Stonesoffire: Genesis study

[stonesoffire]

stones...you said you believed A & E were beings of light in post 107



are you saying Gloria Copeland says this...but clearly, you say you believe it

IMO, confusion is a side effect of the op.......

I know you said the same thing some weeks back in another thread...so...

Sorry for the confusion, was just trying to lay a groundwork for stunning as to why I might come up with a different conclusion then hers. So I posted first how I see Genesis.

Yes, I heard a teaching from Gloria Copeland at Lester Sumralls church many years ago and this is what she said. Since then, I read that this is also a Jewish belief...I like to read what Rabbis teach. And its in a lost book which I know the church doesn't recognize. I haven't read all of this book,only skimmed through the contents and then through the books itself. I think this particular one was called Adam and Eve, but not sure.

Why I believe this is because this is what we will be in heaven. A being of light, in the image of God. Did Jesus restore us to a future previous state? Haven't yet done my own study on this subject. But, someday will.

Clear as mud yet?

 

[Willie-T]

If Ariel's post was what I quoted and then responded to, why on earth would you think I was responding to you...???

Not willing to say? S'bout what I thought. LOL

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

Not willing to say? S'bout what I thought. LOL

I thought I should address the mix up where you thought I was referring to your what?!?! Rather than to Ariel's what??
I specifically quoted her post, which you did not see apparently and so you said you were tired of being accused of things you didn't say by me. So it's important to look at who someone is quoting to know who and which post they are responding to. At the time I posted what you took offense at, I hadn't even yet gotten to your post of what?!?!

Can you understand why it might be important to me that this be cleared up?

 

[stonesoffire]

LOL!

ok...when in advanced mode ...see bottom right hand corner, just highlight everything and then click on the size button up above and choose...you should see the font shrink

ok to copy/paste, but what are you trying to say with regards to it?

what are YOU understanding from it?

I know...I'm a brat for questions......

I was typing this answer out and it disappears...grrr...

Thanks for the tip.

What I see....the word was in reference to was without form suggests it was always this way and God begins to create. Became without form suggest that it was different then something drastic happened.

Which is what I believe. This earth is older than the creation account most believe. Or at least I think it's most. Not sure.

 

[1ofthem]

This was even before candles too. This was even before the first man was created to make a candle.

I was referring to this part of your post:

So if, as you say, that this first light spoken of is a temporal and physical light, what IS this physical light? The only physical light we know(this was before lightbulbs ) is the sun. So I'm trying to understand what you think this physical light IS.

I threw that little tidbit about the candle in there just for the fun of it and to explain another type of physical lights that we do know about besides the sun and the light bulb...lol

I really don't know the exact answer as to what the light was but I do know there are other forms of physical light besides the sun; such as, Lightening, fire, sparks, explosions...

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

Yes 1, I understood you were throwing the candle in for fun. I was joking back.

 

[Willie-T]

I thought I should address the mix up where you thought I was referring to your what?!?! Rather than to Ariel's what??
I specifically quoted her post, which you did not see apparently and so you said you were tired of being accused of things you didn't say by me. So it's important to look at who someone is quoting to know who and which post they are responding to. At the time I posted what you took offense at, I hadn't even yet gotten to your post of what?!?!

Can you understand why it might be important to me that this be cleared up?

Distinguishing who quoted what is why we are given a "QUOTE" tool that puts people's words, other than our own, in a separate blue balloon. If you just type "I believe thus and so....." Then you should expect to be asked why you believe that.

I'm still wondering why you don't believe babies have spirits.

 

[Ariel82]

Oh no! Not the 2 question marks! Whuut??
I thought you were saying the light of men is their spirit.
You gave many good verses but those verses didn't give examples of that light being mens spirits. In other words, the verses did not show a link between light - spirit.

I know Adam and Eve had Gods' Spirit in them as they were created. But I believe that part of them died on the day they ate. And since all things (even men) were made to bring forth from their own kind, how can the dead bring forth the living? By that I mean, can a spiritually dead man give birth to a spiritual man? I believe only the Spirit of God can birth a spiritual man. This is how Jesus could say of living beings: let the dead bury their own dead.
I think we are born without a spirit and we do not have spirit apart from Gods' Spirit.

We have a spirit apart from God otherwise the verse that says our spirit agrees with the HOLY Spirit that we are children of God and can call Him Abba, father would make no sense.

