KFC Kickin For Christ KFC Kickin For Christ

The Very First Lady-Eve

The Very First Lady-Eve

A Marriage Made In Paradise

Last weekend I was asked to speak at a woman's luncheon for Mother's Day.  When I inquired as to what they wished for a subject matter they left it up to me.  So I thought about it for a day or so.  Then I came up with Eve.  Why not?  Afterall she was the mother of us all.  Since I've never heard a Mother's Day Sermon on this topic I decided I'd tackle it myself.   

Woman are important to God and He makes that very clear thru His written Word.  Even so, the message gets clouded by the cultures.  In the Eastern culture we know that women are surpressed.  In the Western culture women are aggressive and domineering more than ever.  During the days of Christ the Jews kept their women as subservient.  I heard that that it's written about the Torah that it would be better to burn it than to teach it to women! 

But what does the bible say about woman's role in society?  What is their purpose?  Jesus did much to elevate women during His time on earth and they loved Him.  It was to a woman He first announced He was the Messiah.  It was to women He first revealed Himself as risen from the dead.  He delivered at least one woman from unjust justice. 

Women were used mightily by God.  I think of Rahab who God used to save two spies facing sure death as a result if caught.  I think of Miriam who was a prophetess and ministered alongside her brother Moses.  Deborah was a judge and leader who was chosen to deliver God's people during the terrible days of the Judges.  Esther helped save her people, the Jews, from sure extermination and Lydia was a business woman who was instrumental in starting a first century church out of her home. 

So we come to Eve.  We know very little of this first lady.  We do know she was God's final creative work in the first week.  She was also a companion for Adam.  But there's more. 

Everything started out well in the garden although it didn't end that way thanks to Eve and her husband.  Eve led her husband into direct violation of God's revealed will to them.  So they were banished from Paradise.  She is a very human portraid of falling into sin but also of picking up the faith afterwards. 

She was created for a unique role in creation.  She was to minister to Adam and with Adam being his help-mate.  She was designed to complete him as well as assist him.  We read this in Genesis 1:26-28:

"And God said Let us make man in our image after our likeness and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the fowl of the air and over the cattle and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.  So God created man in his own image in the image of God created he him, male and female created he them.  And God blessed them and God said to them, Be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the fowl of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth." 

Did you see the word "them?"  This was for both of them. A job for two.  These things were too great for them to do alone.  We see a few things about God's purposes for mankind here. 

1.  To be like Him; to reflect God's image in creation.  It took both of them to do this.  We think of God as a He and that pronoun is used but it takes both man and woman to accurately reflect God's image.  We think of God as mighty, powerful, just, logical, strong, etc. but He's also depicted in scripture as loving, tenderhearted, merciful, gracious etc.  We see both male and female characteristics in Him. 

2.  They were to rule over creation.  They were given authority over all the earth.  Together.

3.  They were to reproduce; be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth.  Together.

So zooming in on Eve let's look at why she was created.  What is her purpose for being created?  Gen 2:18-22:

"And the Lord said It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper for him.  And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every fowl of the air and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them and whatsoever Adam called every living creature that was the name.  And Adam gave names to all cattle and to the fowl of the air and to every beast of the field but for Adam there was not found a helper for him.  And the Lord caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam and he slept and he took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh.  And the rib which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman and brought her to the man." 

1.  Adam was not complete by himself.

2.  It was not good.  Even in Paradise something was not good.  Seven times, it was mentioned in the first chapter after God created, God said that "it was good" until we get here to 2:18 which says "it was not good." 

3.  Man was completed with need.  He was created incomplete.  He was made complete with Eve. 

4.  She was to be a helper suitable for him. 

Looking a bit further we can see some principles for the marriage relationship right here that brought this first couple together in Holy Matrimony. 

Genesis 2:23-24

"And Adam said this is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh she shall be called Woman because she was taken out of Man.  Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother and shall cleave to his wife and they shall be one flesh."

We see that God brought Eve to Adam.  It wasn't Adam's job to find a mate which makes me wonder looking around today at all the broken marriages.  How many consulted God in the choosing of their mate?   What would it have been like if they did?  God know more than we do so why don't we ask Him first?  

Unlike the animals she was like him.  She was bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh.  She was perfect for him.  The relationship necessitated him to leave his mother and father.  Obviously this was meant for future generations because these two were a special first couple with no parents.  This marriage required cleaving and the Hebrew word implies "to be joined by commitment."   Marriage is a commitment not a feeling or an emotion.  We need to stick it out, stay together and work things out as much as possible with us. 

Marriage results in being one together.  This one flesh points to the physical body but in principle also includes all that a person is; mind, emotions, will etc.  One cares for the other as one would care for oneself. 

And marriage results in nakedness without shame.  They had no shame.  They were naked and it was good.  This, again, goes beyond the physical.  We need to be open and up front with each other.  There should be no hiding, no secrets from each other. 

So everything started out well.  Until Eve was tempted.  Then everything changed.  She entered into a discussion with a serpent.  Is it no wonder women and snakes don't get along today?  We'll start there next time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

41,968 views 189 replies
Reply #51 Top

In post 46 I cited the Scriptural passages which soundly refute your claim.

only because you say so but there's nothing sound there Lula. 

the Three Wise Men came and "fell down and worshipped" the Baby in the manger. St.Matt. 2:10-11.

Ok, this is a good point...BUT who said there were three?  I don't know exactly what these wise men knew.  But if you go up to v6 they told Herod a Governor would come out of Bethlehem.   They didn't say God would come in the form of a baby.  They said a Governor or basically an earthly king.  They were quoting Micah 5:2.  They understood one was supposed to come from God.  That's all they knew.  A deliverer would come.  A Messiah like Moses only He would be greater than Moses and they thought Moses was quite special.   

