What does it mean to be Born-Again?

[GodsGrace]

I understand how your reasoning the word perfect. However, that's not how Moses reasoned by power of the Holy Spirit when he was directed to use good, not perfect

My objective when going to scripture is not to put my view on scripture, but rather for scripture to form my view. It's not always easy.

My point is this, and Strong's bears this out. Why did Moses call Noah perfect, but Adam only good?

In other words, why would I alter the original narrative from it's intended purpose?

The Holy Spirit had a purpose in using those specific words in those specific places, so I want to tread lightly before I simply reason why Adam was "perfect" when the Holy Spirit prompted Moses to write "good".

I don't think we can get there without looking the words up in a Hebrew Lexicon and reading the Sages on the matter.

A study of the covenant is necessary....

You have an interesting question which I've never pondered....
Why did Moses call Noah perfect if he already had the sin nature and Adam good when, before the fall, Adam was more than good.

It takes me a long time to think about these things...I use commantaries only as a last resort.

 

[GodsGrace]

I understand how your reasoning the word perfect. However, that's not how Moses reasoned by power of the Holy Spirit when he was directed to use good, not perfect

My objective when going to scripture is not to put my view on scripture, but rather for scripture to form my view. It's not always easy.

My point is this, and Strong's bears this out. Why did Moses call Noah perfect, but Adam only good?

In other words, why would I alter the original narrative from it's intended purpose?

The Holy Spirit had a purpose in using those specific words in those specific places, so I want to tread lightly before I simply reason why Adam was "perfect" when the Holy Spirit prompted Moses to write "good".

I don't think we can get there without looking the words up in a Hebrew Lexicon and reading the Sages on the matter.

What I have so far....
Not all versions use the word PERFECT
for Genesis 6:9 regarding Noah.
Some use the word RIGHTEOUS.
Noah was the ONLY righteous man living at that time...?
Could this be hyperbole?
God was sorry He had created man.

And as to Adam...
Are you saying that Moses said Adam was GOOD in Genesis 1:31?
Or is there some other scripture regarding this?

 

[GodsGrace]

I understand how your reasoning the word perfect. However, that's not how Moses reasoned by power of the Holy Spirit when he was directed to use good, not perfect

My objective when going to scripture is not to put my view on scripture, but rather for scripture to form my view. It's not always easy.

My point is this, and Strong's bears this out. Why did Moses call Noah perfect, but Adam only good?

In other words, why would I alter the original narrative from it's intended purpose?

The Holy Spirit had a purpose in using those specific words in those specific places, so I want to tread lightly before I simply reason why Adam was "perfect" when the Holy Spirit prompted Moses to write "good".

I don't think we can get there without looking the words up in a Hebrew Lexicon and reading the Sages on the matter.

Maybe this should be a thread.....

 

[JLB]

A study of the covenant is necessary....

You have an interesting question which I've never pondered....
Why did Moses call Noah perfect if he already had the sin nature and Adam good when, before the fall, Adam was more than good.

It takes me a long time to think about these things...I use commantaries only as a last resort.

Moses says Noah was perfect in his generations.

This is the genealogy of Noah. Noah was a just man, perfect in his generations. Noah walked with God. And Noah begot three sons: Shem, Ham, and Japheth. Genesis 6:9-10


This together with the context of Genesis 5, the genealogy of man, is painting a picture of the verses in Genesis 6:1-4 that something different had been introduced into the genetic makeup of mankind, of which Noah was free of.


Noah was complete human through and through, and he and his family would be used by God to repopulate the earth with a the pure human seed, which in Noah’s case was perfect, and complete, free from the corrupt seed that had been introduced by the “sons of God”, having relations with the daughters a men, which produced Nephilim, not humans.



Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose.
And the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.
Genesis 6:1-4.





JLB

 

[GodsGrace]

Moses says Noah was perfect in his generations.

This is the genealogy of Noah. Noah was a just man, perfect in his generations. Noah walked with God. And Noah begot three sons: Shem, Ham, and Japheth. Genesis 6:9-10


This together with the context of Genesis 5, the genealogy of man, is painting a picture of the verses in Genesis 6:1-4 that something different had been introduced into the genetic makeup of mankind, of which Noah was free of.


Noah was complete human through and through, and he and his family would be used by God to repopulate the earth with a the pure human seed, which in Noah’s case was perfect, and complete, free from the corrupt seed that had been introduced by the “sons of God”, having relations with the daughters a men, which produced Nephilim, not humans.



Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose.
And the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.
Genesis 6:1-4.





JLB

Thanks JLB.
I'd like to start a thread on this....
I'm also thinking of Romans 5:14

Will tag you in....

 

[stovebolts]

together with the context of Genesis 5, the genealogy of man, is painting a picture of the verses in Genesis 6:1-4 that something different had been introduced into the genetic makeup of mankind, of which Noah was free of.

That certainly is another way to interpret those verses. However, there are other ways to interpret them as well. We are likely to disagree on those as well.

 

[JLB]

That certainly is another way to interpret those verses. However, there are other ways to interpret them as well. We are likely to disagree on those as well.

I hope we can at least agree that Nephilim were not godly offspring between godly men and women.


Also, that Nephilim did not appear in the genealogy of
Genesis 5, which is contextually linked to Genesis 6.




JLB

 

[JLB]

Thanks JLB.
I'd like to start a thread on this....
I'm also thinking of Romans 5:14

Will tag you in....

Go for it.


Im heading out, and will contribute to your thread more in the morning.



JLB

 

[GodsGrace]

Go for it.

Done!

 

[stovebolts]

I hope we can at least agree that Nephilim were not godly offspring between godly men and women.


Also, that Nephilim did not appear in the genealogy of
Genesis 5, which is contextually linked to Genesis 6.




JLB

Ive seen your views on this matter and we are at complete opposite ends. It would be very difficult to find common ground. About the best I think we could hope for is to grant grace toward one another when it came to the whole angels having sex thingy...

Nephilim in Hebrew simply means "because they fell and caused the world to fall".

This parallels Solomon in many ways. Solomon was a great son of God, yet he caused the people to fall. Difference being that Solomon repented. Had it not been for God's covenant with David, things may have turned out differently for Solomon.

Sons of God can also be accuratly translated as sons of nobles, aka the direct line of Adam. Men of renown can mean " who made the world desolate".

I don't expect you to agree with me here. And I'm perfectly ok with that.

However, we are moving away from our original topic.

I'll talk with you later.

 

[JLB]

Nephilim in Hebrew simply means "because they fell and caused the world to fall".

This parallels Solomon in many ways. Solomon was a great son of God, yet he caused the people to fall. Difference being that Solomon repented. Had it not been for God's covenant with David, things may have turned out differently for Solomon.

Sons of God can also be accuratly translated as sons of nobles, aka the direct line of Adam. Men of renown can mean " who made the world desolate".

It’s unreasonable at best to believe that son of God, “godly men”, would consistently produce Nephilim giants, when they came into the daughters of men.


It becomes impossible to believe this after the flood, unless you believe Noah and his sons, produced these things, which we know isn’t true because we have their genealogy.

It’s quite simple, to understand that sons of God we’re angels who were disobedient just as Peter taught.


For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment; and did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly; 2 Peter 2:4-5


JLB

 

[stovebolts]

It’s unreasonable at best to believe that son of God, “godly men”, would consistently produce Nephilim giants, when they came into the daughters of men.


It becomes impossible to believe this after the flood, unless you believe Noah and his sons, produced these things, which we know isn’t true because we have their genealogy.

It’s quite simple, to understand that sons of God we’re angels who were disobedient just as Peter taught.


For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment; and did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly; 2 Peter 2:4-5


JLB

Just to be clear,
This is not a salvation issue. Instead, it is a theological view. As such, grace toward the differences in our theological views should be exercised.

With that said, my theological view is not impossible, just as your theological view is not impossible.

Both views have merit, and both views can be supported by proper biblical reference. As such, neither view is impossible.

Where either view could become an issue of salvation is if either view caused our faith to stumble or if either view was elevated to mistreat or sin against another.

For example, if your view caused somebody to look at a very large person (giant) and think of them as anything less than a human, then said person would also treat them as non human. It's a form of discrimination but worse yet, it would be looking at another as both worthless and condemned.

 

[JLB]

Just to be clear,
This is not a salvation issue. Instead, it is a theological view. As such, grace toward the differences in our theological views should be exercised.

Amen.

JLB

 

[JLB]

Just to be clear,
This is not a salvation issue. Instead, it is a theological view. As such, grace toward the differences in our theological views should be exercised.

With that said, my theological view is not impossible, just as your theological view is not impossible.

Both views have merit, and both views can be supported by proper biblical reference. As such, neither view is impossible.

Where either view could become an issue of salvation is if either view caused our faith to stumble or if either view was elevated to mistreat or sin against another.

For example, if your view caused somebody to look at a very large person (giant) and think of them as anything less than a human, then said person would also treat them as non human. It's a form of discrimination but worse yet, it would be looking at another as both worthless and condemned.

Agreed.


What’s impossible for me to believe, is that sons of God mentioned in Genesis 6, can be human;
Ie “godly men”, since all flesh was destroyed and the sons of God that produced Nephilim continued after the flood.

To put it another way, it’s impossible for me to believe that Noah and his sons, were the source of Nephilim production after the flood.

That’s me though.

Each person is free to read God’s word and decided for themselves.


JLB

PS. It’s not a salvation issue and is nothing to argue about.

 

[Prycejosh1987]

To be born again, is to become new in nature and absorb the spiritual man.

 

[Susannah]

Agreed.


What’s impossible for me to believe, is that sons of God mentioned in Genesis 6, can be human;
Ie “godly men”, since all flesh was destroyed and the sons of God that produced Nephilim continued after the flood.

To put it another way, it’s impossible for me to believe that Noah and his sons, were the source of Nephilim production after the flood.

That’s me though.

Each person is free to read God’s word and decided for themselves.

JLB

Thank you for saying this. You're the first person that's told me this is okay. I have always believed that but I keep running into people who say the Bible is not open to interpretation. Anyway thank you. ❤