Abortion - at what point does a baby have the right to life?

[Arial]

In Scripture, we read that God wanted to give man His image and likeness, and when He formed the first man from the Earth, He then breathed into him "the breath of life" (the soul), and only into man, not animals, and thus that's what distinguishes the former from the latter (Gen. 1:26;2:7). Therefore, Scripture gives us the by whom, to whom, the why and when the soul is given. The Poem of the Man-God is the Gospel expanded, contaning dictations and visions of scenes from Jesus's life on Earth. In certain visions, as well as dictations from this and her other works, Jesus explained matters of the soul. All of this to my belief. If interested, see the links in my signature for a complete and thorough history of The Poem of the Man-God, which the Church deems permissible for publishing, reading, and promoting.

In Scripture we read that God made man in His image and likeness, not that He wanted to give man His image and likeness. We do not have the Scripture saying that the breath of life is the soul.

If the breath of life is the soul and animals don't have a soul----where do they get their life from?

Animals do what God commanded and how fulfill the purpose He had for them by the instinct He put in them at creation.

What is different between man and animal is that as made in God's image and likeness, man is a moral agent, whereas animals are not.

The gospel is expounded upon by men, but it is never expanded outside of the Scriptures.

Jesus did not ever dictate what to write to anyone even within the Bible and the Holy Spirit did not stand beside and dictate to any of the writers of the Bible. He never expanded His word beyond the Scripture through visions of scenes of His life. There is zero, nothing, nada, that supports any of those claims.

 

[ChristB4us]

I posted it for no other reason than the fact that many people, including me, have a hard time reading the archaic English of 250 years ago (c. 1769, Benjamin Blayney revision). While I can understand the attraction people have to the traditional, sophisticated, and solemn language in the King James Version (KJV), it's really quite difficult to absorb.

I can understand what I am reading just fine with His help.

Why don't you give an example or two of where you needed help in understanding the KJV from another Bible version?

So, I posted from the New English Translation, which is not only super accurate but also much easier to read. And it says exactly the same thing, but using language that people today can more easily understand and apprehend.

For example, the KJV translates Psalm 139:13a like this:

​

• "For thou hast possessed my reins ..."​

​

Setting aside the archaic nature of the word "thou," why is the psalmist talking about horse tack here? Reins are long straps, usually made of leather, that are attached to a bridle and used to direct a horse for riding. So, how is that related to God covering David in his mother's womb? And what does covering mean, anyway?

But this is what we have to deal with when it comes to old Shakespearean English. Reins didn't refer to horse tack back then. It actually referred to the kidneys or, more broadly, the inner parts of the body (and was typically used figuratively to represent the seat of conscience and reflection, e.g., Rev 2:23, "I am he which searcheth the reins and hearts," KJV).

This is why the New King James Version (1982) translates it as,

​

• "You formed my inward parts ..."​

​

And the New English Translation (2006) goes even more accurate and translates it as,

​

• "You made my mind and heart ..."​

​

If you want to say that this translation "confirms" how the KJV translated it, I guess that's fine. Seems a bit weird, but whatever. To me, they both translated it exactly the same; the only difference is that one translated it into 18th-century English while the other translated it into 21st-century English. It certainly hasn't changed its meaning. They used different English words to say exactly the same thing (e.g., "reins" versus "mind and heart").

If I was to defend the wording in the KJV I would see the reins as our genes in commanding it to do as He will.

Yes, which is clear in the English of both the 18th and 21st centuries. As the NET puts it (Psalm 51:5-6),

​

"I was guilty of sin from birth, a sinner the moment my mother conceived me. Look, you desire integrity in the inner man; you want me to possess wisdom."​

​

Again, the psalmist acknowledges his existence at conception.

Well are you choosing another version as if having trouble comprehending that truth in the KJV or just finding it a better read?

Here is why I rely on the KJV ( even though it is not without faults nor error but compared to other Bible versions, way less )

There are false teachings out there that says we are not saved yet but in the process of being saved and like it or not, your version, the New English Translation can be used by those that push that false teaching and therefore difficult for you to reprove it whereas the KJV does it ( along with some other Bible versions for 1 Corinthians 1:17-21 KJV VS NET . You can click on that and compare at that link.

