Who is Jesus Christ in this verse and why they call him The Everlasting Father?

[GWH]

You're making the assumption that he was there by her side approving of what she did. "With her" is not constrained to such rigid meaning.

Yes it is.

No assumption, merely reading what it obviously says and means,
although actually the first or original sin was not eating physical fruit, but rather choosing not to doubt the Devil,
not to cooperate with God, and not asking God why the serpent contradicted what He had told them (Gen. 3:4, MT 7:7).
It is wise to question God. The serpent introduced the option of ungodliness or functional atheism, which they chose.

in Gen. 3:7-13. Adam and Eve tried to cover up their crime, refusing to accept responsibility for their mistakes. They should have confessed immediately (1JN 1:9). Instead their ungodly attitude was manifested by a chain of sins, including their silly attempt to hide from God and to blame someone else and very likely “dysfunctional” parenting that probably contributed to the emotional disturbance (anger) in Cain that resulted in the murder of Abel and so on and so forth through the millenniums.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Yes it is.

No assumption, merely reading what it obviously says and means,
although actually the first or original sin was not eating physical fruit, but rather choosing not to doubt the Devil,
not to cooperate with God, and not asking God why the serpent contradicted what He had told them (Gen. 3:4, MT 7:7).
It is wise to question God. The serpent introduced the option of ungodliness or functional atheism, which they chose.

in Gen. 3:7-13. Adam and Eve tried to cover up their crime, refusing to accept responsibility for their mistakes. They should have confessed immediately (1JN 1:9). Instead their ungodly attitude was manifested by a chain of sins, including their silly attempt to hide from God and to blame someone else and very likely “dysfunctional” parenting that probably contributed to the emotional disturbance (anger) in Cain that resulted in the murder of Abel and so on and so forth through the millenniums.

You're with somebody in a store who shoplifts something without your knowledge. Are you guilty of that crime? Of course not. Adam could have had his back turned or been paying attention to something besides his wife when she commited the crime. You're making the assumption that Adam was micromanaging Eve.

 

[GWH]

You're with somebody in a store who shoplifts something without your knowledge. Are you guilty of that crime? Of course not. Adam could have had his back turned or been paying attention to something besides his wife when she commited the crime. You're making the assumption that Adam was micromanaging Eve.

I hope I can assume that you are not guilty of being unwilling to understand that saying "Then the eyes of BOTH of them were opened,
and THEY realized THEY were naked..." means A&E were partners in crime/sin.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

I hope I can assume that you are not guilty of being unwilling to understand that saying "Then the eyes of BOTH of them were opened,
and THEY realized THEY were naked..." means A&E were partners in crime/sin.

Yes they were partners, but you seem to imply that Eve suggested to Adam that they eat, and then both ate together. It says Eve ate first and then offered it to Adam to eat. Adam wasn't deceived like his wife was; he was dealing with the fact his wife committed a crime and then decided to join her in that crime for reasons we can only speculate about.

 

[GWH]

Yes they were partners, but you seem to imply that Eve suggested to Adam that they eat, and then both ate together. It says Eve ate first and then offered it to Adam to eat. Adam wasn't deceived like his wife was; he was dealing with the fact his wife committed a crime and then decided to join her in that crime for reasons we can only speculate about.

Partners in crime means both were equally guilty. It is silly to speculate that the Bible should have described them as eating the fruit simultaneously which is only attempted at party games.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Partners in crime means both were equally guilty. It is silly to speculate that the Bible should have described them as eating the fruit simultaneously which is only attempted at party games.

Yes, equally guilty, but I think the point Paul was trying to make is that without Eve there would have been no crime because she was seduced, whereas he wasn't

 

[GWH]

Yes, equally guilty, but I think the point Paul was trying to make is that without Eve there would have been no crime because she was seduced, whereas he wasn't

Well I think Paul wanted to justify making men the head of their wives by interpreting the A and E story in that way, perhaps without noticing that what he said in Galatians 3:28 makes that problematic.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Well I think Paul wanted to justify making men the head of their wives by interpreting the A and E story in that way, perhaps without noticing that what he said in Galatians 3:28 makes that problematic.

It's not problematic because that passage describes a spritual reality, not a physical one. In heaven, where we don't bodily dwell, there is no husband-wife hierarchy because there is no marriage and Christ is the head of all.

 

[GWH]

It's not problematic because that passage describes a spritual reality, not a physical one. In heaven, where we don't bodily dwell, there is no husband-wife hierarchy because there is no marriage and Christ is the head of all.

