Hidden Revelation in the Genealogy From Adam to Noah


This is the first Guest Article that I’m featuring, an enlightening insight into the genealogy from Adam of Noah. I gladly welcome more on any topic :)

For those of you who have been following Apologia tou Kristou, this is the third featured example of the Messiah, Jesus Christ being declared waaaaaay back in the Old Testament.

(See A-Cross to the Promised Land and Christ as God in the Old Testament, with The LORD Said to my Lord and Isaiah in the Dead Sea Scrolls for additional support.)

And now, from guest blogger Michael Parson:

—————

I have much to share that might not be known by some, and would love to build up knowledge and faith (with the help of Jesus). I thought I might start by showing you a interesting insight I have come across from listening to lectures given by Dr. Chuck Missler.

Sometimes when reading Scripture we find things that at first glance seem to be nothing more than a bit of information the Spirit has put there so we will understand history. A good question to ask is, did God place this here for more than describing history?

I recall this about myself, how many times I have opened the New Testament and skipped over the genealogy of Jesus in Matthew. I heard a testimony of a Jewish man who found Christ through the start of Matthew. He had not known about Jesus, and when he read the Genealogy it hit home to his Jewish roots.

The Spirit places things there for many reasons. It tells us in Proverbs 25:2 - “[It is] the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings [is] to search out a matter.”

And Jesus tells us in the Gospels that if we look at the Scriptures (meaning the Old Testament), we will find that they are written about Him.
 
So I would like to share with you another discovery from a genealogy we find in the Bible. This one is found near the beginning of the Bible, in Genesis 5 . It is the genealogy from Adam to Noah.

You will find from the Scriptures that it was common for people to name children with a meaning. Usually it would describe an attribute, an act in their lives, or something to come.  A great example of this is Jesus, Whose name means salvation.

Hebrew names come from a root word, for example Adam comes from the root word ‘adomah’ which means ‘man’. This is a fitting name as he was the first man.

As we carry on throughout this genealogy, we can dig up the meanings of the names from their Hebrew roots. For time’s sake I will only give a few examples of root words, but remember what God said to us in Proverbs 25:2. 

Continuing through Genesis 5, we find Seth is next in line after Adam. Seth’s name means ‘appointed’, you will find a reference to this in Gen 4:25, where Eve says God has appointed her another son in place of Abel who had been killed by Cain.

After this we find Enosh which means ‘mortal’. The root is ‘anash’ which mean incurable, wound, grief… You can see how his name means mortal with words like that associated with it!

Next we have Kenan which means ‘sorrow’. Some of these name meanings are a bit sombre, I don’t think I would like to be named sorrow! I wonder why parents would name their child that? I can just imagine:

“Honey, I’m pregnant.”

“Oh man, my freedom is gone! Sorrow, oh what sorrow!”

:) Sorry, I’ll go on. Next we have Mahalalel. Things get a bit brighter with the meaning of his name. The first portion ‘mahalal’ means ‘blessed’ or ‘praise’, and ‘El’ is the name for God. (When you see ‘El’ in any name it has God’s name built into it, like Daniel.) So Mahalalel means ‘the blessed God’.

Next we have Jared which means ‘shall come down’. A rather odd meaning for a name? But read on and you shall see…

After this we have Enoch, which means ‘teaching’ or ‘commencement’. We know from the book of Hebrews that Enoch did not die – he was taken up by the Lord. His story is one of salvation. At 65 years old, he turned to God and walked with Him for the remainder of his 300 years of life, as a prophet proclaiming God’s judgment on a corrupt Earth.

The judgment would later come by the Great Flood in Noah’s time. There is a lot to talk about when it comes to Enoch, but I will save it for another day. I’d also love to address the reason for the long life spans in the Bible.

Next we have Methuselah. His name means ‘his death shall bring’. Methuselah’s name is actually a prophecy for the day of his death, for the Great Flood ‘his death shall bring.’

You will find a great show of Gods grace in this for Methuselah has the longest life span recorded in Scripture. God gave the world 969 years to turn from sin. But they did not.

Next we have Lamech, the root of his name means ‘despairing’. You will see the meaning of his name still evident in the English word ‘lament’. 

Now last but not least, we have Noah. His name comes from the word ‘nacham’ which means ‘to bring relief’. Noah’s name means ‘comfort’ and ‘rest’.

And we’re done, from Adam all the way to Noah! Now this is where it gets good. I’m sure you will find it worthwhile.

Is the above just a genealogy filled with interesting names? Or is it something more? Now that we’ve found the root meanings of each name, let’s put them all in order:

Adam - Man
Seth - Appointed
Enosh – Mortal
Kenan – Sorrow
Mahalalel – The blessed God
Jared – Shall come down
Enoch – Teaching
Methuselah – His death shall bring
Lamech – Despairing
Noah – Comfort and rest

Put those meanings into a complete sentence and you get: Man (is) appointed mortal sorrow, (but) the blessed God shall come down teaching. His death shall bring (the) despairing comfort and rest.

And there you have it, in the names of Adam to Noah, a summary of the New Testament message – the Gospel of Jesus Christ!

For Jesus is Himself God, who came to down to Earth to teach. His sacrificial death on the cross washed away the sins of despairing man, and gave them comfort and rest.

Wow that’s great eh! I would say there is no way it could be by chance. A seemingly boring genealogy holds inside itself a short summary of the New Testament, and also holds the statement that Jesus is God.

Jesus was right when He said the whole of Scripture speaks of Him! The Bible has the fingerprint of God all over it. It has a depth that we could spend all of eternity searching. And if we search with the power of the Spirit, He will show us the wonders to be found in the Scriptures.

Thank you for spending the time to read this, and I hope it put a smile in your heart! God bless.

Michael Parson

—————


61 Responses to “Hidden Revelation in the Genealogy From Adam to Noah”

  1. Michelle Says:

    I’m addict when it comes to studing about my Savior Jesus Christ…and I never saw what you pointed out in the meaning of the names……thanks for the smile! It was a ” no duh” thanks for pointing it out

    God Bless

  2. john Says:

    if u would like to know the message from thr hebrew names of the apostles, which there were more than 12, hidden in the brit hadasha eail me back

    P.S.
    its more than u think,

    john

  3. Anya Says:

    Not to put a damper on all this or anything – it is a pretty cool discovery, but first off, “adomah” means “earth” or “ground” in hebrew, and “adam” means man, because the first man was made from earth: you got the cause and effect of the name mixed up a little. This makes me wonder about the validity of your other translations, but that’s not my main point.

    Even if that entire translation is true, all it means the way you phrased it, is that this COULD happen – it’s not proof that Jesus was it. Also, you added words and broke them up according to a message you wanted to find. What if that read: “Man [was] appointed mortal [causing] sorrow [to] the blessed G-d. {but one] shall come down teaching. His death will bring despairing, comfort, and death.”

    Considering that Adam & Eve were sentenced to mortality as a result of disobeying G-d – causing the Lord sorrow for the creations were imperfect, or (if we believe milton) because G-d knew it would happen and is sad that it did – this other version makes sense. I’m not saying it’s more or less right, just pointing out that there are more options of putting those words together.

  4. Scott Thong Says:

    Appreciate your comments and clarification, Anya! Your version works too, but you meant the last part to be ‘His death will bring despairing, comfort, and rest’ right?

    For the record, it’s true that a coincidence like this is not proof that Jesus was the fulfillment of it. On their own, any of the Messianic prophecies don’t seem to amount to much, and they could easily fit any number of other individuals.

    (Psalm 22:17′s “I can count all of my bones. They look and stare at me” could apply to the robbers being crucified with Jesus, and being hung on a tree happened to Judas Iscariot.)

    But when all the prophecies and criteria are taken together, only Jesus fulfilled them all. A relatively vague hidden message like the subject of this post is much less direct than, say, Isaiah’s prophecies. It will be interesting to see what other Easter eggs God has prepared in His holy word!

  5. Jamie Says:

    How about Humpty Dumpty?

    Various explanations for the origin of the nursery rhyme exist, but you could interpret it as an allegory for mankind.

    At the beginning of the world, Humpty dumpty sat on the wall of protection God had accorded him, but he fell when he sinned. None of the King’s prophets, priests or judges could restore man’s brokenness and put his soul back together again. Only the King of Kings could do it.

  6. Anya Says:

    Yes, that is what I meant, thanks! (and sorry).

    as to Jesus fulfilling all the prophecies – I was recently told that it is only we peons that “do not know all the prophecies” that would cite this one, and nevertheless, since it makes a clear point: one of the main purposes or guarantees of the Meshiah was supposed to be that after his coming, there will be the ever cliche’d “peace on Earth” – an everlasting, reigning peace. This is the most obvious example of what did not happen after Jesus

    And about humpty dumpty: it very well could have been meant as an allegory of mankind, however definitely was not a predecessor to Jesus(as evidenced by the language. old english, and middle english, wouldn’t look like that), so beyond underscoring that there can be multiple interpretations, and that one can make anything have an interpretation fit with the message they want to get across, I don’t see what your point was..??

  7. Scott Thong Says:

    I think Jamie’s quoting an 1800s nusery rhyme was meant as a tongue-in-cheek joke… Wikipedia says it likely refers to a cannon, a person or a building. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humpty_dumpty

    Similar analogies can be found in the Lord of the Rings and especially the Chronicles of Narnia books, but these all refer to Jesus in hindsight – therefore are not prophetic of His Messiahship.

    Rather, they can be considered to be inspired by Jesus’ life, a tribute to Him, or a way to spread the Gospel message through literature and media.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lord_of_the_Rings#Influences

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chronicles_of_Narnia#Christian_parallels

    ————–

    On whether Jesus brought peace to mankind…

    The peace that the Messiah brings does not have to mean political and physical peace on this Earth at this time… After all, Jesus said to His followers that “All men will hate you because of Me” – definitely not very peaceful.

    Rather, it can mean the peace between God and man that the Messiah’s atoning sacrifice gifts to us. Or the peace in the hearts, minds and attitudes of Christians toward others. Or even the peace of knowing that God is always watching over us and that we have a place with Him by His side in heaven.

