A Marriage Made In Paradise
Published on May 14, 2010 By KFC Kickin For Christ In Religion

Last weekend I was asked to speak at a woman's luncheon for Mother's Day.  When I inquired as to what they wished for a subject matter they left it up to me.  So I thought about it for a day or so.  Then I came up with Eve.  Why not?  Afterall she was the mother of us all.  Since I've never heard a Mother's Day Sermon on this topic I decided I'd tackle it myself.   

Woman are important to God and He makes that very clear thru His written Word.  Even so, the message gets clouded by the cultures.  In the Eastern culture we know that women are surpressed.  In the Western culture women are aggressive and domineering more than ever.  During the days of Christ the Jews kept their women as subservient.  I heard that that it's written about the Torah that it would be better to burn it than to teach it to women! 

But what does the bible say about woman's role in society?  What is their purpose?  Jesus did much to elevate women during His time on earth and they loved Him.  It was to a woman He first announced He was the Messiah.  It was to women He first revealed Himself as risen from the dead.  He delivered at least one woman from unjust justice. 

Women were used mightily by God.  I think of Rahab who God used to save two spies facing sure death as a result if caught.  I think of Miriam who was a prophetess and ministered alongside her brother Moses.  Deborah was a judge and leader who was chosen to deliver God's people during the terrible days of the Judges.  Esther helped save her people, the Jews, from sure extermination and Lydia was a business woman who was instrumental in starting a first century church out of her home. 

So we come to Eve.  We know very little of this first lady.  We do know she was God's final creative work in the first week.  She was also a companion for Adam.  But there's more. 

Everything started out well in the garden although it didn't end that way thanks to Eve and her husband.  Eve led her husband into direct violation of God's revealed will to them.  So they were banished from Paradise.  She is a very human portraid of falling into sin but also of picking up the faith afterwards. 

She was created for a unique role in creation.  She was to minister to Adam and with Adam being his help-mate.  She was designed to complete him as well as assist him.  We read this in Genesis 1:26-28:

"And God said Let us make man in our image after our likeness and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the fowl of the air and over the cattle and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.  So God created man in his own image in the image of God created he him, male and female created he them.  And God blessed them and God said to them, Be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the fowl of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth." 

Did you see the word "them?"  This was for both of them. A job for two.  These things were too great for them to do alone.  We see a few things about God's purposes for mankind here. 

1.  To be like Him; to reflect God's image in creation.  It took both of them to do this.  We think of God as a He and that pronoun is used but it takes both man and woman to accurately reflect God's image.  We think of God as mighty, powerful, just, logical, strong, etc. but He's also depicted in scripture as loving, tenderhearted, merciful, gracious etc.  We see both male and female characteristics in Him. 

2.  They were to rule over creation.  They were given authority over all the earth.  Together.

3.  They were to reproduce; be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth.  Together.

So zooming in on Eve let's look at why she was created.  What is her purpose for being created?  Gen 2:18-22:

"And the Lord said It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper for him.  And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every fowl of the air and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them and whatsoever Adam called every living creature that was the name.  And Adam gave names to all cattle and to the fowl of the air and to every beast of the field but for Adam there was not found a helper for him.  And the Lord caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam and he slept and he took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh.  And the rib which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman and brought her to the man." 

1.  Adam was not complete by himself.

2.  It was not good.  Even in Paradise something was not good.  Seven times, it was mentioned in the first chapter after God created, God said that "it was good" until we get here to 2:18 which says "it was not good." 

3.  Man was completed with need.  He was created incomplete.  He was made complete with Eve. 

4.  She was to be a helper suitable for him. 

Looking a bit further we can see some principles for the marriage relationship right here that brought this first couple together in Holy Matrimony. 

Genesis 2:23-24

"And Adam said this is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh she shall be called Woman because she was taken out of Man.  Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother and shall cleave to his wife and they shall be one flesh."

We see that God brought Eve to Adam.  It wasn't Adam's job to find a mate which makes me wonder looking around today at all the broken marriages.  How many consulted God in the choosing of their mate?   What would it have been like if they did?  God know more than we do so why don't we ask Him first?  

