I do not take you as being contrary and please forgive me, I am not the best at explaining some things, Scripture is the word of God given to us through the Holy Spirit by the prophets but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son and there are no contradictions, he that doubteth is damned. Man is who makes the contradictions. God called out Abraham when he was 75 years old, Genesis 12:4 and Genesis 12:1 this is after Terah died and Genesis 11:32 says he was 205 years old when he died. Acts 7:4 also says when his father was dead God removed Abraham into this land.
We make the contradiction when we take Genesis 11:27 as saying Terah was 70 years old when Abraham was born. But it says Terah was 70 years old when he begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran, This is saying all three sons were born when Terah was 70 years old and we know that is impossible. Scripture is clear Haran was older because Lot was his son, Nahor married one of Haran's daughters and Haran died before his father Terah.
We have two verses in Scripture that say God called out Abraham after Terah died Genesis 12:1 and Acts 7:4 and Genesis 11:32 says Terah was 205 years old when he died and Genesis 12:4 Abraham was 75 years old, this tells us Terah was 130 years old when Abraham was born, 205 minus 75 = 130 no contradiction.
Studying the timelines is interesting, as knowing how many years from Adam to Abraham to Moses and on. But if we try to use these timelines for any purpose other than our enjoyment, we must know there are different texts and they all do not agree. We can only reach approximately the years from then and now. None of these charts will predict the second coming of Jesus.
There are discussions or debates on the chronology of the age of Terah when Abraham was born. In Genesis 11:26 Terah was 70 years old and begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran, in Genesis 11:32 Terah lived to be 205 years old. In Genesis 12:1-4 it looks like God did not call Abraham out until after Terah died, and in verse 4 it says Abraham was at that time 75 years old. If Terah lived to 205 years old and Abraham was 75 when God called him out after Terah died that would make Terah 130 years old when Abraham was born.
The other verse used is in Acts when Stephen was giving his defense, basically a step-by-step of Israel's troubles from Abraham to then. Speaking of Abraham in Acts 7:4 Then came he out of the land of the Chaldaeans, and dwelt in Charran: and from thence, when his father was dead, he removed him into this land, wherein ye now dwell.
If Terah was 205 when he died, and God did not call out Abraham until then and Abraham was 75 years old that would make Terah 130 years old when Abraham was born. If that is so it looks like a contradiction but if we look at Genesis 11:27-32 it is clear Haran was the oldest son of Terah and Lot, the son of Heran was a man of some age maybe not much younger than Abraham when God called out Abraham.
If Terah was 70 when he began to have sons, all three were not born at the same time so Terah could very well have been 130 when Abraham was born. So, should it be 70 or 130? It does not change anything meaningful but discussions over chronological charts about 60 years.
Thank you, I made chronological charts years back and I know how hard it is and how much time it takes, considering the different texts like the Hebrew Masoretic, Greek Septuagint, and others.
And other things like the age of Terah when Abram/Abraham was born in Genesis 11:26 he is 70 years old, in Genesis 11:32 Terah was 205 years old when he died. In Genesis 12:1-4 it sounds like Abram/Abraham left Haran after his father died when he was 75 years old. We have to consider did he leave before or after Terah died that would make a 60-year difference. Thanks again.
I have been wiped out on my computer TWICE trying to get this posting out. Seems the enemy doesn't want me to do this.
Or I had too many windows up at the same time. UGH.
Whenever I go to get scripture references I take a chance on wiping out the page; although my computer for some reason stalled out last run..
I will post this as an argument and rebuttal format just to do something different....
First assumption (as best I understand it). Christ didn't appear any other time in a bodily form except while here on earth.
It should be clear that Christ rose with scars remaining from His body which He had on earth that was resurrected. This is clear from "doubting Thomas" in John 20:28. There are numerous instances when Christ was indeed in a preincarnate form; such as with the incident with Abraham in Genesis 18:18 (where it also appears the discussion in the previous verses is between the Godhead as to whether these things should remain hidden). There is also the incident with the angel of the Lord in Hosea 11:4 cross referencing Jacob wrestling with God in the account of Genesis 32:22-32. For worship to occur these saints of God were indeed only to worship God. Since 1 John states that no one can see God and live; and Genesis 32:30 says that no one has seen God at any time; it seems clear that Christ was appearing in these cases. Numerous other verses could be cited.
The "us" verses.
We see in the original creation story in Genesis 1; as well as the narrative of the Tower of Babel ( Genesis 11:7) where "our image" and "us" is referred to in the creation of man; and the determination to confuse the language of men.
Argument Two: Main premise that God is one appearing in different "modes" or forms. To ignore that God is in distinct persons seems absurd in light of verses such as Luke 23:46 (where Jesus commended His spirit to God at death); and all other verses which showed Christ praying to the Father.
Although Genesis 11:26-27 lists the order of Terah's sons as Abram, Nahor and Haran, this appears to be according to the regard God has for them in terms of their importance to establishing His chosen godly line of promise and not their natural birth order. Haran almost certainly is the natural first born son of Terah for several reasons:
1. Haran dies in Ur of the Chaldeas before any of His relatives begin to sojourn.
2. If Haran was Terah's first born son and died before Terah did, Lot would have to remain with Terah from that time until Terah's death, since Lot would then be the heir of Terah's possessions, not Abram or Nahor.
3. Haran is old enough to father the wife of Abram's brother Nahor before he dies. If Haran was older than Abram by 60 years this makes sense.
4. In Gen 12 Abram seems to be genuinely interested in being treated well by Pharoah for Sarai's sake, which would be less likely to be important to Abram if he had inherited all of Terah's possessions as the first born son.
5. Lot's possessions seem to rival Abram's possessions in Gen 13, which would be significantly more likely if he was nearly equal in age with Abram and Lot had become wealthy through inheriting Terah's possessions.
6. In Gen 13 Lot is given first pick of the land of their sojournings by Abram. Lot makes no effort to show any special appreciation to Abram for granting him this honor. Lot's acceptance of the honor without showing any deference would be unthinkably arrogant if Abram was actually the first born heir of Terah. However, this all makes sense if Abram was showing recognition that Lot was the heir of Terah as the son of Terah's first born deceased son.
7. In Gen 19:31 Lot's daughters consider him old when they conspire to get pregnant by him. This is much more likely if he was in his 80s or 90s like Sarah and Abraham, rather than in his 60s or 70s, which is the oldest he would likely be if Haran was Abraham's younger brother.
John 10:34- seems to be a popular verse here. People want to believe they are a god, is that what's happening here? That would be a gross misinterpretation. You know this is a quote with a question mark at the end, right? Let's be honest about it. Here's the commentary for that:
Christ's argument is: If your law calls judges gods, why should I be held guilty of blasphemy for saying that I am the Son of God?