    (Compare the establishment of the Kingdom of God that the Messiah was supposed to bring – Christian theology explains that the Kingdom is not political or geological, but rather spiritual as God is. The Kingdom that was established is the fellowship of all believers who have the Holy Spirit within them. e.g. John 3:5 – “I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit.”)

    And of course, when Jesus returns to defeat all evil, abolish death and reign on Earth – then peace on Earth will be established in all ways.

  8. Anya Says:

    So then my question there becomes, where did the entire notion of the “second coming” come from? It seems mostly like a way to fix the fact that Jesus did not in fact do all that the Messiah was prophecied to do – an addition to explain how it is he could still be the Messiah. (Or, according to the Mormons, there already was a second coming, in the America’s, which is the foundation of the book of Mormon…)

    I understand the notion that the peace on earth thing didn’t have to be literal, and the potential versions you gave are possible, except “the peace in the hearts, minds and attitudes of Christians toward others”. First, isn’t one of the reasons for the Messiah’s coming that he would reconcile all the people of the earth under the one G-d? And also, historically speaking, Christianity is one of the most violent religions – crusades, missonaries, etc. If they were brought peace to their minds and attitudes toward others, why would they seek to convert – through violnet meands – all those others?

    And one last thing (sorry), technically, isn’t every human being one of G-d’s chilldren? Therefore every single one of us was born of the Spirit, and of water (simply because we get washed as soon as we are born, or because babies are held in fluid while in the womb, etc..). Also, Kingdom of G-d is a questionable term – is that here on Earth? after all, G-d did create all of this – a kingdom of sorts. And every creature that enters it does so through G-d’s volition. In that sense, John would be completely right(and telling the truth), because there is in fact no other way to enter this kingdom. Similarly, if it is the kingdom of the afterlife, then the only assumption is that no one who wasn’t born here on earth(or in a similar way) could make it in, it still doesn’t actually limit who of the people/creatures here on earth would..

  9. Scott Thong Says:

    No need to apologize Anya… Discussion is what comments are all about. I’ll try my best to accurately explain doctrine to you – I’m not theologically trained, except for my own reading and study. Hope I can be of clarifying help.

    —–So then my question there becomes, where did the entire notion of the “second coming” come from? It seems mostly like a way to fix the fact that Jesus did not in fact do all that the Messiah was prophecied to do – an addition to explain how it is he could still be the Messiah. (Or, according to the Mormons, there already was a second coming, in the America’s, which is the foundation of the book of Mormon…)—–

    Well, the notion of the Second Coming stems from several verses, one of which is an account of angelic testimony regarding Christ’s return. These same verses also flatly refute the claims of the Mormons, the Jehovah’s Witnesses, Sun Myung Moon and other cults – especially cult leaders like Moon who claim that THEY are Christ returned!

    So here are some verses to clarify:

    “After he (Jesus) said this, he was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid him from their sight. They were looking intently up into the sky as he was going, when suddenly two men dressed in white stood beside them. “Men of Galilee,” they said, “why do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven.”(Acts 1:9-11)

    So it is clearly stated by heavenly messengers that Jesus will come back from heaven again one day, in the same way He went – from above. This ‘coming back’ is what is referred to as the Second Coming, since Jesus already came once.

    2 Thessalonians 2:1-4 tells that Jesus’ return will not take place until the Man of Lawlessness (the anti-Christ) appears and proclaims himself god. This has not yet happened, so the Mormon doctrine is wrong.

    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20thes%202;&version=31;

    Jesus Himself also said: “In my Father’s house are many rooms; if it were not so, I would have told you. I am going there to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am. ” (John 14:2-3)

    And then: “I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you.” (John 14:18)

    Mark 13 and Matthew 24 records Jesus’ warnings about the end times. After the persecution of believers is complete, Jesus says that:

    “Immediately after the distress of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.”

    “At that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and all the nations of the earth will mourn. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky, with power and great glory. And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.” (Matthew 24:29-31)

    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2024&version=31

    Clearly, the return of the Son of Man will come AFTER the massive persecution of believers and frightening celestial phenomena. And when He comes, it will be witnessed by all people on Earth. Thus all claims that the Second Coming has already ‘secretly’ happened are blatantly false.

    Also note how the first mention of the Second Coming comes from Jesus Himself, and the next from two angels. It was not an invention of Paul as some might accuse.

    Info bite: Son of Man was a term Jesus used to refer to Himself by. It is one of the Messiah’s titles, harkening back to the prophet Daniel’s vision:

    “In my vision at night I looked, and there before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed. (Daniel 7:13-14)

    Finally, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_coming has more explanation, and a long list of verses and links.

    —–I understand the notion that the peace on earth thing didn’t have to be literal, and the potential versions you gave are possible, except “the peace in the hearts, minds and attitudes of Christians toward others”. First, isn’t one of the reasons for the Messiah’s coming that he would reconcile all the people of the earth under the one G-d? —–

    I would agree that the Messiah comes to reconcile all peoples to God – but only those who willingly choose to. God will not impose His will over the free will of people, and thus, each of us is free to reject reconcilition if we want to.

    You can read my post on the doctrine of Hell for more of free will: http://scottthong.wordpress.com/2006/11/07/hell-if-i-know/ (9th paragraph onwards)

    For some reason, God decided to send Jesus as Messiah to us for just three years of public ministry, and then leave the rest to frail humans. But that went quite well, as the most heavily persecuted religion in history somehow managed to reach 2 billion people. (Whether they are practising, church-going, Bible-reading believers is sadly another matter.)

    I firmly believe in a literal, worldwide peace – but the time for it to be established is not here yet. Perhaps it is because “The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.” (2 Peter 3:9)

    —–And also, historically speaking, Christianity is one of the most violent religions – crusades, missonaries, etc. If they were brought peace to their minds and attitudes toward others, why would they seek to convert – through violnet meands – all those others?—–

    The Crusades, Conquistadors and Inquisition are one of the darkest marks on the history of the Church… Yet are these the failings of what Christianity teaches, or the failings of sinful and corrupt men?

    Nowhere in the New Testament can we find justification or commands to spread the Gospel by the sword. Even in the Old Testament, where God authorizes severe punishments, the judgements are always localized and restricted to a particular extremely evil society. Never in the whole Bible does it say to wage war to spread God’s word – on the contrary, Jesus’ command is to ‘love your enemy’ as well as your neighbour.

    My opinion is that the Crusades were launched for political reasons. It made the European nations rally to a cause and stop killing each other. The Pope had absolute authority, reading the Bible was restricted to priests, and the common people were uneducated. If the Pope told them that invading Jerusalem and killing all nonChristians was God’s holy will, how would the poor soldiers know any better? Today, you would be hard pressed to convince an educated, matrue believer that the Bible commands unbelievers to be nuked.

    As a comparison, very good people and very bad people can be found in all belief systems… Mother Teresa as opposed to the Klu Klux Klan; the Dalai Lama as opposed to Talduwe Somarama (Buddhist monk who assassinated the Sri Lankan president); liberal human-rights as opposed to Lenin, Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot.

    And see the peace that the majority nonviolent Christians have brought – hospitals, charities, orphanages, abolition of slavery, civil rights for African Americans… And the countless martyrs who chose to die rather than use force to oppose their persecutors? http://scottthong.wordpress.com/2007/03/28/christians-are-the-most-persecuted-people-of-all/

    I firmly believe that without the guiding rules set down by God, the example of Jesus and the morality that the Apostles kept on encouraging us to uphold, the world would be a much more horrifying place.

    Atheism, a rejection of belief in God, frees people up to do despicable things – because they hold themselves not accountable to anyone’s moral standards. Quite frankly, atheistic Communists killed far more people than all the god-claiming religions combined. They may have been guided by some skewed philosophy, but the fact is that they flatly rejected the existence of any god.

    http://scottthong.wordpress.com/2007/06/26/communism-atheism-relative-morality/

    http://scottthong.wordpress.com/2006/08/30/morality-of-absolutes-and-relatives/

    http://scottthong.wordpress.com/2007/06/26/fascism-and-bestiality-atheists-please-tell-me-why-i-am-morally-wrong/

    —–And one last thing (sorry), technically, isn’t every human being one of G-d’s chilldren? Therefore every single one of us was born of the Spirit, and of water (simply because we get washed as soon as we are born, or because babies are held in fluid while in the womb, etc..).—

    John 3:5-6, “Jesus answered, “I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit.”

    The theological understanding is that all people are born to flesh, being organic creatures. But in order to have our spirit ‘born’ (awakened), it takes the power of the Spirit of God.

    John the Baptist said: “I baptize you with water, but he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit.” (Matthew 3:11)

    Jesus said: “And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever — the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you. ” (John 14:16-17)

    Jesus said: “For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.” (Acts 1:5)

    “When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them. When they arrived, they prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, because the Holy Spirit had not yet come upon any of them; they had simply been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus. Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.” (Acts 8:14-17)

    All the followers of Jesus had been baptized in water. But they had not been baptized with the Holy Spirit until Jesus had left the Earth and then sent down the Holy Spirit. And as John 14 says, if anyone does not accept Jesus, they cannot accept the Holy Spirit either.

    Threfore, in mainstream Christian doctrine, in order to enter the kingdom of God as a child of God, with full inheritance, one must receive the Holy Spirit willingly – and that involves accepting Christ’s offer of reconciliation and forgiveness.

    (And flesh is often portrayed as the opposite of the Spirit, e.g. desires of the flesh.)

    —–Also, Kingdom of G-d is a questionable term – is that here on Earth? after all, G-d did create all of this – a kingdom of sorts. And every creature that enters it does so through G-d’s volition. In that sense, John would be completely right(and telling the truth), because there is in fact no other way to enter this kingdom.—–

    As I’ve explained in a previous comment, the Christian doctrine of the Kingdom of God is a spiritual and heavenly one.

