Genesis 1: 3 Commentary

Hey Marek are you a Jew? I cannot attain to your explanation…it is wonderful…but I have to study it further…

By TIUCHE (wrote 2759 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 5/1/2011 10:06 am

Re: Post 110, Post 111. TIUCHE, Charles. Let dispel all your doubt by proposing this below, please:

1. El as in the first state of the existing, everlasting God in the pre - existing form of
the Zygote. All in One, One in All.

2. Elohim is as the plural image of the one God, there must have been someone else to complete the duality in the Zygote and after. Genesis 1:27 27. And God created the human being to resemble* His own visage; He created them male and female.*
*1:27.1 Lit. Aramaic word: “Adam.”
*1:27.2 Lit. Ar. idiomatic construction: “And there created God to Adam with His visage, in the visage of God He created him, male and female He created them.

Visage - noun [usu. in sing. ] poetic/literary
a person’s face, with reference to the form or proportions of the features : an elegant, angular visage.
• a person’s facial expression : there was something hidden behind his visage of cheerfulness.
• figurative the surface of an object presented to view : the moonlit visage of the port’s whitewashed buildings.
ORIGIN Middle English : via Old French from Latin visus ‘sight,’ from videre ‘to see.’

3. Jesus was NOT purposefully left out of the OT. He is always there. He is only wearing different name.
This is it: the Book that prophesies about the Coming of Eashoa (Jesus) by name! This is the major breakthrough of this translation project.

This is a translation of the Book of Zechariah from the Ancient Aramaic Scriptures of the Ancient Church of the East.

The name of Eashoa (Jesus) appears in the 3rd chapter of the Book of Zechariah. In all the other English language translations, the name used is “Joshua.” There is no such name in the Hebrew language. The name of Eashoa Bar Nun is also transliterated in error in the English language Bibles. It should not have been “Joshua Barnun”, but “Jesus Barnun”.

Therefore, here in this Book, in the Book of Zechariah chapter 3, verse 1, the name is not “Joshua” or “Joshua Bar Nun”; the name is Eashoa (Jesus). There is no Bar Nun. If this verse was about Eashoa Bar Nun, it should have appeared as “Joshua Bar Nun” in all the English language Bibles. But it did not; therefore, it is clearly a deliberate distortion of the Scriptures. Link to: http://www.v-a.com/bible/zechariah.html

Jesus Christ or Eashoa Msheekhah

[Eashoa Msheekhah in Syriac Aramaic script]

In the Ancient Aramaic language, the name of Eashoa (Jesus) is spelled “yeh-sheen-waw-ein.” (These are four consonants. In Aramaic the vowels are not in the form of letters of the alphabet. The vowels are added by dots and symbols to make pronunciation of the all-consonant words possible.) In English the “yeh” becomes “J,” the “sheen” becomes “s,” the “waw” becomes a “u,” and the “ein,” becomes an “s.” This makes “Jsus”; but according to English grammar, a vowel has to follow the “J” otherwise the name cannot be pronounced properly, so in the transliteration of the name, they added the “e” after the “J” and they ended up with “Jesus.”

Now, this might not sound like the same name, but since three of the four letters in the name don’t have English language equivalents, the English pronunciation had to be modified. Eashoa’ and Jesus are the very same name in fact, albeit the transliterations are of two very different languages, with four thousand years of divergent evolution.

The name of Christ comes from the Greek word for “The Anointed” or “Χριστός.” The English language is based on the Latin, which in turn is based on the Greek. The word “Msheekhah” is the original word for “The Anointed.” Another good choice for “Christ” is the Messiah — again from “Msheekhah.” This is the same word in all the languages, designating Jesus as the Messiah prophesied by the Old Testament.