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

Oh my gosh...I DID quote box her. You might not have seen that I did but if you go back and look you will see that I did!
So then you quote boxed my reply to Ariel and said you were tired of being accused of things you didn't say. It was not you I was replying to. I did not accuse you of anything I was replying to her post. Gosh sakes!

Distinguishing who quoted what is why we are given a "QUOTE" tool that puts people's words other than our own in a separate blue balloon. If you just type "I believe thus and so....." Then you should expect to be asked why you believe that.

 

[stonesoffire]

So if, as you say, that this first light spoken of is a temporal and physical light, what IS this physical light? The only physical light we know(this was before lightbulbs ) is the sun. So I'm trying to understand what you think this physical light IS. I've found no mention of it so I'm wondering if there are some verses you are basing it on that I have missed.

I know what I found in my word study of the Hebrew, but I don't know what you have studied to determine this is a physical light other than the sun.

In fact, it goes on later to tell us that He created the sun and moon for 3 reasons:
1. To separate the day (3117 - always; everlasting) from the night (a twist away of the light.) He already separated them though, as it states earlier. So He is making a copy on earth that tells or proclaims the spiritual thing.
2. For signs, seasons, days and years.
3. To give temporal light on the temporal earth.

And in fact, there are night/day periods of time before the temporal creations of sun and moon. So they are something different than what we literally understand by night/day periods.

1-3 above was done for us. HE had already separated the everlasting from the turning away and HE doesn't NEED the sun and moon to inform Him of seasons or periods of time, and He doesn't NEED temporal light to see by. So they were made for us.

Wow, lots of questions...which is good.

Here is a footnote out of the oxford...I know this is to stunned, (I think I called you stunning once, lol) (which you may well be) back to footnote:

lights- It is thought by many scholars that the sun, moon, and stars were created "in the beginning" but that fog and gases surrounding the ruined earth had hidden them.

I don't agree with this but it is another opinion.

 

[Ariel82]

Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house. Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven. King James Bible, 1611, Matthew, 5:15 and 5:16.

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

We have a spirit apart from God otherwise the verse that says our spirit agrees with the HOLY Spirit that we are children of God and can call Him Abba, father would make no sense.

Ariel, you are so easy to talk with. And you use verses! I appreciate you.
I am going to look into this verse. Be back.

 

[Ariel82]

I have a lot of thoughts that i need to test.

One is about Angels being stars. I heard someone say it.but haven't had time to research the thought.

If it's true then being "spirit" doesn't mean you are bodiless because stars have bodies.

 

[Willie-T]

I'm getting real tired of being accused of things I never said. And I don't want to do it to someone else who I seem to be hearing say one of the most fantastically inaccurate things I have ever seen here. So let me get this straight.

Are you saying that as, and after, a baby is born, they do NOT have a spirit? If so, when, exactly, does a baby get a spirit as they grow into childhood?

Oh my gosh...I DID quote box her. You might not have seen that I did but if you go back and look you will see that I did!
So then you quote boxed my reply to Ariel and said you were tired of being accused of things you didn't say. It was not you I was replying to. I did not accuse you of anything I was replying to her post. Gosh sakes!

This is unbelievable. Tell me what you think I said in that first paragraph?

 

[stonesoffire]

I've never heard this either! I didn't know anyone thought this. I am learning all kinds of new things about what all of you believe.

So, you have tied this in with the rest of the creation story? For instance, you think it was spirit beings with no human form or flesh that were to rule over fish and birds? Do you think the fish and birds had a flesh being before the fall? And you think it was spirit beings without human form or bodies who were to birth other spirit beings without human form or bodies when He told Adam and Eve to multiply?

I'd never heard this thought before. I'd like to hear you lay it out with the verses you've collected to bring you to this understanding. I'm all ears.

We don't really understand what a Spirit being would be like but God is Spirit and He has a form. Looks like men doesn't He? Not sure where I got that idea...perhaps a vision in scripture.

So I would not call them ethereal. Not sure now who used that word. This is another thought that I have. Perhaps they had a body like ours but were filled with light? Ruled by spiritual authority? Similar to what we are now yet what we are is just a foretaste of what we will be.

With the fall...light left, darkness rules. Men become flesh beings and so does all mankind. Before the fall, men and animals both ate plant life. I can't say what animals were like

But, I did say I haven't studied this yet for myself stunned. Where I will start though is "man became a living soul". Hint...lol

 

[Ariel82]

Scientist are still learning the connection between energy and matter.

Electricity is made from flowing electrons.

Light is emitted when electrons from a higher energy level drops its orbital or loses energy.

