In whose name would that be lawful?

quote:

---

According to the everlasting covenant of eternal Justice,
Is it lawful to kill or slaughter the man in the name of a land,
or of a country, or of a flag, or of an institution of doctrine,
or of an imposition of operation of law,
or of any command from man?

---

Absolutely it is lawful, and comes under lawful defense. This is common to all life forms.What is not lawful:Mass murder because one follows a different belief, and such murders disguised by other false deflections. And here we have primarilly christianity, followed by Islamists. I would say, many christians and muslims may be surprised what questions confront them if there is a hereafter judgement - I'm sure nothing they imagine will be asked, only thoese which will make their booties melt.

quote:

---

What if the nations weren't deceived by the doctrines of religion

---

They will have no problem inventing a different ideology. Murder predates religions, and also occurs outside it.

Jeohova understandeth the nature of man - because that nature was constructed by Jehova. We find that all life forms have certain basic requirements, such as air to breathe, food and also a place to park at night. A land is an inherently internal construct embedded in all life forms; perhaps one day in the future, this may become obsolete and all nations will be subject to global criteria - but this will be replaced by new paradigms.The notion of the love of God not being limited to a temple, was also a message here, but one cannot take a people to task for having an unbreakable attachment to a land. Subconsciously, one is most at ease in the land they were born, their body cells recognise this attachment, which is akin to smell being the longest held in memory. Thus the Hebrews were lured with the emotional premise of a promised land flowing with milk and honey - this became attached to their beings and dna. This trait is seen in all life forms: else mankind would not have survived and been able to contain offspring and generations of a race and athnicity, or as a nation.Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

I see that as a naive interpretation. The forthcoming OT laws clearly define what constitutes a violation, so the reading of the eden story must be intergrated with those laws.The eden story affirms the most prized aspiration of a human: immortality and ultimate knowledge. Here, no matter what other gifts were given to man, it would be deficient when placed in a garden displaying the ultimate prizes.It is blatant that the occurence of death was already pre-established before adam and eve were cursed with this punishment: why else forbid the fruit of the tree of everlasting life? And why such an overwhleming temptation, which none could resist, be the measurement of this violation? We know there is a law in the OT, one must not tie the mouth of animal when it is thresding the grain - because this is overwhelming temptation and pain to that animal. Eve was placed in the same position, compounded with the serpent's tauntings.I see this story of what humans can anticipate in life, and this is vindicated. We are constantly and continuously tempted at every turn. But it does not appears as causeless punishment, there is more here than meets the eye.

I agree it appears an overwhleming demand put to them. But on closer examination, even after the punishment was declared, there is clear signs of love and affection, namely that Adam and Eve are clothed by God when they became aware of their nakedness [a sign of knowledge].The other aspect is that this did not happen on this physical realm, but from another realm from which they were cast down to earth. There are aspects of this episode I do not understand and see as mysterious or enigmatic. I don't think it is a simple story, but says something metaphorically.

All our wrongs, sins and failings are pre-known and anticipated. With regard their punishment, it does appear that death was already factored in - the reason they were forbidden and stopped to eat from the tree of life. The knowledge tree being given to humans means there had to be laws, which did come forth.But adam and eve were not destroyed, nor was Cain punished with death for the crime of murder. This means they were not punished in line with the crime commited, according to the laws of murder. The situation is akin to how a parent or teacher would deal with children - even to allow them to touch a fire and get burnt, as a lesson of what they face in life.

Absolutely.'Know for a surety thy seed shall be in bondage'

quote:

---

But they did, the fall of man.

---

No, they did not. While there was a punishment for disobedience, the aspect of death was pre-ordained, before adam and eve emerged. This is proven by the command they should not eat from the fruit of knowledge - which they did eat and beget knowledge; but they did not/could not eat the fruit of life [immortality]. Here, the immortaility factor was pre-ordained, but the knowledge factor was not.When the law emerged, we are clearly told, only the sinner pays; only the knowledgeable can sin; all are born sinless.Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Although the Scribes have been writing the opposite, adulterating the copies of the manuscripts of Genesis,

---

This is not correct and is not based on any evidence. In fact, the evidence says:The most undistorted writings in humanity's geo-history, is genesis. This is proven by the scrolls, which is upto 2300 years old and unchanged from today's hebrew bible. And this document is the most undistorted by period of time - which document is unchanged for 2300 years? So you cannot make your claim based on nothingness, and against the greatest proof humanity has at its disposal. In fact, genesis and the OT represents the world's first HISTORICAL [with soecific dates, names, places and events], advanced [aphabetical] book [multiple pages with a continueing narrative].Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

quote:

---

1/2. immediate - lef - Do the biblical dictionaries agree that the word 'elohim' was a common generic designation for deity in the middle east?

---

Do you agree that is an absolute proof of its athenticity of being contemporary? The same applies with the name 'EL' [Lord, Sir, Boss, High One, etc]; and circumsizion - this ritual predated Abraham and was the standard mode used for contracts and vows.You will find, likewise, the OT does not say camels and tomatoes existed in ancient egypt - because this is not known as a fact: camels emerged in arabia much later. Its called vindicated authentic contemporary writings.Also, the term 'dust' is not understood in this thread. This is an appropriate term to denote the base sub-atomic particles of the earthly elements, which all life contains. This says the OT was written for all generations of mankind. What better word can you nominate, which would be understoof by 3500 year mankind- and those of today?! Grammar was introduced in the OT.Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

No sir. The fall does not relate to the causation factor of death, but the disobediance of a command only; the crime of murder was also yet not mandated - the reason Cain was not terminated. This is also not the cause of man being born in sin, which is a later gospel doctrine, motivated by its own views. Man is born sinless; sins are not transferable; sin is only possible with full and wanton knowledge. Death and knowledge were pre-ordained; immortality [tree of life] was not: the eden story is not based on a physical realm - it becomes physical only after the casting down from paradise.'ONLY THE SOUL THAT SINNETH IT SHALL PAY - THE SON SHALL NOT PAY FOR THE FATHER NOR THE MOTHER FOR THE DAUGHTER' [OT]This is also accepted in all judiciary institutions.

I may be wrong, but I saw the doctrine of born in sin referring to the fall of adam and eve.

quote:

---

And this is his instruction, That we should remain in the name of his first-fruit, Yhwh'shuah --I AM is the Salvation, and *love all persons, as he **gave us instruction.

---

Politics and racism - a doctrine which can be, and was, used to persecute. This was seen when Isabela of spain massercered many, with the premise of 'better to destroy their bodies and save their souls', and with Pope Pious who forbid the return of the jews to their land - a declaration of genocide. The law rules, not a name, and christians will be judged only how they act with Israel. You cannot choose your own premises and boast about only what suits you. The OT declares the most formidable 'AND' here: 'I SHALL JUDGE ISRAEL - *AND* - THE NATIONS'. And this has naught to do with the NT - it preceded and anticipated you.

quote:

---

**love your enemies; let the sun of FORGIVENESS shine upon everyone

---

Let this doctrine be judged how others were treated - first learn to 'love the starnger' [OT] - then try for love your enemies'

quote:

---

*do not kill nor die in the name of a flag or of a country
*do not anihilate nor judge a human being in the name of the justice courts of the earth.

---

There is nothing wrong in love of country - a natural human trait. Better, do not rob another's land and deem it yours. Christians who do not act as honest historical witness of another peoples' land - should not fantasize they will get 70 virgins and a free bonus salvation.

quote:

---

but he that does not receive him is already lost, because he has not received the name of him --Yhwh-- that abides in the name of the only begotten first-fruit of Eliyoun (Most High).

---

Kbnock, knock! Let the Most High speak for himself. Otherwise go and worship Mohammed before deciding the destiny for muslims, hindus, budhists, jews and atheists. The NT wants to act as judge, jury and executioner - but the Judge has not appeared. A judge must be arm's length and non-biased, cannot speak anything but the truth, with no omissions of any side's crimes and falsehoods. A true judge does not judge on the basis of which VIP club one joins. The law rules.