Yes, it was a typo, whether you agree or not makes no difference to me. You continue keeping God in your box by believing that if He commands an inanimate object to do something, that object cannot move on its own, but must be moved by God Himself to complete the command. There is no scriptural support for that in any way. The Bible says, With God, ALL things are possible. You appear to deny that.
You're really grasping at straws here to hold on to your nonsensical and false doctrine! What you're missing in all of this is that when God spoke Creation into existence, there was in what He spoke the power to make His command come to pass. Thus, He could say "let there be light" (though the Hebrew is more along the lines of the more active "light be" or "light exist") when there was none and the very act of His speaking the command caused it to happen. You keep trying to assign sentience to inanimate objects or substances. Your whole "Well God could do it if He wanted to" notion is really a childish kind of thing.
Quote:
Do the wind continued to blow? No, it stopped, just as it was commanded to do.
No, the power to cause the wind to cease was in the very command that Jesus gave - just as in the power to cause Creation to come into existence was in the very words that God spoke.
Quote:
You are too humanity minded, Chan. God is greater than what you think He is capable of doing and you just don't seem to get it. And no, the dirt wasn't alone, but without it, Adam wouldn't have been made....from the dirt, that is.
Oh, please, don't give me this "Well, God could have done it if He wanted to" garbage!!!!!! You're being childish in your theology. The text of the Genesis 1:26 is clear and there is nothing in it that even remotely suggests God was speaking to inanimate substances!
Quote:
And you are correct. It doesn't say rocks, it says stones.
Luke 19:38 Saying, Blessed be the King that cometh in the name of the Lord: peace in heaven, and glory in the highest.
39 And some of the Pharisees from among the multitude said unto him, Master, rebuke thy disciples.
40 And he answered and said unto them, I tell you that, if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out.
It still doesn't say that if WE keep silent the stones would cry out.
Quote:
I get the point. I'm sure you don't and are ready to give me a sermon on how I took that completely out of context, yada, yada, yada.....
And again I'll ask was it someone or something? For instance, do you ever speak to your vehicle as if it were a person? How do we know it was SOMEONE?
What part of "The hebrew grammar has God speaking to someone other than himself" did you NOT understand the first few times Praxeas said it?
Quote:
Not necessarily more than one PERSON....I talk to myself often and use 'us' and 'we' when talking just to me! LOL!
Well, I won't go into this whole thing about you talking to yourself but I will say that when humans talk about themselves in the third person, they're being arrogant.
Quote:
I paint once in a while, and I've often looked at the house and looked at my tools and said, "well, let's see what we can do to this place'. Yet, I'm the only person there. I also used 'us' when speaking to the paint supplies.
This whole notion of you speaking to inanimate objects has me worried.
Quote:
I am a nurse, and when someone complains of chest pain, I say to them, "let's take a listen' and my stethescope and I work together as a team.
Normal people would interpret what you said as a statement being made to the patient and not to the stethoscope, even though the patient didn't actually get to listen to his or her heart.
Demons are altogether different. They might be fallen angels, but I view them in a totally different light.
Where does the Bible say that they're altogether different? This is the problem, you're viewing things in a totally different light than the light of scripture.
Quote:
And the Lord put him there. He didn't go on his own. If God said no, that demon couldn't have went, regardless the will he possessed, but that's not really the point, as it also applies to all.
The angel volunteered to go and be a lying spirit and God gave him the go ahead.
Quote:
However, it does seem that God had a purpose in all that, evil as it were.
Of course He did!
Quote:
That is something I cannot understand in my feeble human mind.
The proof - all the proof you need - is in the words "us" and "our." "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness." God was clearly speaking to sentient beings that were, in some way, like Himself - not other Gods but having characteristics or something that God also has - perhaps that something is the fact that God is Spirit and the angels are ministering spirits. But since dirt does not have any of God's characteristics, God could not have spoken to the dirt. Whatever the image or likeness is in which God made man, that image or likeness must be one that is shared by both God and those to whom God spoke.
I wasn't there.....apparently, you were.
__________________
I've gone and done it now! I'm on Facebook!!!
