the Law, governed by the Law, but it isn't the Law. The author of Hebrews was clear that if the first covenant was not flawed/violated, there would be no need for a second better (read NEW) covenant. However, there is a second covenant, a new covenant.

24 Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law. Acts 21:24.

By keeping the Law - which you say is no more - Saul lived in perpetual sinfulness. Why would Saul keep the Law of God you say is no more. Think about that. God's Law are not binding upon His people. Every Christian is antinomian.

When did I say the Law was no more? I said the Mosaic Covenant is no more. You really do need to go back and learn about God all over.

There ya go. Inferior to God is sinful. Adam was created sinful. You finally get it.

Adam was not created sinful, or Adam is not guilty for God made Adam already full of sin. (Sinful... sinfull, full of sin.) However, did Adam and Eve realize they were naked after they were created? Did God clothe them right them? Why not. You just said they were created sinful.

On a sunny day which is the real you? Is it you or the shadow you cast on the ground? And if you're hungry does that mean your shadow is hungry, too? The image of God is Christ NOT man. Man is of the earth, earthy. Is God earthy?
You have a lot to learn.

Again, you say God lied. I already explained to you that the word for image and the word for likeness in Hebrew does not mean what you say it means. And the word eikon in the Greek, which is the word translated as image, is not synonymous with the Hebrew word. The work in Greek means exact copy, a duplicate, an exact replica. The work in Hebrew is just likeness. It is not exact, it is not a duplicate, it is not a replica. It is but a likeness. Some attributes are present, which gives it a likeness.

GOD HIMSELF said "Let us make man in our own image." GOD SAID THAT. GOD TOLD US HE SAID THAT. You then turn to me and tell me that God lied. God did not lie. The problem is that you are unwilling to consider what God MEANT when He said image, and that you can only begin to see it when you actually translate and intepret the word IMAGE by the word used in Hebrew. There is not duplication. That is not what the word in Hebrew means. So please STOP. You are not only trampling on God's Son, you are trampling on God Himself.

So, Adam was sinless. He possessed a glory of God. So, by your interpretation Isaiah lied. Your interpretation makes everyone in the Bible a liar including Jesus.

Adam was sinless. Adam did not possess the glory of God, because,as you said it is the glory OF GOD, not the glory OF ADAM. Being sinless is not glory, it means that Adam had not yet missed the standard that had been set. The only standard that existed at the time, the ONLY STANDARD was, do not eat that fruit over there. So as long as Adam did not eat that fruit, he did not miss the standard, which is, he was sinless. The moment he ate the fruit, he missed the standard. And, in this game, once you miss the standard, you lose the competition. There is no way to shoot a perfect game, and a perfect game is what God requires.

The one who is in the wrong here, the one who doesn't know what he is talking about is YOU. Adam was sinless. That is, when God created Adam, Adam had not sinned. If Adam is sinful...again that is sin full, which means full of sin. What standards had Adam missed? None. So how can you say Adam missed some standard? You are really lost here, simply because you have deceived yourself.

Adam was created without sin, however, unlike God, unlike Jesus, Adam had the capacity to sin. While Adam was sinless, Adam was not perfect. Being sinless is not glory. Should I give you the definition of glory again? Okay, I didn't mean to ask because apparently you need to see the definition of glory again. The glory of God refers to God's greatness. His beauty. His perfection. Those things Adam did not have. Notice how there is no need to make Adam sinful to show that Adam did not have or take God's glory. Yet you would present God as one who made Adam a sinner, removing all responsibility from Adam. That is not what happened. Adam was sinless at the time of his creation, but he was not perfect, only innocent. That is, he didn't know the difference between good and evil. God knows the difference between good and evil, and as the serpent said, both Adam and Eve knew the difference between good and evil the moment they ate the fruit. Was it because of the fruit? No. It was because the moment they sinned, their eyes were opened to it. At that moment they realized they were naked. The didn't realize it prior.

Until you understand who God is, you will never get it.

 

[armylngst]

Your interpretation makes Jesus a liar, God a liar, Joel a liar, Jesus a liar, Jesus a liar, Jesus a liar.
That's what your interpretation does. It makes Jesus sin.

No it does not. I also didn't interpret it. I took it as written. You completely changed what God said. The scripture is inspired by God which means it is God's words to man's pen through their personality. So it is God who is telling us what happened with the demon possessed man. It is God who tells us that His Son cast out demons and sent them into the pigs. You changed this to say that what God actually meant to tell us is that the man was amongst the pigs and scared them. Perhaps you didn't realize that we are talking about approximately 2000 pigs. Pigs are not like sheep. Pigs are not like lemmings. You can scare a few, but that won't make the whole herd suicidal.

