Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

God is a Satan?


  • Please log in to reply
113 replies to this topic

#31 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 23 January 2006 - 04:44 PM


Depends on the "he" is in Samuel.

Samuel - ...the anger of the LORD was kindled... he moved David
Chronicles - Satan stood up... and provoked

"moved" and "provoked" are the same Hebrew word. Looks pretty parallel.


It's not the word translated 'moved' and 'provoked' which is the issue here. The issue is that God is said to provoke David, whereas the satan is said to provoke Israel.


I might be being a bit dim here, but I can't see that it says anywhere that Satan provoked Israel. In my Bible it says that "Satan ... provoked David". I think we might be on the same side of the debate, and that this is purely semantics, I just wanted to check.


Here:

1 Chronicles 21:
1 An adversary opposed Israel, inciting David to count how many warriors Israel had.


The relevant NET footnotes:

1tn Or “Satan.” The Hebrew word /f*c* (c*f*/) can refer to an adversary in general or Satan in particular. There is no article accompanying the term here, which suggests it should be understood generally.

2tn Heb “stood against.”

3tn Heb “and incited David to count Israel.” As v. 5 indicates, David was not interested in a general census, but in determining how much military strength he had.

sn The parallel text in 2 Sam 24:1 says, “The Lord’s anger again raged against Israel and he incited David against them, saying: ‘Go, count Israel and Judah!’“

The version of the incident in the Book of 2 Samuel gives an underlying theological perspective, while the Chronicler simply describes what happened from a human perspective.

Many interpreters and translations render the Hebrew /fc as a proper name here, “Satan” (NEB, NASB, NIV, NRSV). However, the Hebrew term /fc, which means “adversary,” is used here without the article. Elsewhere when it appears without the article, it refers to a personal or national adversary in the human sphere, the lone exception being Num 22:22, 32, where the angel of the Lord assumes the role of an adversary to Balaam.

When referring elsewhere to the spiritual entity known in the NT as Satan, the noun has the article and is used as a title, “the Adversary” (see Job 1:6-9, 12; 2:1-4, 6-7; Zech 3:1-2).

In light of usage elsewhere the adversary in 1 Chr 21:1 is likely a human enemy, probably a nearby nation whose hostility against Israel pressured David into numbering the people so he could assess his military strength.

For compelling linguistic and literary arguments against taking the noun as a proper name here, see S. Japhet, I & II Chronicles (OTL), 374-75.


Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#32 Natajack

Natajack

    Rho

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,623 posts

Posted 23 January 2006 - 04:47 PM


Dude, the word angel simply means messenger. Satan's angels are just bad people.

Spiritual angels can't sin, and so can't fall.


Christadelphians have turned the angels into people to jive with Dr. Thomas's theology. The Bible does not say that the angels are people.

No, angels are angels, clearly separate from men and this difference is clearly identified in Scripture. But their role remains messenger of God... Flappie is simply saying that satan's angels are messengers of an adversary.
Romans 13v11-12
And this, knowing the time, that it is time to be waking ourselves from sleep, because now our salvation is closer to us than when we believed. The night has advanced, and the day approaches..

#33 mikecassidy

mikecassidy

    Alpha

  • Christadelphian
  • Pip
  • 18 posts

Posted 23 January 2006 - 04:51 PM

^Gotcha, so you're saying Satan 'opposed' Israel, not 'provoked' Israel. All clear.

#34 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 23 January 2006 - 04:52 PM

^Gotcha, so you're saying Satan 'opposed' Israel, not 'provoked' Israel. All clear.


It's the same Hebrew word anyway. :corbather:
Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#35 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 23 January 2006 - 04:55 PM

^Gotcha, so you're saying Satan 'opposed' Israel, not 'provoked' Israel. All clear.

It's the same Hebrew word anyway. :corbather:


Sorry, it's the same word in 1 Samuel 24:1 where David is 'provoked' by God as is used in 1 Chronicles 21:1 where David is 'provoked' to number the people.

The word used for the opposing of the satan against Israel is a different word.
Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#36 mikecassidy

mikecassidy

    Alpha

  • Christadelphian
  • Pip
  • 18 posts

Posted 23 January 2006 - 05:02 PM

We seem to be trying very hard to agree with each other!

#37 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 23 January 2006 - 05:04 PM

We seem to be trying very hard to agree with each other!


