Vegetarians Before the Flood

[bbyrd009]

all the stuff ppl wanna take literally yeh, but see no one wanna take
1After this, the Lord appointed 70a others, and He sent them ahead of Him inpairs to every town and place where He Himself was about to go.
2He told them:b“The harvestc is abundant, but the workersd are few. Therefore, pray to the Lordof the harvest to send out workers into His harvest.e
3Now go; I’m sending youout like lambs among wolves.f
4Don’t carry a money-bag,g traveling bag,h orsandals;i don’t greet anyone along the road.
5Whatever house you enter, first say, ‘Peacej to this household.’
6If a son of peacek is there, your peacel will rest onhim; but if not, it will return to you.
7Remain in the same house, eating anddrinking what they offer, for the worker is worthy of his wages.m Don’t be movingfrom house to house.
8When you enter any town, and they welcome you, eat thethings set before you.n
9Heal the sicko who are there, and tell them, ‘The kingdomof Godp has come nearq you.’
literally at all, right, no one even wanna acknowledge that one lol

 

[bbyrd009]

Seems I missed the edited version of our reply.

sorry, dunno who "our" is here, or i have no context for this to make sense i guess, pls rephrase

Jesus did validate scripture for how it cannot be broken, meaning what is written is true.

so who's trying to "break Scripture?"
how is it you did not know i was not talking about bread?
etc

i mean bam interpret as you believe, eat all the red stew you want, contemplate a "rapture" if you like, many do, right, and point to Scripture for the foundation, yeh? Ignoring what Isaiah has to say in the process, but whatevs imo, i dont even show that to them anymore lol

Not when scripture testify Noah by male pronouns.

English trannies of Scripture anyway, sure. So now understand why i am not too interested in proceeding much here; what is your point anyway? "Noah" the way we pronounce that is a girl's name in Hebrew, and Noah is also the father of humanity who built an ark according to Yah's command, according to english. Not Hebrew iow. Written differently in Hebrew, and transliterated badly into English, happens all the time i guess. Regardless, i still know who is meant when someone says "Noah," and i generally dont enlighten them, for the reasons i am now suff...experiencing, see. Yes, our scribes have tacked male pronouns onto a Hebrew female name, by way of Anglicizing or shortening Noach's name i guess?

surely if one of us were to go back in time and say "hey, Jesus," Jesus prolly would not even turn around eh

 

[Enow]

exactly imo, that is the Q, and it is as real as one who is ig...unlearned needs it to be, at least until the facts intrude; geology does not lie nor equivocate, and we can find no evidence of a literal worldwide flood, even by geologists who are believers and really wanted to find one. Test everything, and keep what is good right so either we are being lied to, or wisdom is hidden from the wise i guess. Imo the story of Noach works way better on a spiritual level anyway, literal/not literal flood becomes completely irrelevant tbh; there was a real, if only "spiritual" flood imo, ppl began to call upon the name of Yah etc

https://phys.org/news/2016-09-scientists-ocean-fossils-mountains-future.html

Take a peek at this evidence of a global flood before it is gone off the internet or they block it by needing you to register or pay a subscription for it.

so then bam believe that, the flood myths predate Moses even, used in virtually every culture and belief system on the planet i guess, and not for nothing imo. I do not disbelieve the spiritual principles imparted in the story of Noach, i have just come to find more value in contemplating Noach as a type rather than an actual person,whose name we dont even get right

ha tbh i doubt you would, knowledge brings sorrow right, what believer wants to accept that they are Esau and No son of man may die for another's sins after all?
i tell you its no fun no longer being Esau, and not yet being Jacob lol; the real wrestling comes after that i guess huh

Esau is hated because he valued a temporary satisfaction of a meal in the now rather than his first inheritance in the future whereby he traded it away. In like manner, the prodigal son gave up his inheritance for wild living and though he could never get it back, he is still son whereby he can come home.

So whether you think you are Esau, you are still His. We are to look to the author & finisher of our faith to help us lay aside every weight & sin, but you need the scripture to discern good and evil with His help to know what iniquities to depart from.