I am talking about 1Tim. 2:11-15, in which Paul says women should not teach or have authority over men because of A&E,
which I find to be problematic logic referring to earthly relationships that contradicts Gal. 3:28 saying there is neither Jew nor Greek... male nor female."

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

I am talking about 1Tim. 2:11-15, in which Paul says women should not teach or have authority over men because of A&E,
which I find to be problematic logic referring to earthly relationships that contradicts Gal. 3:28 saying there is neither Jew nor Greek... male nor female."

I think a better translation would be wife instead of woman. They are the same Greek word used in that verse. In other words, a wife should not teach or exercise authority over a man; let her husband handle that. But if an unmarried woman speaks the word of God to a man, then IMO it carries as much authority as if a man spoke it.

 

[Godsgood]

Here are another verses pertaining again to Jesus as The Everlasting Father.

REVELATION 17:14
14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.

REVELATION 19:16
16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, King Of Kings, And Lord Of Lords.

JOHN 18:36
36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

 

[GWH]

I think a better translation would be wife instead of woman. They are the same Greek word used in that verse. In other words, a wife should not teach or exercise authority over a man; let her husband handle that. But if an unmarried woman speaks the word of God to a man, then IMO it carries as much authority as if a man spoke it.

Yes, and I think Paul was aware that in general it works better for wives to have children and for husbands to earn the living,
but folks have various gifts, so there may be exceptions (except for the having babies part :^).

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Here are another verses pertaining again to Jesus as The Everlasting Father.

REVELATION 17:14
14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.

REVELATION 19:16
16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, King Of Kings, And Lord Of Lords.

JOHN 18:36
36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

I can't recall where God, the father, is called lord in scripture.

 

[GWH]

I can't recall where God, the father, is called lord in scripture.

Then use a concordance!
(That's what I do :^)

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Then use a concordance!
(That's what I do :^)

I do constantly. Can you provide an example?

This verse is obviously referring to God, the father, and Jesus, the lord, but the Hebrew word for "the LORD" is the name YHWH, not lord. That's just the way interpreters chose to do it.

A Psalm of David. The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool. Psalms 110:1​

 

[GWH]

I do constantly. Can you provide an example?

This verse is obviously referring to God, the father, and Jesus, the lord, but the Hebrew word for "the LORD" is the name YHWH, not lord. That's just the way interpreters chose to do it.

A Psalm of David. The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool. Psalms 110:1​

Well, my concordance begins calling God "Lord" in Genesis 2:4, ends with Revelation 22:5 referring to the Father/God
and Rev. 22:20 referring to Jesus, and has over 100 in-between.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Well, my concordance begins calling God "Lord" in Genesis 2:4, ends with Revelation 22:5 referring to the Father/God
and Rev. 22:20 referring to Jesus, and has over 100 in-between.

Any time you see LORD in all caps in the bible, as in Gen 2:4, the Hebrew word is YHWH, not adown (lord), So Gen 2:4 says YHWH God, not lord God.

 

[GWH]

Any time you see LORD in all caps in the bible, as in Gen 2:4, the Hebrew word is YHWH, not adown (lord), So Gen 2:4 says YHWH God, not lord God.

Elohim means God and YHWH is the personal or covenantal name for God pronounced with the vowels of Adonai,
which means Lord, and Joshua means the Lord (Yahweh) saves, so Lord God is a proper understanding per an article in my NIV .
Do you deny that God is Lord?!

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Elohim means God and YHWH is the personal or covenantal name for God pronounced with the vowels of Adonai,
which means Lord, and Joshua means the Lord (Yahweh) saves, so Lord God is a proper understanding per an article in my NIV .
Do you deny that God is Lord?!

I think their explanation is BS. Jesus is lord. Where is God, the father, called that in the bible? Simple question. I won't entertain BS Christian contortions.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

I asked AI for some verses in the bible in which God, the father, is called lord. Even it couldn't answer my question and gave some BS answer that is wrong. LORD (with all caps) in the bible is always a wrong translation of YHWH. In the Jeremiah verse it provided YHWH is speaking.

In the Bible, God the Father is often referred to as "Lord." For example, Isaiah 64:8 states, "But now, O LORD, thou art our father; we are the clay, and thou our potter; and we all are the work of thy hand." Additionally, Jeremiah 31:9 says, "for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn." These verses illustrate the relationship between God as Father and His title as Lord.