If the spirit realm isn't some mystical place in people's mind and an actual place with its own set of laws that interact with our world. Then the Bible would have a lot more meaning.

Even now we can see how baking recipes have to change due to altitude..change in the atmosphere.

We know that our eyes only see a small part of the electromagnetic spectrum which is how energy/light is transmitted.

Our nervous system runs on electrical impulses and chemical messages.

When i sit and contemplate it all, I know how much I truly don't know.

That is where faith comes in. I trust God to tell me enough to not overwhelm my limited brain and do the work He created me to do.

 

[Willie-T]

We don't really understand what a Spirit being would be like but God is Spirit and He has a form. Looks like men doesn't He? Not sure where I got that idea...perhaps a vision in scripture.

So I would not call them ethereal. Not sure now who used that word. This is another thought that I have. Perhaps they had a body like ours but were filled with light? Ruled by spiritual authority? Similar to what we are now yet what we are is just a foretaste of what we will be.

With the fall...light left, darkness rules. Men become flesh beings and so does all mankind. Before the fall, men and animals both ate plant life. I can't say what animals were like

But, I did say I haven't studied this yet for myself stunned. Where I will start though is "man became a living soul". Hint...lol

How does a person claim to believe something if they have not even studied it for themselves?

 

[LaurenTM]

Sorry for the confusion, was just trying to lay a groundwork for stunning as to why I might come up with a different conclusion then hers. So I posted first how I see Genesis.

Yes, I heard a teaching from Gloria Copeland at Lester Sumralls church many years ago and this is what she said. Since then, I read that this is also a Jewish belief...I like to read what Rabbis teach. And its in a lost book which I know the church doesn't recognize. I haven't read all of this book,only skimmed through the contents and then through the books itself. I think this particular one was called Adam and Eve, but not sure.

Why I believe this is because this is what we will be in heaven. A being of light, in the image of God. Did Jesus restore us to a future previous state? Haven't yet done my own study on this subject. But, someday will.

Clear as mud yet?

well why wouldn't you believe Gloria over the Bible?

since God has never been seen by anyone and He is spirit, yet tripartate and Jesus had a physical body...a RESURRECTED body...the of course we shall all be unlike Jesus but instead as Copeland and her scary husband teach us we will be

the confusion will not stop until one or both of you lay down the delusion and error

that goes for the Copelands too

look at Jesus as He is described AFTER He is resurrected..Gloria et al are in error

 

[Magenta]

So you think we are born with the Holy Spirit in us and that we also are born again when we receive the Holy Spirit? Why do we need to receive something we already have in us?

I enjoy talking with you by the way.

The Truth resides within us, but we turn away from it due to the lusts of the flesh and the pride of life. There is a Scripture that speaks to this, how non believers are without excuse, because they knew but rejected the Truth of God. Starting at Romans chapter one, verse 19

Because that which may be known of God is manifest
in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were
thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like
to corruptible man, and to birds, and four footed beasts, and creeping things.

Etc etc We are born with this natural inclination to turn away from God, being born in the flesh after Adam into a fallen world, in need of a Spiritual rebirth through the Holy Spirit of God, by grace, through faith, which is itself a gift from God, in the propitiatory sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross, out of His great love for us, as payment for our sins, and through His (Christ's) resurrected life, we attain to life ever after. I do keep trying to streamline my responses into a digestible sound byte that still contain a full message of the gospel and God's love for us, so thank you for helping me work toward that end

There is much I find in you to admire, not the least of which is your long suffering attitude towards others: instead of instantly assuming the worst and blaming the other person for your misunderstandings, which I see others doing here (generally speaking) on a dismayingly regular basis, you take the time to tease a fuller understanding of that which they wish to convey. So kudos to you!

 

[LaurenTM]

I was typing this answer out and it disappears...grrr...

Thanks for the tip.

What I see....the word was in reference to was without form suggests it was always this way and God begins to create. Became without form suggest that it was different then something drastic happened.

Which is what I believe. This earth is older than the creation account most believe. Or at least I think it's most. Not sure.

the age of the earth is not in the discussion or 'teaching' of the op that I can tell...

but who knows at this point..perhaps it is a thought not yet manifested but will be in the posts to come and we will be assured it was always there and the Hebrew interpretation of the Greek past tense participle of the advent of before times began will be introduced

maybe that's where the unicorns went...even thought unicorn is another bad example of the KJV translation which some hold is the inspired word of God as opposed to translation but I digress...

but don't let that stop anyone