Here I will begin to attempt to find my own error in my previous Blog post here --->
spiritualtalk.weebly.com/blog/the-devil-does-not-care
wherein I freak out when I see Genesis 3:22 seem to suggest that the Snake did not lie.
This will evolve over time, so it will be added to as I find my errors.
One that comes to mind which People who actually have brains that work correctly most of the time have perhaps suggested, is that it appears I am confusing this fella in the Garden of Eden with the Father, When in fact it appears the New Testament suggests Jehovah, or Yahweh, from the Garden is Pre-incarnate Jesus Christ. And since most errors begin with fundamental flaws, one such as I just described could be the case.
I will look at this for sure as one avenue where I go wrong.
(although I hardly ever just make one mistake, there are probably many)
Therefore read more if you dare. And refresh from time to time as I try to unravel my own retardation. This may take days or weeks. Or not. who knows?
spiritualtalk.weebly.com/blog/the-devil-does-not-care
wherein I freak out when I see Genesis 3:22 seem to suggest that the Snake did not lie.
This will evolve over time, so it will be added to as I find my errors.
One that comes to mind which People who actually have brains that work correctly most of the time have perhaps suggested, is that it appears I am confusing this fella in the Garden of Eden with the Father, When in fact it appears the New Testament suggests Jehovah, or Yahweh, from the Garden is Pre-incarnate Jesus Christ. And since most errors begin with fundamental flaws, one such as I just described could be the case.
I will look at this for sure as one avenue where I go wrong.
(although I hardly ever just make one mistake, there are probably many)
Therefore read more if you dare. And refresh from time to time as I try to unravel my own retardation. This may take days or weeks. Or not. who knows?
So lets start with what we know.
It is clear from The book of Revelation that the Dude everyone refers to as Satan, is going to try to convince everyone that he is the Father that Jesus Christ speaks of who sent Jesus here to earth to save us all from this satan guy.
This Lucifer fella Even going so far as to bring a false Prophet along with him in his scheme and performing fake miracles.
So we know a war is on for sure.
And The Father Sent his Son Jesus Christ here to not only pay for our sins, yet will also send him again to kick hiney and take names.
And from the descriptions as I understand them, it is going to be quite violent and bloody for the ungodly and the devils that back them. With Jesus Christ almost effortlessly killing all who are wicked with extreme prejudice.
You have the bad guys trying to overthrow God and steal, kill and destroy all of humanity, and the good guys fighting this abomination.
There is no debate there.
The 4 main players, though there are many others, are God the Father, God the Son, and This Lucifer fella who it appears from the old testament was a Cherub of vast authority and power from God in Heaven, till iniquity was found in him.
And One would be negligent not to mention the Helper that Jesus Christ sends to us to help us remember what Jesus Christ said. He is referred to as the Holy Spirit in most Bibles. The Holy Spirit is Quite active throughout all of this.
Now somewhere in this timeline of history a true retard is born
Me.
And being led to God by God, I begin to search the scriptures.
Sure I started searching the Scriptures before I was saved, but lets just count the last 22 or 23 years or so instead of all of it.
So 20 something years go by, as I stumble through the Scriptures, and I one day realize That Genesis 3:22 seems to suggest the snake did not lie about the fruit from the Tree of Life.
For not only did the fruit not kill them as Yahweh said it would, the day they ate it, but that also it made them self aware or whatever you want to call it.
Gen 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
So I freak out and make a post with a crappy poem attached, and I am trying to make sense of it in relation to other passages from various books and authors of the Books of the Bible.
And I cant.
The whole time I am thinking of Yahweh as the Father.
Yet a quick Google search seems to suggest that Jesus Christ is Yahweh before he came in the flesh. Which I remember hearing before from time to time, but mostly people round here call Yahweh the Father.
So thats where we are. And that may change everything.
Break time. Will be back after a lot of reading with more.
Well, God willing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
A learned friend just sent me a link to a pretty good summary of how the Bible clearly states that sometimes Yahweh, or Jehovah of the Old testament is indeed Jesus Christ Before he came to earth in the flesh at times.
bibledots.com/Articles/Jesus/The-Angel-of-the-Lord.html
I checked the Biblical Passages used, and they are quite correct.
This means my fundamental flaw (or at least one of them) or error is that I was approaching the Old Testament viewing Yahweh as the Father instead of the Messiah.