Then there is that false teachings that the Holy Spirit can turn God's gift of tongues around for His own use in uttering His intercessions out loud to God in gibberish nonsense for why many are astray thinking that tongue is for private use but all Bible versions testify in John 16:13 that the Holy Spirit does not speak from Himself but speaks only what He hears. Even the NET in that lengthy footnote stresses that truth when reading that against the KJV John 16:13 KJV VS NET BUT when it comes to Romans 8:26-27 KJV VS NET , it is as if the truth in John 16:13 has gone out the window. Plus a grammatical error has been committed in verse 27 in the NET because how can the "he" that is separate from us in searching our hearts and separate from the Spirit to know the mind of the spirit, conclude as "the Spirit" at the end of verse 27? So obviously that "he" is Jesus Christ that searches our hearts per Hebrews 4:12-16 KJV VS NET that knows the mind of the Spirit as He is the One that gives the unuttered silent intercessions of the Spirit to the father which is in according to the will of God being that there is only One mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus as of 1 Timothy 2:5.

The KJV has maintained the truth of John 16:13 as the Holy Spirit cannot even utter His groanings out loud from Himself whereas the NET does not. The KJV is key to assure every saved believer that the Holy Spirit does not use tongues for HHis own use and that He does make silent intercessions form within each and every believer for why tongues are not necessary.

That is how the Father knows before we ask anything in prayer. Matthew 6:7-8 KJV VS NET

But like I said, there are errors in the KJV because of those that wrest the scriptures. More at this link There Are Two Lies in the KJV & All Bibles I am glad Jesus Christ is my Good Shepherd & Friend to help me discern the truth in His words from those that have wrest the scriptures.

 

[Soul]

In other words, adding to Scripture? Galatians 1:8

No, there's only the four gospels of Christ.

 

[DialecticSkeptic]

In scripture, we read that God wanted to give man his image and likeness, ...

I would have to say that is incorrect, given what can be clearly read in the scriptures. This image is not something given, but rather how we were made—namely, God created mankind in his own image (Gen 1:27). This has been interpreted in various ways throughout the centuries, of course, but the most common, biblically consistent, and compelling interpretation I believe is the royal-functional view, which implies a vocational election and calling to participate with God in achieving his eschatological purposes. Mankind alone was made in God's image. Only mankind was chosen and called to this.

Ergo, "In scripture, we read that God made man in his image and after his likeness" (v. 26).

This is why abortion is such an unspeakable evil, for it is the wanton destruction of innocent image-bearers of God (cf. Gen 9:6).

... and when [God] formed the first man from the earth, he breathed into him "the breath of life" (the soul), ...

Nowhere in scripture is the "breath of life" called the soul. That's an important point.

A more important point is that the "breath of life" and "soul" are actually set in contrast in Genesis 2:7, where it says that God breathed into his nostrils the "breath of life" and the man "became a living soul." They are not the same thing. The soul is man himself, but the life-giving breath belongs to God. After all, if God were to withdraw his breath from anyone, they would die (Job 34:14; cf. Eccl 12:7).

... and [God breathed] only into man [the breath of life], not animals, and thus that's what distinguishes the former from the latter (Gen. 1:26; 2:7).

No, animals likewise have the breath of life from God (Gen 1:30; 6:17). We read in scripture that humans and animals "both have the same breath" (Eccl 3:19).

In Psalms 104:24-30, we read:

How many living things you have made, O LORD! You have exhibited great skill in making all of them; the earth is full of the living things you have made. Over here is the deep, wide sea, which teems with innumerable swimming creatures, living things both small and large. The ships travel there, and over here swims the whale you made to play in it. All of your creatures wait for you to provide them with food on a regular basis. You give food to them and they receive it; you open your hand and they are filled with food. When you ignore them, they panic. When you take away their life's breath, they die and return to dust. When you send your life-giving breath, they are created, and you replenish the surface of the ground.
​

If anything lives, it is by the breath of God. When he withdraws it, they die. That is true for both humans and all other creatures.

This is also why I believe the right to life begins at conception, because that is when a unique human being is first alive, which is by the breath of life from God.

The Poem of the Man-God is the Gospel expanded, ...

If it was dictated by Jesus Christ to Maria Valtorta and written down, then it belongs to divine canon and is an expansion of sacred scriptures—for that is no less than what the authors of the Bible experienced: "Men carried along by the Holy Spirit spoke from God" (2 Pet 1:21).

Incidentally, I have access to all five volumes.