4. I do not think that NT is as confusing as OT is. When you read NT plainly without any interpretation, just plainly like it happens on the first rehearsals in any theatre, usually text is read without any intonation or interpretation. Something like bla, bla, bla, bla, bla, bla bla, bla based on one musical note. It sounds sometimes very funny but it is like it goes.
The same though with all the text of Genesis, NT especially the Book of Revelation. The secret and magic about it is when one reads it as a simple references to the happenings which occur at present and believe me there is no need for any interpretation because the text is self-explanatory.

5. Returning to the very beginning of El, the first God, do not forget about this passage in John 1:1 and 2.
1. In the beginning [of creation]
there was the Manifestation*;
And that Manifestation was with God;
and God was [the embodiment of] that Manifestation.
2. This was in the beginning with God.
————–
Footnotes:

1:1 “Milta,” in Aramaic: the essential connotation for a person or thing.
There is no true English equivalent for this concept. [So far.]

‘Milta’ as a concept of a person or thing, there is a concept of the energy, E.

[ E ], El without the letter ‘l’, E.
The potential of this energy of E is such a magnificent power accumulated there, released then sand there and still being in motion of existence there and here, from the very beginning in manifestation, the manifestation of everything what exists in the entire universe without the limit.

No matter how small it is, the one, the remaining half shall always be able to divide into two, to infinity. Therefore E=MC2 does not exist because is limited.
Therefore e

By Marek Zielinski (wrote 15 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 5/1/2011 03:32 am

I agree with Tiuche. God, the Second Person of the Godhead Three, existed in eternity past. By Him all things were created. He is the Word. The Word became flesh, that is, God, the Second Person of the Godhead Three, incarnated becoming fully God and fully man. At birth, He was named “Jesus.” Believers often refer to “Jesus” as having lived in eternity past. Indeed, believers are correct. Except that, God, the Second Person of the Godhead Three, was not named “Jesus” before birth as He had not yet taken on a human nature. So, The God-Man, Jesus Christ can no longer be separated because He took on a dual nature. So, whether believers refer to Him as God or Jesus is OK with me. I understand what they are trying to say.

By Roland G (wrote 1416 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/30/2011 01:10 am

TIUCHE, for you a square can be round and a globe can have corners! And the light of a star that is millions of light years away can reach Earth in 6,000 years! And dinosaurs can live 70 million years before they are created! All this is “possible” for you. So am I surprised that in your mind Jesus is both God and a creation of God? Of course not. Blessed be your bewildered state of fantasy.

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/29/2011 19:06 pm

CHARLES DON’T YOU GET IT?
Jesus had a beginning… He is the ALPHA - the firstborn/ beginning of creation…does this then mean that because Jesus was a created being, that He is not God? He is God…the MIGHTY GOD the son, the image of the invisible God. while the only true God- the Almighty God is the Father…for us we have God the Father and one LORD Jesus Christ though there be many so called gods…the misunderstanding you have regarding Jesus that He is not God is liked that of the Jews when they tried to stone Jesus for saying He is God (John 10:33-36)….we are here to learn from one another,..to the believers who donot know what they are teaching and shall teach men so…what will happen to them? They shall be least in the Kingdom…but remember the very least in the Kingdom will be greater than John the Baptist…

By TIUCHE (wrote 2759 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/29/2011 18:13 pm

TIUCHE, I have no hope of ever making you accept the truth, but let me just tackle one of your contradictions for now. In Post 110 you said that “Jesus was created” and that “He had a beginning”. These are your words. Then in post 114 you said “Jesus is God”. Now in the Greek, Roman and other mythologies we find many instances where gods were created. But the Christian mythology only accepts ONE God with NO beginning. So can you tell me which mythology you believe in?

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/29/2011 16:07 pm

Charles:
Of the four (4) report regarding the fulfillment of the 1st Phase of God’s Redemption Plan…the Gospel of John is to my opinion the most informative on who Jesus is! Jesus is God, do you know why? Because He had never & will never sin! Even angels sinned. But Jesus is the Lamb of God…in Him dwelt the full Godhead! Tell me now if He was not God…what was He, just a man? To make people doubt one of the books of the Bible, to make people doubt some scriptures, is like telling people that what they drink had dirt in it…not pure!