    At the trial before Pontius Pilate: “Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place.” (John 18:36)

    However, I agree that originally this entire creation was meant to be a pure and holy kingdom for God. But then man’s sin corrupted creation, introducing death and suffering.

    “For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God. We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time.” (Romans 8:21-22)

    And having thus fallen, God allowed Satan to rule over the world for a time.

    “Now is the time for judgment on this world; now the prince of this world will be driven out.” (John 12:31)

    “As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, 2in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. ” (Ephesians 2:1-2)

    So currently, the kingdom of God has been hijacked and usurped by evil.

    How can this fallen world be brought back to perfection and into God’s holy presence? Only through the redemptive power and sacrifice of Jesus, and this will be fully accomplished at the End of Days and the Second Coming of the Christ.

    “But in keeping with his promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, the home of righteousness.” (2 Peter 3:13)

    That brings me to the question: If heaven and the restored Earth are perfect, but we remain as our current sinful selves, wouldn’t our presence in perfection make it imperfect? Like how a single non-H2O molecule makes a sample water no longer pure. Read my post for an explanation:

    http://scottthong.wordpress.com/2006/11/07/pure-soul-water/

    Thus, only by Jesus’ cleansing, ‘reformatting’ power and forgiveness that washes away our sins completely can we enter the perfect new creation. There is no other way except to accept Him and the Holy Spirit He gives us.

    —–Similarly, if it is the kingdom of the afterlife, then the only assumption is that no one who wasn’t born here on earth(or in a similar way) could make it in, it still doesn’t actually limit who of the people/creatures here on earth would..—–

    I’m not so clear what you mean in this sentence, but I’m guessing you’re saying ‘Only those NOT born on this Earth will be turned away from heaven (kingdom of the afterlife). Therefore, all people and creatures will enter heaven, since they are born on Earth.’

    As I’ve said, the imperfect can never enter the perfect… For then the perfect would ebcome imperfect too. So although we are all born on this Earth, none of us is clean enough to touch the afterlife kingdom without soiling it… Not until we are cleansed by accepting Jesus’ guilt offering on our behalf.

    ———-

    On a final note, one interpretation among followers of Judaism is that the concept of Messiah is purely allegorical. Messiah does not refer to a man, but to the nation of Israel in general – how it suffers, is persecuted and is finally redeemed by God.

    On the other hand, Messianic Jews have come to accept the Jesus fulfilled the criteria and thus is the Messiah, but being Jews, they do not abadon their culture and rituals. Thus they are basically Jews who believe that Jesus is Messiah.

    And apart from Jesus’ own claims to be Messiah, the Son of Man, the only Son of God, and God Himself – why should we think that He was Messiah and not anyone else?

    This site gives a partial list (partial because there are even more very exact prophecies) of Messianic prophecies that Jesus fulfilled:

    http://www.allabouttruth.org/messianic-prophecy.htm

  10. Anya Says:

    Wow that was long. Thanks for the attention, although, I find myself with just more questions..(sorry!)

    All the mentions of the second coming that you listed come form the New Testament, which, according to history, was hand-chosen by a council of leaders at Nicea several hundred years after Jesus actually lived. So, there is a high chance that the text that made it into the New Testament actually follows that same political inclination (ok, not same, but also political) on which you blame the crusades, right? Not only that, but the writings at that point, are pretty much guaranteed to have been heavily altered from the writings that would have existed/been created during Jesus’ lifetime – for one thing, because many of them were retold by word of mouth, and then rewritten when they reached someone/where that could write it down.

    I’m not saying the teachings of Christianity are immoral, evil, or anything along those lines. I question the notion that the only way to redemption is to accept Jesus as the Messiah. For one thing, because the support for specifically Jesus being the messiah, is, again, based heavily on the New Testament, with its aforementioned flaws. Definitely the examples you mentioned of good Christians are a valid point, but that, in my opinion, speaks more to the fact that it’s human nature, not the religion, that leads to both ‘saintly’ people like Mother Teresa, and ‘evil’ people. Is religion then unrelated to morality? The reason Mother Teresa was as good as she is, is that religion? or life experience? or the particular way she was taught scripture? the reason the KKK is so…anti human, is that religion? or, etc.

    I’m not atheist, so I tend to agree that without the guidelines given to us by G-d the world would be worse off. However, I don’t think that that’s a reason to support any one religion over the next. Buddhism and Taoism and Christianity and Judaism and Wicca even all have guidelines on morality, that are rather similar. my personal belief is that the Deity discovered or realized by the religions other than mine is really the same deity accepted into a different culture, therefore, if the rules/guidelines are the same (morally), it’s likely (if that’s all true) that it’s because it’s all from the same G-d.

    With regards to baptism/spirit.. Do I believe that because no one ceremoniously put water on my head when I was a baby that G-d would abandom me (or anyone else)? Absolutely not. That actually ties in to an idea I respect of Judaism: if you’re unaware of the law, you are not expected to uphold it. (i.e. if I’m born to a buddhist family where baptism isn’t the practice, G-d is definitely not going to hold it against me). How could G-d fault me for something that was in the realm of his control, not mine? No individual chooses what religion they are born into, but most people are so used to following it, believing it, that by the time that they are old enough to actualy make any kind of decision, they choose the religion they are used to. That’s mostly out of our control.

    So, then that leads to.. if I am unaware of a rule, by virtue of something out of my control, am I imperfect? If I am born to illiterate parents in Africa, and die illiterate just like them, am I going to be excluded from that perfect Kingdom? What defines perfect then, because that just seems judgemental and intolerant.

    Thanks for all the websites, I’ll have to look at those when I get a chance. One comment about the last one though – that lists prophecies that Jesus did fulfill. Out of curiosity, I wonder if there’s a website that lists prophecies he didn’t fulfill?

  11. Geo Says:

    One cannot say that the Crusades, the Conquistadors or the Inquisition were in any way, shape of form representative of Christ and His church. These were Roman Catholic-inspired assaults for largely political ends. Are you aware, for example, that the Crusaders wiped out entire villages of true Christian believers? (as well as Jews, Muslims and anyone else who stood in the way of the “Mother Church”).
    Also, I find it interesting that you use “Mother” Theresa as the antithesis of the KKK. There are many women in Kolkata who would not necessarily agree with that. :o(

  12. Scott Thong Says:

    Welcome back, Anya!

    All the mentions of the second coming that you listed come form the New Testament, which, according to history, was hand-chosen by a council of leaders at Nicea several hundred years after Jesus actually lived. So, there is a high chance that the text that made it into the New Testament actually follows that same political inclination (ok, not same, but also political)

    Well actually, what happened at all those councils was that church leaders from all around the known world met to decide on what doctrines were ALREADY ACCEPTED. It wasn’t so much an American Idol style process of elimination, but rather a confirmation of which things the various churches believed and accepted.

    ————————————

    Not only that, but the writings at that point, are pretty much guaranteed to have been heavily altered from the writings that would have existed/been created during Jesus’ lifetime – for one thing, because many of them were retold by word of mouth, and then rewritten when they reached someone/where that could write it down.

    The line of transmission from eyewitness to written record is debatable, but there are several factors that back up the accuracy of the Gospel records.

    First, there is evidence that the Gospels were completed as early as a few decades after Jesus’s lifetime.

    http://scottthong.wordpress.com/2006/11/24/when-were-the-gospels-written-internal-evidence-from-acts/

    Tens of years may seem like a long time, but by the standards of ancient history is actually pretty good, especially when compared to other ancient texts generally accepted as true accounts.

    http://www.carm.org/evidence/textualevidence.htm

    Now if the Gospels recording the life, miracles, teachings, death and resurrection of Jesus contained errors or false information, then opponents of the Christians could easily have spoken up and denounced the errors. There would have been many still alive in the year 70 A.D.

    If Christians really upheld the virtue of truth, they would have admitted the errors and made the changes. For all we know, they DID actually make mistakes in the originals, and the mistakes were corrected as soon as they were pointed out.

    (And remember that each of the Apostles, as well as Paul and many believers, chose to die proclaiming their belief that their story was true, rather than recant.)

    Luke likely took a different approach in writing his Gospel, as well as Acts. Not being an Apostle who was there to witness what Jesus said and did, Luke instead investigated the story for himself:

    “Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.” – Luke 1:1-4

    Looking at the amount of small details in Luke and Acts, you can see how this idea of orderly research fits in with his intention to write an orderly account based on careful investigation.

    Luke probably studied the Gospels of Mark and/or Matthew, or the prototype that would become them. Likely he also dug into official Roman records and interviewed those who knew Jesus (perhaps such as Jesus’ earthly mother Mary, which would explain how Luke got the story of Mary and Joseph before Jesus was born).

    And if the Luke who has a Gospel named after him is the same Luke mentioned by Paul, then he is a doctor – which would explain a lot of his methodology.

    Various nonChristian ancient sources also confirm the existence of Jesus, including agreement on several details of his life (not many, though).

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus#Greco-Roman_sources

    All together, I feel that the Gospels (which detail the life of Jesus) are on the whole truthful and accurate. As I said, the writers all died for their beliefs – would they choose to die for something they knew was a lie? Or were they convinced of its truth and the promise of a ressurection?

    —————————–

    in my opinion, speaks more to the fact that it’s human nature, not the religion, that leads to both ’saintly’ people like Mother Teresa, and ‘evil’ people. Is religion then unrelated to morality?

    Very true. No matter what the religious teachings, human nature will always take over. However, what is taught by the religion DOES make a difference.

    The Bible says to love God and mankind. If I were to follow its teachings, I would be a really nice guy. But if I ignored this command, I would be a rotten jerk. Ergo, a good Bible-believer would be a good person.

    On the other hand, certain religions clearly state that its followers should attack and kill all non-believers until they surrender. After that, they are to be oppressed unless they convert. Or the old pagan religions that demand child sacrifice. If a follower of those religions were to obey those commands, they would seem like jerks to the rest of us!

    So religion cannot MAKE people good or bad… But what it teaches can have a profound influence on the start, the journey and the end result.

