Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
None of that matters. God is not a respecter of persons or tribes.
The true God, being Christ's ABBA, spoke through Moses and the Prophets,
not necessarily in the earlier stories.
No birthright, no race, and no tribe can esteem a man with God.
Hosea 2:23
And I will sow her unto me in the earth, and I will have mercy on her that was without mercy. And I will say to that which was not my people: Thou art my people: and they shall say: Thou art my God.
Interesting stuff and there are truth in what you say "yeshuasavedme" as there are scriptural evidence support your claims. There is just one thing that bothers me: if Adam was white and Eve black, how then could Adam have said: Flesh of my flesh and bone of my bones? (Genesis 2:23)
Is it because there were no other flesh (human flesh excluding the color of the skin) on earth except Adam or is it became Eve looked 100% (including skin color) like Adam but only in female form.
Interesting stuff and there are truth in what you say "yeshuasavedme" as there are scriptural evidence support your claims. There is just one thing that bothers me: if Adam was white and Eve black, how then could Adam have said: Flesh of my flesh and bone of my bones? (Genesis 2:23)
That's pretty obvious...She was a human being and not an animal, which he had gone though and could not find a mate suitable to him...Eve was therefore suitable because she came from him...
None of that matters. God is not a respecter of persons or tribes.
The true God, being Christ's ABBA, spoke through Moses and the Prophets,
not necessarily in the earlier stories.
No birthright, no race, and no tribe can esteem a man with God.
Hosea 2:23
And I will sow her unto me in the earth, and I will have mercy on her that was without mercy. And I will say to that which was not my people: Thou art my people: and they shall say: Thou art my God.
YLT
Hos 2:23 And I have sowed her to Me in the land, And I have pitied Lo-Ruhamah, And I have said to Lo-Ammi, My people thou art , and it saith, My God!'
TaNaKh
23.And it shall come to pass on that day, [that] I will answer, says the Lord; I will answer the heavens, and they shall answer the earth.
Rashi's Commentary:
I will answer the heavens: to pour upon the clouds from the rivulet of good that depends on My word. They will, in turn, answer to pour water upon the earth.
24.And the earth shall answer the corn and the wine and the oil, and they shall answer Jezreel.
Rashi's Commentary:
Jezreel: The people of the exile who were scattered and then in gathered.
25.And I will sow her for Me in the land, and I will have compassion upon the unpitied one, and I will say to them that are not My people, "You are My people," and they shall say, "[You are] my God."
Rashi's Commentary:
And I will sow her for Me in the land: As one who sows a se’ah in order to gather many korim, so will many proselytes be added to them. [from Pesachim 87b]
This is what the Hebrew scriptures say...Looks like it's not talking about Gentiles after all...It also looks as if some things are missing and changed in your OT...
It is not among the 66 books considered canonical.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
I assume it was God who chose the canonical ones, right Vizio???? Don't Catholics use 73??? Was God confused about which ones to canonize???
Correct Mystic, if it is not in THEIR bible it is NOT considered scripture. As you pointed out the RCC has more canonical books then the protestant bible and the Ethiopian bible contains the 1 book of Enoch.
The irony is vizio and those like him always quote where Paul says all scripture is inspired by God, then turn around and reject many of the books that were in the bible at that the time Paul made that statement.
But of course Paul was not correct according to them, the canonisation of the 66 books in the 1500 by a bunch of men were.
The Book of Enoch, in the Totemic imagery of the nations' dream visions, reveals that Adam was white, Eve black, Cain black, Abel red. Seth in the image/likeness of his papa means nothing more than Seth was the first white seed of Adam, born of Eve.
There was, in Enoch, no "yellow" or "green/olive" or purplish [some black skin tones] seed. Those variations of skin tone are from the mixed genetic information of Adam's genes, when the black and white melanin information is mixed in differing amounts. Red was the first mixture variation, in Abel.
The sons of the gods -the nephillim/titans- were "white", mostly blonde. When Noah was born, he was so white and shining, and spoke at birth, praising God, that his daddy, Lamech, accused his wife of fornicating with the fallen Watchers, and did not believe that Noah was his, for his whiteness. Lamech fled to his daddy, Methusaleh, to seek advice about why Noah was so white and shining and spoke. Methusaleh then fled to the gates of Eden to call out to Enoch, who was translated and dwelling with the holy Watcher angels, there. *
Methusaleh called out to Enoch from the gates of Eden; "Hear me"! "Hear Me"! "Hear me"! three times; and Enoch came to him and gave the prophetic assurance that Noah was indeed Lamech's seed, and would survive the flood, etc...
Then, in the dream visions of the history of the world, with the tribes depicted in totemic imagery, Noah's three sons were black, red, and white.
The tribes descending from the three sons of Noah and their multicolored wives were not separated by color, at Babel, but by tongues. Seventy tongues were the separation of the tribes, at Babel, and those tribes began to scatter out over the earth by tongue division, becoming more and more genetically isolated, and shrinking the gene pool for variations in physical characteristics, because of the scattering by language barriers.
As they scattered, and as the seventy tongues continued to divide like tree branches, to the five thousand plus of modern times, there was never a barrier made by skin color or any other physical characteristic, but by language.
Children were varying shades of colors, mixed from the first parents, the black Eve and white Adam.
As tribes scattered, they fought because of language barriers at first, but then because of any reason. Brother fought, and fights, brother, with no distinction of color. Black and middle brown Arabs fought black and middle brown blacks, enslaving them, in ancient times -and do in modern times.
Nimrod, the first tribal conqueror and dictator, and Nebuchadnezzar, his direct descendant, were both black. Nebuchadnezzar ruled the entire world, "wherever man, beast, and fowl dwelt" -the entire globe. Nebuchadnezzar was the first king of all the kings of the world, by conquest. Colossal images of the face of Nebuchadnezzar, the first one world/global ruler, who was called the "king of kings", by YHWH, in Daniel 4, have been dug up in Mexico, in the area of the Olmecs, who were waning in their culture's height of achievements, already, when Nebuchadnezzar ruled the kings -who ruled the kings... who ruled them.
All this is said to put to rest the idea of superiority of any skin color, in the eyes of the Creator, who made all Adam-kind of one blood, one flesh, one spirit, one bone, and male and female; and wrote each seed of Adam in the Book of Life, before creation, to come forth in the pre-ordained time, in the pre-ordained tribes/famlies, in the pre-ordained boundaries [days to live]of their "habitation [bodies]", as the Book of Enoch, the OT, and the NT teach us, "for His glory".
Malachi 2:15 -One Adam spirit [each seed come to fruit has their own share/remnant of the Adam spirit].
Genesis 5:2 One Adam kind/race, made Male and female.
Genesis 2: 23; Acts 17: 25,26. One Adam kind flesh, one Adam kind bone, one Adam kind blood [the blood is made from the bone marrow]; male and female persons make one flesh.
Abraham had two black wives/ishyah, in the course of his life; Hagar and Keturah. Sarai was white.
Moses married a black wife in Cush/Ethiopia, but never went in to her. The marriage was for politicical expediency. When Moses took the throne of Cush, he got the late king's wife [Jasher -"And all the people and nobles swore unto him to give him for a wife Adoniah the queen, the Cush -ite/Ethiopian, wife of Kikianus, and they made Moses king over them on that day. Book of Jasher 72 ]. Miriam was struck with leprosy for speaking against Moses because of the Ethiopian wife he had married [he had also left her in Ethiopia, when her son grew up, who was the late king's heir, who took the throne. Moses departed in peace, with gifts from the Chus -ites, to Midian].
In Midian, Moses married Zipporah, a Midianite, descended from Abraham through the Canaanite woman, Keturah, whom he married after Sarah died. Only in Jasher is the story told of the Egyptian wife of Moses which is mentioned in Exodus. Jasher. What is told in Jasher is redacted in Moses' Genesis record. -And I believe there is enoguh evidence in Jasher to prove that Moses wrote Jasher -the Correct/Upright record", as the longer form of history, which he does redact for the Torah, esp his own history.
Joseph married a black Egyptian wife, and many of the sons of Jacob took Canaanite wives, and the shades of skin colors varied, then, as they do today, in the descendants of Jacob, who have among themselves Asian Jews, black African Jews, and "white" European Jews, among others, and red, olive, black and white skin tones among the tribes -with all manner of variations of the skin tones and hair, eyes, etc.
* Mount Eden: the heavenly realm/Mount Zion above, which Adam was cast out from and gated from entering into, which gate was guarded by Cherubim with flaming swords, so that no Adam could enter and eat of the Tree of Life and live forever in the unclean Adam flesh. For if they had, there would be no hope for redemption by cleansing and rebirth of Spirit and Flesh, for the Glory to dwell in them, which glory Adam lost, at the fall.
Why do you think that both the Jewish and Christians rejected the book of Enoch as either inspired or canonical?
Correct Mystic, if it is not in THEIR bible it is NOT considered scripture. As you pointed out the RCC has more canonical books then the protestant bible and the Ethiopian bible contains the 1 book of Enoch.
The irony is vizio and those like him always quote where Paul says all scripture is inspired by God, then turn around and reject many of the books that were in the bible at that the time Paul made that statement.
But of course Paul was not correct according to them, the canonisation of the 66 books in the 1500 by a bunch of men were.
When Paul said that, the only texts considered Scriptural were Jewish.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
