RSS

Tuesday Night Radio Show: A little bit of everything

18 Feb

American Independence Hour hosted by Alfred Adask; 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM Central time, Tuesday nights, on AmericanVoiceRadio.com and also on the KU band, free-to-air satellite link at Galaxy 19.  There’ll be call-ins at 1-800-596-8191.

American Independence Hour--Internet Radio [courtesy Google Images]

American Independence Hour–Internet Radio
[courtesy Google Images]

Tonight, I’ll be talking about my article “MOOA Meets Ecclesiastes 3:18” and I may also explore the question “Is the Bible Perfect?“.

I also plan to discuss some recent news reports, and I hope that some of you will not only listen,but call in with your own comments, opinions and questions at 1-800-596-8191.

As usual, I’ll be broadcasting from within the borders of The State of Texas, a member-State of the perpetual Union styled “The United States of America” and directing my message to those men and women made in God’s image (Genesis 1:26-28) and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights (“Declaration of Independence“).  Again, I hope you’ll tune in and call in.

 

 
76 Comments

Posted by on February 18, 2014 in American Independence Hour, Radio

 

Tags:

76 responses to “Tuesday Night Radio Show: A little bit of everything

  1. Martens

    February 18, 2014 at 6:33 PM

    Some questions for the show.

    Question 1:

    If men in general are the image of God, why does Paul say Christ, specifically, is the image of God in the following two verses?

    2 Corinthians 4:4 The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

    Colossians 1:15 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.

    Question 2:

    If men in general are the image of God, why does Paul say Christians in particular shall bear the “image of the heavenly” in the following statement?

    1 Corinthians 15:47-49 The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven. As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.

    Question 3:

    If men in general are the image of God, what does Paul mean by the change of “our vile body” to something like the “glorious body” of Jesus Christ, who is the image God (see above), in the following statement?

    Philippians 3:20-21 For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.

    Question 4:

    On the other hand, if it is not true that men in general bear the image of God, what does Paul the Apostle tell us about the requirements for acquiring the image of God?

     
    • Adask

      February 18, 2014 at 8:07 PM

      Thank you. Much appreciated. I probably can’t answer some of your questions, but I’ll try. Thanks again.

       
      • J.M.

        February 21, 2014 at 6:53 AM

        Martens a.k.a. Jetlag
        Jetlag a.k.a. Martens
        Anyone else unconcerned

        1.Martens a.k.a. Jetlag, Don must be a good dude.

        2. Christian Gains, I owe you a deep heartfelt apology. I thought when you gave me the 7 scriptures & all 7 pointed to a FOOL, I thought you were being vindictive being that you also said, We’re Done !!!
        No, Christian Gains, you were being gentle. Now, I see that at least most scriptures that apply to a FOOL, apply to me. I apologize Christian Gains. I was wrong in my thoughts about you, at least in that area.

        3. I came on this blog for two reasons. One reason was selfish. I was needing some company, & I thought I found a home from what I was reading. The 2nd reason was, I do care for people & stupid me, I thought I could help be uplifting etc to one or two more people. FOOL I am & worse than a FOOL.

        4. I know that I have no credibility but I know I have left messages from people who do, & the final warning has been posted.Once again Daniel the 12th chapter is a “credible” source 2nd witness, Matthew 24:22, 3rd witness, Mark 13:20. This is what people should be concerned about,yes even above the money accumulation wise thinkers.

        5. There is a scripture that talks about a certain ANIMAL that tramples pearls if these pearls are put out for them for “food.” I thought they were “food for thought” for people, not animals.” STUPID FOOLISH me.

        6. Skip, dejure, thanks for your support

        7.I do not want to be on any blog where Satan has the upper hand, e.g. where SELF PROFESSING & PROUD OF IT ANIMALS like Martens, a.k.a. Jetlag, are allowed to dominate. So, if this message goes through, as Alfred would say, Bye Bye.

         
      • Martens

        February 21, 2014 at 7:40 AM

        Bye-bye, Don a.k.a. Les Fuchs.

        Don’t be shy by returning under yet another name, now.

        Since becoming familiar with the remarkable body of work you have bequeathed to this blog in the form of highly accomplished trolling, I’ll spot you right away and announce your comeback to everyone like I did a few hours ago.

         
      • Jetlag

        February 21, 2014 at 2:48 PM

        @Martens

        You gotta admit that Les Fuchs did provide a service by stress testing Prof. Adask’s belief in free speech.

        Normally, calling a fellow commenter a “servant of Satan” or similar will get you a warning the first time, and the banhammer after the 2nd or 3rd offense.

        Our ubertroll, on the other hand, got away with it dozens of times over multiple threads.

        Thumbs up for the marketplace of ideas.

         
      • Martens

        February 22, 2014 at 6:45 AM

        From a comment posted by Adask, in the comment section attached to the article “On this rock I will build my church”—OK, but which “rock”?, on May 11, 2013:

        (begin quote)

        It’s interesting that you complain that some of your comment was deleted. The only other person I can recall who complained about losing some of his comments was “Les Fuchs”–one of the two people recently banned. More, according to IP Location Lookup, both you (Ironhead) and “Les Fuchs” are located at or near Santa Fe, New Mexico. Perhaps you know him?

        He’s a fairly intelligent guy, but he’s mentally ill and probably obsessive-compulsive. He never knows when to quit. He spent some time in prison (perhaps for stalking?) where he claims to have been beaten up several times–probably because he just can’t shut his mouth. If there’s one way to get you ass beaten or even killed in the slammer, it’s by means of a refusal and/or inability to shut your mouth. “Les Fuchs,” aka Sparky, Sparks, Sparky the Dullard, Don Bailey and at least two or three other names that I don’t currently recall.

        In any case, being obsessive-compulsive, he’s fairly easy to spot. He generally has nothing new to say–just complaints (you’d be amazed how many times he bitched about the blog “eating his homework” (deleting part of his comments)), criticisms, phony humility. He can’t help it. He’s obsessive-compulsive. He’s kinda amusing at times. But also kinda sad.

        He is so isolated that there’s nothing left for him to do but hang around a blog where he’s not wanted and hide in the shadows under a series of alias and IP addresses.

        Of course, I only assume he’s obsessive-compulsive. Maybe he’s a government agent. Whatever he, he’s so consistent in his arrogance and negative attitudes, that he’s pretty easy to identify. He acts as if he’s some sort of super-spy, but he should probably change his “moniker” to “PinkPanther” or “PeterSellers2” or some such.

        Anyway, keep your eyes peeled. If you see him, let me know so I can bounce him off this blog for the 5th? 6th? time.

        (end quote)

        Also by Adask, in the comment section attached to the same article, on May 12, 2013:

        (begin quote)

        Why do you keep coming back? You know I don’t want you. You know I’ll spot you. You know I’ll ban you again and again and again. Are you in love with me? Do you want to have my baby?

        […]

        In any case, you be banned again. You will remain banned. I will dump you every time I spot you. Previously, I gave you chance after chance to cut the crap. But, being obsessive-compulsive, you just can’t let it drop, can you? I think you have a problem with authority. Daddy issues? How many times were you beaten up in the slammer by inmates? How many times by guards?

        In any case, Les, Sparky, Ironhead, Don–I’ve had enough. Bye-bye.

        (end quote)

        https://adask.wordpress.com/2013/05/07/on-this-rock-i-will-build-my-church-ok-but-which-rock

        Well, the elusive Les Fuchs, international virtuoso of tolling, turned up here again – this time using the name “J.M.” as cover.

         
      • Jetlag

        February 22, 2014 at 4:18 PM

        @Martens

        The dastardly and obsessive Les Fuchs – a.k.a. J.M. this time around – actually posted overt and explicit threats of physical violence again you and me, at least three times in the last couple of weeks.

        I wonder if either of us has, in an unguarded moment, revealed some piece of information that identifies our locations. If we did, it’s now on the permanent record for the infamous Les Fuch to discover with a search engine.

         
      • Martens

        February 22, 2014 at 5:28 PM

        Jetlag, you’re right.

        I laughed off those threats of bodily harm against us, at the time. But, now that we know the reputation “J.M.” has at this blog, I think maybe I should have taken them seriously.

         
      • Jetlag

        February 22, 2014 at 5:48 PM

        @Martens

        Agreed, so nix the talk about it here.

         
    • Doug

      February 19, 2014 at 8:23 AM

      Man was created in the spiritual image of God. Paul only spoke of Christ after his death and resurrection, when he had shed the body and had not only become the image he had become GOD.

       
    • J.M.