As per the other argument trying to discredit the word "one" sounds like your argument is that one doesn't really mean one, because Jesus used it to describe believers being one. I don't see how being one in unity as Christ's body somehow means that all the Bible verses about Jesus being God and divine suddenly don't apply? The verse about the Father and Son being one is only one of MANY verses competing the picture. The Bible already says Jesus the Word is God so how can you disregard that?
God: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:1 KJV
You: Word was "NOT" God?
"Then said they unto him, Where is thy Father? Jesus answered, Ye neither know me, nor my Father: if ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also." John 8:19 KJV
Have you thought about how your belief reconciles with verses like this above?
Isaiah 7:14 -
Yes, Jesus is called Immanuel which means "God with us". People called Jesus "God". He's King of King and Lord of Lords. Alpha and Omega, first and last. Do you believe Jesus is Lord? I believe that is a requirement for even being a Christian. A Christ follower should know who Christ is.
1 John 5:7-8
John 10:30
John 8:19
Genesis 1:26
Genesis 11:6-7 (plural "us" which includes Jesus, as per John 1:1)
Genesis 11:31 And Terah took Abram his son, and Lot the son of Haran his son's son, and Sarai his daughter in law, his son Abram's wife; and they went forth with them from UR OF THE CHALDEES,
Genesis 11:27-32. Abraham, his father, Terah, nephew Lot, with their wives left Ur in southern Mesopotamia, almost at the northernmost coast of the Persian Gulf. Ur was one of the first cities built in the plains between the Tigris and Euphrates after the family of Noah migrated south and eastward from the Mountains of Ararat after the landing of the Ark.
They came to Haran in Padam Aram in Northwest Mesopotamia (modern day Syria/Iraq border area) where Terah and Nahor settled their families there and the whole family dwelt in Haran for a time until God again called Abram to travel to the land He had chosen for Abram. It seems that Nahor already lived in Haran because he did not travel from Ur with the group. Later, Isaac send for a wife from the family of Nahor in Haran. Rebecca. Haran became a major city on the trade routes from Egypt through Canaan to the Tigris-Euphrates plains that lie between these rivers going northwest to southeast to the Persian Gulf. Abram, Sarai, Lot journeyed from Haran to Canaan.
God asked Abram to leave his family and set out with Sarai to the land God would show him. Lot went with them to Canaan. ( Genesis 12) It seems that Abram had servants that went with them whom they had acquired while residing in Haran. ( Gen 12:5) So, there must have been a larger group of people than just Abram, Sarai, and Lot.
Abram and Sarai and Lot descended from Noah's son, Shem, therefore were known as Semites along with all the other descendants of Shem that formed other people groups and tribes. He was descended from Eber (sometimes spelled Heber) and therefore was called a Hebrew along with all of the other descendants of Eber that formed other people groups and tribes. By the time of Abram, the Semites and more narrowly, the Hebrews were a large race of people. But as one can see from the list of nations in Genesis 10, God was slowly narrowing down the family and tribes that He wished to work through in those days as people selected.
Is says earth, most cases referring to the ground we walk on. Did God divide the earth as in the continents or placed them in land already separated (continents) as they are today? Like the world, 5 Hebrew translations, 3 Greek. Earth though all refer to the ground, dirt, soil in all three translations.
1 Chronicles 1:19 - And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of the one was Peleg; because in his days the earth was divided: and his brother's name was Joktan.
Genesis 10:25
"And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother's name was Joktan."
Genesis 10:32 - These are the families of the sons of Noah, after their generations, in their nations: and by these were the nations divided in the earth after the flood.
Genesis 11:16-19 - And Eber lived four and thirty years, and begat Peleg:And Eber lived after he begat Peleg four hundred and thirty years, and begat sons and daughters.And Peleg lived thirty years, and begat Reu:And Peleg lived after he begat Reu two hundred and nine years, and begat sons and daughters.
Deuteronomy 32:8 - When the most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.
Luke 3:35-36 - Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala,Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech,
Acts 17:26 - And 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;
Was reading up on this "breakthrough development using stem cells to create a human embryo, yet since it was not from a fertilized egg they are not calling it a human life technically, so they use this as an excuse for calling this technology "ethical".
Science and medicine really took a leap into what is really God's realm, that of conception of human beings, "fertility treatments" that manipulate bodies and hormones, fertilizing in vitro, cloning, as well as the various ways we try to we try to eliminate life before birth or even conception. This tampering with the very nature of the creation of life to control it is not from God. But we have fallen far down the slippery slope. Reproductive research and health services are playing at being god in this area of our society. I wish we could turn back the time to before ideas like Eugenics and Genetic engineering began. But alas, I think we have gone over the brink. It was only a matter of time.
Genesis 11:6 says "And the Lord said, "Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language, and this they begin to do (Towe of Babel); and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do."
In our day, language is not a barrier in Science anymore. We have come again to the "Babel" of our time, when mankind can think together and accomplish whatever they imagine to do.
There will be a judgment for this, just like the flood of Noah's day, and the scattering of the people from Babel. This time, it most likely will be the judgment promised at the end of the age. The upside is, Christ will return and destroy all who oppose Him and redeem all who believe to the fullest. Praise be to God.
0817880641. You asked, "what is a gentile to God?" When we think of a 'gentile' (or, a non-Jew), we can only use the word after Noah, the Flood, & ultimately his sons as they & their descendants departed & inhabited the 'new world' (post-Flood). Before Noah, there were no Jews or Israel - but man from the very beginning began to depart from worshiping the true God. So when you look at the generations from Shem (Noah's son, through whom God called out His special people), in Genesis 11:10-26, we see that God had a specific plan to bring about blessing first to Israel & then to the gentiles. Even though it might seem that the gentile was unimportant to God, because they did not receive His Favor, His Laws, & His Presence, gentiles were never far from God's thoughts, even using them to sometimes bless or chastise His people.
Till the coming of Jesus, His Sacrifice for all sinners (Jew & Gentile alike: Romans 10:12, "For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him"), the gentile had little knowledge or participation in the Grace of God. Therefore, gentiles, as the Jew, are from the one Adam onto Noah & his sons - all are precious to Him & all will fulfill His Plan for the world.
You have questioned your position & purpose as a gentile before God. The Apostle Paul reminds us in Romans 9:25,26, "As he saith also in Osee (Hosea), I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved. And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there shall they be called the children of the living God" ( Hosea 2:23). This is speaking about us, to us. If you as a gentile rejected God's Call on your life to salvation & blessing, then you would be in the same boat as the Jew, who received the blessings, but still rejecting God's Grace in His Son. "There is no difference". You are more precious to God if you have called upon Him.