You might say "yeah but that does not change Genesis 3:22. Well, OK. But give me enough time and I bet I can show it does. Because it for sure clears up a whole bunch of the other problems in one fell swoop of the sword.
It clears up ALL of the passages that say or suggest that the Father is unseen for sure.
Sure, I could have spent 4 or 5 days working 18 or 20 hours a day or even more days or weeks and found all this over time. My friend just saved me boatloads of time. And therefore you too have been saved a wait.
My Initial Approach was FLAWED BIGTIME.
More later as I figure out more areas where I went wrong.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sooooooo,
As I began this I had this thought or intuition if you will that I was going to have to use my writing on the Trinity to explain some of this.
Yeah,
That writing.
The one I deleted from online and offline a while back.
Now that is a real bummer. Then yesterday I realized the truth of that Intuition was in my face now, and I was going to have to go back through all those books from the Bible and find all of those hard to find passages again, reread them all in context, and re-explain them all.
What a bummer ay?
Not really. One of my mentors sent me some info from a learned man, and I began looking into this guys lectures, and sure enough, as I stumbled along looking at his stuff, one caught my eye discussing the two powers of Heaven, so to speak.
I had only ever come at this from a 3 Powers in heaven mind frame, so I was really excited to see this.
And sure enough, this guy in this lecture touched on not only the same passages I did in my now gone writing on the Trinity, he used the same words and Ideas to express what he was saying as I did!!!
Of course his lecture was far more detailed and understandable than this old, Un-educated by Schools, ex construction workers writing was.
And it touched on other passages too that I had not brought up in my writing.
Not because I did not know about them or missed them or anything, but because I had used more than enough to not only prove the idea of a Trinity, but to also clearly show where God, Jesus, and the holy Spirit were frequently mentioned in the Old Testament.
And there were more than plenty of chapters, sections, and verses that pointed out just that. My writing was done so to speak, I saw no need to spend another couple of weeks looking for the many more that are no doubt there.
Well this Lecture just saved me if I were to hazard a guess, About 3 (full) days of work. Maybe more.
But what was so exciting about this lecture (for me before I watched it) is that possibly I had stumbled upon a lecture that may explain what I have been missing my WHOLE ENTIRE LIFE as a Bible Student.
Sure the heck enough. I was right. I now CLEARLY see where I have gone wrong. I never looked at the 2 person angle alone. I never put together that God the Father in the Garden was also Jesus Christ so to speak. I thought that was not included in the same duality or triality of power from one God aspect as other passages that clearly outline themselves as such.
Let me Digress for a moment. --- Dont get too caught up in the words I use. I am not a Schooled man. So I dont know the Theological minded Academian Worlds ins and outs and do's and don'ts when it comes to discussing anything, including the Trinity or even just two of them at a time. Nor do I care about those various rules and Politically Correct grammar or whatnot. Because that is not the world I live in.
As you should be able to notice from my use of such terms as "Theological minded Acedamian Worlds".
Anyone with a brain should be able to see I just made that term up to describe exactly what it describes. Nothing else. The same can be said for other words or phrases I use. such as "Duality or triality of power. I am just making up phrases to describe the subject we are discussing. So just take it for what it says.
Dont add your theological or academic rules to it or we will not be on the same page here.
At all.
Anyway, back to the topic.
So I did not put the Yahweh of Genesis in the Garden within the scope of being another one of the Trinity, because the Duality or triality power of the 3 in one godhead language was not used there.
Err, at least not that I noticed. It did not jump out at me like it clearly does in other passages.
I thought Yahweh meant the Father. because there was only one there that I saw.
And not to mention everyone calls Yahweh in the Garden the Father in the real world quite often, and that fairly constant subconscious subliminal messaging from other Christians discussing Biblical stuff just takes over in our minds after some time.
So I want to give a huge shout out to Michael Heiser for explaining the Old Jewish belief (that they re-canted after Jesus came along) in an Unseen and Seen, singular, one and only, yet also Two, God.
(forgive my wording all you educated people, I am but a retard)
I also want to let Michael Heiser know that it works the other way too. You can clearly see the Two, if you see the three first.
As I have just done. With Your Lecture.
In other words, one of the ideas you are explaining in this lecture at several points, one of which is in the following related picture, that you can see the Trinity if you learn of the Duality, works the other way too. You can see the Duality, if you understand the Triune language used also.