Isn't it wonderful? :corbather:
Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#38 Flappie

Flappie

    Psi

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,730 posts

Posted 23 January 2006 - 05:04 PM

Christadelphians have turned the angels into people to jive with Dr. Thomas's theology. The Bible does not say that the angels are people.


No, I'm simply saying that αγγελος means messenger, read Luke 7:24 for example, John didn't have a group of angels as his disciples, they were quite clearly human. The first 3 definitions Strongs comes with are: a messenger, envoy and one who is sent.

The Bible uses the same word to describe human messengers, and spiritual messengers, the context usually tells us which it is. Now we know that spiritual angels can't sin, therefore the satan's angels can't be the spiritual variety.
"I am Flappicus!"
"The first condition of immortality is death."
Broeders in Christus

#39 Dianne

Dianne

    Upsilon

  • On Vacation
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,082 posts

Posted 23 January 2006 - 05:12 PM

I really enjoy discussing with Colter but his last post is so very unfortunate in trying to air brush out the aspects of God's character he doesn't want to believe are true.


This is a perfect example of what it means to make God in your image.
"If it's not in the Bible, then why do you believe it?"
"I AM SPARTACUS!"
"It's the VIBE..."

#40 Colter

Colter

    Sigma

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,711 posts

Posted 23 January 2006 - 06:05 PM


I really enjoy discussing with Colter but his last post is so very unfortunate in trying to air brush out the aspects of God's character he doesn't want to believe are true.


This is a perfect example of what it means to make God in your image.


I do have an image of God Dianne, I think he's just like Jesus but even better.

I believe that "God is Good" and that "God is love" and that "God is spirit."

Jesus believed that and proved it to be true in his life. We are taught to attempt to make ourselves in Gods image not the other way around.

None of you have proven yet that God is both good and evil. You put yourselves in an unenviable position and It all centers around trying to make the bible perfect instead of what your heart is telling you. You drowned out the word of God that the Bible tells you is written on your hearts for the happenstance of 66 books being put together by the early church actually being written by God himself.

By conecting some of the the inferior concepts of divinity in the OT with the superior concepts in the NT ( all to try to make the Bible itself perfect rather than God) you compromise the beautiful message in the Life of Jesus, to seek the living presense of God in your heart.

Colter

Edited by Colter, 23 January 2006 - 06:07 PM.

We must give up all hope for a better past.

#41 Colter

Colter

    Sigma

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,711 posts

Posted 23 January 2006 - 06:09 PM


Christadelphians have turned the angels into people to jive with Dr. Thomas's theology. The Bible does not say that the angels are people.


No, I'm simply saying that αγγελος means messenger, read Luke 7:24 for example, John didn't have a group of angels as his disciples, they were quite clearly human. The first 3 definitions Strongs comes with are: a messenger, envoy and one who is sent.

The Bible uses the same word to describe human messengers, and spiritual messengers, the context usually tells us which it is. Now we know that spiritual angels can't sin, therefore the satan's angels can't be the spiritual variety.


Your using C-delph context as "flux" :shades: again.
We must give up all hope for a better past.

#42 Natajack

Natajack

    Rho

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,623 posts

Posted 23 January 2006 - 06:41 PM

Colter, I couldn't see anything wrong in Flappie's reasoning... just wondered if you could explain the flaws as you see them?
Romans 13v11-12
And this, knowing the time, that it is time to be waking ourselves from sleep, because now our salvation is closer to us than when we believed. The night has advanced, and the day approaches..

#43 Natajack

Natajack

    Rho

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,623 posts

Posted 23 January 2006 - 06:50 PM

I do have an image of God Dianne, I think he's just like Jesus but even better.

Your image of God should be formed what He tells us in the Bible, His Word.

I believe that "God is Good" and that "God is love" and that "God is spirit."

All those statements are true, but that's not only what God is.

Jesus believed that and proved it to be true in his life. We are taught to attempt to make ourselves in Gods image not the other way around.

Again, I agree with you! We are made in God's image. Our purpose is to give God glory by reflecting His image, as you say.

None of you have proven yet that God is both good and evil.