A Globe can have four corners even eight corners mind you, imagine a glove with a cube inside! Well the Holy Scripture say that the earth have four (4) corners (Revelation 7:1) and you won’t believe that? So you are the authority over the Bible?

What proof positive of early humans? Cro-magnum and neanderthal were humans? What is a human, a human is one created after God’s Kind in His image! Just because some scientist wrote that neanderthal and cro-magnum were men, you believe that than what is written in the scripture? The scripture states that the first human were created only about 4158 B.C., you won’t believe it? You rther believe men’s word over God’s infallible word?

They are proven science alright, geology, archaelogy & etc…..but you seem to imply that the Bible is not the proven word of God! There is no problem with all Sciences…for Science is a TOOL- the methodical study of all things….the problem is to believe every statement of men who use THIS TOOL… just because several scientist claim he use the Scientific method, then begin to write that there were humans before Adam and Eve, you believe it as though it is the Words of God….And no I am not right….nor is science wrong…..what I am stating is the writing of Scientist
that there were humans before Adam and Eve is wrong…I am not ashamed of being a believer of the KIng of Books- for HIS WORD IS TRUTH! AND THE WORD IS GOD! the HOLY BIBLE IS THE AUTHORTY OVER US, AND NOT US THE AUTHORITY OVER IT; THAT IS WHY WE STUDY IT HERE!

By TIUCHE (wrote 2759 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/29/2011 13:51 pm

Re Post 112. TIUCHE, two reasons why I doubt the authenticity of the Gospel of John. 1. It was written too long after the death of Jesus. At the time of writing John was probably long dead himself (obviously he was not the real author.) 2. John seems so different from the other gospels. It s the only one, for example, that deifies Jesus (”Whoever has seen me has seen the Father”, “I am in the Father and the Father in me”, and several other such verses). That’s why I say that denying the deity of Jesus is contrary to the Gospel of John.

Re squares and circles, yes you can draw a square inside of a circle and vice versa. So!? You keep confusing yourself perhaps because you keep imagining a flat circle instead of a globe, which is what Earth is. And a globe can’t have corners, period.

And, finally, ok, now I know that you are a YEC. Well, we know from the story of creation that the Bible is certainly no authority on cosmology. We have proof positive and physical evidence of the Cro-Magnon and other early humans as well as dinosaurs and other animals that lived 70 million years before God created them (sic), so the Bible is no authority on archaeology either. Or on geology, evolutionary biology, and many other branches of science. But all this proven science is wrong and you are right, huh!!

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/28/2011 19:51 pm

Charles:
Why do you say that believing that Jesus was a the beginning of God’s creation contradict John gospel? Would you know that the writer of Revelation is also John, although some scholars would deny this? And why have doubt about the book of John when it is written by the beloved disciple of jesus Christ?
Cant you draw a square inside a circle? Who would constrain you?
Who said that there were humans before Adam and Eve our first parent. God created Adam more less in 4159 B.C….i made in a mistake in stating it was 4058. Review secular history books and archaeology! Don’t you rely too much on Science that state that there were already humans thirty thousand years ago…such as the Cromagnum man, neanderthal man…The Bible should be the authority not science books! If one bookof the Bible is unrelaible…then it will cause a toboggan slide…all scripture is inspired of God!

By TIUCHE (wrote 2759 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/28/2011 17:43 pm

Re: Post 109. John, what is your basis for thinking that Jesus was purposefully left out of the OT in order not to confuse the Israelites? Does Jesus or Paul tell us that or are you just making it up? The Israelites did in fact have more than one god. It was only when their political power waned that they became serious about monotheism. And do you think that we in the NT are not just as confused?

