Results 81 - 88 of 88
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: drbloor Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
81 | Does Satan Exist Part III | Bible general Archive 3 | drbloor | 166216 | ||
PART III 5. He was the perfection of wisdom and beauty. Ezekiel 28:12. If we agree that Ezekiel 27 is a prophesy upon literal Tyre then this is clearly an echo of the language used in Ezekiel 27 and reinforces the notion that Ezekiel 28 is also a prophesy upon literal Tyre. This quote from Ezekiel 27 is clearly not about Satan: Ezekiel 27:3,4: "O Tyrus, thou hast said, I am of perfect beauty. Thy borders are in the midst of the seas, thy builders have perfected thy beauty." Tyre was also at one time wise, as we have seen – Tyre had a great friendship with Israel, with David and with Solomon. Tyre helped to build the Temple of the Lord on Mount Zion. Surely this sets Tyre apart from many other nations as "full of wisdom"? Indeed, Hiram king of Tyre made peace and a league with King Solomon, whose most famous attribute was... Wisdom. 6. He fell through pride. Ezekiel 28:17. This may be true, in a manner of speaking, but let us examine Ezekiel 28 to discover the source of this pride: Ezekiel 28: 4,5. "With thy wisdom and with thine understanding thou hast gotten thee riches, and hast gotten gold and silver into thy treasures: By thy great wisdom and by thy traffick hast thou increased thy riches, and thine heart is lifted up because of thy riches." Ezekiel 28:16. "By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned." Ezekiel 28:17 "thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness" This "brightness" is clearly the "brightness" of "gold and silver", of "treasures" and "riches" which had been gained by "traffick" and "merchandise". The pride which is being talked about must be the pride of these monetary and physical possessions, none of which an angel in heaven would be concerned with, indeed not even Satan is supposed to be interested in these things but apparently with mens souls, power in heaven etc. It is only men who lust after gold and silver. And note Ezekiel 28:2 "yet thou art a man" – not an angel. Therefore, whoever fell through pride, it could not have been Satan. It would clearly make more sense, especially as this chapter is addressed to Tyre, that the great trading city of Tyre had accumulated these "riches" and "merchandise" and ESPECIALLY because they have already been specifically mentioned in Ezekiel 26:12 which you have to agree cannot possibly be about Satan. ------------------------------------- The original meaning of the word "Satan" in The Bible is "an adversary". Thus it is used to describe adversaries. This is, for example, why Jesus calls Peter a Satan, or "an adversary". This is why an obedient "angel of the LORD" is called Satan in Numbers 22:22. And this explains the apparent contradiction of 2 Samuel 24:1 and 1 Chronicles 21:1 – "the anger of the LORD" is an adversary (or Satan) to Israel. To say anything else is to ignore the explicit statement of 2 Samuel 24:1 – that God moved David against Israel. If, for the sake of argument, God did this through Satan (which this verse does not say), then Satan is obediently doing the will of God; therefore Satan is an obedient angel and not a fallen one. Okay, and so much for all that. As I said at the start, this answer has (of necessity) been longer than I had thought. And the more I think about it, the longer it will grow, so I will sign off now. After one last question...! Q. If we understand angels to be direct servants of God, indeed that some, most likely all have been in the presence of God, then they must know at least as much about God as we do, and almost by definition far more than we do. We know that God is all powerful – immortal, omnipotent and omnipresent – therefore angels must know this as well. However, if Satan is an angel that rebelled and attempted to overthrow God, he must have believed that he had a chance of succeeding. Therefore angels must not believe that God is immortal and omnipotent. And this conclusion, and by extrapolation, a belief in Satan as a fallen angel, I would put to you, is blasphemous. That is the essence of why I find this belief so troubling. I hope and pray that this will give you some food for thought. If nothing else may it lead to a careful consideration of The Word of God, which "is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness." Amen, Dr. B. |
||||||
82 | Where in scripture is the fall of Satan? | Bible general Archive 3 | drbloor | 166062 | ||
Thank you for your quick response Mark. I believe my misunderstanding of the view of Satan as an actual person has arisen because I thought that Revelation 12 was the explanation of Satan being a fallen angel. Where in scripture does it describe the 'creation' or 'fall' of Satan? Thanks again. |
||||||
83 | Is there any way to edit posts? | Not Specified | drbloor | 166053 | ||