And nobody will, because that's not what any of us have said. You've clearly not understood what's been said. God is NOT both good and evil. God created peace and calamity. Evil is disobedience to God... No sinful being can be in the presence of God and live. But God will dwell man, when those who have been saved are granted immortality: when sin is abolished, God will be all in all... Back to evil though, disobedience to God: God is not evil because He cannot disobey Himself! Evil comes about when somebody disobeys God... so evil was brought into the world when Eve ate of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good AND EVIL.

You put yourselves in an unenviable position and It all centers around trying to make the bible perfect instead of what your heart is telling you. You drowned out the word of God that the Bible tells you is written on your hearts for the happenstance of 66 books being put together by the early church actually being written by God himself.

This particular side of the debate centres around inspiration of Scripture. I believe the Bible to be the inspired Word of God and unfortunately you appear to disagree with that belief.. would i be right?
Romans 13v11-12
And this, knowing the time, that it is time to be waking ourselves from sleep, because now our salvation is closer to us than when we believed. The night has advanced, and the day approaches..

#44 Colter

Colter

    Sigma

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,711 posts

Posted 23 January 2006 - 07:05 PM

Colter, I couldn't see anything wrong in Flappie's reasoning... just wondered if you could explain the flaws as you see them?



The C-delph flux of context turns these angels into people.

7And there was war in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back. 8But he was not strong enough, and they lost their place in heaven.

9The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.

It is possible to make a square peg fit into a round hole, by whittling off the corners, lubeing up the end and smashing the deformed peg into the hole.....even if it' "cracks" the whole foundation. :corbather:

In Gen. you guys see a literal animal but here in Rev it's not literal. That's selective application to fit an idea from "somewhere" into the Bible.
We must give up all hope for a better past.

#45 Flappie

Flappie

    Psi

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,730 posts

Posted 23 January 2006 - 07:08 PM

You didn't actually answer his question. :corbather:
"I am Flappicus!"
"The first condition of immortality is death."
Broeders in Christus

#46 Colter

Colter

    Sigma

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,711 posts

Posted 23 January 2006 - 07:24 PM

Your image of God should be formed what He tells us in the Bible, His Word.


The Son is the word. Whenever God speaks he does so through the Son.

All those statements are true, but that's not only what God is.


God may be defined in other ways but he does not resort to evil.

This particular side of the debate centres around inspiration of Scripture. I believe the Bible to be the inspired Word of God and unfortunately you appear to disagree with that belief.. would i be right


You would be right. :corbather: The son is the word. The Bible is like a news paper, basically true but consideration should be given to the agendas and imperfection of the authors.


Colter
We must give up all hope for a better past.

#47 Colter

Colter

    Sigma

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,711 posts

Posted 23 January 2006 - 07:33 PM

You didn't actually answer his question. :corbather:


The answer Flappie is that I'm not buying your explanation.

24After John's messengers left, Jesus began to speak to the crowd about John: "What did you go out into the desert to see? A reed swayed by the wind?

This has nothing to do with the angels that sinned but rather Christadelphian interpretation to fit an idea.

:)
We must give up all hope for a better past.

#48 Flappie

Flappie

    Psi

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,730 posts

Posted 23 January 2006 - 07:46 PM

Now check the Greek, and lo behold, it's the same word!

Luke 7:24
απελθοντων δε των αγγελων ιωαννου πρξατο λεγειν προς τους οχλος περι ιωαννου τι εξηλθατε εις την ερημον θεασασθαι καλαμον υπο ανεμου σαλευομενον

Revelation 12:7
και εγενετο πολενος εν τω ουρανω ο μιχαηλ και οι αγγελοι αυτου του πολεμησαι μετα του δρακοντος και ο δρακων επολεμησεν και οι αγγελοι αυτου

Edited by Flappie, 23 January 2006 - 08:09 PM.

"I am Flappicus!"
"The first condition of immortality is death."
Broeders in Christus

#49 Colter

Colter

    Sigma

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,711 posts

Posted 23 January 2006 - 08:18 PM

Now check the Greek, and lo behold, it's the same word!

Luke 7:24
απελθοντων δε των αγγελων ιωαννου πρξατο λεγειν προς τους οχλος περι ιωαννου τι εξηλθατε εις την ερημον θεασασθαι καλαμον υπο ανεμου σαλευομενον

Revelation 12:7
και εγενετο πολενος εν τω ουρανω ο μιχαηλ και οι αγγελοι αυτου του πολεμησαι μετα του δρακοντος και ο δρακων επολεμησεν και οι αγγελοι αυτου


Not being a student of Greek I ran your word through a translator and it said this:

angels and demons. Δείτε επίσης: demon....funny thing those translators :shades:

Edited by Colter, 23 January 2006 - 08:19 PM.