You're really grasping at straws here to hold on to your nonsensical and false doctrine! What you're missing in all of this is that when God spoke Creation into existence, there was in what He spoke the power to make His command come to pass. Thus, He could say "let there be light" (though the Hebrew is more along the lines of the more active "light be" or "light exist") when there was none and the very act of His speaking the command caused it to happen. You keep trying to assign sentience to inanimate objects or substances. Your whole "Well God could do it if He wanted to" notion is really a childish kind of thing.
No, the power to cause the wind to cease was in the very command that Jesus gave - just as in the power to cause Creation to come into existence was in the very words that God spoke.
Oh, please, don't give me this "Well, God could have done it if He wanted to" garbage!!!!!! You're being childish in your theology. The text of the Genesis 1:26 is clear and there is nothing in it that even remotely suggests God was speaking to inanimate substances!
It still doesn't say that if WE keep silent the stones would cry out.
No, you really don't get it!
God said He wants out of your box, Chan. Let Him out.
__________________
I've gone and done it now! I'm on Facebook!!!
What part of "The hebrew grammar has God speaking to someone other than himself" did you NOT understand the first few times Praxeas said it?
Well, I won't go into this whole thing about you talking to yourself but I will say that when humans talk about themselves in the third person, they're being arrogant.
This whole notion of you speaking to inanimate objects has me worried.
Normal people would interpret what you said as a statement being made to the patient and not to the stethoscope, even though the patient didn't actually get to listen to his or her heart.
It doesn't bother me that you think I'm arrogant and not normal. I think the same of you.
God still wants out of your box.
__________________
I've gone and done it now! I'm on Facebook!!!
You answered it when you quoted me saying "someone other than God" 3-4 times. Every time you quote than then you ask "someone or something?" and expect me to answer it. That's nuts.
Quote:
You haven't provided proof of that, however.
The "proof" or evidence was in the article. It went into the hebrew grammar. You said you read it. You said you could not understand it. So I am a little bewildered how you can tell me I did not provide proof when the proof I provided you could not comprehend by your own admission
Quote:
That's what I'm looking for. Proof that the 'someone' God spoke to was in someway like God with the same image as God.
God said "Let us make man after OUR image and after OUR likeness" isn't enough proof? The word image and likeness here are singular. If there were two images here, dirt and God, God would have used a plural. There is one sort of image or likeness here and the plural OUR has that one image. God is NOT like dirt! There is no way God could be speaking to dirt and saying dirt has an image like God and that "we will make man in our image". Like I said it is very very very simple grammar.
Quote:
The problem you have is that on several occasions, God speaks to something inanimate and that object does what it's commanded to do.
Show me where God speaks to an inanimate object and says "us" and "our" and "image". God does not talk to inanimate objects. He commands or speaks things to happen. He does not hold conversations with non living beings
Quote:
And you must be the only guy who's never gotten mad at his car, hit it and yelled at it when it didn't work right...haha!
I might say "stupid car" but Im not going to say "You can't be a stupid car because you were made in our image"
Quote:
Does is matter what exact words I used? The fact is, I said, "Let us..." That's the entire point.
Yes it does matter! we are talking about grammar, sentences. God said "Let us make man in OUR image after OUR likeness" and you say that is dirt. In order to be grammatically correct Dirt would have to have an image like God. God and dirt would have to have a similar image
Quote:
Not exactly....LOL! But the fact is, I said, "Let's take a listen." US is still used, even though I'm a singular person.
I think most people that would say that would be talking to the patient and thus would be including them since they are there and they are going to be the one you are listening to even though you are the only one listening
__________________ Let it be understood that Apostolic Friends Forum is an Apostolic Forum.
Apostolic is defined on AFF as:
There is One God. This one God reveals Himself distinctly as Father, Son and Holy Ghost.
The Son is God himself in a human form or "God manifested in the flesh" (1Tim 3:16)
Every sinner must repent of their sins.
That Jesus name baptism is the only biblical mode of water baptism.
That the Holy Ghost is for today and is received by faith with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues.
The saint will go on to strive to live a holy life, pleasing to God.
Demons are altogether different. They might be fallen angels, but I view them in a totally different light.
