• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The suffering servant of isaiah 53

Heneni

Miss Independent
Have you ever read the book of Job? The man Job never existed.
The book was written with the purpose to illustrate the role of Israel in the Counsel of God.
Job represents Israel and his three friends represent the Gentiles. At the end of the book
God does not accept the prayers or sacrifices of his friends, but instructs them to go to Job
and ask him to intercede for them. That's in Job 42:8. If you can't see mediation here,
we can change the subject and you can say you beat me on this debate. I'll accept defeat.
That's all right.


Yes, the book of Job has a lot to do with the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Throughout the book,
we have job explaining to his friends that he was suffering innocently; that he had not sinned to suffer that much.
Obviously, it means that he was suffering for someone else's sins. And throughout the book his friends would try
to make him believe that his suffering was caused by his own sins. Obviously, they could not handle the truth that
Job was suffering for their sins. But as I said in the above paragraph, we don't have to continue this debate.
I am ready to give in. Why? Because you will never change my mind, and obviously I will never change yours.
I will only make you upset and upset myself.


Ben :sorry1:

Job was suffering for their sins? Interesting...then even job was a type of christ. I knew david was, and joshua, and boas were also types of christs, but it never came to mind that job was too..ill have a think about it.

Though of course you dont think job was a type of christ, but rather a type of jew that would suffer for mankind in the future and save us.

Do you really think that saving mankind is something that we can place on the shoulders of humans?

And wouldnt it be a relief to know that the fate of the world does not lie on your shoulders?

Im afraid AK4 has made a valid point in a particular part of your 'doctrine' that is contradicting. If there is no afterlife...what are you saving us for or from?

heneni
 

AK4

Well-Known Member
We are wasting our time with each other. Let's make a deal: You stick to your Bible, the NT, and I'll stay with mine, the Tanach.
And let's leave each other alone. I rest my case for all that I am concerned.


Ben :run:

Yes we are wasting time with each other because--(would you believe Paul was right again)

1Co 1:21 - For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
No i stick to the Whole Word of God not a bible (translation). You quit because you have no leg to stand on. We can keep it civil, but defend your faith oops knowledge. Dont give up PROVE ME WRONG LIKE I AM DOING YOU. Now dont get me wrong, im not trying to save you, not in the least bit. I believe the Word of God where it says that "let those who wanna be unjust, be unjust" (paraphrasing from Revelations). So stand strong for your faith---SAVE ME! for i am lost.

oh brother i wont patronize you. good luck in your studies
 

Ben Masada

Well-Known Member
Job was suffering for their sins? Interesting...then even job was a type of christ. I knew david was, and joshua, and boas were also types of christs, but it never came to mind that job was too..ill have a think about it.

Though of course you dont think job was a type of christ, but rather a type of jew that would suffer for mankind in the future and save us.

Do you really think that saving mankind is something that we can place on the shoulders of humans?

And wouldnt it be a relief to know that the fate of the world does not lie on your shoulders?

Im afraid AK4 has made a valid point in a particular part of your 'doctrine' that is contradicting. If there is no afterlife...what are you saving us for or from?

heneni

If you had read the topic about the Place of Israel in the Counsel of God, you would not have to ask the above questons. But I'll explain over again.


Okay, Heneni, read Genesis 8:21. That's when God promised Noah that He would never again destroy Mankind in a universal catastrophe.

But why was it necessary to destroy it in the first place? Because, according to Genesis 6:5, the wickedness on earth was too great and that it was
crying for justice before the throne of God.

Now, what about if Mankind turned again into the same wickedness after God's promise that He would not recourse to universal destruction again?
That's when God created a special People from the Patriarchs: Abraham, Isaac and Jacob: The People of Israel, to serve as the pledge to guarantee
God's promise to Noah.


Now, here is the how salvation is effected: Not individual salvation, of course, but universal salvation from universal catastrophe.

I might be mistaken perhaps, but after many years of research on this matter I have come to the conclusion to firmly believe in it
that the salvation that comes as a result of the place of Israel in the Counself of God is to safeguard Mankind from universal catastrophe.
That's quite different from the etimology of individual salvation as a Christian doctrine.