We must give up all hope for a better past.

#50 psalm109:31

psalm109:31

    Eta

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 84 posts

Posted 23 January 2006 - 08:20 PM

The most enlightening of all the passages in the OT is coming up now, for it tells us that God was satan. If satan was the arch enemy, the devil, this would be difficult to understand, but as we now know that satan is just a Hebrew word meaning an adversary / opposer, we can easily understand what follows) -


1 Chronicles 21:1 reads.. And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.

There is a parallel passage to this, another account of the same incident recorded in 2 Samuel 24:1

This reads "And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah". So that the satan that provoked Israel in 1 Chronicles is called the LORD in 2 Samuel.

If you apply this principle throughout the Bible many of your problems will vanish but isn’t it easy to see now why the Lord Jesus should call the Apostle Peter satan when he told Jesus there was no need for him to die. He was getting in the way of his Master’s mission and so was an adversary. Read for yourself Matthew 16 v 21 to 23 and see how you can apply the idea of an adversary rather than an evil angel.

We must conclude then that there can be both good and evil satans. For if I prevent you from doing something wrong, I come between you and the wrong you want to do. I am therefore your adversary in this thing to prevent you from doing wrong. I am therefore a good satan. But if you want to do some good thing which I do not want you do; if I get between you and that good thing, I become a bad or evil satan. Sometimes we get the devil and satan mentioned in the same verse. That is because the devil is always evil and when the devil stands in the way of good he becomes and evil adversary or satan.

Let us look now then at the phrase The devil. This is really strange because all 38 references to the devil are in the NT. There are none at all in the OT. If the devil is such an arch enemy of God and man, why is there no mention of him in the OT? The answer is that the devil is a translation of the Greek word Diabolos

This is translated in the AV. - devil 35, false accuser 2, slanderer 1: 38

The meaning is given as

1) prone to slander, slanderous, accusing falsely

1a) a calumniator, false accuser, slanderer,

2) metaphor. applied to a man who, by opposing the cause of God, may be said to act the part of the devil or to side with him.

In this dictionary there follows the compiler’s own version which reads like this.

"Satan the prince of the demons, the author of evil, persecuting good men, estranging mankind from God and enticing them to sin, afflicting them with diseases by means of demons who take possession of their bodies at his bidding."

There are two very obvious mistakes with this exposition of the devil. One is that the writer is mixing up the word for the devil with a different word for the devils which people thought brought diseases. (composer writes- daimonion) The second point is that the writer says Satan is the author of evil. Of course he thinks satan and the devil are one and the same person but from our studies we know differently. But let us ask; Is the devil the author of evil?

The Bible tells us he is not. We shall go to the prophet Isaiah now and read the words of God.

Isaiah 45:5-7 I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me: 6 That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else. 7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. (Isaiah 45:5 - 7)

That surely is plain enough for any one. God claims to send peace and war, prosperity and adversity, as in Amos 3:6 "Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done it?"

God claims that HE is the author of evil; not the devil or satan. He does not claim to be the author of sin but of evil.

When did God create evil then? The word is found in the first book of the Bible and is associated with Adam and Eve’s disobedience, which was sin.

Genesis 2:9 And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

Dennis - (My Ref: \136)

composer


What it looks like to me is that David was proud of the number of His people growing. So satan told him to # His people, and God anger grew because of david proudness. So His anger grew and told david to # the people.

When they came back with a #, He fell to His kness, because the promise was not fullfilled through him, that the number of his people through the promise of abraham would be like the sands of the seashore.

God did create the one that is evil and created the light and the darkness.

My question is was evil found or created?

Ezekiel 28:
13 You were in Eden,
the garden of God;
every precious stone adorned you:
ruby, topaz and emerald,
chrysolite, onyx and jasper,
sapphire, turquoise and beryl.
Your settings and mountings were made of gold;
on the day you were created they were prepared.

14 You were anointed as a guardian cherub,
for so I ordained you.
You were on the holy mount of God;
you walked among the fiery stones.