Jesus also talks about casting out demons on occassion, to include giving his disciples the power to do it. The difference is, the disciples cast out the demons by Jesus name. Jesus cast out demons by His sheer authority as God. And, none of the Jews accepted Jesus as the Son of God, but considered it blasphemy. However, Jesus was silencing the demons because they kept telling everyone who Jesus was, the Son of God. And the guy at the tomb said, and who do you Jesus, Son of God, have to do with us?

"“[o]What business do You have with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I beg You, do not torment me!" being the direct quote. It is in John 10 where it is said that Jesus calling Himself the Son of God made Him equal with God, that is, He was claiming to be God. That was blasphemy to the Jews, and they were more then happy to say so. Jesus question to them? For which of His works did the seek to stone him? And they said that it wasn't for His works, but because He claimed to be the Son of God.

Please, again, for the love of all that is Holy, stop changing what God has spoken.

 

[jeremiah1five]

No it does not. I also didn't interpret it. I took it as written. You completely changed what God said. The scripture is inspired by God which means it is God's words to man's pen through their personality. So it is God who is telling us what happened with the demon possessed man. It is God who tells us that His Son cast out demons and sent them into the pigs. You changed this to say that what God actually meant to tell us is that the man was amongst the pigs and scared them. Perhaps you didn't realize that we are talking about approximately 2000 pigs. Pigs are not like sheep. Pigs are not like lemmings. You can scare a few, but that won't make the whole herd suicidal.

Jesus also talks about casting out demons on occassion, to include giving his disciples the power to do it. The difference is, the disciples cast out the demons by Jesus name. Jesus cast out demons by His sheer authority as God. And, none of the Jews accepted Jesus as the Son of God, but considered it blasphemy. However, Jesus was silencing the demons because they kept telling everyone who Jesus was, the Son of God. And the guy at the tomb said, and who do you Jesus, Son of God, have to do with us?

"“[o]What business do You have with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I beg You, do not torment me!" being the direct quote. It is in John 10 where it is said that Jesus calling Himself the Son of God made Him equal with God, that is, He was claiming to be God. That was blasphemy to the Jews, and they were more then happy to say so. Jesus question to them? For which of His works did the seek to stone him? And they said that it wasn't for His works, but because He claimed to be the Son of God.

Please, again, for the love of all that is Holy, stop changing what God has spoken.

Jesus came to fulfill the Law. The Law mandated animal sacrifice to atone for the sins of the children of Israel. As lamb of God Jesus was sacrificed to atone for the sins of the children of Israel. There are no Gentiles under the Law and there are no Gentiles in the New Covenant in Jesus' blood. So, if your interpretation is to include Gentiles and that Jesus died for Gentiles then you are making Christ a liar and He did not come to fulfill, but to CHANGE it by adding Gentiles.
THAT'S HOW YOU MAKE CHRIST A LIAR, by saying Jesus died for Gentiles when the animal sacrifice under the Law was slain to atone for ISRAEL'S SINS not Gentiles.

 

[armylngst]

Jesus came to fulfill the Law. The Law mandated animal sacrifice to atone for the sins of the children of Israel. As lamb of God Jesus was sacrificed to atone for the sins of the children of Israel. There are no Gentiles under the Law and there are no Gentiles in the New Covenant in Jesus' blood. So, if your interpretation is to include Gentiles and that Jesus died for Gentiles then you are making Christ a liar and He did not come to fulfill, but to CHANGE it by adding Gentiles.
THAT'S HOW YOU MAKE CHRIST A LIAR, by saying Jesus died for Gentiles when the animal sacrifice under the Law was slain to atone for ISRAEL'S SINS not Gentiles.

That is not what the Law mandated. The Law mandated perfection in keeping the Law. The sacrificial system was put in place to appease God when Israel violated the Law. What the Law mandated was the death of the sinner. The fact that you are pushing for sinless Gentiles who are not covered by a standard, in this case the Law, is patently absurd. You are making God SOOOOO small. God, through John the Baptist, who prepared the way for Jesus said: "Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the WORLD." That is everyone. However, John 3, Ephesians 1, and other passages show that it is limited to those in the world (not just Israel) who believe in Jesus by faith. Salvation is OF the Jews. It doesn't say FOR the Jews, but OF, which is the same as saying FROM. However, if there is no other group besides the Jews affected, which you say that that is all there is, then OF the Jews makes absolutely no sense.

 

[jeremiah1five]

That is not what the Law mandated. The Law mandated perfection in keeping the Law. The sacrificial system was put in place to appease God when Israel violated the Law. What the Law mandated was the death of the sinner. The fact that you are pushing for sinless Gentiles who are not covered by a standard, in this case the Law, is patently absurd. You are making God SOOOOO small. God, through John the Baptist, who prepared the way for Jesus said: "Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the WORLD." That is everyone. However, John 3, Ephesians 1, and other passages show that it is limited to those in the world (not just Israel) who believe in Jesus by faith. Salvation is OF the Jews. It doesn't say FOR the Jews, but OF, which is the same as saying FROM. However, if there is no other group besides the Jews affected, which you say that that is all there is, then OF the Jews makes absolutely no sense.

All three part of the Law of Moses were established between God and the children of Israel. Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy each contain some aspect of the Mosaic Covenant. Animal sacrifices were already established with the first Passover in Egypt.

You are taking a Greek word that refers to a group of people and making is to mean all humanity. This is incorrect. Just because it is translated as "world" does not mean all humans but to a group of people and that group of people are in context to the Hebrew people. God so loved the world of Hebrews is the correct understanding for one simple reason besides the Greek word. IF God loved the world what is He doing destroying the world of Philistines, Moabites, Amorites, Egyptians, and all the rest of those God destroyed. Did God love the Canaanites during Joshua's life? Is it love to command Joshua to invade Canaan and eradicate with extreme prejudice those living in the land? God commanded Joshua to kill and slaughter every man, woman, teen, boy, girl, toddler, infant, newborn, and child in the womb. Is that love? That's how God loves "the world"

No, God's love is the love that is found in the Hebrew Scripture, to feed His people, to house His people in giving them their own land, to prosper His people, to defend His people, to protect His people, those people being the children of Israel THAT is what God's love is and does. So, in commanding Joshua to invade Canaan and destroy every man

Gos so loved the non-Hebrew world that He what? Utterly destroys and causes their suffering until dead?, woman, child, and babe in the womb is the love you say God has for everyone who is not Hebrew but of the world?

God so loved the world (everybody) is a terrible love - actually, it's hate, hate for those who are NOT His people that those that are NOT His people are everyone IN THE WORLD who is not Abraham's seed.

Is it love of God for non-Hebrew Gentiles - the world - when God commands Joshua and the children of Israel to invade Canaan and destroy every non-Hebrew Gentile that lives there.

How do you call that love? Love for the world that you erroneously hold to??

Answer me.

Explain that.

 

[armylngst]

All three part of the Law of Moses were established between God and the children of Israel. Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy each contain some aspect of the Mosaic Covenant. Animal sacrifices were already established with the first Passover in Egypt.

That is not true. The killing of a lamb in sacrifice as a prophecy pointing to Jesus, yes, but that was not the first sacrifice that would mark the Jewish sacrificial system. It was prophecy through foreshadowing. The passover existed as a memorial to what God had done for them in Egypt, but also served as foreshadowing Christ, not the covenantal sacrificial system. It spoke of Jesus' atonement in that even death passed over them. The atonement of Yom Kippur did not remove sin, it only covered it, and it did not cover all sin. (You would know that if you read the passage and understood it.)

You are taking a Greek word that refers to a group of people and making is to mean all humanity.

If you look up the word in the Strongs, you will find out that that is the proper way to understand the Greek word in the context. There are multiple meanings given, and not one limits it to a specific group of people, unless that specific group of people is all humanity. In fact, it can even mean world in a moral sense. It also means a lot of things that have nothing to do with populations or the world. The word "cosmetic" in English comes from this greek word, or a form of this greek word.

This is incorrect. Just because it is translated as "world" does not mean all humans but to a group of people and that group of people are in context to the Hebrew people.

Except that is incorrect. In Greek the word does speak of all humanity, when it is speaking of people. When it speaks of makeup and other things (the word "cosmetic" comes from a form of this word), it is obviously not speaking of people at all. In the New TEstament (where the greek word is found) it refers either to the collective of humanity, a world system, or world view (morals), or collectively to those who reject God's teaching. So, again, you are incorrect. When speaking of the world in terms of salvation, it speaks to the collective humanity. What it does not speak to is individuals. So just because the world will be saved, it is speaking of humanity collectively. Individually, some are saved, some are not. Collectively, it is humanity, not animals or plants that are being saved. Individually it is those God has chosen for Himself in Ephesians 1. There is no distinction made in Ephesians 1 to say that it is Hebrew, or it is Gentile, so it is best to consider it to mean a group of individuals from the whole span of humanity. Hebrew/Jew, and non-Hebrew Gentile.