Re: Post 110. TIUCHE, let me make sure I answer all your points:
1. I KNOW elohim is plural. I know the Bible acknowledges several gods.
2. Ok, so you believe that Jesus was created, that he had a beginning, and that he is lesser than God. I have no quarrel with your beliefs. I will just state that your beliefs contradict the Gospel of John. (And I don’t mean that in a bad way because I have serious reservations with the Gospel of John myself.)
3. Isaiah 40:22 does NOT state that the Earth is round. If you ever stood on a hill, as Isaiah did, you would see a circular horizon. Isaiah was not seeing the whole world. Far from it! If you want to believe that this “circle of the earth” literally meant a round planet, then you’d have to also believe that the “four corners of the earth” literally meant a flat one. You have to be honest with interpretations and not pick and choose according to the argument at hand.
4. I think you confused yourself with your geometry example. The four (or eight or sixteen) directions of the compass are NOT corners. You can not have corners on a circle.
5. If God made our first parents in 4058 BC, then who made all the other humans that lived before that time?

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/28/2011 17:24 pm

Charles:
God (Elohim in Hebrew is plural) that is why in other scriptures it states that Hear O Israel the LORD our God (plural-Elohim) is One(meaning united) LORD (DEUTERONOMY 6:4).That is why Jesus asked: Is it not written I said you are gods (note plural)?And He said further Father I pray thee that as WE are ONE, let this that You have given be ONE as we are ONE….God calls us to be a member of God’s Family…is He not our Father?

Where in the Bible that it says that Jesus had no beginnings? Jesus was created…is that not clear yet in Rev. 3:14? He was before Abraham but He had a beginning!His Father is His God and the Father is greater than Jesus the Scripture says so….

Where in the Bible does it say that the earth is flat? The planet earth is ROUND as stated in Isaiah 40:22 .Scot nor I have not said there was four A C T U AL CORNERS…

In geometry class: let say you were told to make a circle and then set up four corners on it according to the dictate of your compass…THE NORTH, THE SOUTH, THE EAST & THE WEST.. we czn even make eight corners on it …would that be a contradiction? You just misunderstood our words…

Whether angels pre-existed creation of all things I donot know…what I believe is that when God created the Earth to be habitable,
and then at about 4058 B.C. made our first parents in their (note plural) image….God the Father, God the Son and the angels were responsible for that …
All our belief now is looking through the dark glass…but when Jesus returns in the future then God’s mystery will be finhished (Revelation 10:7)..

By TIUCHE (wrote 2759 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/28/2011 15:55 pm

Charles the name Jesus is the only absent in the OT. Jesus said in john8:58 I was before Abraham. He was not stated because this might have confusion to the Israelites they might end up saying they a 2 Gods.

By Cleopas john (wrote 61 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/28/2011 14:51 pm

I’m sorry TIUCHE, but this is a matter of pure logic now. To say a round earth can have corners IS a contradiction. A huge one! Now, in my opinion, the Bible portrays the world as flat, but this opinion has nothing to do with any reference to the four corners. That reference could very well be a mere figure of speech, as Scott Dale pointed out in Post 105. However, to say that a round world can have four ACTUAL corners is to make a mockery out of geometry.

In the same manner you can treat the words ‘Jesus is the beginning of God’s creation’ as a figure of speech. But for anyone to believe that Jesus has no beginning and yet is the beginning of God’s creation is not only a contradiction in terms but also a statement that would put Jesus in a very inferior position vis-a-vis God. I am glad you do not believe this to be the case.

You said you believe that God, Jesus, and probably angels created everything together. This is a valid article of faith when considered in conjunction with the gospel of John. I respect any faith that doesn’t contradict itself or go against the grains of truth. My issue with this view of creation is that Genesis does not in any way, shape or form indicate any involvement by Jesus. Jesus is totally absent in the entire Genesis and the entire OT. All indications are that the OT authors were not aware at all of Jesus’ existence (other that some of them were waiting for a Messiah who had yet to have any sort a beginning).