Yes JRR, the word 'flesh' can be taken to apply to only mankind; but the Bible does speak of 'other' flesh. As the Apostle Paul referred to this in 1 Corinthians 15:38,39: "But God giveth it (i.e. the seed by God that contains the necessary constituents to form a particular organism), (gives it) a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body. All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds." So, I believe that Genesis 6:18-20, speaks of the various categories of 'flesh' & not to the many tribes & families that exist as human beings.
And back to the Kenite origins. I have seen opinions that indicate that the Kenites descended from Cain, hence not all flesh were destroyed by the flood. And yet, we get an example in Judges 1:16 indicating that Jethro, Moses' father-in-law, was a Kenite. And then in Numbers 10:29, Jethro is referred to as Raguel (also called 'Reuel' in Exodus 2:18), as a Midianite. What would you make of this? We know that it is the same man, Jethro, that is referred to, but can we assume a connection between the two families (Kenites & Midianites)? If there is and we go back to the immediate descendants of Noah's sons, we can follow the descendency from Shem through to Terah to Abram to Midian (through Keturah): Genesis 10:21-31; Genesis 11:10-32; Genesis 25:1-4 (here, we see Midian born to Abraham through Keturah, of whom (Midian), Jethro is connected to. If Jethro is also recorded as being a Kenite, there must be another family line coming through Midian (maybe through a daughter, not mentioned (only sons) in Genesis 25:4).
So, it appears that we must be open to the possibility that the Kenites were not from Cain (as much as a similarity exists in those names), but could have come through the descendants of Shem & the Abraham.
Hi Patrick. Sarah, in the Book of Genesis, was Abraham's wife. Actually, her name was Sarai (& Abraham was first known as Abram) & she was probably from the same region that Abram, his father Terah, & brothers Nahor & Haran, were from. This was a Gentile, pagan area, though we're not sure of the spiritual condition of these men at that time.
In Genesis 11:27 onwards, you can read of Sarai becoming Abram's wife, but she was infertile. And you can read their story from here on, but then in Genesis chapter 17, God establishes a covenant with Abram, that he would be a father of many nations, and that he would now be called, Abraham. As for Sarai, her name became Sarah, for she would be the mother of nations & kings of people would come from her (v16).
It's not really fair to judge someone based on the definition of a name given before or at time of birth, before the person defines who they, themselves are by their life, actions, achievements etc. 1Chronicles 4:9-10, Genesis 10:25, Genesis 35:18, Neither is it Justice to define anyone by a name because someone has the same name. Please read these scriptures: 1Samuel 2:3, Genesis 25:25,26, Genesis 29:32, yet not exactly true, because Genesis 29:33, contadicts the previous name. Following Genesis 29:34,35,
Sometimes people live up to names given, is it because they've been called so? Genesis 27:36,
However sometimes a name is earned: Genesis 25:30, Genesis 30:13, Revelation 11:8, Revelation 12:9, Revelation 19:13, Revelation 17:14
Many times people in the Bible share name, yet are completely different. Especially 1611 KJV, on this site. Examples today many people have name like Jesus pronunciation different are not even close, or Angels names, that are far from. We should be careful to not be deceived even evil can appear as light, likewise many names have been made to deceive. 2Corinthians 11:13,14
There are divine names given by GOD however, those maybe we should take more notice of, :
I grew up in the 60's and 70's with the big push to explore space. I remember the moon landing and am amazed by the pictures we receive from telescopes from crafts launched into outer space.
But with this as part of my life's experience, I just feel deep down that God gave us earth to live upon. It is where He reveals Himself and works with mankind, not outer space. I think of the billions of dollars spent on the space programs, and consider how much good we could have done on earth for those in need with these resources. I am sure that we may have some benefits from exploring space, but I don't know if what we have benefited outweighs the detriment. I guess I just don't think that God ever wanted us to bring anything from space to earth, nor for man to go into space.
I know that our inquisitiveness and intellect are good things bestowed on us from God. Yet, the fallenness of mankind has corrupted these abilities to an immense depth of depravity, as it says in Genesis 6:5-6 of unredeemed human nature: the wickedness of man was great in the earth and that every intent of the thoughts of his hearts was only continually evil." ."
And in Genesis 11: 6 the LORD says that "Indeed the people are one and they all have one language, and this is what they begin to do, now nothing that they propose will be withhold from them." (Meaning that whatever they can think of to do they can accomplish it.)
So, our exploration of space is really from an unredeemed standpoint. What are we trying to prove or discover, really? If man is really trying to prove the existence of God by space exploration, they won't discover that since man does not believe what God has already revealed about Himself in our history and Scripture. Are the scientists that are working on this exploration Christian believers influenced by Christian thought? If not, then their endeavors are evil, just like at Babel. I think that instead of trying to satisfy a curiosity of "what is out there"
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
Who is the Word?
John 1:14-15 says the Word is Jesus. Does anyone deny that the Word is Jesus?
If someone believes John 1:14, then do they believe John 1:1
"...the Word was God."
"...[Jesus] was God."
JESUS.
WAS.
GOD.
John 1:1
This is God's Word.
Some here are saying "Jesus was NOT God" despite John 1:1 clearly saying Jesus WAS God. I'd like to know exactly how someone can believe in all other verses of the Bible except this one? If something WAS something, that seems to offer little room for interpretation. It means it's the same, does it not? So, if something WAS something, how does someone twist this into believing it says something WAS NOT something?
It then must be asked: since it takes so much effort to take a sentence something WAS something to turn it into: something WAS NOT something, what is the true underlying motive here? Does God's Word carry the most weight and influence or does something else?
This is eerily similar to Gen 3:4 where satan denied what God said and claimed that they shall NOT surely die. Satan loves opposites and this seems to have his signature, does it not?
I welcome any perspective I'm missing, but do not consider anything other Bible verses as valid evidence. God's Word is all that matters and because there's already numerous verses supporting that Jesus is God like John 1:1 then that is what is true. Lastly, why not just pray and ask God directly to know the truth? Genuinely ask!
This is an interesting logical argument. I find that in 1 Peter 3:22. Let's assume for argument's sake that your conclusion is correct and you get 1 point for this.
But for every verse you cite, there are even more that say that Jesus IS God, like John 1:1 saying the "Word was God" and verse 14 that Jesus is the Word.
This could continue to play out and you can cite any number of verses to support your position, but again we don't run out of very compelling verses saying that Jesus is God.
Let's say that it's a dead even race. 30 verses suggesting Jesus isn't vs 30 verses suggesting He is.
Then what? Which do you choose to believe?
