Greek2me

The real issue is: which "in the beginning" is John talking about? Of course, everyone just assumes that it's before the Creation in Genesis, but that isn't necessarily the meaning to be understood.... the link below provides excellent evidence imo to offer another explanation. http://www.angelfire.com/space/thegospeltruth/TTD/verses/john1_1.html

Actually, if you maintain that their spirit left them in that 24 hour day (as Weirwille taught) or that the image of God was removed or something other than 'they themselves' died in that time period, you commit the same context-hopping leap by substituting 'thou' for something else. Scripturally, they did not die within the 24 hour period. So, what are our choices? God lied their spirit left -- which doesn't mean 'die' our understanding of die and / or day and / thou may need changing Since the Scripture in Peter does tell us that a day with the Lord is as a thousand years and that there is evidence in other parts of the Scripture that support the week of millenniums concept, I submit that it is our understanding of the word 'day' that needs enlightenment. While the word 'day's' interpretation may contradict the immediate context of the usage in Genisis, it does not contradict the broader context of God's Word. The broader context allowing 'thou' to die and not only a part of them to 'leave'. Another portion of Scripture that supports the week of millenniums idea is found in Joshua's long day -- another 24 hour period added (nearly) -- foreshadowing the age of Grace as in being nearly two-thousand years long (of which we are rapidly nearing the end.) Maybe we need to understand image in context of 'image and likeness'. Certainly logic, reason, ability to create, etc., are part of it and I think you have a solid point but I think there is more to God's likeness and image including things like compassion, mercy, being able to forgive, love, holiness and, maybe, most importantly, morality. Being able to make moral decisions. This likeness may be very corrupted by now due to Sin but certainly only man exhibits such *character*. My understanding for the image and likeness of God is the displaying of His character, not merely having a spirit or being, in part, a spirit being. And, yes, I can be wrong too.

There is also another take which has some merit to my mind. That is... "the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die" actually happened to Adam and Eve... i.e., THEY actually died in THAT day.... not their spirit, or their image, or something else, but they actually, literally died themselves just as God said they would. 2 Pe 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. No person lived more than a thousand years so in a sense we all die in the day we eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The above fits with the idea that creation being 6 days and the seventh being the Lord's Sabath. Arguably, we are near the end of the 6 thousand years (6 days) since Adam and will soon head into the Lord's Sabbath (the day of the Lord).

I am the Author of this series. If you like, I can send you the rest via email as it's not posted on the Net yet, though I am planning on putting it up soon. I don't see the Promised Land as representing 'the renewed mind' -- I see it more as being an allegory of the Kingdom of God.... at any rate, I'll be glad to send you what I have.

Don't ask me why... I just read this thread and felt I should share the following. What follows is the first teaching in an 11 part series entitled; "From Jericho to Jerusalem". FJTJ expounds the allegory of the Israelites entering and progressing in the Promised Land with a Christian's entering and progressing in the Kingdom of God. It takes us on the journey of the fall of the walls of Jericho (worldly walls that prevent Christ's dwelling in our hearts by faith) to the building of Jerusalem's walls (Christ-built walls that prevent the entrance of the things of the world) in our hearts. It has blessed some ex-way people so I thought I'd share. From Jericho to Jerusalem Crossing Jordan – God's Presence, Preparation, Provision Before reaching the walls of Jericho the children of Israel once again faced an obstacle in the form of a body of water. This group of wilderness wanderers had been led by Moses out of Egypt and through the Red Sea on dry ground more than 40 years before. Now, a flooded Jordan River stood between them and the Land of Promise. And Joshua rose early in the morning; and they removed from dangtim, and came to Jordan, he and all the children of Israel, and lodged there before they passed over. And it came to pass after three days, that the officers went through the host; And they commanded the people, saying, When ye see the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, and the priests the Levites bearing it, then ye shall remove from your place, and go after it. Yet there shall be a space between you and it, about two thousand cubits by measure: come not near unto it, that ye may know the way by which ye must go: for ye have not passed this way heretofore. Jos 3:1 - 4 The instructions couldn't have been any clearer. They were to keep a space between themselves and the Ark of the Covenant and to follow the Ark because they had "not passed this way heretofore." Such plainly spoken words express such profound spiritual truth. If only we in the Church would grasp this truth and hold onto it with both hands! We have not passed this way before, so when you see the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord your God, then shall you remove from your place, "and go after it." In other words, we are to follow God to the places He has gone before. And as they that bare the ark were come unto Jordan, and the feet of the priests that bare the ark were dipped in the brim of the water, (for Jordan overfloweth all his banks all the time of harvest,) That the waters which came down from above stood and rose up upon an heap very far from the city Adam, that is beside Zaretan: and those that came down toward the sea of the plain, even the salt sea, failed, and were cut off: and the people passed over right against Jericho. And the priests that bare the ark of the covenant of the LORD stood firm on dry ground in the midst of Jordan, and all the Israelites passed over on dry ground, until all the people were passed clean over Jordan. Jos 3:15 -17 This event was so tremendous and miraculous that even the inhabitants of cities far to the north and south noted it! To the north they saw Jordan rise as a heap and to the south the waters failed, or receded, so that there weren't any at all. Now, with all the Israelites passed over to the other side of Jordan, Joshua receives some additional instructions. At that time the LORD said unto Joshua, Make thee sharp knives, and circumcise again the children of Israel the second time. And Joshua made him sharp knives, and circumcised the children of Israel at the hill of the foreskins. Jos 5:2, 3 This is hardly the action you would think should be taken now that Israel was in the presence of their enemies. After all, it would take many days for these men to heal during which time they would be in no condition to fight had their enemies decided to attack them then and there. God told Joshua to 'Circumcise again the children of Israel the second time' because those that were now entering the Land had not been circumcised in the wilderness. And this is the cause why Joshua did circumcise: All the people that came out of Egypt, that were males, even all the men of war, died in the wilderness by the way, after they came out of Egypt. Now all the people that came out were circumcised: but all the people that were born in the wilderness by the way as they came forth out of Egypt, them they had not circumcised. Jos 5:4, 5 Mere weeks before this time, just before the death of Moses, he reminded the children of Israel of all that God had done in bringing them out of Egypt and to this Land. During his speaking to the congregation, Moses says some remarkable words. Remarkable, that is, because they point to a greater truth concerning real circumcision. Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked. De 10:16 Moses, who received and instigated circumcision of the flesh according to the law, speaks now of the true circumcision. Allow me to point out the obvious in saying that someone who has been circumcised in the flesh can not be circumcised 'again.' God told Joshua to 'circumcise again the children of Israel.' True circumcision, therefore, is not of the flesh or of the law. For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. Ro 2:28, 29 True circumcision, is a circumcision 'of the heart.' This circumcision is the circumcision of Christ. It marks the beginning of the putting off the body of the sins of the flesh. In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: Col 2:11 The circumcision taking place now among the children of Israel, though happening in the flesh, pictures what Moses spoke of when he told them to remove the foreskin of their hearts. The message is clear. Entering and progressing in the Promised Land, requires that there be a circumcision of the heart. This circumcision is not accomplished by man, nor is it a work of the flesh; this is the exclusive work of the Holy Spirit of God. And the LORD thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live. De 30:6 The purpose of this circumcision is 'that thou mayest live.' All of those Israelites who were circumcised according to the flesh and who came out of Egypt (with the exception of Joshua and Caleb) 'died in the wilderness by the way, after they came out of Egypt.' (Jos 5: 4b) It is evident, then, that circumcision of the flesh does not 'save' anyone. This, also, is the conclusion reached by our brethren in the first century when the question regarding circumcision threatened to split the Church. The apostles and elders met in Jerusalem to discuss this very issue. And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question. And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter. Acts 15:1, 2, 6 The meeting that takes place was lively with support for both sides of the issue. However, Peter speaks and offers irrefutable proof to those with ears to hear. And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they. Acts 15:7 - 11 In essence Peter simply puts the emphasis where the emphasis needs to always belong. God made choice among us, God which knoweth the hearts, God bear them [the Gentiles] witness, God gave them the Holy Ghost, God put no difference between us and them [Jew and Gentile] God purified their heart by faith, God will save we and they [Jew and Gentile] through the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ. And it came to pass, when they had done circumcising all the people, that they abode in their places in the camp, till they were whole. And the LORD said unto Joshua, This day have I rolled away the reproach of Egypt from off you. Wherefore the name of the place is called Gilgal unto this day. Jos 5:8, 9 Now, after the Israelites were healed from the circumcision that took place immediately upon their crossing Jordan, they were commanded to do one more thing before they took Jericho. Gilgal means 'a rolling,' or 'a rolling away.' God literally rolls away the reproach of Egypt (the world) through the circumcision of our hearts. And the children of Israel encamped in Gilgal, and kept the passover on the fourteenth day of the month at even in the plains of Jericho. Jos 5:10 Even as circumcision shows us that Salvation is not through any works of the flesh, but through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, this Passover demonstrates who our sustenance, our meat, and our strength, is to be. Remember, this Passover takes place in the plains of Jericho in full view of their enemies. As David knew full well, this is God's way of doing things. Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies: Ps 23:5a The people in Jericho had to think these Israelites were somewhat unbalanced. Instead of attacking right away as one would think, Israel made camp and proceeded to circumcise all their men. Then, after a number of days when all the men were healed, they had a big feast right there in the presence of their enemies. And they did eat of the old corn of the land on the morrow after the passover, unleavened cakes, and parched corn in the selfsame day. And the manna ceased on the morrow after they had eaten of the old corn of the land; neither had the children of Israel manna any more; but they did eat of the fruit of the land of Canaan that year. Jos 5:11 The manna ceased because it was no longer needed. This event marks a great turning point for the children of Israel. The Land was now set to sustain them. All of the preparation has been made and all of the provision has been well provided for by our Heavenly Father. The children of Israel, from this time forward, are going to eat of the fruit of the land flowing with milk and honey. We, too, are meant to eat of the Land for it is written… Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom. Lu 12:32 Our provision to journey in the Land has already been provided for by our Heavenly Father. The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it. Lu 16:16 As we press into His kingdom every need will be met according to His riches in glory by Christ Jesus. To enter and progress in the Promised Land of God's Kingdom, we will need to follow God's presence, submit to His preparation and rely on His provision.