God so loved the world of Hebrews is the correct understanding for one simple reason besides the Greek word. IF God loved the world what is He doing destroying the world of Philistines, Moabites, Amorites, Egyptians, and all the rest of those God destroyed. Did God love the Canaanites during Joshua's life? Is it love to command Joshua to invade Canaan and eradicate with extreme prejudice those living in the land? God commanded Joshua to kill and slaughter every man, woman, teen, boy, girl, toddler, infant, newborn, and child in the womb. Is that love? That's how God loves "the world"

You probably don't want to go here. Consider what God Himself, by His own direction and action, did to Israel. Did to the Hebrews/Jews. I mean, it is even WORSE than what happened to the Canaanites who received mercy in the form of death. There are fates WORSE then death, and Israel got to learn that from God first hand. The were exiled, slaughtered by their enemies, faced starvation, were eating their own children, sacrificed their children to idols, etc. Is that God's love? If God loved Israel in the way you are presenting love, is that not complete disdain of Israel. Something even worse than hatred? I mean, God said these things would happen. With some of it He says that it is by His own hand. Even you know that that is not God's hate, but punishment. You have the wrong understanding of the word love. Does Isaiah 56 show God's love for His Son? It says that God was PLEASED to CRUSH His Son. To torture His Son. All those things which people who hate penal substitutionary atonement says amounts to cosmic child abuse. (Note, do not mistake me bringing this up as saying these people have one iota of intelligence about them.) They are like you, except that they interpret "love" and such things as saying that Isaiah 56, if taken as written, and used for Jesus crucifixion amounts to cosmic child abuse.

No, God's love is the love that is found in the Hebrew Scripture, to feed His people, to house His people in giving them their own land, to prosper His people, to defend His people, to protect His people, those people being the children of Israel THAT is what God's love is and does. So, in commanding Joshua to invade Canaan and destroy every man.

Again, you completely miss all the horrible things God did to His chosen people in the Old Testament. Did that amount to hate? God starved His people, destroyed their houses, took away their land, made them poor, enabled their enemies to destroy, slaughter, exile them, etc. Is that God's love? Did you just decide to forget that God did all of that since it defeats your argument? I mean, if you understood what God's love is, you would realize that this does nothing to change the idea that God is love. Neither does what you mentioned above. However, since you have decided to relegate God and His attributes to the realm of man, instead of treating God is God, you can make God as petty as man. That was the sin of Job's friends. They made God as petty as man. God wouldn't bring calamity upon you except if you sin. That is not true. The book of Job tells us that God is above all that, and that He acts as He wills, or simply, how He feels. (Desires, feels like, etc.) He never sinks to the level of men, so stop dragging Him down. John 3:16 speaks of God's universal love. It isn't sappy. It isn't emotional. It is way deeper. You may love so much that you might sacrifice yourself to save another person. God so loved that He died for the whole world, that any who would believe in Him would be saved. Do you see that dragging down God's love to simply being a facsimile of a human emotion is just wrong? Yet you claim to hold God higher, that God is higher. So... treat Him that way. You keep showing that you have a complete lack of understanding as to who God is.

Gos so loved the non-Hebrew world that He what? Utterly destroys and causes their suffering until dead?, woman, child, and babe in the womb is the love you say God has for everyone who is not Hebrew but of the world?

It is God so loved all the world, Hebrew and non-Hebrew, that He gave His only Son to die for it, that those who are believing in His Son will have eternal life and live with Him. God sent His Son first (and salvation) to the Jews. Hence salvation is OF the Jews. However, the Jews rejected Christ, and this is collective. It is not a collective where every Jew has to reject, but that the representation is there that the rejection is collective. The same way that those Jews who managed to keep the covenant suffered along with those who did not. God took care of them, unfortunately, they were still along for the ride. God clearly states that there is a remnant in Israel who had not broken with Him. They had not bowed to baal, they had not rejected God. Yet they suffered right along with those who did. Why? Collective.

The reason why there is suffering in this world, for both Hebrew and non-Hebrew, is sin. It has nothing to do with God's love or hate, when you take it to that level. It has everything to do with God's justice. If you commit the crime, you do the time. Love is like logic in those times. Cold, unfeeling, and merciless. You WILL do the time. The only way out is if God does decide to have mercy, but if He does not, there is no mercy. It isn't hate. It isn't love gone cold. It is the exercising of justice, which CANNOT be countered except by mercy. And that doesn't save. THere is one other except, and that is grace. Grace saved, however, grace required a sacrifice to cleanse all sin.