    I also believe that if moral values are not dictated by a Creator who made us, then any moral codes we have today are our own invention. Therefore no one definition of ‘good’ would have any authority over another. If 2 billion people say that ethnic purging is moral, does that make it moral? It does, in relative morality where there is no God to say His piece!!

    http://scottthong.wordpress.com/2007/06/26/fascism-and-bestiality-atheists-please-tell-me-why-i-am-morally-wrong/

    http://scottthong.wordpress.com/2007/06/26/communism-atheism-relative-morality/

    http://scottthong.wordpress.com/2006/08/30/morality-of-absolutes-and-relatives/

    —————————–

    my personal belief is that the Deity discovered or realized by the religions other than mine is really the same deity accepted into a different culture, therefore, if the rules/guidelines are the same (morally), it’s likely (if that’s all true) that it’s because it’s all from the same G-d.

    You know what, I would actually agree. It is my personal belief that most of the religions in the world arise from the same source, a memory of the Almighty who created them. However, the great spans of time, the individualisticness and pride on mankind, and the effects of culture have changed the original memory greatly.

    As a Christian, I believe that the traits of God closest to the original truth can be found in the Bible. With a connection to God going all the way back to Adam (if Genesis can be believed), it has been kept accurate while other religions reflect a distorted image of God.

    As an example, take the story of Noah and the Great Flood. He builds an ark with specific measurements, long and low. The flood comes, and he survives. After the flood, he makes an offering to God. But after that, he gets drunk and is seen naked.

    All these details – the ark’s shape, the shameful story after all the glory – give Noah’s story an air of realism, especially when you compare it to the flood accounts of other cultures.

    The Sumerian account has the protagonist build a cubical boat, which would have turned over endlessly in the seas like an ice-cube. After the flood, he makes offerings to the gods and is given immortality and becomes the first king of the Sumerian line.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flood_%28mythology%29

    Thus it can be reasoned that something like a worldwide flood must have happened, in order that every culture in the world has a flood story. And by comparing the details, the Bible’s version seems the most factual and reasonable. Therefore, it is likely that the Bible’s acocunt is the most true and may even be 100% accurate.

    (Secular scholars look at this the other way round, that the existence of flood myths in other cultures shows that Genesis borrowed their stories. However, when myths are propagated they become mroe complex, not simpler. Noah’s story is more to the point and ‘business-like’ than the Babylonian account.)

    With regards to baptism/spirit.. Do I believe that because no one ceremoniously put water on my head when I was a baby that G-d would abandom me (or anyone else)? Absolutely not.

    Me too, if I were never baptised I would still be saved, as long as I chose to accept God’s free gift of salvation.

    I would instead turn this notion on its head and say: Baptism is not God accepting me, but rather me accepting God in a public manner.

    ———————————-

    No individual chooses what religion they are born into, but most people are so used to following it, believing it, that by the time that they are old enough to actualy make any kind of decision, they choose the religion they are used to. That’s mostly out of our control.

    This is a dificult question, but I would have to say that the circumstances of one’s life can’t be used as an excuse for their behaviour. Just as how one street urchin grows up to be a murderer and another grows up to be a schoolteacher, and the law deals with them according to their adult actions.

    ———————————-

    So, then that leads to.. if I am unaware of a rule, by virtue of something out of my control, am I imperfect? If I am born to illiterate parents in Africa, and die illiterate just like them, am I going to be excluded from that perfect Kingdom? What defines perfect then, because that just seems judgemental and intolerant.

    And this may be one of the most difficult questions of them all!

    What happens to those people who lived before Jesus arrived on Earth? What about those who never heard the good news? Poeple of other religions who are taught their whole lives that Christianity is evil and corrupt? Tribals in the deepest jungle or on some remote island… Do they go to hell, and is that fair?

    It is a tough question for me… I am personally inclined to hope that God will be understanding of their circumstances. Same goes for those who genuinely seek God, but are misguided. How He will acomplish this without breaking His own rules or being unfair to Christians who acknowledged Him (with all the suffering and persecution it brings) remains to be seen.

    The following passage is often used for this question. Basically, God has made known His existence in all of creation and nature.


    The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities — his eternal power and divine nature — have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

    For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

    Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen. – Romans 1:18-25

    Therefore, even in the deepest jungle people have the awareness that there is a greater force out there. And even if they don’t know its specific name, they can still honour it.

    I don’t really agree fully with this line of explanation, but there it is for you. Just as by the sin of one man Adam we were all exposed to corruption, the misguidedness of our ancestors – who turned away from the one true God over to idols and false gods – bears down on us even today, in the form of traditions and inherited religion.

    C.S. Lewis seems to be of this opinion in the final book of the Narnia series, the Last Battle. In it, a good-hearted Calormen who served the false (and scary) god Tash dies and meets Aslan. Aslan then accepts him, because ‘Whenever someone does good in the name of Tash, he is actually doing it for me. And whenever someone does evil in the name of Aslan, he is actually doing it for Tash.’

    Whether this applies to real life is highly debatable. What C.S. Lewis, a renown defender of Christianity, actually meant by this scene is also highly debated, as it seems to negate the need to acknowledge Christ as one’s sole Lord and Saviour.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_Battle

    ———————————-

    Thanks for all the websites, I’ll have to look at those when I get a chance. One comment about the last one though – that lists prophecies that Jesus did fulfill. Out of curiosity, I wonder if there’s a website that lists prophecies he didn’t fulfill?

    Very interesting question… Here are some that I dug up.

    http://www.godvsthebible.com/chapter09.htm (A few objections, but ones I can explain offhand without even needing to Google it.)

    http://www.evilbible.com/jesus_false.htm (More polemic attitude, but again, objections I can explain offhand.)

    http://judaism.about.com/library/3_askrabbi_c/bl_jesus.htm (Short reply that doesn’t really answer the question, ‘Why don’t Jews accept Jesus as the Messiah?’)

    http://www.realmessiah.com/Objections_vol4.htm (List of objections to Jesus having fulfilled Messianic prophecies. It’s from a Jewish-run site which examines the credentials of Jesus as Messiah, they believe He is. http://www.realmessiah.com/answers.htm )

    http://www.christian-thinktank.com/falsechrist.html (In-depth study of the Messianic prophecies, and whether they apply to Jesus and other people claimed to have been Messiah. Especially takes a Jewish perspective on the question.)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Messiah (Different Jewish views on Messiah.)

    I still haven’t found a list of Messianic prophecies that Jesus didn’t fulfill. Most of what I found are refutations of prophecies Jesus is claimed to fulfill, and many of them not very in-depth or well researched.

  13. Jamie Says:

    There are two views/doctrines in Christianity that I can introduce regarding the great white throne. One is regarding those who have never heard the gospel before Jesus came, died and was resurrected. This doctrine states Jesus, when He was in Sheol, appeared to the spirits there and those who believed were taken up with Him to another part of Sheol where righteous believers went to when they died.

    The second view/doctrine concerns those who died after the resurrection, but without hearing the gospel even once. They will be judged according to their consciences, and to the moral codes of their society. Having been found righteous by the standards of their society, they will be accepted by God.

    I don’t know how true these doctrines/views are, but you can consider them as possibilities.

  14. Geo Says:

    Hi Jamie,

    I’d be interested to know where you read of the “second view” in your answer above.

  15. ray nwamb Says:

    Your site is simply great. You have a wonderful resource for the online audience. Please do check out my site when you have time http://genealogydatabases.blogspot.com

  16. Kaom Says:

    Ahh Jeez Liam, i thought you weren’t lazy either, genealogy of in ch 5 huh, well first off, Adam had 3 children, he did not simple begat Seth, he begat CaIN ABEL and Seth, Abel died, and Cain was banished yes, but still he begat 3, but yes, Seth begat EnoS but also if you keep reading it says Seth begat more sons and daughters (bible doesnt give the names lol, nor dos it even give the woman of who he begat these children.. and why is the woman important, Well In the Mitochondria in our Cells and DNA, we see that every child born is made in the image and likeness of the WOMAN, ??? Confused, well let me explain lol

    Scientist have discovered that the Y chromosome in sperm has 2.8% less genetic material than the X chromosome in the same sperm specimen (XY=male) By FACT the X chromosome is five times larger than the Y chromosome. Females = (XX)
    the female species is a 100% genetic match to their source ( mother) (see this goes deep, because, in the very begining before the replenishing the actual first human was Female but thats another subject matter i would love to discuss wit You) moving back to the genes cos you did give me that adorable genealogy site.

    To get the Y chromosome out of X chromosome, you lose one of your genetic points, thus the chromosome becomes a defect, which is why a man has the same components on his body that a female does. (nipples, breast, however man cant breast feed) Men are the genetic defect of Woman. A Woman is the nurturer of the whole world, in side of woman, life is created, and life is formed, this concept is perverted in religion through the mother child image of Jesus and Mary, which was taken from ISIS and Heru, where you have the woman breast feeding the Christ aka GOD as man aka LIFE.

    so a question you are probably asking is this Does it mean woman came first ? well to find the first being anthropologists had to use 147 pregnant women (look it up, dnt believe me) to donate their babies placentas to science. The placenta is the easiest way to get large samples of body tissue, From this after all there test etc, bla bla, they came across DNa in its Pure-st form. They found that DNA (genes) comes from outside the nucleus, in a compartment of the cell called the MITOCHONDRION. Now Liam it is Scientific FACT (cos i see you like to try and state scientific facts, so let me too) it is Fact that the mitochondrial DNA is only inherited from the mother. It is NOT a mixture of both parents genes, unlike nuclear DNA. therfore the mitochondrial DNA preserves a family record that is NOT scrambled in every generation (so far we have already smashed your little geneology of man theory, because as you have shown me, there is not but one women in that cycle, that means after Seth whom had Eve’s DNA, everything goes to pot.)

    Mitochondria what does this word mean,, hmm let me break it down… the word is from the New Latin Greek MITOS, which means to wrap thread plus the greek Khondrion, which means diminutive of Khondros, which means grain or granule.