 

[DialecticSkeptic]

I can understand what I am reading just fine with [God's] help.

Okay, but I wasn't referring to you, so ... anyway.

Why don't you give an example or two of where you needed help in understanding the KJV from another Bible version?

I didn't need help in understanding the King James Version (KJV), I needed help in understanding the OT Hebrew and the NT Greek, languages that I can't read. And since the KJV uses a lot of archaic English words and phrases from hundreds of years ago, it's a lot less helpful than translations that use modern English. There are several different Bible translations, lexicons, and commentaries to which I turn for help with understanding the Hebrew and Greek texts, including the New English Translation (NET) and its 60,000 translators' notes.

(The Geneva Bible is even less helpful than the KJV for understanding the biblical texts, with not only obscure spellings but even obscure letters. See image below.)

View attachment 926​

If I was to defend the wording in the KJV I would see the reins as our genes in commanding it to do as He will.

Okay, but—if I may point out the glaringly obvious here—that doesn't address the fact that from the 20th century onward "reins" has referred to leather straps fastened to a bit by which a rider controls a horse. It hasn't meant the kidneys, loins, or inner parts of the body for a very long time (and has never meant genes). Again, this is just one example of why many people struggle with the KJV, including me.

Are you choosing another version as if having trouble comprehending that truth in the KJV or just finding it a better read?

Again, the truth is not what I have trouble comprehending, but rather the archaic English language used by the KJV. (Can you read Beowulf? That's written using 8th-century Old English.)

The truth that God made my mind and heart, that he wove me together in my mother's womb, is something that I comprehended well enough, but I struggled to comprehend the English phrase "possessed my reins," for example, because this text has nothing to do with leather straps or horses.

Are you able to distinguish the difference between "the truth" being conveyed and "the language" by which it's conveyed? I struggle with the latter, not the former. The NET conveys the truth in accessible English, while the KJV conveys the truth in archaic English.

 

[Mr GLee]

The truth that God made my mind and heart, that he wove me together in my mother's womb, is something that I comprehended well enough, but I struggled to comprehend the English phrase "possessed my reins," for example, because this text has nothing to do with leather straps or horses.

The word reign is a metaphor used for turning power led by the Spirit .It is used several time in parables.

Without parables Christ spoke not.

Throughout the bible God uses clean animal to represent the redeemed and unclean not redeemed

Jeremiah 31:18-20King James Version18 I have surely heard Ephraim bemoaning himself thus; Thou hast chastised me, and I was chastised, as a bullock unaccustomed to the yoke: turn thou me, and I shall be turned; for thou art the Lord my God. Surely after that I was turned, I repented; and after that I was instructed, I smote upon my thigh: I was ashamed, yea, even confounded, because I did bear the reproach of my youth.

In that way you can use other words for reign but it does not change the outcome.

Christ reining in us .

a few synonyms . . . .command, control, leadership, rudder, tiller, wife (LOL)

 

[ChristB4us]

Okay, but I wasn't referring to you, so ... anyway.

I didn't need help in understanding the King James Version (KJV), I needed help in understanding the OT Hebrew and the NT Greek, languages that I can't read. And since the KJV uses a lot of archaic English words and phrases from hundreds of years ago, it's a lot less helpful than translations that use modern English. There are several different Bible translations, lexicons, and commentaries to which I turn for help with understanding the Hebrew and Greek texts, including the New English Translation (NET) and its 60,000 translators' notes.

(The Geneva Bible is even less helpful than the KJV for understanding the biblical texts, with not only obscure spellings but even obscure letters. See image below.)

View attachment 926​

FYI I have noticed those who go to the Greek & Hebrews for the translation of His words often quarrel over each other in rightly translating the words. Plus scriptures did not teach us to go to the Greek & Hebrew to understand His words but to Jesus Christ for wisdom.

Okay, but—if I may point out the glaringly obvious here—that doesn't address the fact that from the 20th century onward "reins" has referred to leather straps fastened to a bit by which a rider controls a horse. It hasn't meant the kidneys, loins, or inner parts of the body for a very long time (and has never meant genes). Again, this is just one example of why many people struggle with the KJV, including me.

I can understand your point just as my trying to convince people today that uncleanness, as listed in among the works of the flesh between fornication and lasciviousness which is sexual excessiveness applies to masturbation. Just because the term uncleanness is archaic, it does not mean He could help us understand what uncleanness applies to for what we would all it today, back then.

