Patrick Jane Forums | Theology, Anthropology, Conspiracy

"Coffee Break"
Well, if you are anywhere close to being normal, you should be able to identify with Saint Peter, ie, you know what it feels like to be hanging upside down on your cross. In other words, you should be fairly confused by now. Well, if you are, don't get into a sweat about it. The confusion usually dissipates if it's read over again. (And I have yet to meet anyone who didn't have it after the third time through.[54] This is by far the hardest part of this book,[55] and it is very basic, so please try to get it well before you go on. (That's the easiest way too.[56] Just imagine where we might to end up if this is how it starts!)

Here are some hints. When it asks you a question, try to answer it. Don't put finding the answer off. Secondly, don't read it so fast. You should have noticed by now that you just can't breeze over it and have it make sense immediately. On the other hand, it will make good sense if you go slow and answer the questions (or, at least, try to). You're going to have to do some work to see things this way. Blessed are those who are hungry enough to do the work, at least, that's what everyone says who has already worked hard enough to have climbed this mountain. They all say that the view is absolutely out of this world, and that the fruit at the top is even better, definitely worth the effort.[57]

Genesis 3:1  Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field, which the LORD GOD had made.[58] Strong's(#14) gives the meaning of subtil, 6175,  aw-room, as: “passive participle of 6191[59]; cunning (usually in a bad sense): translated as: crafty, prudent, subtil.” Therefore, I believe that I can say that this attribute carries the connotation of moral badness. The serpent was bad to be subtle, and if that is so, then, the rest of the animals must have been a bit bad too, but just not quite so bad as the serpent.

Now, I believe that this is somewhat contrary to the picture that we are usually given of the good old animals in “pre-fall” Eden. We are usually given a picture of complete peace and goodness among the entire animal population.[60] Of course, we should not forget where that idealistic picture comes from. It is necessitated by the presupposition that none of us existed before the earthly creation. Therefore, it had to be faultless in all respects or else the works of GOD would not match up with the character They have revealed to us. Therefore, we just change or ignore a few Scriptures like this one, rather than changing our presuppositions.

Well, now we have another Scripture that says that something was bad in the garden before Adam and Eve ate the fruit. First, it was bad that Adam was alone. Second, it was bad that they were naked but not ashamed. Now we have a lot of bad animals too. And who are we to blame for all this badness? Well, if we blame Adam and Eve, that is, if GOD created it bad in response to their previous sin, then we must also admit that we all existed before our conception and that we are given life to be saved by learning to be faithful unto the degree of obedience that is holy.


Genesis 3:5  For GOD doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods (elohim, NIV: GOD) knowing good and evil.[61]

Many of the traditional interpretations of this verse have Eve wanting to be like GOD, ie, coveting the glory of GOD for herself to the extent of being willing to make a grab for it, while trusting primarily on the witness of the serpent to the effect that she would not receive or could thwart GOD's judgment of death; and secondly, trusting her own rationality, which also helped to convince her that the serpent's way was indeed better and attainable.

This interpretation also forces us to believe that she was an horrible liar in that she attempted to blame her fall, not on her willful sin (covetousness) but on the fact that she was beguiled, that is, misled by a seducing evil spirit. According to preconception theology, she fell because she listened to the lie of the serpent, which lie she was prone to believing because she thought him to be a minister of GOD's grace (ie, she was spiritually blind, unable to always distinguish between good and evil preachers) and because she greatly desired to become like the ELOHIM. Her desire was the same as every believer (who would like to get into Paradise), commendable and quite normal.[62] Her sin was in seeking to obtain this worthy goal through the “faithful"[63] way that the serpent suggested to her. She obviously believed that he was trying to help her achieve this goal, but alas, to her shame, he had another goal in mind, and was lying to her. Thus we can see that Eve's error was directly attributable to her spiritual blindness, that is, to the fact that she listened to him as if he were her friend and divine messenger, rather than looking on him as being one of her worst enemies.