    After all this i hope it is clear that you now have been Enlightened even more than your friend Scott who wrote that silly site, that IF A COUPLE DOES NOT HAVE A DAUGHTER LIAM< their genes disappear. Now yet again lets see your little list

    Adam – Man
    Seth – Appointed
    Enosh – Mortal
    Kenan – Sorrow
    Mahalalel – The blessed God
    Jared – Shall come down
    Enoch – Teaching
    Methuselah – His death shall bring
    Lamech – Despairing
    Noah – Comfort and rest

    Out of that list how many of them are female ?, what type of genealogy chart is this, the genes of each generation are lost after each son lol ? the genes of “god” from the first man, has been lost by the time you get to Noah, perverted by what ever fallen angel, or foreign woman those men slept with to begat each child, unless they were all doubling up on eve ?

    why do they call the book genesis for pete sack liam. look at the Word. you have Gene – sis yet again they stolen an egyptian book, from the genealogy of ISIS hence GENE- sis = GENE – ISIS , they cleverly took out one letter, the I , but of course you didn’t see that Liam. Coincidence you say ? well maybe hmmmmmm .

    and further more, going back to the meanings of them names.. geez geez geez, LIAM do your own research in future, and dont rely on poor Scott (the sites author, u gave me), let me write the names in bold.

    Adam = Adama which means of the Ground ( hence the bible says man was made from the dust of the ground, just like every other beast in the world, therefore his name shall be What.. ADAM) now for some strange reason, King james felt he didn’t need to put in the origin of ADAM’s name, but felt it right to put the origin of EVE’s name instead. hmm. Also, ADAM does not simply mean MAN, it means MANKIND Adam, is not a singluar name, If you but Read Gen Ch 5 Liam, you will see that by accident possibly King James felt it right to leave in there the truth, that ADAM means a Tribe, a Generation of ppl, thats why Verse 2 of Ch 5 says .. Male and Female created he them, and he called THEIR name ADAM. then verse 3 brings back the confusion of Adam being One person.

    So thats ADAM sorted out, more so than the rest, cos ADAM is a deep name, has a lot of meanings, and a interesting origin. ADAM is a tribe of ppl, coming from the ADAMA project, which is the creation of MANKIND from the dust of the ground. (this is why i say study your Own language, the Hebrew/Arabic, language of the bible, not this twisted evil one world global language called English. (hmm maybe the holy ghost hasn’t directed you down that path yet)

    Now Seth is hebrew for Anointed, not Appointed , get it right Scott.

    The name Enos is hebrew for MAN Not Mortal (even though yh man is a mortal) get it right Scott (why scott calls him Enosh i dont know, where did he get the H from Liam, cos the bible calls him Enos, Scott must be digging hard to find new names and meanings to prove this stupid point.

    Next Scott says Kenan ? where did he get this name from Liam, cos the bible says Enos begat Cainan. so let me break down Cainan.

    Cainan derives from the name Cain, meaning possession or He who possesses . not sorrow, SCOTT keep looking, and scott pls read your bible, because you are confusing my brother Liam.

    Mahalaleel is the hebrew name, meaning Praise of God, not THE blessed God. yes he was right when he said El means God, but he lost the plot everywhere else.

    (geez Liam i am losing respect for you slowly, because you have the cheek to cal me lazy, but yet even you have given me rubbish weak lame, points, you are at a disadvantage to me, because you as a dedicated christian havent found the time to learn the language of which your lord and saviour spoke.) let me contiune on this geneology rubbish

    Jared is hebrew for Rose flower, and also Descending what on earth is Scott talking about , shall come down ? maybe he is getting the word Descended confused with Shall come down as it is a similar concept.

    Enoch, means Dedicated trained, famous bearer. ( i guess it is similar to what a Teacher can be, so i give Scott the benefit of the doubt for that effort (claps)

    Methuselah is the hebrew for Man of the dart, or alternatively when he dies died, it will be sent ,has been sent
    Not his death shall bring ?, come on scott wake up.

    Lamech is translated to Priest or servant of God, where on earth does Scott get despair from ? ( i ma come on Liam, your friend Scott is insulting the Hebrew language with his lies, and pervertedness, in a futile attempt to prove and cling to a point that marks the basis of your faith)

    Finally we have Noah, and yes SCOTT finally you got one right, noah does mean comfort, rest etc. so no need to explain that name.

    Now that we have dealt with the facts, lets break these names down and create a sentance out of it, just as Scott did

    so we have

    Of the ground
    Anointed
    Man
    who possesses
    praise of god
    rose flower/ Descending
    Dedicated trained, famous bearer
    Man of the dart, when he dies, he will be sent
    servant of God
    Comfort/rest

    Now lets turn this into a sentence. Of the ground (an) anointed man who possesses (the) praise of EL aka god (with a) rose flower descended (from) dedicated training. (A) famous bearer, man of the dart, when he dies, he will be sent (a) servant of El aka god (to) comfort (and give you) rest.

    hmm, close close, now this Could be talking about Jesus ? even though it doesn’t say his name, and does say the man will come from the EARTH(ground) not heaven and it does say this man will praise god, and be dedicated in training, and will be famous, and that when this man dies, He , the same man, will be given a comforter, to help give him rest, in his death.

    now i can agree, it prob is talking about Jesus yh lol, if Jesus is simply a spiritual man, who came to teach the TRUTH and was dedicated in his training that he received from Egypt (after being told to practically grow up there from 0 – 12) and yh Jesus was a servant a god and yh, when he died, was given rest ?. no beef there mate.

    So come again, what point was you trying to make with these names ? hmmmm i wonder. Father, son holy ghost right, the God head, and god coming down right.. hmm well i am sorry, these names, in their order, does not say any thing of the LIKE.

    go back to the drawing board. I am guessing you get your info copy and pasted my friend, because the Holy Spirit in me, has no problem, smashing up your false lies, and teachings. (my people are being destroyed by the lack of knowledge) and the TRUTh WILL MAKE you free.

    Hotep.

  17. Scott Thong Says:

    Well, I’m not trained in Hebrew, so you two can discuss it at your leisure.

  18. Jordan Says:

    There’s not really all that much difference between Michael Parson’s definitions of name meanings, and Kaom.

    Let’s look at these words and names a little closer, shall we?

    The Hebrew word “adamah” means “mankind”, our race, our kind.

    “Seth” means “appointed, granted, given” – as it says in the text, Eve called him Seth, because she said “God has granted me another son”. It could also come from the root for “anointed; compensation” – in which case, the root meaning is still similar — compensation = given in response to.

    Then “enosh” is another Hebrew word that means man, but in the mortal sense, is specifically used to point out man’s mortality, and therefore, can mean “mortal” or “destined to die”.

    Then the word “lemech”, from which the name “Lamech” derives.

  19. Jordan Says:

    There’s not really all that much difference between Michael Parson’s definitions of name meanings, and Kaom.

    Let’s look at these words and names a little closer, shall we?

    The Hebrew word “adamah” means “mankind”, our race, our kind.

    “Seth” means “appointed, granted, given” – as it says in the text, Eve called him Seth, because she said “God has granted me another son”. It could also come from the root for “anointed; compensation” – in which case, the root meaning is still similar — compensation = given in response to.

    Then “enosh” is another Hebrew word that means man, but in the mortal sense, is specifically used to point out man’s mortality, and therefore, can mean “mortal” or “destined to die”.

    Then — if you look at the ACTUAL HEBREW TEXT – its NOT “Cainan” – that was an error on the part of the King James translators. Here’s a Hebrew Bible website that properly translates it, for reference.

    http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0105.htm

    It really is “Kenan”, therefore Michael’s translation of “sorrow” is accurate.

    “Mahalalel” – whether it means “the God we praise” or “the blessed God” (can you really bless the One from whom all blessings flow, anyway?) — the root meaning is STILL the same — The glorious, wonderful God.

    Jared – descended. Erm… descended DOES mean “came down” … so… where’s the point of conflict here???

    Enoch’s root meaning is “training up” – equivalent to “teaching”, only with more of an emphasis on leading the way.

    Then “Methusaleh” – “when he dies, it shall come” — Kaom, I really must ask, is English your first language? Because “when he dies, it shall come” and “his death shall bring (or heralds)” is the EXACT SAME THING in English, just worded differently!

    Then the word “lemech”, from which the name “Lamech” derives. If it comes from the Hebrew, the name means “poor man, pauper”. If it comes from Akkadian, THEN it means “priest” or “servant of God”. Either way, it doesn’t change the root meaning of the prophecy, as I’ll point out in a moment.

    And finally, “Noah” meaning “rest” or “comfort”

    So altogether, we have:

    Mankind
    appointed to/granted/receives in compensation
    mortality
    sorrow
    The God who we praise
    descends/comes down
    teaching/training
    when he dies, there comes
    the poor/ servant of God
    comfort/rest

    Altogether: Mankind received mortality in compensation (for sin) mortality and sorrow, but the God who we praise came down [PROPHETIC PAST TENSE] teaching that when he dies, there comes for the poor ones, the servants of God, comfort and rest.

    The prophecy is STILL intact.

    Man is destined to die, to live a life filled with sorrow and pain. But God, even in this lineage (yes, it’s all men, but that was just how it was accounted in those days) promised to us that He would come, and die, and through that death, bring us mortal human beings, comfort and rest that this world can never bring.

    Thousands of years before Christ, when Moses wrote the Torah as God spoke it to him, the coming of God as Jesus was written there, just waiting for one to crack open the meanings and see it.

    Praise God!

    ~ Jordan

    –P.S. – if you like this kind of thing, check out what happens when you plug in the meanings of the 12/13 tribes of Israel when they’re listed out in the Bible. :D

  20. John A Says:

    ‘The Crusades, Conquistadors and Inquisition are one of the darkest marks on the history of the Church…’

    Which Church? The head of the Biblical church is Yeshua, the head of the catholic church is the anti(instead of)-christ vicar of rome. Scott, in brotherly love, get your facts right The church of rome paganized Christianity, they were not converted (through repentance) by the Gospel of Yeshua, and anyone opposing it was tortured and/or put to death.

