-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Are the souls of men the fallen heavenly hosts?
- Thread starter TomLaPalm
- Start date
- Status
if you cain't run with the big dogs you need to stay on the porch,
I already threw down, Froggy. Still waiting to see your exegesis.
I gave you a starter kit, for beginners , no response.
argue with Jesus,.
Jesus said "ye are elohyim" what is your response to what Jesus said?
Nevermind. I found it: http://beforeitsnews.com/alternativ...els-who-fought-alongside-lucifer-2523296.html
Download the pdf: http://thewayhomeorfacethefire.net/
Download the pdf: http://thewayhomeorfacethefire.net/
These post are wrong , there was no fight. All sinners were condemned and removed to here in darkness. The problem is unscriptural tradition is not supported by facts.
So when you are fighting me, you think you are fighting this nonsense.
Consider only scripture , to learn truth not some internet rubbish
I asked for exegesis, not eisegesis. Tell me how you arrived at that conclusion, other than stock in cultic myths and Jewish fables.
I am sorry, I presumed you had a least a minimal level of understanding and could follow on a basis of logic.
You have to believe Scripture is correct and accept it , even if you do not fully understand
אֲֽנִי־אָמַרְתִּי אֱלֹהִים אַתֶּם וּבְנֵי עֶלְיֹון כֻּלְּכֶֽם׃ or I -- I have said, 'Gods ye are, And sons of the Most High -- all of you,
The basis of the position is the Words of Jesus in John and God in Psalms 82. Taking these words literally from the Hebrew and comparing to all the other uses of the same words (you can look these up, gods , sons of gods etc.) ), it is obvious that these words reference more than men as rulers or judges. ..
So we know Jesus was talking to Jews who were trying to kill him and God was talking to those in Heaven who " But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes." v 7. How can both be true if not the same type of beings?
further evidence
Heb 2:14
Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
children first, then flesh and blood.
Jhn 3:5
Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
Jhn 3:6
That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
Being born into flesh and blood first is necessary to be born again spiritually second.
What does this mean, all humans are born physically first, yes but not all sinners.
So are there sinners here who do not have physical bodies?
yes we know , sinners from Heaven were expelled into darkness (chains of darkness) and are here in darkness before Gen 1 "let there be light"
We know the sons of God shouted (Job 38:7) at this moment.
We know Satan is here and that 1/3 of the heavenly host fell with him. So they are here being condemned "reserved unto everlasting judgment"
What does God do with sinners expelled from Heaven ,? Each unique individual creation of God without brotherhood that He cares not to destroy? Heb 2:14 He puts the spiritual in a flesh and blood vessel that by one death all sinners might be saved.
Can you follow this,? Your comments were comparable the atheists' to which I have proposed this.
(this position makes Calvinism debate moot)
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.
I was giving the Hebrew because I though you could read it.
by this last post., It seems I was very wrong,
You do not have a minimal understanding of these scripture passages. Your response and the verse to show your position are wonderful it is just they are totally unrelated to the topic you so fiercely questioned.
If the English word" god" is causing a problem for you, use the Hebrew meaning of elohyim as "heavenly host" or resident of heaven
by this last post., It seems I was very wrong,
You do not have a minimal understanding of these scripture passages. Your response and the verse to show your position are wonderful it is just they are totally unrelated to the topic you so fiercely questioned.
If the English word" god" is causing a problem for you, use the Hebrew meaning of elohyim as "heavenly host" or resident of heaven
Last edited:
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.
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.
Thank you for your kind response but there are several errors present.
1. There is no scripture that says angels are not redeemable, (although it is true, they have to be human first. )
2 , 3 . Elohyim is used for the almighty but this is not that usage "heavenly host" and is plural as in Job 1 This is why we cannot determine doctrine from Translation, esp KJV.
4. This is the exact opposite of new age thinking. You agree we are spiritual eternal beings in a flesh and blood temporal body. We are not Gods but the sinful beings that were kick out of Heaven.
WE are the bad guys in this redemption scenario.
The use of Jehovah in the OT is comparable to God in the NT. " to them gave He the power to become the sons of GOD " is the same GOD of the OT.
The sons of God are not the chosen line of Seth. It is used to reference beings before Seth was born.
Job 38:7
How is it that we will judge sinful angels?
How is it that Hell is prepared for the Devil and his angels and we know sinners go there but no verse says a man is cast into hell?
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?
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.
let me get this straight, Jesus is comparing the Law unto Himself in John 10?
So John 10:35 is a false statement by Jesus Himself.
This is exactly why I came to the Baptist board to escape those who had no basic knowledge of scripture. And here you are, as confused as any atheist , JW or Mormon.
Read the verses again.
Jhn 10:33
The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
Jhn 10:34
Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
Jhn 10:35
If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
Jhn 10:36
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?
So John 10:35 is a false statement by Jesus Himself.
This is exactly why I came to the Baptist board to escape those who had no basic knowledge of scripture. And here you are, as confused as any atheist , JW or Mormon.
Read the verses again.
Jhn 10:33
The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
Jhn 10:34
Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
Jhn 10:35
If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
Jhn 10:36
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?
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
- Status