This Forum is now inactive and has been replaced by a new Christogenea Forum. You may browse here but there are no updated threads or new posts since January 1st 2017. Forum members please see THIS NOTICE for information concerning your account at the new forum.

Gen 1:26 Who are us?

This forum is for discussions and questions concerning Christian Identity direction, doctrine and debate.

Re: Gen 1:26 Who are us?

Postby wmfinck » Mon Oct 03, 2016 9:36 am

martin41 wrote:Yeah, But what I'm saying is if "G"od made us "g"ods then why not the pre-existence and the "us" be us?


Martin, you are not at all considering the earlier answers:

wmfinck wrote:That is how Wesley Swift tried to reconcile that verse in Job, and that is how Dewey Tucker insists upon interpreting it. However it is refuted by many other passages, which I have often explained in other places. 1 Corinthians chapter 15, Zechariah 12:1, etc.

Just because there were sons of God present at some point in the past does not mean that any one of "us" were there among them. As Paul said, the natural body comes first, and then the spiritual, which is sown a physical seed along with the natural.

PS: A few years ago, a few of our forum members departed, pulled away by Dewey Tucker's nonsense over this issue, which is clearly refuted by Scripture.


In the post before this one, Joe just quoted the passage I was referring to by mentioning 1 Corinthians 15. Zechariah 12:1 says "The burden of the word of the LORD for Israel, saith the LORD, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him."

There are other passages of Scripture which also support this concept, that the spirit of an individual man is not formed until conception.

For this reason and others, the "us" in Genesis 1:26 cannot be the "us" who are reading this forum.

If Yahweh God knew us before we were conceived, it is only because He is God and knows what is in the future.

The issue of whether we are "gods" has no bearing on the fact that we do not exist before we are conceived.

Some of the things Mark says may seem to conflict with some of the things which I have said on this topic. We do not agree about everything, but we are not as apart as it may seem.

It is true, that man does not have an "immortal" spirit. Only Yahweh God the Father is immortal, in the sense of having always existed and existing of His own power.

But the Adamic man has an eternal spirit. Meaning that it has a promise from God that it will exist eternally, at His leisure and subject to His will. This eternal spirit, according to both Paul and Zechariah, comes into existence when the man is conceived in the womb.
Image
If a jew is moving his lips, he's lying. If you see a rabbi, there has already been a crime!
User avatar
wmfinck
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2775
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 2:09 am

Re: Gen 1:26 Who are us?

Postby wmfinck » Mon Oct 03, 2016 9:52 am

MichaelAllen wrote:The creation language found in Genesis is also found on an Egyptian inscription where a Pharoah is being "created" or "formed" by the gods. Interesting to note that the artwork depicts the gods literally putting Pharoah's body together physically... however, when you read the associated text, it is clear that all that was actually happening was that Pharoah was being made king - and this was viewed as His "divine purpose" - i.e. creation.


I am not going to address every aspect of MichaelAllen's insightful post, and I already have addressed just about all of them in Pragmatic Genesis.

But Pragmatic Genesis was never meant to be a Genesis Commentary. Rather, it was a series of arguments which were intended to extricate a lot of the nonsense from Christian Identity, while setting the foundation for a practical view of Genesis which is based on Scripture rather than on the imagination.

What MichaelAllen says here is correct. The view of "creation" in Genesis, the way the word was used when Moses had written the accounts, is correct. I only touched on it briefly in Pragmatic Genesis, but I hope to go into more detail in a future Genesis commentary. Of course, I cannot do that until I have finished presenting my New Testament commentary, which has been my ongoing priority. And even when I am done going through the New Testament in podcasts, that will only be the start of a more formal written commentary.

However, to answer another issue which MichaelAllen had made. I also showed in Pragmatic Genesis that Genesis 1:1-2:3 was clearly written as a separate and distinct work from Genesis 2:4-4:26, and Genesis 5:1 begins yet another separate and distinct work. These are three separate works which Moses made from different perspectives, each with its own purpose. He cannot be faulted that men later screwed up the divisions between them.
Image
If a jew is moving his lips, he's lying. If you see a rabbi, there has already been a crime!
User avatar
wmfinck
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2775
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 2:09 am

Re: Gen 1:26 Who are us?

Postby wmfinck » Mon Oct 03, 2016 10:00 am

John 10 wrote: 34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;


Of course, this is true. And this is also very profound, because as Christ spoke these words, He was also fulfilling the intended prophecy of the 82nd Psalm, the same Psalm that He was quoting.