    Likewise, the reformation can be likened to a condemned building, by which the owner wants to sell it or rent it, so instead of tearing down the structure (repentance), he slaps a lick of paint to make it look as good as new, yet still dangerously condemned.

    Both outfits went after heretics and Jews just as Hitler did.

    ————————————————————
    ‘hmm, close close, now this Could be talking about Jesus ? even though it doesn’t say his name, and does say the man will come from the EARTH(ground) not heaven and it does say this man will praise god, and be dedicated in training, and will be famous, and that when this man dies, He , the same man, will be given a comforter, to help give him rest, in his death.’

    WOW, you seem to have nailed it!

    ‘Now lets turn this into a sentence.’

    ‘Of the ground (an) ‘
    - OR of the womb, the Son of Man

    ‘anointed man who possesses (the) praise of EL aka god’
    - the Son of God, anointed (Christ) also Matthew 3:17 and many other
    verses.

    ‘(with a) rose flower descended (from) dedicated training.’
    NT shows that even at the age of 12 Jesus new Scripture inside out.

    (A) famous bearer,
    - That goes without saying

    ‘man of the dart, when he dies,’
    - He did die

    ‘he will be sent (a) servant of El aka god (to) comfort (and give you) rest.’
    - Yeshua said that He will send the Comforter (the Holy Spirit). Also note
    He didn’t stay dead so that He could send the Comforter, alluding to His
    resurrection.

    ‘… to help give him rest, in his death.’
    questionable interpretation, or is it more likely ‘… to help (comfort, guide, testify) whilst not present physically’.

    The following verses do clarify it:

    ‘John 14:26:
    But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.’
    ‘Comforter’ can also be translated as ‘Helper’.

    ‘John 16:7
    Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.’

    ‘John 14:16
    And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;’

    Kaom, you may well be a genius, but I think it true that it requires one to be fluent in Hebrew, at the very least. Thanks.

    ———————————————————–

    Anya Says:

    ‘… technically, isn’t every human being one of G-d’s chilldren?’

    No every human is the creation of God, and this is the basis of discussion for one of your other questions:

    ‘So then my question there becomes, where did the entire notion of the “second coming” come from?’

    I’ll put it in summary. Firstly, after the fall of man, the central message of Scripture OT & NT is in regards to salvation. Salvation from what? Simply put, to be spared from the judgment of God. The Hebrews knew what the God of Abram, Isaac and Jacob expected of them. Nevertheless, the Tanakh is strewn with verses siting the continual disobedience of His people, so much so that God rhetorically asked ‘How long shall I tolerate you’ (paraphrasing). Also, that He would gather the no-nation (Gentiles) to Himself. However, here’s the first problem which Jews identify correctly: God will not break His promises to His own people. This is absolutely correct, and He hadn’t. So how did He accomplish this. Before I go on, it is necessary to understand that to be qualified for the promises of God, you had to be of the lineage of Abraham and obedient, and yet Scripture talks about the sojourners/strangers amongst His people as sharing in His promises also. Therefore, salvation could only be attained by converting and submitting to the Mosaic Law.

    Now we come to the Law. Yeshua did not abolish the commandments of the Law, in Him the repeated ordinances (animal sacrifices, etc…) were abolished. The Law showed the highest standard by which man must live by to attain to righteousness. Only some came close. The real problem with the Law in relation to the Hebrews was that once it was broken judgment had to ensue. Forgiveness could only be sectioned once the evil thing was cut-off from their midst.

    God still required the perfect obedience of man, so Messiah came to fulfill this requisite. He also became sin for us (NOT sinner) so that the judgment of the whole Law would by cast on Him on our behalf. Once this happened, He was found guiltless and became the eternal propitiation for all of mankind. Also, since the wages of sin is death (2nd death), Scripture states that death could not hold down (or claim) the Perfect One.

    What else did Jesus fulfill? Let’s go back to the original plan. God declared that He would make a way for the Gentiles to be blessed for His name’s sake. Well, God could not just automatically became the God of the Gentiles, instead He, through the first Son (Yeshua), became the Father to all who call upon His name. In other words, through Yeshua, the legitimate Jewish Son, Gentiles could become His children by adoption. What of the Jews? They did not convert as a Gentile does, rather their journey under the Law was completed in Yeshua.

    So the first coming (Messiah ben Joseph) was to pave the way for Jews and Gentiles to become children of God under the covenant of grace, amongst many other fulfillments. The second coming is as (Messiah ben David) the conquering King.

    I think it is also necessary to allude to His prophetic return. It is fact that Jews are still awaiting the arrival of their acceptable messiah. Yeshua stated that having rejected Him, they (the Jews) will accept him who comes in his own name. When the son of perdition comes on the scene, he will be declared to be the messiah. Now it is also fact that Jews believe that messiah cannot be worshiped. A new temple will be erected by way of political negotiations, in which he will declare himself as god. I think that it’s at this point the people of God will become disillusioned and reject him as messiah, in which case he will make war with them. Once this happens, and the nations are gathered around Israel (or what’s left of it), the Jews will have no where to run to, and though a massacre will possibly take place, He (Yeshua) will return to save His people and will smite His enemies, and they (the Jews) will look upon Him as the One whom they pierced (Zechariah 12:10). The Romans performed the act literally, but the people of God did it spiritually (ie. they grieved Him).

  21. Scott Thong Says:

    Thanks John A. I meant Church as in the general grouping of those who claim to follow Christianity, and the Roman Catholic Church in particular.

    If the RCC and Protestantism are both heretical, um, what do you suggest we proscribe to?

  22. John A Says:

    ‘Thanks John A. I meant Church as in the general grouping of those who claim to follow Christianity, and the Roman Catholic Church in particular.’

    Yes I understand what you meant, so tell me which Church performed those atrocious acts, the Church of Jesus Christ or the RCC?

    ‘If the RCC and Protestantism are both heretical, um, what do you suggest we proscribe to?’

    I cannot believe you asked this question!

    Simple, the teachings of the Church founders, at the head Jesus and His apostles. Do you have a problem with that?

  23. Scott Thong Says:

    No problem at all, just that how do you define those teachings? Do any modern denominations still hold true by your standards? The Baptist perhaps, who consider themselves to predate the Reformation?

  24. John A Says:

    ‘just that how do you define those teachings?’

    Wrong question, no one is an elitist, so ask rather:

    ‘just that how do WE define those teachings?’

    The teachings have already been defined, it is our responsibility to reason together the peshat and then the pesher of Scripture. The expounding of the word was not limited to any one fundamental Christian denomination, and certainly not to any non-fundamental Christian denomination.

    ‘Do any modern denominations still hold true by your standards?’

    Here starts the attacks.

    Don’t you try to live by the same standards as prescribed in Scripture, even though we both may not be perfect at it? Have I intimated that I’m better then you. Actually, having read a number of your posts I do find myself nodding in agreement, as I do with others. Is this elitist of me?

    I do subscribe to fundamental Christian precepts, even if they are not all Scripturally correct. So unless you believe that the RCC and the Reformation are only slightly skewed in error, then we will both continue to be in disagreement.

    What we are doing here is what the early Church members were doing… contending for the truth. We should Praise God that we still have this opportunity.

  25. Scott Thong Says:

    Dude, touchy! I have hardly any idea of what you’re even getting at, other than

    1) We must stick to the Scriptures, Jesus and the Apostles.
    2) RCC and Reformation fall short of the above.

    You aren’t Obama, so why should I intimate that you are elitist? Do lots of people immediately throw that accustion at you or something?

    Well I didn’t. I was just trying to ask exactly what you proscribe, from your own personal point of view, because I know next to nothing about your views, while you have my entire blog to get a grip on my views.

    Are you non-denominational? Independent? Personal interpretation? Identify with a group that advocates back-to-basic-Bible teachings?

  26. John A Says:

    ‘Here starts the attacks.’

    For this I apologize. My reaction was in relation to ‘… by your standards?’

    ‘RCC and Reformation fall short of the above.’

    They don’t just fall short, they are absent and unrepentant.

    ‘I have hardly any idea of what you’re even getting at’

    I’ll recap:

    ‘just that how do you define those teachings?’

    The teachings have already been defined, it is our responsibility to reason together the peshat (simple understanding) and the pesher (deeper meaning) of Scripture like we’re doing here with the genealogy from Adam to Noah.

    ‘Do any modern denominations still hold true’

    Any denomination which fundamentally adheres to Scripture alone as the authoritative word of God and that there is only One Mediator between man and God, even if there are some other debatable doctrinal differences. The RCC certainly does not fit this category, and the Reformists never truly detached themselves from the mother church.

    ‘If the RCC and Protestantism are both heretical, um, what do you suggest we proscribe to?’

    Christianity existed way before pagan Rome became a pseudo-christian-and still pagan order and well before the Reformation, which came about when certain clergies within the order realized that the RCC’s practices (eg sacramental) did not match what Scripture taught, and therefore believed that a type of revolution was required. Followers of Jesus existed before – during – and always outside of this system. Notice that the Protestant churches are slowly but surely reintegrating back into the RCC. The apple surely does not fall too far from the tree.

    ‘The Baptist perhaps, who consider themselves to predate the Reformation?’

    This brings up one of those debatable doctrines.

    Having heard some Baptist ministers, most of them seem to be fundamentally aligned to the Scriptures, with one particular exception. Some Baptist groups are cessationists. I don’t see any Scriptural proof that suggests the gifts of the Holy Spirit ended with the Apostolic age. However, I have noticed that a number of Baptist denominations had already signed up with the World Council of Churches (ecumenical movement) as far back as 1948.

    In summation, I don’t put my trust in any denomination but I do identify with the confessions and testimonies of believers. Jesus asks every believer ‘who do you say that I am?”. I hope I’ve clarified some ambiguities.

  27. Scott Thong Says:

    Hmm, I understand more now. Your views and mine are not so far apart.

