Christian Study

Recently someone recommended that I listen to a preacher from their local church. I downloaded the lesson and once I converted it to a useable format I gave it a listen. Usually most lessons are nothing to write home about. This one had some wisdom that is missing from most Judeo-Christian churches.

The preacher had been stationed overseas while in the military and learned first hand some of the basic principle of sheep herding. He learned about sheep, goats and wolves. The scripture teaches important principles in regard to the behavior of people. The problem is that political correctness and general preacher teaching downplay the truths that scripture teaches.

One of the important truths is that a sheep can not change into a wolf and a wolf can not change into a sheep. They are as God created them. Sometimes the sheep of God’s kingdom try to behave as wolves, but eventually conscience or God’s chastising usually wins out and the sheep behaves as a sheep. Sometimes the wolves in the world try to behave as a sheep, but eventually they show their true nature and behave like a wolf.

Without repeating the story remember the frog swimming across a river with a scorpion riding on his back. God, after all, is the potter and we are just clay. Who are we to question or disagree with God’s reason and motives for this truth. Romans 9:21-24 explains that some were made for destruction and others for glory. So why is it taught that everyone can choose Christ and be saved?

Joh 6:44  No one can come to Me unless the Father who has sent Me draw him, and I will raise him up at the last day. [MKJV]

Think about it. Who does the compelling or choosing? The Greek word translated “compel” or “draw” has the literal meaning “to drag”. God draws or drags us to Him. It should really be no surprise as several times in scripture we are told that God is the one who saves us. We do not save ourselves. Our job as sheep is to behave as sheep and not as goats or wolves. It is also our job to be wise enough to note wolves when we find one and keep our distance.

Tim

I receive email questions from a couple of religious websites. It occurred to me that I have not seen any questions regarding the order of worship in quite a while. I used to receive questions having to do with whether is was alright to have two songs before the prayer or a song during the communion. One might consider that people are becoming more informed and enlightened. Perhaps it is just that no one cares anymore?

I still receive questions. Many questions have been very good questions. So I have to think that there is hope for those who do care. Perhaps we are going through a weeding process? The churches may be much more empty than they were a few years ago, but those, whether a part of a church group or not, who care might be deep in study. That is encouraging to me.

Over the years I have heard many different stories about how some people believe the creation of man occurred and how we came to have all of the races and even how Noah’s flood occurred. My current understanding of all of these things comes mostly from scripture taking into account the Hebrew text. This post is going to be a bit different for me as I am going to step out in print and give you my ideas. Normally I avoid this as it is just another opinion. Well, see what you think.

Let’s start with Genesis chapter one. God creates or restores the earth and places living creatures on the land, in the water and in the air. Some of the words in the King James Version are a bit misleading. Here is an example from Genesis 1:24.

And God (H430) said, (H559) Let the earth (H776) bring forth (H3318) the living (H2416) creature (H5315) after his kind, (H4327) cattle, (H929) and creeping thing, (H7431) and beast (H2416) of the earth (H776) after his kind: (H4327) and it was (H1961) so. (H3651)

I left the Strong’s numbering in so that you could see something interesting. Notice that the word “living” found right after the phrase “bring forth” is from H2416 chay, which means alive or living thing. Now notice the number right after the word beast. Chay can include an aspect of strength, but a literal translation could have just said, “and living things of the earth” perhaps rather than “beast of the earth”. As you can see this would have a much broader meaning and as I prefer would allow the context to determine just what was intended by the writer. I always want to know what the writer intended and not what some one thought they meant. It is here that I believe God’s creation included more than just animals.

It is currently my belief that God created the races that archeology shows have existed many more thousands of years on the earth than what many churches teach. It was later on day six then when God said that he created Adam. This did not include but one racial type and, as the word Adam is more of a description than a name here, this racial type could show color, blood or redness, in the face. This man could blush. I know it is politically incorrect to talk about white men unless it is in a derogatory manner, but this, I believe, was the beginning of white men upon the face of the earth. I also believe that just like God did not create one bird or one fish or one elephant that God created many of these Adamic type of men and women.

After God rested on the seventh day he made one very special Adam on day eight. I am told that the Hebrew refers to this Adam as “The Adam” which would set him apart as a special creation. It was this creation found in chapter two of Genesis that is later called a son of God in Luke 3:38. So when Eve was formed by the taking of a rib from The Adam she did become the mother of all of the living of this special line of man. This also takes care of one very important problem that most have to deal with in Genesis.

I believe that something that is sin today was sin the day Adam was placed in the garden. I also believe that anything that was sin that same day is still sin today. God can not change. God’s morals can not change. God can not sin. His very nature, his morals, his law, forbids it. So most have to conclude that God forced men to commit incest in order to propagate the race of Adam. In the time line I am suggesting no such sin need be committed as there were for The Adam’s children men and women ready and available.