And I will point out that the KJV that I refer to at Bible Gateway has gone through many revisions for what I am reading today. I stay away from the New King James Version and the 21st Century King James Version, and although not the authorized King James version, it suits me fine, even though there are errors in the KJV as I had shared prior of a link to that thread

Again, the truth is not what I have trouble comprehending, but rather the archaic English language used by the KJV. (Can you read Beowulf? That's written using 8th-century Old English.)

The truth that God made my mind and heart, that he wove me together in my mother's womb, is something that I comprehended well enough, but I struggled to comprehend the English phrase "possessed my reins," for example, because this text has nothing to do with leather straps or horses.

Are you able to distinguish the difference between "the truth" being conveyed and "the language" by which it's conveyed? I struggle with the latter, not the former. The NET conveys the truth in accessible English, while the KJV conveys the truth in archaic English.

I will strongly advise that if you have trouble correcting anyone with the NET Bible and you find yourself stumped, check with the KJV. Even though I have tried that with others, it was for myself that troubling passages in the NASB & the NIV that somehow, the Lord lead me to read it in the KJV which aligns with His words and thereby reproves that false teachings or the troubling passages for the wrong message that it was.

Thanks for sharing. May the Lord bless you & keep you. May He shine His face upon you and give you His peace.

 

[makesends]

Soul said:
No, Jesus audibly spoke to Maria Valtorta, and at His request she took dictation from Him, so my understanding of this matter came from Him through her, to my belief.
makesends said:
In other words, adding to Scripture? Galatians 1:8

No, there's only the four gospels of Christ.

Galatians 1:8 applies to more than just the four gospels. But, nice sidestep.

 

[Soul]

In Scripture we read that God made man in His image and likeness, not that He wanted to give man His image and likeness. We do not have the Scripture saying that the breath of life is the soul.

In Gen. 1:26 we read, "And he said: Let us make man to our image and likeness," and in Gen. 1:27 we read, "And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them,"and both verses convey that God wanted to do that.

In Gen 1:2, we read, "the Spirit of God," and in Jn. 4:24, we read, "God is Spirit," and thus His image and likeness would have to be of a spiritual nature. It's my understanding that in Gen. 2:7, after God had formed the first man from the Earth, the "breath of life" that He breathed into him is another name for "soul," which is a spirit, and the image and likeness of God that He gives each man when they're created.

To quote Jesus, in my belief, "This wonderful thing which is a soul, a thing created by God to give man His image and likeness as an unquestionable sign of His Most Holy Paternity, shows signs of the qualities characteristic of Him Who creates it. It is therefore intelligent, spiritual, free, immortal, like the Father Who created it." (The Poem of the Man-God: Vol. III)

If the breath of life is the soul and animals don't have a soul----where do they get their life from?

What do you mean by "their life?"

Animals do what God commanded and how fulfill the purpose He had for them by the instinct He put in them at creation.

I agree.

What is different between man and animal is that as made in God's image and likeness, man is a moral agent, whereas animals are not.

I agree, and that's because of the soul He gives man (Gen. 2:7), not animals, in my belief, and yet, unfortunately, humans lower themselves to a lower degree than them at times.

Jesus did not ever dictate what to write to anyone even within the Bible and the Holy Spirit did not stand beside and dictate to any of the writers of the Bible. He never expanded His word beyond the Scripture through visions of scenes of His life. There is zero, nothing, nada, that supports any of those claims.

In the links cited in my signature, you'll find scientific, historical, and scriptural evidence, and more to support that Maria Valtorta received visions and dictations from Jesus, in my belief.

 

[Soul]

I would have to say that is incorrect, given what can be clearly read in the scriptures. This image is not something given, but rather how we were made—namely, God created mankind in his own image (Gen 1:27).

Nowhere in scripture is the "breath of life" called the soul. That's an important point.

A more important point is that the "breath of life" and "soul" are actually set in contrast in Genesis 2:7, where it says that God breathed into his nostrils the "breath of life" and the man "became a living soul." They are not the same thing. The soul is man himself, but the life-giving breath belongs to God. After all, if God were to withdraw his breath from anyone, they would die (Job 34:14; cf. Eccl 12:7).

No, animals likewise have the breath of life from God (Gen 1:30; 6:17). We read in scripture that humans and animals "both have the same breath" (Eccl 3:19).