    I do not consider myself bound to any one denomination, and judge doctrine for myself (though the weight of other believers’ judgements has an influence).

    And I agree that your approach is sound – the Scriptures and only the Scriptures as the source of teaching and direction. Manmade institutions should have no say on par with God’s word.

    I don’t really generalize that all members or member churches of a denomination are astray just because some of them are. Only when a church chooses to remain in a denomination that espouses clearly un-Scriptural doctrine, then there’s a problem. It is akin to someone claiming to be a good man, yet holding membership in the local mafia.

    But other than that, I feel all churches and persons should be judged individually.

  28. John A Says:

    In agreement.

    ‘But other than that, I feel all churches and persons should be judged individually.’

    And we will be, Scripture testifies to that.

    ‘I don’t really generalize that all members or member churches of a denomination are astray just because some of them are.’

    Nor do I, but I do evaluate the soundness of their doctrine and theology, as I must. I neither tell anyone to leave a church which may have degenrated far from the basic precepts of Scripture, but I do contend, when the opportunity arises, with the truth of Scripture and leave it to the person(s) to judge for themselves. It would obviously be far better if the leadership would get back on track, but rarely does this happening.

    With that said, when we read the message to the angels of the seven churches (Rev 2) we find, for instance, the judgment against the church of Pergamos. Though they performed acceptable works before the Lord, nevertheless there were those amongst them who were holding on to ungodly doctrines while the rest stood idly by, and therefore it compromised the whole assembly. Guilt by association, a little leaven leavens the whole lump, etc…

    Also in relation to the church in Thyatira and it’s practice of sexual immorality, there were those who had not bowed to that corruption and so were urged to keep going and hold on (2:24,25), and for the rest to repent. Sexual misconduct is usually done behind closed doors, on the other hand, false doctrine is always clearly manifest in the assembly.

    Let’s not forget the message to the first church which was charged with losing their first love. So Jesus begins by identifying those people/churches which originally repented of their sins and loved the Lord God. Some fell away, as we are also seeing the great falling away from the love of God. Therefore denominations and people can also be held up to this measurement with which we must also judge ourselves.

    Notice though that the whore of Babylon cannot be forgiven and anyone affiliated with her will also share in her judgment. This corrupt system has nothing to do with God, so much so that in Rev 18:4 we read:

    ‘Then I heard another voice from heaven saying, “Come out of her, MY PEOPLE, so that you don’t participate in her sins and also suffer from her diseases.’

    Some say that she is the RCC, but I do know that the RCC embodies all of her characteristics.

    There is no excuse for staying, as an individual or as a congregation, in a church/affiliation which had nothing to do with God to begin with, or has degenrated as such.

    Remember fellowship can only be achieved in Spirit and in truth.

    ‘all churches’

    I’m not sure if you are still alluding to the RCC as pertaining to the legitimate offspring of the Body of Christ. History makes that quite clear. She began in peganism, continues in paganism, and will remain pagan, no repentance whatsoever to the point she declares that there is no salvation outside of the catholic church. This is not a trivial problem.

    1 John 1:6:
    If we claim that we have fellowship with him but keep living in darkness, we are lying and not practicing the truth.

    Matthew 7:22,23
    Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, we prophesied in your name, drove out demons in your name, and performed many miracles in your name, didn’t we?’
    Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Get away from me, you evildoers!’”

    These verses apply to those who were/are in Christ but have become proud, self-righteous, denouncing sound doctrine, etc…

    Correct me if I’m wrong, I thought I noticed in another post (can’t recall which one), Christians were currently numbered at around 2 billion worldwide. If so what would be the premise for this statistic? Is it because of everyone who says Jesus? If so, might has well increase this number exponentially. Do Christians feel it necessary to validate their existence via numerical superiority/significance? Scripture (OT and NT) has always shown the concept of fewer than few, not that God intended to be so but that’s the reality. Now Christianity may number millions but that would only be a historical tally, and an unknown estimate at that.

    I think I’ve been quite quite clear in my position to the RCC, but I do need to clarify my position with the Reformation. It’s original motivation, that the RCC’s doctrines and theology didn’t square up with Scripture, was good. Except for making some changes, they (Luther, Calvin) remained predominately catholics and retained much of its unscriptural doctrines and practices. Nevertheless, some evangelical groups were birthed from this movement and some of those even become far more aligned to Scripture and renounced much of the ungodly catholic practices. However, as I noted earlier, most of these reformed offsprings are returning back to the mother church, and so disqualifying themselves from the race toward the prize.

  29. SueB Says:

    How do you know that the code in your geneology doesnt mean this: man is appointed
    mortal sorrow- the link between man that God created and man that the lord god
    created (which is differentiated in Genesis 1:4), and that the blessed God shall come
    down isn’t the One-God that gave the Torah (the books of Moses) to Moses and spoke
    to the millions of Jews at Mount Sinai, which was to direct, instruct and teach them,
    And that heis death (christs’) will bring despair? Comfort and rest maybe comes
    from Noah and the laws of Noah that the One-God instructed us to follow.
    He says in the Old Testament/Torah, ” I am the only God, no God comes before me or
    after me. Worship no one but me. So……why is it that we worship Jesus. Maybe
    he is the beautiful deceiver. After all, he spoke of beautiful things, and made
    beautiful promises, and he was the most beautiful of all the angels that God created.
    Also, he wanted to show God that he was just as powerful as God himself.
    Also, Lucifer was called the morning star in the old testament and cast down to the
    earth. Isaiah 14:12
    Also, jesus himself calls himself the morning star in the end of revelation. 22:16
    Look, God gave us free will to choose, but in romans 14:11, as surely as i live, says
    the lord, every knee will bow before me: every tongue well confess to God.
    WHY IS HE REFERRING TO HIMSELF AS LORD, AND THEN SAYING WE WILL CONFESS TO GOD????????
    God did not say every knee shall bow because he gave us the brains to see the truth, and
    the will to chose. Only a master deceiver/liar, could fool you into something that will
    only bebfit his purpose, not yours.
    P.S. I was raised christian and have studied scripture. I am not of Jewish descent.

  30. SueB Says:

    P.S.S. God gave the Torah (Old Testament) to the Jews and told them it was their responsibility (as His chosen people) to share this with the rest of the nations and that there would never be a mediator between the people and Him. So who is jesus????????

  31. Scott Thong Says:

    Jesus is the Messiah – the one foretold throughout the Old Testament to be the one to bring salvation to the entire world, including the Gentiles. Jesus is the ‘seed and offspring of Abraham’ through whom the entire world would be blessed, the ‘son of David’ who would rule on the throne forever, the ‘Lamb and sin offering’ offered on behalf of the entire human race.

    If you recognize any of those terms that are in ‘quotations’, you will see how Jesus is considered the fulfilment and completion of the Old Testament given to the Jews.

  32. Scott Thong Says:

    In answer to your questions:

    Maybe he is the beautiful deceiver. After all, he spoke of beautiful things, and made
    beautiful promises, and he was the most beautiful of all the angels that God created.

    Jesus was not an angel – He is not a created being. Rather, He was already with God at the very start of everything, and He is responsible for making all creation:

    “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came to be through him, and without him nothing came to be. ” (John 1:1-3)

    Compare to other angels, when people try to worship them:

    ”Do not do it! I am a fellow servant with you and with your brothers who hold to the testimony of Jesus. Worship God! For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.” (Revelation 19:10)

    Also, he wanted to show God that he was just as powerful as God himself.

    You are mistaken here. Jesus was always completely submitted to the will of God the Father:

    “Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done.” – Luke 22:42

    “Very truly, I tell you, the Son can do nothing on his own, but only what he sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, the Son does likewise.” – John 5:19

    “While he was still speaking, a bright cloud overshadowed them, and behold, a voice out of the cloud said, “This is My beloved Son, with whom I am well-pleased; listen to Him!” – Mark 1:10-11

    The last one also shows how God is pleased with Jesus, which wouldn’t be the case if Jesus were evil or actually Lucifer in disguise.

    Also, Lucifer was called the morning star in the old testament and cast down to the
    earth. Isaiah 14:12

    The verse never actually says that the ‘morning star’ referred to here is Lucifer or an earthly king or whoever. It is just assumed to be by certain commentators.

    In any case, Lucifer aspired to replace God. Jesus is God. Therefore, it makes sense that Lucifer tried to replace the ‘morning star’ Jesus.

    In fact, Lucifer tried to gain Jesus’ allegiance:

    The devil said to him, “I shall give to you all this power and their glory; for it has been handed over to me, and I may give it to whomever I wish. All this will be yours, if you worship me.” Jesus said to him in reply, “It is written: ‘You shall worship the Lord, your God, and him alone shall you serve.’” – Luke 4:6-8

    So again, we see Jesus being completely submitted and loyal to God.

    Also, we see here that Lucifer and Jesus are two separate beings. And Jesus rejected Lucifer’s offer.

    WHY IS HE REFERRING TO HIMSELF AS LORD, AND THEN SAYING WE WILL CONFESS TO GOD????????

    He says in the Old Testament/Torah, ” I am the only God, no God comes before me or
    after me. Worship no one but me. So……why is it that we worship Jesus.

    This is the concept of the Trinity: God is one, but also three: The Father, the Son (Jesus), and the Holy Spirit. But make no mistake: There is ONLY ONE GOD.

    Jesus affirms this belief when He said: “Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one.” (Mark 12:29) and “The hour is coming, and now is, when true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him.” (John 4:23-24).

    So as you can see, Jesus was a true Jew – worship is reserved only for God.

    But Jesus also allowed people to worship Him:

    On coming to the house, they saw the child with his mother Mary, and they bowed down and worshiped him. – Matthew 2:11

    Then those who were in the boat worshiped him, saying, “Truly you are the Son of God.” – Matthew 14:33

    Suddenly Jesus met them. “Greetings,” he said. They came to him, clasped his feet and worshiped him. – Matthew 28:9

    When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. – Matthew 28:17

    Then they worshiped him and returned to Jerusalem with great joy. – Luke 24:52

    Then the man said, “Lord, I believe,” and he worshiped him – John 9:38

    Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!” – John 20:28

    Why would Jesus allow this, unless He believed Himself to also be God? If Jesus were not God but let people worship Him, then He would be either a liar, insane or evil. Jesus is none of those things, so Jesus must therefore be God.

    Many of the things Jesus did were also reserved only for God – like forgiving sins directly. Jesus also said that whoever saw Him, saw the Father.

    It may be hard to understand, but that is what the Bible says.

    In fact, even the Old Testament has God referring to His three persons:

    “And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son.” – Zechariah 12:10

    You see here that God refers to ‘the one they have pierced’, referring to crucifixion. Who was crucified? Jesus, of course.

    But God refers to this person using the terms I, me, him and even a spirit – as if though God were talking about Himself but also someone else at the same time!

    God is saying in this verse that God is also Jesus.

    ————————–

    It seems you know some Scripture, but it is not quite enough yet. You need to know more of the Bible if you want to properly understand what Jesus represents. I am willing to help in any way I can!

  33. Nir bdr pakhren Says:

    I am literature student so i need a lot of information regarding to English literature. i want to know about the Adam and EVa

  34. Scott Thong Says:

    Just ask away, and we’ll try and answer.

  35. del hatley Says:

    I would like to see more documentation. Source of difiniton.
    Thanks,
    del

  36. Scott Thong Says:

    Can’t really help you on that one, since this was a guest post… I didn’t do this research.

  37. Apostle Luis Says:

    God bless you all in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. I really appreciate your biblical validity Scott.
    Defending the Word of God. Many will speak and have spoken to really learn and know and others
    to refute and mock with foolishness. According to Proverbs we must answer and then not answer.
    You know what I mean Scott??? Only if you are born from above, meaning that you have invited Jesus
    Christ into your heart, you would be able to come to the understanding of the Trinity and other
    Challenging questions and doctrine. Keep up the good work Scott. God bless you and stay encouraged.

  38. Aaron Says:

    Though I havn’t researched how many times the word “Elohim” is used in the original scriptures, i found it amazing that it literally means God in the plural. If so, this is further proof of the trinity, understood by those in the days of the old testiment! Any input on this?

    Thank you to all for sharing. It has been a blessing.

  39. Scott Thong Says:

    Here’s some input: A passage where God refers to Himself as the trinity!

    http://scottthong.wordpress.com/2008/07/10/the-christian-trinity-in-the-old-testament-god-is-i-us-and-he/

  40. Nykisha A. Madison Says:

    One thing I love about the trinity is that it’s reflection of a family operating in wholeness. GOD is like it’s last name So we have the father, the son, and the holy spirit which plays the role of mother in the essence of comforting. It’s divine order. I love that we can all post what we see as the truth. But who really knows the fullness of God. He is always showing us things about himself that we never knew. The system is perfect and when seeking truth you will find it. When we come together we then realize that our father which is in heaven has revealed different pages of himself to us. We began to see that the more we thought we knew him the more we realize we didn’t know him at all. It is in knowing him that we know ourselves and the more time we spend in fellowship with our creator that he will begin to reveal mysteries which we know not. Many things do not make sense but it makes faith and without faith it’s impossible to please GOD. Things like science and math makes great sense but nothing but GOD can speak a world into existince, part a red sea, impregnate a virgin with a child with out sex and so on. What I know and what I am confident in is that there is a GOD. I don’t need king James to tell me this and I don’t have to understand Hebrew. Because he drew me and he teaches and reveals things to me. Our greatest wisdom is not even greater than God foolishness. And yes he uses the foolish things of this world to confound the wise. He alone is worthy to be praised and I am excited and grateful to be joint heirs to the kingdom of GOD!!!! May peace and love be multiplied unto you mightily and may the GOD of love continue to circumcise your hearts and minds. Be encouraged and continue to study because knowledge is the one thing that will never see death!!!!!

  41. kim Says:

    adamah is meant for soil not directly man

  42. Ron Says:

    Yeah, by why let the facts spoil the fun?

    Humans have an innate ability to see hidden patterns where none exist.

  43. Simon Thong Says:

    Ron: Humans have an innate ability to see hidden patterns where none exist.

    That makes you less than human.
    OR
    You are human = guilty of seeing hidden patterns like all the other atheistic evolutionists.

  44. Ron Says:

    Though most atheists are evolutionists, they are not dependent on one another. There are theistic evolutionists as well.

  45. Simon Thong Says:

    I am a theistic limited version evolutionist..

  46. how will the world end Says:

    I think this is among the most vital info for me. And i am glad reading your
    article. But should remark on few general things, The website style is perfect, the articles is really excellent :
    D. Good job, cheers

  47. Joanne Barnes Says:

    Documentation, Smockumentation, if Jesus came down in person some people would ask for his driver’s license! What a wonderful thing the Bible is; it is indeed a miracle book. Had God told the reader everything, we would have Bibles the size of telephone books stretching to the heavens. Instead, He told the basics and we get to do the research! “Come let us reason together” means God will give us answers through prayer and dutiful commentators like you.

  48. Mariaan Says:

    How great is our God!! that we can debate and still have to realize how little we know of such a great God. I believe that the whole Bible
    is spirit breathed and that we have to discover God through his word. come Lord Jesus!!
    1 Corinthians 13:9-13. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears. When i was a child, i thought like a child, i reasoned like a child. When i became a man, i put the ways of childhood behind me. for now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face.
    now i know in part; then i shall see face to face. now i know in part; then I shall know fully, even as i am fully known.
    And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. but the greatest is love.

  49. Lachel Says:

    This has truly blessed me!

  50. ad1br Says:

    i just had to leave a comment.. this article, as well as the discussions in the comments, has really blessed me! i give thanks to God for granting me the Wisdom while reading your articles.

    Indeed, “It is the glory of God to conceal a thing; but the glory of kings is to search out a matter.” (Proverbs 25:2)
    The non-kings/worldly people will always attempt to “suppress the truth”, but God is full of mercy and love that He extends His Grace even to these people by revealing Himself to them, “since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.” (Romans 1:18-19) It’s amazing how God truly knows the heart of every person! He knows when someone is genuinely “seeking Him with all of their heart” (Jeremiah 29:13)

    i believe in the bible, even if not everything seem to make logical sense (unless one is able to transcend the human laws of logic), but by faith, all the pieces seem to fit in place.

    “That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;” (Ephesians 4:14)

    the Truth always stands up to hard scrutiny!

  51. ad1br Says:

    btw, i laughed at the above comment of the guy who claimed that GENESIS came from GENE and ISIS… uh, it’s not just wrong, that’s totally dumb. After having a glimpse of that i’m glad i didn’t waste time reading his entire comment. Even though he seems to be some kind of an expert (judging by his style of writing :) and with all the scientific buzzwords and all that, i can attest that his comment is full of baseless and unfounded unresearched crap.

    anyway, you talked of GENE as an english word while ISIS is the ROMAN name of an egyptian goddess. you never mix languages when you make a code! You are mixing up semetic languages with egyptian (which is non-semetic). Besides, the transliteration of Isis into Hebrew and Aramaic look completely different to make your GENE-ISIS. That is like taking a Japanese word and then combining English words to examine it. For example: Toyota is really “toy auto.” or “toyo-ta” toyo means soy sauce in our country, which is ridiculously nonsensical. That makes then, what Ron said true: “Humans have an innate ability to see hidden patterns where none exist.”

  52. cindy Says:

    Bravo! Thank you for added insight. :) cindy

  53. Hidden Revelation in the Genealogy From Adam to Noah Says:

    […] Revelation in the Genealogy From Adam to Noah I found this article very interesting. Hidden Revelation in the Genealogy From Adam to Noah God, all the way back in Genesis, predicted Jesus' coming using the names He selected to give us […]

  54. roughing tools Says:

    I always emailed this website post page to all my contacts, because if
    like to read it next my contacts will too.

  55. niknik Says:

    Hi, I’ve found this a very interesting thread. I was researching the topic and checking the translations of the names before I teach it to others. Because I know how to read Hebrew, I have an idea if the translation is dodgy or not.

    However I will only be teaching that it reveals the hand of God in the writing of the scriptures. People are often too ready to make doctrines from the wrong things.

    So my aim is to show that the Scriptures are from God and therefore reliable. Since this topic is not foundational we shouldn’t get too adamant or hot under the collar about the interpretation.

    PS Scott, just from this thread, I commend you apologetics and graceful manner. God bless.

  56. Scott Thong Says:

    Thanks, and any insights from a native Hebrew speaker are more than welcome – I post from no knowledge of the language!

  57. Timothy McCullough Says:

    Please try a new book called “Bible Names and Genealogy: Volume one- The Pentateuch View. you can find it on amazon or google it. I think there are some agreements you will find in there.

  58. online Casino Says:

    The amount of chips inside your side will probably be stripped away from this collection on the table.

    Once you have grappled while using Martingale, another method so that you can deal with for you to would be the Uber Martingale, really additional often
    called the particular Lavish Martingale.

  59. Darrell Bane Says:

    You seem to have it all together. God has revealed many more things to me. I would like it if you could be a middle man to getting some of these things on the internet. e-mail me for pictures etc. Believe me people would love these things!

  60. Debbie Penner Says:

    John, you said
    if u would like to know the message from thr hebrew names of the apostles, which there were more than 12, hidden in the brit hadasha eail me back

    P.S.
    its more than u think,

    john

    I’d love that info, but no way to contact you that I can see.
    I’m also doing research on the 12 tribes, and how they relate to the mazzeroth, and perhaps other 12s in scripture. Any comments on that?

  61. High technology Wood Pellets plants Says:

    Its like you learn my thoughts! You seem to know a lot approximately this, like you wrote the ebook in it or something.
    I think that you simply can do with some p.c. to power the message home a bit,
    but other than that, that is wonderful blog. A great read.

    I’ll certainly be back.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 122 other followers

%d bloggers like this: