Results 1 - 9 of 9
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | The Real stature of Satan | Is 14:16 | BarbaraC102 | 126885 | ||
I found the scripture, it was Isaiah 14:16. |
||||||
2 | The Real stature of Satan | Is 14:16 | Stultis the Fool | 126946 | ||
There is debate as to wether or not Isaiah chapter 14 is, in fact, refering to Satan. I have come to understand that some believe the prophet is referring in whole or in part to the king of Babylon [Isaiah 14:4], and still other information points to Messianic prophecy; specifically the verse which we use to derive refference to Satan, Isaiah 14:12 "How you have fallen from heaven, O star of the morning, son of the dawn! You have been cut down to the earth, You who have weakened the nations!" See 2 Peter 1:19 "So we have the prophetic word made more sure, to which you do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts." See Revelation 2:26 "He who overcomes, and he who keeps My deeds until the end, TO HIM I WILL GIVE AUTHORITY OVER THE NATIONS;[Rev 2:27] AND HE SHALL RULE THEM WITH A ROD OF IRON, AS THE VESSELS OF THE POTTER ARE BROKEN TO PIECES, as I also have received authority from My Father;[Rev 2:28] and I will give him the morning star." Also, see Revelation 22:16 "I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star." The context of Isaiah 14:12 seems to indicate prophecy of Christ. This would eliminate reference to "Satan," in verse 12, and would likely place verse 16 in reference to "the King of Babylon." Food for thought. |
||||||
3 | The Real stature of Satan | Is 14:16 | DocTrinsograce | 126950 | ||
I cannot find a single orthodox reformation era scholar (1500 through 1700) who considered this passage to be referencing anything except the king of Babylon. Now I'm curious to see if there are any commentators at all who are of the opinion that this verse is speaking of Satan. | ||||||
4 | Commentator? | Is 14:16 | Stultis the Fool | 126953 | ||
When you say "commentator," how do you mean? Does our friend BarbaraC102 not fulfill the role of a "commentator" of the opinion this verse is speaking of Satan? | ||||||
5 | Commentator? | Is 14:16 | DocTrinsograce | 126955 | ||
Only if she's published. | ||||||
6 | Out of curiosity? | Is 14:16 | Stultis the Fool | 126957 | ||
Out of curiosity, what is the importance of a "commentator" making agreement with the opinion in question? | ||||||
7 | Out of curiosity? | Is 14:16 | DocTrinsograce | 126959 | ||
Lends authority. Helps to insure we do not go off on the deep end studing a thing. | ||||||
8 | Out of curiosity? | Is 14:16 | Stultis the Fool | 126962 | ||
I appologize, but you beg the question: If God is no respector of persons, and we are not to be a respector of persons, what does being "published" have to do with anything? Many people have published many things, but that most certainly does not guarantee the veracity of what they write. I will add that a fact should be established on the basis of two or three witnesses, and again, where two or three are gathered, there I am amongst you. Please understand, I am not trying to fight, but rather to gain some insight into your methodology. Do we both seem to be in agreement regarding the verse in question (Isaiah 14:16)? |
||||||
9 | Out of curiosity? | Is 14:16 | following him | 126964 | ||
Please excuss me. I must say that I agree with Stultis the Fool. I can find a "published" commentary to support any number of different sides of an issue. Gap Theory, day age theory, young earth theory. Pre-trib, mid-trib, post-trib etc. They all can't be right if they are saying the opposite of each other. Most commentaries I've read are slanted toward a particular denomination or church organization's beliefs. So how can you say that their "opinions" are worth more than someone else who has not been published. Each side of the issue always thinks they are the right one and have scriptural proof (at least in their view) to back them up. As far as I'm concerned a commentary is simply someone's elses opinion it may be in writen form (and it should be considered) but its still an opinion. | ||||||