Was Satan evil in Job 1:7?

[Truthnightmare]

Scripture also says humankind (man) came from the one man & woman; Adam and Eve. Humanity had to have a beginning.

No. Certain translations say that, but that is not in the original manuscripts. So what does one do when the translations say something different than the manuscripts? One must make a choice.

 

[rwb]

No. Certain translations say that, but that is not in the original manuscripts. So what does one do when the translations say something different than the manuscripts? One must make a choice.

How do you or anyone else know what is original, since the original no longer exists? All we have is translations from other translations. So it becomes a matter of faith. Because God has promised His words shall never pass away, that we would always have, in spite of the plethora of translations, the written Word of God. The Bible is translated from manuscripts that have been preserved, but even these manuscripts are not the original, but handwritten copies of biblical texts.

I rely mainly on the KJV of Scripture with the Stong's Concordance. Though the KJV too has errors, I have found it to be reliable translation. These passages from the beginning at creation convince me that mankind began with the creation of two humans, Adam & Eve, who are the progenitors of all of humanity.

Genesis 1:26-28 (KJV) And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

Genesis 2:4-7 (KJV) These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens, And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground. 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.

Luke 3:38 (KJV) Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

1 Corinthians 15:45 (KJV) And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

1 Timothy 2:13 (KJV) For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

 

[Truthnightmare]

How do you or anyone else know what is original, since the original no longer exists? All we have is translations from other translations. So it becomes a matter of faith. Because God has promised His words shall never pass away, that we would always have, in spite of the plethora of translations, the written Word of God. The Bible is translated from manuscripts that have been preserved, but even these manuscripts are not the original, but handwritten copies of biblical texts.

I rely mainly on the KJV of Scripture with the Stong's Concordance. Though the KJV too has errors, I have found it to be reliable translation. These passages from the beginning at creation convince me that mankind began with the creation of two humans, Adam & Eve, who are the progenitors of all of humanity.

Genesis 1:26-28 (KJV) And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

Genesis 2:4-7 (KJV) These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens, And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground. 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.

Luke 3:38 (KJV) Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

1 Corinthians 15:45 (KJV) And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

1 Timothy 2:13 (KJV) For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

You have no idea what you are talking about.
The original no longer exist? Then what is this?
If your research has came up wanting, then that is you. Don’t cast your shortcomings on the rest of us.

The following screenshot comes from Acts 17:26. This is the Greek text from the Codex Sinaiticus.

I used the same color scheme as earlier, so you can cross-reference this yourself. Even better, the Codex Sinaiticus website not only provides the ancient manuscripts, but the English translation so we can all understand.

Let’s take a look.

Acts 17:26: Codex Sinaiticus – Click to zoom
You will notice, the word “blood” and “man” are not found in this ancient copy of God’s Word. Instead, we have “ενοϲ” which is “one” and the next two words that appear in this 1,600-year-old manuscript are “παν εθνοϲ” being “every nation”.

This tells us, the word “blood” was added to the more modern manuscripts, and the word “man” was simply added to modern Bibles.

That is an issue with modern Bibles.

Though they may use an older manuscript, they are a word for thought translation, whereas the KJV is a word for word translation. So they both have their own downfalls.

Note: I can’t remember the author of this particular writing.

 

[Truthnightmare]

How do you or anyone else know what is original, since the original no longer exists? All we have is translations from other translations. So it becomes a matter of faith. Because God has promised His words shall never pass away, that we would always have, in spite of the plethora of translations, the written Word of God. The Bible is translated from manuscripts that have been preserved, but even these manuscripts are not the original, but handwritten copies of biblical texts.

I rely mainly on the KJV of Scripture with the Stong's Concordance. Though the KJV too has errors, I have found it to be reliable translation. These passages from the beginning at creation convince me that mankind began with the creation of two humans, Adam & Eve, who are the progenitors of all of humanity.

Genesis 1:26-28 (KJV) And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

Genesis 2:4-7 (KJV) These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens, And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground. 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.

