Genesis

[@SeerSeekingTruth]

If you were to suddenly hear voices that do not belong to you or what you ppl now call “schizophrenia” and this voice tells you to write an “inspired” book. Would you do it? How would you verify the source? How would you determine whether what you are being told is the truth? People are hearing voices nonstop and are talking about this all over the internet, they are hearing actual voices from someone… who the voices belong to no one truly knows. Religious people call them mentally ill yet all of you worship books that came from this exact source. Think about that.

[@GalynWiemers]

True, I agree. I know nothing about "voices" and I do not defend books written under the inspiration of "voices". I agree a voice in my head that is not mine would most likely be a mental disease or, more likely, demonic activity. What I teach and defend are historical documents written by people who had some kind of actual encounter or interaction with YHWH. The list is extensive, but here are a few that can be considered much more than a mystical voice caused by mental illness or demons: 1- Adam encounters the actual Lord in Genesis 2 2- Abraham meets, eats and spends time with a physical manifestation of YHWH in Genesis 18 3- Moses on several occasions saw the Lord, spoke with the Lord, took dictation from the Lord who appeared to him beginning in Exodus 2 4- A group of Israelites were confronted by the Lord at Bokim and physically saw and heard him speak in Judges 2 5- Ezekiel was terrified (as was Daniel and others) when the glory of the Lord moved into their physical reality and they recorded the encounter, the appearance and the words in Ezekiel 1. This discussion can go on and on along with illustrations and examples including the most important being the Lord taking on flesh to engage the human experience in order to save mankind from death and the forces of darkness (such as demonic voices in your head). I teach from the text of these books with actual encounters with YHWH (Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Psalms, Jeremiah, Matthew, Acts, Romans, Revelation). I do not teach modern day "voices" or books written by demon possessed humanity. These deviant types of books existed in the ancient world and people who are demon possessed or mentally sick are still writing these types of books. Thank you for drawing a clear distinction between the text of Scripture and mere mystical books written under the inspiration of Satan or sickness. Great comment!

[@earlysda]

Why does the presenter flippantly dismiss the real truth of the matter - that the godly men of Seth's line married the ungodly women of Cain's line? His reason that this position means that God didn't know what would happen is ridiculously mistaken.

[@GalynWiemers]

false assessment of the class. 1) Genesis 6:6 is not presented here as evidence for or against the "good boys" (Seth's line) marrying the "naughty girls" (Cain's line). Genesis 6:1-2, talking about the "sons of God" and the "daughters of men" is not connected to the philosophical, theological implications of Genesis 6:6 - "the LORD regretted that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart." 2) Genesis 6:6 is used by some people to support the idea that God does not know the future. Which the presenter here clearly rejects and uses phrases like "the alpha and the omega" to refute this false idea. 3) The "good boys" (Seth's line) marrying the "naughty girls" (Cain's line) is presented as one of three possible understanding of the phrases "sons of God" and "daughters of men". This IS dismissed by the presenter as the weakest of the three possible interpretations. The second option interprets "sons of God" as royal children of the kings forming harems of women from the common, middle class ("daughters of men"). This is also rejected because royal kings were considered throughout the ancient world as a "son of God", but the sons of a king were never referred to in the ancient world or in Scripture as plural "sons of God". The third option is hard to accept, but is the most intriguing, which is the "sons of God" (bene elohim) were angelic beings. This is not a solid interpretation, but does allow the reader to make some connections to a wide variety of verses and concepts in the Bible. 4) The presenter makes it clear that these verses are hard to come to a solid, unarguable position due to apparently missing information or a lacking of the original author's perspective. 5) It is hard to sustain the position that God regretted making mankind because good boys married naughty girls. And, because of these marriages, and the resulting sin, God destroyed the whole earth (except Noah and seven others). - Today we still have the godly marrying into the families of the unbelievers. - We also still have, as they did throughout the Old Testament period, royal sons with harems filled with women. - So, Noah's flood did not resolve either of those problems. - But, if the angels infiltrated the blood line of the seed of woman that was promised in the Garden to be the source of humanities' salvation, then the Flood did put an end to that corruption and preserved the pure line of humanity through Noah. Thus, keeping alive the promise that the seed of the woman would bruise the serpent's head through Shem, Abraham and the nation of Israel. 6) Again, the presenter has a preference, but several times admits he does not have all the answers to these verses which include apparently four separate groups: - sons of God - daughters of men - offspring of the union of the sons of God and the daughters of men which were the "heroes of old, the men of renown" - and, a fourth, separate group, called Nephilim which literally means "the fallen ones" that are not sons of God, daughters of man, nor their offspring 7) Stay tuned, I'll be talking about this more next week...but, I will still be wishing for more insight. But, whoever wrote this comment reminds me of the mainstream media reporting the news. Did you even listen to the message without talking on the phone in the drive-through ordering coffee while scrolling through social media to post memes. This statement made in the comment above is itself ridiculous since I did not teach it and it would be a "ridiculous mistake" for me to teach this: "His reason that this position means that God didn't know what would happen is ridiculously mistaken." 8) Also, all the so called "godly men of Seth's line" (which would have been in the millions by Noah's generation) all perished in God's Flood judgment. So, they were not all that godly. At least, God wasn't impressed with Seth's line, other than Noah and, maybe, Shem, Ham and Japheth. Seth's line died right alongside Cain's line of Jabal, Jubal, Tubal-cain and Namah. Let's try again next week! Thanks for listening.

[@earlysda]

@@GalynWiemers 42:20 You specifically say that the first option is "ridiculous". Yet it is the correct option. . I will not be watching another video from you, as I value the Holy Bible. Please repent and humble yourself, and ask the Holy Spirit to give you insight into the holy words, as all the Bible is breathed in by the Holy Spirit.

[@GalynWiemers]

@@earlysda thank you for considering my reply with an open mind. I appreciate your fervor for the Lord, the Word of God and holiness. Thank you being willing to speak to me with conviction. This is very much needed in our Western world and in our institutional church. Sincerely, thank you. I would like to add to your comment by saying that I did not only call the first option "ridiculous", I think I followed that by also saying it was stupid. I guess I wanted to make sure no one thought I believe God sent the Flood because good boys married the naughty girls. Surely, something bigger than that was going on. We will know soon, that I am sure! Hang on!! Stay strong, and thank you for giving my Bible teaching an honest, open minded hearing.