In Psalms 104:24-30, we read:

How many living things you have made, O LORD! You have exhibited great skill in making all of them; the earth is full of the living things you have made. Over here is the deep, wide sea, which teems with innumerable swimming creatures, living things both small and large. The ships travel there, and over here swims the whale you made to play in it. All of your creatures wait for you to provide them with food on a regular basis. You give food to them and they receive it; you open your hand and they are filled with food. When you ignore them, they panic. When you take away their life's breath, they die and return to dust. When you send your life-giving breath, they are created, and you replenish the surface of the ground.
If anything lives, it is by the breath of God. When he withdraws it, they die. That is true for both humans and all other creatures.

This is also why I believe the right to life begins at conception, because that is when a unique human being is first alive, which is by the breath of life from God.

In Gen. 1:26 we read, "And he said: Let us make man to our image and likeness," not "Let us make man and animals to our image and likeness," and in Gen. 1:27 we read, "And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them," not "And God created man and animals to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them."

In Gen 1:2, we read, "the Spirit of God," and in Jn. 4:24, we read, "God is Spirit," and thus His image and likeness would have to be of a spiritual nature. It's my understanding that in Gen. 2:7, after God had formed the first man from the Earth, the "breath of life" that He breathed into him (not also animals) is another name for "soul," which is a spirit, and the image and likeness of God that He gives each man when they're created.

To quote Jesus, in my belief, "This wonderful thing which is a soul, a thing created by God to give man His image and likeness as an unquestionable sign of His Most Holy Paternity, shows signs of the qualities characteristic of Him Who creates it. It is therefore intelligent, spiritual, free, immortal, like the Father Who created it." (The Poem of the Man-God: Vol. III)

 

[Soul]

Galatians 1:8 applies to more than just the four gospels. But, nice sidestep.

No, not a sidestep, I just need to clarify myself for you. The dictations and visions that Maria Valtorta received from Jesus, and later published under the title The Poem of the Man-God, is an expansion of the four Gospels of Christ, in my belief. It's not another Gospel. There are four Gospels. There are four, and four there will remain. Understood in detail or left in their broad outlines, four and no more.

 

[Mr GLee]

In Gen. 1:26 we read, "And he said: Let us make man to our image and likeness," not "Let us make man and animals to our image and likeness," and in Gen. 1:27 we read, "And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them," not "And God created man and animals to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them."

In Gen 1:2, we read, "the Spirit of God," and in Jn. 4:24, we read, "God is Spirit," and thus His image and likeness would have to be of a spiritual nature. It's my understanding that in Gen. 2:7, after God had formed the first man from the Earth, the "breath of life" that He breathed into him (not also animals) is another name for "soul," which is a spirit, and the image and likeness of God that He gives each man when they're created.

To quote Jesus, in my belief, "This wonderful thing which is a soul, a thing created by God to give man His image and likeness as an unquestionable sign of His Most Holy Paternity, shows signs of the qualities characteristic of Him Who creates it. It is therefore intelligent, spiritual, free, immortal, like the Father Who created it." (The Poem of the Man-God: Vol. III)

It would seem a soul is the communication witness of two spirits walking together as one. The soul that sins dies. Christ's soul cannot did

James 5:20 Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.

Leviticus 4:1-3King James Version4 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a soul shall sin through ignorance against any of the commandments of the Lord concerning things which ought not to be done, and shall do against any of them:

Leviticus 4:1-3King James VersionAnd the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a soul shall sin through ignorance against any of the commandments of the Lord concerning things which ought not to be done, and shall do against any of them:

 

[makesends]

No, not a sidestep, I just need to clarify myself for you. The dictations and visions that Maria Valtorta received from Jesus, and later published under the title The Poem of the Man-God, is an expansion of the four Gospels of Christ, in my belief. It's not another Gospel. There are four Gospels. There are four, and four there will remain. Understood in detail or left in their broad outlines, four and no more.

The Gospel is the whole story, included in God's word. Your confidence in revelations received from Jesus is unfounded.

But leaving alone this spat over "gospel", nobody may add to the Word of God. Look at Deuteronomy 4:2, Revelation 22. They refer to the command, and to the prophecy. Does that mean that the principle does not apply to the rest of the Scriptures?

Why would you trust someone claiming direct revelation via dictation or any other method, if it is not in scripture?