God so loved the world (everybody) is a terrible love - actually, it's hate, hate for those who are NOT His people that those that are NOT His people are everyone IN THE WORLD who is not Abraham's seed.

Wow, did you just trample on God's love simply because you seem incapable of understanding it? All those things you say happened to those in Canaan, God did the same kind of things to His people Israel. He did even worse things. So is that somehow not hate? I mean, God makes it clear that it is not hate, yet you say while it isn't hate here, it is over there. No, it is the same in both cases. God loves all humanity as a collective. It does not speak of individuals. It does not speak to individuals. God loves the works of His hands, and humanity is the work of His hands. So God so loved humanity His creation, a universal love, that He sent His Son to save some of them. Do you see how this universal love is not like you say. If it was as you say, then using it as I am using it would speak to universalism. However, I clearly stated it was not universalism because God did so love the world to send His only Son, but He did not send His Son to save everyone. He sent His Son to save individuals from the collective of humanity. So humanity is not lost, because God saves some.

Is it love of God for non-Hebrew Gentiles - the world - when God commands Joshua and the children of Israel to invade Canaan and destroy every non-Hebrew Gentile that lives there.

Is it the love of God for Hebrews when he brings Nebuchadnezzar to attack and slaughter many of His people? No, it was God's judgment. It has nothing to do with His love, except that by His love and for the promise of the forefathers, He stops short of wiping Israel off the face of the Earth, and destroying all Hebrews. You are cutting out so much scripture, it isn't funny.

How do you call that love? Love for the world that you erroneously hold to??

The question of a non-believer. A question of one who has not come to Jesus. If you had, you would understand that there is nothing simple about God, or His creation. You would understand that one cannot simply look at one instance, divorced from all history, and from the rest of scripture, and define all existence by it. Consider that both Esau and Jacob were descendants of Abraham by Isaac, but God hated Esau. I thought Esau would be saved because He is Abraham's descendant by Isaac. He was not. In fact, He was not Hebrew, He was the father of the Edomites. Semitic, because he is still a descendant of Abraham, but he has no part in the covenant, or in the promise.

God loves all humanity as the work of His hands that He bothered sending His Son in the first place. The reason it is worded like this is to show the universality of the love. It is for collective humanity. It does not automatically extend to individuals except that they are human, and thus part of the collective. So, you need to learn more about God's love, and about God's sovereignty. You keep making God petty, and giving Him simple, lowly human emotions, at the level of a human. God isn't human. God doesn't suffer from the handicap of human like emotions. We have emotions like God does, but not to the same level, and ALL have been corrupted by sin in us, God's image. (Again, the definition of the word image specifically says it is NOT a facsimile, so please stop talking about reduplication. The word for image used in relation to Jesus (a completely different word) speaks to a facsimile, a duplicate. The same in substance. So nothing to do with God's image in humanity.

Also, when you said you glowed when you were younger, it just means that you were blushing, or your emotions (such as hapiness) were turned up to 11, to the point that no one could fail to notice. Like in a book when someone is so happy that it is described like "they were positively glowing". Or in coversation when someone says "you are positively glowing". That is NOT the same as Moses. Moses was glowing with the glory of God, which was so bright he had to wear a veil. So literal light. Well God is light, so no surprise, right? It sounds like something in what you read had such an impact on you, that you basically wore that on your face, in the way you carried yourself, etc. It was noticeable. I have had something like that happen myself, when I came to understand what Paul meant in Ephesians when he said that the enmity (hate) that existed between the Jews and non-Jewish Gentiles was eradicated in Christ's body on the cross. I was probably 9 or 10 years old, and once I understood what that word enmity meant, and then what it meant to the verse, it opened up the entire context. All of a sudden there was full understanding of just what the church is. I could not keep my emotions in check, it meant so much.

 

[jeremiah1five]

That is not true. The killing of a lamb in sacrifice as a prophecy pointing to Jesus, yes, but that was not the first sacrifice that would mark the Jewish sacrificial system. It was prophecy through foreshadowing. The passover existed as a memorial to what God had done for them in Egypt, but also served as foreshadowing Christ, not the covenantal sacrificial system. It spoke of Jesus' atonement in that even death passed over them. The atonement of Yom Kippur did not remove sin, it only covered it, and it did not cover all sin. (You would know that if you read the passage and understood it.)

It wasn't a prophecy; it was an actual ritual performed by the Hebrew people in accordance with the command of God.