15 You were blameless in your ways
from the day you were created
till wickedness was found in you.


#51 mikecassidy

mikecassidy

    Alpha

  • Christadelphian
  • Pip
  • 18 posts

Posted 23 January 2006 - 09:04 PM

Ezekiel 28:15 "Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee." (KJV)

Good quote! This verse almost precisely explains how sin came to be in the Race of Man:

This verse exactly describes the fall of Adam, which is a historical event already recorded in The Bible, unlike the fall of 'Satan'. If a verse in the Bible refers us to another part of Scripture, surely we must analyse this before we introduce an extra-Biblical conception.

(In other words, we must extrapolate Scriptural teachings from Scripture, not interpolate extra-Biblical teachings into Scripture.)

If we are told that this person was in the Garden of Eden and was perfect until iniquity was found in him, then the only logical step is to see who The Bible (not man) says was in Eden and was perfect until iniquity was found in him. There is only one candidate - Adam. This must therefore be a comparison between the fall of the king of Tyre and the fall of Adam.

In fact, the comparison between Adam and the king of Tyre runs throughout Ezekiel 28:

Ezekiel 28:2 "thou art a man, and not God, though thou set thine heart as the heart of God".

Genesis 3:5 "For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods"

According to The Bible, this was the sin of "a man", not an angel - of Adam - that he set his heart as the heart of God. That he believed that he could become "as God". Note that this is NOT the sin of the serpent, at least not according to The Bible account.

---------------------------

This has mostly been a cut & paste from a study I recently found myself doing on Ezekiel 28 which I'd be happy to pass on if you'd like to look it over. I won't post it here as it would take up some space and may derail the flow of discussion.

Edited by mikecassidy, 23 January 2006 - 09:17 PM.


#52 He-man

He-man

    Rho

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,716 posts

Posted 23 January 2006 - 09:20 PM


The most enlightening of all the passages in the OT is coming up now, for it tells us that God was satan. If satan was the arch enemy, the devil, this would be difficult to understand, but as we now know that satan is just a Hebrew word meaning an adversary / opposer, we can easily understand what follows) -


1 Chronicles 21:1 reads.. And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.

There is a parallel passage to this, another account of the same incident recorded in 2 Samuel 24:1

This reads "And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah". So that the satan that provoked Israel in 1 Chronicles is called the LORD in 2 Samuel.

If you apply this principle throughout the Bible many of your problems will vanish but isn’t it easy to see now why the Lord Jesus should call the Apostle Peter satan when he told Jesus there was no need for him to die. He was getting in the way of his Master’s mission and so was an adversary. Read for yourself Matthew 16 v 21 to 23 and see how you can apply the idea of an adversary rather than an evil angel.

We must conclude then that there can be both good and evil satans. For if I prevent you from doing something wrong, I come between you and the wrong you want to do. I am therefore your adversary in this thing to prevent you from doing wrong. I am therefore a good satan. But if you want to do some good thing which I do not want you do; if I get between you and that good thing, I become a bad or evil satan. Sometimes we get the devil and satan mentioned in the same verse. That is because the devil is always evil and when the devil stands in the way of good he becomes and evil adversary or satan.

Let us look now then at the phrase The devil. This is really strange because all 38 references to the devil are in the NT. There are none at all in the OT. If the devil is such an arch enemy of God and man, why is there no mention of him in the OT? The answer is that the devil is a translation of the Greek word Diabolos

This is translated in the AV. - devil 35, false accuser 2, slanderer 1: 38

The meaning is given as

1) prone to slander, slanderous, accusing falsely

1a) a calumniator, false accuser, slanderer,

2) metaphor. applied to a man who, by opposing the cause of God, may be said to act the part of the devil or to side with him.

In this dictionary there follows the compiler’s own version which reads like this.

"Satan the prince of the demons, the author of evil, persecuting good men, estranging mankind from God and enticing them to sin, afflicting them with diseases by means of demons who take possession of their bodies at his bidding."

There are two very obvious mistakes with this exposition of the devil. One is that the writer is mixing up the word for the devil with a different word for the devils which people thought brought diseases. (composer writes- daimonion) The second point is that the writer says Satan is the author of evil. Of course he thinks satan and the devil are one and the same person but from our studies we know differently. But let us ask; Is the devil the author of evil?

The Bible tells us he is not. We shall go to the prophet Isaiah now and read the words of God.