I don't know if you've gone through this exercise or not, but I now have a spoiler: someone will run out of verses supporting that Jesus "isn't" God long before the verses supporting He IS God. Not only that, but each of the verses commonly cited to claim that Jesus "isn't" God require some extra creative interpretation and human logic whereas the verses supporting the other side can be read and interpreted more literally. Not only that, but there's logical explanations for why Jesus called His Father God. The main reason is that He temporarily became a human being and limited His power. Phil 2:6-7. So, yes, as a man, He prayed to His Father and called Him God. So, all verses must be considered as a whole, not cherry picked in order to have understanding about the Godhead and I admit it is hard to comprehend as we don't have anything like it in on earth. But perhaps like an orange with seeds, pulp, skin. Someone calls pulp an orange, and it is.
Genesis 11:1-10 I believe would answer your question,
And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech."
"Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech. So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city. Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth."
The Bible literally refers to God as Godhead, so the few who are uncomfortable with that term can simply use the word Godhead instead. There's a mountain of scriptures showing the dynamic and divinity of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. We're here to defend Jesus Christ and anyone trying to discredit or smear His divinity. We should all pray for wisdom, understanding and truth as we read the scriptures so that we are not mislead by the enemy and buy into things that merely fulfill our itching ears.
Circular arguments on this topic remind me of an Abbott and Costello "who's on first" skit. In case anyone isn't aware, here are some scriptures describing one God with three components: father, son, and holy spirit. We likely will never 100% comprehend God nor should we expect to, but the fact is the Bible describes God as a triune Godhead, uses plural terms, says the three are "one", and I will trust God's Word over man's word. Christians will keep sharing the truth of the scriptures everytime someone tries to challenge God's word.
Godhead:
Colossians 2:9
Acts 17:29
Romans 1:20
John 1:1
1 John 5:7-8
Genesis 1:26
Genesis 11:6-7
John 10:30
John 8:19
Philippians 2:5-8
2 Corinthians 5:19
John 1:3
Matthew 28:19
1 Peter 1:2
2 Corinthians 13:14
Deuteronomy 6:4
John 14:10
John 20:28
1 John 2:22-24
Matthew 1:23-25
Isaiah 7:14 - Jesus is called Immanuel which means "God with us"
Hi Jasmine, you asked several questions but I will just address your first question about God plural. It's plural because God is a triune being composed of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Beware of anyone pushing their own ideology and twisting scripture in order to accomplish their desired outcome. The Bible already says what it means and because it says this about God I choose to believe it.
Hi Pam. We see this pronoun ('us') used also in Genesis 1:26 & Genesis 11:7, but we should not understand that God, in these instances, is speaking of Himself & the other beings in Heaven. Rather, we learn that all of the Godhead (i.e. the Divine Beings within the Person of God) were active in these instances where they interacted with mankind.
1 John 5:7 reads, "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one", reminds us that for God to be Who He is, His Word (now Jesus as man & in Heaven), & His Spirit, are all one in the Godhead & yet separated (or, sent out) for the performance of God's Will. So when God uses 'Us', we can understand that the all-inclusive God is declaring His Deity (His Unity in Triunity) & this fact should be seen in those instances where they are revealed to us (in His creation of man & His dealings with man).
The key to understanding 2:4 is in the opening Hebrew phrase tldt ("This is the history of"), as it formulates the structure of the book of Genesis. A number of scholars recognize that here tldt serves as a heading that introduces a new section of the narrative. Interestingly, this is the only time the phrase tldt occurs without a personal name, the reason being that "Adam had no human predecessors. The tldt serves two main purposes in Genesis 2:4. First, it "links 2:4-25 with 1:1-2:3. The language of 2:4 looks back to the creation account, just as the tldt in Genesis 11:10 looks back to a line of Shem in Genesis 10:1 and 10:21-31. Second, "its main purpose is to shift attention to the creation of man and his placement in the garden. The setting of Genesis 2 is the garden in Eden, in which the LORD God places the man he creates ( Genesis 2:8, 15). Because there was no man to work the ground ( Genesis 2:5), this is the reason that the LORD God forms "the man" (hdm) from the dust of the "ground" (dm). The description of the creation of the first man is given in Genesis 2:7:
then the LORD God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature.
Like a craftsman who shapes his material, the LORD God "formed. (yar) the man from the "dust" (pr) of the ground. The word "dust" is not a metaphor. It can only mean literal dust in the context of Genesis 2-3 because it is to dust that Adam will return due to his disobedience ( Genesis 3:19; cf. Job 34:14-15). After the formation of man from the dust of the ground, he is given human life when the LORD God breathes into him the breath of life.
I had to look at a couple of commentaries. Write this down so you can view them when you need to.
Go on Google. " Type your scripture: Genesis 2:4, commentaries"
It'll bring up several. I like BIBLEHUB. It's fun to look at other websites too ( within the first 5-10 listings)
>> Pulpit Commentary
Verse 4. - These are the generations is the usual heading for the different sections into which the Book of Genesis is divided (vial. Genesis 5:1; Genesis 6:9; Genesis 10:1; Genesis 11:10, 27; Genesis 25:12, 19; Genesis 36:1; Genesis 37:2).
All of these proposals are, however, rendered unnecessary by simply observing that toldoth (from yaladh, to bear, to beget; hence begettings, procreations, evolutions, developments) does not describe the antecedents, but the consequents, of either thing or Person (Rosen., Keil, Kalisch).
>>[Keil and Delitzsch Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament]
The historical account of the world, which commences at the completion of the work of creation, is introduced as the "History of the heavens and the earth," and treats in three sections, (a) of the original condition of man in paradise ( Genesis 2:5-25); (b) of the fall ( Genesis 3); (c) of the division of the human race into two widely different families, so far as concerns their relation to God ( Genesis 4).
I do not take you as being contrary and please forgive me, I am not the best at explaining some things, Scripture is the word of God given to us through the Holy Spirit by the prophets but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son and there are no contradictions, he that doubteth is damned. Man is who makes the contradictions. God called out Abraham when he was 75 years old, Genesis 12:4 and Genesis 12:1 this is after Terah died and Genesis 11:32 says he was 205 years old when he died. Acts 7:4 also says when his father was dead God removed Abraham into this land.
We make the contradiction when we take Genesis 11:27 as saying Terah was 70 years old when Abraham was born. But it says Terah was 70 years old when he begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran, This is saying all three sons were born when Terah was 70 years old and we know that is impossible. Scripture is clear Haran was older because Lot was his son, Nahor married one of Haran's daughters and Haran died before his father Terah.
We have two verses in Scripture that say God called out Abraham after Terah died Genesis 12:1 and Acts 7:4 and Genesis 11:32 says Terah was 205 years old when he died and Genesis 12:4 Abraham was 75 years old, this tells us Terah was 130 years old when Abraham was born, 205 minus 75 = 130 no contradiction.
Studying the timelines is interesting, as knowing how many years from Adam to Abraham to Moses and on. But if we try to use these timelines for any purpose other than our enjoyment, we must know there are different texts and they all do not agree. We can only reach approximately the years from then and now. None of these charts will predict the second coming of Jesus.
Hope this helps if not let me know.
God bless,
RLW
There are discussions or debates on the chronology of the age of Terah when Abraham was born. In Genesis 11:26 Terah was 70 years old and begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran, in Genesis 11:32 Terah lived to be 205 years old. In Genesis 12:1-4 it looks like God did not call Abraham out until after Terah died, and in verse 4 it says Abraham was at that time 75 years old. If Terah lived to 205 years old and Abraham was 75 when God called him out after Terah died that would make Terah 130 years old when Abraham was born.
The other verse used is in Acts when Stephen was giving his defense, basically a step-by-step of Israel's troubles from Abraham to then. Speaking of Abraham in Acts 7:4 Then came he out of the land of the Chaldaeans, and dwelt in Charran: and from thence, when his father was dead, he removed him into this land, wherein ye now dwell.
If Terah was 205 when he died, and God did not call out Abraham until then and Abraham was 75 years old that would make Terah 130 years old when Abraham was born. If that is so it looks like a contradiction but if we look at Genesis 11:27-32 it is clear Haran was the oldest son of Terah and Lot, the son of Heran was a man of some age maybe not much younger than Abraham when God called out Abraham.
If Terah was 70 when he began to have sons, all three were not born at the same time so Terah could very well have been 130 when Abraham was born. So, should it be 70 or 130? It does not change anything meaningful but discussions over chronological charts about 60 years.
I hope this makes some kind of sense.
God bless,
RLW
Thank you, I made chronological charts years back and I know how hard it is and how much time it takes, considering the different texts like the Hebrew Masoretic, Greek Septuagint, and others.
And other things like the age of Terah when Abram/Abraham was born in Genesis 11:26 he is 70 years old, in Genesis 11:32 Terah was 205 years old when he died. In Genesis 12:1-4 it sounds like Abram/Abraham left Haran after his father died when he was 75 years old. We have to consider did he leave before or after Terah died that would make a 60-year difference. Thanks again.
God bless,
RLW
In consideration of your request and for your verification, I am sending what I was able to conclude in my private Bible study, as follows:
The Bible I use is King James Version -> Biblegateway
SIX PERIODS OF BIBLICAL TIMES --------------------------- DURATION
I- From Adam to the Flood-( Genesis 5:1-32 plus 7:11)-----1656 years
II- From the Flood to Abraham-( Genesis 11:10-32 & 12:4---427 years
III- From Abraham to Exodus-( Galatians 3:17)---------------430 years
IV-From Exodus to king Saul-(1Reis6:1(480 minus 84 yrs)--396 years
V-From Saul to Jerusalem's fall(1095-587BC)----------------508 years
(my source: Biblical Dictionary)
VI-From the fall of Jerusalem (587BC) to Jesus --------------587 years --> Total = 4004 years
(source: Biblical Dictionary)
That's what I have to report. I hope it helps,
GOD bless
I have been wiped out on my computer TWICE trying to get this posting out. Seems the enemy doesn't want me to do this.
Or I had too many windows up at the same time. UGH.
Whenever I go to get scripture references I take a chance on wiping out the page; although my computer for some reason stalled out last run..
I will post this as an argument and rebuttal format just to do something different....
First assumption (as best I understand it). Christ didn't appear any other time in a bodily form except while here on earth.
It should be clear that Christ rose with scars remaining from His body which He had on earth that was resurrected. This is clear from "doubting Thomas" in John 20:28. There are numerous instances when Christ was indeed in a preincarnate form; such as with the incident with Abraham in Genesis 18:18 (where it also appears the discussion in the previous verses is between the Godhead as to whether these things should remain hidden). There is also the incident with the angel of the Lord in Hosea 11:4 cross referencing Jacob wrestling with God in the account of Genesis 32:22-32. For worship to occur these saints of God were indeed only to worship God. Since 1 John states that no one can see God and live; and Genesis 32:30 says that no one has seen God at any time; it seems clear that Christ was appearing in these cases. Numerous other verses could be cited.
The "us" verses.
We see in the original creation story in Genesis 1; as well as the narrative of the Tower of Babel ( Genesis 11:7) where "our image" and "us" is referred to in the creation of man; and the determination to confuse the language of men.
Argument Two: Main premise that God is one appearing in different "modes" or forms. To ignore that God is in distinct persons seems absurd in light of verses such as Luke 23:46 (where Jesus commended His spirit to God at death); and all other verses which showed Christ praying to the Father.
1. Haran dies in Ur of the Chaldeas before any of His relatives begin to sojourn.
2. If Haran was Terah's first born son and died before Terah did, Lot would have to remain with Terah from that time until Terah's death, since Lot would then be the heir of Terah's possessions, not Abram or Nahor.
3. Haran is old enough to father the wife of Abram's brother Nahor before he dies. If Haran was older than Abram by 60 years this makes sense.
4. In Gen 12 Abram seems to be genuinely interested in being treated well by Pharoah for Sarai's sake, which would be less likely to be important to Abram if he had inherited all of Terah's possessions as the first born son.
5. Lot's possessions seem to rival Abram's possessions in Gen 13, which would be significantly more likely if he was nearly equal in age with Abram and Lot had become wealthy through inheriting Terah's possessions.
6. In Gen 13 Lot is given first pick of the land of their sojournings by Abram. Lot makes no effort to show any special appreciation to Abram for granting him this honor. Lot's acceptance of the honor without showing any deference would be unthinkably arrogant if Abram was actually the first born heir of Terah. However, this all makes sense if Abram was showing recognition that Lot was the heir of Terah as the son of Terah's first born deceased son.
7. In Gen 19:31 Lot's daughters consider him old when they conspire to get pregnant by him. This is much more likely if he was in his 80s or 90s like Sarah and Abraham, rather than in his 60s or 70s, which is the oldest he would likely be if Haran was Abraham's younger brother.
Christ's argument is: If your law calls judges gods, why should I be held guilty of blasphemy for saying that I am the Son of God?
As per the other argument trying to discredit the word "one" sounds like your argument is that one doesn't really mean one, because Jesus used it to describe believers being one. I don't see how being one in unity as Christ's body somehow means that all the Bible verses about Jesus being God and divine suddenly don't apply? The verse about the Father and Son being one is only one of MANY verses competing the picture. The Bible already says Jesus the Word is God so how can you disregard that?
God: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:1 KJV
You: Word was "NOT" God?
"Then said they unto him, Where is thy Father? Jesus answered, Ye neither know me, nor my Father: if ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also." John 8:19 KJV
Have you thought about how your belief reconciles with verses like this above?
Isaiah 7:14 -
Yes, Jesus is called Immanuel which means "God with us". People called Jesus "God". He's King of King and Lord of Lords. Alpha and Omega, first and last. Do you believe Jesus is Lord? I believe that is a requirement for even being a Christian. A Christ follower should know who Christ is.
1 John 5:7-8
John 10:30
John 8:19
Genesis 1:26
Genesis 11:6-7 (plural "us" which includes Jesus, as per John 1:1)
Philippians 2:5-8
2 Corinthians 5:19
John 1:3
Matthew 28:19
1 Peter 1:2
2 Corinthians 13:14
Deuteronomy 6:4
John 14:10
John 20:28
1 John 2:22-24
Matthew 1:23-25
Colossians 2:9
Acts 17:29
Romans 1:20
Isaiah 7:14
Hebrews 1:8
Isaiah 44:6
Isaiah 43:11
Ur of the Chaldees.
Genesis 11:31 And Terah took Abram his son, and Lot the son of Haran his son's son, and Sarai his daughter in law, his son Abram's wife; and they went forth with them from UR OF THE CHALDEES,
It is said to be near southern Iraq.
I hope this helps.
God bless.
Genesis 11:27-32. Abraham, his father, Terah, nephew Lot, with their wives left Ur in southern Mesopotamia, almost at the northernmost coast of the Persian Gulf. Ur was one of the first cities built in the plains between the Tigris and Euphrates after the family of Noah migrated south and eastward from the Mountains of Ararat after the landing of the Ark.
They came to Haran in Padam Aram in Northwest Mesopotamia (modern day Syria/Iraq border area) where Terah and Nahor settled their families there and the whole family dwelt in Haran for a time until God again called Abram to travel to the land He had chosen for Abram. It seems that Nahor already lived in Haran because he did not travel from Ur with the group. Later, Isaac send for a wife from the family of Nahor in Haran. Rebecca. Haran became a major city on the trade routes from Egypt through Canaan to the Tigris-Euphrates plains that lie between these rivers going northwest to southeast to the Persian Gulf. Abram, Sarai, Lot journeyed from Haran to Canaan.
God asked Abram to leave his family and set out with Sarai to the land God would show him. Lot went with them to Canaan. ( Genesis 12) It seems that Abram had servants that went with them whom they had acquired while residing in Haran. ( Gen 12:5) So, there must have been a larger group of people than just Abram, Sarai, and Lot.
Abram and Sarai and Lot descended from Noah's son, Shem, therefore were known as Semites along with all the other descendants of Shem that formed other people groups and tribes. He was descended from Eber (sometimes spelled Heber) and therefore was called a Hebrew along with all of the other descendants of Eber that formed other people groups and tribes. By the time of Abram, the Semites and more narrowly, the Hebrews were a large race of people. But as one can see from the list of nations in Genesis 10, God was slowly narrowing down the family and tribes that He wished to work through in those days as people selected.
Is says earth, most cases referring to the ground we walk on. Did God divide the earth as in the continents or placed them in land already separated (continents) as they are today? Like the world, 5 Hebrew translations, 3 Greek. Earth though all refer to the ground, dirt, soil in all three translations.
1 Chronicles 1:19 - And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of the one was Peleg; because in his days the earth was divided: and his brother's name was Joktan.
Genesis 10:25
"And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother's name was Joktan."
Genesis 10:32 - These are the families of the sons of Noah, after their generations, in their nations: and by these were the nations divided in the earth after the flood.
Genesis 11:16-19 - And Eber lived four and thirty years, and begat Peleg:And Eber lived after he begat Peleg four hundred and thirty years, and begat sons and daughters.And Peleg lived thirty years, and begat Reu:And Peleg lived after he begat Reu two hundred and nine years, and begat sons and daughters.
Deuteronomy 32:8 - When the most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.
Luke 3:35-36 - Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala,Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech,
Acts 17:26 - And 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;
Was reading up on this "breakthrough development using stem cells to create a human embryo, yet since it was not from a fertilized egg they are not calling it a human life technically, so they use this as an excuse for calling this technology "ethical".
Science and medicine really took a leap into what is really God's realm, that of conception of human beings, "fertility treatments" that manipulate bodies and hormones, fertilizing in vitro, cloning, as well as the various ways we try to we try to eliminate life before birth or even conception. This tampering with the very nature of the creation of life to control it is not from God. But we have fallen far down the slippery slope. Reproductive research and health services are playing at being god in this area of our society. I wish we could turn back the time to before ideas like Eugenics and Genetic engineering began. But alas, I think we have gone over the brink. It was only a matter of time.
Genesis 11:6 says "And the Lord said, "Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language, and this they begin to do (Towe of Babel); and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do."
In our day, language is not a barrier in Science anymore. We have come again to the "Babel" of our time, when mankind can think together and accomplish whatever they imagine to do.
There will be a judgment for this, just like the flood of Noah's day, and the scattering of the people from Babel. This time, it most likely will be the judgment promised at the end of the age. The upside is, Christ will return and destroy all who oppose Him and redeem all who believe to the fullest. Praise be to God.
Till the coming of Jesus, His Sacrifice for all sinners (Jew & Gentile alike: Romans 10:12, "For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him"), the gentile had little knowledge or participation in the Grace of God. Therefore, gentiles, as the Jew, are from the one Adam onto Noah & his sons - all are precious to Him & all will fulfill His Plan for the world.
You have questioned your position & purpose as a gentile before God. The Apostle Paul reminds us in Romans 9:25,26, "As he saith also in Osee (Hosea), I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved. And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there shall they be called the children of the living God" ( Hosea 2:23). This is speaking about us, to us. If you as a gentile rejected God's Call on your life to salvation & blessing, then you would be in the same boat as the Jew, who received the blessings, but still rejecting God's Grace in His Son. "There is no difference". You are more precious to God if you have called upon Him.
In Genesis 5 you see Adam and Eve begat more sons and daughters, There also omitted.
"And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters:" Genesis 5:4.
In Luke 3:23-38 there's a genealogy of Jesus from Heli (The father of Mary) on through Seth to Adam. Joseph's father is omitted.
The focus of these genealogies is to present the line of Christ.
THE VOLUME OF THESE 66 BOOKS IS WRITTEN OF CHRIST.
In Matthew there's a genealogy of Jesus with the line going through Solomon on through David through Seth to Adam.
In Luke 3 it goes through Nathan on through David, again through Seth to Adam.
When these names are omitted are presented it's to present Jesus in a specific way and display a particular message.
SECONDLY;
The genealogy in Genesis 5 sets the stage for the next theme or story of the Bible. Noah.
You see this repeated when Abraham is presented in Genesis 11:10-32.
There's been many heresies presented around this over the years.
Some presented the idea of there were offspring that wasn't of Adam.
Even Satan is mentioned as being the father of Cain.
I hope this helps.
God bless.
And back to the Kenite origins. I have seen opinions that indicate that the Kenites descended from Cain, hence not all flesh were destroyed by the flood. And yet, we get an example in Judges 1:16 indicating that Jethro, Moses' father-in-law, was a Kenite. And then in Numbers 10:29, Jethro is referred to as Raguel (also called 'Reuel' in Exodus 2:18), as a Midianite. What would you make of this? We know that it is the same man, Jethro, that is referred to, but can we assume a connection between the two families (Kenites & Midianites)? If there is and we go back to the immediate descendants of Noah's sons, we can follow the descendency from Shem through to Terah to Abram to Midian (through Keturah): Genesis 10:21-31; Genesis 11:10-32; Genesis 25:1-4 (here, we see Midian born to Abraham through Keturah, of whom (Midian), Jethro is connected to. If Jethro is also recorded as being a Kenite, there must be another family line coming through Midian (maybe through a daughter, not mentioned (only sons) in Genesis 25:4).
So, it appears that we must be open to the possibility that the Kenites were not from Cain (as much as a similarity exists in those names), but could have come through the descendants of Shem & the Abraham.
Nehemiah 9:7, Acts 7:2,
Hopefully helpful
In Genesis 11:27 onwards, you can read of Sarai becoming Abram's wife, but she was infertile. And you can read their story from here on, but then in Genesis chapter 17, God establishes a covenant with Abram, that he would be a father of many nations, and that he would now be called, Abraham. As for Sarai, her name became Sarah, for she would be the mother of nations & kings of people would come from her (v16).
Sometimes people live up to names given, is it because they've been called so? Genesis 27:36,
However sometimes a name is earned: Genesis 25:30, Genesis 30:13, Revelation 11:8, Revelation 12:9, Revelation 19:13, Revelation 17:14
Many times people in the Bible share name, yet are completely different. Especially 1611 KJV, on this site. Examples today many people have name like Jesus pronunciation different are not even close, or Angels names, that are far from. We should be careful to not be deceived even evil can appear as light, likewise many names have been made to deceive. 2Corinthians 11:13,14
There are divine names given by GOD however, those maybe we should take more notice of, :
Genesis 16:11,12, Genesis 11:29, + Genesis 17:5,15,19, Genesis 32:28, Genesis 35:10, Revelation 19:11,
Thanks for your question, for it did remind me of that. Genesis 5:2,
Hopefully these are helpful & give you intrigue into deeper study of names with scripture & reading GOD's WORD
I grew up in the 60's and 70's with the big push to explore space. I remember the moon landing and am amazed by the pictures we receive from telescopes from crafts launched into outer space.
But with this as part of my life's experience, I just feel deep down that God gave us earth to live upon. It is where He reveals Himself and works with mankind, not outer space. I think of the billions of dollars spent on the space programs, and consider how much good we could have done on earth for those in need with these resources. I am sure that we may have some benefits from exploring space, but I don't know if what we have benefited outweighs the detriment. I guess I just don't think that God ever wanted us to bring anything from space to earth, nor for man to go into space.
I know that our inquisitiveness and intellect are good things bestowed on us from God. Yet, the fallenness of mankind has corrupted these abilities to an immense depth of depravity, as it says in Genesis 6:5-6 of unredeemed human nature: the wickedness of man was great in the earth and that every intent of the thoughts of his hearts was only continually evil." ."
And in Genesis 11: 6 the LORD says that "Indeed the people are one and they all have one language, and this is what they begin to do, now nothing that they propose will be withhold from them." (Meaning that whatever they can think of to do they can accomplish it.)
So, our exploration of space is really from an unredeemed standpoint. What are we trying to prove or discover, really? If man is really trying to prove the existence of God by space exploration, they won't discover that since man does not believe what God has already revealed about Himself in our history and Scripture. Are the scientists that are working on this exploration Christian believers influenced by Christian thought? If not, then their endeavors are evil, just like at Babel. I think that instead of trying to satisfy a curiosity of "what is out there"
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
Who is the Word?
John 1:14-15 says the Word is Jesus. Does anyone deny that the Word is Jesus?
If someone believes John 1:14, then do they believe John 1:1
"...the Word was God."
"...[Jesus] was God."
JESUS.
WAS.
GOD.
John 1:1
This is God's Word.
Some here are saying "Jesus was NOT God" despite John 1:1 clearly saying Jesus WAS God. I'd like to know exactly how someone can believe in all other verses of the Bible except this one? If something WAS something, that seems to offer little room for interpretation. It means it's the same, does it not? So, if something WAS something, how does someone twist this into believing it says something WAS NOT something?
It then must be asked: since it takes so much effort to take a sentence something WAS something to turn it into: something WAS NOT something, what is the true underlying motive here? Does God's Word carry the most weight and influence or does something else?
This is eerily similar to Gen 3:4 where satan denied what God said and claimed that they shall NOT surely die. Satan loves opposites and this seems to have his signature, does it not?
I welcome any perspective I'm missing, but do not consider anything other Bible verses as valid evidence. God's Word is all that matters and because there's already numerous verses supporting that Jesus is God like John 1:1 then that is what is true. Lastly, why not just pray and ask God directly to know the truth? Genuinely ask!
1 John 5:7-8
John 10:30
John 8:19
Genesis 1:26
Genesis 11:6-7
(plural "us")
Philippians 2:5-8
2 Corinthians 5:19
John 1:3
Matthew 28:19
1 Peter 1:2
2 Corinthians 13:14
Deuteronomy 6:4
John 14:10
John 20:28
1 John 2:22-24
Matthew 1:23-25
Colossians 2:9
Acts 17:29
Romans 1:20
Isaiah 7:14
Hebrews 1:8
Isaiah 44:6
Isaiah 43:11
This is an interesting logical argument. I find that in 1 Peter 3:22. Let's assume for argument's sake that your conclusion is correct and you get 1 point for this.
But for every verse you cite, there are even more that say that Jesus IS God, like John 1:1 saying the "Word was God" and verse 14 that Jesus is the Word.
This could continue to play out and you can cite any number of verses to support your position, but again we don't run out of very compelling verses saying that Jesus is God.
Let's say that it's a dead even race. 30 verses suggesting Jesus isn't vs 30 verses suggesting He is.
Then what? Which do you choose to believe?
