[RevTestament]

Originally Posted by Wile E. Coyote

The Hebrew word for "earth" is "eretz" and should have been translated "land" and not "earth." It is talking about the founding of the land of Israel and not the whole globe. They were there for the founding of Israel but not for the creation of the globe.

Isaiah's time was just a little late for the founding of Israel, Wile. More like the end of Israel - all that was left was Judah. The context shows God was talking about the whole earth - the nations etc.

15 Behold, the nations are as a drop in a bucket,
And are counted as the small dust on the scales;
Look, He lifts up the isles as a very little thing.
16 And Lebanon is not sufficient to burn,
Nor its beasts sufficient for a burnt offering.
17 All nations before Him are as nothing,
And they are counted by Him less than nothing and worthless.

further:
22 It is He who sits above the circle of the earth,
And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers,

Context shows you are wrong. Sorry

[ttruscott]

Originally Posted by RevTestament

I'm curious as to what extra meaning, if any, you get out of PCE. Acknowledging a preexistence avails you nothing if you believe we were still created. It is just a slightly earlier creation.

A pre-earth creation:

1. allows that our free will was before we became enslaved to sin by being born and verses about our lives being determined are about our earthly lives.

2. allows that we are all responsible for our own original sin (not Adam) as per Ezekiel 18:20-23 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him;

3. allows our election and predestination to be based upon our free will choice which provides a reasonable explanation why GOD has mercy on some and not others, and created some though they end in hell.

4. it explains why the judgment of the damned has been prosponed though the attributes of GOD necessitate the judgement at the earliest possible time.

5. and it explains why the devil and his minions get to wander the earth destroying lives and attacking the Church.

Peace, Ted

[ttruscott]

Originally Posted by Wile E. Coyote

...

The Hebrew word for "earth" is "eretz" and should have been translated "land" and not "earth." It is talking about the founding of the land of Israel and not the whole globe. They were there for the founding of Israel but not for the creation of the globe.
...

Well, before your icon busts a gut, I know what my Hebrew teacher taught me what eretz means and I agree with Strong's H776 - 'erets
Outline of Biblical Usage
1) land, earth
a) earth
1) whole earth (as opposed to a part)
2) earth (as opposed to heaven)
3) earth (inhabitants)

that Isa 40:21 can have this translation. I dissagree with your interpretation offered as the only truth.

peace, Ted

[ttruscott]

Originally Posted by Nang

This PCE stuff, is nothing but a denial of the Holy Scriptures and the inspired account of creation/sin/redemption given to mankind from God.

It emanates from religious mystics who would seek to deny the authority (and destroy the safeguards and spiritual parameters) of the Word of God.

Bad stuff, folks.

Ignore it . . .

Nang

Still arguing against the man and not the theology eh? Isn't there a logical fallacy in there somewhere, hmmm?

Please name for us these religious mystics, ok? (You seem to have forgotten to include a link to them...)

...who would seek to deny the authority (and destroy the safeguards and spiritual parameters) of the Word of God. - whew, for a minute there I thought you meant me but I love GOD's authority and HIS safeguards and spiritual parameters so

thanks Nang, I'll keep my eyes open for them for sure.

Peace, Ted

PS: If all things are decreed by GOD then the fall of man fulfills GOD's decree, it doesn't abrogate it, right?

[Wile E. Coyote]

Originally Posted by ttruscott

Well, before your icon busts a gut, I know what my Hebrew teacher taught me what eretz means and I agree with Strong's H776 - 'erets
Outline of Biblical Usage
1) land, earth
a) earth
1) whole earth (as opposed to a part)
2) earth (as opposed to heaven)
3) earth (inhabitants)
that Isa 40:21 can have this translation. I dissagree with your interpretation offered as the only truth.

peace, Ted

Uh, you did not cite all of Strong's.

H776

earth
country
field
ground
land

Your interpretation is ridiculous! Man was created on the sixth day. Man was not present at the creation of the earth. They were present at the establishment of Israel. Therefore, only "country" or "land" can apply.

Why do you pick and choose from what Strong said?

[tomlapalm]

Originally Posted by Wile E. Coyote

Uh, you did not cite all of Strong's.

H776

earth
country
field
ground
land

Your interpretation is ridiculous! Man was created on the sixth day. Man was not present at the creation of the earth. They were present at the establishment of Israel. Therefore, only "country" or "land" can apply.

Why do you pick and choose from what Strong said?

That is one of the errors that persists despite correction.
Adam's body was formed from dust not created from nothing. God place the eternal part when breathed.
it is to elevate humanity importance to an incorrect level that is concealed in modern humanism and is a tool of deceit for satan

Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man [of] the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

[tomlapalm]

Originally Posted by ttruscott

A pre-earth creation:

1. allows that our free will was before we became enslaved to sin by being born and verses about our lives being determined are about our earthly lives.

2. allows that we are all responsible for our own original sin (not Adam) as per Ezekiel 18:20-23 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him;

3. allows our election and predestination to be based upon our free will choice which provides a reasonable explanation why GOD has mercy on some and not others, and created some though they end in hell.