Did you understand me? Either you did or not, please, let's change this subject. AK4 is already so upset at me that communication between us has become impossible.

You might say: You started it! Yes, I know. And I already regret it. Now, I understand what a certain Rabbi I shared my finds with and he told me to keep it to myself.


Ben :sorry1:
 
Last edited:

AK4

Well-Known Member
Job was suffering for their sins? Interesting...then even job was a type of christ. I knew david was, and joshua, and boas were also types of christs, but it never came to mind that job was too..ill have a think about it.

Though of course you dont think job was a type of christ, but rather a type of jew that would suffer for mankind in the future and save us.

Do you really think that saving mankind is something that we can place on the shoulders of humans?

And wouldnt it be a relief to know that the fate of the world does not lie on your shoulders?

Im afraid AK4 has made a valid point in a particular part of your 'doctrine' that is contradicting. If there is no afterlife...what are you saving us for or from?

heneni


Good point heneni. Another case of using his own words against him. Frugals!!
 

AK4

Well-Known Member
If you had read the topic about the Place of Israel in the Counsel of God, you would not have to ask the above questons. But I'll explain over again.

Okay, Heneni, read Genesis 8:21. That's when God promised Noah that He would never again destroy Mankind in a universal catastrophe. But why was it necessary
to destroy it in the first place? Because, according to Genesis 6:5, the wickedness
on earth was too great and that it was crying for justice before the throne of God.
Now, what about if Mankind turned again into the same wickedness after God's promise that He would not recourse to universal destruction again? That's when God
created a special People from the Patriarchs: Abraham, Isaac and Jacob: The People of Israel, to serve as the pledge to guarantee God's promise to Noah.

Now, here is the how salvation is effected: Not individual salvation, of course, but
universal salvation from universal catastrophe. I might be mistaken perhaps, but after many years of research on this matter I have come to the conclusion to firmly
believe in it that the salvation that comes as a result of the place of Israel in the Counself of God is to safeguard Mankind from universal catastrophe. That's quite different from the etimology of individual salvation as a Christian doctrine. Dis you understand me? Either you did or not, please, let's change this subject. AK4 is already so upset at me that communication between us has become impossible.

Ben :sorry1:

You know, i read all the way up to That's when God
created a special People from the Patriarchs: Abraham, Isaac and Jacob:

Please choose your words carefully and restate what you are saying because once again youll be doing this:foot::foot::foot::foot::foot:
 

AK4

Well-Known Member
ben
[Either you did or not, please, let's change this subject. AK4 is already so upset at me that communication between us has become impossible.

No im far from upset. You actually have me LOL. I wont call you a hypocrite anymore... i mistake people to be like me-- not sensitive to others words. Why dont you want to communicate? Remember im not upset so we can--but i hold the same standard to you that i hold to me--- if you can show me where im wrong in my thinking/belief where its beyond just the--this verse says this and this verse says that, without knowing that God is Love-- that proves that God is not Love then i will consider what you have to say and not have to expose you or anyone else who contradicts His Word.
 

Ben Masada

Well-Known Member
No im far from upset. You actually have me LOL. I wont call you a hypocrite anymore... i mistake people to be like me-- not sensitive to others words. Why dont you want to communicate? Remember im not upset so we can--but i hold the same standard to you that i hold to me--- if you can show me where im wrong in my thinking/belief where its beyond just the--this verse says this and this verse says that, without knowing that God is Love-- that proves that God is not Love then i will consider what you have to say and not have to expose you or anyone else who contradicts His Word.


Okay, apologies accepted if that meant to be one.
Now, bear in mind the abyss of a difference that exists between we two.
While you are a man of faith who takes the Bible literally at face value,
I am more of Bible Scientist who goes beyond the letter and analyse what the
symbols point to.

Bear in mind too that the NT does not have much of an influence over me,
except for the 20 percent, which I accept as genuine. And mind you, most other Jews don't go even that far.
Having said that, I am giving another chance to our dialog.