Isaiah 45:5-7 I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me: 6 That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else. 7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. (Isaiah 45:5 - 7)

That surely is plain enough for any one. God claims to send peace and war, prosperity and adversity, as in Amos 3:6 "Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done it?"

God claims that HE is the author of evil; not the devil or satan. He does not claim to be the author of sin but of evil.

When did God create evil then? The word is found in the first book of the Bible and is associated with Adam and Eve’s disobedience, which was sin.

Genesis 2:9 And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

Dennis - (My Ref: \136)

composer


What it looks like to me is that David was proud of the number of His people growing. So satan told him to # His people, and God anger grew because of david proudness. So His anger grew and told david to # the people.

When they came back with a #, He fell to His kness, because the promise was not fullfilled through him, that the number of his people through the promise of abraham would be like the sands of the seashore.

God did create the one that is evil and created the light and the darkness.

My question is was evil found or created?

Ezekiel 28:
13 You were in Eden,
the garden of God;
every precious stone adorned you:
ruby, topaz and emerald,
chrysolite, onyx and jasper,
sapphire, turquoise and beryl.
Your settings and mountings were made of gold;
on the day you were created they were prepared.

14 You were anointed as a guardian cherub,
for so I ordained you.
You were on the holy mount of God;
you walked among the fiery stones.

15 You were blameless in your ways
from the day you were created
till wickedness was found in you.

Ezek 28:12 Son of man, take up a lamentation upon the king of Tyrus, and say unto him, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty.

The devil is summarized by the words of Mark:
Mr 7:15 There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him: but the things which come out of him, those are they that defile the man.

Edited by He-man, 23 January 2006 - 09:22 PM.

He-man Called "THE SINGER"
1 Chr 25:5 King's seerer in the matters of God
1 Chr XV 16-22 "The Vocal & Instrumental Music of the Temple Service in the Reign of David"

#53 Flappie

Flappie

    Psi

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,730 posts

Posted 23 January 2006 - 09:39 PM

Not being a student of Greek I ran your word through a translator and it said this:

angels and demons. Δείτε επίσης: demon....funny thing those translators :shades:


That's a dodgy site, but at least it told you that angel was αγγελος, which is the same word as the word for messenger in Luke 7.

Look here and here

Then here
"I am Flappicus!"
"The first condition of immortality is death."
Broeders in Christus

#54 composer

composer

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,065 posts

Posted 23 January 2006 - 11:04 PM

The term "angels" does not relate exclusively to heavenly beings, but also refers to mortal men set in authority (see Rev. 2:1, 2:8, 2:18, etc), or appointed to a specific work. The word is translated "messenger" in Matt. 11:10; Mark 1:2; Luke 7:24, 7:27, 9:52; James 2:25, KJS and obviously relates to mortal men. (See also: 2 Peter 2: 4)

Therefore the expression "fallen angel" refers not to "heavenly" angels who can NEVER sin but refers to MEN / MORTALS who were once "messengers of God" in positions of Spiritual authority, who became corrupt.

So does the Bible refer to mortal men as 'angels' the answer is yes! it does.

The Original Greek NT Text NEVER uses the Word / Metaphor Satan. For Satan is NOT a Greek word at all, but a transliterated Hebrew word / metaphor, meaning an ADVERSARY / OPPOSER. It is NOT the legitimate title of an alleged fallen heavenly being, but rather Churches have illegitimately superimposed and inferred that "title" for an unscriptural and illegitimate concept.

Edited by composer, 25 January 2006 - 06:40 AM.


#55 Colter

Colter

    Sigma

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,711 posts

Posted 24 January 2006 - 01:38 AM


Not being a student of Greek I ran your word through a translator and it said this:

angels and demons. Δείτε επίσης: demon....funny thing those translators :shades:


That's a dodgy site, but at least it told you that angel was αγγελος, which is the same word as the word for messenger in Luke 7.

Look here and here

Then here


Thanks Flappie, now you guys have me learning Greek. :corbather: I got my wifes Greek NT dictionary out to make some sence of all this. What is the significance of the different letters at the end of the two Greek words for "angel" or messanger:


αγγελων in Lukes messanger

αγγελοι in Johns?

What you have demostrated is that these passages both consider these angels messangers which is fine but Lukes messangers and Satans messangers are contratsed Good and evil messangers.

