Buzsaw's Belief Statement

As I debate counterparts on the Substantiating The Validity Of Bible Prophecy thread and many others it has become apparant from much of the talk that many are assuming a whole lot about Buzsaw and the Buzsaw Hypothesis that is not factual. So as for folks who debate and disuss matters with me this may help to clear up much of what folks are assuming about Buzsaw that just is not true.

1. I am not a Seventh Day Adventist. I am the member of no church. I have attended many churches, all 1st day ones such as Baptist, Christian & Missionary Alliance, undenominational Bible churches, Undenom. Community churches, United Methodist, Wesleyan Methodist, and various other undenominational et al for most of my Christian life since age 10 when I became a Christian. For the past four years I've been faithfully attending sabbath school and worship services at a 7th day evangelical Baptist church.

2. I do not ascribe to much of the prophecy teaching of Hal Lindsey and most of the more notable evangelic preachers and teachers.

3. Most teach a pre-tribulation rapture. I do not.

4. Most teach a revived 10 nation Roman empire. I do not. It is a global empire of 10, likely either heads of a ten regional earth or ten unidentified who pull the puppet strings so to speak. I never have taught a revived Roman Empire. This is why they were wrong on the EU.

5. Most say the first beast of Revelation 13 is the antichrist. I do not. It is the 2nd beast of Revelation 13. There's a big difference.

6. None that I know of agree with me on global warming.

7. None that i know of agree with me on the Vatican relative to Rev 17, 18.

8. 7th Day Adventists believe that the Vatican = antichrist entity. I do not.

9. Nearly all except 7th day Adventists look for an imminent(can happen any time) rapture. I do not. More needs to happen before this event.

9. Most do not believe that antichrist will be a Muslim as I do but some are coming on board on that as the events beging to indicate. I've been saying he will be Muslim on every board I've participated in which is four including EvC.

10. Most are YEC's. I am not. I am however a YCC, which is a Young Creature Creationist, meaning all creatures were created roughly six milleniums ago.

11. Nearly all say that God/Jehovah, the father, Jesus the son and the Holy Spirit are persons. I do not. Jesus is the only person by definition of the trinity. Nor do they have 3 personalities, et al.

12. Most join churches. I do not on the basis of how they are set up, but I very religiously attend them each and every week at least for Sabbath or Sunday school and worship service.

13. On church government et al, I'm pretty much a loner doctrinally. As per the NT, , imo, the church pastors were not professional one man churchmen doing all the stuff professional pastors do today. I believe they had pastors (plural) in each church, men who were able to do the preaching. They had a bishop/overseer who acted as a president would in a secular organization. They also had deacons who ministered in various ways. They had evangelists who traveled and preached around, evangelizing and they had teachers, prophets, et al in the churches. The only ones of these who were professional with pay, imo were the evangelists and apostles/missionaries who needed to travel and receive support, not being in one location to make a living. The blanket word depicting all of these men ws the word elders, which simply means older ones and often in both OT and NT was used in reference to the older ruling men of Israel and of the NT church. As I read the epistles, this is how I see it. None of the churchmen of the churches I've been in see this as I do. I do not get on my soap box and try to change them as I know it aintagona happen so we get along ok. My present pastor knows my thinking and respects me for it. He who is a PHD listens and learns from me with no degree and I learn from him. We both agree that "iron sharpens iron," and get along great as we study together.

14. Most refer to Jesus as God perse. I always refer to God/Jehovah as the both god and father exactly as Jesus referred to him always. Both the OT and the NT refer to God as the god and father of messiah/Jesus and the NT referrs to Jesus as the son of God the father. I say keep it as written and don't obfuscate the trinity by muddling the terms. Each member of the trinity has a unique and separate function. God is the father/god/majesty of the Universe. Jesus is the son of God, the mediatior/high priest between God and men and is lord/master of all believers to whom we will give an account to in the judgement one day. The Holy Spirit is the spirit of both the father and the son and the only multipresent member of the trinity who the God sends into the universe to effect the work which the God wants done.