I think you can then see that we also do not have to do like the creation science folks and resort to evolution after the flood of Noah. All of the races of men were already in existence and did not need to magically evolve from the children of Noah. This is especially a problem for the creation science crowd as scripture goes out of it’s way in Genesis chapter six to show that Noah was pure in his lineage. I do not believe that the flood of Noah was world wide, but even if you do then the other races could have been included on the ark. The fact that they might have been on board and not specifically mentioned is not unusual in scripture. After all the book is about The Adam and his descendants with out apology.

Well I hope this makes sense and perhaps even might clear up some of the confusion as to a part of our beginning. I get a little perturbed at some beliefs that make no sense based on the fossil record. I find that the ideas I have presented here fit nicely into what I know of this record and also seem to fit into the scriptural record. They should support each other after all. There is more to this and probably a whole lot more that we still do not know. I hope the speculation on my part is understood as just that. I do not claim that this is the only way to see these events.

Tim

To begin I should state that I believe that the scripture teaches a final punishment that has an everlasting, or better said, a never ending result.

I recently read a book loaned to me by a friend. It was titled Counterfeit Christianity, by E. Raymond Capt. I had the opportunity to meet Mr Capt many years ago. I was able to speak to him at length about several things over a period of four or five days. He was a very well respected man. It was very much deserved too. Many of his writings and films have been very helpful in presenting truth. The one thing that surprised me was at some point during the week I saw a book on his table that told me that he believed in a form of Universal Reconciliation. Unfortunately the book I read is very heavily influenced by that doctrine. However, the point he made about an eternal bar-b-que pit known as hell was reasonably well made.

Most of the time that the word hell is found in scripture the Hebrew or Greek word really just means grave and should have been translated as such. The Hebrew word sheol is one of these. The Greek word hades or haides is as well. The Greek word tartarus really just means a really deep pit or grave. Gehenna found only in the Gospels or writings that were intended for an audience in or around Jerusalem was understood because it was the local garbage dump. The fires were kept burning there as long as there was garbage to burn. The result of the burning was permanent as none of it ever was restored to an unburned state.

The other day I was looking closely at the Greek wording of a verse that ended with the word diablos. Diablos had been translated as devil. I have to say that it is hard to undo years of false teaching. Once I looked closely at the whole verse, however, it was easy to see that there was only a false accuser of some kind. There was no creature called a devil being discussed. The same goes for the hell issue.

Probably the largest stumbling block for people comes from Luke 16 with the Rich Man and Lazarus. Another author of the past, Sheldon Emry, dealt with this subject pretty well. It is another situation where just looking at the Greek text with out prior bias solved the problem all together. It is not the easiest thing to do, but we who desire truth must look beyond our teaching to find truth. By the way, you can download and listen to Emry’s taped messages on this subject by finding the tape catalog at the link above. Look under the year 1974 and then all the way at the bottom of the page.

Other than that the phrase “lake of fire” is found four times in scripture. We are not left to guess it’s meaning however. In two of those four verses we are told exactly what the phrase means. It is the second death. It means that the person who is put in the lake of fire perishes, permanently. There is no scripture concerning returning after the second death. The word perish is also found in John 3:16, but how many really believe what it means?

Tim

Early on I mentioned that if something is a sin today then it had to be a sin for The Adam and if something was a sin for The Adam then it must be a sin today. God does not change and God’s morals can not change. So who did Seth marry? The scripture does plainly teach that The Adam did have sons and daughters born to him after Seth, Genesis 5:4. However incest, in this case a brother taking a sister to wife, was a sin then just like it is now. Where did Cain find a wife and who populated the city he built?

The simple answer is that there were other people alive when The Adam was placed in the garden. I have been referring to this Adam with The to denote which Adam I am referring. I believe that Adam and Eve in Genesis chapter one are a previous creation of Adamites. I would suggest, and this is my guess, that God made several couples in Genesis one. Remember the word Adam is a description and not really a name. Although the scripture does refer to him with that word it describes him as well. It was this chapter one creation that provided husbands and wives for The Adam’s children.

Genesis chapter two then refers to Adam made after God rested as “The Adam” in the Hebrew. It was this Adam that is referred to as a son of God in Luke 3:38. Genesis chapter one and Genesis chapter two Adamites were all of the same type as the scripture uses the same descriptive term for all of them. They are the same people who have continued down through the ages eventually becoming Israelites. From the time of Jacob Israel to the present the scripture is mainly concerned about these same people

As far as timing goes we do know that the Genesis chapter two Adam was created almost six thousand years ago. Chapter one’s Adam could be considerably older. I have had several people tell me that I was wrong when I suggested that the six days of creation could possibly be one thousand years per day because of Peters statement in 2 Peter 3:8. “one day is with the Lord as a thousand years”. What is then ignored is that after The Adam sinned he was told that he would die that same day. However the day of his death was some nine hundred plus years later. That does fall into the 2 Peter 3:8 description. So I think it certainly is a possibility that we should at the least keep in mind.

