Posted on 02/12/2010 10:48:23 PM PST by bogusname
The history of the races of mankind is a fascinating subject. Biologically, a race is generally thought of as a variety, or subspecies, within a given species. All the races are a part of the human race. We have made the term race to apply to skin color, but the dictionary defines race as "a class or kind of individuals with common characteristics, interests, appearances, or habits as if derived from a common ancestor."
Where did we come from? The answers have always been with us, as presented in the original Table of Nations. What you are about to read can best be described as an Exegesis (from the Greek exégesis, verb: exégetikos, meaning interpretation, guide, translation or critical exposition). Once you have read what is presented here, you may not view any race of people the same way again. Note that there is nothing like the Table of Nations (as presented here) in any other national tradition. Here we are presented the origin of nations...
(Excerpt) Read more at soundchristian.com ...
I am NOT hunting your respect, I did NOT Write what was Written. I did not 'choose' a theory, I take very serious every WORD and keep finding the literal physical evidence found all over this earth was left for the purpose of giving credibility to what was Written.
Could you please tell me in ALL of the Scripture where at any point and time when the children were following the instructions of the Heavenly Father, HE allowed another way to replace what they preach? See now something is wrong with what is taught about a young earth, and only two peoples being the historical parents of all of the Heavenly Father's children to have come to 'TOE' being the law of the land.
If you believe what you think is “literal physical evidence” over a sound interpretation of the Bible you are no different than the Darwin crowd.
This creation is only 6000 years old just as the Bible clearly indicates. The Bible is true as written and you don’t have to mangle it’s verses to fit what you think the “evidence” says.
We did come from those two original human beings Adam and Eve. If you find something that simple is hard to believe then how can you believe the record of Christ unto salvation?
You had better accept God’s word as being true as written. Your eternal life depends on it.
Ignoring the Written WORD is NOT sound interpretation of the Bible. And 99% is ignored to call sound *interpretation* what the Heavenly Father again and again said otherwise.
IITimothy 3:16 *ALL* Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
Peter (IIPeter 3) says to be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour:
Moses was the first 'holy prophet' but only gave a portion of doctrine, and other prophets filled in what he did not give. Solomon in Ecclesiastes said "the thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun. And Peter says there are three different heaven/earth ages. The one that WAS which "For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the *WORD* of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:....
Whereby the world that then *was*, being overflowed with water, perished:.... Now check out what Genesis 1:2 says about what happened to this earth before anything was reported to be created...And the earth was (should be the word *became*) without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. (Deep what?) And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
It says what it says NO matter what others might call sound to the contrary.
Quoting verses you don’t understand isn’t helping your case. You’re throwing anything you can find against wall in hopes that something will stick. You’ve resorted to this because you know you are losing the battle. You’re not at all stable with this weird evolution/creation mix you believe in and you know it. The Scriptures won’t support that belief so you’re feeling the loss. You need to believe all of God’s word as written and not just a few verses you pull out of context and misinterpret to fit your new man made and Darwin influenced religion.
Now, as much as I’d love to go on hearing your confusion I have to hang up at the moment. I have things to do and it’s apparent you prefer to remain wrong. I don’t mean to sound harsh but I can see you don’t believe and I have to go spend time with some people that do. They’re waiting on me. I sincerely hope you find your way someday because right now you’re quite lost.
One thing I do NOT believe in or about is evolution. And your chart showing so call linage of flesh upon this earth from ‘the’ Adam and all the Heavenly Father’s children is evolution in quick time.
Do you teach that ‘the’ Adam and Eve shared an apple?
So long.
Jesus was dressing down the Sadducee for their seven brothers one wife story and what will happen in the resurrection. Jesus says nothing about Satan or fallen Angels. But in "Gen 6:4 Now giants were upon the earth in those days. For after the sons of God went in to the daughters of men, and they brought forth children, these are the mighty men of old, men of renown." Since "sons of God" is used for a term for Angels and the text indicates the procreation results into a hybrid being it is not unreasonable to believe that the fallen angels did this. Peter says "2Pe 2:4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but delivered them, drawn down by infernal ropes to the lower hell, unto torments, to be reserved unto judgment: 2Pe 2:5 And spared not the original world, but preserved Noe, the eighth person, the preacher of justice, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly." Was the procreation between angels and women a part of the reason for the flood? Could "Gen 6:9 These are the generations of Noe: Noe was a just and perfect man in his generations, he walked with God. " mean Noah genealogy was not polluted?
Hold with the sermon daug. I’ve been rethinking this subject indepencently and let me add that all that you wrote I’ve already considered many times over many years. This very day I watched the latest Hal Lindsey video and lo and behold he was talking about the angels with women thing. I respect his views and he seeems to think that angels did indeed cohabitate with human females. On top of that the author of the article we’re commenting on returned my email and he likewise holds that same opinion.
Ok, hold on to your seat freeper...I might be wrong. Man I hate whwn that happens. At this point I’m just going to have to say that it’s possible. It has nothing to do with ones salvation and I shouldn’t have been chopping up those that held that view anyway.
bogusname
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.