Is Reincarnation baloney?

[QuantumBit]

Satan is the Biological Father of the Human Race. Here is an illustration to help us define who 'The Devil' is...

View attachment 31766​

OK, so Mount Zion is the opposite of the above graphic. Mountains in the Bible represent the Male Generative Principle...

Revelation 14:1
"And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father’s name written in their foreheads."

The Lamb represents Abraham's Seed.

Of course, we all know that when a Man plants his Seed in the Lowest Parts of the Earth, it is not just one Seed, but many. Thus, the 144,000 are the rest of Seed that follows.

Where does the Lamb lead the Seed? Into the 'Yoni Gates' of New Jerusalem.

Euphemism...

Job 38:8 (Good News Translation)
"Who closed the gates to hold back the sea when it burst from the womb of the earth?"

• Earth = Mystery Babylon, the Biological Mother of the Human Race
• Womb = Womb
• Gates = Yoni
• Sea = Amniotic Fluid. The 'sea of people'.

Gates of Hell is the opposite...

Matthew 16:18
"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Thus, New Jerusalem 'sits' on Mount Zion so that the Seed can enter the Gates.

The Opposite is the Harlot that 'sits' on Seven Mountains to conceive the Seven Antichrists throughout the history of the Old Testament.

Stop listening to that "It's the Vatican!" nonsense and start listening to the Kingdom of God Within. You were supposed to seek it first!

If you would have done that, you would have had the 'Decoder Ring' to double-check what the Churches teach to see if what they say is True or not.

 

[Mr E]

OK, so Mount Zion is the opposite of the above graphic. Mountains in the Bible represent the Male Generative Principle...

Revelation 14:1
"And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father’s name written in their foreheads."

The Lamb represents Abraham's Seed.

Of course, we all know that when a Man plants his Seed in the Lowest Parts of the Earth, it is not just one Seed, but many. Thus, the 144,000 are the rest of Seed that follows.

Where does the Lamb lead the Seed? Into the 'Yoni Gates' of New Jerusalem.

Euphemism...

Job 38:8 (Good News Translation)
"Who closed the gates to hold back the sea when it burst from the womb of the earth?"

• Earth = Mystery Babylon, the Biological Mother of the Human Race
• Womb = Womb
• Gates = Yoni
• Sea = Amniotic Fluid. The 'sea of people'.

Gates of Hell is the opposite...

Matthew 16:18
"And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Thus, New Jerusalem 'sits' on Mount Zion so that the Seed can enter the Gates.

The Opposite is the Harlot that 'sits' on Seven Mountains to conceive the Seven Antichrists throughout the history of the Old Testament.

Stop listening to that "It's the Vatican!" nonsense and start listening to the Kingdom of God Within. You were supposed to seek it first!

If you would have done that, you would have had the 'Decoder Ring' to double-check what the Churches teach to see if what they say is True or not.

This is already tiresome.

Why not link to your website directly, or your videos on specific subjects. You’ve taken this thread far off topic and deep into the weeds.

Consider starting individual, new threads for your many diversions.

 

[St. SteVen]

there is no evidence from the Hebrew of Genesis chapter 6, that "the sons of God" were angels, or any heavenly beings.

No evidence?
That's debatable. Who do you think they were?

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

No evidence?
That's debatable. Who do you think they were?

The Hebrew "ʼĕlôhîym", does not necessarily need to be translated as "God", as it is also used for "judges, rules", and men of high station, nobles, etc. or can simply mean "goldy men". The Samaritan Version reads, "sons of the rulers."

The Jewish Targum Palestinian reads, "and the sons of the great saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and painted, and curled, walking with revelation of the flesh, and with imaginations of wickedness; that they took them wives of all who pleased them"

The Apocryphal book of Enoch has the legend of humans intermarrying with humans, from where this story no doubt comes from:

"1. And it came to pass when the children of men had multiplied that in those days were born unto them beautiful and comely daughters. 2. And the angels, the children of the heaven, saw and lusted after them, and said to one another: 'Come, let us choose us wives from among the children of men and beget us children.' 3. And Semjâzâ, who was their leader, said unto them: 'I fear ye will not indeed agree to do this deed, and I alone shall have to pay the penalty of a great sin.'" (chapter 6)

This is also found in another Apocryphal book, Jubilees, where we read:

"And it came to pass when the children of men began to multiply on the face of the earth and daughters were born unto them, that the angels of God saw them on a certain year of this jubilee, that they were beautiful to look upon; and they took themselves wives of all whom they chose, and they bare unto them sons and they were giants" (chapter 5, verse 1)

I personally don't do speculation theology, as it is not Biblical!