26 And it shall come to pass, when your children shall say unto you, What mean ye by this service?
27 That ye shall say, It is the sacrifice of the LORD’s passover, who passed over the houses of the children of Israel in Egypt, when he smote the Egyptians, and delivered our houses. And the people bowed the head and worshipped.
28 And the children of Israel went away, and did as the LORD had commanded Moses and Aaron, so did they.
Exodus 12:26–28.

As we look back in hindsight, we can now see this service foreshadowed the ministry of Christ, but these things were hidden from the Hebrew people in the day God commanded them to perform these sacrifices. Exodus 12 describes what the children of Israel were to do as a means of protection from death which God was to soon exercise against the Egyptian Gentiles as judgment who were not included in this protection. This "Lord's Passover" was to be done every new year of the Hebrew calendar by the Hebrew people.

If you look up the word in the Strongs, you will find out that that is the proper way to understand the Greek word in the context. There are multiple meanings given, and not one limits it to a specific group of people, unless that specific group of people is all humanity. In fact, it can even mean world in a moral sense. It also means a lot of things that have nothing to do with populations or the world. The word "cosmetic" in English comes from this greek word, or a form of this Greek word.

God commanded this "Lord's Passover" upon the Hebrew people and not upon Gentiles. It never included Gentiles from the first time these services were done even until years after the last Passover which Jesus Christ Himself was given by God as His lamb that would protect the children of Israel only and not Gentiles. Gentiles were never part of this service then when it was first done while in Egypt with Moses and Gentiles were never part of this service when Jesus came and died on His cross for the children of Israel later. All things pertaining to this "Lord's Passover" were committed to the children of Israel and never to Gentiles. Understanding the "Lord's Passover" as it pertains to Jesus Christ was a sacrifice by God to and for the children of Israel only. Jesus' sacrifice was to and for the children of Israel and never for Gentiles. Thus, Gentiles are not atoned by the Lord's sacrifice and the judgment of death rests upon them as it did for the Egyptians in Moses' day.

Except that is incorrect. In Greek the word does speak of all humanity, when it is speaking of people. When it speaks of makeup and other things (the word "cosmetic" comes from a form of this word), it is obviously not speaking of people at all. In the New TEstament (where the greek word is found) it refers either to the collective of humanity, a world system, or world view (morals), or collectively to those who reject God's teaching. So, again, you are incorrect. When speaking of the world in terms of salvation, it speaks to the collective humanity. What it does not speak to is individuals. So just because the world will be saved, it is speaking of humanity collectively. Individually, some are saved, some are not. Collectively, it is humanity, not animals or plants that are being saved. Individually it is those God has chosen for Himself in Ephesians 1. There is no distinction made in Ephesians 1 to say that it is Hebrew, or it is Gentile, so it is best to consider it to mean a group of individuals from the whole span of humanity. Hebrew/Jew, and non-Hebrew Gentile.

Gentiles were never part of the "Lord's Passover" and as this service eventually came to be known as an atonement for the children of Israel and never for Gentiles. Jesus did not come to destroy the Law nor to change it but to fulfill it and as the lamb of God it is His blood that God used to atone for the sins of the children of Israel and not for Gentiles as Gentiles were never extended protection from sin.

You probably don't want to go here. Consider what God Himself, by His own direction and action, did to Israel. Did to the Hebrews/Jews. I mean, it is even WORSE than what happened to the Canaanites who received mercy in the form of death. There are fates WORSE then death, and Israel got to learn that from God first hand. The were exiled, slaughtered by their enemies, faced starvation, were eating their own children, sacrificed their children to idols, etc. Is that God's love? If God loved Israel in the way you are presenting love, is that not complete disdain of Israel. Something even worse than hatred? I mean, God said these things would happen. With some of it He says that it is by His own hand. Even you know that that is not God's hate, but punishment. You have the wrong understanding of the word love. Does Isaiah 56 show God's love for His Son? It says that God was PLEASED to CRUSH His Son. To torture His Son. All those things which people who hate penal substitutionary atonement says amounts to cosmic child abuse. (Note, do not mistake me bringing this up as saying these people have one iota of intelligence about them.) They are like you, except that they interpret "love" and such things as saying that Isaiah 56, if taken as written, and used for Jesus crucifixion amounts to cosmic child abuse.

24 But Jesus did not commit himself unto them, because he knew all men,
25 And needed not that any should testify of man: for he knew what was in man. John 2:23–25.

God knew precisely that sin as thief came to steal, kill, and destroy the children of Israel and had not God provided atonement for their sin then the children of Israel would be in the same judgment of death for their sins as Gentiles.

