A Study of Torah from Gen. - Rev.

[miknik5]

I just want you to know (I am addressing you in the same discourteous manner as you have addressed me in your last post to me) that this thread which you created is not a bible discussion thread at all

it is not a discussion at all when the owner of the thread tries to control the "discussion"

if it were a true discussion, there would be freedom to ask questions without the "owner" laying down rules first in his opening paragraph

How does controlling a discussion lead to or even open up pure lines of communication

ir doesn't

 

[miknik5]

I addressed your marriage post (on topic as well) but even
thSt, though it is currently being discussed now, you haven't addtessed


should I wait and stick around for a response to that as well?

 

[miknik5]

I really believe the moderators should examine your thread

you want to discuss genesis to revelation than you respond to another poster who speaks of the old wine (old testament/covenant) and the NEW WINE (new testament/covenant) that they are off topic?

Is everyone whom you want to shut up (for fear of a debate between the NEW COVENANT and the old covenant) off topic and disruptive?

Really?

 

[miknik5]

By the way, when you get to Jeremiah 31, I would like to be able to add my input


will it be allowed?

 

[Zmouth]

Figured this thread might be in trouble from the get go since the Torah is from Genesis to Deuteronomy.

 

[graceNpeace]

Figured this thread might be in trouble from the get go since the Torah is from Genesis to Deuteronomy.

The whole point of the thread will be to "prove" that the law is still binding on new covenant believers...
Wolves in sheep's clothing.

 

[miknik5]

The whole point of the thread will be to "prove" that the law is still binding on new covenant believers...
Wolves in sheep's clothing.

That's why I asked about Paul who was

P. E. R. F. E. C. T.

according to the legal requirements of the law...a Pharisee of Pharisees

i was wondering if he was led by THE SPIRIT when he said that all these "gains" he considers a loss so as to gain CHRIST and be found in HIM not having any righteousness of his own based on the law but THE RIGHTEOUSNESS which comes through faith in CHRIST (Philippians 3)


thats why i asked if he agreed that paul spoke by CHRIST's SPIRIT and can we trust that what he said is just as CHRIST gave him to say?

 

[Rainrider]

Yes it does seem that some people are only here to show the love of Christ through disruption and misdirection.

 

[Rainrider]

The whole point of the thread will be to "prove" that the law is still binding on new covenant believers...
Wolves in sheep's clothing.

The point of this thread is to study. If you will stop being disruptive, that is if you know how. You willl find a lot of things that make your comment wrong on more levels than you think. Besides, if you are not interested, then move along, and let us that do wish to study do so with out the disruption. Thank you ever so much.

 

[Rainrider]

By the way, when you get to Jeremiah 31, I would like to be able to add my input


will it be allowed?

So long as you stay on topic. Don't push your own ideas or ideology on others, and do so with respect, yes. You will notice if this thread is left orderly, that I am not pushing my ow ideas or ideology at all. Rather using the Word to tell us what the Word means. So yes, please stay and learn, don't be disruptive, or try to push what you think you know on others.
I say that, as I know full well that is what you do. I have seen it on almost every thread I have looked at were you have posted.

 

[miknik5]

The point of this thread is to study. If you will stop being disruptive, that is if you know how. You willl find a lot of things that make your comment wrong on more levels than you think. Besides, if you are not interested, then move along, and let us that do wish to study do so with out the disruption. Thank you ever so much.

I don't think you have the right to lay down rules in a discussion forum and tell people what they can and can not say and when they can or can't say it

i really don't think you have that right
and I also don't think you have the right to bully or try to intimidate people into feeling uncomfortable about saying things or implying that their main purpose is to be disruptive

sir.

you're wrong

you are trying to mix old with new and that doesn't work

 

[Rainrider]

As we move on, we find that in chapter 3 of Gen, It opens with the first sin of man kind. I have seen that some say it was sex. When asked how that can bee as HaShem told them to multiply? I got the strangest answer. it was something like this. Keep in mind this has been some time ago, so it is not a direct quote.
Eve had sex with the serpent, and that was where Cain from. Now just nut's is that? There are a lot of people that follow this teaching however. It has been used for years to show that just because a man tells us something, it needs to be studied in it's context, from Gen. to Rev.
So what was the first sin, that lead to fall of man into sin?
Disobedience. Nothing real fancy or hard to follow, If one was to read every passage in the Word, every time sin is found, it can be brought right back to disobedience. No mater what the sin is, no mater how it was done, it comes back to that one thing.

As we look at desperation in the Bible, we find that Satan uses it in many ways. Yet almost always he simply uses a part of a passage, or twist what is there to his liking. Take,
1Ch 21:1 And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.
Mat 4:3 Now when the tempter came to Him, he said, “If You are the Son of God, command that these stones become bread.”

Both show that Satan uses description to lead us into sin. There are many passages that show this, I am only uses the 2 I posted. So I do ask that if you think of 100 or so, please keep it real. I am not going to enter into debate on this thread. I need to stop for now, as I have folks that just showed up. I will finish this in a bit. Sorry for the interruption.

 

[graceNpeace]

So long as you stay on topic. Don't push your own ideas or ideology on others, and do so with respect, yes. You will notice if this thread is left orderly, that I am not pushing my ow ideas or ideology at all. Rather using the Word to tell us what the Word means. So yes, please stay and learn, don't be disruptive, or try to push what you think you know on others.
I say that, as I know full well that is what you do. I have seen it on almost every thread I have looked at were you have posted.

Which is precisely what you are doing!
Hypocritical...

 

[Rainrider]

Which is precisely what you are doing!
Hypocritical...

You don't find me going to treads and disrupting them do you. If you don't wish to follow this tread then by all means leave. Not one person is holding you here.

 

[Rainrider]

As we move on, we find that in chapter 3 of Gen, It opens with the first sin of man kind. I have seen that some say it was sex. When asked how that can bee as HaShem told them to multiply? I got the strangest answer. it was something like this. Keep in mind this has been some time ago, so it is not a direct quote.
Eve had sex with the serpent, and that was where Cain from. Now just nut's is that? There are a lot of people that follow this teaching however. It has been used for years to show that just because a man tells us something, it needs to be studied in it's context, from Gen. to Rev.
So what was the first sin, that lead to fall of man into sin?
Disobedience. Nothing real fancy or hard to follow, If one was to read every passage in the Word, every time sin is found, it can be brought right back to disobedience. No mater what the sin is, no mater how it was done, it comes back to that one thing.

As we look at desperation in the Bible, we find that Satan uses it in many ways. Yet almost always he simply uses a part of a passage, or twist what is there to his liking. Take,
1Ch 21:1 And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.
Mat 4:3 Now when the tempter came to Him, he said, “If You are the Son of God, command that these stones become bread.”

Both show that Satan uses description to lead us into sin. There are many passages that show this, I am only uses the 2 I posted. So I do ask that if you think of 100 or so, please keep it real. I am not going to enter into debate on this thread. I need to stop for now, as I have folks that just showed up. I will finish this in a bit. Sorry for the interruption.

Sorry about that, life does go on even when we may wish it to stay away just a little longer.

Have any of you ever wondered what would have happen if Adam hadn't eat of the fruit? Don't get me wrong, it is clear that anything said on that would just what the person speaking thinks. So the best we can do is work with what we have. As the Word tells us, Adam and Eve both found shame in their nakedness. Though one must wonder, was it that, or was the shame they felt for their disobedience?

There is one thing that we need to look at here. As we read in 8-12, we find something that at first seems odd. HaShem is asking were they are, then ask how told them they were naked. So why was that?
Can it be that HaShem was giving them the opportunity to confess their sin to Him?
Or was it that He know they needed to, so that they would see the wrong in what they had done?

When we look at Adam, saying he was afraid, one can draw a parallel to Israel when HaShem spoke to them at Sinai. The people were scared, and told Moses to talk to HaShem, they thought they would die if HaShem spoke to them directly. Ex. 19.
Gen 3:21 Also for Adam and his wife the LORD God made tunics of skin, and clothed them.

This passage has been the focus of some debate. As in all debates their are 2 sides. Here one side thinks, (as it can not be proven) that this was the first Day of Atonement. They say that the skins were from a goat, yet that is not in the Word, and I have looked in some 25 translations to see.
On the other side, they stay with in the Word, and teach simply that it was the skins of an unknown animal. Holding to the idea that none of the feast were in place at this time. It would be interesting to hear what some of you may think.
As for me, I do think that the sacrificial system did start here. That HaShem took this time to show Adam what needed to be done, and told him way. If He hadn't, then what we find chapter 4 may lead to things best left unsaid, or even thought.
I am looking foreword to hearing your thoughts on this one. I know I didn't use much for out side scripture, that is mainly due the lack of any that hold any further elaboration on this topic.

 

[GandalfTheWhite]

When we study the Bible from Genesis to Revelation we basically study the beginning of God's word to the end. Jesus teach us that He is the beginning and the end the aleph and the tav.

The first letter of the Bible is Bet (as in Bereshit) and the last letter is Nun (amen) and this basically spells Ben which means son. The Bible teaches us everything is about Jesus/Yeshua the son of God.

 

[GandalfTheWhite]

The first word in the Bible is beresheet (בראשית). If we look at the Hebrew picture of this word we see the following:

ב beyt – house/home
ר resh – head / head of
א aleph - all power / all strength
ש shin – divine protection / all-consuming fire
י yud – hand
ת tav – sign of a cross

בר bar in Daniel 3-25 Son
ברא berah means create, form of shape
שי shayee in Psalm 68-29 translated as presents / gifts
שית sheet in Genesis 4-25 translated as appoint

Now if we put it all together we get:

“Elohim will build/create (berah) a house, He will appoint his son as the head of the house. He will have all power/ all strength is in his hands for divine protection. He will be an all-consuming fire / gift and his sign will be a cross.”

 

[Rainrider]

The first word in the Bible is beresheet (בראשית). If we look at the Hebrew picture of this word we see the following:

ב beyt – house/home
ר resh – head / head of
א aleph - all power / all strength
ש shin – divine protection / all-consuming fire
י yud – hand
ת tav – sign of a cross

בר bar in Daniel 3-25 Son
ברא berah means create, form of shape
שי shayee in Psalm 68-29 translated as presents / gifts
שית sheet in Genesis 4-25 translated as appoint

Now if we put it all together we get:

“Elohim will build/create (berah) a house, He will appoint his son as the head of the house. He will have all power/ all strength is in his hands for divine protection. He will be an all-consuming fire / gift and his sign will be a cross.”

May I ask where you learned this? It has been some time that I have studied under any Rabbi's, though I do know rabbinic teaching when I see it.

 

[GandalfTheWhite]

May I ask where you learned this? It has been some time that I have studied under any Rabbi's, though I do know rabbinic teaching when I see it.

Our Pastor is a professor in Hebrew and also a Rabbi (however he is not Jewish). He teach us in Hebrew.

 

[Rainrider]

Our Pastor is a professor in Hebrew and also a Rabbi (however he is not Jewish). He teach us in Hebrew.

Col deal. Not many in organized religion would be so bold. I take my hat off to him. Though I have found that at times Rabbinic teaching, can lead into Kabbalistic as well. having studied that just a bit, I don't see it as something that I wish to follow. After all, Geometria being a study of numbers and letters, can become more than a bit distracting. I was draw to it, as I seen a new understanding that seemed to open new doors. I lost interrest, when I found that the doors being opened, at times lead away from teh truth.
Don't get me wrong I am not saying that is your intent. I am just letting you know a bit about me, and why I follow the things I do.