4. it explains why the judgment of the damned has been prosponed though the attributes of GOD necessitate the judgement at the earliest possible time.

5. and it explains why the devil and his minions get to wander the earth destroying lives and attacking the Church.

Peace, Ted

if i was pre-created, what was i created as?

[ttruscott]

Originally Posted by Wile E. Coyote

Uh, you did not cite all of Strong's.

H776

earth
country
field
ground
land

Your interpretation is ridiculous! Man was created on the sixth day. Man was not present at the creation of the earth. They were present at the establishment of Israel. Therefore, only "country" or "land" can apply.

Why do you pick and choose from what Strong said?

I pick the translation from Strongs to use that supports my ridiculous interpretation,

just like you do/did!

GOD knew Jeremiah before he was born - why not Adam...or me? Jeremiah 1:5 "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,

OR:

Job 1:21 - And Job said,[1] Naked came I out of my mother's womb and naked shall I return thither.

Obviously Job was not going to re-enter his mother's womb, right? So then why is his death described as a return to his mother's womb? Why didn't he say, Naked was I born and naked shall I die?

Well, may I suggest that, to a person (author) who knows about preconception existence, who is writing a book about suffering (but not for sin committed during this life since he was characterized as : “There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.”)

this is a very poetic, secretive way of describing death, that is, our return to the state we were in before we were given life.

Now, a return to the state one was in before one was born or given life can mean only one of two things: either annihilation or preconception existence. Well, since I do not believe that Job's author thought that death meant annihilation, I am not really left with much choice. There is only one rational answer left... Now, what do you think about that? Pretty surprising eh!

Peace, Ted

[RevTestament]

Originally Posted by ttruscott

A pre-earth creation:

1. allows that our free will was before we became enslaved to sin by being born and verses about our lives being determined are about our earthly lives.

2. allows that we are all responsible for our own original sin (not Adam) as per Ezekiel 18:20-23 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him;

3. allows our election and predestination to be based upon our free will choice which provides a reasonable explanation why GOD has mercy on some and not others, and created some though they end in hell.

4. it explains why the judgment of the damned has been postponed though the attributes of GOD necessitate the judgement at the earliest possible time.

5. and it explains why the devil and his minions get to wander the earth destroying lives and attacking the Church.

Peace, Ted

Oh, I think I get it. You need PCE to explain scripture in light of the error of Calvinism. But his wrong conclusions bring you to some incorrect conclusions. A child is not enslaved to sin, so doesn't need PCE to escape it. I will ponder on what else to say.
Blessings

[Wile E. Coyote]

Originally Posted by ttruscott

I pick the translation from Strongs to use that supports my ridiculous interpretation,

just like you do/did!

GOD knew Jeremiah before he was born - why not Adam...or me? Jeremiah 1:5 "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you,

OR:

Job 1:21 - And Job said,[1] Naked came I out of my mother's womb and naked shall I return thither.

Obviously Job was not going to re-enter his mother's womb, right? So then why is his death described as a return to his mother's womb? Why didn't he say, Naked was I born and naked shall I die?

Well, may I suggest that, to a person (author) who knows about preconception existence, who is writing a book about suffering (but not for sin committed during this life since he was characterized as : “There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.”)

this is a very poetic, secretive way of describing death, that is, our return to the state we were in before we were given life.

Now, a return to the state one was in before one was born or given life can mean only one of two things: either annihilation or preconception existence. Well, since I do not believe that Job's author thought that death meant annihilation, I am not really left with much choice. There is only one rational answer left... Now, what do you think about that? Pretty surprising eh!

Peace, Ted

You're all over the place dude! Isaiah 40:21 is talking about the creation of the heavens and the land. In this context it denotes Israel which is often called by the denomintion "heavens and the land." The book of the law of Moses is also called the "heavens and the land" in scripture. The people were present in the creation of these. They were not present in the creation of physical universe.

Isaiah 40:21 offers you nothing.

[Wile E. Coyote]

Originally Posted by RevTestament

Oh, I think I get it. You need PCE to explain scripture in light of the error of Calvinism. But his wrong conclusions bring you to some incorrect conclusions. A child is not enslaved to sin, so doesn't need PCE to escape it. I will ponder on what else to say.
Blessings

You don't know anything anyway so be quiet please!

[ttruscott]

Originally Posted by RevTestament

Oh, I think I get it. You need PCE to explain scripture in light of the error of Calvinism. But his wrong conclusions bring you to some incorrect conclusions. A child is not enslaved to sin, so doesn't need PCE to escape it. I will ponder on what else to say.
Blessings

1) Are they innocent? YES, innocent of how life on earth works but not free of guilt.

Have you considered God's wrath?

Noah's flood and the "innocent" but not righteous babies in his day...

Gen 6
11 Now the earth was corrupt in God’s sight and was full of violence.
12 God saw how corrupt the earth had become, for all the people on earth had corrupted their ways.
13 So God said to Noah, “I am going to put an end to all people, for the earth is filled with violence because of them. I am surely going to destroy both them and the earth.

Also, when God smote the nations did He not order the killing of everyone? Do we not see that as judgement for sin?
EX 12:29 The Lord kills all the first-born in the land of Egypt.
NU 21:3 The Israelites utterly destroy the Canaanites.
DT 2:33-34 The Israelites utterly destroy the men, women, and children of Sihon.
DT 3:6 The Israelites utterly destroy the men, women, and children of Og.

Children are not treated as righteous, are they? I guess it is not proof they are sinners since it may (not likely) be that GOD killed them in their innocence to send them on to heaven (except why do they get to be the lucky ones?).

Have you considered The Destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah?
God was asked about sparing a city if HE found righteous people within it. God responded by saying that he would not destroy a city that had righteous people within it.

Presumably those two places had many babies inside. Why didn't God spare those cities since there were babies innocent of guilt in the cities who, without sin, are by definition righteous??

Genesis 18:32 Then he said, “May the Lord not be angry, but let me speak just once more. What if only ten can be found there?” He answered, “For the sake of ten, I will not destroy it.”

Not even ten babies in all of two big cities? No, I think there was a normal contingent of babies and pregnant mothers etc, but I don't think they were counted as innocent of guilt in the eyes of the LORD's wrath. They may have been young and ingenuous about their new bodies and life but they were indeed under condemnation for sin.

We know that a house divided against itself will fall so somehow this GOD of wrath must be reconciled with the Jesus who calls children to HIM and says that we must become like them to go to heaven ourselves. Either there must be two different classes of children involved in these stories or there must be some other difference, because we know that there is no difference between the Persons of the Trinity and Jesus mentions S&G without any hedging about children.

Ps 51:5... sinful from the time my mother conceived me.

PLUS:
My thoughts lead me in this direction:
if babies who die prior to the age of accountability automatically go to heaven without any free will choice to become saved or to reject salvation, by a God who does not want people to go to hell as per:
2 Peter 3:9: ....He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance,

then WHY are NOT all humans saved this way if it is a legitimate way to be saved?

Why do some die to automatically go to heaven and some live to get tested, some to their annhilation or eternal torrment? Why some and not others?

I feel left out of the automatic heavenly club - God should have killed me as a child!! What a lot of suffering it would have saved the people I've hurt.

AND: I think the wages of sin is death means that death is the proof of sin.

So we have little children under condemnation and destroyed by the flood

BUT

we have little children used to demonstrate ingenuous innocence:

Luke 18:16-17 But Jesus called the children to him and said, "Let the little children come unto me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. Truly I tell you, anyone that will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child shall never enter it.

Notice it says: receive the kingdom like a little child?

That is why I believe it is the quality of their acceptance that matters, not their lack of guilt before the judgment throne of GOD.

Are they ingenuous? Yes, indeed. Are they innocent - they are indeed innocent of the way ways of the world and the way physical beings do good and bad things as their nature dictates and

that does not change just because this person, innocent about the ways of the world, is guilty of sin in the eyes of GOD.

Our birth and our growing awareness and understanding of the moral nature of existence is perfect type for our pre-earth existence wherein
we were created and slowly came to be aware that a serious moral choice was before us and then learned the full nature of the outcomes of our prospective choices and then, chose the life we most hoped for, the one we most wanted to live in our deepest hearts.

PCE insists that the essential nature of someone capable of making a true free will decision is to be ingenuously innocent. Jesus here confirms that only the ingenouously innocent can make such a choice so that they will be offered the kingdom.

PCE insists that all who did accept GOD's purpose for their creation by a faith based true free will choice, ie based on full knowledge and hope without proof, were elected to be HIS church forever.

Jesus does not say they are innocent of sin, which is a faith based interpretation of scripture which denies the judgmental aspect of the flood and the righteous genocide of the OT as well as the the fact that GOD rejects this idea as a way to save everyone like HE wants to do, thereby sending some to perdition.

One of the problems hidden in the interpretation of innocent children going to heaven is that innocence is not the criteria for entry into the kingdom but only righteousness.

Matthew 5:20 "For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven."

The Scriptures make it plain that the only source of Righteousness is Jesus Christ. “For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.” Rom. 4:3.


Can a baby believe? Can a baby have faith?

Rom. 10:8-11 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; 9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. 11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.”

...So, there it is, my faith based interpretation of scripture, ahem.

Peace to all,

Ted

[tomlapalm]

in view of the last post,, Maybe all humans have not had eternal souls.

eh?

[ttruscott]

Originally Posted by tomlapalm

in view of the last post,, Maybe all humans have not had eternal souls.

eh?

Although I've stood with all being created eternal for many years, I do wonder...sigh.

If we were created eternal how can we be promised or inherit eternal life?
1 John 2:25
And this is the PROMISE that he hath promised us, even ETERNAL LIFE.

Is it only opposed to eternal death (whatever that is)? ie the eternal is given, not added on, so the difference is where we spend eternal, in life or in death...?

<shrug>

Peace, Ted

[tomlapalm]

Spiritual death is eternal separation from God just as eternal life is" abiding in the vine".

if you take "All souls are mine" literally. it is easy to accept a sovereign God does what He pleases with them.