Featured Are the souls of men the fallen heavenly hosts?

He used to be crazy, but he's a whole lot better now.

 

I already threw down, Froggy. Still waiting to see your exegesis.

 

I ain't playin' chess. Lay out your case. 100 words or less.

 

Nevermind. I found it: http://beforeitsnews.com/alternativ...els-who-fought-alongside-lucifer-2523296.html

Download the pdf: http://thewayhomeorfacethefire.net/

 

You're cukoo for cocoa-puffs.

 

I asked for exegesis, not eisegesis. Tell me how you arrived at that conclusion, other than stock in cultic myths and Jewish fables.

 

You've no idea.

Belief is not a prerequisite to comprehension. I don't have to believe the sun goes round the earth for me to understand what someone means when he says he's a geocentrist.

Neither do I have to believe that we are fallen angels to understand that's what you're saying, but trying to equalize dissent with apostasy right out of the gate suggests that you don't have clear, coherent arguments.

Gobbledygook, and I don't believe you can read Hebrew either. But I can read lexicons.

And so says my English translation.

But what does the English word "god" mean? It's early usage was not exclusively to describe deities or spirits. It means authority and dignity. The historical interpretation of these passages is never the deity of men, nor their preexistence.

It is always their dignity and their office.

So they are gods, not spirits like angels, but men of authority and dignity. God is the Most High Authority and Dignity. And so Paul tells every soul to be subject unto the higher powers. Kings can command men, but they cannot command the Most High, nor command men to disobey the Most High.

It would be easier to see the sense of it if we lived under a monarchy. Monarchs rule by divine right. They are called "Lord," "Sire," "Majesty," etc, which are all titles rightfully used in reference to the Authority and Dignity Most High, and are yet under the authority of God.

Christ's allusion to the passage is in the same tenor as in Heb 9:13-14.

For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
​

The blood of bulls and goats doesn't really purify anything, but if was said to purify in the law, how much more purifying is blood of Christ?

Men are not gods, but if in the law they are called gods because they spoke His Word, how much more is the promised Messiah God, Who IS the Word?

​

The law speaks to those on earth. It was given to men, not to angels.

Now that your premise has been shown to be completely and utterly fallacious, there is no need to say anymore about the structure you built upon it.

 

TomLaPalm,
Understanding the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, would recognize how very thin ice the view you present is based.

Much of it is attempting to place some redemption to the fallen angelic beings, that the Scriptures teach are just not redeemable.

Second, it seems that in the discussion you have not understood that the Jews take the grammatical plural Elohim as a singular deity in which is Sovereign over all the Creation. As a result, He has authority to create and destroy at His pleasure, and also the authority to delegate certain aspects of his power to various parts of the creation with not diminishing His final authority over the whole.

Third, the Jews also use the word Elohim as any "mighty one," be it a earthy ruler, a mighty or strong warrior, a person who exhibits great skill in some manner, and as one who is also politically connected. An example is the use of "lord" in the last some 1400 years in Europe. It could be a land owner and even a male courtesan.

So, when one takes to looking into and defending the new age thinking of humans being fallen angels, one easily falls into the pit of new age vipers that have the venom of misinformation, half truths, and whatever the mood and mode is at the moment.

Now, I could spend page after page of the BB arguing with you about all this, but that you might clarify in your own mind and find further documentation using the original language sources and the writings of the Jews, perhaps you might want to look at this source.

Do not be ignorant of this source for it does present factual information that will be helpful to those who have open ears, eyes that see, and minds that understand.

There will be some who reject this source and prefer to chase after what is doubtful and delusional. I am not certain that you are among them.

So, this attempt to draw your interest to this source is offered in hope that you will gain insight and understanding.

One word of caution: Do not confuse the term, "sons of Elohim" with that of "sons of Jehovah." The "sons of Jehovah" is not found in the OT.

I will give you also this hint.

The sons of God (of the chosen line - Seth) were marrying the daughters of man (the line of Cain) who were perverse and spent their time in scheming to entrap the foolish - (think of the fools who are enticed by the harlots in the book of Proverbs).

Read what is in this source, and I trust it will be helpful.

 

Says you.

Duh!

It ain't the subject matter in Hebrews, it's the structure. Here's some more:

If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?

If then God so clothe the grass, which is to day in the field, and to morrow is cast into the oven; how much more will he clothe you, O ye of little faith?

Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness? ... For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree?

Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?

Not now as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved, specially to me, but how much more unto thee, both in the flesh, and in the Lord?​

And now, John 10:

If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?​

Paraphrase:

You accuse me of blasphemy? If He called them gods because they preached the Word, How much more am I the Son of God, Who IS the Word?
​

But back to the reference to Hebrews. I chose it primarily for the structure, but also because it is a commentary on the law. We can all look up the words goats, bulls, ashes, sprinkling and copy and paste Hebrew and Greek letters to look all smart and everything, but the truth of the matter is that the blood of bulls and goats does NOT in reality have ANY purifying or cleansing effect, and it never did--no matter what the law says.

But using your freakazoidal hermeneutic, we would have to conclude otherwise. Heck, your bat-[edited] crazy [edited]-for-brains ideas allow for the possibility that we are in reality four-footed little woollies, bleating and chewing cud—and so is Christ.

But, no matter what the law says, men ain't gods, and that's the point that Christ is making. He's not saying we're like Him. He's drawing a stark, black and white contrast between us and Himself, and then citing the types and shadows of the law to expose the corruption in the judgment of the Pharisees—and yours.

And so you see that Tom doesn't have the comprehension skills of a third grader.

 

No one with a third grade reading comprehension level would have gotten that from what I wrote. That's solid bone between your ears.

I'll mock and jeer atchya later, angel man. Laugh