Is there any way to edit posts? For example I have quoted from 2 Samuel 24:1 in my question regarding Satan, but accidentally missed that out. If not, is this an option that the people running this forum could introduce? |
||||||
84 | Is there any way to edit posts? | Bible general Archive 3 | drbloor | 166058 | ||
Is there any way to edit posts? For example I have quoted from 2 Samuel 24:1 in my question regarding Satan, but accidentally missed that out. If not, is this an option that the people running this forum could introduce? |
||||||
85 | Abel's sacrifice better than Cain's? | Heb 11:4 | drbloor | 166039 | ||
Just a quick note in agreement (apart from the last sentence) with your statement. Take note of the start of Genesis 4, verse 4 and you will see that Abel brought two (2) offerings to The Lord. He brought an offering of the fruit of the ground, just as Cain did, but he "also brought of the firstlings of his flock". There was nothing wrong with offering "of the fruit of the ground", the problem was Cains ommission of sacrifice which was necessary for atonement. 4:3 And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD. 4:4 And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering: |
||||||
86 | Does Satan Really Exist? | Not Specified | drbloor | 166037 | ||
Does 'Satan' Really Exist? If 'Satan' is an actual person, how can the parallel accounts of Davids numbering of Israel be explained: 1 Chronicles 21:1 "And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel." 24:1 "And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah." If 'Satan' is an actual person, scripture would here indicate that 'Satan' is God. How is this possible? Secondly, if you believe that the 'war in heaven' of Revelation 12 is a literal war and not symbolic, how can it be understood in terms of it's correct chronological context: Revelation 1:1 "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass." This means that the 'war in heaven' must occur some time after the giving of The Revelation - it must "shortly come to pass." This would place it historically some time after circa 70AD. In other words, if you believe that 'Satan' is a fallen angel, then you must also believe that he did not become a fallen angel until after the whole of The Bible had been written, thus preventing the 'Satan' of Revelation 12 from being the 'Satan' of the rest of The Bible. Okay, and thanks. Dr. B. |
||||||
87 | Does Satan Really Exist? | Bible general Archive 3 | drbloor | 166055 | ||
Does 'Satan' Really Exist? If 'Satan' is an actual person, how can the parallel accounts of Davids numbering of Israel be explained: 1 Chronicles 21:1 "And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel." 24:1 "And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah." If 'Satan' is an actual person, scripture would here indicate that 'Satan' is God. How is this possible? Secondly, if you believe that the 'war in heaven' of Revelation 12 is a literal war and not symbolic, how can it be understood in terms of it's correct chronological context: Revelation 1:1 "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass." This means that the 'war in heaven' must occur some time after the giving of The Revelation - it must "shortly come to pass." This would place it historically some time after circa 70AD. In other words, if you believe that 'Satan' is a fallen angel, then you must also believe that he did not become a fallen angel until after the whole of The Bible had been written, thus preventing the 'Satan' of Revelation 12 from being the 'Satan' of the rest of The Bible. Okay, and thanks. Dr. B. |
||||||
88 | Does Satan Really Exist? | John 8:44 | drbloor | 166060 | ||
Does 'Satan' Really Exist? If 'Satan' is an actual person, how can the parallel accounts of Davids numbering of Israel be explained: 1 Chronicles 21:1 "And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel." 24:1 "And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah." If 'Satan' is an actual person, scripture would here indicate that 'Satan' is God. How is this possible? Secondly, if you believe that the 'war in heaven' of Revelation 12 is a literal war and not symbolic, how can it be understood in terms of it's correct chronological context: Revelation 1:1 "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass." This means that the 'war in heaven' must occur some time after the giving of The Revelation - it must "shortly come to pass." This would place it historically some time after circa 70AD. In other words, if you believe that 'Satan' is a fallen angel, then you must also believe that he did not become a fallen angel until after the whole of The Bible had been written, thus preventing the 'Satan' of Revelation 12 from being the 'Satan' of the rest of The Bible. Okay, and thanks. Dr. B. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 1 2 3 4 5 ] |