 

[Arial]

In Gen. 1:26 we read, "And he said: Let us make man to our image and likeness," and in Gen. 1:27 we read, "And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them,"and both verses convey that God wanted to do that.

That goes without saying. If He didn't want to He wouldn't have. Wanted is a superfluous word that changes the tone.

In Gen 1:2, we read, "the Spirit of God," and in Jn. 4:24, we read, "God is Spirit," and thus His image and likeness would have to be of a spiritual nature. It's my understanding that in Gen. 2:7, after God had formed the first man from the Earth, the "breath of life" that He breathed into him is another name for "soul," which is a spirit, and the image and likeness of God that He gives each man when they're created.

In John 4:24 we read "God is spirit (not Spirit) and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth. In Gen 1:2 it is the Holy Spirit who is hovering. His image and likeness is a moral nature, and a rational being. I "breath of life" is not the soul is is the breath of life. Adam was made of dust, God gave him life. It is not another name for "soul". That may be your understanding but I believe you would be hard pressed to find and corroborating scripture. Soul and spirit are often used interchangeably in Scripture, but in regards to man, it is the inward part of us.

To quote Jesus, in my belief, "This wonderful thing which is a soul, a thing created by God to give man His image and likeness as an unquestionable sign of His Most Holy Paternity, shows signs of the qualities characteristic of Him Who creates it. It is therefore intelligent, spiritual, free, immortal, like the Father Who created it." (The Poem of the Man-God: Vol. III)

We have all the words that Jesus spoke that God wanted us to hear, in the Bible---and those words aren't there. I know it is not Jesus speaking because it would mean he was contradicting himself. Read the seven woes of Matt 23 if you don't believe me. Also Jesus is ruling in heaven where he will be until he returns. He is not returning to earth to speak to or dictate further revelation to any individual.

What do you mean by "their life?"

???? They are alive are they not? They have breath of life do they not? (That means they are breathing as opposed to say---a tree or a rock.)

I agree, and that's because of the soul He gives man (Gen. 2:7), not animals, in my belief, and yet, unfortunately, humans lower themselves to a lower degree than them at times.

Whether animals have a soul or not is yet another thing debated from different viewpoints. The truth of the matter is, the Bible does not tell us whether they do or they don't. Everything outside of that is speculation.

In the links cited in my signature, you'll find scientific, historical, and scriptural evidence, and more to support that Maria Valtorta received visions and dictations from Jesus, in my belief.

No I won't. There isn't any. I don't want to read those links, at least not right now. So give me the scriptural evidence to what is outside of Scripture.

 

[Soul]

The Gospel is the whole story, included in God's word.

The word that refers to all the books that make up the Old Testament and New Testament is "Scripture," but the word "Gospels" refers to the four Gospels of Christ in the New Testament:

gospel

1 a often capitalized : the message concerning Christ, the kingdom of God, and salvation

b capitalized : one of the first four New Testament books telling of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ
also : a similar apocryphal (see apocrypha sense 2) book

2 capitalized : a lection (see lection sense 1) from one of the New Testament Gospels

The dictations and visions that Maria Valtorta received from Jesus, and later published under the title The Poem of the Man-God, is an expansion of the four Gospels of Christ, meaning the gaps, brought about by natural causes and by supernatural will, were filled in by Jesus, in my belief. It's not another Gospel. There are four Gospels. There are four, and four there will remain. Understood in detail or left in their broad outlines, four and no more.

...nobody may add to the Word of God. Look at Deuteronomy 4:2, Revelation 22. They refer to the command, and to the prophecy. Does that mean that the principle does not apply to the rest of the Scriptures?

Why would you trust someone claiming direct revelation via dictation or any other method, if it is not in scripture?

I wouldn't automatically believe every person who claims to have received visions and taken dictation from Jesus, because there are false spokespersons, but I also can't ignore that Jesus said there's true spokespersons as well, and He taught us how to discern and identify between the two. And, I trust that He will take care of His true spokespersons, and make sure to give evidence that they are, just as He always has done. He's done that for Maria Valtorta as the links in my signature show, in my belief.

To quote Jesus, in my belief: "Further: if you object that the revelation was closed with the last Apostle, and there was nothing further to add, because the same Apostle says in Revelation: "If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him every plague mentioned in the book" (22:18) and that can be understood for all the Revelation, the last completion of which is the Revelation by John, I reply to you that with this work no addition was made to revelation, but only the gaps, brought about by natural causes and by supernatural will, were filled in.