Ben :yes:
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
While you are a man of faith who takes the Bible literally at face value, I am more of Bible Scientist who goes beyond the letter and analyse what the symbols point to.
You're a "Bible Scientist" who asserted that the Bible was written down by Moses over 4 thousand years ago. Whatever the nonsense phrase "Bible Scientist" might be construed to mean, you are an unabashedly ignorant one.
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
My comments come in between yours above.

Ben:clap

There is absolutely no evidence to support your theory that Paul was the only one preaching Christ or that he did at all. I will agree that someone did but there is nothing to tie it in to any person. The idea that the appelation "Christians" came in at the end of Paul's teaching doesn't mean that it is directly tied to it and the text does not support that kind of connection.

As for the church in Jerusalem, we find Peter preaching Christ in the syagogue and before the Sanhedrin.
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
When I read it, I see that it is clearly talking about Jesus. If you don't beleive Jesus is a the Messiah, then you will TRY to find a different meaning. However, Jesus fulfilled all requirement in Isaiah 53.

Isaiah 53:1-3 (NIV)


1 Who has believed our message
and to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed? 2 He grew up before him like a tender shoot,
and like a root out of dry ground.
He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him,
nothing in his appearance that we should desire him.
3 He was despised and rejected by men,
a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering.
Like one from whom men hide their faces
he was despised, and we esteemed him not.


Where does it say the servant was born deformed? And if it did, how do you know what Jesus looked like? Your evidence might come from v. 3, however, this is an analogy of lack of admiration and not physical aesthetics.

They only followed Jesus for short periods of time and when he told them what was required of his disciples, they left.
John 6

Isaiah 53:4-8 (NIV)

4 Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God,
smitten by him, and afflicted.
5 But he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was upon him,
and by his wounds we are healed.
6 We all, like sheep, have gone astray,
each of us has turned to his own way;
and the LORD has laid on him
the iniquity of us all.
7 He was oppressed and afflicted,
yet he did not open his mouth;
he was led like a lamb to the slaughter,
and as a sheep before her shearers is silent,
so he did not open his mouth.

8 By oppression and judgment he was taken away.

And who can speak of his descendants?
For he was cut off from the land of the living;
for the transgression of my people he was stricken

Where does it say that he live a long life?

While I found the Da Vinci's Code to be a very interesting book, the truth of the matter is Jesus' descendants are his followers, which are many. Jesus gave up his life to show the world the spiritual world.

Your right about Jesus' inclusion of the whole world. However,
God chose the Jews to be his nation first, that is obvious, and Jesus displayed reservations about who deserves to be first in line, so to speak.

Isaiah 53:9-12 (NIV)

9 He was assigned a grave with the wicked,
and with the rich in his death,
though he had done no violence,
nor was any deceit in his mouth. 10 Yet it was the LORD's will to crush him and cause him to suffer,
and though the LORD makes his life a guilt offering,
he will see his offspring and prolong his days,
and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand.
11 After the suffering of his soul,
he will see the light of life and be satisfied;
by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many,
and he will bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore I will give him a portion among the great,
and he will divide the spoils with the strong,
because he poured out his life unto death,
and was numbered with the transgressors.
For he bore the sin of many,
and made intercession for the transgressors.


No nation can bear the sins of anyone. In Biblical terms, a clean person has to atone for sin and all fall short of the glory of God, but Jesus. Jesus was the only Biblical person to accomplish this task. Now, many people will fart and tap-dance around this subject. But if you are to look at all Scripture, the Suffering Servant is clearly Jesus. :angel2:


Now do you understand what this topic is about? :D

A tender shoot has no implication of deformity in it. Interestingly enough the Messiah is mentioned as a shoot (sometimes translated branch) many times in prophecy. A Sabra told me that it was new growth from an old tree. This takes on a great deal of meaning when the tree is God. Since God can do an epiphany as an adult the prophecy is definitely saying that the Messiah will start out as a child.

This also does not indicate deformity but rather that there was nothing uncommon about His looks.

This is a fulfillment. Jesus was spat upon by the Pharisees, He was mocked by the people. All of this happening while He was on the cross. In addition He was bleeding and his back had to be a mess from the whipping. No doubt he had been beaten about the face leaving it black and blue and maybe even a broken jaw. (You should see the pictures of what someone did to my brother in law by beating him in the face and broke his jaw; it is very hard to look at them).