Well, for the moment it's the following...

Finally! I've got'em right where I want'em.

This reminds of an amusing few moments of anticipation I had when I was in Cornwall, England, and came upon a sign at the end of a remote country lane that read, "St. Just Bar and Church." I though to myself, "wow, these guys have got it tuned-in, haven't they?" So.... Curiosity being what it is, and me being the adventurous type, I wound my way down the one-lane country road to a beautiful, old church building with a small, centuries-old cemetery next to it. "Beautiful," I thought, "now, where's the bar?" Sure enough, through the tress I saw a bunch of small boats next to the church resting on the "bar" ... just waiting for high tide so they could make their way to the Atlantic. :B) Check it out here or try google earth!

Why, thank you! I think, no, wait a minute I don't think. I was told to think but not at the time that I thought it.... it was six months later and it wasn't about what to think it was that I thought I didn't think that way. Clear? At any rate, someone else thought it and then lied to me about it so it wasn't my thought it was theirs so I'm still cool, got it? ... knew you would. Actually, Garth, comparing anyone to that woman is a low blow... even coming form someone with your sterling reputation. But then, I think you already knew that.

C'mon, guys, really. Do I have to repeat myself? Re-read my posts, Garth. I've been very clear. Even the post questioned by Oenophile _to my mind_ was clear when I wrote it....hence the clarification that I didn't make the distinction in the previous post because I really did think it was understood in context. Now, if that's not a satisfactory answer for you, or you want to ascribe attitudes and/or beliefs to me that don't, in fact, belong to me... go for it.

I see. You are correct. I thought it was understood. My bad.

I didn't say that adherents of Islam (or any other belief system differing from mine) are misguided. I said that adherents of Islam that strap a bomb to their waste and blow up themselves (including as many *infidels*) or fly hijacked airliners into tall buildings are misguided. Big difference, no?

You're right. Followers of all religions are cable of -- and have committed -- heinous acts. And again, you're 100% correct, you could find evidence of psychopaths and murderers from every ethnic group. And there's no question or argument that individuals should be judged on their own merit. However... that's not the point. You can't really equate school shootings or disgruntled church goers with Muslim suicide bombers, can you? The motives are hardly the same. Seriously, you must see this. Islamic indoctrination that motivates and teaches it's ok to kill the infidels and that everyone must 'submit or die,' is a far cry from the mental illness or social ills of the purveyors of the other acts. One is systematic, accepted, rewarded, praised and tacitly tolerated ( by the not so extreme followers of the same religion even if on a small level) the other are tagedies caused by a plethora of ills. Oh, one more thing, no one is talking about 'keeping them all out of the country,' although Geert Wilders and others wouldn't mind seeing them move back to their countries of origin. (Did you read the speech?) Most European countries have quotas for the amount of foreigners (regardless of origin, however, the large majority are now from Islamic countries) that they allow in. Like the States, however, the borders are anything but, and illegals abound.