Unlike the animals she was like him.  She was bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh.  She was perfect for him.  The relationship necessitated him to leave his mother and father.  Obviously this was meant for future generations because these two were a special first couple with no parents.  This marriage required cleaving and the Hebrew word implies "to be joined by commitment."   Marriage is a commitment not a feeling or an emotion.  We need to stick it out, stay together and work things out as much as possible with us. 

Marriage results in being one together.  This one flesh points to the physical body but in principle also includes all that a person is; mind, emotions, will etc.  One cares for the other as one would care for oneself. 

And marriage results in nakedness without shame.  They had no shame.  They were naked and it was good.  This, again, goes beyond the physical.  We need to be open and up front with each other.  There should be no hiding, no secrets from each other. 

So everything started out well.  Until Eve was tempted.  Then everything changed.  She entered into a discussion with a serpent.  Is it no wonder women and snakes don't get along today?  We'll start there next time.

 

 

 

 

 

 


Comments (Page 5)
13 PagesFirst 3 4 5 6 7  Last
on Jun 13, 2010

And remember Philip asked, "Lord show us the Father." ANd Christ replied, Phiilip have you not known Me?" He that sees Me sees the Father also."

yes.  Again for us it's 20/20 hindsight.  We get it now. But I'm trying to impress on you they didn't get it.  It was puzzling to them.  It all became clear to them later. 

Just want you to know, I enjoy discussing Scripture with you.

ok and I do you...to a point and you know that point has to do with RCC theology.  When you take scripture and make it fit RCC's tradition it drives me crazy because I know you're getting your thoughts from RCC commentaries and you're listening MORE to them than you are the actual scriptures. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

on Jun 13, 2010

Verse 4, ".....He will come and save you." Here "He" is the Messias Christ, and it was at His First Coming that He came as the Redeemer/Savior and therefore fulfilled Isaias 35:4 to a "T".

NO.  I already told you there are many scriptures that say this about God saving us and doesn't necessarily mean what you're trying to say.

Look back at Isaiah 33:22 for instance: 

"For the LORD (Jehovah) is our Judge, The LORD is our Lawgiver, The LORD is our King; He will save us."

or Psalm 145:19 He (Jehovah) will fulfill the desire of those who fear Him; He also will hear their cry and save them."

The "God" you're reading in 35:4 is Elohim.  Not Jesus.  That's why it's important to know the names of God and which part of the trinity is being spoken of here.   You can either go to the Greek or go to a version that differentiates this by the upper and lower cases to make it easier for you. 

Remember I gave you the difference between God, GOD, LORD and Lord, etc. ? 

 

 

on Jun 16, 2010

"And God said  " Let us make man in our image after our likeness"

Now that's an interesting bit of scripture.  Care to explain KFC, just who God was speaking to when God said "let US make man in OUR image after OUR  likeness"?  

on Jun 16, 2010

In all the places that I've read your remarks KFC, never once have I read you say "I don't know.  Ask God for the answers."  You have always sought to explaiin the mind of God and what the meaining of Gods words are.  When you are backed into a corner, you are done, and dismiss the other person like a queen dismisses a lowly subject with a wave of her hand and a "I told you what it meant."  Or you run away and refuse to explain anything .

You are the grandest fraud that I've ever seen.  You seek to explain the workings and thoughts of a mind and heart that is so far above your own that there are no words to describe it, and what is worse you think that you can do so with the lowly miniscule mind that you possess.  You speak as though you wrote the scripture yourself and only you know what it says.  You usurp the power of God, and the audacity of your actions can only lead to disaster and the fall of your false pride.

I can only feel sorrow for your pride and marvel at the grandeious manner of your ego..

on Jun 20, 2010

In all the places that I've read your remarks KFC, never once have I read you say "I don't know

I have said that before when I don't know.  But when asked a straight forward biblical question, I defer to scripture and answer accordingly.  God gave us HIS Word to give us the answers and to share with others.  Mainly the questions that we can't answer are the "why" questions.  Those are usually the questions I do answer "I don't know" because who can know the mind of God?

So are you angry with me because I know where to go to get the answers?  They are not my answers nor do I claim to have all the answers.  They are HIS. 

On one hand you say I have all the answers and on the other you say I've been backed into a corner?  Would you care to elaborate which corner?  Which answer did I give that was incorrect?  Instead of going on the attack, why not attack the issue or the answer?  You really said very little to add to this discussion.  Your attack is nothing more than your hatred showing. 

"And God said " Let us make man in our image after our likeness"

Why do you ask?  To gain wisdom and knowledge of the scriptures or to tear asunder the one who answers your question?

 

 

on Jun 21, 2010

Why would you assume that I am angry with you?  I never said that.  Nor am I angry with you.  I told you the truth of what I see.  You may not like it, and you may disagree with it, but it is what I see when I look at your postings.   It doesn't mean that I hate you, unless of course you associate hearing those things that you do not care to hear, with hate.     

Yes you do use scripture that you think answers the question, and then you give your version of what you think it means, and then swear that what you think is so, is so.  An example of it, is what I said about Jesus being specific about wealth, and  also about how one must depend  totally upon God for their own well being.  It was not as you assert " about not loving money".    That is your interpretation, it is not what was written.   Jesus was serious when he said render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and unto God what is God's, when he said don't worry about  what you will eat, or how you will be clothed, that God will ltake care of all your needs.   It wasn't a parable, it was the truth, and I suspect that it is only  fear and non belief in those words that makes one want to believe it's "about not loving money".

I asked about the question because I wanted to hear what your explanation or thoughts about what you think it means.   It is an interesting phrase.  If you only speak to those that you know will agree with you, those words will simply be noise in the wind.  You have no problems disagreeing with Lulapilgrim I see, but I suspect it's only because you think that your knowledge is superior to hers and  can defeat her.  Why so afraid of disagreement with me?

on Jun 21, 2010

It was not as you assert " about not loving money". That is your interpretation, it is not what was written. Jesus was serious when he said render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and unto God what is God's, when he said don't worry about what you will eat, or how you will be clothed, that God will ltake care of all your needs. It wasn't a parable

I never said it was a parable.  The point of the whole passage was not to worry.  As frail humans we do worry.  We are only one or two paychecks away from losing it all we think.  God will take care of our needs, not necessarily our wants.  If I remember correctly you were about just giving it all away and doing nothing but just depending on God for everything?  Who says I don't?  Do I give my house away?  My car?  Who am I trying to prove to?  You?  God?  Does God need this proof?  God knows my heart.   Is that what you're advocating?  Giving it all away and just walking around with no material things? 

I guess I don't get what you're trying to say.  I know this subject means alot to you and that it's first and foremost on your mind but you have to know that God gives gifts to his children because he cares for them and these gifts come in many different forms.  So when I look at my house or my car, I consider it a gift from God.  Do I just thumb my nose at that and give it all away anyway?   God may call some to do that.  For others he doesn't.  We all are called to different walks and ministries God has ordained for us. 

Some marry and some don't.  Some sell all they have and go into the missionary field.  Not everybody does this, nor are we all called to do so.  Some are put into Palaces (like Esther) to do the work of God.  Some are put in the fields to eat (Ruth).  Some are put in prision (Paul) to do his work.  Some are called to be Doctors (Luke) others are called to be in business (Lydia), some are called to be shepherds and work in the field (David) and some are wealthy landowners (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) and had many material possessions.  The point is God says "walk in my ways" no matter where he puts us. 

The whole idea is to have a proper respect for who God is and who I am.  I know that everything I have is a result of God's tender mercy, love and grace.  My very breath comes from him.  I am grateful for everything I have whether it be from a monetary, emotional or physical standpoint.  I listen to Him, not man telling me what or who I should be.  I answer to God and my conscience has to be clear in order to do His work. 

You have no problems disagreeing with Lulapilgrim I see, but I suspect it's only because you think that your knowledge is superior to hers and can defeat her. Why so afraid of disagreement with me?

it's not about disagreeing with you.  It's about tone.   Your tone was hateful, and certainly not kind or inquisitive.  I appreciate bluntness.  I like that and am not one to pussyfoot around either but you went way past that in your posting and have done so before.  You want the word to say what you wish the Word to say.  Can't help that.  We can't just use one piece of the puzzle and build a belief around it.  We have to take the whole of scripture and listen to what it's saying to us.  When we do that, we can see the big picture all put together for us. 

I know Lula in person.  I like Lula.  We are friends.  It's not about defeating her but making sure she understands the correct exposition of Scripture.  This is not a game of one conquering the other.  It's about rightly dividing the truth from error.  The only time we really disagree is when she tries to proselytize her RCC to me trying to get me to agree that the RCC has the truth.   She knows this and we've talked about it at length but yet it doesn't stop her from trying. 

Now, instead of going after me. ..show me where I was wrong in my answer to Lula which is what you're claiming all along.  Show me where I exposited the scripture wrongly as you seem to assert. 

 

 

 

on Jun 21, 2010

What did Jesus tell the wealthy man who wanted to follow him, even though he was a "righteous and just man" in his heart and kept all the commandments that were given to the hebrew nation?  Do you remember?  Let me refresh your memeory.    St. Matthew chapter 19 verse 20- 21

"The young man said to him, All these I have kept; what is yet wanting to me?"  Jesus said to him, "If thou wilt be perfect, go, sell what thou hast and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me." 

This does not sound like Jesus is saying keep your job, and your home, and the few possessions that will stave off starvation and keep you from being homeless.  He tells him to sell everything, as in "go, sell what you have".  He doesn't give exceptions to what the young man shall save, nor does he tell him what he can keep.

Later Jesus says to his disciples in St. Matthew chapter 19 verse 27.  "Then Peter addressed him, saying "Behold, we have left ALL and followed thee; what then shall we have?"  And Jesus said to them, "Amen I say to you that you who have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of Man shall sit on the throne of his glory, shall also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.  And EVERYONE who has left house, or brothers, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife or children, or lands for my name's sake, shall receive a hundredfold, and shall possess life everlasting." 

This is the price of everlasting life.  One will either pay it, or not receive it.  If one clings to the material possessions of life because one fears being hungry or homeless, then it is indeed true as you so aptly put it, God knows what is in ones heart and knows that it is not God that means all to one, but instead their own life that is of import.   So the answer to your quesiton is, yes, that is what I am advocating. to rely upon God for everything.  Is that so very terribly hard?  It is what the man Jesus did, the man that you profess to follow.  They are his instructions, not mine.  I do agree with you not everyone does it, but not everyone will have everlasting life either, and that very fact should make all of us wonder.  Yes. Esther was put into a palace, but please remember it was God that put her there, and  that she didn't strive to get there, it wasn't her labor that built the place nor her money that paid the laborers that did  In other words God took care of her with no effort on her part.

It was not the tone of my post, since it is impossible to have a "tone" on a computer.  It was what I said, and the fact that you didn't like it that made you think that I hated you.  As to making the "word" say what I think it should, aren't you guilty of that yourself?  You don't just quote scripture you add to it meanings that suit what is comfortable for you.  You don't want to think that Jesus is saying to give up your material possessions, even though  scripture is perfectly clear about the matter.  That very thought scares you.  What would make you think that God would want you to have a car or an earthly home?  Does having a car or home add to your soul, do they guarantee you everlasting life?  Those things are not gifts from God, they are the results of your own strivings to own them.  God did not pay for your car or home.  God did not get you a job, you did all those things.  All that God will give you is the basics of life, those being cothing and food, and the opportunity to save your own soul.

on Jun 21, 2010

I never said that you were wrong in quoting scripture or your exposition of it, (although I do think that on occassion), to Lulapilgrim.  It might be better of you would learn to read what is written.  I said that you were willing to argue it with her, although you do have a tendencyto dimiss her when you discover that she's not buying what you are selling, and I gave the reasons as to why I think that you are willing.  You seem to be afraid of me and think that I am your enemy, and I am wondering why.  Believe it, I don't hate you, and I'm not going to take your life either, (I know that a lot of chrisitians have this overblown persecution complex, even though the murdering of christians in this country for their religious beliefs, is pretty much non existent.)  Although I may not agree with you on some things, there is no reason to think that I hate you.

Isn't it a game of oneupmanship?  You  are going to  tell her the meaning of scripture, according to your interpretation of it that is.   When she refuses to see it your way, you run off pouting, refusing to talk to her anymore.   What makes you think that you are so correct?  What makes you think that Lulapilgrim is so wrong?  .

on Jun 21, 2010

You have no problems disagreeing with Lulapilgrim I see, but I suspect it's only because you think that your knowledge is superior to hers and can defeat her.

I know Lula in person. I like Lula. We are friends. It's not about defeating her but making sure she understands the correct exposition of Scripture. This is not a game of one conquering the other. It's about rightly dividing the truth from error. The only time we really disagree is when she tries to proselytize her RCC to me trying to get me to agree that the RCC has the truth. She knows this and we've talked about it at length but yet it doesn't stop her from trying.

I see I'm being drawn back into the discussion.

KFC posts:

..show me where I was wrong in my answer to Lula which is what you're claiming all along. Show me where I exposited the scripture wrongly as you seem to assert.

Which answer did I give that was incorrect?

Even though this was directed to Whisper2, given what you said (highlighted above), it  pertains to me as well.

So, I'll answer.

Here's what you wrote:

interesting you didn't put the whole of 35:4 down...speaks volumes Lula. Why didn't you put down "Your God will come with vengeance? This has NOTHING TO do with the first coming. Nothing. Jesus came to seek and to save. He said many times he didn't come to judge (John 8)

Your claim that Is. 35:4 has NOTHING TO do with Christ's First Coming is absolutely incorrect  and I fully explained why in post 58:

post 58

Here's the entire verse....

From the Douay Rheims version....35:4 "Say to the fainthearted: "Take courage and fear not: Behold your God will bring the revenge of recompense, God Himself will come and save you."

From the KJV, "Say to them that are of a fearful heart, Be strong, fear not. Behold your God will come with vengence, even God with a recompense; He will come and save you."

So you're saying verse 4 refers to Christ's Second Coming? No way. That's utter nonsense because it will be the end of the world when Christ comes again to judge the living and the dead. Isaias 35:4 can't possibly fit with Christ's Second Coming in Judgment of the whole world.

Verse 4, ".....He will come and save you." Here "He" is the Messias Christ, and it was at His First Coming that He came as the Redeemer/Savior and therefore fulfilled Isaias 35:4 to a "T".

Vengence here means God has vengence against sin and the devil and recompense is the Christ will make full satisfaction by His sacrificial death on the Cross.

Since you say that Is. 35:4 has nothing to do with Christ's First Coming, you must therefore believe Is. 35:4 has to do with Christ's Second Coming. But note, I refuted that too which went unnoticed.

Instead of addressing that and supporting your postion by showing how Isaias 35:4 refers to Christ's Second Coming,  you wrote:

NO. I already told you there are many scriptures that say this about God saving us and doesn't necessarily mean what you're trying to say.

and

The "God" you're reading in 35:4 is Elohim. Not Jesus.

Yes, indeed, it's really important that not only I but also you (we) have the correct exposition of Scripture. In this case Isaias 35:4 means that God is the Messias Christ.

One...Isasis 35:4 pertains to Christ's First Coming. And two....OK, no problem if you say the "God" in 35:4 is Elohim. But you must answer who is Isaias' 35:4 God Who was to come and save if not the Messias Christ? 

You may be right the "He" in Is 35:4 means God (Elohim) but that is not the point. The point is the "He" of Isaias 35:4 was fulfilled by Christ. God (Elohim) did come and save .."He" came as the Messias Christ.

And lastly, as we read the rest of Chapter 35, we realize even moreso that Isaias was prophecying Christ's First Coming and the miracles He  would work during this time. 

........................                                                                                                                                                                          

on Jun 21, 2010

Excuse me for interrupting this debate on what one passage means, but I would like to ask a question of both of you.  Where did you find in scripture  anything that states that the Elohim were God? 

on Jun 21, 2010

although you do have a tendencyto dimiss her when you discover that she's not buying what you are selling, and I gave the reasons as to why I think that you are willing. You seem to be afraid of me and think that I am your enemy, and I am wondering why.

No, not at all, but after years of arguing the same thing it gets tiresome.  Maybe you haven't been around all the many many times we've gone around?  Think about Christ.  He said things clearly always using scripture.  They could either accept it or reject it.  Choice is theirs.  He was very clear when he said to go out and give out the Word.  If they accept it you've gained a brother, if not, shake the dust off your feet and move on.  He didn't say stick around and argue them to death. 

And where in the world do you get I'm afraid of you?  That's a very strange thing to say. 

Although I may not agree with you on some things, there is no reason to think that I hate you.

well that's good to know.  I can only go by your words and they are almost always accusatory and very far from loving so I read what I read.  It is hard not having a verbal eye to eye conversation but you come across very angry when I read you. 