      February 20, 2014 at 4:47 AM

      Martens,Jetlag,

      Would the following scriptures be the correct, proper, clearer translation per your higher than high level of the highest degree of understanding?

      However, as it is written: “No animal eye has seen, no animal ear has heard, and no “animal mind” of any animal man or man animal has conceived” the things God has prepared for those kinds of animals who love him.

      This is a much clearer understanding of what the scriptures really do mean & say, right? Of course. You both are proud of me now. I know you are. You finally won me over. I would like to hear both of you at least say that you are proud of me. This would encourage me to come up with more goodies.

       
  2. Jetlag

    February 18, 2014 at 7:57 PM

    @Adask

    On the question “is the Bible perfect?”, here’s what the Bible itself has to say:

    2 Timothy 3:16-17 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

    @Martens

    I applaud your continuing exploration into this “man or other animals” deal. Questions are a good thing.

    Let’s have another look at a verse you cited:

    Philippians 3:20-21 For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.

    Here both instances of “body” are “soma” (G4983) in the original text.

    Paul also uses this word “soma” (G4983) in the following:

    1 Corinthians 6:15 Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ himself? Shall I then take the members of Christ and unite them with a prostitute? Never!

    Therefore, since Christ is the image of God, Christians, being members of the body of Christ, are thus also the image of God.

    This is how Christians regain the image of God which was lost by Adam at the fall.

     
    • Yartap

      February 18, 2014 at 8:27 PM

      Jetlag,

      I concur with your thoughts to Martens. Adam’s fall changed our abilities with a curse until judgement by God and Christ; and the offer of the tree of life to remove the curse of Adam.

      As far as the question about “is the Bible perfect?” Jet lag, I believe your answer to be true. The problem we have is this: Do we have “All Scripture?” Many Holy Books have been removed by many different religious authoritarians.

       
    • J.M.

      February 20, 2014 at 3:43 PM

      Jetlag,
      @ >I applaud your continuing exploration into this “man or other animals” deal.

      I’m sure you do applaud Martens continuing exploration into this “man or other animals” deal.

      You are tenacious meaning not easily stopped or pulled apart, firm or strong, continuing for a long time, HELLBENT & determined to do something one way or the other. SEE the FULL definition of, tenacious

       
  3. Frank Moorman

    February 18, 2014 at 8:29 PM

    What SW frequency?

     
    • J.M.

      February 19, 2014 at 1:03 AM

      @ >Many Holy Books have been removed by many different religious authoritarians.

      IF this is true, why did “God” allow this to happen? Did the “authoritarians” overpower “God?” What is your source of information on this “removal?” Also, I, by mistake, put a “t” instead of a “n” in one word & I know this thoroughly confused most who, if any, read ( < pronounced red) my comment. I tried to say, I am more interested in the “change” OF & what this body will be changed INTO, rather THAN just knowing what the word “body or vile body means.

       
      • Yartap

        February 19, 2014 at 12:03 PM

        Hear you go Jim. This will give you a history of books that were removed by religious leaders.

        http://www.bibleufo.com/anomlostbooks.htm

         
      • J.M.

        February 19, 2014 at 1:53 PM

        @ > This will give you a history of books that were removed by religious leaders.

        Religious leaders? Earlier you,Yartap said, Many Holy Books have been removed by many different religious authoritarians. You, Yartap connected this statement with Jetlag’s insertion of, “ALL scripture is GIVEN by inspiration of God…………………” leading someone to think that these “Holy Books” WERE part of the inspired words of The Almighty God WHO IS the Creator & sustainer of the Universe. NOW, you Yartap, say, “books” that were removed by “religious leaders.” Well now, how about that, The HI REV JESSIE JACKSON IS A RELIGIOUS LEADER TOO.
        There are “religious leaders” and just like santa clause, they are everywhere.

        Yartap, I apologize for following up on your comments on a prior thread to Martens & Jetlag. I was trying to be encouraging to you, e.g. I said, go getum Yaratp, & things like that. I only meant to let you know that at least SO FAR, you were at least informing Martens & Jetlag of scriptures the way I understand them too. Heck who knows, we may ALL be in error. One of the things I admire about animals is, even ANIMALS seem to know what kindness is. I am beginning to like my animals more than “human” beings

         
  4. Adask

    February 18, 2014 at 11:34 PM

    No SW at this time. Only internet.

     
  5. J.M.

    February 18, 2014 at 11:44 PM

    Re: MOOA. Please name ONE other “animal” besides a “man or woman” who can be “charged” with or accused of a violation of the drug laws. I can just see a cow, pig, horse,etc., in court being & “represented” too. I think the creators of that legislation outsmarted themselves & put their footsies in their mouth.

     
  6. J.M.

    February 18, 2014 at 11:55 PM

    @ >who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body

    I am more interested in the “change” & what this body will be changed into that just knowing what the word “body or vile body means

     
    • Jetlag

      February 19, 2014 at 4:58 AM

      @J.M.

      The “vile body” is the body corrupted by the sin of the first Adam. The “glorious body” is that of the last Adam, Jesus Christ, who bears the image of God:

      Colossians 1:15 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.

      The book of Genesis tells us man was made in the image of God. It does not say man is made in the image of God. Man is not made, but rather is remade through Christ, in the image of God.

      1 Corinthians 15:42-44 So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.

      The terms “perishable”, “in dishonor”, “in weakness”, and “natural” – which describe one’s present, vile body – do not describe an image of God.

      The terms “imperishable”, “in glory”, “in power”, and “spiritual” – which describe one’s future body remade to be like Christ’s glorious body – do describe an image of God.

       
      • J.M.

        February 19, 2014 at 1:20 PM

        @The “vile body” is the body corrupted by the sin of the first Adam.

        What leads, or WHO is “influencing” you, Jetlag to “think” that I, J.M do not understand what, “vile body” means? I SAID, I am MORE CONCERNED, MORE INTERESTED, it is MORE IMPORTANT To KNOW WHAT happens, what the FUTURE HOLDS, that which WILL TAKE PLACE, to & with this VILE BODY, than I am with ONLY knowing what the definition of, the meaning of, > VILE BODY is. I see that YOU Jetlag, seem to think it’s MORE IMPORTANT to KNOW what the MEANING is, of, “vile body” than what is awaiting, what is in store FOR this vile body YOU Jetlag, AND Martens, BOTH are hellbent & determined to HAMMER in the physical aspect of this particular & put the SPIRITUAL aspect on the shelf OR back burner, or off the stove completely. I too, cannot see the forest for the trees in somethings either but those physical things are not important anyway.

         
  7. J.M.

    February 19, 2014 at 3:55 PM

    To Alfred Adask, Jetlag, Martens & Yartap

    2 Corinthians 2

    6 We do, however, speak a message of wisdom among the mature, but not the wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing. 7 No, we declare God’s wisdom, a mystery that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began. 8 None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

    9 However, as it is written:

    “What no eye has seen,

    what no ear has heard,

    and what no mind of man has conceived”

    the things God has prepared for those who love him

    Spit that out too, Jetlag & Martens. Don’t you dare chew on it. SEE, As for ME, I appreciate the things God has prepared for those who LOVE HIM. IF either one of you LOVED HIM, both of you would SEE the messages FROM “God” in a different “light.” NO !!! I do NOT appreciate you telling someone I am trying to establish a FRIENDSHIP with that he has been BLINDED by the “god of this world” to not see the glorious truth of the “good news” as YOU BOTH SEE It. NO!! I do not appreciate BOTH of you saying that “he” is LOST. NO !! I DO NOT appreciate you using the word of God to say “he” is an UNBELIEVER. Who is this he? Alfred Adask. HE is the one you say is BLINDED, AND AN UNBELIEVER, AND LOST. You say this about me too but as Almighty & the heavenly host ARE my WITNESSES, you saying this about me, doesn’t bother me, ONE IOTA. BUT don’t say it by using The Word of God to say it about Alfred Adask. The following says what?

    Martens,
    You Martens, inserted this scripture: > 2 Corinthians 4:3-4 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

    Am I understanding correctly that you use the above scripture to say that the above scripture applies to, Alfred Adask, Yartap, & me, J.M.? Your refusal to answer this question will be understood that you are saying, YES. This is the only way I can get a response from you, & that is, to answer for you, in your behalf.

     
    • Jetlag

      February 19, 2014 at 5:50 PM

      @JM “This is the only way I can get a response from you, & that is, to answer for you, in your behalf.”

      A splendid paradox, worthy of Lewis Carroll.

      You’ve got a hidden talent there, JM.

       
      • J.M.