But no where does it say they knew he would be God.  They knew this was a gift from God and this was supernatural.  But remember they were warned in a dream by God himself.  So I dare say they couldn't be thinking this baby in a manger was God too because they didn't understand or know about any trinity. 

Notice clearly it says they worshipped this child knowing he was sent from God.  They did not worship his mother.   

What you are missing is that the BLessed Virign Mary and the Apostles all believed...they were the very first Christians who believed the Messias Christ is God.

not until AFTER the resurrection.  Had they believed before why would Peter deny Christ?  Because he didn't know.  Why would Mary and Peter try to stop his ministry a couple of times?  Because they didn't know.  They knew he was sent from God.  They understood he was God's son.  Yes.  But the Jews only believed in ONE God (Deut 6:4).  They didn't get the Trinity like we do today.  They knew nothing about the trinity.  They didn't understand it.  Christ told him just before he died about the Comforter that would come.  They had no idea about that before. 

No Lula, you're benefitting from 20/20 hindsight and going by your church tradition when you say some of this stuff.  When you dig thru the plain scriptures it says another thing.  When you read it, feel it, taste it, ask God to open your eyes and see what they saw.  As you go thru and read the gospel you can only come to the conclusion they didn't really know at the time, who was in their presence.  Had they known they would have surely done things differently. 

If they all knew at the start this was God in the Flesh they would have been on their faces continually because that's what happens when you encounter God face to face.  Instead they were shielded from this knowledge until Christ opened their eyes, as I wrote above, at the end just before he left.  Their response?  On their face just like we will be some day.

 

 

 

Reply #52 Top

Now Elizabeth as well as Mary had no idea that Jesus was God.

Nobody knew he was the Messiah. Even Mary. Same with the Apostles.

Lula posts

In post 46 I cited the Scriptural passages which soundly refute your claim.

only because you say so but there's nothing sound there Lula.

Not I, but Scripture says so, KFC. Scripture, exactly what you asked for .....irrefutable, infallible Scripture, Isaias, St. Luke, and St.Matthew, all sound as can be, solidly refute your claim.

Nothing sound there you say?

St.Luke 1:35, 43

Gabriel told the Blessed Virgin, "....and the Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee. And therefore also the HOLY which shall be born.....".

To the Blessed Virgin Mary hearing Gabriel say this to her....Who is "the HOLY" if not God?

and then the Blessed Virgin Mary went to visit her cousin Elizabeth...and upon hearing Mary, Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost and asked v. 43, "And whence is this to me, that the MOTHER OF MY LORD should come to me?"

Here, Elizabeth filled with the Holy SPirit most definitely knew Mary was the Mother of God for she called her such. When you uput it all in its full context as I did in post 46, there is no other explanation or meaning to this Scripture.

 

 

Reply #53 Top

lula posts:

The Blessed Mother knew her Son was the King of kings, the Lord of lords as she was there when the Three Wise Men came and "fell down and worshipped" the Baby in the manger. St.Matt. 2:10-11.

Ok, this is a good point...BUT who said there were three? I don't know exactly what these wise men knew. But if you go up to v6 they told Herod a Governor would come out of Bethlehem. They didn't say God would come in the form of a baby. They said a Governor or basically an earthly king. They were quoting Micah 5:2. They understood one was supposed to come from God. That's all they knew. A deliverer would come. A Messiah like Moses only He would be greater than Moses and they thought Moses was quite special.

But no where does it say they knew he would be God. They knew this was a gift from God and this was supernatural. But remember they were warned in a dream by God himself. So I dare say they couldn't be thinking this baby in a manger was God too because they didn't understand or know about any trinity.

Notice clearly it says they worshipped this child knowing he was sent from God. They did not worship his mother.

KFC,

Yes, from this Scripture we don't know how many Wise Men there were. In answer to your question, Tradition holds that there were three Wise Men..Kaspar, Balthasar and Melchoir (but we know you reject Sacred Tradition!).

St.Matt. 2:10-11 makes a rock solid point that Mary knew that the young Child Jesus was the Holy God and so did the Wise Men for that matter. While in the presence of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Wise Men "fell down and worshipped" Him. Plain and simple, the Wise Men fell down and worshipped Him becasue they believed He was God. There is no other explanation or meaning to this Scripture.

You reference verse 6 but your explanation of it makes me wonder how much you've actually read. You say they didn't know He would come in the form of a Baby, yet in verse 2, it says,  the Magi came and asked Herod "...Where is He that is born king of the Jews? For we have seen His star in the East and have come to adore Him." "He that is born.." is definitely a Baby and they want to adore Him indicates that He is the Holy God. And verse 16, Herod sends soldiers to kill all the male infants that were in Bethlehem and in its borders from 2 years old and younger.

Verses 6-8 supply even more proof text to my point that they knew that Jesus was the Holy God.  From this it turns out that it's not Jerusalem that produces the Messias, but rather Bethlehem. At the end of verse 6, St.Matthew adds "who shall rule my people Israel". You say they understood one was supposed to come from God that a deliverer would come ..a Messias like Moses...and I say yes this and more...they knew the Messias was God. They were familiar with OT prophecy of Micah 5:2 which  prophesises the birth of Christ and it proves my point. 

"...out of thee (Bethlehem) shall He come forth unto me that is to be the ruler in Israel; and His going forth is from the beginning, from the days of eternity."   The underlined means that He who as man shall be born as God was born of His Father from all eternity.

Right there the prophecy of Micah finds its fulfillment in St.Matthew 2:5-6 and offers indisputable proof that the Messias Christ was God for no one but God goes forth from the beginning from the days of eternity.

Now go to verse 8, and we find that Herod tells the Magi to go to Bethlehem and when they find the Child to tell him so "that I also may come and adore Him." So even here, we learn that dispicable Herod knew who He was.

Another thing that shows my point that they knew the Christ-Child was God is that the Magi brought Him gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh. That they would offer Him their treasures and adore Him fulfills the prophecies from Is. 60:5 and adore Him from Psalm 72:10-15. Each gift signify's something about Christ... gold singnifies His kingship, incense His Divinity since incense was offered to God  and myrrh signifgied Christ's mission to redeem mankind by His death since myrrh was used for embalming.   

You ask for Scriptural proof and I've brought it to you. By now, I'd apply the saying "you can bring a horse to water, but you can't make him drink" but in your case there is something more going on. You not only reject Sacred Tradition, but you scorn Sacred Scripture in favor of following the spirit of Protestantism which is wholly negative about the Blessed Virgin Mary's extraordinary role in salvation history and denies she is the Mother of God.

Lula posts:

What you are missing is that the BLessed Virign Mary and the Apostles all believed...they were the very first Christians who believed the Messias Christ is God.

They believed Christ was God is all I'm saying here....Agree...they didn't fully understand the details...and the same of us today...we believe but still don't fully understand for they are true mysteries indeed.

 

Reply #54 Top

They believed Christ was God is all I'm saying here....Agree...they didn't fully understand the details...and the same of us today...we believe but still don't fully understand for they are true mysteries indeed.

and I will say they didn't know UNTIL after the resurrection. 

The reason Lula is you have to understand their thinking.  They were looking for a prophet; a Messiah..not a God only one sent from God. 

I figured out you must not be good at puzzles.  I notice you take one piece and go off on it without taking the other pieces into consideration.  So instead of seeing the whole forest, you're just looking at one tree and trying to fit all the tree pieces into that one tree when there are other tree pieces that fit other trees in the forest. 

I've shown you point blank why they couldn't have known He was God.  I've taught the book of John so many times now I can't remember but one thing that keeps coming up over and over is Christ kept trying to get the people to think spiritually and they kept thinking in the physical.  Christ talked of water, they thought physical water.  Christ talked about bread, they thought manna like Moses gave them.  Christ talked being born again and Nicodemus asked how can one enter the womb a second time?  Over and over it was like this.  He always used physical things to teach a spiritual truth and it wasn't coming easy for them.  It's like that for us today, the closer we get to God the more spiritual we become but still, the flesh and spirit are in constant battle. 

Yet here you are over 2,000 years later saying "oh yeah they understood right off he was God." 

Not one of your scriptures you put up there prove your point.  But not for lack of trying on your part.  I've asked you questions and you've not answered them so I'll ask again.

1.  If Mary thought he was God, why did she and his brothers try to stop him wanting him to come home with them? 

2.  If Peter thought he was God why did he try to stop him from going to the cross? 

3.  Why did Peter cut off the soldiers ear in the garden at the arrest?  Did he think he was more powerful than God? 

4.  Why is Thomas' new understanding so relevant when he saw the risen Christ?  Why did he get down on his face and say "my Lord AND MY GOD?" 

5.  Why didn't we see the title Thomas used for Jesus at that moment during the whole 3 1/2 years prior? 

6  Why didn't the Apostles believe the women when they came from the tomb saying Christ had risen?  The Jews knew that ONLY God could raise someone from the dead.  We know that from Abraham. 

7.  Also, if they thought he was God, why was he crucified?  Judas, who had been with him 3 1/2 years was the leader.  Certainly he didn't think he was God.  You don't have God crucified do you? 

8.  Why wasn't the inscription over his head "God of Nazarath" instead of "King of the Jews?" 

9.  When Lazarus died why didn't his sister Martha implore Christ to raise him up knowing He was God?  Instead she said she knew he'd be raised in the last day. 

10.  Why did Martha answer Christ "yes, Lord I believe that you are the Christ the Son of God which came into the world"  when He asked her a question about Himself?   Why didn't she say He was God himself? 

11.  Why did Christ asked his disciples, "Who do you say that I am" if they already knew?

12.  Why did the disciples flee like cowards when Christ was taken?  If they knew He was God would they have run like that?

 

 

 

Reply #55 Top

Not one of your scriptures you put up there prove your point.

Funny that you keep insisting this yet refuse to acknowledge my point about Isaias who prophecied the Messias to come is God  and answer my questions concerning the passages found in St.Luke and St.Matthew.

Last time:

They were all familiar with Isaias. Christ fulfilled Isaias who had not only prophecied the Messias but that the Messias is God.

In Isaias 35:4  "....God Himself will come and will save you." and  "His name shall be called Emmanuel", which means God with us. 7:14.  In 9:6, "...God the Mighty, the Father of the world to come, the Prince of Peace."   

 

With Isaias in mind and given the entire context of St. Luke chapter 1....go to verses 35 and 43.

Gabriel told the Blessed Virgin, "....and the Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee. And therefore also the HOLY which shall be born.....".

If not God, who then did the Blessed Virgin think "The Holy" is that Gabriel said would be born as a result of the Holy Ghost overshadowing her? Who is "the Holy" if not God?

 

Shortly afterwards, the Blessed Virgin Mary went to visit her cousin Elizabeth...and upon hearing Mary, Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost and asked v. 43, "And whence is this to me, that the MOTHER OF MY LORD should come to me?" Who is "my Lord" if not God?