The link that you provided had a good commentary, thank you. I will provide that commontary for everyone.

7. In Job 1:6-11 2:1-6 , Satan appears among the sons of God, presenting himself before God in heaven, as the accuser of the saints: again in Zec 3:1, 2 . But at Christ's coming as our Redeemer, he fell from heaven, especially when Christ suffered, rose again, and ascended to heaven. When Christ appeared before God as our Advocate, Satan, the accusing adversary, could no longer appear before God against us, but was cast out judicially ( Rom 8:33, 34 ). He and his angels henceforth range through the air and the earth, after a time (namely, the interval between the ascension and the second advent) about to be cast hence also, and bound in hell. That "heaven" here does not mean merely the air, but the abode of angels, appears from Rev 12:9, 10, 12 1Ki 22:19-22 .
there was--Greek, "there came to pass," or "arose."
war in heaven--What a seeming contradiction in terms, yet true! Contrast the blessed result of Christ's triumph, Luk 19:38 , "peace in heaven." Col 1:20 , "made peace through the blood of His cross, by Him to reconcile all things unto Himself; whether . . . things in earth, or things in heaven."
Michael and his angels . . . the dragon . . . and his angels--It was fittingly ordered that, as the rebellion arose from unfaithful angels and their leader, so they should be encountered and overcome by faithful angels and their archangel, in heaven. On earth they are fittingly encountered, and shall be overcome, as represented by the beast and false prophet, by the Son of man and His armies of human saints ( Rev 19:14-21 ). The conflict on earth, as in Dan 10:13 , has its correspondent conflict of angels in heaven. Michael is peculiarly the prince, or presiding angel, of the Jewish nation. The conflict in heaven, though judicially decided already against Satan from the time of Christ's resurrection and ascension, receives its actual completion in the execution of judgment by the angels who cast out Satan from heaven. From Christ's ascension he has no standing-ground judicially against the believing elect. Luk 10:18 , "I beheld (in the earnest of the future full fulfilment given in the subjection of the demons to the disciples) Satan as lightning fall from heaven." As Michael fought before with Satan about the body of the mediator of the old covenant ( Jud 1:9 ), so now the mediator of the new covenant, by offering His sinless body in sacrifice, arms Michael with power to renew and finish the conflict by a complete victory. That Satan is not yet actually and finally cast out of heaven, though the judicial sentence to that effect received its ratification at Christ's ascension, appears from Eph 6:12 , "spiritual wickedness in high (Greek, 'heavenly') places." This is the primary Church-historical sense here. But, through Israel's unbelief, Satan has had ground against that, the elect nation, appearing before God as its accuser. At the eve of its restoration, in the ulterior sense, his standing-ground in heaven against Israel, too, shall be taken from him, "the Lord that hath chosen Jerusalem" rebuking him, and casting him out from heaven actually and for ever by Michael, the prince, or presiding angel of the Jews. Thus Zec 3:1-9 is strictly parallel, Joshua, the high priest, being representative of his nation Israel, and Satan standing at God's fight hand as adversary to resist Israel's justification. Then, and not till then, fully ( Rev 12:10 , "NOW," &c.) shall ALL things be reconciled unto Christ IN HEAVEN ( Col 1:20 ), and there shall be peace in heaven ( Luk 19:38 ).
We must give up all hope for a better past.

#56 thechild

thechild

    Lambda

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 282 posts

Posted 24 January 2006 - 02:45 AM

Ezekiel 28:15 "Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee." (KJV)

Good quote! This verse almost precisely explains how sin came to be in the Race of Man:

This verse exactly describes the fall of Adam, which is a historical event already recorded in The Bible, unlike the fall of 'Satan'. If a verse in the Bible refers us to another part of Scripture, surely we must analyse this before we introduce an extra-Biblical conception.

(In other words, we must extrapolate Scriptural teachings from Scripture, not interpolate extra-Biblical teachings into Scripture.)

If we are told that this person was in the Garden of Eden and was perfect until iniquity was found in him, then the only logical step is to see who The Bible (not man) says was in Eden and was perfect until iniquity was found in him. There is only one candidate - Adam. This must therefore be a comparison between the fall of the king of Tyre and the fall of Adam.

In fact, the comparison between Adam and the king of Tyre runs throughout Ezekiel 28:

Ezekiel 28:2 "thou art a man, and not God, though thou set thine heart as the heart of God".

Genesis 3:5 "For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods"

According to The Bible, this was the sin of "a man", not an angel - of Adam - that he set his heart as the heart of God. That he believed that he could become "as God". Note that this is NOT the sin of the serpent, at least not according to The Bible account.

---------------------------

This has mostly been a cut & paste from a study I recently found myself doing on Ezekiel 28 which I'd be happy to pass on if you'd like to look it over. I won't post it here as it would take up some space and may derail the flow of discussion.




adam was not alone.

#57 Dianne

Dianne

    Upsilon

  • On Vacation
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,082 posts

Posted 24 January 2006 - 05:06 AM


Colter, I couldn't see anything wrong in Flappie's reasoning... just wondered if you could explain the flaws as you see them?



The C-delph flux of context turns these angels into people.

7And there was war in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back. 8But he was not strong enough, and they lost their place in heaven.

9The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.


This is speaking about literal events in symbolic language. It's a prophecy of things to come.

Michael represents someone in history
Michael's angels represent someone
The dragon represents someone
The dragon's angels represent someone

Edited by Dianne, 24 January 2006 - 05:35 AM.

"If it's not in the Bible, then why do you believe it?"
"I AM SPARTACUS!"
"It's the VIBE..."

#58 Steven

Steven

    Upsilon

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,365 posts

Posted 24 January 2006 - 05:29 AM

Thanks Flappie, now you guys have me learning Greek. :corbather: I got my wifes Greek NT dictionary out to make some sence of all this. What is the significance of the different letters at the end of the two Greek words for "angel" or messanger:

αγγελων in Lukes messanger

αγγελοι in Johns?


They're case endings. "of the angels" (Genitive) and "the angels" (Nominative)

The C-delph flux of context turns these angels into people.


It's Christ-Adelphia, as in Phil-Adelphia, brotherly love. The C-adelph flux (flux?) merely reads symbols as symbolising things. I'm aware in the Urantia flux, Rev12 is read as literal history (PAPER 53 - THE LUCIFER REBELLION, PAPER 67 - THE PLANETARY REBELLION etc), but in the Bible symbols are symbolic.

So in Zech 3 Satan symbolises the Samaritans who raised a SATNAH against Ezra. etc.
God bless
S.

#59 Dianne

Dianne

    Upsilon

  • On Vacation
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,082 posts

Posted 24 January 2006 - 08:18 AM

I'm aware in the Urantia flux, Rev12 is read as literal history (PAPER 53 - THE LUCIFER REBELLION, PAPER 67 - THE PLANETARY REBELLION etc), but in the Bible symbols are symbolic.


Interesting. I wonder why John is writing to the seven Churches to warn them of the Lucifer rebellion/Planetary rebellion.
"If it's not in the Bible, then why do you believe it?"
"I AM SPARTACUS!"
"It's the VIBE..."

#60 Natajack

Natajack

    Rho

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,623 posts

Posted 24 January 2006 - 10:25 AM

Your image of God should be formed what He tells us in the Bible, His Word.

The Son is the word. Whenever God speaks he does so through the Son.

I humbly disagree with you. Jesus does not equal the Word. The Bible is God's Word. That Jesus = the Word is one of the great errors of human history.

All those statements are true, but that's not only what God is.

God may be defined in other ways but he does not resort to evil.

I agree! I didn't say that He did. You still don't see the difference do you? To create evil, does God require evil in His nature? Absolutely not! We are sinners, but we are capable of good... what does that prove!? No, GOD IS NOT EVIL AND THERE IS NO EVIL IN HIM, but HE CREATED PEACE AND EVIL (CALAMITY).

This particular side of the debate centres around inspiration of Scripture. I believe the Bible to be the inspired Word of God and unfortunately you appear to disagree with that belief.. would i be right

You would be right. :corbather: The son is the word. The Bible is like a news paper, basically true but consideration should be given to the agendas and imperfection of the authors.

And there, my friend, we must disagree. The Son is not the word. The Bible is the Word. The Bible is entirely true, barring a few translational boobies. The translator and scribe were both imperfect, but the author was God.
Romans 13v11-12
And this, knowing the time, that it is time to be waking ourselves from sleep, because now our salvation is closer to us than when we believed. The night has advanced, and the day approaches..




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users