Luke 3:38 (KJV) Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

1 Corinthians 15:45 (KJV) And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

1 Timothy 2:13 (KJV) For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

The Hebrew disagrees with you, and to rebuttal my believes you would need to know something of the Hebrew, it is essential to understand scripture.

The Differences between the two creation events​
In Genesis chapter One They all (plural) were CREATED. Created is Hebrew word #1254 bara' "...male and female created he them" (Gen 1:27)​	But in Genesis chapter Two Adam alone (singular) is FORMED Formed is Hebrew word #3335 yatsar "...in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed." (Gen 2:8)​
They are created male and female at the same time. No 'Adam's Rib' here!​	Adam is formed some time before Eve. She later being made from him.​
They were simply created, human and mortal. "And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment"(Heb 9:27).​	Adam given the breath of life, became a living soul. (Adam would have lived forever had he not fell - see Gen 6:3 "for that he also is flesh"). Ask yourself, "also," as in whom else?​
They are told to multiply. "...Be fruitful and multiply..." (Gen 1:28)​	No such command is given to Adam and Eve (Adam's family was told to multiply after the flood; i.e., Noah's family was told in Gen 9:1).​
Mankind given dominion over animals and fish.​	Adam was a farmer.​
The animals were wild animals and the plants were wild plants. No names given.​	They were domestic animals and crop plants. Adam named these.​
There was not yet rain.​	"...went up a mist from the earth..."(Gen 2:6)​
The creation was completed. All the various races, men and women alike, were created. THEN ------ >>>​	But after that, in Gen 2:5, God saw that He "did not have a man to till the ground" (farmer). So God then FORMED Adam.​

But probably the most striking evidence that Genesis chapter Oneand Genesis chapter Two are not speaking of the same event would be:

In Gen 1, the plants and animals were created BEFOREman(kind) was created.
In Gen 2, the plants and animals were formed AFTER the man Adam was formed.

This immediately dismisses the misconception that the account in Gen 2 is merely a deeper explanation of the events in Gen 1, as many will say and teach. For if it were, then God 'messed up' on the order of His creation, which is of course impossible. When God and man are at variance, man is always wrong and God always right. Let's now go to the Creation Scriptures themselves for further evidence and documentation.

 

[rwb]

The following screenshot comes from Acts 17:26. This is the Greek text from the Codex Sinaiticus.

And where or from whom did this Greek text Codex Sinaiticus originate from?

 

[rwb]

But probably the most striking evidence that Genesis chapter Oneand Genesis chapter Two are not speaking of the same event would be:

This immediately dismisses the misconception that the account in Gen 2 is merely a deeper explanation of the events in Gen 1, as many will say and teach. For if it were, then God 'messed up' on the order of His creation, which is of course impossible. When God and man are at variance, man is always wrong and God always right. Let's now go to the Creation Scriptures themselves for further evidence and documentation.

There is not controversy here. Gen 1 shows the creation of all that God created. Then Gen 2 is a recapitulation focusing on what became of Adam and his progeny as the "generations" proceed from him.

Genesis 2:4-5 (KJV) These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens, And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

 

[Truthnightmare]

And where or from whom did this Greek text Codex Sinaiticus originate from?

Why does that matter? Whether If I do or don’t know it’s origin, that does not change the fact that many new Bible versions are translated from the Sinaiticus.

But anyhow…

The Sinaiticus is a manuscript that was 'found' in 1844 in a trash pile in St. Catherines Monastery near Mt. Sinai by a man named Mr. Tischendorf. It contains nearly all of the New Testament plus it adds the to the New Testament, the "Shepherd of Hermes" (which reads that we are to take the mark of the beast!) and the "Epistle of Barnabas."

Now what has changed?

 

[Truthnightmare]

There is not controversy here. Gen 1 shows the creation of all that God created. Then Gen 2 is a recapitulation focusing on what became of Adam and his progeny as the "generations" proceed from him.

Genesis 2:4-5 (KJV) These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens, And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

A recapitulation? You are willingly ignoring what is clear. So once again.

In Gen 1, the plants and animals were created BEFOREman(kind) was created.

In Gen 2, the plants and animals were formed AFTER the man Adam was formed.

Further more a recapitulation is
an act or instance of summarizing and restating the main points of something.

There would be no difference in the order of events, either plants and animals were created before man, or after man. Your belief has no answer for this quagmire.

 

[Truthnightmare]

And by all means believe what you will, and I have no judgment against you, you believe in Christ, and I know you believe He is Lord. That’s good enough for me.

Here is truth in its simplify.
God created trees and wild animals, and mankind (races)
Then God rested on day 7
After day 7 God formed a special man, then created certain trees and domestic animals.

Adam was a farmer/gardener the trees and animals given to Adam were the things a man would need to be a farmer/gardener.

Same with Noah, the animals taken were specifically designed for Noah to restart a farm garden… No lions, no polar bears, giraffes etc, but I digress. The point is, we need to understand each others point of view, whether we disagree or not. I understand yours because I lived it and believed it, no longer is that the case.
Have you ever considered mine is the question.

 

[gpresdo]

And by all means believe what you will, and I have no judgment against you, you believe in Christ, and I know you believe He is Lord. That’s good enough for me.

Here is truth in its simplify.
God created trees and wild animals, and mankind (races)
Then God rested on day 7
After day 7 God formed a special man, then created certain trees and domestic animals.

Adam was a farmer/gardener the trees and animals given to Adam were the things a man would need to be a farmer/gardener.

Same with Noah, the animals taken were specifically designed for Noah to restart a farm garden… No lions, no polar bears, giraffes etc, but I digress. The point is, we need to understand each others point of view, whether we disagree or not. I understand yours because I lived it and believed it, no longer is that the case.
Have you ever considered mine is the question.

You suggest there are different ok ways to interpret the Bible?

 

[TonyChanYT]

You suggest there are different ok ways to interpret the Bible?

I think that's possible. See Does the Paraclete guide different believers differently on the same issue?

 

[Truthnightmare]

You suggest there are different ok ways to interpret the Bible?

Yes, look at all the divisions of Christianity. This comes from interpretation.

 

[gpresdo]

Yes, look at all the divisions of Christianity. This comes from interpretation.

But the different interpretations I see have no basis. THEY ARE MADE WHERE CLEAR AND DEFINITIVE LANGUAGE OF THE BIBLE RENDER THEM NULL AND VOID. (caps on purpose).

 

[Truthnightmare]

But the different interpretations I see have no basis. THEY ARE MADE WHERE CLEAR AND DEFINITIVE LANGUAGE OF THE BIBLE RENDER THEM NULL AND VOID. (caps on purpose).

Do you have an interpretation or perhaps a rounded belief that you find to have a accurate basis?

 

[gpresdo]

I think that's possible. See Does the Paraclete guide different believers differently on the same issue?

But the question produced is....why isn't the different interpretations of the Bible supported by the Bible?...they are not.
Further why wasn't these ...new age religion interpretations ....in existence before the ....1960's?
So far in research we can only find reference to such since the 1960's.
Anyone wishing to add to the findings are welcome to contribute such information to the effort and study.

 

[gpresdo]

Do you have an interpretation or perhaps a rounded belief that you find to have a accurate basis?

Absolutely;
The..... new age religion...... teaching that baptism is not necessary is ruled null and void by Acts 2;38 Repent and be baptized....et al.
Now ad the many more supportive reference;

Baptism is Required



Peter 3: 21.... whereunto even baptism doth also now save us...

John 3:5 .......Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.


Acts 2;38-....Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Acts 22;16... And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.


Galations 3:26...... For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

KJV Marrk 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

KJV Matthew 3:14... But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me? 15. Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now, for thus it becometh us to fulfil all rightesousness. Then He suffered Him.

KJV Matthew 28:19..... Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:.

Acts 10;47-48...
47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.
Acts 8:12-18: But when they believed Philip as he preached the things concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, both men and women were baptized.

Acts 19:4 And Paul said, “John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in the one who was to come after him, that is, Jesus.”

John 3; 22 After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.
23 And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized.

Quote from Billy Graham that is note worthy;
....Also, to clarify I did not say remission of sin takes place at repentance. Scripture makes it clear that it occurs upon obedience to water baptism in the name of the Lord Jesus. Each is a step of faith, along with receiving the Holy Ghost, in the process of one's spiritual rebirth

.."Paul explains the doctrinal significance of what occurs when one is baptized.His explanation is found in his letter to those who had already been obedient to the command.

Paul tells the Roman Christians what actually occurred when they were/are baptized; they were baptized into His death. Being buried with Jesus into His death resulted in their sin being destroyed.

Even though Paul explains this concept, the NEW AGE RELIGION TEACHING is......... that water baptism is nothing other than a mere public display.......... And that is so far removed from the truth.

Keep in mind that Satan knows if he can continue to perpetuate that lie ...... he can keep people from entering the kingdom of God. Thus He has proven scripture which says ...in the end times there will be ...great delusions.....they are here.

Conclusion....teaching that baptism is not necessary is violation of Rev. 22;19.... And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. 20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus. (Also two other books of the Bible).

We can find nothing of such teaching before the 1960's. Thus...new age religion interpretation.

 

[Truthnightmare]

Absolutely;
The..... new age religion...... teaching that baptism is not necessary is ruled null and void by Acts 2;38 Repent and be baptized....et al.
Now ad the many more supportive reference;

We can find nothing of such teaching before the 1960's. Thus...new age religion interpretation.

But that’s exactly my point, Interpretation.

John 3:5 .......Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

Born of water does not mean being baptized in water.
Let's look at the Scripture and follow the subject and the object. Who was Jesus speaking to? He was speaking to man that was alive, born of his mother from her womb. Her 'water broke' and he issued forth. Jesus tells this man that he must also be born from above (of the Spirit) to see the kingdom of God. ("born again" in the Greek is ‘born from above' - Strong's #509).

AGAIN: Greek word #509 anothen (an'-o-then);from 507; from above; by analogy, from the first; by implication, anew: KJV-- from above, again, from the beginning (very first), the top.​

The man, Nicodemus then speaks of the womb and Jesus does not correct him. Jesus acknowledges that man will not go through the womb for this second birth.

Jesus then removes all difficulty for us by telling Nicodemus in verse 6: "That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." Water baptism, while important, was simply not the subject in this Scripture. For water Baptism does not make one "born of the flesh," but the birth from the amniotic fluid of the womb does.

 

[gpresdo]

But that’s exactly my point, Interpretation.

John 3:5 .......Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

Born of water does not mean being baptized in water.
Let's look at the Scripture and follow the subject and the object. Who was Jesus speaking to? He was speaking to man that was alive, born of his mother from her womb. Her 'water broke' and he issued forth. Jesus tells this man that he must also be born from above (of the Spirit) to see the kingdom of God. ("born again" in the Greek is ‘born from above' - Strong's #509).


The man, Nicodemus then speaks of the womb and Jesus does not correct him. Jesus acknowledges that man will not go through the womb for this second birth.

Jesus then removes all difficulty for us by telling Nicodemus in verse 6: "That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." Water baptism, while important, was simply not the subject in this Scripture. For water Baptism does not make one "born of the flesh," but the birth from the amniotic fluid of the womb does.

But ...you see...John 3;5 is not the scripture which validates the requirement that Baptism is necessary. So, why then are you attempting to apply it here
? Only to try to establish a new age religion interpretation of scripture as relates to a new interpretation....my exact point.

Please comment on acts 2;38 ...Repent and be baptized... and other like scriptures?

 

[Truthnightmare]

But ...you see...John 3;5 is not the scripture which validates the requirement that Baptism is necessary. So, why then are you attempting to apply it here
? Only to try to establish a new age religion interpretation of scripture as relates to a new interpretation....my exact point.

Please comment on acts 2;38 ...Repent and be baptized... and other like scriptures?

8 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.
12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.
13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be
8 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.
12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.
13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

There is no mention of water baptism for a man’s salvation here.

 

[quietthinker]

Was Satan evil in Job 1:7?​

How is it that Job believed all his troubles originated with God? Who put that idea in his head?