Also, are you suggesting that Angels also pre-existed creation (as Nukwa did in Gen 1:1 Post 173)? That would be consistent with several other Bible passages extolling the powers of other Elohim but would make the field of Gods too crowded for what is supposed to be a monotheistic faith.

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/28/2011 13:58 pm

Charles & Scot Dale:
I agree with Scot about his explanation on the round earth& the 4 corners via post #105 to correct Charles post #103 however Isaiah 40:22 gives us a hint that the earth is round…to say a round earth have four corners is not a contradiction!

Jesus is the BEGINNING of God’s creation- the FIRST among God’s creation…meaning God had created Him…Jesus was there before all others were created…the FIRST (the Alpha) before all things created…

Alpha, can be compared to the letter A of the alphabet.is there any letter before letter A? there is none…but letter A is the beginning…

On Jesus being the light mentioned on Genesis…I don’t believe He is that light because God (Elohim-plural, that means the Father & Son & probably with their Angels) spoke the Word Let there be light!

Yet please note that although God (Father & Son…) SPOKE the Word…the WORD was before them (See John 1:1)…note too that THE WORD LATER ON BECAME GOD (John 1:1)! wHERE DOES this leads us…

That God has magnified HIS WORD above all His Names (Psalm 138:2)…& Jesus the beginning of creation had become that WORD INCARNATE! HE ALONE IS WORTHY TO OPEN OUR UNDERSTANDING ON THE WORD (the Record/the Book) -Rev. 5:5.

By TIUCHE (wrote 2759 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/28/2011 11:42 am

1 thing i have noticed is that the a some thing which a not written in the bible. Why? 1 may ask. Its because other things are not much naccessary for us to know. Even other miracles & other dids Jesus did a not written in the bible. John21:25 this verse applies to the whole bible.

By Cleopas john (wrote 61 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/28/2011 11:20 am

For the record, the Bible nowhere directly says that the earth is round; but of course, we know for a fact that it is. However, the earth, though it is round, actually DOES have corners when understood in the way the bible indicates. The words “four corners” or “four winds” are always and only given in reference to direction thereby disecting the earth into four quadrants relative to the axis of the sunrise and sunset. These axis points form actual “corners” of direction. It is never a reference to the actual terra firma.

By Scott Dale (wrote 496 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/28/2011 05:14 am

“Through him (Jesus) all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.” John 1:3

By Scott Dale (wrote 496 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/28/2011 04:55 am

TIUCHE, that’s exactly my point. It’s a contradiction. It’s like believing that Earth is round and also believing that it has four corners. Can’t! Either you believe that Jesus is the Alpha and the Omega (i.e. he was there BEFORE creation), or you believe that Jesus is the light of Genesis (i.e. he was CREATED). You have to choose one or the other. You can’t defend two contradictory statements.

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/27/2011 17:17 pm

Charles:
Jesus is the Alpha and Omega-the BEGINNING …although MADE an high priest forever after the order of Melchizedek..having NO beginning OF DAYS nor end of life yet Jesus IS THE BEGINNING OF the creation of God (Revelation 3:14)…

By TIUCHE (wrote 2759 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/27/2011 16:46 pm

Nukwa, I have been through this before (see for example my post # 75 in this thread). The idea that Jesus is the light of Genesis has absolutely no basis. Tell me, in which verse does Genesis imply in the slightest that Jesus had anything at all to do with creation! Not only is Jesus totally absent from Genesis, he is not even mentioned in the entire OT. Not once! Now you can of course believe whatever you want but if Jesus is the light of Genesis it means he was created. It means he had a beginning. Is this what you believe? Do you believe that Jesus was created?

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/27/2011 03:02 am

In response to Charles (post #96): Oh Yes Light is an object… Jesus is THE Light… The true and absolute nature of light may not be fully discussed now but even for scientific purposes Light as a form of energy is directly related to matter as the equation E=MC2 demonstrates. When we see objects, physical particles (of light) are actually bombarding our retina. Your retina could be physically damaged should the light become too intense! And beloved, bulbs do not produce light as such they only convert energy from one form to light. As in any of God’s creation, We cannot create(produce) light although we can play around, explore, subdue,transform and use it. Yes indeed light is physical and can destroy physical objects in much the same way as sound can. (or heat can etc.)

By Nukwa Yeshua (wrote 7 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/27/2011 01:36 am

This verse should be understood in the context of the previous verses…and the next verses.

It simply means that when the earth was created (verse 1) it was at first unoccupied,it was still useless (see the meaning of void) and its face was dark and murky (verse 2) probably covered with thick mists or clouds,the counting
for God’s Day did not start yet…

Then God through His Word (verse 3) created the light by preparing the earth and clearing the mists and the clouds which in a way cleared the face of the earth-this was the start of counting it was the FIRST DAY…

…then later to permanently fixed the day(w/ light) and night (small light) He made the lights from His created sun and moon, with the STARS (see verse 16) to pass through earth atmosphere and now viewable through spaceship earth… this was finished and it was the 4th Day (see verse 14-18)…

All of these are mere conjectures…but the Word of God is the word of God…it is the authority…that is what we should remember always. The Bible is over science and logic…but we must study if methodically and logically…

By TIUCHE (wrote 2759 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/26/2011 15:31 pm

I enjoyed jim t’s scientific explanation of light (post 97), but his last paragraph is a non-sequitur. The Biblical story of creation barely mentions the stars or anything that is not readily visible by the naked eye, so I doubt that the light of Genesis had anything to do with photons or any invisible light. Genesis 1 is a story of the PHYSICAL creation of Earth and its contents, with scant mention of anything else. The creation of light was a day’s work for God, as was the creation of the waters, trees, and so forth. Earth with its plants, animals, creeping creatures, and Adam and Eve are all PHYSICAL creations. There is nothing symbolic or invisible about them. Why are we making an exception with light?

Light was not even the first thing that God created. God created light AFTER he had already created the heaven and the earth (which is scientifically impossible, but that’s another argument!) If light is this something “pure, beautiful, and beyond human understanding”, as jim t tells us, then why did God create heaven without it? If we are to interpret God’s creation of light in the terms that “God is light”, then did God create himself? If light is “the opposite of darkness”, then did God also create darkness? Did God create evil?

I understand all this conjecturing about the meaning of the Genesis light. It’s an effort to understand something that doesn’t make any scientific sense. But creating our own unscientific interpretations only muddles the issue.

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/26/2011 14:05 pm

What is light?

Light has both particle-like properties and wave properties. That is, light sometimes behaves like invisible particles called photons.

These photons can collide with other particles such as electrons, and be deflected like microscopic marbles. At the same time, light also displays wavelengths which can act similar to water waves or sound waves. Scientists accept this unusual dual nature of light without completely understanding it.

We are familiar with visible light, of course. The sun produces the dramatic colors that brighten our day. Rainbows, blue skies, red sunsets all result from the separation of sunlight into its spectral colors. However, this visible light is only a small part of the total picture. The sun and other stars also emit many kinds of light that our eyes cannot see. You have heard of some of these forms of light: radio waves and microwaves, ultraviolet and infrared, x-rays and gamma rays. All of these strange varieties of light flood our sky continually. If we could see them, the heavens would appear to be bright with energy. Although this sounds dangerous, it should be noted that the microwaves from space are just a whisper, much weaker than those produced inside a microwave oven. Also, most of the ultraviolet and x-rays are safely absorbed by the earth’s atmosphere. In recent years, instruments have been designed to detect and learn from these invisible kinds of light. For example, infrared telescopes show us many new details of stars and galaxies, and receivers for the radio waves are built in the form of huge dishes. There is obviously much more light in space than “meets the eye,” and each variety of light, visible or invisible, has its own story to tell about the heavens.