        February 19, 2014 at 6:51 PM

        @ You’ve got a hidden talent there, JM.

        Thanks. But, I know you really don’t appreciate my talent.Some people have a talent to grasp things that animals cannot, & vice versa, Jetlag, I have the ability to SEE what you & Martens are doing. YOUR so called god, Jetlag, is the kind of being that makes a retarded chimp look smart. My God is not animalistic.Unless I get barred, I will post something later that “paints a picture” of “my God” & it will be A “God” that you are not aware of. No, Jetlag, your high level reading skills & your HIGHER than that level of understanding skills will not suffice to make it clear. I believe Alfred Adask will appreciate my future post describing my “God.” Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe I will be barred for what I am about to say because it IS a “different understanding” than that of my Commander & Chief on/of THIS Blog. The Apostle Paul WAS NOT the AUTHOR of the scriptures WRITTEN by Paul.He was only the writer. IF I am someone’s Secretary, & I “take a letter” & write down what I am told to write, That which I write is no more than just that. The AUTHOR is the one telling me what to write. Jetlag, I KNOW you already KNOW this is true.So, what I just said is not for you. In all honesty, I hope I do not get barred BEFORE I can or at least try to post WHO my “God” IS. I honestly believe with all my heart & soul that it will bring tears to the eyes of Alfred. I wish I could say the same for you & Martens but I cannot & be still be honest. But if I do get it posted, it might just make you laugh.It’s worth waiting for. It will make some animalistic people laugh & IT WILL touch the hearts of those who are not hardhearted.

         
      • Jetlag

        February 19, 2014 at 7:12 PM

        @JM

        Evidently you did not read, or did not understand, the quotes from Paul above where he talks about putting off the image of the earthly and putting on the image of the heavenly.

        The earthly, vile body is Adam’s fault. Don’t blame God for that. Adam was made in God’s image. The fact that Adam ended up with a corrupted “image of the earthly” was his own doing.

         
      • J.M.

        February 19, 2014 at 7:46 PM

        @ > Don’t blame God………….”

        I do not blame “God” for anything. I praise him for everything because I understand WHY things are like they are & I understand his overall plan & I KNOW how it ends up. I speak from my heart you & Martens speak from an intellectual capacity using 50 cent & up words Most people have to learn EVERYTHING the hard way. I have been no different in this respect. Please quit planting “seeds” of poison & lies. I do not BLAME God for anything. I am not going to answer anymore of your subtle coy suggestions, < AT BEST, that I blame "God" for anything. I only want to get posted WHO "my God" IS. SEE HOSS, if I don't respond to you instantly, this will impress people that you "got me" on that one. I'll be away for quite a while after this trying to organize, put together WHO "my "God" is. I have a gut feeling you are trying to hinder me. I don't think you want it posted because of WHO you MR Jetlag are representing, because I think you know it will be "out of the ordinary." I am beginning to think my ANGER about you is truly, Righteous Indignation because I SEE where you are coming from & what you are trying to accomplish..Later GATOR

         
  8. J.M.

    February 19, 2014 at 4:52 PM

    MOOA meets Eccles. 3:18 thread is when & where I asked Martens about “Am I understanding…………” He never answered. Well he did not have too, did he. < a statement, not a question

     
  9. Adask

    February 19, 2014 at 7:52 PM

    It may be that Adam’s original sin reduced all of mankind from the status of men made in God’s image to the status of beasts and/or animals. I’m not convinced that’s true, but I can see the possibility.

    For example, in Genesis 9:6 God, Himself, explains that killing a man constitutes murder and is prohibited because the man is made in God’s image.

    Genesis 9:6 occurs after Noah and his family emerge from the Ark after the Great Flood–centuries after Adam’s original sin. Insofar as God appears to state that men are made in God’s image after the Flood, one of two things seems true–either: 1) Adam’s original sin never defeated or even compromised man’s standing as men made in God’s image; or 2) Adam’s original sin did reduce mankind to the status of animals, but God restored man’s standing as being made in God’s image after the Flood.

    In either case, I would still appear to be entitled today to claim my status as a “man made in God’s image”.

    If, on the other hand, despite what God seems to say at Genesis 9:6 (after the Flood) about men being made in God’s image is mistaken, and man had that status but lost it due to Adam’s original sin, doesn’t it also follow that when the Messiah paid for that original sin with the sacrifice of his life, that the Messiah either: 1) re-elevated mankind to the status of men made in God’s image; or 2) at least made it possible for each of us (though still animals) to choose to become men made in God’s image by choosing to have faith in the Messiah?

    In either case, once again, by my faith, I am a man made in God’s image or I am at least entitled to make my claim on the status of a man made in God’s image by virtue of my faith in the Messiah.

    More, it seems likely that those who believe mankind lost its status as men made in God’s image by virtue of Adam’s original sin (and who also argue that that loss remains inescapable to this day) must therefore also deny any significant effect that might be attributed to the Messiah’s sacrifice and crucifixion.

    Somehow, I don’t think you’ll be able make that last denial fly–at least not among Christians.

     
    • Jetlag

      February 19, 2014 at 8:41 PM

      @Adask > “For example, in Genesis 9:6 God, Himself, explains that killing a man constitutes murder and is prohibited because the man is made in God’s image.”

      Not in any translation I can find. What translation are you using? None of the translations I can find say man “is” made in God’s image. They all use a form of the past tense:

      1. (New Living Translation) If anyone takes a human life, that person’s life will also be taken by human hands. For God made human beings in his own image.

      2. (King James Bible) Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.

      3. (Young’s Literal Translation) whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man is his blood shed: for in the image of God hath He made man.

      Etc., etc.

      This verse says man WAS made in the image of God. Nowhere does scripture say man as such IS made in the image of God.

      @Adask > “In either case, I would still appear to be entitled today to claim my status as a “man made in God’s image”.”

      On the other hand, Paul the Apostle says Jesus Christ is the image of God:

      2 Corinthians 4:4 The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

      Colossians 1:15 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.

      Paul writes of acquiring Christ’s image of God using the future tense, meaning Paul and those he was addressing did NOT have the image of God at the time:

      1 Corinthians 15:49 And just as we have borne the image of the earthly man, so shall we bear the image of the heavenly man.

      How do you reconcile Paul’s statements that Jesus Christ is the image of God with a doctrine that claims this honor for Alfred Adask?

       
      • J.M.

        February 19, 2014 at 11:03 PM

        Martens,Jetlag,
        Well, I wonder if you know Him. Do you know Him? Don’t try to mislead me. Do you know my King & my “God”?

         
      • Adask

        February 19, 2014 at 11:41 PM

        My use of the word “is” was merely casual. Nevertheless, a translation of Genesis 9:6 that’s in the past tense doesn’t disturb my fundamental belief. Man was made in God’s image at Genesis 1:26-28 and God, Himself, appears to recognize that (after the Flood) either man was still recognized as in God’s image from Genesis 1:26-28; or, 2) had been (after the Flood) restored to the status of being made in God’s. Either way, I can still make a claim of faith on being made in God’s image.

        As for the Messiah being made in God’s image, the reason may be that only a man made in God’s image would be suitable for the sacrifice required to pay for original sin. If that weren’t true, the sacrifice might’ve been achieved by crucifying a “beast” like a cow or a sheep.

        The fact that Paul remarks that the Messiah is made in God’s image does not necessarily mean that only the Christ was made in God’s. image. There might’ve been millions of other men who was also made in God’s image. Paul may simply be commenting that the Messiah was suitable for sacrifice because he was made in God’s image.

        But even if it were true that, at the time of the crucifixion, the Messiah was the only man on earth who was made in God’s image, what could the Messiah have achieved by his death and sacrifice if not: 1) paying the debt incurred by original sin; and 2) thereby re-elevating all living men (or at least all those who believed in the Messiah) to the status of men made in God’s image?

        If the original sin caused all mankind to lose it’s original status as men made in God’s image, and if the Messiah’s sacrifice didn’t pay for the original sin and thereby restore the original status of mankind to that of men made in God’s image–what other purpose did the Messiah’s sacrifice achieve?

         
      • Jetlag

        February 20, 2014 at 12:51 AM

        @Adask > “Nevertheless, a translation of Genesis 9:6 that’s in the past tense doesn’t disturb my fundamental belief.”

        Perhaps not, but what should disturb your fundamental belief is the complete absence from scripture of any statement saying man (as such) was made in the image of God at any time after the Fall.

        @Adask > “The fact that Paul remarks that the Messiah is made in God’s image does not necessarily mean that only the Christ was made in God’s. image. There might’ve been millions of other men who was also made in God’s image.”

        So you think Jesus could have said, in the following verse, “Anyone who has seen me, or one of millions of other men, has seen the Father”?

        John 14:9 Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?”

        Or do you think Jesus could have said, in the following verse, “Whoever sees me, or one of millions of other men, sees him who sent me”?

        John 12:45 And whoever sees me sees him who sent me.

        @Adask > “If the original sin caused all mankind to lose it’s original status as men made in God’s image, and if the Messiah’s sacrifice didn’t pay for the original sin and thereby restore the original status of men made in God’s image–what other purpose did the Messiah’s sacrifice achieve?”

        The sacrifice and resurrection of Christ did restore to man the image of God, however, as stated by Paul, this restoration comes after death.

        Paul wrote his first letter to the Corinthians decades after the ascension of Christ, yet Paul and those he was addressing did NOT have the image of God at the time. This is made clear by Paul’s reference to their acquisition of the image of God as a future event:

        1 Corinthians 15:49 And just as we have borne the image of the earthly man, so shall we bear the image of the heavenly man.

        If Paul and the Corinthians had to wait until after death to acquire the image of God, what scripture makes it plausible that Alfred Adask would not have to wait?

         
      • Adask

        February 20, 2014 at 5:51 AM

        Jetlag, why do you waste my time by trying to put words in my mouth with nonsense like “So you think Jesus could have said, in the following verse, “Anyone who has seen me, or one of millions of other men, has seen the Father”? You confuse “image” with “essence”. To have seen the “image of God” is not equivalent to having seen God, Himself. The fact that the Messiah was made in the image of God does not prove or even suggest that being made in God’s image was the Messiah’s only remarkable characteristic. While you and I may be made in God’s image, so far as I know, the Messiah is the only man who was both made in God’s image and also the actual son of God. Even though you and I might one day be construed as adopted sons of God, only the Messiah was a true son of God.

        As for what the Christ might’ve said, I don’t know. Maybe he might’ve said “Let’s adjourn to the Planet Mongo to play tennis with Flash Gordon, Dale Arden, and Ming the Merciless.” While is seems possible that the Messiah might’ve said such things, I’m not going waste much time on what he might’ve said. I’ll content myself with whatever the Messiah is reported in the Bible to have actually said.

        Incidentally, with all your clever interrogation, and reliance on definitions and Bible verses, you seem to be fairly adept at the letter of the Law. But, I’m not sure that your grasp of the spirit of the law is quite so strong. You reasoning and arguments remind me of the Pharisees.

        * Paul wrote his first letter to the Corinthians decades after the ascension of Christ, yet Paul and those he was addressing did NOT have the image of God at the time. This is made clear by Paul’s reference to their acquisition of the image of God as a future event:

        1 Corinthians 15:49 And just as we have borne the image of the earthly man, so shall we bear the image of the heavenly man.

        If Paul and the Corinthians had to wait until after death to acquire the image of God, what scripture makes it plausible that Alfred Adask would not have to wait?

        First, I’m curious as to what authority tells us that the phrase “image of the heavenly man” is synonymous with the phrase “image of God”. Might be two different images. We might be the “image of God,” now, and also the acquire the “image of the heavenly man” later. Perhaps you have evidence that the two terms are synonymous. If not, your question is based on your own unsubstantiated presumption.

        As for your question, “If Paul and the Corinthians had to wait until after death to acquire the image of God, what scripture makes it plausible that Alfred Adask would not have to wait?”

        Answer: My faith. And, given that we have a 1st Amendment to the federal Constitution that guarantees our Freedom of Religion, my faith is all I need to make my argument stand up in court.

        Finally, I am amazed at the people who resist the MOOA argument’s validity. Even if you don’t believe it’s true, you should at least have brains enough to know that if we accept the label of “animals” or “beasts,” we authorize and invite our own enslavement and even murder. My argument that we can’t be “animals” will tend to save lives. Your argument that we remain animals lays the foundation for mass murder and genocide. That threat of mass murder applies even to the people who argue that men are still “beasts”. Such people are as absurd and even fantastic as Jews For Hitler during WWII.

        What’s wrong with you people? You’re arguing in favor of your own demise.

        As per Genesis 1:26-28 and Genesis 9:6, I am a man made in God’s image. As per the “Declaration of Independence,” I am also a man endowed by my Creator with certain unalienable Rights. I’m quite prepared to testify under oath to the truth of both of of those statements. Is there anyone who can testify under oath to the contrary? Nope. Not possible. Besides, you can’t prove a negative statement. If I testify that I’m a man made in God’s image and I have Bible verses to support my claim and a 1st Amendment to allow my claim.

        I know from experience that even the government has brains enough not to try to argue the contrary (and that’s even after they’d invested 6 years and nearly $500,000 on pre-trial investigations and hearings). Unfortunately, a few of the readers on this blog are apparently not as bright as the government.

        One other point: My object is not to engage in holy war with whatever pharisees choose to strain at gnats on this blog. My object is to use my Freedom of Religion to hold the government at bay with the MOOA argument and strategies. And I’m amazed that some people who frequent this blog would not only seek to authorize genocide against their nation, family and even themselves–they also seek to empower a tyrannical government by disparaging and refuting a legal strategy that’s been shown to work on at least one occasion.

        What’s wrong with those of you who choose to deny that we are made in God’s image? Are you simply stupid? Suicidal? Government trolls? You remind me of Esau who traded the blessings of being first born to Jacob for a bowl of pottage and thereby despised God’s blessing. Later in the Bible, God twice says “and Esau I have hated”. So far as I know, God never says why (in the Bible) that He hated Esau, but I believe it was because Esau despised God’s blessing. Those of you who persist in arguing that you and all men are still “beasts” (rather than men made in God’s image) impress me as acting like Esau and despising our Father YHWH ha Elohiym’s blessings. If that’s true, then like Esau, you may also risk being hated by God.

         
      • Yartap

        February 20, 2014 at 1:37 AM

        Jetlag,

        You err by associating “earthy body” and “glorious body” as having the same meaning as “image.” Remember: Jesus was seen by many and Jesus said if you see me, then you see God. Those who witnessed Jesus saw him in an “earthly body” and in the Image of God. They did not see him in his heavenly body.

        “And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.” 1 Corinthians 15. Both images, earthly and heavenly, can be in the Image of God. You are confusing Paul’s words.

         
      • J.M.

        February 20, 2014 at 4:17 AM

        @ This verse says man WAS…………………..”

        This depends on what your definition of was IS

         
      • Jetlag

        February 20, 2014 at 7:17 AM

        @Adask > “You reasoning and arguments remind me of the Pharisees.”

        This comment reminds me of how frivolous arguments by personal insult are.

        @Adask > “First, I’m curious as to what authority tells us that the phrase “image of the heavenly man” is synonymous with the phrase “image of God”.”

        The authority is Paul the Apostle. He uses “the heavenly man” to refer to Christ. He also tells us Christ is the image of God. Therefore, knowing the definition of “image” (or the corresponding word in the original text), the image of Christ is the image of God.

        @Adask > “Answer: My faith.”

        This is not a citation of scripture. Here’s the question again, for clarity:

        “If Paul and the Corinthians had to wait until after death to acquire the image of God, what scripture makes it plausible that Alfred Adask would not have to wait?”

        @Adask > “Finally, I am amazed at the people who resist the MOOA argument’s validity.”

        I, for one, do not resist the validity of the MOOA argument. Since it is an argument without force, there is nothing to resist.

        Why is it without force? Because your conclusions do not follow from your premises. (It is, however, a useful topic for discussion, which is apparently why you keep airing it for public comment.)

        I suggest you reread your citations of Genesis before further committing yourself to this argument. They only constitute a basis for the claim that man WAS made in God’s image. There is nothing in Genesis that says anyone around today IS made in God’s image.

        @Adask > “What’s wrong with those of you who choose to deny that we are made in God’s image? Are you simply stupid? Suicidal? Government trolls?”

        Try “students of the Bible” who are not persuaded by wrong arguments erroneously presented as Biblical.

         
      • J.M.

        February 20, 2014 at 5:49 PM

        Jetlag,
        You, Jetlag, say,>This comment reminds me of how frivolous arguments by personal insult are.

        FRIVOLOUS ??? Nobody can be more INSULTING than YOU, Jetlag. What we have here is simply, EVIL against GOOD. Alfred Adask is the GOOD, you & Martens are the EVIL. Lemme tell you this U & yo ko-hawt IS crusin for a brusin, U B unn-uhn stainin shawtleh what umm sayin, U B noin whut umm tawkin baut. U B C N whut umm sayin. I had a dream last nite I only saw a LONG ROPE.