I wish I had saved that old writing. some few of my explanations were quite close to the same as yours in this lecture.
As I began this I had this thought or intuition if you will that I was going to have to use my writing on the Trinity to explain some of this.
Yeah,
That writing.
The one I deleted from online and offline a while back.
Now that is a real bummer. Then yesterday I realized the truth of that Intuition was in my face now, and I was going to have to go back through all those books from the Bible and find all of those hard to find passages again, reread them all in context, and re-explain them all.
What a bummer ay?
Not really. One of my mentors sent me some info from a learned man, and I began looking into this guys lectures, and sure enough, as I stumbled along looking at his stuff, one caught my eye discussing the two powers of Heaven, so to speak.
I had only ever come at this from a 3 Powers in heaven mind frame, so I was really excited to see this.
And sure enough, this guy in this lecture touched on not only the same passages I did in my now gone writing on the Trinity, he used the same words and Ideas to express what he was saying as I did!!!
Of course his lecture was far more detailed and understandable than this old, Un-educated by Schools, ex construction workers writing was.
And it touched on other passages too that I had not brought up in my writing.
Not because I did not know about them or missed them or anything, but because I had used more than enough to not only prove the idea of a Trinity, but to also clearly show where God, Jesus, and the holy Spirit were frequently mentioned in the Old Testament.
And there were more than plenty of chapters, sections, and verses that pointed out just that. My writing was done so to speak, I saw no need to spend another couple of weeks looking for the many more that are no doubt there.
Well this Lecture just saved me if I were to hazard a guess, About 3 (full) days of work. Maybe more.
But what was so exciting about this lecture (for me before I watched it) is that possibly I had stumbled upon a lecture that may explain what I have been missing my WHOLE ENTIRE LIFE as a Bible Student.
Sure the heck enough. I was right. I now CLEARLY see where I have gone wrong. I never looked at the 2 person angle alone. I never put together that God the Father in the Garden was also Jesus Christ so to speak. I thought that was not included in the same duality or triality of power from one God aspect as other passages that clearly outline themselves as such.
Let me Digress for a moment. --- Dont get too caught up in the words I use. I am not a Schooled man. So I dont know the Theological minded Academian Worlds ins and outs and do's and don'ts when it comes to discussing anything, including the Trinity or even just two of them at a time. Nor do I care about those various rules and Politically Correct grammar or whatnot. Because that is not the world I live in.
As you should be able to notice from my use of such terms as "Theological minded Acedamian Worlds".
Anyone with a brain should be able to see I just made that term up to describe exactly what it describes. Nothing else. The same can be said for other words or phrases I use. such as "Duality or triality of power. I am just making up phrases to describe the subject we are discussing. So just take it for what it says.
Dont add your theological or academic rules to it or we will not be on the same page here.
At all.
Anyway, back to the topic.
So I did not put the Yahweh of Genesis in the Garden within the scope of being another one of the Trinity, because the Duality or triality power of the 3 in one godhead language was not used there.
Err, at least not that I noticed. It did not jump out at me like it clearly does in other passages.
I thought Yahweh meant the Father. because there was only one there that I saw.
And not to mention everyone calls Yahweh in the Garden the Father in the real world quite often, and that fairly constant subconscious subliminal messaging from other Christians discussing Biblical stuff just takes over in our minds after some time.
So I want to give a huge shout out to Michael Heiser for explaining the Old Jewish belief (that they re-canted after Jesus came along) in an Unseen and Seen, singular, one and only, yet also Two, God.
(forgive my wording all you educated people, I am but a retard)
I also want to let Michael Heiser know that it works the other way too. You can clearly see the Two, if you see the three first.
As I have just done. With Your Lecture.
In other words, one of the ideas you are explaining in this lecture at several points, one of which is in the following related picture, that you can see the Trinity if you learn of the Duality, works the other way too. You can see the Duality, if you understand the Triune language used also.
I wish I had saved that old writing. some few of my explanations were quite close to the same as yours in this lecture.
So before we go any further here, if there is some new Christian that stumbled across my retardation and is still reading this far, I need you to understand not only the Trinity, but also this concept that Dr. Michael Heiser is explaining in great detail here.
He does a much better Job than I did explaining things in that old writing on the Trinity I tossed out, so take the hour or so and listen. This just saved us a minimum of 3 days work. ---->
www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUkhWBKCuXc
Just a couple of examples of the Dual Nature of the Father and the Son and of Yahweh being seen face to face by a man who did not die from seeing Yahweh in the flesh. There are huge numbers of these types of examples all throughout the Books of the Bible.
Plus I want to sneak the Gospel in on you here. There are a whole bunch of Bible passages throughout the entire Bible that show both the Father and son, and also Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
It would take me at least 3 days to find the few out of many I had searched for before, since I tossed out that old writing on the Trinity, and that is a VERY conservative estimate. Might take a month. So watch that video above if you have not yet, It includes some I had shown in my examples, and some others too.
Just a few relevant Examples -
Here Yahweh appears with two other fellas. and was seen. In person. Face to face. -
Gen 18:1 And the LORD appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day;
Gen 18:2 And he lift up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood by him: and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed himself toward the ground,
Here is a clear picture of both Yahweh as the Son and Yahweh as the father - This is not debatable, it is quite clear. -
Gen 18:17 And the LORD said, Shall I hide from Abraham that thing which I do;
Gen 18:18 Seeing that Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him?
Gen 18:19 For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the LORD, to do justice and judgment; that the LORD may bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him.
Here is an example of Yahweh being called Yahweh and Elohim in Genesis. -
Gen 21:1 And the LORD visited Sarah as he had said, and the LORD did unto Sarah as he had spoken.
Gen 21:2 For Sarah conceived, and bare Abraham a son in his old age, at the set time of which God had spoken to him.
I want to throw one in for good measure, Due to the great commission as men call it, Proving beyond doubt that Yahweh is not the bad guy here.
Yeppers, this is where I sneak the Gospel in on ya heh heh heh...
And at the same time, Also showing that repentance is just a fancy word for turning around from your current direction into wickedness and evil, and not doing those things anymore, but doing good instead, and Qualifies you for salvation if you have repented and believe the good news.
I do a bad job wording things.
Yet Yahweh clearly lays out EXACTLY what Jesus Christ is talking about later on in his ministry before he was crucified, and lays it out right here in Ezekiel 18.
Herein God is talking about men and the sins of the fathers and the Sins of the sons and how these people are wrong about men paying the price for their fathers sins.
Yet if you notice in Ezekiel 18:8 - "..., that hath withdrawn his hand from iniquity,..."
And even WAY more clearly in Ezekiel 18:21 and 18:22
" But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed,... "
The very Gospel or "Good News" if you will that Jesus Christ preached, the repentance part is explained in detail. So a whole bunch of those questions about Repentance and Grace can be answered if one will but read Ezekiel 18 with Jesus Christ in mind as one does so.
Mat 4:17 From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
Mar_1:15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.
Eze 18:5 But if a man be just, and do that which is lawful and right,
Eze 18:6 And hath not eaten upon the mountains, neither hath lifted up his eyes to the idols of the house of Israel, neither hath defiled his neighbour's wife, neither hath come near to a menstruous woman,
Eze 18:7 And hath not oppressed any, but hath restored to the debtor his pledge, hath spoiled none by violence, hath given his bread to the hungry, and hath covered the naked with a garment;
Eze 18:8 He that hath not given forth upon usury, neither hath taken any increase, that hath withdrawn his hand from iniquity, hath executed true judgment between man and man,
Eze 18:9 Hath walked in my statutes, and hath kept my judgments, to deal truly; he is just, he shall surely live, saith the Lord GOD.
Eze 18:10 If he beget a son that is a robber, a shedder of blood, and that doeth the like to any one of these things,
Eze 18:11 And that doeth not any of those duties, but even hath eaten upon the mountains, and defiled his neighbour's wife,
Eze 18:12 Hath oppressed the poor and needy, hath spoiled by violence, hath not restored the pledge, and hath lifted up his eyes to the idols, hath committed abomination,
Eze 18:13 Hath given forth upon usury, and hath taken increase: shall he then live? he shall not live: he hath done all these abominations; he shall surely die; his blood shall be upon him.
Eze 18:14 Now, lo, if he beget a son, that seeth all his father's sins which he hath done, and considereth, and doeth not such like,
Eze 18:15 That hath not eaten upon the mountains, neither hath lifted up his eyes to the idols of the house of Israel, hath not defiled his neighbour's wife,
Eze 18:16 Neither hath oppressed any, hath not withholden the pledge, neither hath spoiled by violence, but hath given his bread to the hungry, and hath covered the naked with a garment,
Eze 18:17 That hath taken off his hand from the poor, that hath not received usury nor increase, hath executed my judgments, hath walked in my statutes; he shall not die for the iniquity of his father, he shall surely live.
Eze 18:18 As for his father, because he cruelly oppressed, spoiled his brother by violence, and did that which is not good among his people, lo, even he shall die in his iniquity.
Eze 18:19 Yet say ye, Why? doth not the son bear the iniquity of the father? When the son hath done that which is lawful and right, and hath kept all my statutes, and hath done them, he shall surely live.
Eze 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.
Eze 18:21 But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.
Eze 18:22 All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am going to take a guess on where this is going. -----
SPOILER ALERT (or not, for I am sometimes wrong before I am right)
So lets define "this" as = Finding out what is going on in Genesis 3:22 wherein it appears that Yahweh says the snake did not lie at all.
Having run into very similar walls before, I am going to call it now.
There is an obvious (to any writer, even bad ones like me) break in the text between Genesis 3:22 and Genesis 3:23.
Yeppers. I am calling it now. We may not have the full story. Lets look at it.
Gen 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
Gen 3:23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.
Perhaps if "Therefore" were not used in the beginning of verse 23 it might flow as one.
But here as it is written does not flow at all. There is missing text right after the colon in verse 22.
This is my guess and I am calling it now. Before I get to material that proves me right or wrong.
What does this mean if it turns out my guess is correct?
Nothing we can really know since the missing text is not there, other than this may (or may not) be a test of belief or faith or something from Jesus Christ himself. But I doubt that too. No-one can pass tests with missing lessons now can they. Same thing would apply here.
Obvious ways I could be wrong about where this ends up???
TOO MANY TO COUNT!!!
But here are a couple of real quick ones off the top of my head.
- The English words used here in the translation are wrong.
- My lack of understanding of cultural language use from three or four thousand years ago. (Many Words in todays world do not mean what they did 150 years ago, much less 4000, Now compound that with transliteration)
- I am just plain wrong and it is all there.
- In the original Hebrew this flows perfectly, but not in English.
And on and on and on...
There are many ways I could be wrong here.
But that is my best guess right now.
My best guess is that it is missing some words. Maybe a few. Maybe a lot. There is no real way to tell as far as I know. So we MIGHT not have the whole story.
Take a look yourself.
I am going to take a guess on where this is going. -----
SPOILER ALERT (or not, for I am sometimes wrong before I am right)
So lets define "this" as = Finding out what is going on in Genesis 3:22 wherein it appears that Yahweh says the snake did not lie at all.
Having run into very similar walls before, I am going to call it now.
There is an obvious (to any writer, even bad ones like me) break in the text between Genesis 3:22 and Genesis 3:23.
Yeppers. I am calling it now. We may not have the full story. Lets look at it.
Gen 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
Gen 3:23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.
Perhaps if "Therefore" were not used in the beginning of verse 23 it might flow as one.
But here as it is written does not flow at all. There is missing text right after the colon in verse 22.
This is my guess and I am calling it now. Before I get to material that proves me right or wrong.
What does this mean if it turns out my guess is correct?
Nothing we can really know since the missing text is not there, other than this may (or may not) be a test of belief or faith or something from Jesus Christ himself. But I doubt that too. No-one can pass tests with missing lessons now can they. Same thing would apply here.
Obvious ways I could be wrong about where this ends up???
TOO MANY TO COUNT!!!
But here are a couple of real quick ones off the top of my head.
- The English words used here in the translation are wrong.
- My lack of understanding of cultural language use from three or four thousand years ago. (Many Words in todays world do not mean what they did 150 years ago, much less 4000, Now compound that with transliteration)
- I am just plain wrong and it is all there.
- In the original Hebrew this flows perfectly, but not in English.
And on and on and on...
There are many ways I could be wrong here.
But that is my best guess right now.
My best guess is that it is missing some words. Maybe a few. Maybe a lot. There is no real way to tell as far as I know. So we MIGHT not have the whole story.
Take a look yourself.
OK I'm going to watch some more lectures from various peeps and read a whole bunch too.
Will be back later for more.
This is quite the quest for me. Finding my errors and seeking answers.
Later Taters.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Will be back later for more.
This is quite the quest for me. Finding my errors and seeking answers.
Later Taters.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------