Since it takes 4000 coordinated proteins all acting together for cell division to occur, even in a so-called simple cell which is not simple at all, isn't the idea of evolutionary chance producing proteins, DNA and cells an impossibility? Doesn't it make much more sense that a divine designer, God, engineered this process and set it in motion?
Craig Dressler
http://christianbook2.webs.com/

craigdressler : Welcome to Praize



Doesn't it make much more sense that a divine designer, God, engineered this process and set it in motion?

I agree it makes sense that God would have designed the material universe in such a way as to make it inevitable that life would evolve to at least the degree that a creature could eventually have the capacity to ask that question and appreciate the possibility of God having initiated and overseen the whole protracted process. Indeed it might have even been God's purpose to have such a creature appreciate God's Greatness and explore His 'Creation' in the hope of finding God themselves.

Who can say whether 'man's' curiosity is not naturally implanted by God.

Yes, though this does not necessarily take one any nearer having to accept ‘Creationism’ as a valid form of ‘science’. I don’t think it is.

Regards Chris.

God has let His inspired word remain recorded as man having been a special creation of God in very specific terms not fitting the modern evolution theory. The word "theory" is falsely applied. It is a concept based on many assumptions. No person has scientifically observed evolution. The sheer volume of fossil record ought to have abundantly proved most if not all intermediate changes in a logical order and fitting the geologic timescale. It fails concerning all species. The only way evolutionists can "prove" evolution is through talented artists who can add necessary body parts.

The persistence of DNA alone ought to cast shame over evolution. Consider what happens when one minimal change happens to one chain! For chance to have effected one efficient increase in viable genetic information would require billions of Earth duplicates and trillions of years of success v. failure to have occurred, far beyond any comprehensible statistical measure.

Blessings, Jim
·...¸><((((º>
.··´¯`·.¸.·><((((º>
·.¸.·´¯`·...¸.·><((((º>
Be fishers of men

Indeed it might have even been God's purpose to have such a creature appreciate God's Greatness and explore His 'Creation' in the hope of finding God themselves.

That's expected if coming from an agnostic, unexpected of an impartial evolutionist regardless of religious basis. I shall pose the Christian biblical response to that statement, whether you call it creationism or fundamentalist literalism

Where in the Bible can you support such a statement that God might have intended man to find him through exploring His creation? What God created does testify to Him, though He manifested Himself to the first man long before you or I saw nature. Consider Romans 1:[18] For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men,
who hold the truth in unrighteousness; [19]
Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them;
for God hath shewed it unto them. [20]
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made,
even his eternal power and Godhead;
so that they are without excuse:

Charles Darwin is accountable to that knowledge, and all who followed him into grave deceptions. Anyone with a very basic knowledge of DNA/RNA knows the illogical, overwhelmingly impossible chances of evolution of organisms from simple to complex creatures, requiring the addition of massive genetic information that cannot be generated from the less complex. I would sooner expect a dusty country road to somehow become, of itself, a super paved highway complete with painted stripes, fencing, proper drainage, exits, overpasses, signage set in the exact appropriate positions, and linking key populated areas. But I am not so foolish.


·...¸><((((º>
.··´¯`·.¸.·><((((º>
·.¸.·´¯`·...¸.·><((((º>
Be fishers of men

Dovegiven : Jim - Hi.

I previously wrote : “Indeed it might have even been God's purpose to have such a creature appreciate God's Greatness and explore His 'Creation' in the hope of finding God themselves”.

In your haste, it seems, to contradict anything I write, no matter how scripturally supportable it may actually be, you replied – “Where in the Bible can you support such a statement that God might have intended man to find him through exploring His creation?”

Perhaps you have not read Acts 17:24-27


24God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; 25Neither is worshipped with men’s hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things; 26And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; 27That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us: 28For in him we live, and move, and have our being;

I can understand a Biblical literalist not wanting to pay due attention to this passage when holding forth on the visibility of God, suggesting as it does that God is as close, (though entirely invisible), to every human being as the air that we breathe. This concept rather conflicts with the rather simplistic materialist view of Deity that a literal fundamentalist Biblical interpretation necessarily confines one to.

I find it unsurprising that you prefer the material to the spiritual in your choice of scripture with which to attempt to refute my initial statement. You quote : “Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.”

For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made,
even his eternal power and Godhead;

So, I read this as saying :- God being invisible has made it possible for the things that He has made visible to understand His eternal power and Godhead. What has been made visible being God's creation and, as part of it, us.

I think, if you care to study closely rather than merely rush to contradict me, you will find that your underlined scripture quotes actually confirm my initial comment rather than conflicting with the truth of it.

Charles Darwin is accountable . . . . . . . . populated areas. But I am not so foolish.

Judging from the analogy you chose to debunk and ridicule 150 years of painstaking biological, botanical, palaeoclimatological, geological etc. research and data gathering, plus your blinkered and hidebound interpretation of scripture which overrides any possibility of your discerning any 'truth' which conflicts with your predetermined 'world view', I would say the jury is still out on your last statement.

Regards Chris.

Perhaps you have not read Acts 17:24-27

Yes, I have read that, many times, but always in context. Paul's sermon was focused on a stone idol. Back up to verse 22 for the proper setting, which was not some remote mountaintop garden ecosystem. The Athenians had been foolishly confining their attention to deity in a confined location. For now lets extend the context at least down to Acts 17:[29] Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device. [30] And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:

Still, Paul's focus was on the foolishness of graven images and seeking God in man-made temples, yet given of God freedom to live all over the world where they may seek God.

To say all the text in between says men were supposed to find God in nature is missing the whole sermon point. There are destructive cults that teach such things, environuts worshiping Gia, goddess of nature. Paul in no way indicated such things were sanctioned by God. He was simply teaching that men are free to seek God from all the face of the earth, not just on Mars Hill or at the feet of stone statues wherever they might be. Those men recognized there was an "unknown god" deserving their attention.

The closeness of God Paul spoke of was the same principle as said in Matthew 4:17 From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Iron sharpeneth iron. Let's not become too dull to divide truth from error.

Blessings
Jim

·...¸><((((º>
.··´¯`·.¸.·><((((º>
·.¸.·´¯`·...¸.·><((((º>
Be fishers of men

Chris, please eliminate any comments that even cause one person (like me) to think that a match is coming close. I'm talking about flaming. Your comments should be soley on what he has said, not on what you might consider the poster's motives to be or anything directly speaking negatively about him or his reasoning.

If I went through this last post and removed the fire, there would be little left... albeit, the pertinent part.

Please reread the TOS http://www.praize.com/blog-forum-terms
paying particular attention to the last sentence in #2.

New Praize TOS are much briefer than the old ones, but continued insults to other posters WILL NOT be tolerated.
Blessings ~ Sarah

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men,
who hold the truth in unrighteousness; [19]
Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them;
for God hath shewed it unto them. [20]
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made,
even his eternal power and Godhead;
so that they are without excuse:

Please note I have not backed off that statement of truth.
1. That which MAY be known of God is already shown to man, who showed that to them.
2. Men hold His truth in unrighteousness, even that which men have seen.
3. The invisible things of GOD are clearly seen.
4. The invisible things of God are understood by those things God made.
5. God has revealed the GODHEAD and His power.
6. There is no excuse.
7. Jesus affirmed it. John 14:7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.
John 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

See Jesus.
Then see the Father. It is mandatory, my friend. Not an option.
Upon doing that I became very uncomfortable letting science rule my mind and spirit. It doesn't matter what THEY say about what God said about it. I was one of them until 1976, when I saw God, met Him, and pledged my life to Him. Since then He has opened my eyes. On looking back to before 1976 I was a rebel claiming to be a Christian, yet persecuting people I considered ignorant for taking the Bible verbatim.

I love you with all my being, brother. I am for you, not against you.
Jim

·...¸><((((º>
.··´¯`·.¸.·><((((º>
·.¸.·´¯`·...¸.·><((((º>
Be fishers of men

Dovegiven: Hi Jim :


Yes, I have read that, many times, but always in context.

The context was (as you noticed yourself) Paul’s sermon in the Are-op’agus in which Paul attempts to describe for his hearers “The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and Earth”.

He goes on to state God’s purpose in making mankind, “that they should seek God, in the hope that they might feel after Him and find Him”. (No mention of Idolatry so far, just a description of the True God and his reason for making mankind).

Paul's next point is stating God’s immediate proximity to each of his creatures. “Yet He is not far from each one of us”. (even idolatrous Athenians)

Further underlined by his statement. “In him we live and move and have our being”. That is,( the whole creation).

There is a figurative and a literal interpretation to this sentence. Which do you prefer?

I prefer the literal. That God is an invisible, omnipresent and immanent life giving Spirit outside of whom nothing can exist.

Still nothing about idolatry has yet been mentioned by Paul, only scripturally supportable inspired facts about the actual nature of The True God and the purpose for which we were made.

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.

Now at last we have Paul’s critique of the foolishness of trying to represent an invisible, omnipresent Spirit by ‘graven images’ of stone, silver or gold’. WE refers to the entire human race without exception.


And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:

Previously to the teachings, life, death and resurrection of Our Lord, God overlooked this ignorance in every nation except Israel (who alone had been given the revelation of The Law and therefore were then without excuse).

Ignorance is excusable, deliberate stiff necked stupidity is not.


To say all the text in between says men were supposed to find God in nature is missing the whole sermon point.

I don’t think so. Paul needed to inform his listeners of the true nature of God before he compared that to the falsity of graven images.

Paul clearly states that God’s original intention in creating mankind was “that they should seek God, in the hope that they might feel after Him and find Him”. Clearly idolatry was not seeking God nor was there any possibility of finding God 'in temples made with human hands' for those who sought him there.

Paul's focus was on the foolishness of graven images and seeking God in man-made temples

Not so! His actual focus was upon Jesus, the risen Christ

“The man whom God has appointed, and of this God has given assurance to all mankind by raising Jesus from the dead” v. 31

The purpose of Paul’s preaching was not merely a critique of idolatry but to positively present Christ risen from the dead.

THAT was the focus of his sermon.

This however does not alter the fact that Paul’s description of the nature and purpose of God in verses 26-28 remains as true today as it was when he first said it.

There are destructive cults that teach such things, environuts worshiping Gia, goddess of nature. Paul in no way indicated such things were sanctioned by God.

Your own 'cult watch' agenda seems to have hijacked your exegetical discernment on this passage of scripture. Who said anything about ‘worshipping nature’, I didn’t, neither did Paul. You must have listened to too many hellfire and damnation sermons vilifying our New Age opposition. I certainly never had them in mind when I suggested that God intended that we might find Him through studying the physical creation He has made, (and indeed may still be making).

Paul seems to be saying (as far as I can make out), that the invisible God has made the visible creation to be explored and understood by us. That we might get to know God by appreciating the wonder and glory of the physical creation which He has made.

As for ‘dangerous cults’, they may be wacky environmentalists and New Age wierdos to us, but they are probably less dangerous than the ‘believing’ owners of the gas guzzling SUVs which fill the parking lots of local churches on a Sunday in the USA, within less than a miles walking distance of where their obese owners live.

Global warming is a real danger and the ‘good ol religious USA’ is only just now being overtaken by China as the worlds worst polluter of God’s Earth.

Poor old ‘Gia’ is staggering like a drunk and swaying like a rotten hut (Isa. 24:20) partly because of the size and weight of the cars people drive over there, just because fuel is cheap on the dollar market.

The closeness of God Paul spoke of was the same principle as said in Matthew 4:17 From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

I am sure that can't be right because :

(1) 'Is at hand' refers mainly to temporal proximity, not physical proximity. It is a call to repentence because time is short not because the Kingdom is physically close.

(2) You should have considered Luke 17:21 "Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you." This is referring to the proximity of The Kingdom of God and confirms exactly what St Paul said to the Athenians. For 'believers' the Kingdom is 'within us' for unbelievers the Kingdom is 'among' them.

And said unto them, Whosoever shall receive this child in my name receiveth me: and whosoever shall receive me receiveth him that sent me: for he that is least among you all, the same shall be great. Luke 9:48



Now it is quite plain to see that 'this child' means any child, not only the child Jesus was presenting to his listeners. So Jesus said : anyone who defends and protects any child, (the vulnerable / powerless), in accordance with HIS teachings, receives Jesus, and anyone therefore who receives (the vulnerable / powerless), receives God.


'True Believers' are as children in a hostile world. Greatness in the Kingdom is epitomised by vulnerability. Thus we believers are 'among' the world : in it but not of it. John 17:15


Iron sharpeneth iron. Let's not become too dull to divide truth from error.

If I have interpreted wrongly, then bear witness to the wrong. John 18:23

Regards Chris.

Dovegiven : Hi : Greetings.

The KJV is notoriously difficult to understand the meaning of in plain English let alone plain American English (a foreign language to me, an Englishman ) So I will attempt to ‘unpack’ the 17th Century Elizabethan English of Shakespeare’s time and make it understandable to a modern American like yourself.

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Rom.1:18 KJV

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness of those who by their wickedness suppress the truth. Rom.1:18 NRSV

(‘hold the truth in unrighteousness’ = suppress the truth.)

Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. KJV

19For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. NRSV (Self explanatory)

For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, KJV

Obviously this no longer means exactly what it says in the 17th century English of Elizabeth the 1st. Invisible things cannot be seen. They could not be seen then and they cannot be seen now. Only visible things are visible and God’s eternal power and Godhead are invisible and therefore cannot be seen. Ipso facto we cannot see The Godhead.

being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead;
so that they are without excuse: KJV

20Ever since the creation of the world his eternal power and divine nature, (invisible though they are), have been understood and seen through the things he has made. So they are without excuse; NRSV

Q. Who was without excuse? . . . A. Those that suppress the truth. Rom.1:18 Not the entire human race .

God has designed human beings to seek after Him in the hope of finding Him.
Science is the pursuit of truth. Those that knowingly suppress 'the truth' have no excuse before God.

Creationists and scientists be warned ! When you honestly and sincerely are convinced that something is true, to the best of your understanding, denying it will leave you with no excuse when all truth will be layed bare for all to see.

Which all goes to confirm what I have previously said and St Paul said before me.

From one ancestor he made all nations to inhabit the whole earth, and he allotted the times of their existence and the boundaries of the places where they would live,
so that . . . . .
they would search for God and perhaps grope for him and find him—
though indeed he is not far from each one of us. Acts 17:26-27

_______________________________________________________________________________



7. Jesus affirmed it. John 14:7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.

Yes but Jesus was not The Father, so the disciples were not looking at the Father when they saw Jesus. What they actually saw was the character of God embodied in man, (incarnation). Jesus at that time was yet to “return to His Father”. He couldn’t do that if He was already standing there before them as “The Father”, could he !

John 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

Again, Jesus did nothing apart from the will of The Father, spoke nothing but the words his Father gave him and would return to His Father after the resurrection but it was not The Father that stood before them at the last supper, it was Jesus and He was telling them “If you know me and what I stand for, then you already know The Father and what HE stands for”

Understand Jesus. Know and put his words into practice.
Then we will understand the Father.

Science does not rule my mind and spirit. Truth does, and when I am sure something is true I cannot deny it, to do so I would become one who suppresses the truth and THEY have no excuse before God.

As a pacifist I have no intention of allowing myself to persecute anyone. What a person believes to be true is a matter between them and God. If God has not revealed to them what God has revealed to me through scripture, study and life experience, then perhaps God has revealed something to them that He has not revealed to me.

If I am wise I will try to discover what God has revealed to them also. Then I shall be twice as wise. Wisdom is rarely gained by rejecting another brothers ‘truth’ out of hand and it is better for all to hear and weigh another’s ‘truth’ than try to ram theirs down his throat.

Peace be with you. Regards Chris.

Let's set the stage to determine the context. Paul was accused by two groups of pagan humanists that didn't fear any god, said to be introducing a new god in a town where that was a crime. The setting is the Supreme Court of the land, where Paul was taken for trial. On his way inside to stand before his accusers, Paul noticed the array of idol statues, then was given his chance to speak for his defense. It should be noted those men had no theoretical business worrying over gods anywhere. They were devoted to tranquility/happiness devoid of any fear or pain in life.

God gave Paul the right words that put his accusers on trial so to speak. First he pointed out they were too superstitious, something they were to avoid as Epicurians and Stoics. Being surrounded by the national gods he pointed out the one they supposedly worshipped in ignorance. They worshiped none, but stood as accusers on behalf of those idols. He wins the first point.
Next, while the one altar was named "To the Unknown God" they were made responsible now to defend, Paul tells the philosophers they are ignorant.

Next Paul indicted them as responsible toward worship at that altar since they took its defense. Another point in his favor. Of course, all that clashed heavily against their theories.

Since the altar was not named, Paul was then free to pose the identity of the God they ignorantly worshiped. Another point for Paul. That left Paul free to declare he wasn't introducing a new god at all. Point. Paul named God with a capital G, God of gods, Lord of lords. Point.

Athens had their gods living in town, but God didn't live there, or anywhere men had made to house Him. Point.

In verse 25 Paul declared God needed no help of men, no attendance by men since God made everything and gave life to all that live. None of their gods were claimed to do that. Each god was relegated a specialty, none in overall control. There was no defense against that, nothing in the town's idolatrous religion to counter Paul's claim. So...point.

Paul declared it was God that divided wicked men into tongues and nations, and split up the land to further divide them to thwart their evil ambitions. No defense against that statement, so...point.

God divided men so they could depart from the world religion overtaking them, leaving each nation free to pursue God, Paul inferring that to be the assumed case men would seize upon (haply). Paul pointed out that it shouldn't be difficult to find God since He was close by. Note that the people of Athens had God close by, but sought after other gods. Point.

Now to get to the heart of my dissent. Acts 17:28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.

We, not the rocks, the trees, the fire, but we humans owe that "Unknown God" for our very being, being His very offspring. By that Paul obviously indicated that man was made after God's image and likeness according to the Genesis record. No rock is the offspring of God. He made the rocks, the trees, the fish, but they are not His offspring. They are part of His creation. Point.

Acts 17:29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.

Because we have that special intimate connection to God WE should not pay attention to idols that can't represent God, but rather to the Living God our Father. Keep in mind no fish or foul worships God.

Acts 17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:

Paul delivered a moratorium to the accusers. Stop the nonsense, repent, find the Living God. That destroyed their case for pursuit of painless, guiltless pleasure of life. They had no defense against Paul, so let him go. Some of them mocked over the idea of the resurrection, but some believed and cleaved to Paul, including one judge.

There is the sum of Paul's case in that court. I will look over your case to find whether I should comment on it further. I submit that you missed the points.

Idolaters who ignorantly miss God, but don't become dogs or swine are eligible for an invitation from the Father to meet Jesus.

Still nothing about idolatry has yet been mentioned by Paul, only scripturally supportable inspired facts about the actual nature of The True God and the purpose for which we were made.

Let me take you back to the beginning at Acts 17:16 Now while Paul waited for them at Athens, his spirit was stirred in him, when he saw the city wholly given to idolatry.

Who said anything about ‘worshipping nature’, I didn’t, neither did Paul.

Look up Stoicism. I think it is moot to address the rest of the post at this time.

Blessing to all seekers of the Truth,
Jim
·...¸><((((º>
.··´¯`·.¸.·><((((º>
·.¸.·´¯`·...¸.·><((((º>
Be fishers of men

Dovegiven : Hi

We, not the rocks, the trees, the fire, but we humans owe that "Unknown God" for our very being, being His very offspring.

I can’t remember ever writing anything which even hinted otherwise. Nevertheless Paul says elsewhere that the invisible God can be perceived through the things he has made, (i.e. the material universe). And furthermore it was God’s purpose in making us that we would ‘feel after him and find him”.

Where is your God situated Jim? Is he a man shaped thing high above the clouds or is He a surrounding invisible Spirit “In whom we live and move and have our being”?

God is invisible, scripture clearly says so, anything that is “in the image of God” in us is also invisible. God is Spirit and Spirit has not flesh and bones.

By that Paul obviously indicated that man was made after God's image and likeness according to the Genesis record.

According to your literal, material Deity interpretation of what Genesis may mean; you mean.

No rock is the offspring of God. He made the rocks, the trees, the fish, but they are not His offspring. They are part of His creation.

Yes, and !

Because we have that special intimate connection to God WE should not pay attention to idols that can't represent God, but rather to the Living God our Father. Keep in mind no fish or foul worships God.

Certainly we have a special relationship with God but it is because we are Spiritual beings, not because we have flesh that looks like HIS. And as for your notion that fish and foul do not worship God - try reading psalm 148. You will find that worms and feathered fowl bless the Lord along with the whole heavens which declare the glory of God. You certainly don't agree with scripture Jim on that point. " Let every thing that hath breath praise the LORD. Praise ye the LORD". Ps. 150:6

Any human being, being in the spiritual likeness of God, would be foolish indeed to make material images in an attempt to accurately represent a being who is invisible.

You might just as well produce a statue of ‘LOVE’ and claim it to actually be what ‘LOVE’ looks like. Even the ancient Greeks were not that stupid.

There is the sum of Paul's case in that court. I will look over your case to find whether I should comment on it further. I submit that you missed the points.

And I submit that you don’t yet understand what scripture means when it says God is invisible. That is the point we are debating and all your other points go nowhere towards supporting your naïve notion that God has a body and looks like a man.

What does the word invisible describe? Something which cannot be seen.

God is LOVE.

LOVE cannot be physically seen. The closest anyone has ever come to seeing LOVE physically demonstrated, (nailed to a cross), was the centurion who said “Truly this was the Son of God.” Matt. 27:54

That was the only image and likeness which is truly representative of GOD and I doubt if God was pleased to see what we had done.

Regards Chris.

I'l reply to the main body of your post tomorrow Lord willing, but can't let the night pass without answering this: You certainly don't agree with scripture Jim on that point. " Let every thing that hath breath praise the LORD. Praise ye the LORD". Ps. 150:6

We've been discussing "context", so I will remind you about that again.
The Psalm is short enough to post it all conveniently.
Psalm 150:[1] Praise ye the Lord. Praise God in his sanctuary: praise him in the firmament of his power. [2] Praise him for his mighty acts: praise him according to his excellent greatness. [3] Praise him with the sound of the trumpet: praise him with the psaltery and harp. [4] Praise him with the timbrel and dance: praise him with stringed instruments and organs. [5] Praise him upon the loud cymbals: praise him upon the high sounding cymbals. [6] Let every thing that hath breath praise the Lord. Praise ye the Lord.

The word "thing" is added, not represented in the Hebrew. Examine the Hebrew words for greatest accuracy. What has the "breath" of spirit and soul is to praise God. Animals lack those, having only fleshly breath of life, air for land dwellers, oxygenated water for marine animals. PEOPLE are commanded to:
1. praise God who is in His sanctuary, where He is.
2. praise God why? Mighty acts and excellent greatness.
3. praise God how? With an array of musical instruments and with our voices.

That's how they did it back then. Nowhere that I can see in that Psalm are the instructions suitable for animals like fish and fowl or any other animal. Animals were being killed and sacrificed, not grouping up in choirs singing and playing instruments. Have you ever seen a fish play a harp? I suppose a flying fish could leap through one and strum a note. Can you see what I mean by context? I suspect no animal has yet read those instructions, nor have any done those things.

Please consider that in terms of textual context.

Blessings to all who seek the Truth,
Jim
·...¸><((((º>
.··´¯`·.¸.·><((((º>
·.¸.·´¯`·...¸.·><((((º>
Be fishers of men

1 O Praise the LORD of heaven: praise him in the height.
2 Praise him, all ye angels of his: praise him, all his host.
3 Praise him, sun and moon: praise him, all ye stars and light.
4 Praise him, all ye heavens, and ye waters that are above the heavens.
5 Let them praise the name of the LORD: for he spake the word and they were made; he commanded and they were created.
6 He hath made them fast for ever and ever: he hath given them a law which shall not be broken.
7 Praise the LORD upon earth, ye dragons, and all deeps:
8 Fire, and hail; snow, and vapour; wind and storm fulfilling his word:
9 Mountains, and all hills; fruitful trees, and all cedars:
10 Beasts, and all cattle; worms, and feathered fowls:
11 Kings of the earth, and all people; princes, and all judges of the world:
12 Young men, and maidens; old men, and children: Praise the name of the LORD: for his name only is excellent; and his praise above heaven and earth.
14 He shall exult the horn of his people; all his saints shall praise him : even the children of Israel, even the people that serveth him. Ps. 148

I don't think that leaves out anything that is not to praise the Lord in it's own wormy, fishy, feathery, dragony way. And after this myriad of praising creatures gets praising God finally even the children of Israel get the idea. Ironically WE the people that serveth Him are chronologically just about the last lot to give God the glory. That is pretty comprehensive proof that the whole creation praises God, do you not think Jim.


"But ask now the beasts, and they shall teach thee; and the fowls of the air, and they shall tell thee: Or speak to the earth, and it shall teach thee: and the fishes of the sea shall declare unto thee. Who knoweth not in all these that the hand of the LORD hath wrought this? In whose hand is the soul of every living thing, and the breath of all mankind. Doth not the ear try words? and the mouth taste his meat?.

Job 12:7-10 KJV Authorised Version.

Is any of the above "the truth"? Is any of the above "inspired"? (rhetorical question as from the pulpit). Why then do you disagree with it? And you an old time Bible believer and all.

Regards Chris

I love and prefer the KJV you quoted from, having filled my memory with the way it words the scriptures, enjoying its poetic flow. However, I also am aware of the changes in meaning of many words that should be sorted by use of lexicons and other tools for greatest accuracy. Words have been added (usually in italics) intended to help the flow, but now can mask the true transliteration/interpretation) That isn't the problem I am addressing in these last two posts.

My complaint is lifting one verse out of an entire context to make a doctrine, especially one that isn't supported elsewhere in the Bible. Out of Psalms 150 you used the last verse to include all animals in praise, while the other verses could only apply to the abilities of people. Now you are making the common mistake of lifting one statement from Job while Job was spewing error both sides of that verse. He was answering Zophar who saif Job weas suffering because he was reaping what he sowed. Job disagreed, but came back with equal error saying in verse Job 12:6 The tabernacles of robbers prosper, and they that provoke God are secure; into whose hand God bringeth abundantly. That is not what God would do. Job made his case that God would not spare him suffering any more than He will protect a worm from being eaten by a bird. Suffering is natural. Just ask the animals. Ask the zebra why it is run down by the lion. Where was God? Why didn't God save the zebras from being eaten? Job is saying to Zolphar he was suffering for the same lack of help from God.
Two verses below your quote is another huge error from Job in Job 12:9 Who knoweth not in all these that the hand of the Lord hath wrought this?

God didn't bring those sufferings upon Job. Satan did once God let that hedge down. Later on God chastises Job over that. So you find verses 7-8 to be sound advice? I don't. It is obvious the Word records failures of people for our learning.
It isn't that there isn't truth in a verse such as you used, but that truth is easily twisted into error when not in it's proper place of context. I realize that a doctrine of quasi evolution such as you believe in hopes some animals have a spiritual connection with God, but it just isn't so. We can certainly learn about God from observing nature, but nature will not do the devotions meant for people.

None of that whatsoever has anything to do with praising God. Take Psalms 150 as entirely meant for people to read and heed, not chimps or salmon.

Blessings to all seekers of the Truth (Jesus)
Jim
·...¸><((((º>
.··´¯`·.¸.·><((((º>
·.¸.·´¯`·...¸.·><((((º>
Be fishers of men

Science happens to observe invisible things that are reveled in various ways. We are not limited to the field of view of natural eyes. We can know most of the attributes of hidden things, but not without aid of a microscope, for instance. You said From one ancestor he made all nations to inhabit the whole earth, and he allotted the times of their existence and the boundaries of the places where they would live,
so that . . . . .
they would search for God and perhaps grope for him and find him—
though indeed he is not far from each one of us. Acts 17:26-27

Are you saying by quoting that that God intended for men all over earth to grope around like a worm in the dark looking for food, that men should look for God like that? Did Adam go about like a blind man trying to find God? I don't think so. God came down...walked with Adam in the Garden.
God is close by, not on the edge of the universe.
He is easily found if the seeker seeks on God's terms.
The Epicurians and Stoics were not doing that.
Most people prefer to seek God on their own terms.
They want to see Him with their eyes before believing.

That is the bare minimum God set "in stone", but it is far short of what God provided every generation. "Perhaps" is a keyword there. Perhaps leaves doubt as to success. It is "happenstance", against odds. That was the way the people of Athens were going about searching for God. Out of all those gods they had one altar that could remotely be assigned to Jehovah God, but they had not got the revelation of Him. God got Paul out of town allowing that temporary assignment of an idol to Him, with no permanent change of its inscription. God left it the "unknown god". History tells us those people failed to grasp God, left to "grope" like the blind.

Blessings to all seekers of the Truth (Jesus)
Jim
·...¸><((((º>
.··´¯`·.¸.·><((((º>
·.¸.·´¯`·...¸.·><((((º>
Be fishers of men

Where is your God situated Jim? Is he a man shaped thing high above the clouds or is He a surrounding invisible Spirit “In whom we live and move and have our being”?

God is invisible, scripture clearly says so, anything that is “in the image of God” in us is also invisible. God is Spirit and Spirit has not flesh and bones.

Jesus ascended in that special glorified body shown to Thomas and the others. John in Revelation described Jesus as He presently is. Is Jesus not Spirit? Is He only a man in heaven? Or is Jesus not also God in Heaven? If Jesus is not Spirit with a glorified body, then what do you say Jesus is today?

Where is Jesus? Jesus sits on His own throne next to (at the right hand of) God the Father, the One Jesus consistently gave credit and glory to. Both are sitting on literal thrones in a literal thrones in a literal temple after which pattern Moses built the tabernacle, as shown him by God. From that throne Jesus intercedes for the saints. Saints sit around them, along with angels and other beings, forever praising. All that are there can plainly see the Godhead. The thrid Person of the Godhead was sent to replace Jesus as our COmforter. He is the one that is everywhere at once, omnipresent. Wherever we go He is there. He is OUR (believers) perfect representative of the Godhead.

Have you been seeing angels? I can't say that's a regular sight for me. Why? Because they are invisible until choosing to revel themselves. Evil angels can appear as angels of light. Lots of people won't believe they exist because they are not visible. I know now I have witnessed one angel. My wife did too while sitting alone outside a remote county highway bus stop around midnight in 1966 in Arkadelphia AR. A man kept driving by whistling and suggesting things. With the bus still an hour away she grew frightened. Suddenly, out of the dark came a man in a business suit and hat. He sat with her chatting about her future and her college studies, making her forget her fear. The man in the truck left, then the bus finally arrived. She turned to see the man was gone, even though the area was well lit. He apparently crossed the parking lot in a matter of 5 seconds. Once on the bus a lady asked her who that handsome man was sitting on that bench with her. At that moment she realized she had entertained an angel unawares.

God is Spirit. However, will you limit His appearance by limited definitions of Spirit? Do we comprehend the scope of "Spirit"? He has chosen to appear to a few, like to Moses, and Joshua, and others. The Bible tells of God having almost all the same body parts as men, hands, feet, head, face, mouth, backside, etc., with no analogies intended whatsoever. Enough parts are testified to as making a complete man shape to be obvious. He comes sometimes in a column of fire, but is not a fire, while is an all consuming fire. But to most people God shall remain invisible until they are standing before Him at His great judgment. Don't be one of them, folks.

Blessings to all seekers of the Truth (Jesus)
Jim
·...¸><((((º>
.··´¯`·.¸.·><((((º>
·.¸.·´¯`·...¸.·><((((º>
Be fishers of men

Dovegiven : Jim Hi :

I also am aware of the changes in meaning of many words that should be sorted by use of lexicons and other tools for greatest accuracy. Words have been added (usually in italics) intended to help the flow, but now can mask the true transliteration/interpretation) That isn't the problem I am addressing in these last two posts.


Do you mean that there is something amiss with the good old KJV. I’m astonished.

My complaint is lifting one verse out of an entire context to make a doctrine, especially one that isn't supported elsewhere in the Bible.

I wasn’t aware that my mere musings constituted the establishment of a full blown doctrine. Ah well – If I’m a heretic for believing that God understands the language of every creature then I guess you had better get the faggots together and start building my execution pyre.

Nevertheless I cite the following verses of the infallible KJV in my defence.

7The whole earth is at rest, and is quiet: they break forth into singing.
8Yea, the fir trees rejoice at thee, and the cedars of Lebanon, saying, Since thou art laid down, no feller is come up against us. Isa. 14:7

14Thus saith the Lord GOD; When the whole earth rejoiceth, I will make thee desolate. 15As thou didst rejoice at the inheritance of the house of Israel, because it was desolate, so will I do unto thee: Ezek. 35:14

1 O sing unto the LORD a new song; for he hath done marvellous things: his right hand, and his holy arm, hath gotten him the victory.
2 The LORD declared his salvation: his righteousness hath he openly showed in the sight of the heathen.
3 He hath remembered his mercy and his truth toward the house of Israel: all the ends of the earth have seen the salvation of our God.
4 Make a joyful noise unto the LORD, all the earth: make a loud noise, and rejoice, and sing praise.
5 Sing unto the LORD with the harp; with the harp, and the voice of a psalm.
6 With trumpets and sound of cornet make a joyful noise before the LORD, the King.
7 Let the sea roar, and the fulness thereof; the world, and they that dwell therein.
8 Let the floods clap their hands: let the hills be joyful together
9 Before the LORD; for he cometh to judge the earth: with righteousness shall he judge the world, and the people with equity. Ps. 98

Out of Psalms 150 you used the last verse to include all animals in praise, while the other verses could only apply to the abilities of people.

Well, looking at Psalm 98 it would seem that ‘making a joyful noise unto the Lord’ is by no means restricted to humans with trumpets and harps.

This includes the sea and everything in it. The floods clapping their hands and the hills rejoicing when God finally accomplishes the consummation of all the ages and establishes His Judgment in all the earth.

For a ‘literalist’ you are not very literal when you choose to interpret “Let everything that breathes Praise The Lord” in such a way as to effectively exclude every breathing thing except human beings.

It strikes me that, taken literally, everthing should by definition not exclude anything if you were to be exegetically honest.

How ironic that I, an avowed non-literalist should believe that the entire creation will rejoice and praise God at the end of all things and a Biblical literalist, no less, insists that only a very few human beings will show God any gratitude whatever.

I prefer to think that the Bible says everything will rejoice and Praise the Lord for what He has done.

The heavens declare the glory of God : and the firmament showeth his handywork.
Day unto day uttereth speech : and night unto night showeth knowledge.
There is neither speech nor language : where their voice is not heard.
Their sound is gone out into all lands : and their words into the ends of the world.
Ps 19:1

The heavens declare his righteousness, and all the people see his glory.
Ps.97:6

Job was spewing error both sides of that verse.

So are you suggesting that Job was also ‘spewing error’ in the verse between then?

6 The tents of robbers are at peace,
and those who provoke God are secure,
who bring their god in their hands.

Job is making the very valid point that dishonest people appear to prosper, while honest people often remain poor; that the wicked are no more prone to misfortune than are the righteous. You will find that Job’s ‘comforters’ are the ones upbraided by God for ‘spewing error’ in all their convincing arguments against Job’s claim that he is being unjustly punished.

9 Who among all these does not know
that the hand of the LORD has done this?

You think that this is ‘spewing error’ ? Why ? Is God not almighty, omnipotent and sovereign. Do the birds, beasts and plants not (according to God’s Word the KJV Bible), “know that God has done this with His very own material hands”.

Where do you draw the line when interpreting what you read ‘Literally’ ?

10 In his hand is the life of every living thing
and the breath of every human being.

For me this poses no real problem because I do not have to take each and every sentence of scripture as ‘literal’ truth either in practical application or in scientific analysis. I can see that poetic and spiritual 'truth' often require deeper insight than a mere reading of the words themselves will superficially reveal.

But Biblical literal Inerrantists will always have a problem knowing exactly where to draw the line, because the idea of 'Biblical Literal Inerrancy' is an invention of man. In fact it is an 18th – 19th Century American Invention which has now become fashionable mostly in certain regions of The USA.

None of that whatsoever has anything to do with praising God. Take Psalms 150 as entirely meant for people to read and heed, not chimps or salmon.

I don’t think the author of Psalm 150 intended God’s Praise to be so restricted, in agreement with Psalms 19, 97, 98 and 148.

Loosen up Jim and join the rest of everything on earth which is grateful to God.

Let all those that seek thee rejoice and be glad in thee: let such as love thy salvation say continually, The LORD be magnified. Ps. 40:16

Regards Chris.

Dovegiven : Jim Hi:

Are you saying by quoting that that God intended for men all over earth to grope around like a worm in the dark looking for food, that men should look for God like that?

I thought I had already made clear that the scientific study of all kinds reveals knowledge which leads to a deeper understanding of The God who made what we are studying.

“Feel after”, “Perhaps find” are metaphors not literalisms. God is invisible.

God came down...walked with Adam in the Garden

Metaphorically yes! There is no absolute necessity to take it ‘literally’. If you do so what insight do you actually draw from the information? Is it worth knowing? How does it help you and I today?

They want to see Him with their eyes before believing.

They’ll have a long wait then ‘cause He’s invisible.
"Perhaps" is a keyword there. Perhaps leaves doubt as to success. It is "happenstance", against odds.

Paul was not suggesting that God was any longer difficult to track down. It is difficult to locate a God who is inherently invisible and unknowable but since the birth, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ none of those things now apply in our search for God. All we need is in Jesus Christ. HE is effectively Our LORD and our GOD.

Happenstance has been entirely eliminated but God is still there as before ready to reveal the mysteries of His creation to those who pursue scientific truth.

If Jesus is not Spirit with a glorified body, then what do you say Jesus is today?

Jesus is a life giving Spirit. 1 Cor. 15:45


Where is Jesus? Jesus sits on His own throne next to (at the right hand of) God the Father,

‘At the right hand of God’ refers to Authority and throne refers to Sovereignty, both of which are Biblical metaphors. Metaphors which incidentally have to be modified in translation for some languages because there are some cultures in which the Kings Consort actally sits by custom on the Kings left hand.

The Godhead is invisible and intangible but scripture attests that Jesus had what appeared to be a physical presence, tangible and visible but not subject to the normal laws of matter. (Able to materialise and de-materialise at will wherever He chose, without restriction). As far as we know the same still applies but as to “ literal thrones in a literal temple” there is no scriptural evidence that I know of that establishes that assertion beyond all doubt.

The Bible tells of God having almost all the same body parts as men, hands, feet, head, face, mouth, backside, etc., with no analogies intended whatsoever. Enough parts are testified to as making a complete man shape to be obvious.

Yes and all of these are anthropomorphic metaphors excepting in the case of Jesus Himself. You might make a case for the apparent appearances of ‘God’ in OT scripture actually being appearances of Jesus in his post resurrection ‘glorified body’ but that would have to remain speculation since it is not information that God had made us privy to via the medium of scripture it seems.

Regards Chris.

Jim wrote
Chris wrote Do you mean that there is something amiss with the good old KJV. I’m astonished.

Why would you assume from that there is a particular problem with the KJV? All Bible versions up to and for centuries after that version until only decades ago contain an excess of wording not used these days. Regardless of version or choice of language/grammar, etc. it is wise to study the words; the reason lexicons exist, as tools for optimum understanding. Here's some good advice: 2 Tim. 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

Isaiah 14 clearly concerned the future which is obviously still yet to come. Read the context! Please....
None of those promises have come to pass. From other scriptures we learn there are two biblical Babylon's, the old one gone, no threat to Israel. The end-times Babylon is coming in the Tribulation. In those days and following into the Millennium the Bible says the trees will rejoice, but first must come an earth at peace. When did that happen, Chris? Is the world quiet, at peace? No. It is in upheaval, without peace. This is yet another example of taking verses out of context to support some doctrine/point.

Ezekiel 35 is only partly fulfilled. When the whole earth rejoiceth, I will make thee desolate has not happened yet. The earth is still in travail. When Jesus reigns a thousand years then the earth will rejoice. Nothing like that is reality now. Besides, the phrase "whole earth" is typically, and in this case, meaning the people of earth rejoicing. It is the people rejoicing and worshiping God that pleases Him.

Let's look at Ps 98, shall we? I love that one.
Psalm 98:1
A Psalm.
O sing unto the Lord a new song; for he hath done marvellous things: his right hand, and his holy arm, hath gotten him the victory.

I ask again, what chimp or tree have you witnessed obeying that? WHich knows what marvelous things God has done by His mighty HAND and holy ARM? Has the total victory arrived yet?

[2] The Lord hath made known his salvation: his righteousness hath he openly shewed in the sight of the heathen.

Salvation and His righteousness was openly shown to the heathen. Are trees and chimps the heathen? No. They are animals.

[3] He hath remembered his mercy and his truth toward the house of Israel: all the ends of the earth have seen the salvation of our God.

His aim was toward Israel, not the natural world of animals. As a result of His showing, all the ends of earth have known about the salvation plan. Animals were not included. When an animal dies it reenters the carbon cycle.

[4] Make a joyful noise unto the Lord, all the earth: make a loud noise, and rejoice, and sing praise.

There is nothing here to suggest God has injected the animal kingdom into that action. It is for the people, both Israel and the Gentiles.

[5] Sing unto the Lord with the harp; with the harp, and the voice of a psalm.

Again, only humans can do those things. Still, there is no inclusion of the animal world.

[6] With trumpets and sound of cornet make a joyful noise before the Lord, the King.

Ditto.

[7] Let the sea roar, and the fulness thereof; the world, and they that dwell therein. [8] Let the floods clap their hands: let the hills be joyful together

Enter the role of the seas in that time period. They already roar, have all along. They shall continue to roar. The flora and fauna therein shall continue as before, though magnificently healed in the Millennium. The rivers will prosper, none remaining dried up.

[9] Before the Lord; for he cometh to judge the earth: with righteousness shall he judge the world, and the people with equity.

All of that ushers in the judgment of God. But for now.....Romans 8:22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.

I think the above pretty well addresses the balance of your post.

Blessings to all the seekers of the truth (Jesus)
Jim
·...¸><((((º>
.··´¯`·.¸.·><((((º>
·.¸.·´¯`·...¸.·><((((º>
Be fishers of men

Jim wrote:

Chris wrote: It happens that the academic world regulating the release of science knowledge routinely excludes any credit to God. In the USA public schools are required to teach and test for student knowledge of a list of points of evolution, never allowed to inject mention of God. A few teachers have done that, were fired. No science knowledge such as presented very professionally by scientists on the Creation side of the issue is let through. I have no doubt that a huge amount of scientific evidence against evolution, and in favor of special creation, exists that would help us all better understand God's creation.

“Feel after”, “Perhaps find” are metaphors not literalisms. God is invisible.

Paul was at liberty to express his side of the case using terminology the hearers fully understood as being derogative, pointing to the clumsy manner in which Athens sought after God. In no way does God prefer that men search for Him like blind men groveling in a garden for a leftover carrot. He had manifested Himself far better, leaving them no excuse.

Jim wrote: God came down...walked with Adam in the Garden

Chris wrote: Metaphorically yes! There is no absolute necessity to take it ‘literally’. If you do so what insight do you actually draw from the information? Is it worth knowing? How does it help you and I today?

If that part was metaphoric, then all of the Genesis account of beginnings is metaphoric, and therefore "original sin" would be metaphoric. Metaphoric of what? It only makes sense to take it all literally. If not, then you the one making metaphors out of much of the Bible are free to write your own bible and thereby deceive people.

From that record of God walking with Adam like being a friend stopping by for a visit, I see plainly that God desires to so fellowship with people as friend to friend. That isn't a new thing, but was God's will from the beginning. Be comfortable with God, yet fear Him in a healthy fear of greatest respect. That friend men must worship and praise. Look forward to His daily visits. Jesus exemplified that relationship, sending the Holy Spirit to me to continue that wonderful personal relationship. It happens every day for us here, not just on Sunday.

Paul was not suggesting that God was any longer difficult to track down. It is difficult to locate a God who is inherently invisible and unknowable but since the birth, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ none of those things now apply in our search for God. All we need is in Jesus Christ. HE is effectively Our LORD and our GOD.

Happenstance has been entirely eliminated but God is still there as before ready to reveal the mysteries of His creation to those who pursue scientific truth.

Paul was in fact pointing out the Athenians believed they had tracked down their array of gods, all invisible too. Yet, they had standard images of each, and they all had names and individual attributes. Happenstance is still very active in the world, especially in Hinduism and most all other religions. They welcome our "invisible" God (Jesus), but place him among all the other very invisible gods.

Pursue the Creator instead of every "scientific truth" mostly ungodly scientists present. Connect with some creation scientists for truth.

Jim wrote
Jesus is a life giving Spirit. 1 Cor. 15:45

Yes. Now would you please reveal the various descriptions of Jesus from His resurrection, ascension, and appearance in John's Revelation? Was He invisible all along? He was Spirit, as you admit.

‘At the right hand of God’ refers to Authority and throne refers to Sovereignty, both of which are Biblical metaphors. Metaphors which incidentally have to be modified in translation for some languages because there are some cultures in which the Kings Consort actally sits by custom on the Kings left hand.

The Godhead is invisible and intangible but scripture attests that Jesus had what appeared to be a physical presence, tangible and visible but not subject to the normal laws of matter. (Able to materialise and de-materialise at will wherever He chose, without restriction). As far as we know the same still applies but as to “ literal thrones in a literal temple” there is no scriptural evidence that I know of that establishes that assertion beyond all doubt.

So we have it from that that Jesus comes and goes, invisible, visible, sort of visible, and is not really allowed to sit next to the Father who is on His throne in the temple He showed Moses for a pattern. Jesus just wanders about holding some authority, trying to demonstrate how what we know of Him is but a bunch of metaphors. He claims sovereignty yet man was ordered to hold dominion over earth, which order has not been retracted.

By taking anything of the Bible as metaphoric without clear scriptural announcement of "metaphorically speaking" interpreting the text, I can see where the things of God can become bewildering.

Yes and all of these are anthropomorphic metaphors excepting in the case of Jesus Himself. You might make a case for the apparent appearances of ‘God’ in OT scripture actually being appearances of Jesus in his post resurrection ‘glorified body’ but that would have to remain speculation since it is not information that God had made us privy to via the medium of scripture it seems.

Metaphors again? Do you not realize how unfair it would be of HOLY God to teach us so much using metaphors rather than MANIFEST Himself to us? I have listened to clergy of several religions that dread the possibility of God being real, hopefully being a "force", relieving us all of the responsibilities of the scriptures, like perhaps happily we all face a non-existent image like Dorothy facing the Wizard of Oz. Facing a real God after which men appear and exist likewise is a daunting threat to many that have no real vision of Jesus yet.

By "post resurrection glorified body" appearing in the OT scenes do you suggest what those people saw those many times was Jesus traveled back in time? I prefer "pre-incarnate" Jesus. So there we would have Jesus being both visible and invisible in time beginning, the past, and present, and future. Visible and invisible. If He is one with the Father, then why can't the Father also be invisible and visible?

I believe God has always been visible to His children, invisible to the world. Some in the world think they heard thunder, while other an angel speaking. Some see, most don't.

Blessings to all seekers of the Truth (Jesus)
Jim
·...¸><((((º>
.··´¯`·.¸.·><((((º>
·.¸.·´¯`·...¸.·><((((º>
Be fishers of men