         
      • J.M.

        February 20, 2014 at 10:24 PM

        Jetlag, you say,
        @ > In Internet slang, a troll is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a forum, chat room, or blog), either accidentally or with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.”

        If you, Jetlag, could get your mind off of yourself, as you describe yourself above, you may be on the road to NOT BEING just another castaway.

        IF I am barred from this blog it will because something somebody else said is mistakenly presumed to be something I said, OR something I said is understood entirely different from what I meant. I am at rest with the REAL reason you don’t want to get into discussing the “tree in the midst” of the garden & the purpose of it being there. But, here is some good news for you. ONE of us is going to leave this blog one way or the other. I don’t want to be on a blog that you are on, Jetlag. But, I will stay on it until I am barred & IF I am not barred, then only for a short time afterwards if you are still on it. I do know that sooner or later you are going to self destruct but may not be soon enough for me.

         
    • J.M.

      February 19, 2014 at 9:02 PM

      @ >”………doesn’t it also follow that when the Messiah paid for that original sin with the sacrifice of his life, that the Messiah either: 1) re-elevated mankind to the status of men made in God’s image; or 2) at least made it possible for each of us (though still animals) to choose to become men made in God’s image by choosing to have faith in the Messiah?

      YES YES YES !!!!!!!!

      Dear Alfred, & HOPEFULLY 1 or 2 “others.” The following describes my “God” about as well as possible, coming from the heart & mind of a man but I believe this man had the “spirit of “God” within his heart. I hope it all posts.

      My King was born King. The Bible says He’s a Seven Way King.
      He’s the King of the Jews – that’s an Ethnic King.
      He’s the King of Israel – that’s a National King.
      He’s the King of righteousness. He’s the King of the ages.
      He’s the King of Heaven. He’s the King of glory. He’s the King of kings and He is the Lord of lords.Now that’s my King and my “God.”

      Well, I wonder if you know Him. Do you know Him? Do you know my King and my “God?”
      David said the Heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament shows His handiwork.
      My King is the only one of whom there are no means of measure that can define His limitless love.No far seeing telescope can bring into visibility the coastline of the shore of His supplies.
      No barriers can hinder Him from pouring out His blessing.

      He’s enduringly strong. He’s entirely sincere. He’s eternally steadfast.
      He’s immortally graceful. He’s imperially powerful. He’s impartially merciful. That’s my King.
      He’s God’s Son. He’s the sinner’s saviour. He’s the centerpiece of civilization. He stands alone in Himself. He’s honest. He’s unique. He’s unparalleled. He’s unprecedented. He’s supreme. He’s pre-eminent.He’s the grandest idea in literature. He’s the highest personality in philosophy.
      He’s the supreme problem in higher criticism. He’s the fundamental doctrine of historic theology.
      He’s the carnal necessity of spiritual religion.
      That’s my King.and my “God.”

      He’s the miracle of the age. He’s the superlative of everything good that you choose to call Him.
      He’s the only one able to supply all our needs simultaneously. He supplies strength for the weak. He’s available for the tempted and the tried. He sympathizes and He saves.
      He’s the Almighty God who guides and keeps all his people. He heals the sick. He cleanses the lepers.He forgives sinners upon repentance He discharged debtors. He delivers the captives. He defends the feeble. He blesses the young. He serves the unfortunate. He regards the aged. He rewards the diligent and He beautifies the meek.
      That’s my King and my “God.”

      Do you know Him? Well, my King is a King of knowledge. He’s the wellspring of wisdom.
      He’s the doorway of deliverance. He’s the pathway of peace. He’s the roadway of righteousness.
      He’s the highway of holiness. He’s the gateway of glory. He’s the master of the mighty.
      He’s the captain of the conquerors. He’s the head of the heroes. He’s the leader of the legislatures.He’s the overseer of the overcomers. He’s the governor of governors. He’s the prince of princes.He’s the King of kings and He’s the Lord of lords.
      That’s my King and my “God.”

      His office is manifold. His promise is sure. His light is matchless. His goodness is limitless.
      His mercy is everlasting. His love never changes. His Word is enough.
      His grace is sufficient. His reign is righteous.
      His yoke is easy and His burden is light. I WISH I COULD DESCRIBE HIM TO YOU . .
      but He’s indescribable. That’s my King and my “God”. He’s incomprehensible,
      He’s invincible, and He is irresistible.

      I’m coming to tell you this, that the heavens of heavens can’t contain Him,
      let alone some man explain Him.
      You can’t get Him out of your mind. You can’t get Him off of your hands.
      You can’t outlive Him and you can’t live without Him.
      The Pharisees couldn’t stand Him, but they found out they couldn’t stop Him.
      Pilate couldn’t find any fault in Him.
      The witnesses couldn’t get their testimonies to agree about Him.
      Herod couldn’t kill Him. Death couldn’t handle Him and the grave couldn’t hold Him.
      That’s my King and my “God.”

      He always has been and He always will be. I’m talking about the fact that He had no predecessor
      and He’ll have no successor.There’s nobody before Him and there will be nobody greater than Him. You can’t impeach Him NOW, and He’s not going to resign.
      That’s my King and my “God.”

      Thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory. Well, all the power belongs to my King.
      We’re around here talking about black power and white power and green power,
      but in the end all that matters is God’s power.Thine is the power. Yes. And the glory. We try to get prestige and honor and glory for ourselves, but the glory is all His.Yes. Thine is the Kingdom and the power and glory, forever and ever and ever and ever. How long is that?
      Forever and ever and ever and ever. . . And when you get through with all of the ever’s, then . . .Amen!

      AND YET, the above words do not do him justice, my King and my “God.”
      I will try & find the source. This was sent to me over 10 years ago. It makes me sob, yes it does.
      Where is everybody !!!!

       
      • J.M.

        February 20, 2014 at 11:58 AM

        Romans 8:28
        We know that all things work together for the good of those who love God: those who are called according to His purpose.

        One 4 letter word says all that is necessary to know, IF we understand what this 4 letter word means, the way YHWH understands this word. Some understand. Some do not. Some do not want to understand but they too have their reward awaiting. They will understand THEN.

        The “hidden agenda” of Martens & Jetlag will not succeed.

         
  10. J.M.

    February 19, 2014 at 9:36 PM

    Yartap,
    @ > Hear you go Jim.

    Thanks Yartap. I sadly say, I think I am beginning to, “hear” you. But, I think more so, it’s a matter of, “seeing rather than, hearing.”

     
  11. Yartap

    February 20, 2014 at 12:57 AM

    Man has never lost being created in the Image of God. Man retains the Image of God. If one will look closely, he or she will discover that after the fall of man, man became MORE like God.

    “And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take ALSO of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:…” Genesis 3:22.

    Man received God’s promise that if man ate from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, then man would “surely die,” Genesis 2:17. This is man curse.

    Understanding Paul is very hard for many. Paul’s verbiage is very difficult for most, due to his legalese of religious concepts. Paul is a servant of God sent to bring the Gosple in such a way to filter out those who do not understand or believe. We show our approval by God by truly understanding Paul’s writings. All we read is about how an unbelieving man can think of himself as being no better or more than a beast. We read Solomon questioning man’s thoughts about being no better than a beast for man’s profit.

    Nowhere do we find God or Jesus calling us beast, except for allowing the blind and unbelieving to think such thoughts. Mankind is in the image of God. PERIOD! The only thing that a man in God’s image must do is follow His commandments and believe in the one and only Christ, our Redeemer, to receive the promise from the curse placed upon man to have access to the Tree of Life.

     
    • J.M.

      February 20, 2014 at 9:54 PM

      @ >Understanding Paul is very hard for many. Paul’s verbiage is very difficult for most, due to his legalese of religious concepts.

      On the other hand, some of Paul’s writings are very easy to understand. SO, when we come across a “writing” of Paul that is hard to understand or “appears” to contradict an earlier “writing” of/from Paul, in all fairness to “Paul,” we should say, we are either not understanding “for sure” what Paul is saying, OR the scriptures DO contradict themselves, AND IF this is true, we cannot logically or rationally depend on ANY part of the Bible being true. IF any one “catches” another telling a lie, how do we know that the next thing he/she says is the truth or a lie IF we don’t know for sure about the subject matter? IF we really “LOVE” “God” I guaroantee you, IN TIME, these “uncertain” as to what it means Or “seemingly contradiction” scriptures will turn out to be clearly understood too. Sometimes, some people come across a scripture that makes him/her say, well I ain’t buying that. That’s just taking it a little too far,etc. The enuff is enuff point is different for many people. I, J.M. KNOW that Paul LOVED the brethren with all his heart & soul. Then some smart ass says, well if Paul loved all the Brethren with all his heart & soul, what about God? He didn’t have anything left to give God. Oh, is that right, > In as much as you have done this to “others” you have done it unto me. Jesus Christ said this & I believe him. We are supposed to be a family & love one another. It’s just that people will only, IF AT ALL, love so much, or just to a certain extent & that is as far as their “love potion” will extend. There is a limit to their “love.” People talk about “overcoming” & yet don’t know what to overcome. Some say overcoming means this & another says, NO it means something else, & then another says NO, you are both wrong, & another says ain’t none of you right & it’s never ending. We need to learn what The “LOVE” OF ‘God” means. THEN, we need to overcome the things that “God” says, is not love, so we can truly & hopefully love God. IF we do this, we will be one happy loving family. One good clue is, we need to become UNSELFISH. “SELF” is one of the problems. Think MORE of others & less of ourselves. But it ain’t easy, especially in a world like we exist in. IF anyone can say honestly, from his/her heart, Father, PLEASE create within me a clean & pure heart, & sincerely mean this, soon you will be off & running. HEY !!! whoever “out there” is praying for me, THANK YOU !!! it’s working. I pray for Martens & Jetlag, too, oh yes I do, WE ALL need “”God’s help.” But what I need may not be what anyone else needs. I simply ask, do what is necessary, for us all.Praying “for” someone else is not selfish. It’s unselfish. Don’t we have a wonderful Father & elder Big Brother. Just can’t beat umm.

       
  12. Martens

    February 20, 2014 at 6:05 AM

    Prof. Adask,

    You might find this verse useful to your “made in God’s image” claim.

    2 Corinthians 3:18 And we all, who with unveiled faces contemplate the Lord’s glory, are being transformed into his image with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.

    J.M.,

    I’ll have to think about your “animal” talk (above). Some ways “animal” is used nowadays have connotations that I’m not sure were ever meant in the Bible in reference to man.

    Jetlag,

    It starts to look like scripture uses “image of God” in a complicated way.

    1) Adam, before the fall, was the image of God as an earthly being, but then Adam corrupted himself and lost the image of God.

    The following verse confirms that man lost the image of God, because otherwise there would be no need for certain chosen ones to regaining the image of God (by way of the Son, who is the image of God).

    Romans 8:29 For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters.

    2) The next image of God in earthly form was Christ.

    John 12:45 The one who looks at me is seeing the one who sent me.

    John 14:9 Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?”

    3) Christ is now the image of God in heavenly form.

    2 Corinthians 4:4 The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

    Colossians 1:15 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.

    4) Paul talks about putting on the image of Christ, which is the image of God, as a future event.

    1 Corinthians 15:49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.

    5) But there is one example – the only example, apparently – where Paul talks about men already having (as opposed to being in the process of acquiring) the image of God.

    1 Corinthians 11:7 A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man.

    Except, it could be that man being the “image of God” in this case is meant in the context of a man’s relationship with a woman. That is, woman is to man as man is to Christ. Thus, specifically in terms of the man-woman relationship, a man is the image of God. This would resolve the apparent conflict.

    1 Corinthians 11:3 But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.

     
    • J.M.

      February 20, 2014 at 12:39 PM

      Martens,
      @ > 2 Corinthians 4:4 The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ…………

      @ >The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers

      Yes, I know.. I AM NOT a believer “LIKE” YOU & Jetlag, who has chosen a proper user name.
      My KING who is MY “God” has OPENED MY EYES to see your & Jetlag’s HIDDEN AGENDA.

       
    • Adask

      February 20, 2014 at 1:42 PM

      Thanks for that extensive collection of verses. Your research is much appreciated. And, as you imply, the meaning of “made in God’s image” is “complicated”. There are verses and principles that support the claim that we are still made in God’s image but there are also other verses that raise some doubt about that claim.

      Which position is true? Are we, or are we not, made in God’s image. I’m not sure that anyone really knows. But, for me, the issue is so “central” to the Christian faith that I am unable to see how anyone can simultaneously claim to be both a Christian and a “beast”.

      More, subscribing to the notion that “by their fruit, ye shall know them,” the philosophy that man is still a “beast” opens the door to mass murder and genocide, while the philosophy that man is made in God’s image tends to close that door and save lives, I can’t easily understand why anyone would argue in favor of the belief that “men are beasts” (rather than made in God’s image). Do such advocates want people to die?

      It might be said that I “choose,” as an attribute of my Christian faith, to believe that I am a man made in God’s image. But that’s not an arbitrary choice of one “philosophical” position over another. For me, the belief that man is made in God’s image is a “necessary choice,” a “mandatory choice” because I can’t see how the Christian faith can work today without faith in that fundamental principle.

      For me, believing that man is made in God’s image is an essential prerequisite for believing in the Christian faith. Thus, my 1st Amendment right to Freedom of Religion supports my right to believe and claim that I am a man made in the image of our Father YHWH ha Elohiym. I can swear to the truth of that claim as an attriubute of my faith.. I can defend that claim in court with sufficient reason to ensure that my claim is deemed to be authentic. And I can argue that, based on that claim of being more than a mere “animal” or “beast,” I am not subject to the government laws that deem me to be an animal.

      This is not to say that my claim will win in another (hypothetical) court battle. But it is to say that I MIGHT win, and if I did, the power of government might be dramatically reduced. I suspect that government understands the risks it takes to argue against my claims to be a man made in God’s image and might therefore be reluctant to drag me into court. But that’s all speculation and conjecture.

      I see an increased probability of blessings flowing from the claim of being a man made in God’s image. I see an increased probability of genocide flowing from the belief that men are still “beasts” or “animals”.

      I’m unable to understand why anyone given the choice, would opt to believe a philosophy that might get a lot of people (including the ones who advocate that man is still a “beast”/ “animal”) killed.

       
      • donmako

        February 20, 2014 at 2:46 PM

        Gteetings brother J.M., in the name of our LORD Christ Jesus.
        Well i can name 3 things that GOD cant do.
        #1 lie
        #2 learn
        #3 make you love him
        peace to all in Christ Jesus

         
      • J.M.

        February 20, 2014 at 2:59 PM

        @ I’m unable to understand why anyone given the choice, would opt to believe a philosophy that might get a lot of people (including the ones who advocate that man is still a “beast”/ “animal”) killed.

        2 Corinthians 11
        12 And I will keep on doing what I am doing in order to cut the ground from under those who want an opportunity to be considered equal with us in the things they boast about. 13 For such people are false apostles, deceitful workers, masquerading as apostles of Christ. 14 And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. 15 It is not surprising, then, if his servants also masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve.

        So, when 2 Corinthians 11:14 tells us that “Satan disguises himself as an angel of light,” it means that Satan capitalizes on our love of the light in order to deceive. He wants us to think that he is good, truthful, loving, and powerful & all the things that “God” is. To portray himself as a dark, devilish being with horns would not be very appealing to the majority of people. Most people are not drawn to darkness, but to light. Therefore, Satan appears as a creature of light to draw us to himself and his lies, through his, Satan’s followers. This can be made plainer via scripture. Just trying to keep it brief. THEY,Satan’s human being agents are the ones BLINDED,etc.

         
      • J.M.

        February 20, 2014 at 3:26 PM

        @ I’m unable to understand why anyone given the choice, would opt to believe a philosophy that might get a lot of people (including the ones who advocate that man is still a “beast”/ “animal”) killed.<

        The Apostle Peter was inspired to write, "be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary, the devil walks about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour" (1 Peter 5:8–9). Peter is warning his fellow Christians about a life or death matter! Peter cautions that we must be ready to resist Satan & indicating that it will not be easy. Numerous other scriptures make it abundantly clear why Peter wrote so strongly on this subject.

         
    • J.M.

      February 21, 2014 at 12:49 AM

      Martens,
      @ >You’ve been banned from this blog before, several times in fact, when you were posting as Don, Les Fuchs, etc., etc.

      Is that right ??? Well, let’s see what happens. I do know you two agents of Satan are desperate. But, as I said before, I, J.M. really do not want to be on ANY Blog that you two are on. YOU TWO ARE EVIL !!! YOU ARE POISON VIPERS !!!

       
  13. Adask

    February 20, 2014 at 3:02 PM

    Jetlag, your “students of the Bible” who are not persuaded by wrong arguments erroneously presented as Biblical” are advocating the same philosophy that Adolph Hitler used to send Jews to concentration camps and then murder them. Hitler defined the Jews as “untermenschen” (sub-humans, animals) and thereby opened the doors for legalized genocide.

    Insofar as you “students of the Bible” also advocate philosophies that ultimately justify the mass murder of innocent women, children and non-combatants, you may know the verses of the Bible, but you don’t know the Bible’s spirit. I cannot believe that God or the Messiah have written a Bible that justifies mass murder. You, apparently, can believe that while God may have given his only begotten son that mankind might not perish and might have ever-lasting life, God also gave us the Bible so its “student who are not presuaded by wrong arguments, etc.” could justify killing each other as “animals”. Perhaps you’re right, but I don’t believe that the Bible or any of its verses can be properly interpreted (not even by “students of the Bible” who are not persuaded by wrong arguments erroneously presented as Biblical) as justifying genocide since the Messiah’s crucifixion.

    In fact, you “students of the Bible who are not persuaded by wrong arguments, etc.” can correct me if I’m wrong, but if I recall correctly there are a some “commandments” in the Old Testament (ten, perhaps?) and one of them says something about “thou shalt not kill” (murder other members of mankind). When your various “right arguments properly presented as Biblical” refute the idea that man is made in God’s image, then you also appear to refute the idea at Genesis 9:6 (immediately after the Great Flood) that the reason you can’t shed man’s blood (including murder) is that man is made in God’s image.

    So, if it’s true that mankind lost its status as “made in God’s image” with the original sin, why did God after the Flood again declare that the reason why you couldn’t kill man is that he’s made in God’s image? Did He forget that he’s previously reduced all me to the status of animals?

    More, centuries later, when God handed down the 10 Commandments, why did He include “thou shalt not kill”? Jus’ cuz?

    Did God again forget that He’d previously canceled man’s status as made in God’s image? Did God have a different reason for “thou shalt not kill” besides man is made in God’s image? If so, which of the Bible’s verses has been identified by you “students of the Bible” who are not persuaded by wrong arguments erroneously presented as Biblical” explains God’s new-and-improved reason to prohibit the killing of men who are “beasts”/ “animals”?

    If it’s no longer true that we’re made in God’s image, then what’s the basis for the biblical commandment against killing? If you’re a beast and I’m a beast, then it’s OK to kill all beasts (those creatures not made in God’s image)–right?

    If so, why do we bother to incarcerate or even execute those animal-men who are no longer made in God’s image but who nevertheless murdered some other animal-men? I mean, what’s the big deal? Lighten up. Who cares if someone kills your parents, spouse or kids? After all, according to you “students of the Bible who are not persuaded by wrong arguments erroneously presented as Biblical” (the SBNPWAEPB?) you and your faimily are just “beasts”/”animals”–right?

    If we can believe you “students,” there’s no longer any biblical prohibition against murder and Hitler got a very bad rap. (All he did was slaughter some animals–right?) How ’bout serial killers like Ted Bundy? Given that he only killed some female “animals,” what was all the fuss about? And when the cops kill some innocent guy, who cares–he was only animal . . . .

    Alternatively, if “thou shalt not kill” does not mean “thou shalt not kill men made in God’s image” but instead means “thou shalt not kill men who are beasts,” why doesn’t that commandment apply to all beasts? What about the cows, pigs, chickens and goats? Aren’t they beasts? Shouldn’t the “thou shalt not kill” prohibition against killing animal-men also apply to other “beasts” as well?

    If not, how does “thou shalt not kill” apply to men who are animals, but not to other animals as well? If God no longer viewed men as made in God’s image, but instead viewed us as “animals,” how did He nevertheless distinguish between animal-men and other animals in “thou shalt not kill”?

    I look forward to hearing the answer and explanations provided by the “students of the Bible who are not persuaded by wrong arguments erroneously presented as Biblical.” Please share your enormous biblical wisdom (the same once advocated by Adolph Hitler) with me and rest of the readers of this blog.

     
  14. J.M.

    February 20, 2014 at 3:08 PM

    Well hello there donmako, Long time no see. Happy to see you’ve returned.
    @ >#3 make you love him

    What makes me love him, OR, why do I love him or at least try to, love him?

     
    • donmako

      February 20, 2014 at 4:37 PM

      Always been. Just always busy with my wonderful family at the least… that and werkin… na its the free will thing. God isnt gonna step in and robot controll you. Therefore he cant make you love him. Or learn… cause he knows everything…. or lie… cause if he says it it is…. thats a creator trait. This blog thanks to rhe LORD and Alfred is a good bit of church for me. So i love you guys all in Christ Jesus. GOD BLESS

       
      • J.M.

        February 20, 2014 at 6:14 PM

        @ >So i love you guys all in Christ Jesus. GOD BLESS

        Thank you for qualifying who all these guys are, > “ALL” in Christ Jesus. STILL, from the things we have had crammed down our throats, & deceptive seeds planted in our minds, AND from childhood, e.g., deception begets deception, as fraud begets fraud, I KNOW WE ARE ALL STILL DECEIVED ABOUT SOMETHING(s). BUT, you,donmako may not be deceived about something that I am & vice versa. WE CAN HELP EACH OTHER in this way. Still, as long as we put “God” FIRST & FOREMOST in our life, & do the best we can, & always stand ready to be corrected, BUT BY ONE WHO LOVES “God” we’ll be ok. We do get credit for doing the best we can with what we understand. There are not 3 resurrections for no reason. We both, I believe, understand what the first resurrection is about & for. Hardly anyone knows anything about the 2nd. They get the 2nd & 3rd out of order & it’s because they only think there are 2 resurrections. But anyway, SOME people need to know what keep my commandments MEANS.AND DO IT, LIVE BY those Commandments, not just KNOW them. Agreed?? I think you,donmako will say, agreed.

         
  15. Jetlag

    February 20, 2014 at 5:59 PM

    @Adask

    You have commented in volume, as usual, but the only parts of interest to me are those that address the Biblical basis of your argument. As far as I’m concerned, you can have whatever “religious” or “political” opinions you fancy. My comments on this topic are, at present, only those of a student of the Bible.

    @Adask > “When your various “right arguments properly presented as Biblical” refute the idea that man is made in God’s image, then you also appear to refute the idea at Genesis 9:6 (immediately after the Great Flood) that the reason you can’t shed man’s blood (including murder) is that man is made in God’s image.”

    You still don’t appear to have read Genesis 9:6, despite the fact that your misrepresentation of this verse has been pointed out multiple times.

    This verse does not say man “is” created in God’s image. It says man “was” created (or the grammatical equivalent) in God’s image.

    The fact that man WAS created in God’s image is not in dispute here.

    @Adask > “If it’s no longer true that we’re made in God’s image, then what’s the basis for the biblical commandment against killing?”

    The Biblical basis against murder is that God has command against it. Also, God and man have certain covenantal and other relationships between them, including the God-given right to life.

    @Adask > “Please share your enormous biblical wisdom (the same once advocated by Adolph Hitler) with me and rest of the readers of this blog.”

    So now you’re playing the Hitler card. Like I said, this topic is not about your politics or religion (or the overlap of the two), as far as I’m concerned. As a student of the Bible, this is only about what scripture does and does not say.

    If your interest in Christian scripture is genuine, you might finally answer the following question. For clarity, I post it again, after answering your questions about the question:

    1 Corinthians 15:49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.

    “shall” = future tense

    If Paul and the Corinthians had to wait until after death to acquire the image of God, on what scriptural basis is it credible that Alfred Adask would not have to wait?

    Also, how do you explain the following statements by Christ that he, specifically, was the image of God in his day?

    John 12:45 The one who looks at me is seeing the one who sent me.

    John 14:9 Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?”

     
    • Jetlag

      February 20, 2014 at 6:25 PM

      @Adask: “While you and I may be made in God’s image, so far as I know, the Messiah is the only man who was both made in God’s image and also the actual son of God.”

      Adam was also both made in God’s image and the actual son of God:

      Luke 3:38 the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.

      However, Adam lost his sonship at the same time he lost his image of God, i.e. at the fall, which is why Jesus Christ is referred to as “the” son of God.

       
      • J.M.

        February 20, 2014 at 7:46 PM

        Jetlag
        @ >February 20, 2014 at 6:25 PM

        Jetlag, WHY was the tree in the “midst of the Garden” put there to start with? What was the purpose of it? WHY did “God” put it there? I’m gonna have a little fun widjah on this one, that is IF you’re still “on board.”