Now, if GOD created her spiritually blind, that is, in such a way that she would be very prone to looking on the serpent as her friend, and HE refused or neglected to warn her of satan'sss nature, that is, of the incredible danger she would be in if she listened to him, how can we say that GOD loved her or did everything without fault? One would think that if HE had any love in HIM, HE would have warned her about him, HE doing everything perfectly and she being so "blind, naive,[64] innocent and undefiled", right? Of course, if she was already defiled and blinded by her unwillingness to believe GOD's word about HIS enemies and by her friendliness towards them, then GOD just might have put her in HIS earthly garden and allowed the serpent to beguile her into eating her way out of it, without warning her of his evil intentions,[65] so that she would learn of his true character through this nasty experience (since she was unwilling to believe HIM about HIS enemies) so that, the next time HE called for a judgment against all of HIS enemies, she for one, would be willing to believe HIM that such a judgment was absolutely necessary for a peaceful life in Eden (having found that out by her experience) and not be beguiled out of that judgment (peaceful life) again. (And what's your favourite interpretation again?)

Perhaps if you are having a hard time deciding between the two interpretations, you could consider this question: how did Eve view life in Eden? To ask it another way, did Eve believe that Edenic life was her everlasting Paradise, or did she look on it as spiritual school time (because she was good but immature) or did she look on it as a spiritual hospital or correctional school (because of her fault)?

Well, it is obvious, from the serpent'sss appeal to her, that she considered herself to be spiritually blind, and that she wanted to get to see (that is, to be like Elohim, no longer unable to discern between the good and the evil). Thus, it should be apparent that she knew the difference between being blind and being able to see, that is, she knew that some PERsons could discern between the good and the evil, and she knew that she could not.

Now, just how do you think she came to know that she could not see? Well, she might have been able to see before, that is, at one time was able to distinguish between the good and the evil, but subsequent to that time, became confused, that is, changed her mind somewhat; or, if she had been created blind, GOD might have told her about seeing.[66] In other words, GOD might have told her all about the good spirits and the evil spirits, ie, what the evil spirits were like, who they were, and her necessity to stay away from them.

In other words, she would already have had her eyes opened by GOD (if she believed and understood what HE was telling her). But if her eyes were opened, that is, if she believed and understood GOD about seeing, she would not have been blind, that is, still open to the serpent's temptation, that is, still accepting him as a good person with an helpful message about God. Well then, since this way of learning about her blindness dissipates her blindness (that is, makes her unwilling to listen to temptations about having her blindness cured) and since her behaviour shows that she was still blind, she could not have learned about being blind and seeing in this way.

In other words, either GOD did not tell her about seeing, or if HE did, she did not believe HIM, which makes her a rebellious unbeliever, which blatantly contradicts the fact that she wanted to get cured.

But since she wanted to be cured, then GOD could not have told her, and if GOD did not tell her, this only leaves us with the other way, to wit: she knew she was blind because she had previously been able to see,[67] and this being the case, she had to look on life as being a spiritual hospital or correctional centre for her faulty vision[68] (and whatever caused it).

In other words, the fact that she was spiritually blind means that she previously had been unfaithful (the only way one becomes blinded) and the dearth of blatant witness to any prior unfaithfulness in Eden can only mean that her faithlessness had taken place before she was given earthly life, and her earthly life was created to be the means of bringing her to repentance and faithfulness (sight) again. So then, according to the Bible, Eve looked at life the same as a pre-conceptionist does.[69]

Genesis 3:14 And the LORD GOD said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life...[/size Some of the accepted interpretations of this verse really send me into stitches - painful ones. Of course, not possessing the accurate interpretation on account of the prevalence of false theological presuppositions, and assuming that any “legless”[70] interpretation is better than admitting that we just do not know what all the wise GOD is talking about, it becomes very easy to slip into interpretations that future children will really wonder about. So then, how else can we interpret this verse? As it plainly reads, the cattle were cursed already and so were the beasts of the field, that is, this creation was not so “very good” at all by this time. Is it too absurd to surmise that it was “originally” created (or recreated[71]) in a fallen, cursed condition, very good for a chastitory, converting and sanctifying purpose? No it’s not.