I agree with you... but I think that in this case the difference is not only the 'difference' of the people we are talking about, but the kind of difference they bring. Let's face it. Mexicans an Central Americans don't fly airplanes into the twin towers screaming 'God is great.' Nor do they set off bombs in subways or night clubs in far away lands in the name of their God because of a religious or ideological belief. Nor do they attack tourists because they are infidels that must be eliminated. And I can't remember the last time a Mexican or someone from Central America attacked an American Embassy with high explosives or rocket launchers. Again, I agree, but we are not talking about the USA. We're talking about Europe. In short, differences are great. I'm different from almost all of those around me. I am the immigrant here, the one with a different religion, language and set of ideas about what's right and what's wrong. I'm the one that gets stared at and whispered about. The one that's looked at suspiciously just because he's different. But I don't get up in the morning and strap a bomb to my waste or go and shoot a film maker or make death threats to members of Parliament as has been done in the Netherlands. Followers of Islam, however, sometimes do.

Wow, sorry I didn't get to this yesterday, but I was replacing my mother board (*&^%$$#&*^%!@#) (gotta love built in obsolescence... but that's another thread) Pmosh, Is that really what you got from what I said, or are you trying to get a rise? Of course they're humans, and yes, I see them as such. Misguided, of course, but humans nonetheless. You agree, don't you, that they are misguided? You certainly have the luxury (now) to 'tolerate' religion. But what happens when that religion turns out to not 'tolerate' you? You know, kinda like the Jews that tolerated the Nazi's until... whoops too late. Yes, extreme is my example, however, given the fact that it has happened before only emphasizes its veracity. I am too. It's not individuals that are the problem, it's ISLAM. That was the point of my post. But since I posted a link from a site that is 'right wing' it's automatically dismissed as not being worthy of being read or simply ignoring 'the source'. The source, btw, is a democratically elected member of parliament in the Netherlands -- who happens to compare the Koran with Hitler's Mein Kampf -- so I guess that blows your neo-nazi claim, eh? In fact, if you compared your background and his, I'm sure you'd find some striking similarities. I suppose if I had posted the speech (btw, did you read the speeech, right?) from this site (i didn't like the picture at the top) or this site ( i didn't want to bring another religion into the mix but i did like the comment at the top about replacing the word Europe with India and getting pretty much the same thing) or this site (you'll probably like this one, but I think it's too commercial) or this one (because we are not Romanians) or this one (i didn't like the font type and the sub title to the site was too much -- although there are some good (and bad) quotes along the side -- Chesterton sure sounds like he was a wise man) or this one (i didn't like the green moon and star or the name for that matter) and then I came to the site i did post the link from which was so, seemingly, dismissed. So now you have a choice :) You're smarter than this, right? At least, I thought you were. The Netherlands and the UK are both in the EU. They don't need visas anymore. It's kinda like going from Indiana to Illinois. Open borders for Eu citizens. Wilders was/is 'persona non grata' in the UK because of his 'controversial' film, Fitna. I don't consider the speech I posted, nor any of my comments to be 'filth'. Can you enlighten me as to what, exactly, it is that was posted and so 'filthy'? I wouldn't dream of trying to override your opinion of your friends. I do, however, question your somewhat naive and limited conclusions based on 'a night out with the boys'. Mstar, Experience and credibility compared to Pmosh... I think you understood that... but since you bring the POTUS into the mix I think the Dutch member of parliament trumps him hands down -- in the credibility and experience department -- concerning said issue. I don't think a few years in his childhood beats the steady increase of Islaminisation that Wilders has seen and felt in his homeland. Sure, you'll probably disagree, but, quite frankly, you'd be wrong. Harvard law school and the Chicago 'burbs not to mention his stint as a law professor, plus the Illinois State House and the US Senate hardly gives the O'ster experience and credibility in dealing with this issue. None of the places mentioned (stops along Obama's career path?) appear to me to be hotbeds of controversial Islamic activity. Wilders, on the other hand, has seen an explosive increase in Muslims in his country, not to mention Europe (Paris Islamic riots?) and the effects this increase has caused first hand. Concerning the President's quote... I agree with him. The United States isn't at war with Islam. Islam, all claims to the contrary notwithstanding, appears to be at war with the US. some perspective for what it's worth Watch the film too. You might be surprised.