And if I wanted to take pleasure in restoring the picture of My Divine Charity as a restorer of mosaics does replacing the tesserae damaged or missing, reinstating the mosaic in its complete beauty, and I have decided to do it in this century in which mankind is hurling itself towards the Abyss of darkness and horror, can you forbid Me from doing so? Can you perhaps say that you do not need it, you whose spirits are dull, weak, deaf to lights, voices and invitations from Above?

You ought really to bless Me for increasing with new lights the light that you have and that is no longer sufficient for you to "see" your Savior. To see the Way, the Truth and the Life, and feel that spiritual emotion of the just of My time rise in you, attaining through this knowledge a renewal of your spirits in love, that would be your salvation, because it is an ascent towards perfection.

I do not say you are "dead", but sleeping, drowsy. Like plants during their winter sleep. The divine Sun gives you its refulgence. Awake and bless the Sun that gives you itself, receive it with joy that It may warm you, from the surface to deep inside you, it may rouse you and cover you with flowers and fruits.

Rise. Come to My Gift." (The Poem of the Man-God)

 

[makesends]

The word that refers to all the books that make up the Old Testament and New Testament is "Scripture," but the word "Gospels" refers to the four Gospels of Christ in the New Testament:



The dictations and visions that Maria Valtorta received from Jesus, and later published under the title The Poem of the Man-God, is an expansion of the four Gospels of Christ, in my belief. It's not another Gospel. There are four Gospels. There are four, and four there will remain. Understood in detail or left in their broad outlines, four and no more.



I wouldn't automatically believe every person who claims to have received visions and taken dictation from Jesus, because there are false spokespersons, but I also can't ignore that Jesus said there's true spokespersons as well, and He taught us how to discern and identify between the two. And, I trust that He will take care of His true spokespersons, and make sure to give evidence that they are, just as He always has done. He's done that for Maria Valtorta as the links in my signature show, in my belief.

To quote Jesus, in my belief: "Further: if you object that the revelation was closed with the last Apostle, and there was nothing further to add, because the same Apostle says in Revelation: "If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him every plague mentioned in the book" (22:18) and that can be understood for all the Revelation, the last completion of which is the Revelation by John, I reply to you that with this work no addition was made to revelation, but only the gaps, brought about by natural causes and by supernatural will, were filled in.

And if I wanted to take pleasure in restoring the picture of My Divine Charity as a restorer of mosaics does replacing the tesserae damaged or missing, reinstating the mosaic in its complete beauty, and I have decided to do it in this century in which mankind is hurling itself towards the Abyss of darkness and horror, can you forbid Me from doing so? Can you perhaps say that you do not need it, you whose spirits are dull, weak, deaf to lights, voices and invitations from Above?

You ought really to bless Me for increasing with new lights the light that you have and that is no longer sufficient for you to "see" your Savior. To see the Way, the Truth and the Life, and feel that spiritual emotion of the just of My time rise in you, attaining through this knowledge a renewal of your spirits in love, that would be your salvation, because it is an ascent towards perfection.

I do not say you are "dead", but sleeping, drowsy. Like plants during their winter sleep. The divine Sun gives you its refulgence. Awake and bless the Sun that gives you itself, receive it with joy that It may warm you, from the surface to deep inside you, it may rouse you and cover you with flowers and fruits.

Rise. Come to My Gift." (The Poem of the Man-God)

Sorry. But, that is sophistry

 

[Soul]

That goes without saying. If He didn't want to He wouldn't have.

Right, so I don't see why you took issue with my having said that in Scripture we read God wanted to make man in His image and likeness then.

In John 4:24 we read "God is spirit (not Spirit) [...]

His image and likeness is a moral nature, and a rational being.

As I said, in Jn. 4:24 we read, "God is Spirit" (I capitalize the "s" out of respect to God, because it's referencing Him), and because God is Spirit (an incorporeal Being), making us in His image and likeness would have to be of a spiritual nature, and that's what God breathed into the first formed man: the "breath of life," or the "soul," which is a spirit like God is, and it has the characteristics of Him Who creates it. It's therefore intelligent, spiritual, free, immortal, and so on, like the Father who created it. Man's morality and rationality is because of the breath of life, or the soul (spirit), that God gave us, which is the part of us within us that gives us His image and likeness. There's a lot more information Jesus gave about the soul, in my belief, that I've saved in my Google docs.

???? They are alive are they not? They have breath of life do they not? (That means they are breathing as opposed to say---a tree or a rock.)

Whether animals have a soul or not is yet another thing debated from different viewpoints. The truth of the matter is, the Bible does not tell us whether they do or they don't. Everything outside of that is speculation.

I thought that's what you were asking, but your question was initially worded differently than that, so I wanted to be sure first. To answer your question, yes animals are living, but it's life, simply life, that is, being sensitive to real things, both material and emotional. When an animal dies it becomes insensitive because death is its real end. There is no future for it. But while it lives it suffers cold, hunger, fatigue, it is subject to injuries, to pain, to joy, to love, to hatred, to diseases and to death. Man lives as well, but unlike animals, physical death is not our real end, because the soul (spirit) that man was given and has within them is immortal, and thus when we physically die we continue to live, either in life (Heaven) or death (Hell).

Regarding your belief that Scripture doesn't tell us whether animals have souls are not, there's more than one way to say something, and I believe Scripture tells us that animals don't have a soul (God's image and likeness), because in Gen. 1:26 we don't read, "And he said: "Let us make man and animals to our image and likeness," nor in Gen. 1:27 do we read, "And God created man and animals to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them." Only in man after he was formed did God breathe "the breath of life," or the soul (spirit) into him, not animals: "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the earth: and breathed into his face the breath of life" (Gen. 2:7);" And the Lord God having formed out of the ground all the beasts of the earth, and all the fowls of the air, brought them to Adam" (Gen. 2:19).

I know it is not Jesus speaking because it would mean he was contradicting himself.

So, does that mean you've ruled out the possibility that your view about "His image and likeness" and "breathe of life" isn't completely accurate?

No I won't. There isn't any. I don't want to read those links, at least not right now. So give me the scriptural evidence to what is outside of Scripture.

For example, Gamaliel's advice can apply to Maria Valtorta's Work: "And now, therefore, I say to you, refrain from these men, and let them alone; for if this council or this work be of men, it will come to nought; But if it be of God, you cannot overthrow it, lest perhaps you be found even to fight against God." [Ac. 5:38-39]

The Poem of the Man-God has not "come to nought," because on February 26th, 1948, Pope Pius XII gave canonical approval to publish The Poem of the Man-God, more than that an instruction to publish, given at the Vatican before official witnesses.

On March 17, 1993 Bishop Soosa Pakiam of Trivandrum granted an imprimatur to the Malayalam translation of The Poem of the Man-God. What is the juridic import of this imprimatur? It means thatclassroom instruction (in elementary, middle, or high schools) in religious or moral disciplinesmay be based on the Malayalam translation of the Poem. The imprimatur is only valid for thistranslation and so does not give permission for other language editions of the Poem to be used asthe basis for classroom instruction in elementary, middle, or high schools.

Since 1996, acceptance of The Poem of the Man-God has spread widely with imprimatur granted by Bishop Roman Danylak in Rome [1998] for all the approved English translations.

I hope you decide to read or at least glance at the chapters of this e-book entitled “Proofs of the Supernatural Origin of Maria Valtorta’s Visions Described in Her Work” and “A Detailed Analysis of Maria Valtorta and Her Writings According to the Traditional 1912 Catholic Encyclopedia’s Thorough Criteria for Assessing Private Revelations” before making a definitive judgment on whether you think this private revelation is authentic or not (whether it has a divine origin or not).

“Extinguish not the Spirit. Despise not prophecies; but test all things, and hold fast that which is good.” (1 Thess. 5: 19-21)

 

[prism]

And by roughly the fifth week (gametogenesis), it is distinguished as either a girl or a boy.

And some people in their 5th decade aren't able to declare 'it's a boy!' or 'it's a girl!'.

 

[Soul]

Sorry. But, that is sophistry

I'm just speaking what I understand to be true.

 

[Mr GLee]

The dictations and visions that Maria Valtorta received from Jesus, and later published under the title The Poem of the Man-God, is an expansion of the four Gospels of Christ, in my belief. It's not another Gospel. There are four Gospels. There are four, and four there will remain. Understood in detail or left in their broad outlines, four and no more.

There is one gospel .The word of God .Why even look for another knowing we have the perfect?

Galatians 1:5-7 King James Version5 To whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen. I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.