Light was part of the initial creation, the opposite of darkness (Gen. 1:3). God is called “light” (1 John 1:5) and “Father of the heavenly lights” (James 1:17). This is a fitting title because light is pure, beautiful, and beyond human understanding. Christians are expected to be part of this image, since we are told to let our light “shine before men” (Matt. 5:16).

By jim t (wrote 1 Bible Commentary - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/26/2011 10:03 am

Light is not an object. Everything else that God created – the planet Earth, the trees, the animals, Adam - these are all objects. Light is not. Light is a product of other objects - such as a star, a battery, or a light bulb. So how could God create light before first creating the objects that produce it?

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/25/2011 23:55 pm

Light was first determined in the mind of God then God SAID it should be and it became a reality in this other dimension he was creating.

By Nukwa Yeshua (wrote 7 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 4/25/2011 22:49 pm

I was thinking the same thing about the light being Jesus then he would be with God at the beginning of creation. And Jesus says I’m the light of the world. It’s fun to ponder

By Ashley (wrote 1 Bible Commentary - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 2/21/2011 21:40 pm

Reason or faith? Even when reason fails, Jesus enjoins us to have faith: “Believe me that I am in the Father , and the Father in me; or else believe me for the very works’ sake.” (John 14:11)

By Jayant Christian (wrote 287 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 12/14/2010 16:35 pm

Charles,

A not-so-brief response to your post #86: “I hope you agree with me that faith doesn’t mean shutting oneself to reason.”

I agree wholeheartedly. But I also believe the converse is true: “reason doesn’t mean shutting oneself faith.”

Faith and reason are funny things sometimes. Here’s a personal experience to illustrate what I mean:

As a skeptic by nature, I used to have little affection or confidence in chiropractors. Then, one day as things go, I had a GREAT physical need. My normal doctor had me going to physical therapy. After 10 or 12 sessions: no improvement. Someone suggested their chiropractor and after 22 bone-cracking adjustments I was WORSE! By this time I was losing much business because I was simply unable to work. In my distress and pain I got very desperate for God to intervene. Not much later I was at a church function and overheard someone singing the praises of their chiropractor. My pride wanted me to ignore it but my pain told me to inquire. I obeyed my pain and asked the man to tell me about his experience. He explained how his chiropractor had set him free from all his maladies and then went on to describe to me each and every symptom that I myself was experiencing! The skeptic in me asked him; “What does your chiropractor do that mine doesn’t?” He told me and I was impressed enough to investigate for two hours that night on the internet. My pain was driving me to go but I still needed to satisfy my REASON. I needed to understand how this doctor was different.

As the story goes, I went to his chriopractor EAGER to be healed! After the very first painless adjustment, improvement began and I knew I was on the road to recovery. After three weeks I was nearly completely healed. Three more weeks of treatments and I was. That was 5 years ago and I have come to trust this man’s judgment completely. I don’t need to satisfy my understanding anymore when he tells me something about my body. I have learned to trust him FIRST even though my reason for doing so has not been fully satisfied; then, eventually, I come to understand.

Before I knew Dr. Johnson, my faith took a back-seat to reason. But after knowing him; reason now takes a back seat to my faith in him.

I have known the Lord a lot longer now than I’ve known my chiropractor Dr. Johnson. I don’t understand everything in the Bible but I can tell you that the skeptic in me is long gone. What I don’t understand, I wait on. What I DO understand is way more than enough to keep me occupied and believing! But I don’t second guess it anymore. Concerning the two points you raised about executing gays and the creation story, there are certainly reasons to be skeptical; but in my own personal studies of these two issues over the years, I’ve come to a sea-change of understanding.

By Scott Dale (wrote 496 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 12/14/2010 14:27 pm

Regardless of how I feel about some passages of the Bible, I remain fascinated by the wonderful example that Jesus set for us.

By Charles Fiott (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 12/14/2010 13:57 pm