15. Most pray to all three members of the trinity. I pray only to the father/God just as Jesus taught we should and as the apostles did.

The above items are some things that come to mind. Feel free to ask about other matters.

If an admin wishes to promote this I imagine the Coffee House is the forum for it.

(abe: In Jehovah God's Universe; time, energy and boundless space had no beginning and will have no ending. The universe, by and through him, is, has always been and forever will be intelligently designed, changed and managed by his providence.) buzsaw

Edited by Buzsaw, : No reason given.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

Hi again, Anglagard. Thanks much for the concise response dealing with the specifics and not generalizations. This is the kind of response which makes for interesting and productive dialog. :cool:

anglagard writes: Considering the prosriptions in the Bible against false prophets, I am surprised you would ascribe to any of the prophecy teaching of Hal Lindsey. Also, he sure got it wrong IIRC in Late Great Planet Earth as the US was not attacked by the alliance of the Soviet Union and Iran in 1997. Why bet on a horse named "slowpoke?"

I don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. I only throw out the contaminated water. Brother Hal had a weekly program on TBN before he and brother Crouch departed ways. I watched him quite often and much of the current event related stuff he weighed in on relative to Biblical prophecy was quite good. It's the stuff yet to be fulfilled like the rapture and the beast/Roman empire et al that he's so wrong scripturally on. He's not alone on that to by a long shot. The problem is that he and so many got their excatology/prophecy stuff from reading books of people way back in the days when nearly all evangelicals used the Scoffield footnoted Bibles. Scoffield's notes, unfortunately became in effect like part of the Bible to them. People began to write lots of prophecy books and evangelists began preaching based on the Scoffield interpretations of the prophecies in his footnotes rather than doing their own homework and studying exactly what the Biblical prophets were writing.

During the earlier years of my prophecy studies I made this same mistake, reading every prophecy book I could get my hands on. I read and studied the Bible also and it wasn't long before I began to see problems in what most of the books were saying and what I was reading in the scripture itself on them. Revelation 1:3 promised a blessing on those who read, heard and kept that which was written, so I began to be enlightened on prophecy as I studiously read the scrptures on a given subject over and over, comparing scripture with scripture and outlining what I read. The more I did this, the more I left off with reading books and honed in on scripture itself. You might say I became pretty much a one book man on prophecy getting it from the Bible itself.

I need to head out for Sabbath school and church worship now, so I'll get back to your excellent message and respond to more, hopefully later today. Take care.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

anglagard writes: Considering you believe your religion should come from the Bible, this would be an entirely consistent position. My understanding is that this 'rapture' business is not in the Bible but rather an invention of overly excited fundamentalists, most recently exemplified by the Left Behind series from the dominionist La Haye. .............................................................................Perhaps you can tell me where in the Bible it mentions any 'rapture.'

"Rapture" is simply a one word non-Biblical word to depict a Biblical doctrine/term of being caught up or gathered up, referring to when Jesus sends his angels to gather them up from earth to heaven as per Mark 13:27 and be caught up in the clouds... as per I Thessalonians 4:17, et al. It's definitely a term depicting sound Biblical doctrine. The problem arises as to whether it's been imminent all these centuries or whether certain events must happen before it can happen. More specifically for our time is whether it comes before the tribulation or after that which is a matter for another thread sometime. For many years I have had a standing offer of $1000 to the first person to prove that pretribulation doctrine is scriptural. The interesting thing about this is that even though I often present this challenge and offer to preachers, evangelists and authors, hardly any one of them even tries to collect. Bottom line is that they can't. I open that offer up to anyone right here at EvC. If anyone wishes to come on here and prove that the Bible teaches a pre-tribulation rapture I will make my identity known to them and pay up. LOL.

The NT clearly teaches a post tribulation rapture.

anglagard writes: Well, I must admit your position makes more sense than others although IMHO Revelations is basically, and perhaps intentionally, unintelligible.

Guess what. Short hand, trigonometry, quantum theory and many more studies are unintelligible to me as well. That is not to say that if I were to put my mind to mastering any of these I could not do it. It's the same with the book of Revelation. I determined as a youth to master it as best I could with God's help, as it was written to be understood by as scripture puts it him that has an ear to hear. I've went at it as an Olympian athletic aspirant would go at a beloved sport. I'm still learning from it and will likely never master it fully. It's not for one or two time readings by novices.

The problem with the Hal Lindseys and others is that they think by reading books on the prophecies and having a doctorate on religion they become masters of the prophecies rather than checking out the doctrines taught in the books as well as the colleges and seminaries as to whether these popular interpretations are compatible with scripture itself.

anglagard writes: So far as I know, I must agree that your opinion is unique.

One reason this is so is that most evangelicals, like myself are polically conservatives and most political conservatives have not bought into global warming. Even before it became a reality I believed it would happen solely on the basis of Biblical prophecy. It is now becoming so much of a reality that few can seriously deny it. It's all over the weather channel, the mainline news and science arenas.

anglagard writes: Glad to hear that. Having married into a Catholic family, I consider such Catholic-bashing to be both bigoted and unchristian.

Well, my friend, have you read what Revelation 18 and 19 says about Mystery Babylon? I'm afraid that you may not be so glad to hear that imo it's not the antichrist system. However, please understand that I admire many Catholic folks like Allan Keys, Bill Bennet and Newt Gingrich, et al and have many Catholic friends when I tell you what my sincere and forthright interpretation of these scriptures is. Imo, Mystery Babylon is the harlot woman of these chapters which is drunken with the blood of the saints and which has in history committed fornication with the kings of the earth and which will be destroyed in one hour some day as per Rev 18.

Jar wants me to do a thread on it sometime and I hope to do that. The problem is that folks falsely accuse me of being a Catholic basher when I've done it in the past when in fact, like my study of Islam, all I'm doing is presenting facts, both historical and presently to substantiate how I interpret scripture, et al.

Well, this partially explains some of this anti-Muslim venom I've been seeing lately. So I take it "Love your enemies" is off the radar?

See? This is what I mean. I present documented facts about Islam and those facts become anti-Muslim venom by you people. Loving Muslims is not patting them on their ideological backs and telling them their ideology is hunkydory. As wise old Solomon wrote in his wonderful Proverbs, Faithful are the wounds of a friend, but the kisses of an enemy are deceitful I do not hate Muslims. For them and for the good of our nation and all, I present the facts so as to warn from danger ahead. The day before 9/11 I was on the old now defunct Newsmax forum debating a Muslim chap as to whether Islam was a violent religion or not. Wendya, the chief honcho of the forum sided with the Muslim and in that thread I got all this bunk about me being a Muslim basher from nearly all participants. Well, little did I know that that thread would end suddenly with the 9/11 disaster, presenting the terrible show and tell evidence to support my position.

anglagard writes: If I had the slightest idea of what this meant, I would be able to comment. Please elaborate.

YEC, of course means young earth creationist and as I've stated YCC (buzzism) means young creature creationist.

I've explained my position in the past more than once on this, but I'll try to briefly clarify for you. The sun, moon and at least some of the stars, likelyly, imo, our Milky way stars were created sometime during day four. One of the purposes of these was to determine the days, months and seasons, et al. This means that imo, the duration of the days before day five had nothing to determine their duration, including plant life. Thus the birds, fishes, animals, insects and man were all created after day four which was determined by the sun and moon. Biblical cronology as per the given generations of man goes back about 6000 years is correct. So you might say I'm a YCC creationist. Savvy?

anglagard writes: As to points 11, 14, and 15, I find the concept of the trinity confusing and have yet to see an explanation I can even begin to understand. Until then, most Christians just seem to run with whatever their understanding is, as you seem to be doing.

You're certainly not alone here, my friend. For that matter, the majority of doctors of divinity in the pulpits and seminaries are confused on this doctrine and pass on their confusion to their students and parishoners.

If you do a comprehensive study on the members of the trinity from scripture itself you will find a treasuretrove of information. If you sort it all out and outline it, comparing scripture with scripture, you'll discover the following:

1. The word trinity is simply a single non-Biblical word to depict God/Jehovah/father/majesty and creator of the universe, God's son, Jesus, lord and master of all God's children who've been born spiritually into Gods kingdom by receiving Jesus, sacrificial sacrifice for sin, high priest/mediator between God and men and coming messiah/king of Israel to rule and reign in Israel on Mt Zion/Temple Mount (as per Zionism) and the Holy Spirit who is the only multipresent member of the trinity and who is the spirit of both God the father, Jesus the son and who indwells those who've been "born again" literally born from above having received Jesus as lord and savior, i.e. having received the spirit of Jesus who now sits on the right hand of the father in Heaven.

Clear as mud? I hope not. I tried to be concise so as not to steer the thread off course.

As to the rest, have no comment other than to say you appear to be a more independent thinker than I was giving you credit for, although I still disagree with much of your interpretation of God as it pertains to my life.

Well, stay tuned. We'll see if we can fix that problem for you. :D

anglagard writes: However, a I stated before, if it works for you, I have no complaint provided you do not attempt to impose your religious beliefs upon me by force.

When have you ever been forced by a fundamentalist Christian or threatened by force as to what you may believe. I'd like to hear about it. Voting and campaigning for ideologically compatible candidates, et al is the American way. I say you get busy and work to get your people in office and I'll do the same. As per the American way, whoever wins at the polls calls many of the shots withing the perameters of the laws and Constitution. Our side lost the right to do much in government that our forefathers in government practiced because your kind of people won out at the polls. You people have thus been able to out perform our side at the polls for so long now that we can no longer teach our stuff in the schools as the founding fathers did. So please don't say we're imposing anything on you people. You're doing fine expanding your ideology on the kids in schools et al. In fact a few decades ago what your ideological people accomplished is why the majority of the folks on this board have registered athiest. Our people failed to work hard at the polls, et al.

Edited by Buzsaw, : No reason given.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

Ringo writes: Me too. I'm wondering where you stand on The FallTM and Original Sin, since I don't recall ever hearing those terms in those churches.

I've heard a lot about the fall and the original sin in the churches which I've attended for any significant length of time. However I never heard the fall referenced as FallTM. I know this term is used in reference to other things as well but do not know what it's significance is.

As for my belief of the fall and the original sin, I take the whole enchilada as written, so all you need do is read the account, all of it and there you have my answer to your question.

Ringo writes: If more "needs" to happen before the rapture, how can you know the timescale of those events? That is, how can you "predict" that the "end" is coming "soon"?

I've aluded to this a number of times in the threads.

1. Israel must be reinstated as a nation full of Jews and unoccupied by gentile nations as per Jesus in the Olivet Discourse (Matt 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21 and prophesied by several OT prophets. This is what I consider to be the most important sign. This is why so many were so wrong before 1948 over the centuries who erroneously claimed the end time was near.

2. Jesus mentioned some other items and advised that when you see the things he talked about beginning to come to pass the time is near.

3. Now when you corroborate the regathering of Israel/Jews by a significant amount of other corroborating latter day stuff which was prophesied both in the OT and NT you begin to say, "duh, the end must be near." :)

Ringo writes: I'm curious as to how long you've believed that the antiChrist will be a Muslim.

It was a gradual inclination. A number of years ago I began to read up on Islam since I support Voice of the Martyrs who help persecuted Christians Islamic nations such as the Sudan. I learned that Muhammed after death was carried to the Temple Mount on a winged horse where he alegedly ascended to Heaven. He is prophesied to be the first of the dead to be resurrected and will be the one to assemble and effect the resurrection of all the other dead.

I see these claims as similar to what is prophesied about Christ, horse and all. Islam essentially promotes antichrist doctrine and pro-Mohammed replacing Jesus with Mohammed as the prime focus of their allegience and their lord/master. This all bodes as very antichrist imo.

Ringo writes: It seems to me that nobody gave "the Muslims" a second thought until the Ayatollahs took over Iran. Was your "conclusion" foresight or hindsight?

Probably some of both. The more prominent Islam emerged in recent decades, the more I became convince of the antichrist connection. For most of my life however, I never considered this hypothesy.

Ringo writes: (By the way, you can avoid having two number 9s by using a dBCode list.)

Thanks for the advice, good bud. I'll look into this after posting.

Ringo writes: I don't see any significant difference. "All creatures were created roughly six milleniums ago" is a non-starter just as YECism is.

The difference is that I only have the creatures as young whereas YEC's generally have the whole universe as young. That, imo, is just nutty thinking and leaves God with nothing around him and nothing to do except for the last six milleniums. When I confront my good YEC brethren with this I usually get this blank look or some flimsy nonsensical thing like "we'll know the answer when we get to Heaven" et al.

Even the BB creationists have a problem with this. At the end of a lecture at a local college a number of years ago by one of these folks who went about to explain an ID 20 billion year old God made universe, I raised my hand at question time and asked what God was doing before the BB with nothing around him and nothing to do for all eternity before the alleged BB. He had about the same sort of non-answer, shrugging it off as inexplicable.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

Herepton writes: The Bible most certainly teaches pre-trib rapture. If the Church suffers in the Great Trib. then the sacrifice of Christ was in vain. The purpose of the GT is to punish the world for rejecting the Messiah.

Hi Ray. Imo, you're confusing the GT with the wrath of God. The GT is against Christians. Pretrib folks usually refer these as the "tribulation saints," i.e. some other poor souls who after the rapture become saints and get the axe. The tribulation is not the wrath of God. It's when the beast/world power makes war with the Christians as per Revelation 13:7. Nowhere in the NT is a 7 year GT prophesied. It's a time which begins in some parts of the world and spreads to eventually encompass most if not all of the world. In Sudan and elsewhere there is GT as we type. As Islam grows, so grows the GT of the latter days.

Herepton writes: Your view places you in with Pat Robertson. Those who are not expecting Christ to save them from the GT will go through the GT.

No. My view places those who are beheaded (primary Islamic mode of execution) for not worshipping the image of the beast as per Rev 20:4 as living and reigning with Christ a thousand years.

Herepton writes: This is probably greatest error of modern prophecy teaching, double fulfuillment of 10 nation Roman Empire, or EU or UN conflations. The Bible teaches that a 10 nation confederacy will form in the geographic Seleucid portion of Alexander the Great's kingdom.

Well, I see we agree in part. The beast kingdom, however is global as per Rev 13, Rev 17, 18 and Daniel 7. These ten horned beasts are all one and the same end time kingdom. In order to get a handle on all the aspects of this kingdom, one must itemize all the information given in all three of these prophecies, comparing scripture with scripture. Then you will begin to size up this kingdom and come to the knowledge of the truth concerning it, imo.

Thanks for your input here. :cool:

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

Johnfolton writes: Authorized kjv Revelation 19:7-8 happens before Rev 19:14. How does this suggest that the rapture will not happen before the post tribulation resurrection (Revelation 20:4-5). Rev 20:4-5 talks about those that were killed for their witness in the tribulation would be a part of the first resurrection. I'm just curious because those that are beheaded are not the raptured church. Do you believe the army returning with Christ is the raptured church (Revelation 19:14) however agree that the souls that come out of the tribulation will live and reign with Christ for his thousand year rule(Revelation 20-4-5).

Hi John. Your question is a good one. Imo all the verses above are post trib and post rapture as well. The rapture is pre-wrath also, i.e. before the Rev 16 bowls of wrath but post trib. The rapture happens at the last/7th trumpet sound as per I Cor 15:52, Rev 10:7, Rev 11:15-19, Romans 5:9, I Thessalonians 1:10, 1 Thess. 5:9.

The rapture comes after the GT (tribulation) as per Mark 13:24-28 and the above scriptures. It does not come until the last/7th trumpet sounds. There's a lot more to adequately cover this subject but these scripture references are a few to chew on.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

I'll get at your stuff tomorrow, God willing, mefriend. :)

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

We'll have to agree to disagree on the pre/post trib issue, Ray. LOL on the pretrib stance. It's not in the book and your stuff on Moses and the rock et al does nothing to change what the NT specifics are on it. Check out the references which fundi/fundamentalist Buzsaw has given and you'll see the fundamentals of these references clearly denote a post trib pre wrath tribulation. The wrath of God, as I've shown are the 7 wrath bowls which happen after the 7th/last trumpet rapture/assension/ressurection of the church.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

Ringo writes: So you agree that the idea of a FallTM is nonsensical and the idea of original sin is a cop-out. (I don't know if there's ever been a real discussion of the FallTM during my time at EvC. FallistsTM tend to run away from Bible discussions as if the DevilTM himself was chasing them.)

If you can agree that Adam's original sin and the resulting curse by God on him, his wife, the plants and Satan, et al equals fall, you can agree that it's all Biblical. Whether you choose to accept the account as historical is another matter.

Ringo writes: That's what I thought. In two hundred years, when the Himmelfarbians come to prominence, I suppose Bible "prophecy" will demonize them instead.

How does that diminish the significance of the Islam/antichrist hypothesis?

Ringo writes: The problem is with the "young" part - it completely fails to accept reality. We can see the reality of an old universe and old creatures just by looking at the evidence. That's why a "young" scenario of any kind is a complete non-starter.

I don't accept the dating methods of the creatures so we'll have to agree to disagree on that part.

Ringo writes: According to Genesis, God has only "worked" for six days of His life.

Genesis isn't the only account of God's work. It says he rested on the 7th day pertaining to work on earth. He's been working ever since according to the rest of the book on the earth. Does he still rest every 7th from working on tiny planet earth? Nobody knows, but don't forget that this planet is a nothing but a microspeck in God's universe and only this microspect planet has the 7th day rest. Only God knows about all the rest of his work relative to each of the countless things in his universe. Imo, for you to say he's done nothing since makes no sense atol.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

Ringo writes: No, I certainly can't agree to that.

Why not when that's what the text wording says plain and simple.

Ringo writes: I do accept the account as "historical" - in the sense that it's an explanation for why things are the way they are. It's the status quo, not a "fall".

You didn't respond to my point that the curse clearly implies a fall. The curse lowered the status and life quality of mankind. That equals a fall.

Ringo writes: In the same way that your hypothesis diminishes the Napoleon hypothesis - by making it totally obsolete. Two hundred years from now, the fulfillment of prophecy will still not be complete and the "Muslim menace" will have been forgotten.

The only thing you have right is that in 200 years the memace will be history. That's because the end times events will have ushered in the Biblical prophesied millenial messianic kingdom. :cool:

Ringo writes: Unfortunately, that damages your credibility in other areas. If you had done your homework, you would know that the "young creatures" hypothesis is false. So how can we trust the homework you've done on prophecy?

Not when you factor in the reasons for my rejecting the dating methods which is another topic.

Ringo writes: Context, my man. You said: quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The difference is that I only have the creatures as young whereas YEC's generally have the whole universe as young. That, imo, is just nutty thinking and leaves God with nothing around him and nothing to do except for the last six milleniums. Message 7 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You're the one who claimed that YEC leaves God with "nothing to do". I only pointed out that that's what Genesis says. I didn't make any claims for the whole Bible.

You're cheating by spin. My statement clearly left God with an old universe intact forever and only the planet based creatures as young. You're shabily spun up strawman doesn't cut the mustard.

Sagasiously submit sensible substance so substantiated statements signify significant soundness.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

Ringo writes: Which is it? Is there a "clear" implication of a fall? Or does the text wording say plainly and simply that there was a fall?

OK, clear implication would be the more proper term. However "fall" is simply a description of the effect of the curse. The serpents fell short of long legs. Adam and eve fell from the easy life status to laborers. They both fell from imortality to mortality. They both fell the garden utopia. This was a catastrophic fall whether the word fall was in the text or not.

Ringo writes: As I said, the story explains the status and life quality of mankind. To me, it doesn't mean there was a change. The "curse" is the status quo, which has always been.

How can you possibly seriously argue that all of the above and more were the status quo from what they previously enjoyed?

Ringo writes: But, as I have said in other threads, I find it odd that anybody would think a gain of the knowledge of good and evil could be a "fall". I think it's a fine trade off for a little hard work, pain in childbirth, etc. A gain in knowledge is a "climb" to any but those who prefer ignorance.

Knowledge does not necessarily do anything for the status of anyone regarding anything in life. You can fall into a very deep pit to die having been the most knowledgeable person alive.

Ringo writes: You're a little too cocky about pinning down the date - sign of a false prophet. Remind me not to stand too close to you in a thunderstrom.

Not cocky atol. I assemble all the data and go with it for the hypothesis as they do in science. If I'm cocky, so are they. :laugh:

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

jar writes: How can it be a Fall? They were not immortal. The only thing that might have made them live forever would have been eating from the Tree of Life.

They were immortal so long as they had the tree of life. That translates into immortality in that they had the capacity to live forever whereas after the fall they lost that capacity. Had they not sinned/fallen/eaten of the forbidden tree, they would have had the tree of life forever . After the fall death was certain except for Enoch and Elijah who God raptured up before death could claim them.

jar writes: Adam and Eve went from being animals to being human, from being foragers and grazers like the pigs and mice to being food producers. They went from being ignorant animals to adults that knew right from wrong. What Fall?

There is no implication at all in the text that would place their intelligence on the level of brute beasts. The implication is that they only knew to do good and no evil thought or desire could program into their thinking. They enjoyed regular fellowship and communication with Jehovah their maker, being made in his likeness unlike the beasts.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

jar writes: Couple misconceptions in there buz. First, no one said anything about their intellegence. I said they were ignorant. Two different things.

You said they were ignorant animals. The only thing they were ignorant of that we know of was knowledge of good and evil which only God and the higher entities knew. To equate them to ignorant beasts is certainly not what is implied in the text.

jar writes: Second, it is ABSOLUTELY false that they knew only how to do good. The Bible is quite clear on that, they simply knew no difference between right and wrong, good and evil.

You're right. Now that you mention it they did know to disobey relative to the forbidden tree. However imo, the implication is that had they not eaten of the tree, they would not have had knowledge/desire/nature to do evil. It was that act which God warned of relative to the death curse.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW ---- Jesus said, "When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads, for your redemption draws near." Luke 21:28

Omni writes: I'm confused, Buz. As a good Baptist boy, I was taught that after A&E ate from the Tree of Knowledge of G&E, God banished them from the Garden so they wouldn't eat from the Tree of Life and so live forever.

That's correct. What statement of mine says otherwise?

Omni writes: Are you just saying that eventualy they could have eaten from that Tree and become immortal, but hadn't yet, and through banishment from the Garden lost that opportunity? In that case, isn't it simply true to say they were not immortal?

No. They could have went on forever having not eaten of the forbidden tree. Their immortality would remain intact so long as they left it alone. Nothing is implied that they must disobey and eat of the tree to become mortal beings, falling from imortality.

In fact, A&E never had immortality and so did not lose it.

Please reread me carefully and go figure. You're one of the intelligent creatures. :cool: Copy and paste the specific reasons I gave for my position and refute if you can.