 

[St. SteVen]

I personally don't do speculation theology, as it is not Biblical!

Isn't that what you are doing in this post exchange?

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

Isn't that what you are doing in this post exchange?

No, I said that from the Hebrew text, there is ZERO evidence that it refers to "angels"!

Show where I am wrong

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

The Hebrew "ʼĕlôhîym", does not necessarily need to be translated as "God", as it is also used for "judges, rules", and men of high station, nobles, etc. or can simply mean "goldy men". The Samaritan Version reads, "sons of the rulers."

The Jewish Targum Palestinian reads, "and the sons of the great saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and painted, and curled, walking with revelation of the flesh, and with imaginations of wickedness; that they took them wives of all who pleased them"

The Apocryphal book of Enoch has the legend of humans intermarrying with humans, from where this story no doubt comes from:

"1. And it came to pass when the children of men had multiplied that in those days were born unto them beautiful and comely daughters. 2. And the angels, the children of the heaven, saw and lusted after them, and said to one another: 'Come, let us choose us wives from among the children of men and beget us children.' 3. And Semjâzâ, who was their leader, said unto them: 'I fear ye will not indeed agree to do this deed, and I alone shall have to pay the penalty of a great sin.'" (chapter 6)

This is also found in another Apocryphal book, Jubilees, where we read:

"And it came to pass when the children of men began to multiply on the face of the earth and daughters were born unto them, that the angels of God saw them on a certain year of this jubilee, that they were beautiful to look upon; and they took themselves wives of all whom they chose, and they bare unto them sons and they were giants" (chapter 5, verse 1)

I personally don't do speculation theology, as it is not Biblical!

those who cannot support their THEORIES, laugh at the TRUTH of the Bible!!!

 

[Mr E]

those who cannot support their THEORIES, laugh at the TRUTH of the Bible!!!

That's funny. But you should realize that people are just laughing at people, not "truth."

Do you have a translation of the bible that doesn't translate elohim as God?

In the beginning elohim created the heavens and the earth.

Please provide a reference to a Bible translation that says something other than 'In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.'

I'm not saying the translations are correct, but they are consistent.

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

That's funny. But you should realize that people are just laughing at people, not "truth."

Do you have a translation of the bible that doesn't translate elohim as God?

In the beginning elohim created the heavens and the earth.

Please provide a reference to a Bible translation that says something other than 'In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.'

I'm not saying the translations are correct, but they are consistent.

Amplified Bible

"In the beginning God (Elohim) created [by forming from nothing] the heavens and the earth"

;)

 

[Mr E]

Amplified Bible

"In the beginning God (Elohim) created [by forming from nothing] the heavens and the earth"

;)

Hello?

The Hebrew "ʼĕlôhîym", does not necessarily need to be translated as "God", as it is also used for "judges, rules", and men of high station, nobles, etc. or can simply mean "goldy men". The Samaritan Version reads, "sons of the rulers."

What translation can you offer to back up your claim?

Do you have one that says- In the beginning judges, rulers, men of high station, nobles, goldy men or sons of the rulers created the heavens and the earth?

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

Hello?



What translation can you offer to back up your claim?

Do you have one that says- In the beginning judges, rulers, men of high station, nobles, goldy men or sons of the rulers created the heavens and the earth?

I think that you have completely misunderstood what I am saying!

My point is, that the Hebrew houn "ʼĕlôhîym", does not always mean, nor have to be translated as "God"

For example, in Exodus 21:6, we read: ""then his master shall bring him to the judges", where the English "judges" is in the Hebrew "ʼĕlôhîym", where it is clearly used for humans and not God.

And, in Exodus 18:11, it says, ""Now I know that the LORD is greater than all the gods", where "gods" is the Hebrew "ʼĕlôhîym", and here refers to false "gods", and not the One True God of the Bible.

Likewise, in Genesis 6:2, the Hebrew, " B’nê Elohim", can literally read, "the sons of judges", or even "the sons of nobels", etc

 

[Mr E]

I think that you have completely misunderstood what I am saying!

My point is, that the Hebrew houn "ʼĕlôhîym", does not always mean, nor have to be translated as "God"

For example, in Exodus 21:6, we read: ""then his master shall bring him to the judges", where the English "judges" is in the Hebrew "ʼĕlôhîym", where it is clearly used for humans and not God.

And, in Exodus 18:11, it says, ""Now I know that the LORD is greater than all the gods", where "gods" is the Hebrew "ʼĕlôhîym", and here refers to false "gods", and not the One True God of the Bible.

Likewise, in Genesis 6:2, the Hebrew, " B’nê Elohim", can literally read, "the sons of judges", or even "the sons of nobels", etc

I understand perfectly what you are saying. You are saying that as a matter of convenience you can interpret (translate) the term to suit your fancy so that you might prop up your beliefs in doing so.

 

[ByGraceThroughFaith]

I understand perfectly what you are saying. You are saying that as a matter of convenience you can interpret (translate) the term to suit your fancy so that you might prop up your beliefs in doing so.

 

[Mr E]

lol Great rebuttal.

Let me give you a real-world example. If I say I'm going to Worchestershire for a weekend, you'd correctly surmise that I'm going to a place. But if I say I like a little Worchestershire on my steak or meat pie, you'd know I was talking about the sauce of the same name. You wouldn't confuse one for the other and you wouldn't interchange the meaning intended just because they use the same word/name.

But you elect to do this with scripture. You would never use elohim the same in Gen 1 as you do in Ex 18 or 21 even though there is no contextual difference that demands the distinction. In fact you insist on a contextual difference in places like Gen 6 because you can't come to grips with the idea that ben elohim could be talking about the same elohim mentioned in Gen 1 and on.

You thrust and force your understanding upon the text. Why not adjust your understanding instead of such an attempt to adjust the text?

 

[St. SteVen]

No, I said that from the Hebrew text, there is ZERO evidence that it refers to "angels"!

Show where I am wrong

It's a common understanding that the "sons of God" mentioned are angels.
That was why I said it was debatable. No need to fight about it, right?

 

[Mr E]

It's a common understanding that the "sons of God" mentioned are angels.
That was why I said it was debatable. No need to fight about it, right?

It's so strange. People have no trouble whatsoever 'thinking' they understand the concept of God the Father--who they recognize as being spirit, having children-- elohim. Yet when it comes to the idea that those children have children ben elohim-- that immediately becomes a bridge too far. No problem with son of God, no problem with children of God, no problem with God, our Father- who art in heaven.... but then they dismiss entirely, out of hand this story of those children of God that begins as told by Moses in Genesis.

 

[Wrangler]

My point is, that the Hebrew houn "ʼĕlôhîym", does not always mean, nor have to be translated as "God"

Agreed

I understand perfectly what you are saying. You are saying that as a matter of convenience you can interpret (translate) the term to suit your fancy so that you might prop up your beliefs in doing so.

lol Great rebuttal.

Here is a rebuttal for ya ... Many words have more than one sense. For instance, the word 'lord' can refer to one who fidelity is due, such as a land lord. Although there is another sense to the word referring to the Creator, we all know it is not necessarily the case. The Lord of the Rings. The Lord of the Flies. Lord Voldemort. Lord Vader. Lord Cornwallis. Lords and ladies.

The word Elohim generally means "heavenly being" of which the Creator is one - but not the only one - in heaven that this applies. That this could be the case in Genesis 1 has evidence for and against.

In verse 26, there is the use of the plural pronoun, referring to creation; making them (humans) in our image.​

In verse 4, 27 translations read that he (singular) approved of the light being good.​

​

However, 30 translations use no pronoun in v4 but repeats the use of the word Elohim as "God separated" or "God divided" the light, leaving ambiguous the plural or singular nature of who saw and separated the light.

Elohim saw the light was good. So Elohim separated the light from the darkness.

Fortunately for us, there is more to go by than the opening chapter. For instance, the most important commandment is fairly explicit in the general use of the world Elohim contrasted with who our God is in the NOG; Listen, Israel: Yahweh is our Elohim. Yahweh is the only God.

Ending with the word "God," there can be no doubt in this context, Elohim is not generally referring to heavenly beings but to the Creator by name. In 1 Kings 22:19-22, God himself seeks advice from and acts on the spirits that make up Heaven's Armies. (I trust you recognize spirits are synonymous with heavenly beings in this context.)

Furthermore, Psalm 82 and 86 both reference "Divine Councils" and our lord, specifically relied on 82:6 to justify calling himself the son of God. So, I think we ought to give councils of heavenly beings more consideration than Christendom generally in divine matters, including the act of Creation. It always caught my attention that the detailed account of Genesis leaves out when Yahweh created other Elohim, angels, heavenly beings, spirits. So, much ambiguity to consider.

​

 

[St. SteVen]

It's so strange. People have no trouble whatsoever 'thinking' they understand the concept of God the Father--who they recognize as being spirit, having children-- elohim. Yet when it comes to the idea that those children have children ben elohim-- that immediately becomes a bridge too far. No problem with son of God, no problem with children of God, no problem with God, our Father- who art in heaven.... but then they dismiss entirely, out of hand this story of those children of God that begins as told by Moses in Genesis.

Yes, absolutely. Great response, thanks.
Some will be offended by this, but The Holy Spirit "overshadowed" Mary. (whatever that means)
I meant no offense, but this is what we are discussing. Can a spiritual being reproduce as humans can?
Where did Jesus come from? Who is the father? Who is the mother? One is God (spiritual) and one is human. (physical)

Therefore, Jesus said there is no marriage in heaven, but is procreation possible in heaven outside of marriage?
Apparently so. Correct me if I am wrong. Thanks.

 

[Mr E]

Agreed





Here is a rebuttal for ya ... Many words have more than one sense. For instance, the word 'lord' can refer to one who fidelity is due, such as a land lord. Although there is another sense to the word referring to the Creator, we all know it is not necessarily the case. The Lord of the Rings. The Lord of the Flies. Lord Voldemort. Lord Vader. Lord Cornwallis. Lords and ladies.

The word Elohim generally means "heavenly being" of which the Creator is one - but not the only one - in heaven that this applies. That this could be the case in Genesis 1 has evidence for and against.

In verse 26, there is the use of the plural pronoun, referring to creation; making them (humans) in our image.​

In verse 4, 27 translations read that he (singular) approved of the light being good.​

​

However, 30 translations use no pronoun in v4 but repeats the use of the word Elohim as "God separated" or "God divided" the light, leaving ambiguous the plural or singular nature of who saw and separated the light.

Elohim saw the light was good. So Elohim separated the light from the darkness.

Fortunately for us, there is more to go by than the opening chapter. For instance, the most important commandment is fairly explicit in the general use of the world Elohim contrasted with who our God is in the NOG; Listen, Israel: Yahweh is our Elohim. Yahweh is the only God.

Ending with the word "God," there can be no doubt in this context, Elohim is not generally referring to heavenly beings but to the Creator by name. In 1 Kings 22:19-22, God himself seeks advice from and acts on the spirits that make up Heaven's Armies. (I trust you recognize spirits are synonymous with heavenly beings in this context.)

Furthermore, Psalm 82 and 86 both reference "Divine Councils" and our lord, specifically relied on 82:6 to justify calling himself the son of God. So, I think we ought to give councils of heavenly beings more consideration than Christendom generally in divine matters, including the act of Creation. It always caught my attention that the detailed account of Genesis leaves out when Yahweh created other Elohim, angels, heavenly beings, spirits. So, much ambiguity to consider.

​

Doesn't pass the smell test.

It's one thing to say that , J.R.R.Tolkein, William Golding, J.K. Rowlings, George Lucas and King George III might have had differing ideas and differing usages of the word "Lord" across multiple genres and hundreds of years.... you didn't really think you were going to get away with that, did you?

In Genesis-- Moses is your story teller. He knows what/who LORD (Yahweh) is. He doesn't use that word to describe nor identify who it was that was doing the creating in Gen 1.

Why wouldn't he? Ever thought about it?

 

[QuantumBit]

On my rounds of the discussion boards I see that a lot of seemingly intelligent sensible people believe in reincarnation, namely that when we die we're born again as a baby somewhere.
Is there any Biblical scriptural support for it?

I just noticed you have not posted in a while.

If you end up reading this someday, just know that I have provided many verses, commentaries, links, references and case studies proving that reincarnation is a fundamental theme woven throughout Scripture. Remember, God is Love.

As you can see, there are many that ignore the verses I post and points I make due to extreme bias and cognitive dissonance. Some have even resorted to personal attacks which prove how spot-on my information is. As usual, there is a majority of folks that simply cannot handle Truth. Their responses are dishonest, condescending, rude and nasty. They are the exact opposite of everything Jesus taught us. This is a sign of severe indoctrination into false theology. It is a Cult really.

Dare I say...

Some may even have an agenda to keep this information hidden as to not ruin the money they make peddling their lies...

1 Timothy 6:10
"For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows."

I hate to think they do the bidding of Satan for free, but some folks are really lost like that, full of hatred, bitterness and even jealousy. This has been demonstrated many times in this thread already.

Sadly, this is the result of a lifetime of, "God will burn you to infinity and beyond!!!". They are a dying breed and feel very threatened by folks like me. Thank God their time has come and gone. Soon their endless lies will be a thing of the past and maybe we can have True Revival once more before the end comes.