Genesis 3:15  And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed. From this prophecy we can see that GOD's purpose in life from the time of this statement (and quite possibly before that time, since HE planned it well before that time) has been to put enmity[72] between the non-elect (thy seed) and the elect (her seed).[73] I do not know of any prevailing theology that teaches us about this as being the foremost aspect of GOD's purpose in life, that is, except for pre-conception existence.[74]

The second thing worthy of note is that the putting of enmity presupposes its non-existence, that is, the existence of friendship with the world or non-elect. In other words, it presupposes their knowing the good and the evil.[75] I believe that this interpretation is backed up by Malachi 3:18, which prophesies, I believe, of the fulfillment of this verse. Malachi 3:18  And you will again see the distinction[76] between the righteous and the wicked, between those who serve GOD and those who do not. (NIV)

For those who now know how to correctly interpret the prophets, a check on the context will confirm that in this verse Malachi is addressing the elect in the latter days. And isn't it interesting that Malachi views their blindness as something they picked up along the way, rather than being the way they were created, that is, at one time all of the now[77] blind people could see the difference between the good and the evil, to which sight they will finally be restored?

Conclusion for Genesis: To my mind, this constitutes very good proof of an exceptionally strong spiritual foundation for preconception theology in Genesis.[78] Therefore, I say that preconception existence theology is the most attested to by the Scriptures. Perhaps you are thinking that I am not justified in making that statement based on only a few exceptional hard to understand Scriptures that did not fit in anywhere else. Well, if you do not yet consider me justified in making that statement, then why not continue on?

Maybe you might agree with me after you finish my first mundane, boring category. It is my hope that you will find out, as it has been stated by others so many times, that the message of the Scriptures is (fairly) consistent throughout. One more thing, as it also has been stated on so many occasions down through the ages: welcome to revealed religion, or as the Lord so aptly stated it in Hebrews 12:26  Yet once more I shake[79] not the earth only, but also heaven. In other words, what do you think is going to happen if I’m even just half as right as I say I am?

---------------------------------------------------------

 Notes for: 3.  Genesis Study...
 
54.  Sometimes known as really putting you through!

 55.   Undoubtedly the newness of the view-idea has a bit to do with it.

 56.  Therefore count on the devil to try to talk you out of it! 

 57.  That is, of course, if your heart seeks for a view from on high.

 58.  From just reading it, don’t you get the impression that the serpent was not one of the beasts that the LORD GOD had made then?Back:
 
59. Strong’s(#14) 6191, aw-ram'; a primary root; properly to be (or make) bare; but used only in the derivative sense (through the idea perhaps of smoothness) to be cunning (usually in a bad sense): translated as: very, beware, take crafty (counsel), be prudent, deal subtilly. This is the root the word “naked” in 2:25 comes from. (Genesis 2:25 And they both were naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.) In other words, Genesis 3:1  Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD GOD had made. could just as well be translated “the serpent was more naked than any beast!” Of course, since that would be giving away the whole show, it probably has been acceptable (as per Acts 17:30  And the times of this ignorance GOD winked at; but now commandeth all men everywhere to repent.) to have the subtle interpretation. 

 60.  Remember all those pictures of Adam and Eve, with all the nice, sugary, totally unrealistic animals, usually standing in front of them, covering them up. Radical theology to say the least! Quite a cover-up!
 61.  That is, to not be idolatrous, ie, to learn that GOD's ideas (ways) are always the best, the most beneficial to us, definitely better than anyone else's.

 62.  Especially so if she had just recently been put out of Paradise for not being able to distinguish between the good and the evil.

 63.  “Didn't GOD predestine you to eternal life? If so, then how can you die? Is the GOD who wants you to live forever going to kill you? Is something going to kill you when GOD wants you to live forever? When are you going to start believing in the all-powerful GOD who loves you infinitely? When are you going to believe that there is nothing more powerful than the tree of life?”

 64.  Her blindness can not mean naïveté because naïveté is ended by GOD's self-attesting witness, which they had already received because they already accepted HIM as their GOD.

 65.  Doesn't it remind you of 1 Corinthians 5:5 Deliver such an one unto satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit might be saved.?

 66.  GOD's enemies would not have told her about seeing, for to do so, they would have had to tell her the truth about themselves. In other words, being spiritually blind means looking on some of the evil as being good, and looking on some of the truth about evil as being a lie.

 67.  This way she would know the difference but still be blind, that is, still seeking to be cured, that is, still open to the serpent's temptation, that is, still unwilling to stay separate from those things GOD had told her to stay separate from. Do you still have any doubts as to which one of these matches the biblical account of what happened in Eden?

 68.  ie, discernment, that is, disbelief in GOD's word.

 69.  Understanding does not come easy but it does come if you do the work. So read it slowly and think about what it's saying. And you have to do it if you're going to be on the side that understands. Don't worry. Everything usually falls into place by the third time through.

 70.  That is, without understanding!! (Some Christians believe that the serpent had legs before this.)

 71.  Genesis 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void. The word “was” may also be translated “became”. “Without form and void” (Hebrew: tohu wabohu) describes the result of a divine judgment in the other two places where the phrase is used in the Bible (Isaiah 34:11 But the cormorant and the bittern shall possess it; the owl also and the raven shall dwell in it: and he shall stretch out upon it the line of confusion, and the stones of emptiness., and Jeremiah 4:23  I beheld the earth, and lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light.

 72.   That is, to make us faithful unto holiness, for holiness is the only source of such enmity.

73.  Many interpret this as referring to Jesus. I do not think that can be correct, for is it not quite unreasonable to include Him in the group that needs to be separated in spirit from satan's seed, that is, that needs to become holy?

74.  Just like before Jesus came there was no one teaching about the deity of the Lamb.

75.  That is, unholiness, that is, spiritual blindness.

76.   To see the distinction is to lay upon oneself the necessity of making the distinction, that is, the necessity of becoming holy. Please note that in Malachi 3:18, the righteous are defined as those who serve GOD, not those who believe in HIM. Obviously those who serve HIM will believe in HIM, but there are an awful lot who believe in HIM who do not serve HIM. I would say that if you plan on being one of HIS jewels, you had better take note of the difference.

77.  That is, the latter day elect. Just when did you first see the difference in a way that could fulfill this prophecy? Well, you won't wonder when you are finished with this book. (You must take note that you did not see “in Adam” because Adam and Eve were blind.) Welcome to a bigger universe.

78.  Of course, I've studied it enough that I can really understand everything you've just gone over. If you want to understand it, you'll have to read it again. It doesn’t take long. It goes a lot faster the second time. 

79.  Primary waves do not shake you up too bad, but just wait till the love waves get here. (Look them up under “earthquakes”.)

Quote from: Ted T. on May 23, 2019, 08:43:31 pm

"Coffee Break"
Well, if you are anywhere close to being normal, you should be able to identify with Saint Peter, ie, you know what it feels like to be hanging upside down on your cross. In other words, you should be fairly confused by now. Well, if you are, don't get into a sweat about it. The confusion usually dissipates if it's read over again. (And I have yet to meet anyone who didn't have it after the third time through.[54] This is by far the hardest part of this book,[55] and it is very basic, so please try to get it well before you go on. (That's the easiest way too.[56] Just imagine where we might to end up if this is how it starts!)

Here are some hints. When it asks you a question, try to answer it. Don't put finding the answer off. Secondly, don't read it so fast. You should have noticed by now that you just can't breeze over it and have it make sense immediately. On the other hand, it will make good sense if you go slow and answer the questions (or, at least, try to). You're going to have to do some work to see things this way. Blessed are those who are hungry enough to do the work, at least, that's what everyone says who has already worked hard enough to have climbed this mountain. They all say that the view is absolutely out of this world, and that the fruit at the top is even better, definitely worth the effort.[57]

Genesis 3:1  Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field, which the LORD GOD had made.[58] Strong's(#14) gives the meaning of subtil, 6175,  aw-room, as: “passive participle of 6191[59]; cunning (usually in a bad sense): translated as: crafty, prudent, subtil.” Therefore, I believe that I can say that this attribute carries the connotation of moral badness. The serpent was bad to be subtle, and if that is so, then, the rest of the animals must have been a bit bad too, but just not quite so bad as the serpent.

Now, I believe that this is somewhat contrary to the picture that we are usually given of the good old animals in “pre-fall” Eden. We are usually given a picture of complete peace and goodness among the entire animal population.[60] Of course, we should not forget where that idealistic picture comes from. It is necessitated by the presupposition that none of us existed before the earthly creation. Therefore, it had to be faultless in all respects or else the works of GOD would not match up with the character They have revealed to us. Therefore, we just change or ignore a few Scriptures like this one, rather than changing our presuppositions.

Well, now we have another Scripture that says that something was bad in the garden before Adam and Eve ate the fruit. First, it was bad that Adam was alone. Second, it was bad that they were naked but not ashamed. Now we have a lot of bad animals too. And who are we to blame for all this badness? Well, if we blame Adam and Eve, that is, if GOD created it bad in response to their previous sin, then we must also admit that we all existed before our conception and that we are given life to be saved by learning to be faithful unto the degree of obedience that is holy.


Genesis 3:5  For GOD doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods (elohim, NIV: GOD) knowing good and evil.[61]

Many of the traditional interpretations of this verse have Eve wanting to be like GOD, ie, coveting the glory of GOD for herself to the extent of being willing to make a grab for it, while trusting primarily on the witness of the serpent to the effect that she would not receive or could thwart GOD's judgment of death; and secondly, trusting her own rationality, which also helped to convince her that the serpent's way was indeed better and attainable.

This interpretation also forces us to believe that she was an horrible liar in that she attempted to blame her fall, not on her willful sin (covetousness) but on the fact that she was beguiled, that is, misled by a seducing evil spirit. According to preconception theology, she fell because she listened to the lie of the serpent, which lie she was prone to believing because she thought him to be a minister of GOD's grace (ie, she was spiritually blind, unable to always distinguish between good and evil preachers) and because she greatly desired to become like the ELOHIM. Her desire was the same as every believer (who would like to get into Paradise), commendable and quite normal.[62] Her sin was in seeking to obtain this worthy goal through the “faithful"[63] way that the serpent suggested to her. She obviously believed that he was trying to help her achieve this goal, but alas, to her shame, he had another goal in mind, and was lying to her. Thus we can see that Eve's error was directly attributable to her spiritual blindness, that is, to the fact that she listened to him as if he were her friend and divine messenger, rather than looking on him as being one of her worst enemies.

Now, if GOD created her spiritually blind, that is, in such a way that she would be very prone to looking on the serpent as her friend, and HE refused or neglected to warn her of satan'sss nature, that is, of the incredible danger she would be in if she listened to him, how can we say that GOD loved her or did everything without fault? One would think that if HE had any love in HIM, HE would have warned her about him, HE doing everything perfectly and she being so "blind, naive,[64] innocent and undefiled", right? Of course, if she was already defiled and blinded by her unwillingness to believe GOD's word about HIS enemies and by her friendliness towards them, then GOD just might have put her in HIS earthly garden and allowed the serpent to beguile her into eating her way out of it, without warning her of his evil intentions,[65] so that she would learn of his true character through this nasty experience (since she was unwilling to believe HIM about HIS enemies) so that, the next time HE called for a judgment against all of HIS enemies, she for one, would be willing to believe HIM that such a judgment was absolutely necessary for a peaceful life in Eden (having found that out by her experience) and not be beguiled out of that judgment (peaceful life) again. (And what's your favourite interpretation again?)

Perhaps if you are having a hard time deciding between the two interpretations, you could consider this question: how did Eve view life in Eden? To ask it another way, did Eve believe that Edenic life was her everlasting Paradise, or did she look on it as spiritual school time (because she was good but immature) or did she look on it as a spiritual hospital or correctional school (because of her fault)?

Well, it is obvious, from the serpent'sss appeal to her, that she considered herself to be spiritually blind, and that she wanted to get to see (that is, to be like Elohim, no longer unable to discern between the good and the evil). Thus, it should be apparent that she knew the difference between being blind and being able to see, that is, she knew that some PERsons could discern between the good and the evil, and she knew that she could not.

Now, just how do you think she came to know that she could not see? Well, she might have been able to see before, that is, at one time was able to distinguish between the good and the evil, but subsequent to that time, became confused, that is, changed her mind somewhat; or, if she had been created blind, GOD might have told her about seeing.[66] In other words, GOD might have told her all about the good spirits and the evil spirits, ie, what the evil spirits were like, who they were, and her necessity to stay away from them.

In other words, she would already have had her eyes opened by GOD (if she believed and understood what HE was telling her). But if her eyes were opened, that is, if she believed and understood GOD about seeing, she would not have been blind, that is, still open to the serpent's temptation, that is, still accepting him as a good person with an helpful message about God. Well then, since this way of learning about her blindness dissipates her blindness (that is, makes her unwilling to listen to temptations about having her blindness cured) and since her behaviour shows that she was still blind, she could not have learned about being blind and seeing in this way.

In other words, either GOD did not tell her about seeing, or if HE did, she did not believe HIM, which makes her a rebellious unbeliever, which blatantly contradicts the fact that she wanted to get cured.

But since she wanted to be cured, then GOD could not have told her, and if GOD did not tell her, this only leaves us with the other way, to wit: she knew she was blind because she had previously been able to see,[67] and this being the case, she had to look on life as being a spiritual hospital or correctional centre for her faulty vision[68] (and whatever caused it).

In other words, the fact that she was spiritually blind means that she previously had been unfaithful (the only way one becomes blinded) and the dearth of blatant witness to any prior unfaithfulness in Eden can only mean that her faithlessness had taken place before she was given earthly life, and her earthly life was created to be the means of bringing her to repentance and faithfulness (sight) again. So then, according to the Bible, Eve looked at life the same as a pre-conceptionist does.[69]

Genesis 3:14 And the LORD GOD said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life...[/size Some of the accepted interpretations of this verse really send me into stitches - painful ones. Of course, not possessing the accurate interpretation on account of the prevalence of false theological presuppositions, and assuming that any “legless”[70] interpretation is better than admitting that we just do not know what all the wise GOD is talking about, it becomes very easy to slip into interpretations that future children will really wonder about. So then, how else can we interpret this verse? As it plainly reads, the cattle were cursed already and so were the beasts of the field, that is, this creation was not so “very good” at all by this time. Is it too absurd to surmise that it was “originally” created (or recreated[71]) in a fallen, cursed condition, very good for a chastitory, converting and sanctifying purpose? No it’s not.

Genesis 3:15  And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed. From this prophecy we can see that GOD's purpose in life from the time of this statement (and quite possibly before that time, since HE planned it well before that time) has been to put enmity[72] between the non-elect (thy seed) and the elect (her seed).[73] I do not know of any prevailing theology that teaches us about this as being the foremost aspect of GOD's purpose in life, that is, except for pre-conception existence.[74]

The second thing worthy of note is that the putting of enmity presupposes its non-existence, that is, the existence of friendship with the world or non-elect. In other words, it presupposes their knowing the good and the evil.[75] I believe that this interpretation is backed up by Malachi 3:18, which prophesies, I believe, of the fulfillment of this verse. Malachi 3:18  And you will again see the distinction[76] between the righteous and the wicked, between those who serve GOD and those who do not. (NIV)

For those who now know how to correctly interpret the prophets, a check on the context will confirm that in this verse Malachi is addressing the elect in the latter days. And isn't it interesting that Malachi views their blindness as something they picked up along the way, rather than being the way they were created, that is, at one time all of the now[77] blind people could see the difference between the good and the evil, to which sight they will finally be restored?

Conclusion for Genesis: To my mind, this constitutes very good proof of an exceptionally strong spiritual foundation for preconception theology in Genesis.[78] Therefore, I say that preconception existence theology is the most attested to by the Scriptures. Perhaps you are thinking that I am not justified in making that statement based on only a few exceptional hard to understand Scriptures that did not fit in anywhere else. Well, if you do not yet consider me justified in making that statement, then why not continue on?

Maybe you might agree with me after you finish my first mundane, boring category. It is my hope that you will find out, as it has been stated by others so many times, that the message of the Scriptures is (fairly) consistent throughout. One more thing, as it also has been stated on so many occasions down through the ages: welcome to revealed religion, or as the Lord so aptly stated it in Hebrews 12:26  Yet once more I shake[79] not the earth only, but also heaven. In other words, what do you think is going to happen if I’m even just half as right as I say I am?

---------------------------------------------------------

 Notes for: 3.  Genesis Study...
 
54.  Sometimes known as really putting you through!

 55.   Undoubtedly the newness of the view-idea has a bit to do with it.

 56.  Therefore count on the devil to try to talk you out of it! 

 57.  That is, of course, if your heart seeks for a view from on high.

 58.  From just reading it, don’t you get the impression that the serpent was not one of the beasts that the LORD GOD had made then?Back:
 
59. Strong’s(#14) 6191, aw-ram'; a primary root; properly to be (or make) bare; but used only in the derivative sense (through the idea perhaps of smoothness) to be cunning (usually in a bad sense): translated as: very, beware, take crafty (counsel), be prudent, deal subtilly. This is the root the word “naked” in 2:25 comes from. (Genesis 2:25 And they both were naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.) In other words, Genesis 3:1  Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD GOD had made. could just as well be translated “the serpent was more naked than any beast!” Of course, since that would be giving away the whole show, it probably has been acceptable (as per Acts 17:30  And the times of this ignorance GOD winked at; but now commandeth all men everywhere to repent.) to have the subtle interpretation. 

 60.  Remember all those pictures of Adam and Eve, with all the nice, sugary, totally unrealistic animals, usually standing in front of them, covering them up. Radical theology to say the least! Quite a cover-up!
 61.  That is, to not be idolatrous, ie, to learn that GOD's ideas (ways) are always the best, the most beneficial to us, definitely better than anyone else's.

 62.  Especially so if she had just recently been put out of Paradise for not being able to distinguish between the good and the evil.

 63.  “Didn't GOD predestine you to eternal life? If so, then how can you die? Is the GOD who wants you to live forever going to kill you? Is something going to kill you when GOD wants you to live forever? When are you going to start believing in the all-powerful GOD who loves you infinitely? When are you going to believe that there is nothing more powerful than the tree of life?”

 64.  Her blindness can not mean naïveté because naïveté is ended by GOD's self-attesting witness, which they had already received because they already accepted HIM as their GOD.

 65.  Doesn't it remind you of 1 Corinthians 5:5 Deliver such an one unto satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit might be saved.?

 66.  GOD's enemies would not have told her about seeing, for to do so, they would have had to tell her the truth about themselves. In other words, being spiritually blind means looking on some of the evil as being good, and looking on some of the truth about evil as being a lie.

 67.  This way she would know the difference but still be blind, that is, still seeking to be cured, that is, still open to the serpent's temptation, that is, still unwilling to stay separate from those things GOD had told her to stay separate from. Do you still have any doubts as to which one of these matches the biblical account of what happened in Eden?

 68.  ie, discernment, that is, disbelief in GOD's word.

 69.  Understanding does not come easy but it does come if you do the work. So read it slowly and think about what it's saying. And you have to do it if you're going to be on the side that understands. Don't worry. Everything usually falls into place by the third time through.

 70.  That is, without understanding!! (Some Christians believe that the serpent had legs before this.)

 71.  Genesis 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void. The word “was” may also be translated “became”. “Without form and void” (Hebrew: tohu wabohu) describes the result of a divine judgment in the other two places where the phrase is used in the Bible (Isaiah 34:11 But the cormorant and the bittern shall possess it; the owl also and the raven shall dwell in it: and he shall stretch out upon it the line of confusion, and the stones of emptiness., and Jeremiah 4:23  I beheld the earth, and lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light.

 72.   That is, to make us faithful unto holiness, for holiness is the only source of such enmity.

73.  Many interpret this as referring to Jesus. I do not think that can be correct, for is it not quite unreasonable to include Him in the group that needs to be separated in spirit from satan's seed, that is, that needs to become holy?

74.  Just like before Jesus came there was no one teaching about the deity of the Lamb.

75.  That is, unholiness, that is, spiritual blindness.

76.   To see the distinction is to lay upon oneself the necessity of making the distinction, that is, the necessity of becoming holy. Please note that in Malachi 3:18, the righteous are defined as those who serve GOD, not those who believe in HIM. Obviously those who serve HIM will believe in HIM, but there are an awful lot who believe in HIM who do not serve HIM. I would say that if you plan on being one of HIS jewels, you had better take note of the difference.

77.  That is, the latter day elect. Just when did you first see the difference in a way that could fulfill this prophecy? Well, you won't wonder when you are finished with this book. (You must take note that you did not see “in Adam” because Adam and Eve were blind.) Welcome to a bigger universe.

78.  Of course, I've studied it enough that I can really understand everything you've just gone over. If you want to understand it, you'll have to read it again. It doesn’t take long. It goes a lot faster the second time. 

79.  Primary waves do not shake you up too bad, but just wait till the love waves get here. (Look them up under “earthquakes”.)

To the Reader:  If you believe any part of the above, I have some Arizona Beach land for sale at a low cost.

Blade

good thread