St.Matt. 2:10-11 makes a rock solid point that Mary knew that the young Child Jesus was the Holy God and so did the Wise Men for that matter. While in the presence of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Wise Men "fell down and worshipped" Him. Plain and simple, the Wise Men fell down and worshipped Him becasue they believed He was God. Who were the Wise Men worshipping if not God?

Your refusal in answering these questions goes to the fact that St.Luke 1 reveals that both were filled with the gifts of the Holy Spirit, knew the Christ Child was God and that the Blessed Virgin Mary was the Mother of God, a Catholic doctrine you reject.

 

 

 

Reply #56 Top

They believed Christ was God is all I'm saying here....Agree...they didn't fully understand the details...and the same of us today...we believe but still don't fully understand for they are true mysteries indeed.

and I will say they didn't know UNTIL after the resurrection.

Christ certainly claimed to be God by His words and actions (miracles) plenty of times before the Resurrection. The Blessed Virgin Mary and the Apostles believed but didn't fully understand everything until after they received the gifts of the Holy Ghost at Pentecost. At the same time the majority of Jews saw and heard but didn't believe.

I've taught the book of John so many times now I can't remember

Speaking of St.John.....let's go to chapter 10.

Did Christ tell the Jews "I and the Father are one" before or after the Resurrection?  What did Jesus mean when He said  "I and the Father are one" KFC? The Jews hear Him say He is God and that's why they tried to stone Him. They thought it was blasphemy He was speaking. These hearers rejected this revelation of the mystery of the Incarnate God, refusing to examine the proof Jesus offered them.

Verses 31-42 tell us that our Lord, in order to affirm His Divinity once more, uses 2 arguments which his adversaries cannot refute...the testimony of the Scriptural prophecies and that of His own miracles.

I've shown you point blank why they couldn't have known He was God.

Let's continue with verses 33-42 for they are worth noting....(that means they also make my point!....they believe Jesus was God.) :blush:  

33 The Jews answered him: For a good work we stone thee not, but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, maketh thyself God. 34 Jesus answered them: Is it not written in your law: I said you are gods? 35 If he called them gods, to whom the word of God was spoken, and the scripture cannot be broken;

36 Do you say of him whom the Father hath sanctified and sent into the world: Thou blasphemest, because I said, I am the Son of God? 37 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. 38 But if I do, though you will not believe me, believe the works: that you may know and believe that the Father is in me, and I in the Father. 39 They sought therefore to take him; and he escaped out of their hands. 40 And he went again beyond the Jordan, into that place where John was baptizing first; and there he abode.

41 And many resorted to him, and they said: John indeed did no sign. 42 But all things whatsoever John said of this man, were true. And many believed in him.

What does verse 42 say, KFC? ..."many believed in Him" meaning that He was God.

So, it's by all these Scriptural passages that I claim that the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Apostles and the other disciples believed He was God. Obviously they didn't understand EVERYTHING ALL AT ONCE. It was a learning process as He revealed to them more and more details about Himself and the Christian Faith during His 3 year public ministry.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reply #57 Top

In Isaias 35:4 "....God Himself will come and will save you." and "His name shall be called Emmanuel", which means God with us. 7:14. In 9:6, "...God the Mighty, the Father of the world to come, the Prince of Peace."

interesting you didn't put the whole of 35:4 down...speaks volumes Lula.  Why didn't you put down "Your God will come with vengeance?  This has NOTHING TO do with the first coming.  Nothing.   Jesus came to seek and to save.  He said many times he didn't come to judge (John 8)

you're twisting scripture to make it fit your RCC tradition.  It doesn't.  Isaiah 35 has nothing to do with 7:14 and 9:6.  There's many scriptures in the OT that say God himself will save them but it has nothing to do with Christ of the NT.   That's why you're putting it like this. 

This is very bad Lula.  You didn't put the rest of the scripture purposely.  You will have to answer for this if you're teaching this.  Beware.  You are doing exactly what all false teachers/peachers do.  Taking this scripture and that, out of contex, cropping it, and making it say what they want it to say for the sake of their religious ideas.

What does verse 42 say, KFC? ..."many believed in Him" meaning that He was God.

it DOESN'T say that Lula.  You're ADDING to scripture.  It says they believed in him.  Yes.  Believed what?  That he was the Son of God?  That he was sent from God?  Yes.  Not that HE WAS GOD. 

That's why I told you at the end AFTER the resurrection scripture says Christ OPENED their eyes to the scriptures concerning Him.  They did NOT know until then.  That's why their reactions and attitudes totally changed.  It also helped they had the Holy Spirit's guidance showing them. 

You still are NOT answering my questions.  You will not because you have no intention of really seeking the truth. 

I'm done Lula.  There's not more I can say here.  It's a waste of my time and it's unbiblical to be going around and around like this.  Christ said "shake the dust off your feet and move on."  That's what I have to do. 

 

 

Reply #58 Top

In Isaias 35:4 "....God Himself will come and will save you." and "His name shall be called Emmanuel", which means God with us. 7:14. In 9:6, "...God the Mighty, the Father of the world to come, the Prince of Peace."

interesting you didn't put the whole of 35:4 down...speaks volumes Lula. Why didn't you put down "Your God will come with vengeance? This has NOTHING TO do with the first coming. Nothing. Jesus came to seek and to save. He said many times he didn't come to judge (John 8)

Isaias 35 is filled with the promise of redemption and redemption came at Christ's First Coming. That's why Isaias 35 is read so often in Advent....the time leading up to Christmas....Christ's First Advent. Christ's First Coming is the time as you say above that Jesus came to seek and save.

  

interesting you didn't put the whole of 35:4 down...speaks volumes Lula. Why didn't you put down "Your God will come with vengeance? This has NOTHING TO do with the first coming. Nothing. Jesus came to seek and to save. He said many times he didn't come to judge (John 8)

Here's the entire verse....

From the Douay Rheims version....35:4 "Say to the fainthearted: "Take courage and fear not: Behold your God will bring the revenge of recompense, God Himself will come and save you."

From the KJV, "Say to them that are of a fearful heart, Be strong, fear not. Behold your God will come with vengence, even God with a recompense; He will come and save you."

So you're saying verse 4 refers to Christ's Second Coming? No way. That's utter nonsense because it will be the end of the world when Christ comes again to judge the living and the dead. Isaias 35:4 can't possibly fit with Christ's Second Coming in Judgment of the whole world.  

Verse 4, ".....He will come and save you." Here "He" is the Messias Christ, and it was at His First Coming that He came as the Redeemer/Savior and therefore fulfilled Isaias 35:4 to a "T".

Vengence here means God has vengence against sin and the devil and recompense is the Christ will make full satisfaction by His sacrificial death on the Cross.

 

 

  

 

Reply #59 Top

What does verse 42 say, KFC? ..."many believed in Him" meaning that He was God.

It says they believed in him. Yes. Believed what? That he was the Son of God? That he was sent from God? Yes. Not that HE WAS GOD.

In the case of Christ one does not exclude the other. St.John admits  this distinction when he says, "The Word was with God." yet asserts identiity in the divine nature when he adds, "And the Word was God".

And besides Christ showed the co-equality of the THree Divine Persons in the one single Divine Nature when He ordered the Apostles to baptize in the one name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost.

And remember Philip asked, "Lord show us the Father." ANd Christ replied, Phiilip have you not known Me?" He that sees Me sees the Father also."

 

 

 

Reply #60 Top

You still are NOT answering my questions. You will not because you have no intention of really seeking the truth.

I'm done Lula. There's not more I can say here. It's a waste of my time and it's unbiblical to be going around and around like this. Christ said "shake the dust off your feet and move on." That's what I have to do.

Oops, I posted those remarks before reading this.

KFC,

Just want you to know, I enjoy discussing Scripture with you.  

 

Reply #61 Top

And remember Philip asked, "Lord show us the Father." ANd Christ replied, Phiilip have you not known Me?" He that sees Me sees the Father also."

yes.  Again for us it's 20/20 hindsight.  We get it now. But I'm trying to impress on you they didn't get it.  It was puzzling to them.  It all became clear to them later. 

Just want you to know, I enjoy discussing Scripture with you.

ok and I do you...to a point and you know that point has to do with RCC theology.  When you take scripture and make it fit RCC's tradition it drives me crazy because I know you're getting your thoughts from RCC commentaries and you're listening MORE to them than you are the actual scriptures. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reply #62 Top

Verse 4, ".....He will come and save you." Here "He" is the Messias Christ, and it was at His First Coming that He came as the Redeemer/Savior and therefore fulfilled Isaias 35:4 to a "T".

NO.  I already told you there are many scriptures that say this about God saving us and doesn't necessarily mean what you're trying to say.

Look back at Isaiah 33:22 for instance: 

"For the LORD (Jehovah) is our Judge, The LORD is our Lawgiver, The LORD is our King; He will save us."

or Psalm 145:19 He (Jehovah) will fulfill the desire of those who fear Him; He also will hear their cry and save them."

The "God" you're reading in 35:4 is Elohim.  Not Jesus.  That's why it's important to know the names of God and which part of the trinity is being spoken of here.   You can either go to the Greek or go to a version that differentiates this by the upper and lower cases to make it easier for you. 

Remember I gave you the difference between God, GOD, LORD and Lord, etc. ? 

 

 

Reply #63 Top

"And God said  " Let us make man in our image after our likeness"

Now that's an interesting bit of scripture.  Care to explain KFC, just who God was speaking to when God said "let US make man in OUR image after OUR  likeness"?  

Reply #64 Top

In all the places that I've read your remarks KFC, never once have I read you say "I don't know.  Ask God for the answers."  You have always sought to explaiin the mind of God and what the meaining of Gods words are.  When you are backed into a corner, you are done, and dismiss the other person like a queen dismisses a lowly subject with a wave of her hand and a "I told you what it meant."  Or you run away and refuse to explain anything .

You are the grandest fraud that I've ever seen.  You seek to explain the workings and thoughts of a mind and heart that is so far above your own that there are no words to describe it, and what is worse you think that you can do so with the lowly miniscule mind that you possess.  You speak as though you wrote the scripture yourself and only you know what it says.  You usurp the power of God, and the audacity of your actions can only lead to disaster and the fall of your false pride.

I can only feel sorrow for your pride and marvel at the grandeious manner of your ego..

Reply #65 Top

In all the places that I've read your remarks KFC, never once have I read you say "I don't know

I have said that before when I don't know.  But when asked a straight forward biblical question, I defer to scripture and answer accordingly.  God gave us HIS Word to give us the answers and to share with others.  Mainly the questions that we can't answer are the "why" questions.  Those are usually the questions I do answer "I don't know" because who can know the mind of God?

So are you angry with me because I know where to go to get the answers?  They are not my answers nor do I claim to have all the answers.  They are HIS. 

On one hand you say I have all the answers and on the other you say I've been backed into a corner?  Would you care to elaborate which corner?  Which answer did I give that was incorrect?  Instead of going on the attack, why not attack the issue or the answer?  You really said very little to add to this discussion.  Your attack is nothing more than your hatred showing. 

