Results 1 - 2 of 2
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Still waiting.... | 1 Cor 8:5 | pcdarcan | 131072 | ||
Hi Brad, have you been reading my responses with an open mind? - I believe I present a Biblically logical case? Bro Tim has said: "there are things that are called 'gods' that are not really gods". I do believe that 2 Cor 4:4 (The Living Bible) "Satan, who is the god of this evil world..." is not open to interpretation. Satan is called a "god" in this verse. He is not like those idols made of wood and stone that were thrown into the fire and destroyed... to quote Bro Tim: Consider Is. 37:19 - "They have thrown their gods into the fire and destroyed them, for they were not gods but only wood and stone, fashioned by human hands." Satan is not a god of this type, made of wood and stone and fashioned by man's hands. That scripture that Tim uses is describing dead idols made by human hands and venerated as gods. Remember what happened at Exodus 32:1 KJV "And when the people saw that Moses had delayed to come down out of the mount, the people gathering themselves together unto Aaron, and said unto him, Up, make us gods, which shall go before us." Of course whatever they made wasn't a "real" god, but to them it was "a god". That what the verse says. Satan, however, is one of those "living" gods spoken about in the Bible. To say he is "a god" doesn't make him God, the creator, of course. Bro Tim states: "calling something a 'god' simply doesn't make it one!" But, who originally called Satan a god, me? you Brad? Bro Tim? Not me for sure. However, the apostle Paul originally acknowledges Satan as a "god" in 2 Cor 4:4. He never qualifies it by saying that he isn't really a god; as a matter of fact, to revisit 2 Cor 4:4, Paul even called him "THE god" of this evil world. There's no doubt at all that Paul believes him to be a god and that is the thought he was conveying to the reader. Is not my argument Biblically logical, as well? - work with me Brad. :) I'm just kindly presenting a Biblical verse to something I believe shoots holes through the statement: "Jehovah several times denies that there are any other gods but Him" (Bro. Tim) The context of all those verses in Isaiah is clear. God is speaking from his identify perspective, to paraphase, there is not other god that can save you - again, one of the recurring themes in Isaiah. You could say of yourself Brad, that there is no other "me" - however, someone could steal your identity and make it appear they were you. So, just to make sure that I'm clear on Bro Tim argument, is he saying that although 2 Cor 4:4 identifies/reveals/discloses Satan to be "the god" of this evel world, he in not really a god? (Please don't bother with the elohim, that's a smoke-screen.) Lastly, the reasoning purported by Bro Tim are circular and even forced reasoning to me - square peg in a round whole - sorry, that's how it comes across to me (I'm just being honest). It just sounds like a bunch of double talk... I mean the Bible calls Satan "the god" and someone trys to reason that statement away? Why would the Bible call him "the god" if he wasn't a god. Sorry, these arguments presented to me by Bro Tim just don't convince me and even worry me that someone is trying to elevate their knowledge above clear Bible statements - I mean there's a condescening nature to the some of the responses. I don't believe Bro Tim means to be expressing it that way, but that's how it strikes me. Please don't take offense Brad, honest and upright disagreements can even test our own beliefs - not a bad thing if it brings us closer to the accurate knowledge of the Bible. Have a good evening... |
||||||
2 | Still waiting.... | 1 Cor 8:5 | Hank | 131126 | ||
pcdarcan: The Bible recognizes the existence of graven images (idols), whom it calls "gods" and soundly condemns. It also recognizes the existence of Satan, whom it calls "the god of this world" and likewise condemns. But in Scripture polytheism is never supported. So where are we going with this? What is your argument? What is your point? Surely you aren't trying to lay a foundation for something like, say, Jesus is a god, but not God, are you? Oh, I hope not! --Hank | ||||||