We are talking about types of beings, natures. Angels are not mindless robots, just because they do what God wants does not make them mindless robots and demons free will living beings. When you say angels have no will that is what you are saying
Quote:
And the Lord put him there. He didn't go on his own. If God said no, that demon couldn't have went, regardless the will he possessed, but that's not really the point, as it also applies to all.
Notice the context. God is enthroned and he is surrounded by the host of heaven. He asks "who will go for US" referring to the host of angels surrounding him and a number give suggestions till one comes forth and says he will do the job
__________________ Let it be understood that Apostolic Friends Forum is an Apostolic Forum.
Apostolic is defined on AFF as:
There is One God. This one God reveals Himself distinctly as Father, Son and Holy Ghost.
The Son is God himself in a human form or "God manifested in the flesh" (1Tim 3:16)
Every sinner must repent of their sins.
That Jesus name baptism is the only biblical mode of water baptism.
That the Holy Ghost is for today and is received by faith with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues.
The saint will go on to strive to live a holy life, pleasing to God.
You answered it when you quoted me saying "someone other than God" 3-4 times. Every time you quote than then you ask "someone or something?" and expect me to answer it. That's nuts.
The "proof" or evidence was in the article. It went into the hebrew grammar. You said you read it. You said you could not understand it. So I am a little bewildered how you can tell me I did not provide proof when the proof I provided you could not comprehend by your own admission
True enough, but what I read and did understand I didn't agree with, especially when he was defining English words along with it when educated people know that some words were added for clarifications and others aren't exactly translateable.
Quote:
God said "Let us make man after OUR image and after OUR likeness" isn't enough proof? The word image and likeness here are singular. If there were two images here, dirt and God, God would have used a plural. There is one sort of image or likeness here and the plural OUR has that one image. God is NOT like dirt! There is no way God could be speaking to dirt and saying dirt has an image like God and that "we will make man in our image". Like I said it is very very very simple grammar.
God isn't dirt, but we are. It makes no sense for God to say what He did to the angels and choose dirt to make us from. Why not form us out of clouds? He could have done the same thing with clouds that He did with dirt, and we would have still been made in His image and likeness yet turn to a cloud when we disinegrate after death instead of dust. God didn't speak to the dirt saying that IT had an image like God, but that He was making a creation out of that dirt that would be the image and likeness of God. It's very very very very simple to me also.
Quote:
Show me where God speaks to an inanimate object and says "us" and "our" and "image". God does not talk to inanimate objects. He commands or speaks things to happen. He does not hold conversations with non living beings
Give me a break, Prax. You are sounding just like the other guy who wants word for word or it doesn't happen. It's fact that God spoke on several occasions to inanimate objects and they did as He commanded. It doesn't have to be a conversation taking place for him to speak a simple command.
Quote:
I might say "stupid car" but Im not going to say "You can't be a stupid car because you were made in our image"
Now you are being ridiculous. Totally.
Quote:
Yes it does matter! we are talking about grammar, sentences. God said "Let us make man in OUR image after OUR likeness" and you say that is dirt. In order to be grammatically correct Dirt would have to have an image like God. God and dirt would have to have a similar image
The point is the 'us' and 'our'. The rest of the sentence isn't the point.
As for dirt needing to have the image and likeness of God, consider that God is a spirit. We are not, yet we possess one. The rest of us is dirt, therefore we are made in the image and likeness of God and dirt. It's really very very very simple understanding.
Also, understand that 'us' and 'our' was added for clarity, but not in the original scripts. Why did KJV need to clarify?
In addition, the article you posted spoke about the different in 'make' and 'create' and how there was a difference, but I don't get that, since scripture says 'let us make man' then the very next verse says 'so God created man'. Doesn't sound like any difference to me, and that's why I told you I didn't understand what the writer of that article was talking about and that I disagreed.
Quote:
I think most people that would say that would be talking to the patient and thus would be including them since they are there and they are going to be the one you are listening to even though you are the only one listening
But they have nothing to do with it. It's also just a figure of speech that apparently existed in the time of KJV, since he added that for clarity. Why? I don't know, but the lexicon doesn't have 'us' and 'our' definitions as they are added.
__________________
I've gone and done it now! I'm on Facebook!!!
Linear Mode