"And God said " Let us make man in our image after our likeness"

Why do you ask?  To gain wisdom and knowledge of the scriptures or to tear asunder the one who answers your question?

 

 

Reply #66 Top

Why would you assume that I am angry with you?  I never said that.  Nor am I angry with you.  I told you the truth of what I see.  You may not like it, and you may disagree with it, but it is what I see when I look at your postings.   It doesn't mean that I hate you, unless of course you associate hearing those things that you do not care to hear, with hate.     

Yes you do use scripture that you think answers the question, and then you give your version of what you think it means, and then swear that what you think is so, is so.  An example of it, is what I said about Jesus being specific about wealth, and  also about how one must depend  totally upon God for their own well being.  It was not as you assert " about not loving money".    That is your interpretation, it is not what was written.   Jesus was serious when he said render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and unto God what is God's, when he said don't worry about  what you will eat, or how you will be clothed, that God will ltake care of all your needs.   It wasn't a parable, it was the truth, and I suspect that it is only  fear and non belief in those words that makes one want to believe it's "about not loving money".

I asked about the question because I wanted to hear what your explanation or thoughts about what you think it means.   It is an interesting phrase.  If you only speak to those that you know will agree with you, those words will simply be noise in the wind.  You have no problems disagreeing with Lulapilgrim I see, but I suspect it's only because you think that your knowledge is superior to hers and  can defeat her.  Why so afraid of disagreement with me?

Reply #67 Top

It was not as you assert " about not loving money". That is your interpretation, it is not what was written. Jesus was serious when he said render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and unto God what is God's, when he said don't worry about what you will eat, or how you will be clothed, that God will ltake care of all your needs. It wasn't a parable

I never said it was a parable.  The point of the whole passage was not to worry.  As frail humans we do worry.  We are only one or two paychecks away from losing it all we think.  God will take care of our needs, not necessarily our wants.  If I remember correctly you were about just giving it all away and doing nothing but just depending on God for everything?  Who says I don't?  Do I give my house away?  My car?  Who am I trying to prove to?  You?  God?  Does God need this proof?  God knows my heart.   Is that what you're advocating?  Giving it all away and just walking around with no material things? 

I guess I don't get what you're trying to say.  I know this subject means alot to you and that it's first and foremost on your mind but you have to know that God gives gifts to his children because he cares for them and these gifts come in many different forms.  So when I look at my house or my car, I consider it a gift from God.  Do I just thumb my nose at that and give it all away anyway?   God may call some to do that.  For others he doesn't.  We all are called to different walks and ministries God has ordained for us. 

Some marry and some don't.  Some sell all they have and go into the missionary field.  Not everybody does this, nor are we all called to do so.  Some are put into Palaces (like Esther) to do the work of God.  Some are put in the fields to eat (Ruth).  Some are put in prision (Paul) to do his work.  Some are called to be Doctors (Luke) others are called to be in business (Lydia), some are called to be shepherds and work in the field (David) and some are wealthy landowners (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) and had many material possessions.  The point is God says "walk in my ways" no matter where he puts us. 

The whole idea is to have a proper respect for who God is and who I am.  I know that everything I have is a result of God's tender mercy, love and grace.  My very breath comes from him.  I am grateful for everything I have whether it be from a monetary, emotional or physical standpoint.  I listen to Him, not man telling me what or who I should be.  I answer to God and my conscience has to be clear in order to do His work. 

You have no problems disagreeing with Lulapilgrim I see, but I suspect it's only because you think that your knowledge is superior to hers and can defeat her. Why so afraid of disagreement with me?

it's not about disagreeing with you.  It's about tone.   Your tone was hateful, and certainly not kind or inquisitive.  I appreciate bluntness.  I like that and am not one to pussyfoot around either but you went way past that in your posting and have done so before.  You want the word to say what you wish the Word to say.  Can't help that.  We can't just use one piece of the puzzle and build a belief around it.  We have to take the whole of scripture and listen to what it's saying to us.  When we do that, we can see the big picture all put together for us. 

I know Lula in person.  I like Lula.  We are friends.  It's not about defeating her but making sure she understands the correct exposition of Scripture.  This is not a game of one conquering the other.  It's about rightly dividing the truth from error.  The only time we really disagree is when she tries to proselytize her RCC to me trying to get me to agree that the RCC has the truth.   She knows this and we've talked about it at length but yet it doesn't stop her from trying. 

Now, instead of going after me. ..show me where I was wrong in my answer to Lula which is what you're claiming all along.  Show me where I exposited the scripture wrongly as you seem to assert. 

 

 

 

Reply #68 Top

What did Jesus tell the wealthy man who wanted to follow him, even though he was a "righteous and just man" in his heart and kept all the commandments that were given to the hebrew nation?  Do you remember?  Let me refresh your memeory.    St. Matthew chapter 19 verse 20- 21

"The young man said to him, All these I have kept; what is yet wanting to me?"  Jesus said to him, "If thou wilt be perfect, go, sell what thou hast and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me." 

This does not sound like Jesus is saying keep your job, and your home, and the few possessions that will stave off starvation and keep you from being homeless.  He tells him to sell everything, as in "go, sell what you have".  He doesn't give exceptions to what the young man shall save, nor does he tell him what he can keep.

Later Jesus says to his disciples in St. Matthew chapter 19 verse 27.  "Then Peter addressed him, saying "Behold, we have left ALL and followed thee; what then shall we have?"  And Jesus said to them, "Amen I say to you that you who have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of Man shall sit on the throne of his glory, shall also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.  And EVERYONE who has left house, or brothers, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife or children, or lands for my name's sake, shall receive a hundredfold, and shall possess life everlasting." 

This is the price of everlasting life.  One will either pay it, or not receive it.  If one clings to the material possessions of life because one fears being hungry or homeless, then it is indeed true as you so aptly put it, God knows what is in ones heart and knows that it is not God that means all to one, but instead their own life that is of import.   So the answer to your quesiton is, yes, that is what I am advocating. to rely upon God for everything.  Is that so very terribly hard?  It is what the man Jesus did, the man that you profess to follow.  They are his instructions, not mine.  I do agree with you not everyone does it, but not everyone will have everlasting life either, and that very fact should make all of us wonder.  Yes. Esther was put into a palace, but please remember it was God that put her there, and  that she didn't strive to get there, it wasn't her labor that built the place nor her money that paid the laborers that did  In other words God took care of her with no effort on her part.

It was not the tone of my post, since it is impossible to have a "tone" on a computer.  It was what I said, and the fact that you didn't like it that made you think that I hated you.  As to making the "word" say what I think it should, aren't you guilty of that yourself?  You don't just quote scripture you add to it meanings that suit what is comfortable for you.  You don't want to think that Jesus is saying to give up your material possessions, even though  scripture is perfectly clear about the matter.  That very thought scares you.  What would make you think that God would want you to have a car or an earthly home?  Does having a car or home add to your soul, do they guarantee you everlasting life?  Those things are not gifts from God, they are the results of your own strivings to own them.  God did not pay for your car or home.  God did not get you a job, you did all those things.  All that God will give you is the basics of life, those being cothing and food, and the opportunity to save your own soul.

Reply #69 Top

I never said that you were wrong in quoting scripture or your exposition of it, (although I do think that on occassion), to Lulapilgrim.  It might be better of you would learn to read what is written.  I said that you were willing to argue it with her, although you do have a tendencyto dimiss her when you discover that she's not buying what you are selling, and I gave the reasons as to why I think that you are willing.  You seem to be afraid of me and think that I am your enemy, and I am wondering why.  Believe it, I don't hate you, and I'm not going to take your life either, (I know that a lot of chrisitians have this overblown persecution complex, even though the murdering of christians in this country for their religious beliefs, is pretty much non existent.)  Although I may not agree with you on some things, there is no reason to think that I hate you.

Isn't it a game of oneupmanship?  You  are going to  tell her the meaning of scripture, according to your interpretation of it that is.   When she refuses to see it your way, you run off pouting, refusing to talk to her anymore.   What makes you think that you are so correct?  What makes you think that Lulapilgrim is so wrong?  .

Reply #70 Top

You have no problems disagreeing with Lulapilgrim I see, but I suspect it's only because you think that your knowledge is superior to hers and can defeat her.

I know Lula in person. I like Lula. We are friends. It's not about defeating her but making sure she understands the correct exposition of Scripture. This is not a game of one conquering the other. It's about rightly dividing the truth from error. The only time we really disagree is when she tries to proselytize her RCC to me trying to get me to agree that the RCC has the truth. She knows this and we've talked about it at length but yet it doesn't stop her from trying.

I see I'm being drawn back into the discussion.

KFC posts:

..show me where I was wrong in my answer to Lula which is what you're claiming all along. Show me where I exposited the scripture wrongly as you seem to assert.

Which answer did I give that was incorrect?

Even though this was directed to Whisper2, given what you said (highlighted above), it  pertains to me as well.

So, I'll answer.

Here's what you wrote:

interesting you didn't put the whole of 35:4 down...speaks volumes Lula. Why didn't you put down "Your God will come with vengeance? This has NOTHING TO do with the first coming. Nothing. Jesus came to seek and to save. He said many times he didn't come to judge (John 8)

Your claim that Is. 35:4 has NOTHING TO do with Christ's First Coming is absolutely incorrect  and I fully explained why in post 58:

post 58

Here's the entire verse....

From the Douay Rheims version....35:4 "Say to the fainthearted: "Take courage and fear not: Behold your God will bring the revenge of recompense, God Himself will come and save you."

From the KJV, "Say to them that are of a fearful heart, Be strong, fear not. Behold your God will come with vengence, even God with a recompense; He will come and save you."

So you're saying verse 4 refers to Christ's Second Coming? No way. That's utter nonsense because it will be the end of the world when Christ comes again to judge the living and the dead. Isaias 35:4 can't possibly fit with Christ's Second Coming in Judgment of the whole world.

Verse 4, ".....He will come and save you." Here "He" is the Messias Christ, and it was at His First Coming that He came as the Redeemer/Savior and therefore fulfilled Isaias 35:4 to a "T".

Vengence here means God has vengence against sin and the devil and recompense is the Christ will make full satisfaction by His sacrificial death on the Cross.

Since you say that Is. 35:4 has nothing to do with Christ's First Coming, you must therefore believe Is. 35:4 has to do with Christ's Second Coming. But note, I refuted that too which went unnoticed.

Instead of addressing that and supporting your postion by showing how Isaias 35:4 refers to Christ's Second Coming,  you wrote:

NO. I already told you there are many scriptures that say this about God saving us and doesn't necessarily mean what you're trying to say.

and

The "God" you're reading in 35:4 is Elohim. Not Jesus.

Yes, indeed, it's really important that not only I but also you (we) have the correct exposition of Scripture. In this case Isaias 35:4 means that God is the Messias Christ.

One...Isasis 35:4 pertains to Christ's First Coming. And two....OK, no problem if you say the "God" in 35:4 is Elohim. But you must answer who is Isaias' 35:4 God Who was to come and save if not the Messias Christ? 

You may be right the "He" in Is 35:4 means God (Elohim) but that is not the point. The point is the "He" of Isaias 35:4 was fulfilled by Christ. God (Elohim) did come and save .."He" came as the Messias Christ.

And lastly, as we read the rest of Chapter 35, we realize even moreso that Isaias was prophecying Christ's First Coming and the miracles He  would work during this time. 

........................                                                                                                                                                                          

Reply #71 Top

Excuse me for interrupting this debate on what one passage means, but I would like to ask a question of both of you.  Where did you find in scripture  anything that states that the Elohim were God? 

Reply #72 Top

although you do have a tendencyto dimiss her when you discover that she's not buying what you are selling, and I gave the reasons as to why I think that you are willing. You seem to be afraid of me and think that I am your enemy, and I am wondering why.

No, not at all, but after years of arguing the same thing it gets tiresome.  Maybe you haven't been around all the many many times we've gone around?  Think about Christ.  He said things clearly always using scripture.  They could either accept it or reject it.  Choice is theirs.  He was very clear when he said to go out and give out the Word.  If they accept it you've gained a brother, if not, shake the dust off your feet and move on.  He didn't say stick around and argue them to death. 

And where in the world do you get I'm afraid of you?  That's a very strange thing to say. 

Although I may not agree with you on some things, there is no reason to think that I hate you.

well that's good to know.  I can only go by your words and they are almost always accusatory and very far from loving so I read what I read.  It is hard not having a verbal eye to eye conversation but you come across very angry when I read you. 

When she refuses to see it your way, you run off pouting, refusing to talk to her anymore.

I don't run off pouting.  Sorry to disappoint you.  I just don't think it's a good use of my time to constantly argue over the same old things.  This is about what three years now?  It's constantly...baptism, Mary, eucharist, works, Peter and the Rock and the authority of the RCC.  Over and over we go.  There comes a time, you need to agree to disagree.  The bible also warns against the vain wrangling of words.  It's just not good. 

What makes you think that you are so correct? What makes you think that Lulapilgrim is so wrong? .

Because of the exposition of scripture.  Quite often Lula goes to tradition.  I don't.  I stick to the clear meaning of the text and when in doubt go to another scripture that sheds light on a particular scripture.  The scripture does not contradict itself.  There's basically a set of rules of interpretation that must be considered.  One of them is to interpret obscure passages in light of those that are clear and another is to pay attention to genre. 

ere did you find in scripture anything that states that the Elohim were God?

all over the place... "In the beginning God" (Elohim) is the first occurrance. 

Who else but God could create the heavens and the earth? 

 

 

Reply #73 Top

As far as the Rich Young Ruler is concerned Jesus went right to his heart.  He said he kept all the commands but Christ showed him right there he had not.  He broke at least two.  One not to covet and the other to have no other gods before me. 

He walked away sad because his material possessions meant more to him than Christ.  It's not the material possessions that was wrong.  It was the clinging to them instead of God that was wrong.  Christ knew his heart.  Christ didn't say there were to be no rich men in heaven just that it would be difficult.  When one has much possessions it gets very easy to depend on them instead of God. 

Like I said before there were many wealthy people in scripture and not one of them were told to give it all up.  Take Lot, Abraham, David etc.  God may call some to do what you say, but he's not telling us all the same thing.  We all have different walks and works to do while on earth.  Some have much wealth and can help others with it.  Some do not and help in other ways.

Think of it this way, how can you give to God a portion (say 10%) if you HAVE NOTHING? 

The OT was very clear about giving.  A certain percentage was expected.  Nowhere is 100% mentioned except in two cases.  The one you brought up and the poor widow who gave all she had.  She was commended because she gave her last two mites to God.  That is very commendable but there is no imperative anywhere in scripture where we are commanded to do this.  We are commanded to do many things like love our neighbor, love God etc but nowhere does Jesus command us, nor Paul or any other writers of the NT to give 100% of our material possessions...literally that is.  We should dedicate it ALL to God and recognize it all comes from him but to literally walk away outside with nothing is not what God wants for his children. 

 

 

Reply #74 Top

You may be right the "He" in Is 35:4 means God (Elohim) but that is not the point. The point is the "He" of Isaias 35:4 was fulfilled by Christ. God (Elohim) did come and save .."He" came as the Messias Christ.

It is Elohim who would save.  This whole passage is not about Jesus at all. It's about the God of the OT saving Israel.  Of course he would send his son to redeem Israel later but that's not what this passage is about. 

There are lots of OT passages that say Elohim would save his people.  I gave you a few. 

I just mentioned to Whisper that there are certain rules of interpretation that we must adhere to.  Another one that I didn't mention to him is to beware of finding Christ in everything.  Not every text of scripture speaks directly of Christ in the text.  There are primary truths and secondary truths which are absolutely clear and we are to literally (if called) to die for.  It's better to question what is He saying in every text. 

In 1 Peter 3 about Christ going to hell to preach to the saints for instance...there are at least five different interpretations.  There are semi-right interpretations and some flatly wrong. 

 

Reply #75 Top

The "God" you're reading in 35:4 is Elohim. Not Jesus.

Yes, indeed, it's really important that not only I but also you (we) have the correct exposition of Scripture. In this case Isaias 35:4 means that God is the Messias Christ.

So you're adding to scripture to make it fit your RCC commentaries?  It means, according to you,  that God in the OT book of Isaiah in this instance is the Messiah?  It doesn't say that.  Doesn't even imply that. 

So that means everywhere we read of the first person of the Trinity in the  OT it's also the second person of the Trinity? 

Do you see what you're saying?