         
      • Jetlag

        February 20, 2014 at 8:57 PM

        @J.M. > “I’m gonna have a little fun widjah…”

        No thanks.

        In fact, since you are by far the most accomplished virtuoso of trolling I have encountered in over a decade of posting on the internet, I’m done even reading your comments.

        Otherwise, I might be provoked into a response and thus feed a troll, which brings down the level of discussion for everyone.

        “In Internet slang, a troll is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a forum, chat room, or blog), either accidentally or with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.”

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)

        Meanwhile, I’ll keep waiting for a reply from Adask to the questions in my post which your latest feat of trolling has trolled.

        Enjoy yourself.

         
      • J.M.

        February 20, 2014 at 11:00 PM

        Jetlag,
        @ > “In fact, since you are by far the most accomplished virtuoso………”

        Well, shucks now, Jetlag. Thank you. In all honesty, I did not ever expect to receive a compliment from you. Wow. BUT, I know I’m not anywhere near being that good. I just try to be good & upright & just, that’s all. BUT, IF I do have those traits of a troll, tho, as you say I do, I am too blind too see this, and I ask here & now, to Alfred Adask to do this for both of us.> Alfred, if I have the troll traits, etc. that Jet lag says I have, please do us both a favor & bar me. IF this message is allowed to go through, don’t allow any more from me to be posted, if I am what Jetlag says I am. You do not need any trolls on your blog. Maybe I need to be barred. There will be something for me to hopefully learn from it. Thank you, Alfred.

         
      • Martens

        February 20, 2014 at 11:21 PM

        J.M. “Alfred, if I have the troll traits, etc. that Jet lag says I have, please do us both a favor & bar me.”

        You’ve been banned from this blog before, several times in fact, when you were posting as Don, Les Fuchs, etc., etc.

        Apparently you’re clueless to the fact that your virtuoso style of trolling is quite distinctive and makes you easily spottable – much like the distinctive style of Fritz Kreisler, a virtuoso of the violin, makes his recordings instantly recognizable.

         
      • J.M.

        February 20, 2014 at 11:34 PM

        Hi Jetlag, It seems to me you are very upset. But, I am somewhat weary.

        @ >Meanwhile, I’ll keep waiting for a reply from Adask to the questions in my post which your latest feat of trolling has trolled.
        You got me on that one, Jetlag,> feat of trolling has trolled. I’m totally lost on what that is, or means,

        @ >Enjoy yourself.
        Thanks, I don’t need to be happier than I am. I don’t have to tell you to “enjoy yourself” Jetlag, because I KNOW you do, enjoy your”self.”.

         
      • J.M.

        February 21, 2014 at 12:01 AM

        Jetlag, you say,
        @ > No thanks.

        I understand, Jetlag. You would not touch that challenge from my King & my God & me with a 20 foot pole.

        If I were “you”, I would not touch it with a 20 foot pole either, that is, IF I, J.M was, Jetlag. We would have a perfect squelch on our hands wouldn’t we. The Fat lady would be singing, turn out the lights the party is over.

         
    • J.M.

      February 20, 2014 at 6:56 PM

      Jetlag
      Re Genesis 9:6

      Whoever sheds man’s blood, by man shall their blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made mankind. < what rong wid dat? huh" what rong widdit? Doan fits do it? NAW, sho doan fits.

      Just something else for you to chew on, excuse me, spit out. I t gives the REASON & the reason is, for in the image of God has God made mankind. Or, look at it this way, for in the image of God, God has made mankind. This IS the overall purpose FOR mankind being made to start with. BUT YOU Martens & Jetlag are HELLBENT on saying it DOES NOT MEAN THIS. WHY ??? Both of you can "hang" with what you both want to believe. Quit trying to shove your belief down the throat of, or into the minds of another, someone else.I dunn tolt chuh, U crusin faw a brusin. I ain lyin nawsuh

       
    • J.M.

      February 20, 2014 at 7:05 PM

      @ >John 12:45 The one who looks at me is seeing the one who sent me.

      Like in the spittin image of. The Father has a “heart” not an “organ heart” like we do, that which brings tears to your eyes, THAT kind of heart. We have that kind of heart too. He has “eyes too, & arms. Yes he do too.

       
      • J.M.

        February 20, 2014 at 8:22 PM

        whoops, Let’s see if this is better.> The Father has a “heart” not an “organ heart” like we do, BUT that kind of heart which brings tears to your eyes. We have an “organ heart” but we also have the kind of heart that makes cry, laugh, feel joy, sadness, etc. THIS IS a spittin image of our Father’s heart. Isn’t it beyond words to describe, that we really can call him, Father. He does have children. It’s not hard to understand, at least for me.

         
  16. J.M.

    February 20, 2014 at 8:38 PM

    The kind of heart that makes US cry, laugh, feel joy, sadness, etc. I am so tired.

    Jesus Christ IS our “elder brother” too !!! Yes indeed. Satan counterfeits EVERYTHING our Father, AND our elder brother does. We could rightly call Jesus Christ our Elder BIG BROTHER. mmmmm, seems like I have heard that term too, BIG BROTHER. We have our BIG BROTHER & Satan has HIS BIG BROTHER, e.g. guess who? Some people say, gov-co. I agree.

     
  17. Yartap

    February 20, 2014 at 9:46 PM

    @ Jetlag,

    You said, “However, Adam lost his sonship at the same time he lost his image of God, i.e. at the fall, which is why Jesus Christ is referred to as “the” son of God.”

    If not a son of God nor the image of God, then WHY an INHERITANCE from GOD to man? And WHY the PROMISE from GOD to man? Only a son can inherit the Father’s promise. But, if not a son or in the image of his Father, then there stands to reason that there will not be an inheritance of the promise of eternal life with the Father (God).

    God: I change not! Is Adam just like the prodigal son (lost son)? Jetlag, a good read for you to understand how God works is to read ALL of Luke 15 to understand the lost or Father-son relationship.

    The “sonship,” as you call it, and the image of God are retained and never lost, “since he IS the image and glory of God.”

     
    • Martens

      February 20, 2014 at 10:39 PM

      Yartap said: “The “sonship,” as you call it, and the image of God are retained and never lost…”

      Scripture confirms that man does not inherit the status of “son of God” from Adam. That is, everyone is not automatically a son of God simply through descent from Adam. Rather, it is necessary to become a son of God, if one is to have that status.

      John 1:11-12 He came unto his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name.

      Romans 8:14-15 For those who are led by the Spirit of God are the children of God. The Spirit you received does not make you slaves, so that you live in fear again; rather, the Spirit you received brought about your adoption to sonship. And by him we cry, “Abba, Father.”

       
      • J.M.

        February 20, 2014 at 11:17 PM

        @ >But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name.

        To become the sons of God LIKE HE, Jesus Christ IS, NOW, AT THIS TIME, THIS VERY MINUTE, SECOND !!!!

        I don’t believe, YOU, Martens UNDERSTAND what “BELIEVING ON HIS NAME” REALLY MEANS, Remember, the DEMONS ALSO “BELIEVE” AND THEY TREMBLE. Oh yes indeed they do.

         
      • J.M.

        February 21, 2014 at 1:14 AM

        Martens,
        @ >much like the distinctive style of Fritz Kreisler, a virtuoso of the violin, makes his recordings instantly recognizable.

        Musically, speaking, You easily recognize who inspires so called music of this era Well, no, it’s “called music” but it is really DEMENTED NOISE. It’s inspired by your FATHER, SATAN. YOU ARE AN AGENT OF SATAN MARTENS. YOU & JET LAG BOTH. I’m going to bed. STAY AWAY FROM ME SATAN, HAUL ASS !!!

         
      • Martens

        February 21, 2014 at 2:26 AM

        Nighty night, Don.

         
      • Yartap

        February 21, 2014 at 11:49 AM

        Very good, Martens.

        It is a matter of one’s acceptance to become a believer and follower. It is SET an READY by God for anyone. I hope you have read Luke 15 for better understanding.

         
  18. donmako

    February 21, 2014 at 9:15 AM

    Adam was made in gods image. Clothed in light… see he was perfect. Had that extra demensionality to him. After the fall all that had changed. Id say as sin entered creation so did the entropy laws. Look at our LORD Jesus after resurection. He was perfected. In his perfect body. He had extradimensional properties

     
    • J.M.

      February 27, 2014 at 1:09 AM

      donmako,

      And when we see what God said to Cain as to what the problem IS, not WAS but IS, this should open some eyes as to what needs to be done. Overcoming &/or Mastering something means the same thing. Correct me if I.m mistaken.

       

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