So I would just leave this with a reminder that God was very careful to prohibit marriage with any people who were related to Israel through incest. I believe that God carefully preserved the seed line of The Adam through the birth of Christ as is demonstrated by the listings of the lineage in Matthew and Luke. I also believe that contrary to many God still has a plan for his true physical descendants of Israel as is clearly shown in both testaments. I suspect that this aspect will be looked at sometime in the future.

Tim

My last post has forced me to get a little more serious about looking for good Bible software. Bible software is the one major item that is missing for Linux. When one responds with the answer, “Why not use GnomeSword?”, I answer that they are not ready for serious study. They also have errors in the Strong’s dictionary. It is for casual reading only. I think that is all most do with Bible software other wise they would never give the above answer.

There are two and really three choices for Mac. So for OSX things are looking pretty good. For someone like me who is tired of Windows problems and enjoys Linux I may have to switch to the Mac to be able to do any real study.

To the end of improving the possibilities on Linux I contacted a couple of Bible software companies to let them know about the need. E-Sword is going toward on-line and has no intention of writing new versions. The author suggested running Parallels or Boot Camp on the Mac with no suggestion for Linux. This is a very bad answer.

The last thing a Mac or Linux user or fan wants to hear is that the solution is to spend $300 on a copy of Windows. This is not a solution so E-Sword is out of the picture. On-line usage does not facilitate serious study and is unusable except for those with very good broadband connections. I have reasonable DSL and the online version was lagged and hard to use. It reminded me of some satellite connections where you type three letters and wait for the screen to show them ten seconds later.

A simple search will show you QuickVerse, Accordance and now Logos. MacSword is the same as GnomeSword. The Logos solution is to let you download a file that makes their Windows version work on the Mac. It is not in beta yet, but apparently works. I still have QuickVerse 4 for Windows so I am used to that one and the price seems more reasonable than Accordance so far.

I do not use commentaries and do not need 25 different translations. What I really want is an easy way to see what the Hebrew and Greek really say. My experience so far has been that there is unity in the truth between the Hebrew and Greek that one does not find in the English. So various dictionaries and resources like Englishman’s are really very helpful.

This is where Logos suggested their Original Languages Library edition. Looking down the chart I have to agree. I did not see Englishman’s listed, but Logos says that it is integrated into the software. The price is rather steep for what I am used to, but when I called I was told that I could get a better price on the phone. The Logos solution may be the path I try. I do plan to investigate Accordance for a similar solution and will report on how things work when I give one of them a try.

Tim

Several have been studying the importance of the moon as far as determining times and seasons lately. A key verse in the study is Genesis 1:16.

And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

The phrase “he made” is not found in the Hebrew. There is also a good chance that the word “also”, H853 “‘eth”, at the end of the verse is not or should not be there. A suggestion on how the verse should read is as follows.

And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night, the stars.

This makes the verse read significantly different. Looking at one of my study programs leads me to believe that the word “also” is in the Hebrew text. However since there were no verse markings or punctuation in the original text I wondered if the “also” could actually be a part of verse 17?

Here is verse 17.

And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,

The word “And” that starts the verse is actually H5414 nathan and is not the word “And”. It is also translated “set” in verse 17. It has the meaning to give, put or make. So the word “And” is missing from verse 17. Perhaps the word “also” at the end of verse 16 really belongs to verse 17 which would then accurately read as is shown above. Using Englishman’s shows that the word, H853 ‘eth, is translated “and” or “also”.

In verse 16 the word translated “light”, found twice, is translated from the Hebrew H3974 and means “a luminous body or luminary”. Looking at a modern dictionary gives us an answer that any body that radiates or reflects light is a luminous body. Looking at the 1828 Websters says the following.

Luminary

1. Any body that gives light, but chiefly one of the celestial orbs. The sun is the principal luminary in our system. the stars are inferior luminaries.

Luminous

1. Shining; emitting light. The sun is a most luminous body.

2. Light; illuminated. The moon is rendered luminous by the rays of the sun.

I am inclined to favor the older definitions for two reasons. One is that the older definition is more closely related to the source language or word usage at the time of the translation. Second, and maybe this is just me, but I am seeing modern definitions expand to include concepts they were never intended to include. The misuse of words is expanding and definitions are blurring. Unfortunately I may be guilty of this very thing myself. Either way I currently see the word “light” in verse 16 to indicate a source of light, not a reflected light.

It is because of these reasons and one more that I will chat about later that I am inclined to side with a solar calendar to determine times and seasons in scripture.

Tim