He had to be an unblemished lamb, a man without sin but as Isaiah said all have come short of the Glory of God. Only God in the flesh can be without sin and Jesus qualifies as that as well. As Jesus said "Only God is good."

The word cut off suggest a life shortened. The question about descendants perhaps presages the Da Vinci type speculations but it sounds like a challenge to me. Try to find a descendant if you can.

This is a strange juxtaposition of the wicked and the rich. Jesus died between two thieves and was placed in the grave of a rich man.

Offspring can mean followers. The resurrection is clearly stated here.
 

Ben Masada

Well-Known Member
A tender shoot has no implication of deformity in it. Interestingly enough the Messiah is mentioned as a shoot (sometimes translated branch) many times in prophecy. A Sabra told me that it was new growth from an old tree. This takes on a great deal of meaning when the tree is God. Since God can do an epiphany as an adult the prophecy is definitely saying that the Messiah will start out as a child.

This also does not indicate deformity but rather that there was nothing uncommon about His looks.

This is a fulfillment. Jesus was spat upon by the Pharisees, He was mocked by the people. All of this happening while He was on the cross. In addition He was bleeding and his back had to be a mess from the whipping. No doubt he had been beaten about the face leaving it black and blue and maybe even a broken jaw. (You should see the pictures of what someone did to my brother in law by beating him in the face and broke his jaw; it is very hard to look at them).

He had to be an unblemished lamb, a man without sin but as Isaiah said all have come short of the Glory of God. Only God in the flesh can be without sin and Jesus qualifies as that as well. As Jesus said "Only God is good."

The word cut off suggest a life shortened. The question about descendants perhaps presages the Da Vinci type speculations but it sounds like a challenge to me. Try to find a descendant if you can.

This is a strange juxtaposition of the wicked and the rich. Jesus died between two thieves and was placed in the grave of a rich man.

Offspring can mean followers. The resurrection is clearly stated here.


Do you know why you attribute the requirements of Isaiah 53 to Jesus? Because of
Paul. If he had not come up with his Christology to hide his - Paul's - Messiahship,
you would never be able to think of Jesus when reading Isaiah 53.

Ben :rolleyes:
 

Ben Masada

Well-Known Member
THE FIVE COVENANTS

1 - The Edentic Covenant was a Covenant with all Mankind. It was established in the Garden of Eden. The token was the tree of Knowledge.
The eternal gift of God was freewill. (Gen. 4:7) God's promise was dominion over the whole Earth. (Gen. 1:28) Man rejected it and the Flood came.

2 - The Noahite Covenant was likewise a Covenant with all Mankind. The token was the bow in the cloud. (Gen. 9:8-13) God's promise was life
pledged by the People of Israel soon to come from Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Man's part was to obey the Noahite laws.

3 - The Abrahamic Covenant was a Covenant with Israel only. The token was the circumcision. The reason was to fulfill God's promise to Noah as
the guarantee for the world to keep going. (Gen. 17:9-14, 19-21) God's promise was possession of Canaan. (Gen. 15:18-21) Throughout History
the world has kept a tight grip on the Jewish People through pogroms, exiles, Crusades, Inquisition, Nazis and anti-Semites in general.

4 - The Sinaitic Covenant was likewise a Covenant with Israel only. The duty of Israel here was to obey the Law. The token was the Sabbath given
as a sign between the parties: God and Israel. (Ezek. 20:12,20) Under this Covenant the method of conversion was introduced, according to Isaiah 56:1-8.

5 - The New Covenant was a Covenant also with Israel only. What's new in this Covenant was on the method of observance.
It had been prophesied by Jeremiah to be made with the remnant of the Jewish returnees. from the exile in Babylon.

So, new in the New Covenant were the terms; instead of the People being compelled to obey for fear of punishment,
they would voluntarily seek the Lord. In other words, instead of having the Law written in tablets of stone, it would be printed in our own hearts.
Techinically, it was but a renewal of the Sinaitic Covenant made with the House of Israel and the House of Judah as one,
including all those converted to Judaism. (Jer. 31:31,34; Isa. 56:1-8; Zech. 8:23)

Ben:shout
 
Last edited:

AK4

Well-Known Member
Okay, apologies accepted if that meant to be one.
Now, bear in mind the abyss of a difference that exists between we two.
While you are a man of faith who takes the Bible literally at face value,
I am more of Bible Scientist who goes beyond the letter and analyse what the
symbols point to.

Bear in mind too that the NT does not have much of an influence over me,
except for the 20 percent, which I accept as genuine. And mind you, most other Jews don't go even that far.
Having said that, I am giving another chance to our dialog.


Ben :yes:

Now come on, your doing it again. I take the bible literally but say that the whole bible is one giant parable--now that would make me a hypocrite. They are very few things in It that are literal. I look at it spiritually. Spiritually--that means not literal.

I am more of Bible Scientist who goes beyond the letter and analyse what the
symbols point to.

Do you now? Do you want me to paste in this post all of your literal interpretations--one example is the Job thing where you literally--you can also call that physically-- take the words of Job of "no return" and "my change". Your theory, scientist, stays just a failed theory if it can be proven wrong.

Now you dont have to have dialog with me, but i can always disprove your heresy and you dont have to respond. So on that note...:cool:
 

AK4

Well-Known Member
THE FIVE COVENANTS

1 - The Edentic Covenant was a Covenant with all Mankind. It was established in the Garden of Eden. The token was the tree of Knowledge.
The eternal gift of God was freewill. (Gen. 4:7) God's promise was dominion over the whole Earth. (Gen. 1:28) Man rejected it and the Flood came.

2 - The Noahite Covenant was likewise a Covenant with all Mankind. The token was the bow in the cloud. (Gen. 9:8-13) God's promise was life
pledged by the People of Israel soon to come from Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Man's part was to obey the Noahite laws.

3 - The Abrahamic Covenant was a Covenant with Israel only. The token was the circumcision. The reason was to fulfill God's promise to Noah as
the guarantee for the world to keep going. (Gen. 17:9-14, 19-21) God's promise was possession of Canaan. (Gen. 15:18-21) Throughout History
the world has kept a tight grip on the Jewish People through pogroms, exiles, Crusades, Inquisition, Nazis and anti-Semites in general.

4 - The Sinaitic Covenant was likewise a Covenant with Israel only. The duty of Israel here was to obey the Law. The token was the Sabbath given
as a sign between the parties: God and Israel. (Ezek. 20:12,20) Under this Covenant the method of conversion was introduced, according to Isaiah 56:1-8.

5 - The New Covenant was a Covenant also with Israel only. What's new in this Covenant was on the method of observance.
It had been prophesied by Jeremiah to be made with the remnant of the Jewish returnees. from the exile in Babylon.

So, new in the New Covenant were the terms; instead of the People being compelled to obey for fear of punishment,
they would voluntarily seek the Lord. In other words, instead of having the Law written in tablets of stone, it would be printed in our own hearts.
Techinically, it was but a renewal of the Sinaitic Covenant made with the House of Israel and the House of Judah as one,
including all those converted to Judaism. (Jer. 31:31,34; Isa. 56:1-8; Zech. 8:23)

Ben:shout

Wow. God made a new covenant after Abraham then made another at Sinai and then another. Why am i and almost everyone else decieved then when God talks about the same covenant that He made with YOUR fathers that yall kept breaking?

Come on now:slap:
 

gnostic

The Lost One
God did make a number of covenants to different people.

Perhaps the first, when he told that man and woman should "be fruitful and multiply" in Genesis 1.

The next one was to Noah, when he said he would never send another Flood to destroy mankind.

There were actually 2 covenants (I think), which God made to Abraham would be father of many nations, and that he (or his descendants) would have the land of Canaan. This second one wasn't fulfilled until the time of Joshua.

He gave the same covenant about land of Canaan to Isaac and Jacob, but also that the land would be named Israel, which is another name for Jacob.

There were 2 covenants for Moses. That he would helped Moses to free the Israelites from slavery in Egypt and give the Torah (Law) to the Israelites. God also confirmed to Moses of fufilling his covenant to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

To David, he not only gave kingship to the former shepherd, but his covenant to David was that his descendants would have kingship too (House of Judah). David's dynasty lasted till the fall of Jerusalem in the 6th century BCE.
 

AK4

Well-Known Member
God did make a number of covenants to different people.

Perhaps the first, when he told that man and woman should "be fruitful and multiply" in Genesis 1.

The next one was to Noah, when he said he would never send another Flood to destroy mankind.

There were actually 2 covenants (I think), which God made to Abraham would be father of many nations, and that he (or his descendants) would have the land of Canaan. This second one wasn't fulfilled until the time of Joshua.

He gave the same covenant about land of Canaan to Isaac and Jacob, but also that the land would be named Israel, which is another name for Jacob.

There were 2 covenants for Moses. That he would helped Moses to free the Israelites from slavery in Egypt and give the Torah (Law) to the Israelites. God also confirmed to Moses of fufilling his covenant to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

To David, he not only gave kingship to the former shepherd, but his covenant to David was that his descendants would have kingship too (House of Judah). David's dynasty lasted till the fall of Jerusalem in the 6th century BCE.


Lets see---perhaps, i think---no its one covenant. If they were seperated as you may think they all fall under one covenant---is God a man? Do He change His mind?

Nu 23:19 -God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill?

God gave portions of His one covenant at different times, just like He portions of different things at different times thats why you have this

Isa 28:10 - For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:
This falls in with things like resurrection, judgement, the saving of all men, covenant etc etc etc.

God didnt want to make it easy because---

Matthew 13:44-52 44 ...the kingdom of heaven is like unto treasure hid in a field; the which when a man hath found, he hideth, and for joy thereof goeth and selleth all that he hath, and buyeth that field. 45 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a merchant man, seeking goodly pearls: 46 Who, when he had found one pearl of great price, went and sold all that he had, and bought it.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
It has nothing to do with God changing his mind.

He just a separate covenant to different people, where some of them were unrelated.

I am not a believer, like you or Ben Masada, but I can see and I can read them.

Did God not promise to Abraham many descendants?

Did not God promise to David that his line would have kingship?

Did God not promise to Moses that he would provide them with laws (Torah)?

Did God not promise to Noah that he would never destroy mankind with Flood?

These covenants were to fufil in their own time. As I wrote before Abraham, it was not fulfilled until the Israelites had set foot in Canaan, as they cross the River Jordan in Joshua's time.

Are you really that blind that you can't see the difference?

I am sure you know the bible better than I do, so you should easily find the relevant passages about these covenant.
 

Ben Masada

Well-Known Member
Wow. God made a new covenant after Abraham then made another at Sinai and then another. Why am i and almost everyone else decieved then when God talks about the same covenant that He made with YOUR fathers that yall kept breaking?

Come on now:slap:


As you can see, there is much that you still do not know.

Ben :rolleyes:
 

AK4

Well-Known Member
It has nothing to do with God changing his mind.

He just a separate covenant to different people, where some of them were unrelated.

I am not a believer, like you or Ben Masada, but I can see and I can read them.

Did God not promise to Abraham many descendants?

Did not God promise to David that his line would have kingship?

Did God not promise to Moses that he would provide them with laws (Torah)?

Did God not promise to Noah that he would never destroy mankind with Flood?

These covenants were to fufil in their own time. As I wrote before Abraham, it was not fulfilled until the Israelites had set foot in Canaan, as they cross the River Jordan in Joshua's time.

Are you really that blind that you can't see the difference?

I am sure you know the bible better than I do, so you should easily find the relevant passages about these covenant.


Did you read my last post? I mean come on. You as an atheists will not see what i am saying so i wont scourge you too bad.

These covenants were to fufil in their own time. As I wrote before Abraham, it was not fulfilled until the Israelites had set foot in Canaan, as they cross the River Jordan in Joshua's time.


Boy let me show you just a little of how blind i am--God gave the covenant of the seventh day in Genesis and then later restates it and in more detail when it was given to Moses---Is this two different covenants? Come now:slap:
 
Top