When she refuses to see it your way, you run off pouting, refusing to talk to her anymore.

I don't run off pouting.  Sorry to disappoint you.  I just don't think it's a good use of my time to constantly argue over the same old things.  This is about what three years now?  It's constantly...baptism, Mary, eucharist, works, Peter and the Rock and the authority of the RCC.  Over and over we go.  There comes a time, you need to agree to disagree.  The bible also warns against the vain wrangling of words.  It's just not good. 

What makes you think that you are so correct? What makes you think that Lulapilgrim is so wrong? .

Because of the exposition of scripture.  Quite often Lula goes to tradition.  I don't.  I stick to the clear meaning of the text and when in doubt go to another scripture that sheds light on a particular scripture.  The scripture does not contradict itself.  There's basically a set of rules of interpretation that must be considered.  One of them is to interpret obscure passages in light of those that are clear and another is to pay attention to genre. 

ere did you find in scripture anything that states that the Elohim were God?

all over the place... "In the beginning God" (Elohim) is the first occurrance. 

Who else but God could create the heavens and the earth? 

 

 

on Jun 21, 2010

As far as the Rich Young Ruler is concerned Jesus went right to his heart.  He said he kept all the commands but Christ showed him right there he had not.  He broke at least two.  One not to covet and the other to have no other gods before me. 

He walked away sad because his material possessions meant more to him than Christ.  It's not the material possessions that was wrong.  It was the clinging to them instead of God that was wrong.  Christ knew his heart.  Christ didn't say there were to be no rich men in heaven just that it would be difficult.  When one has much possessions it gets very easy to depend on them instead of God. 

Like I said before there were many wealthy people in scripture and not one of them were told to give it all up.  Take Lot, Abraham, David etc.  God may call some to do what you say, but he's not telling us all the same thing.  We all have different walks and works to do while on earth.  Some have much wealth and can help others with it.  Some do not and help in other ways.

Think of it this way, how can you give to God a portion (say 10%) if you HAVE NOTHING? 

The OT was very clear about giving.  A certain percentage was expected.  Nowhere is 100% mentioned except in two cases.  The one you brought up and the poor widow who gave all she had.  She was commended because she gave her last two mites to God.  That is very commendable but there is no imperative anywhere in scripture where we are commanded to do this.  We are commanded to do many things like love our neighbor, love God etc but nowhere does Jesus command us, nor Paul or any other writers of the NT to give 100% of our material possessions...literally that is.  We should dedicate it ALL to God and recognize it all comes from him but to literally walk away outside with nothing is not what God wants for his children. 

 

 

on Jun 21, 2010

You may be right the "He" in Is 35:4 means God (Elohim) but that is not the point. The point is the "He" of Isaias 35:4 was fulfilled by Christ. God (Elohim) did come and save .."He" came as the Messias Christ.

It is Elohim who would save.  This whole passage is not about Jesus at all. It's about the God of the OT saving Israel.  Of course he would send his son to redeem Israel later but that's not what this passage is about. 

There are lots of OT passages that say Elohim would save his people.  I gave you a few. 

I just mentioned to Whisper that there are certain rules of interpretation that we must adhere to.  Another one that I didn't mention to him is to beware of finding Christ in everything.  Not every text of scripture speaks directly of Christ in the text.  There are primary truths and secondary truths which are absolutely clear and we are to literally (if called) to die for.  It's better to question what is He saying in every text. 

In 1 Peter 3 about Christ going to hell to preach to the saints for instance...there are at least five different interpretations.  There are semi-right interpretations and some flatly wrong. 

 

on Jun 21, 2010

The "God" you're reading in 35:4 is Elohim. Not Jesus.

Yes, indeed, it's really important that not only I but also you (we) have the correct exposition of Scripture. In this case Isaias 35:4 means that God is the Messias Christ.

So you're adding to scripture to make it fit your RCC commentaries?  It means, according to you,  that God in the OT book of Isaiah in this instance is the Messiah?  It doesn't say that.  Doesn't even imply that. 

So that means everywhere we read of the first person of the Trinity in the  OT it's also the second person of the Trinity? 

Do you see what you're saying? 

 

13 PagesFirst 3 4 5 6 7  Last