As He was standing in Jerusalem and speaking in the temple, was doing exactly as the entire 82nd Psalm describes.

But just because the Scripture says that "ye are gods", that does NOT mean that "ye WERE gods". That is even silly, to think that John 10:34 is advocating that idea.

In fact, there are other words of Christ which explains this. One instance is found in Luke chapter 6:

Luke 6 wrote:"39 And he spake a parable unto them, Can the blind lead the blind? shall they not both fall into the ditch? 40 The disciple is not above his master: but every one that is perfect shall be as his master."


The tense of the verb indicates that it would have been better translated as "perfected".
Image
If a jew is moving his lips, he's lying. If you see a rabbi, there has already been a crime!
User avatar
wmfinck
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2775
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 2:09 am

Re: Gen 1:26 Who are us?

Postby wmfinck » Mon Oct 03, 2016 10:12 am

martin41 wrote:And as the Spirit of Jesus pre-existed, why not "us"?


The Spirit of Jesus pre-existed because He IS God.
Image
If a jew is moving his lips, he's lying. If you see a rabbi, there has already been a crime!
User avatar
wmfinck
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2775
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 2:09 am

Re: Gen 1:26 Who are us?

Postby Kentucky » Mon Oct 03, 2016 12:27 pm

wmfinck wrote:Some of the things Mark says may seem to conflict with some of the things which I have said on this topic. We do not agree about everything, but we are not as apart as it may seem.

It is true, that man does not have an "immortal" spirit. Only Yahweh God the Father is immortal, in the sense of having always existed and existing of His own power.

But the Adamic man has an eternal spirit. Meaning that it has a promise from God that it will exist eternally, at His leisure and subject to His will. This eternal spirit, according to both Paul and Zechariah, comes into existence when the man is conceived in the womb.

Whenever Bill and I come upon a slight variation of theology, it always resolves itself after a healthy discussion and can only boil down to the principle of the thing. As they say, the devil is in the details lol. If we are working with the right principle, then it become difficult to compromise Scripture. Although some deviations can come into conflict with a given biblical premise. The greater truth of our identity is racial. A secondary consideration would be the particulars of our spiritual identity, which must conform to the Word.

For example, if there were an immortal soul (and I might add, a lot of people don't know the difference between soul and spirit), then that would lead credence to the idea that we really don't die when we die. Hmmm, now who would suggest such a thing? Who would put that bug in Eve's ear?

Of course, God created time and space and therefore it would be ridiculous for Him not to know the beginning of our life and the cessation of our life, which would be His withdrawl of what animates our life in the first place i.e. spirit! It would seem that if man says he has control of this spirit, then when he dies, he has, in essence, withdrawn his own spirit. How would a man go about doing such a thing other than suicide?

When God said, "For My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways My ways" (Isaiah 55:8), He was giving us a clue that some things are none of our business. It just seems to me that claiming control of God's Spirit is not only presumptuous, but preposterous, in light of Scripture comparing our life to a vapor, to wit, " For you are as vapor appearing for a short time, and then disappearing" James 4:14 CNT. If one doesn't think they vanish from the earth (or universe for that matter), then they have subscribed to the suggestion that they "Surely shall not die." And this 'disappearance' is not in conflict with the promise of eternal life, because there is a resurrection or restoration (really a miraculous transfiguration) after an interim of non-existence, which is the same thing before we were born/conceived. If anybody thinks they can transcend time, then they should get in line with the other omnipotents.

Mark
User avatar
Kentucky
 
Posts: 1803
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 2:20 am

Re: Gen 1:26 Who are us?

Postby Joe » Mon Oct 03, 2016 4:02 pm

Bill wrote
What MichaelAllen says here is correct. The view of "creation" in Genesis, the way the word was used when Moses had written the accounts, is correct.


MichaelAllen may be correct about this, but do you agree with MichaelAllen that the 'creation' of Adam was only the Adam-man being given a divine purpose? That the other races were materially created but they only do not have a divine purpose... (Conversely, I asserted that they are corruptions of the creation of God)

That there is no account of 'material creation', the man's actual physical nature being created in Genesis...
This actually fits into other aspects of MichaelAllen's non-exterminationist theology and the nature of the Kingdom of God and how it is established.

I do not agree with MichaelAllen, and I am not wholly familiar with his ideas since I cannot access them. I do not have anything against MichaelAllen but am simply interested in these ideas and bearing them out.
...and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.
User avatar
Joe
 
Posts: 1664
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2013 1:23 pm

Re: Gen 1:26 Who are us?

Postby MichaelAllen » Tue Oct 04, 2016 12:15 am

Joe wrote:Good question wehner, some very inspiring responses. I am not in the tucker camp, that is for sure.

MichaelAllen wrote
I reallyIn the Bible, there is no "creation" of the non-Adamites, however, they got here somehow - so they materially originated from somewhere, so in that sense, they are "created" beings. But they have no divine purpose from Yahweh.


People have said to me 'God created all things' eg. John 1:3, Col 1:16. I think God did create all 'things', but things created outside God's Law are not the creation of God and are outside the will of God.

They are a corruption of His creation. He is not their God, He is not the God of mongrels and of corruption. And He will remove all offenses, uproot the plants that He did not plant.

Also, the 'restoration of all things' does not mean that non-whites are saved, they are not things. Rather I think it is referring to 'all things' between God and His people, which is what Bill teaches, in my estimation.

PS. Not only do all people have a different destination ...I think they also have a different origination. This can be seen at John 8 and the parable of the wheat and the tares and elsewhere. Which, to me, explains why non-whites cannot live in harmony with nature or us and create wastelands wherever they go.



Joe, that phrase in the Greek "all things" if memory serves me correct, it is "ta panta" and (again, if memory serves me correctly) it means literally "the all." If you perform an exhaustive word study of it in the Greek, it is fairly clear that it does not mean all tangible, physical things. It goes back to Yahweh's divine purposing.

The universalists love to take the word "all" and extricate it from the rest of the entire necessary Biblical narrative, to their folly obviously. They find themselves trying to balance direct contradictions in scripture when they demand their definition of "all" include niggers, jews, mestizos, chinamen, and all the rest of the circus. It's like in mathematics, when you solve for all the possibilities of "x" for equations, there can never be a range of possibilities where, for example, x is greater than or equal to 2, AND x is less than or equal to -5. Think of it like this. Jesus said, "I am sent only to the lost sheep of the House of Israel." But John 3:16 says, "God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that whomsoever shall believe in him shall not perish, but have life eternal."

These two verses can NOT harmonize if John 3:16 is universal. So how did the Catholics and Presbyterians and all the rest of them get around it? Oh, they just redefined Israel to be "spiritual Israel," i.e. replacement theology. But then that flies in the face of Gal 4:4-5, Heb 9:15, Heb 8:8-12, and a host of other passages as well. So what is the reconciliation of these two passages. It is the understanding that the anointed offspring of Abraham became the Adamic world.

I'm pretty sure this has been discussed on here before, but "all the nations" in Matthew 28 in the great commission, are the same as "all creation" in Mark 16's great commission, and Mark says that the creation is found in the "world." That's kosmos, i.e. society - like, cosmopolitan magazine... the society people. The greek Kosmos is not the same as our word for cosmos as we have been taught it in the study of celestial objects.

So, the creation (Adamkind), the nations (which Abraham's covenant offspring were promised), and the world (the society which Abraham was promised to be heir of) are all the same. And Paul says by the year 68 AD all of the creation had heard the gospel preached (Col 1:23). But it didn't go to the chinamen, the nubians, and it didn't even go to the arabs, who were on the backdoor step of Judea. This demands a non-universalist gospel, and in my opinion, it is the most powerful New Testament argument that Adam was not the father of all races of upright walking hominids. So, that stands to reason... if the salvation of Adamic man was not universal, how could creation be universal? And if creation was not universal, then what are we actually looking at in Genesis 1 & 2. I say this with caution, but there are some mainstream judeochristian theologians that we can look to for help on this (albeit, you have to edit them when they don't make the connection in the New Testament that I just mentioned above). John H Walton of Wheaton University is an ancient text scholar who is fluent in the reading of many ancient languages. He wrote a few books some years ago, one was called "The lost world of Genesis 1" and another "The lost world of adam and eve."

He doesn't go into the description of Adam and Eve's transgression, but he is clear that the serpent was a person.

A good CI buddy and I have been reading ancient text compendiums for several years now trying to find something that would illuminate us so that we could more fluently explain the events of Genesis 1-11 to our brethren, but the fact is, we're shooting at the wind. It is mythological in nature - and that is not to deride the historicity of any of those events (although I'm quite convinced that the dates are off, and based on some of the Assyrian texts that I've read, I don't know if mankind ever biologically lived to be 900+ years old). Again, I'm not doubting the inspiration and authenticity of the pre-Abrahamic narrative that we find in Genesis... what I'm saying is, it is telling us a story in mythological colloquialisms for a reason.

If you will back out of the text itself like a zoom lens, and take a very solid look at what was going on in other Adamic civilizations at the time when (ostensibly) Moses is supposed to have written the books of the Pentateuch... there is a reason he wrote it the way he did. We're talking about a guy who had access to all kinds of ancient and contemporary texts.

If I could do one tyrannical act in my life time over my kindred it would be this: I would forbid the reading of the Bible unless they were to read 6 or 7 other ancient pieces of literature that included the similar narratives of Genesis. I am convinced that the Bible was written in reaction to something that was being propagated at the time of the bronze age and shortly thereafter.

What that is?

I can only speculate, so I won't go into detail... but I believe that it has to do with the nature and personality of the one true divine, which the children of Israel called Yahweh. These other Adamic nations had a lot of weird concepts about God - and I believe that Moses was trying as best as he could and with the inspiration of the Holy Spirit to dispose of those false ideas.

The Bible is a reaction to the false concepts that ancient man had about God and if you read enough ancient texts it is abundantly clear that the author is presenting the narrative of Genesis 1-11 as a direct antithesis to what was widely believed elsewhere. This gets very telling when we investigate what and who might have wanted to permeate Adamic society with false concepts of deity - and specifically why. The doctrine of the eternal burning hell as an example... why might that doctrine be useful for someone?

Someday when I'm done raising kids I want to put pen to paper and begin flushing out these findings, because we have a modern day church that has been inculcated with false concepts of God, and once you get through all of these texts and you then go back to the scripture... you realize what Moses is trying to teach the people of Israel: Yahweh is literally the conscious ever-present spirit of the white race. It literally comes down to that as the only option - and that is why the law is written on our hearts - we can't get it out even if we try. Those of us who are awake to this are the chiefs and the priests.
MichaelAllen
 
Posts: 253
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 1:35 pm

Re: Gen 1:26 Who are us?

Postby Joe » Tue Oct 04, 2016 6:09 am

I did read your whole post.
The universalists love to take the word "all" and extricate it from the rest of the entire necessary Biblical narrative, to their folly obviously.

I already understand 'all'.
And Paul says by the year 68 AD all of the creation had heard the gospel preached (Col 1:23). But it didn't go to the chinamen, the nubians, and it didn't even go to the arabs, who were on the backdoor step of Judea.

I never asserted that God created non-whites or that creation included non-whites. I don't think anyone here thinks otherwise.

Yahweh is literally the conscious ever-present spirit of the white race.

I already accept that Yahweh God is the Life of men.
...and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.
User avatar
Joe
 
Posts: 1664
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2013 1:23 pm

Re: Gen 1:26 Who are us?

Postby MichaelAllen » Tue Oct 04, 2016 7:42 am

Joe wrote:I did read your whole post.
The universalists love to take the word "all" and extricate it from the rest of the entire necessary Biblical narrative, to their folly obviously.

I already understand 'all'.
And Paul says by the year 68 AD all of the creation had heard the gospel preached (Col 1:23). But it didn't go to the chinamen, the nubians, and it didn't even go to the arabs, who were on the backdoor step of Judea.

I never asserted that God created non-whites or that creation included non-whites. I don't think anyone here thinks otherwise.

Yahweh is literally the conscious ever-present spirit of the white race.

I already accept that Yahweh God is the Life of men.



Joe, I was not aiming to correct you here, okay? I sense that you feel a corrective tone because of what's currently going on at the other post on the other thread. I will go and reply to you on that thread now.
MichaelAllen
 
Posts: 253
Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2013 1:35 pm

Re: Gen 1:26 Who are us?

Postby wehner » Mon Oct 24, 2016 10:35 pm

I stand corrected concerning the identification of the 'us' in Gen1:26. I'm finding some of the older CI material that I had once learned to have become revised since coming to Christogenea. That's why I'm still here. This particular belief was one of them. According to what I've gathered from your comments and research is that we are given the eternal spirit at conception (1Cor15/Zech12:1), the same one Adam received (Gen2:7) that is genetically propagated by race and thru Yahwehs Law. That the ' us ' in Gen1:26 is Elohim(plural) in the fellowship of the Trinity Godhead. The 'sons of God' (angels)' elsewhere in Scripture is an entirely different matter. Using Job38:7 holding to the idea that Elohim was speaking to his angels.
There will be division. Lk12:51.
User avatar
wehner
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2016 9:14 am
Location: Ohio

PreviousNext

Return to Christian Identity Directions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron