The totally "unoriginal" beginning of "Original sin."

You are right, that was terribly worded.

I was trying to say that we need to put others needs before ours, that is what God wants. When we put our needs before others, it puts us as gods.

God doesn’t have needs, but He is a jealous God. He doesn’t like when we try to take His glory.

Example, the writing on the wall. Belshazzar who was prideful and didn’t give God the glory, it was all taken from Him, and other kings before and after him.

If you give to the poor or love others not for God’s glory, that is all the reward you get, a warm feeling or approval of men. Which is fleeting, and leaves you always wanting/needing more.

But when you love others of give to the poor, acknowledging that God has blessed you with all you have and allows you to give to them, and He gets the glory, you will receive a peace and joy, that only He can give. You won’t need to chase more, you are filled. Yet you still give more, our of the love of God pouring out of you.

I don’t think He needs the glory, but I do think that it all belongs to Him. I think that is why everything was created. The stars declare His glory, the mountains too. Anything that does what it was designed by Him to do, proclaims His glory. God being able to show His love for us through His Son dying to save us, was for His glory.

I agree, He desires our love, the 2 greatest commandments are to love. But to love Him first, then others. In loving others, we are loving and glorifying Him. Others can see His glory in us, it isn’t us that love comes from, therefor we do not deserve the glory.

I also agree, man should not seek glory, he deserves none of it. Blessings and grace is what we get, though what we deserve is fear misery, we deserve to be our own gods and have no love in us and we deserve hell. Thanks to the loving mercy of God, we don’t get what we do deserve, and He deserves all the glory for that.

Sorry, Christians don’t believe that God has any needs. If you choose not to believe this, that’s up to you.

I didn’t have much time to write last time, I but I wanted to get something out quick, since that what I did say was not at all what I was intending to get out. But I wanted to add this.

James 4:6 “God opposes the proud but shows favor to the humble”
Prov 3:34 “He mocks proud mockers but shows favor to the humble and oppressed”

When you are prideful and take care of your needs first, or don’t thank God for what He gave you, you are actually going against God Himself. When you are humble, realize that we are nothing without Him, and we have nothing without Him, realize that others are more important than you.

Phil 2:3 “Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves,”

That is why Jesus washed His disciples feet. I don’t think Jesus wasn’t thinking “Oh man, I hate washing feet, this is below me, but I will do it out of ‘love’”.
I do think Jesus was thinking “I value their needs above my own, for humility glorifies my Father, therefore, I will wash there feet.”

Col 3:7
“And whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.”

1 Cor 10:31
“So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God.”

Though I do believe that God can be changed, His mind is changed quite a few times in the scriptures after pleading. It reminds me of my kinds, and I change my mind sometimes. I don’t think God is caught off guard or responding in fear, but I do think He is a personal God who does change His mind. I don’t think His ultimate will, will be changed, but the minutia could be. My kid is still going to school in the morning, but if they want to change their outfit, and there is time, and they are persistent and polite about it, I might let them change outfits.

I never meant to imply that. But if we are to become our own gods, then that is to say that He does not exist. This is why it was the 1st commandment, to have no other gods before Him…including us.

We know He is jealous for us, and our love. Rightly jealous, like a husband should be for his wife. This isn’t the Hollywood jealousy of distrust and paranoia. Rather when we speak our vows, we are saying that our intimate love belongs to each other, and no one else.

"Exodus 6:6-7 I am the Lord, and I will bring you out from under the yoke of the Egyptians. I will free you from being slaves to them, and I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and with mighty acts of judgment. I will take you as my own people, and I will be your God.

I will bring you out
I will redeem you
I will rescue you
I will take you as my own

When a Israelite audience heard those phrases, they weren’t just thinking rescue. But those were the four phrases used in an Israelite marriage vow.

God is calling out His bride. That is why the 1st commandment is have no other God but me, I’m a jealous God. He wants our affection, your mine and only mine."

He doesn’t need our love, He doesn’t need our glory or praise, but He deserved our love, and He deserves all glory and praise.

I don’t want to make this one too long, but I’m not sure if I believe this any more. You can refer to this thread There was no fall (almost) - #15 by still_learning for more discussion on that topic.

He is using two different analogies here. One, is to show humans, that we should not think of one as more deserving or better than the other, we are all God’s children, all having different jobs/lives, all equally important.

The other analogy is speaking of roles in a way we can comprehend.

God needs us like the Mona Lisa or Lamborghini (insert any beautiful peace of art/design greatly admired) needs it’s admirers. It would be a shame for those things to be created, and have no one know about them or be able to appreciate them. BUT, if no one knew about them, they are still the most beautiful and impressive feats, the car still produces 1000hp.

God is so amazing and deserves so much praise and glory, humans and the universe had to be made, for people to realize and appreciate who He is. BUT, God would still be everything He is if humans had not been made, it just wouldn’t have been as known of proclaimed. Though I am sure every angel who did know God would still be praising Him for all long as they existed, His face would still have been impossibly glorious to look upon.

God is invisible/unknowable. Like a child playing hide-and-go-seek. They want to be found, they want you to struggle slightly (which kind of shows them how bad you want to find them), but they ultimately want to be found. God is the same way, He wants to be found, He gives us hints and glimpse of Him. Ultimately revealing Himself to us in flesh at one point. But we can’t know of see Him because He is too much for us to handle, but He still wants us to find Him and seek Him.

But He does not need us. He is immortal, immortal beings don’t need feet, or hands, or any bodily form, they just are, they exist. “I AM, who I AM”.

You had me…until you said “available to those who reciprocate”. Just like God had Hosea marry a harlot, who didn’t reciprocate his love, but Hosea was to still love her. This is to demonstrate that God loves us, no matter how unfaithful we are. He can’t not love us, He is love.

I was just trying to lighten the environment a bit.

Let me try to re-word that. God created our purpose to give Him glory, we can only do this when we allow Him to live through us. We have two sides pulling at war. Needs of the flesh, and needs of the spirit. the flesh is temporary, a vessel on earth evolved. And the spirit is eternal, it is from God (this original blessing). We have a yearning inside us to allow Him to live through us (the eternal spiritual side), and when we don’t, we feel empty and unsatisfied (living for the temporary flesh side). We, like the Tower of Babel, try to “make a name for ourselves” as opposed to giving God the glory and trying to make His name known.

We are putting our fleshly needs before what our spiritual needs are. Maybe that is better than saying putting our needs before His. And in that, we are making flesh more important than our spirit. The flesh loves success, power, pride, the spirit loves God, and is manifested as joy, love, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, self control, humility, submission, praise of God. These attributes are fruits of the spirit, they come from us putting God first. We can’t try to be loving, we will fail, the law shows us this, the flesh is weak. We can’t try to be humble, we will fail. The only way to achieve these fruits, is through God, God brings about the fruits in us. That is what I mean by all good things come from God.

Theo, this is my honest problem I have with your post: It appears that you rely exclusively on the inspiration given to the ancient peoples who wrote Scripture–and our correct interpretation of it. I would rather believe that God intends us to use science as an additional source and, since it is self-correcting, any ‘mistakes’ tend to be temporary. (e.g. the ‘phlogiston’ theory of combustion.)

Can you deny that this interpretation of Genesis 1 has led to centuries of misogyny?

As a scientist using “Occam’s razor”, there is NO evidence-- other than Scripture–that supports pure spirits (Angels) having intercourse with human females. Is that belief an essential component of finding out God’s purpose in creating humankind? IMHO it is not important, except for the fact that it misleads us as to God’s true nature and his purpose for us.

I totally agree. Except I have found that in spending a lifetime in science studies, I have had access to another source of God’s OWN words.
Al Leo

[quote=“aleo, post:44, topic:38429, full:true”]

Theo, this is my honest problem I have with your post: It appears that you rely exclusively on the inspiration given to the ancient peoples who wrote Scripture–and our correct interpretation of it. I would rather believe that God intends us to use science as an additional source and, since it is self-correcting, any ‘mistakes’ tend to be temporary. (e.g. the ‘phlogiston’ theory of combustion.)[/quote]

“Self-correcting?” Suppose I give you an example from Inspiration that Science did NOT “self-correct?”

“Science” tells us “Man” is related (descended from) Apes, because of close similarity through DNA similarity.

Inspiration tells us in early Genesis, that God separated dry land from the Sea.

Dry land, while still in the sea, constituted a common DNA pool, implying a common creator, not a common DNA line.

Upon a time, the earth was flat. Inspiration told us very early on, about the “Circle of the Earth.”

The problem I am having, is the fact that many Scientists are brilliant to a fault. They begin to believe in their own understanding.

Can you deny that this interpretation of Genesis 1 has led to centuries of misogyny?[/quote]

Absolutely! It is not the interpretation that has cause the problem, it is the egoes of Men who consider themselves God’s assistants.

[quote=“Theo_Book, post:38, topic:38429”]
the “habitation” abandoned by the Angels who left heaven to co-habit with daughters of Men.[Gen 6] [/quote]

As a scientist using “Occam’s razor”, there is NO evidence-- other than Scripture–that supports pure spirits (Angels) having intercourse with human females. Is that belief an essential component of finding out God’s purpose in creating humankind? IMHO it is not important, except for the fact that it misleads us as to God’s true nature and his purpose for us.

That assumes conclusions not even recognized let alone considered. We have no evidence against it, but more than enough for it.

Consider: God prophesied that Israel would be in exile in captivity, and would be sent back to Israel to repair the temple and the city walls; and further, that the foreign king would pay the expenses.

Israel was not even in conflict when the prophecy was made.

Over two hundred years passed, and Israel was indeed in exile in captivity, and the king did send them back to repair the temple, and the walls of the city, and paid the expenses.

But the most impressive point was, God named the king two hundred years before the king existed; and it was not a dynasty name. It was Cyrus, King of Persia. THAT serves as evidence worthy of consideration and contemplation.

[quote=“Theo_Book, post:38, topic:38429”]
But if we listen to God’s OWN words, we see a theme presented that is amazing in scope and in depth and in meaning.[/quote]

I totally agree. Except I have found that in spending a lifetime in science studies, I have had access to another source of God’s OWN words.
Al Leo [/quote]

As have I. I accept results from scientific research, analysis, and invention. I do not accept results from musings, opinions, and failed experiments. Like DNA 5 shared with apes.

Yes, Theo, through this Forum many scriptural scholars have found that interacting with scientists have enriched their understanding of both the Old and New Testaments, just as many scientists (yours truly amongst them) have reached a better understanding of how our Universe works by learning more about how Scripture informs thoughtful readers. Biologos was founded upon the conviction that it was a mistake to choose one or the other–in combination they can lead to a better understanding of what God wills for us humans and for the world we live in.

I respect the fact that you do not have a correct view of how science operates (as evidenced from the quotation above), and so I fear you are missing out on the wider appreciation of the Glory of our Creator that can be had from Scripture alone. But regardless of that, you seem to have constructed a Worldview that satisfies you and gives your life a purpose. So why “fix what ain’t broken?”

Al Leo

It is possible you have mistaken my ramblings for knowledge. Not so. I not only am NOT a scientist, I am not even a student thereunto. I just listen to some few illogical offerings from some who mistake science for God. There is even one website where there is an invitation, offering a prize for a solution to Man’s capability to originate Human life.

My response was simply to begin with what was already there, (like previous experiments with test-tube babies), but they wan an original recipe for developing Human life. I point out it will not be “Human” life, but will rather be Human’s life. (Product of Human, not result Human)

Anyway, interesting conversation…

This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.