I don't know if you've gone through this exercise or not, but I now have a spoiler: someone will run out of verses supporting that Jesus "isn't" God long before the verses supporting He IS God. Not only that, but each of the verses commonly cited to claim that Jesus "isn't" God require some extra creative interpretation and human logic whereas the verses supporting the other side can be read and interpreted more literally. Not only that, but there's logical explanations for why Jesus called His Father God. The main reason is that He temporarily became a human being and limited His power. Phil 2:6-7. So, yes, as a man, He prayed to His Father and called Him God. So, all verses must be considered as a whole, not cherry picked in order to have understanding about the Godhead and I admit it is hard to comprehend as we don't have anything like it in on earth. But perhaps like an orange with seeds, pulp, skin. Someone calls pulp an orange, and it is.
1 John 5:7-8
John 10:30
John 8:19
Genesis 1:26
, Genesis 11:6-7 (plural "us")
Philippians 2:5-8
2 Corinthians 5:19
John 1:3
Matthew 28:19
1 Peter 1:2
2 Corinthians 13:14
Deuteronomy 6:4
John 14:10
John 20:28
1 John 2:22-24
Matthew 1:23-25
Colossians 2:9
Acts 17:29
Romans 1:20
Isaiah 7:14
Hebrews 1:8
Isaiah 44:6
Isaiah 43:11
1 John 5:7-8
Genesis 1:26
Genesis 11:6-7
John 10:30
John 8:19
Philippians 2:5-8
2 Corinthians 5:19
John 1:3
Matthew 28:19
1 Peter 1:2
2 Corinthians 13:14
Deuteronomy 6:4
John 14:10
John 20:28
1 John 2:22-24
Matthew 1:23-25
Colossians 2:9
Acts 17:29
Romans 1:20
Isaiah 7:14
Hebrews 1:8
Isaiah 44:6
Here are some verses to get you started. God bless.
Colossians 2:9
Acts 17:29
Romans 1:20
John 1:1
1 John 5:7-8
Genesis 1:26
Genesis 11:6-7
John 10:30
John 8:19
Philippians 2:5-8
2 Corinthians 5:19
John 1:3
Matthew 28:19
1 Peter 1:2
2 Corinthians 13:14
Deuteronomy 6:4
John 14:10
John 20:28
1 John 2:22-24
Isaiah 7:14
Matthew 1:23-25
Hebrews 1:8
Isaiah 44:6
And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech."
"Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech. So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city. Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth."
John 1:1
1 John 5:7-8
Genesis 1:26
Genesis 11:6-7
John 10:30
John 8:19
Philippians 2:5-8
2 Corinthians 5:19
John 1:3
Matthew 28:19
1 Peter 1:2
2 Corinthians 13:14
Deuteronomy 6:4
John 14:10
John 20:28
1 John 2:22-24
Isaiah 7:14
Matthew 1:23-25
Hebrews 1:8
Isaiah 44:6
Colossians 2:9
Acts 17:29
Romans 1:20
Godhead:
Colossians 2:9
Acts 17:29
Romans 1:20
John 1:1
1 John 5:7-8
Genesis 1:26
Genesis 11:6-7
John 10:30
John 8:19
Philippians 2:5-8
2 Corinthians 5:19
John 1:3
Matthew 28:19
1 Peter 1:2
2 Corinthians 13:14
Deuteronomy 6:4
John 14:10
John 20:28
1 John 2:22-24
Matthew 1:23-25
Isaiah 7:14 - Jesus is called Immanuel which means "God with us"
Here are verses describing that. God bless.
John 1:1
1 John 5:7-8
Genesis 1:26
Genesis 11:6-7
John 10:30
John 8:19
Philippians 2:5-8
2 Corinthians 5:19
John 1:3
Matthew 28:19
1 Peter 1:2
2 Corinthians 13:14
Deuteronomy 6:4
John 14:10
John 20:28
1 John 2:22-24
Isaiah 7:14
1 John 5:7 reads, "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one", reminds us that for God to be Who He is, His Word (now Jesus as man & in Heaven), & His Spirit, are all one in the Godhead & yet separated (or, sent out) for the performance of God's Will. So when God uses 'Us', we can understand that the all-inclusive God is declaring His Deity (His Unity in Triunity) & this fact should be seen in those instances where they are revealed to us (in His creation of man & His dealings with man).
Part 2.
The key to understanding 2:4 is in the opening Hebrew phrase tldt ("This is the history of"), as it formulates the structure of the book of Genesis. A number of scholars recognize that here tldt serves as a heading that introduces a new section of the narrative. Interestingly, this is the only time the phrase tldt occurs without a personal name, the reason being that "Adam had no human predecessors. The tldt serves two main purposes in Genesis 2:4. First, it "links 2:4-25 with 1:1-2:3. The language of 2:4 looks back to the creation account, just as the tldt in Genesis 11:10 looks back to a line of Shem in Genesis 10:1 and 10:21-31. Second, "its main purpose is to shift attention to the creation of man and his placement in the garden. The setting of Genesis 2 is the garden in Eden, in which the LORD God places the man he creates ( Genesis 2:8, 15). Because there was no man to work the ground ( Genesis 2:5), this is the reason that the LORD God forms "the man" (hdm) from the dust of the "ground" (dm). The description of the creation of the first man is given in Genesis 2:7:
then the LORD God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature.
Like a craftsman who shapes his material, the LORD God "formed. (yar) the man from the "dust" (pr) of the ground. The word "dust" is not a metaphor. It can only mean literal dust in the context of Genesis 2-3 because it is to dust that Adam will return due to his disobedience ( Genesis 3:19; cf. Job 34:14-15). After the formation of man from the dust of the ground, he is given human life when the LORD God breathes into him the breath of life.
See part 3.
Go on Google. " Type your scripture: Genesis 2:4, commentaries"
It'll bring up several. I like BIBLEHUB. It's fun to look at other websites too ( within the first 5-10 listings)
>> Pulpit Commentary
Verse 4. - These are the generations is the usual heading for the different sections into which the Book of Genesis is divided (vial. Genesis 5:1; Genesis 6:9; Genesis 10:1; Genesis 11:10, 27; Genesis 25:12, 19; Genesis 36:1; Genesis 37:2).
All of these proposals are, however, rendered unnecessary by simply observing that toldoth (from yaladh, to bear, to beget; hence begettings, procreations, evolutions, developments) does not describe the antecedents, but the consequents, of either thing or Person (Rosen., Keil, Kalisch).
>>[Keil and Delitzsch Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament]
The historical account of the world, which commences at the completion of the work of creation, is introduced as the "History of the heavens and the earth," and treats in three sections, (a) of the original condition of man in paradise ( Genesis 2:5-25); (b) of the fall ( Genesis 3); (c) of the division of the human race into two widely different families, so far as concerns their relation to God ( Genesis 4).