Again, you completely miss all the horrible things God did to His chosen people in the Old Testament. Did that amount to hate? God starved His people, destroyed their houses, took away their land, made them poor, enabled their enemies to destroy, slaughter, exile them, etc. Is that God's love? Did you just decide to forget that God did all of that since it defeats your argument? I mean, if you understood what God's love is, you would realize that this does nothing to change the idea that God is love. Neither does what you mentioned above. However, since you have decided to relegate God and His attributes to the realm of man, instead of treating God is God, you can make God as petty as man. That was the sin of Job's friends. They made God as petty as man. God wouldn't bring calamity upon you except if you sin. That is not true. The book of Job tells us that God is above all that, and that He acts as He wills, or simply, how He feels. (Desires, feels like, etc.) He never sinks to the level of men, so stop dragging Him down. John 3:16 speaks of God's universal love. It isn't sappy. It isn't emotional. It is way deeper. You may love so much that you might sacrifice yourself to save another person. God so loved that He died for the whole world, that any who would believe in Him would be saved. Do you see that dragging down God's love to simply being a facsimile of a human emotion is just wrong? Yet you claim to hold God higher, that God is higher. So... treat Him that way. You keep showing that you have a complete lack of understanding as to who God is.

If God loved Israel, He would save Israel. And by sending Jesus Christ as the lamb of God and sacrificing Him for the sins of the children of Israel shows God's love for this people. Israel is God's Chosen people, they are His Church and Bride, and they are all saved by the sacrifice of Jesus Christ in obedience to God the Father. Gentiles are not atoned by Jesus' sacrifice for since the first Passover in Egypt Gentiles have been outside God's protection and covenants. God never Passed Over the sins of Gentiles and they stand in judgment of God for their sins.

It is God so loved all the world, Hebrew and non-Hebrew, that He gave His only Son to die for it, that those who are believing in His Son will have eternal life and live with Him. God sent His Son first (and salvation) to the Jews. Hence salvation is OF the Jews. However, the Jews rejected Christ, and this is collective. It is not a collective where every Jew has to reject, but that the representation is there that the rejection is collective. The same way that those Jews who managed to keep the covenant suffered along with those who did not. God took care of them, unfortunately, they were still along for the ride. God clearly states that there is a remnant in Israel who had not broken with Him. They had not bowed to baal, they had not rejected God. Yet they suffered right along with those who did. Why? Collective.

The word "world" is understood in context to the children of Israel for they are a people in covenant with God and have been atoned of their sins. Gentiles were never part of the "Lord's Passover" in Egypt and never part of the "Lord's Passover" today. To teach that God loved Gentiles and atoned them by Jesus' sacrifice, which was made under the Law to save a people under the Law, is to teach a change in the Law of Moses and the Passover that God gave to Israel only. This teaching that Gentiles are saved goes against biblical history for Gentiles were never God's Chosen people nor are Gentiles God's Church or Bride. Gentiles were never part of the "Lord's Passover." You are adding to the Bible things that it does not teach. If God wanted to atone Gentiles, then they would have been part of the first Passover in Egypt and this would defeat the purpose of God from that day forward to our day today. Saul never taught non-Hebrew Gentiles were ever saved by God at any time in the history of the world. The Bible is clear. God gave the Passover to Israel and not to Gentiles - Egyptian or otherwise - Gentiles are not in covenant with God and never a part of the "Lord's Passover" and as such do not have their sins atoned.

4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth
the adoption,
and the glory,
and the covenants,
and the giving of the law,
and the service of God,
and the promises;
5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh
Christ came,
who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.
Romans 9:4–5.

Christ died to and for the children of Israel for He is the "Lord's Passover." Saul makes this very clear.

4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. Galatians 4:3–5.

Gentile were never under the Law and as Saul states, only those under the Law are redeemed. Adding Gentiles after the fact when there is no history in Scripture of any covenant between God and non-Hebrew Gentiles and this means Gentiles are under God's judgment against unatoned sin.

The reason why there is suffering in this world, for both Hebrew and non-Hebrew, is sin. It has nothing to do with God's love or hate, when you take it to that level. It has everything to do with God's justice. If you commit the crime, you do the time. Love is like logic in those times. Cold, unfeeling, and merciless. You WILL do the time. The only way out is if God does decide to have mercy, but if He does not, there is no mercy. It isn't hate. It isn't love gone cold. It is the exercising of justice, which CANNOT be countered except by mercy. And that doesn't save. THere is one other except, and that is grace. Grace saved, however, grace required a sacrifice to cleanse all sin.

The reason why there is suffering in the human race is because of sin. It steals, kills, and destroys. But God has atoned the children of Israel and on the last day Israel shall be saved, Israel shall be redeemed as says the Scripture which is a Hebrew Scripture and record of God's dealing with this people. God has covenant with Israel and God has no covenant with Gentiles. Thus, Gentiles do not have their sins atoned by the "Lord's Passover." On the last day they will be judged by God and in the end be eternlly separated from God in eternity as they have been separated from God in time and in world history. There is no saving relationship between God and non-Hebrew Gentiles. None.

Wow, did you just trample on God's love simply because you seem incapable of understanding it? All those things you say happened to those in Canaan, God did the same kind of things to His people Israel. He did even worse things. So is that somehow not hate? I mean, God makes it clear that it is not hate, yet you say while it isn't hate here, it is over there. No, it is the same in both cases. God loves all humanity as a collective. It does not speak of individuals. It does not speak to individuals. God loves the works of His hands, and humanity is the work of His hands. So God so loved humanity His creation, a universal love, that He sent His Son to save some of them. Do you see how this universal love is not like you say. If it was as you say, then using it as I am using it would speak to universalism. However, I clearly stated it was not universalism because God did so love the world to send His only Son, but He did not send His Son to save everyone. He sent His Son to save individuals from the collective of humanity. So humanity is not lost, because God saves some.

The bottom line is God has covenant with Israel and has saved Israel through the "Lord's Passover." Gentiles were never a part of the "Lord's Passover" and as such are not atoned. You are adding to the Bible things not contained in Scripture. You are adding to the Bible Gentiles in the Lord's covenants when Gentiles never had a covenant with God. The "Lord's Passover" was given originally to the children of Israel and every year the children of Israel were atoned by God for their sin. The New Covenant instituted by Jesus Christ at His last Passover in His body and blood was a sacrifice to and for the children of Israel ONLY. Gentiles were never part of the "Lord's Passover." Never.

Is it the love of God for Hebrews when he brings Nebuchadnezzar to attack and slaughter many of His people? No, it was God's judgment. It has nothing to do with His love, except that by His love and for the promise of the forefathers, He stops short of wiping Israel off the face of the Earth, and destroying all Hebrews. You are cutting out so much scripture, it isn't funny.

The question of a non-believer. A question of one who has not come to Jesus. If you had, you would understand that there is nothing simple about God, or His creation. You would understand that one cannot simply look at one instance, divorced from all history, and from the rest of scripture, and define all existence by it. Consider that both Esau and Jacob were descendants of Abraham by Isaac, but God hated Esau. I thought Esau would be saved because He is Abraham's descendant by Isaac. He was not. In fact, He was not Hebrew, He was the father of the Edomites. Semitic, because he is still a descendant of Abraham, but he has no part in the covenant, or in the promise.

God loves all humanity as the work of His hands that He bothered sending His Son in the first place. The reason it is worded like this is to show the universality of the love. It is for collective humanity. It does not automatically extend to individuals except that they are human, and thus part of the collective. So, you need to learn more about God's love, and about God's sovereignty. You keep making God petty, and giving Him simple, lowly human emotions, at the level of a human. God isn't human. God doesn't suffer from the handicap of human like emotions. We have emotions like God does, but not to the same level, and ALL have been corrupted by sin in us, God's image. (Again, the definition of the word image specifically says it is NOT a facsimile, so please stop talking about reduplication. The word for image used in relation to Jesus (a completely different word) speaks to a facsimile, a duplicate. The same in substance. So nothing to do with God's image in humanity.

Also, when you said you glowed when you were younger, it just means that you were blushing, or your emotions (such as hapiness) were turned up to 11, to the point that no one could fail to notice. Like in a book when someone is so happy that it is described like "they were positively glowing". Or in coversation when someone says "you are positively glowing". That is NOT the same as Moses. Moses was glowing with the glory of God, which was so bright he had to wear a veil. So literal light. Well God is light, so no surprise, right? It sounds like something in what you read had such an impact on you, that you basically wore that on your face, in the way you carried yourself, etc. It was noticeable. I have had something like that happen myself, when I came to understand what Paul meant in Ephesians when he said that the enmity (hate) that existed between the Jews and non-Jewish Gentiles was eradicated in Christ's body on the cross. I was probably 9 or 10 years old, and once I understood what that word enmity meant, and then what it meant to the verse, it opened up the entire context. All of a sudden there was full understanding of just what the church is. I could not keep my emotions in check, it meant so much.

The Hebrew Scripture of Law, Psalms, and Prophets records God's dealing with Abraham and his seed. It is a record of God's relationship with Israel and Gentiles do not have any covenant with God they can speak of. Gentiles do not have any covenant with God. None.