And not sure how the Sodom and Gomorrah story got involved here? But since it was invoked i will say that there are likely no "homosexuals" such as we define that today in the Bible at all, just as there are no literal whores in prophets gone a'whoring, and even the Scriptural account of Sodom's sins does not list it. And as to Noach i would just refer one to a better source, The amazing name Noah: meaning and etymology which btw i dont agree with entirely, but i can dig up some others that add/conflict too; what i mostly like about the Abarim is they do not use satan's dialectic, dont write like they know everything, even though they pretty much hold the same opinion of themselves that we do of ours, at least they are trying iow

"In English translations of the Bible, there are two characters named Noah, one man and one woman. In Hebrew, however, these two names are totally different, and their meanings are exact opposites."
!
priceless imo, mirrors our opinions of Jesus too, Who turns out to be pretty much the exact opposite of what most believers believe at first.

Scholars can err given our tainted educational system littered with false references to the false science that is the evolution theory.

Proof? In a Bible version footnote for the behemoth in Joh 40, Bible scholars believed it was a hippo or an elephant but yet the behemoth has a tail which moves like a cedar ( said cedar is a tree ) so hardly a hippo or an elephant but a description of a dinosaur. PLUS the Bible said his stones are wrapped in sinew thus his sexual organs are internal and yet science today only recently discovered that the sex organs of a dinosaurs are internal.

!!! Kudos for the Bible.

So I'd go by the Noah as referenced in the scripture to the man and his family, eight people in all.

As for Sodom & Gomorrah, the reference is about real time historical event that Jesus referred to in the past of God's judgment on the people for why they should be ready to avoid God's judgment coming of fire on the earth.​

 

[Enow]

all the stuff ppl wanna take literally yeh, but see no one wanna take
1After this, the Lord appointed 70a others, and He sent them ahead of Him inpairs to every town and place where He Himself was about to go.
2He told them:b“The harvestc is abundant, but the workersd are few. Therefore, pray to the Lordof the harvest to send out workers into His harvest.e
3Now go; I’m sending youout like lambs among wolves.f
4Don’t carry a money-bag,g traveling bag,h orsandals;i don’t greet anyone along the road.
5Whatever house you enter, first say, ‘Peacej to this household.’
6If a son of peacek is there, your peacel will rest onhim; but if not, it will return to you.
7Remain in the same house, eating anddrinking what they offer, for the worker is worthy of his wages.m Don’t be movingfrom house to house.
8When you enter any town, and they welcome you, eat thethings set before you.n
9Heal the sicko who are there, and tell them, ‘The kingdomof Godp has come nearq you.’
literally at all, right, no one even wanna acknowledge that one lol

Considering that they were "appointed" to do that for why He literally sent them out should explain why no one is applying that to all believers today.

 

[Enow]

sorry, dunno who "our" is here, or i have no context for this to make sense i guess, pls rephrase

Went back to edit that "our" to "your" reply. Sorry, Typo.

so who's trying to "break Scripture?"
how is it you did not know i was not talking about bread?
etc

I am talking about why you should rely on the written scripture of the KJV since He said scripture cannot be broken in reference to say it is true regardless to the Pharisees.

i mean bam interpret as you believe, eat all the red stew you want, contemplate a "rapture" if you like, many do, right, and point to Scripture for the foundation, yeh? Ignoring what Isaiah has to say in the process, but whatevs imo, i dont even show that to them anymore lol

2 Peter 1:19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: 20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

John 8:30 As he spake these words, many believed on him. 31 Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; 32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

 

[bbyrd009]

wadr i am not responding to the vv bc i do not see the connection to the subject, not that they arent great vv ok; i might point out that those are corrupted versions that bear little resemblance to the original, but wth eh

The KJV is not

he said, with total confidence, look a medieval Anglish version commisssioned by a homosexual royalty figure, pls dont get me started ok, the KJV is for slaves and non-overcomers imo, even if i do for whatever reason like and even respect ol Queenie. That was then, this is now. Barketh, barketh and all that. If you want to read from a scribed Anglish version that no one even speaks anymore, necessitating an immediate re-translation for every utterance, go for it imo, it becomes another sign of where one is at. I was "kjv only" for forty plus years myself, go for it imo

Take a peek at this evidence of a global flood before it is gone off the internet or they block it by needing you to register or pay a subscription for it.

that suggests a future "global flood," yes? does not establish a past one, iow? at least in human history?
you dont see any problems with that?
and regardless, as i said i find the spiritual analogies more edifying now anyway, and have no objections to believers insisting upon a literal "global flood" if they like, as imo that will come in handy when the truth dawns

Esau is hated because he valued a temporary satisfaction of a meal in the now rather than his first inheritance in the future whereby he traded it away

well so you say, yet we can all read that it was Jacob who left, and Esau who, apparently, "inherited," at least for the time. right?

So whether you think you are Esau, you are still His

he said, with complete confidence
lol

fwiw i dont think so, Scripture seems pretty plain there, Edom is no more

Scholars can err given our tainted educational system littered with false references to the false science that is the evolution theory.

pls, they test everything, and keep only what is good--scientists i mean, scholars, meh--i would be more concerned with scribes, changing virtually every instance of have faith into "believe" myself. So iow scientists cannot err, at least not for long

So I'd go by the Noah as referenced in the scripture

in English, you mean. Ok with me, enough of the story survives to be relevant imo; its just not "the rest of the story"

As for Sodom & Gomorrah, the reference is about real time historical event that Jesus referred to in the past of God's judgment on the people for why they should be ready to avoid God's judgment coming of fire on the earth.

he said, with total...lol
so, go with that, fine, who's arguing anyway

wadr as soon as you say "is" w/o qualifying it i know im about to get hosed, ok? So, i honestly mean no offense, and i rarely/never say this to anyone except here, but as soon as i hear "this is that" or "that is this" i know i am in the presence of satan, the father of lies, which is what imo "facts" are, wise in his own eyes iow

Considering that they were "appointed" to do that for why He literally sent them out should explain why no one is applying that to all believers today.

inferring that you were not appointed then, right? ok fine, see, i have no issue with anyone who wants to take Jesus' literal instructions to His followers not literally. Go with that, i say.

Went back to edit that "our" to "your" reply. Sorry, Typo.

wadr if you cant handle two paragraphs then why were you asking? The edited version is that "Noach" is a type and not a real person at all imo and others, and the "global flood" is a valuable and time-tested myth that contains truths enshrined in honored and well-known--by the ancients anyway--analogies, that point to more spiritual truth, imo. Shem, Ham, and Japheth are just ancient, recycled twin/triplet analogies, all of them are "me" in a sense, just like Esau and Jacob, and Cain and Abel, etc

I am talking about why you should rely on the written scripture of the KJV since He said scripture cannot be broken in reference to say it is true regardless to the Pharisees.

so what? I didn't ask for any lecture on the merits of the kjv, that i am aware of? I am talking about tossing that scribed up crap in the garbage, and tossing Easter while youre at it, pagan, sorry about the fertility rites youll be missing i guess but oh well, and maybe reading the part about scribes, scribing the Book since Jesus didnt speak the Queen's Englyshe anyway. Or bam pick that single one xlation and run with it imo, and know that you will be known by that. I mean we have many "kjv" only here, even many (tiresome and repetitive, at least imo) threads on the (pointless and irrelevant) issue (non-issue)
kjv is just fine as a verifier imo, fwiw, nothing wrong with the kjv per se, for the most part, aside from the glaring and obvious errors, which imo are mostly manifested in "kjv only" types

imo learn Greek too, while youre at it
lol
imo as long as we rely on an Englyshe xlation, we get an Englyshe "Lord" lol;
we want a "Lord" so we get a Lord, regardless of how terrible a concept that is.

Galatians 4:1 Lexicon: Now I say, as long as the heir is a child, he does not differ at all from a slave although he is owner of everything,

 

[Enow]

wadr i am not responding to the vv bc i do not see the connection to the subject, not that they arent great vv ok; i might point out that those are corrupted versions that bear little resemblance to the original, but wth eh

It does make me wonder how you believe what you say to be true if you do not rely on scripture to back you up.

he said, with total confidence, look a medieval Anglish version commisssioned by a homosexual royalty figure, pls dont get me started ok, the KJV is for slaves and non-overcomers imo, even if i do for whatever reason like and even respect ol Queenie. That was then, this is now. Barketh, barketh and all that. If you want to read from a scribed Anglish version that no one even speaks anymore, necessitating an immediate re-translation for every utterance, go for it imo, it becomes another sign of where one is at. I was "kjv only" for forty plus years myself, go for it imo

Keep in mind that part of the accusations about King James being a homosexual was that he had changed the Bible and yet the scripture is still there calling it an abomination for why you should dismiss the slander started back then.

that suggests a future "global flood," yes? does not establish a past one, iow? at least in human history?
you dont see any problems with that?

I referred to that as proof that there was a global flood. What man says as opposed to what Jesus says is coming are 2 different things, and what man says is a guess as opposed to what Jesus says IS coming for why the warning to believers apply.

and regardless, as i said i find the spiritual analogies more edifying now anyway, and have no objections to believers insisting upon a literal "global flood" if they like, as imo that will come in handy when the truth dawns

Well, the problem I see coming your way is that verse which you seem to dismiss as inferring His deity that if you do not believe "I am he", you will die in your sins is why you should take what He says as literal in that regard. I know God the Father has to reveal His Son to you, and so I would ask you to pray to the Father to do that, brother.

well so you say, yet we can all read that it was Jacob who left, and Esau who, apparently, "inherited," at least for the time. right?

I believe what happens in the end about a goodly inheritance is what counts as for why the two are referred to.

he said, with complete confidence
lol

fwiw i dont think so, Scripture seems pretty plain there, Edom is no more​

Since I referred to you by what you had referred to yourself as Esau symbolically, then symbolically, Esau is the least in the kingdom of Heaven, but you can be great in the kingdom of Heaven if you believe that Jesus Christ is Lord as in God to the glory of God the Father. That is the only way God the Father can be glorified is when the Son is God for why His name is above every other name that every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord.

If God will not share His glory with Another and that He will do it or else His name be polluted, then how can that be unless Jesus is Lord/God?

pls, they test everything, and keep only what is good--scientists i mean, scholars, meh--i would be more concerned with scribes, changing virtually every instance of have faith into "believe" myself. So iow scientists cannot err, at least not for long

You say in complete confidence as if man is not fallible in science. So do they have discipline in that science? Not when they have different definitions for microevolution and macroevolution at dictionary and college websites they are not. Some have the definitions separate, some almost sound the same, blurring that line of separation, and then there are a few that reads the same thing.

Then you have people saying that both Gradual Macroevolution and Rapid Macroevolution are true when the latter was proposed because the former cannot be true.

So, no. Hardly any discipline in the scientific field today in regards to the evolution theory as it is a false science when macroevolution is not a phenomenon observed in the natural world at all but exists only in the realm of the imagination; the hypothetical and yet they say it is a fact and proven too.

Do you see a long line at some scientific medical facility that is applying the proven method of macroevolution to human beings to give them wings? And yet you do not seem to apply the same level of skepticism there as you do the Bible.

in English, you mean. Ok with me, enough of the story survives to be relevant imo; its just not "the rest of the story"

Genealogy lists males for the lineage.

Genesis 5:28 And Lamech lived an hundred eighty and two years, and begat a son: 29 And he called his name Noah, saying, This same shall comfort us concerning our work and toil of our hands, because of the ground which the Lord hath cursed.

Even in the N.T.

Luke 3:22 And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased. 23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,.........36 Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech, 37 Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan, 38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

he said, with total...lol
so, go with that, fine, who's arguing anyway

wadr as soon as you say "is" w/o qualifying it i know im about to get hosed, ok? So, i honestly mean no offense, and i rarely/never say this to anyone except here, but as soon as i hear "this is that" or "that is this" i know i am in the presence of satan, the father of lies, which is what imo "facts" are, wise in his own eyes iow

I reckon you can have confidence too when you trust God to help you see the truth in His words.

inferring that you were not appointed then, right? ok fine, see, i have no issue with anyone who wants to take Jesus' literal instructions to His followers not literally. Go with that, i say.

Luke 10:1After these things the Lord appointed other seventy also, and sent them two and two before his face into every city and place, whither he himself would come.

Since Jesus had ascended, then how can you say we are appointed to check out a place to see if Jesus would come to that place during His earthly ministry?

wadr if you cant handle two paragraphs then why were you asking? The edited version is that "Noach" is a type and not a real person at all imo and others, and the "global flood" is a valuable and time-tested myth that contains truths enshrined in honored and well-known--by the ancients anyway--analogies, that point to more spiritual truth, imo. Shem, Ham, and Japheth are just ancient, recycled twin/triplet analogies, all of them are "me" in a sense, just like Esau and Jacob, and Cain and Abel, etc

Genealogy listed is why they are not fictional characters for application of spiritual truths alone.

 

[Enow]

so what? I didn't ask for any lecture on the merits of the kjv, that i am aware of? I am talking about tossing that scribed up crap in the garbage, and tossing Easter while youre at it, pagan, sorry about the fertility rites youll be missing i guess but oh well, and maybe reading the part about scribes, scribing the Book since Jesus didnt speak the Queen's Englyshe anyway. Or bam pick that single one xlation and run with it imo, and know that you will be known by that. I mean we have many "kjv" only here, even many (tiresome and repetitive, at least imo) threads on the (pointless and irrelevant) issue (non-issue)

kjv is just fine as a verifier imo, fwiw, nothing wrong with the kjv per se, for the most part, aside from the glaring and obvious errors, which imo are mostly manifested in "kjv only" types​

Glaring and obvious errors he says with confidence.

Still referencing hype of anti-KJV rhetoric on the internet that was spread and picked up by others unwittingly to promote the sales of modern Bibles. How about applying the love of money to that campaign?

I mean really. "Jesus did not speak in the Queen's English" is just a typical deflection from the point that they are using that saying to sell the other versions which strangely enough is in English. One can even berate the King James Bible still when it is translated in other languages to sell the modern versions in that foreign language. The obvious con in hypocrisy just doesn't seem to be put down for what it is.

imo learn Greek too, while youre at it
lol

And the Hebrew which is a typical deflection to make people just give up and use whatever Bible version they are using regardless if it is not the KJV. I come across a lot of believers that insist on learning the Greek and the Hebrew and all I have to do is use a concordance to see how they are applying His words wrong. The KJV translators were educated and while they all prayed for help in translation to do it justly by Him, they checked each other works. There were if I recall correctly 8 committees that divided up over 50 translators and they all checked each other works.

Now for a person to translate the scripture from Greek and Hebrew, he or she is doing it by himself without confirming the testimony with at least two or three other witnesses as they are supposed to in the assembly concerning the word of God.

1 Corinthians 14:27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret. 28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God. 29 Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.

Between the KJV translators and some hotshot blowhard that wants to exalt himself by his intellectual capacity to translate the Bible a different way, I'm going with the KJV, so no thanks on me bothering to learn the Greek and Hebrew. Referencing the Strong's Concordance is fine but even there I need to rely on the Lord to discern everything even in that Concordance just as Bible footnotes can be in error too.

imo as long as we rely on an Englyshe xlation, we get an Englyshe "Lord" lol;
we want a "Lord" so we get a Lord, regardless of how terrible a concept that is.

Galatians 4:1 Lexicon: Now I say, as long as the heir is a child, he does not differ at all from a slave although he is owner of everything,

I think it is only recent when people say KJV endorses slavery that I have come across. Do the other Bibles say something different? I can't see how. I am quick to say more hype just by teh world to defer from the KJV while using the KJV as the reason to make an "easier to read Bible". Can you smell the money? It was the Puritans that requested another Bible version because of the errant marginal notes in the Geneva Bible that was going against what is written in that Bible.

But like I say,... even the "Liberty's Annotated Study Bible in the KJV has errant footnotes & marginal notes so you really have to prove everything by Him, but He as proven to me that His words in the KJV is the meat of His words to rely on to discern good & evil by in these latter days where faith is hard to find. It is no wonder why.

Go to God and ask the Father to reveal the deity of His Son to you, brother. And maybe from there, He will lead you to rely on His words in the KJV again to reprove the works of darkness.​

 

[bbyrd009]

ok, ty