Can A person Keep the law and live? Have salvation thru the law itself?

[HisWitness]

You need to think through carefully what you are saying.
Of course Adam had the ability to be tempted.

So did the angels in heaven. That is why Lucifer and one third of all the angels fell.

Jesus left the glories of heaven, came, was born of virgin, suffered among men, died, was buried, and rose again.
The Bible says about Christ that he was tempted in all points such as we are.

Jesus was tempted. He was tempted in the wilderness by Satan for 40 days and 40 nights while he fasted. There is no doubt that Christ was tempted. It is not a sin to be tempted. It is sin to give into that temptation. Jesus was sinless in that he never gave into any temptation that came his way. Each time Satan tempted him he answered with Scripture and in the end he rebuked Satan.

Did the Son of God have the ability to sin? He was tempted, but could not, as God, sin. There is a difference between temptation and sin. You seem to be inferring that Christ was a sinner.

Christ was NOT a sinner--He did NOT sin

Fully man had the ability to be tempted and sin.
Fully God CANNOT Sin and NEVER will.

Explain that if you will--because i cant

 

[DHK]

you have NO scripture evidence that the angels had the ability to be tempted or to sin or any to prove angels fell from heaven--i know you will give some and say they do but in reality they can mean some else

Without going into a long exposition I have Revelation 12, Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 to prove that Lucifer fell, and that Lucifer is Satan; and that not only Satan fell, but he took one third of the angels with him. Study the passages if you will.
The reason he fell: his heart was lifted up in pride. That is one verse.
He wanted to be like the most high God.
He also said, I will make my throne as the throne of God.

Pride is sin. One succumbs to the sin of pride. How? He gives into his own desires or temptations. The temptation does not have to come from without. It is able to come from within. He liked what he saw and wanted it. Man does that all the time.
Shoppers are constantly reminded to make a list before they shop. Stay away from "impulse buying." It leads to financial trouble. Buy only what is on the "list," or what is necessary. Our "impulse" is to buy what we desire, what we see, what we want, and not what is just on that list or what we need.
Satan saw; desired what he couldn't have, sinned in his heart, and rebelled. One third of the angels followed him in that rebellion.

 

[HisWitness]

Without going into a long exposition I have Revelation 12, Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 to prove that Lucifer fell, and that Lucifer is Satan; and that not only Satan fell, but he took one third of the angels with him. Study the passages if you will.
The reason he fell: his heart was lifted up in pride. That is one verse.
He wanted to be like the most high God.
He also said, I will make my throne as the throne of God.

Pride is sin. One succumbs to the sin of pride. How? He gives into his own desires or temptations. The temptation does not have to come from without. It is able to come from within. He liked what he saw and wanted it. Man does that all the time.
Shoppers are constantly reminded to make a list before they shop. Stay away from "impulse buying." It leads to financial trouble. Buy only what is on the "list," or what is necessary. Our "impulse" is to buy what we desire, what we see, what we want, and not what is just on that list or what we need.
Satan saw; desired what he couldn't have, sinned in his heart, and rebelled. One third of the angels followed him in that rebellion.

as we discussed at an earlier time--Lucifer was a MAN(King of Babylon-Nebby)

and the King of Tyrus was a MAN also.

and where is the scripture evidence of 1/3rd of angels falling ?

 

[DHK]

Fully man had the ability to be tempted and sin.

You said:

what you are calling a sin nature really is not a sin nature but the ability to be tempted and to sin--which he could do before the fall as after and after the fall God was not leading and directing him anymore as before--soo he walked in the lusts of the fleshof which he had before the fall

What are you trying to say here?
Adam was perfect before the temptation, though he had the ability to give into temptation. Thus the ability to give into temptation is not the sin nature.
Jesus had that ability.

The sin nature is being born with the stain of sin already inherent in our nature. We sin for two reasons:
1. Because we have a nature that is sinful--we can't help but sin.
2. Because we enjoy it. We sin because we want to sin, and we will be held accountable for it.

In your definition you make Jesus a sinner simply because he had the ability to be tempted. So you explain this verse:

Hebrews 4:15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.

 

[psalms109:31]

Question: "Did one third of the angels fall with Lucifer?"

Answer: While there is no verse that says a "third of the angels fell from heaven," some verses, when put together, lead us to that conclusion. Sometime after their creation, and most certainly after the sixth day when everything was declared “very good” (Genesis 1:31), Satan rebelled and was cast out of heaven. “How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!” (Isaiah 14:12). When Lucifer sinned, Jesus said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (Luke 10:18), and in the book of the Revelation Satan is seen as “a star that had fallen from the sky to the earth” (Revelation 9:1).

We are also told that one third of an “innumerable company of angels” (Hebrews 12:22) chose to rebel with him. John saw this great wonder in heaven, “…an enormous red dragon…His tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth…the 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” (Revelation 12:3-9).

Since Satan is referred to as a star which fell or was cast down to earth, and Revelation 12:4 says a third of the stars were cast out with him, then the conclusion is that the stars in Revelation 12 refer to fallen angels, fully one third of the heavenly host. If the one-third number is in fact accurate, what assurance that is! Two thirds of the angels are still on God's side, and for followers of Christ, they are on our side as well.

Recommended Resource: Unseen Realities: Heaven, Hell, Angels, and Demons by R.C. Sproul..

You can disagree with his interpretation but to me it is pretty accurate.

 

[HisWitness]

Question: "Did one third of the angels fall with Lucifer?"

Answer: While there is no verse that says a "third of the angels fell from heaven," some verses, when put together, lead us to that conclusion. Sometime after their creation, and most certainly after the sixth day when everything was declared “very good” (Genesis 1:31), Satan rebelled and was cast out of heaven. “How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!” (Isaiah 14:12). When Lucifer sinned, Jesus said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (Luke 10:18), and in the book of the Revelation Satan is seen as “a star that had fallen from the sky to the earth” (Revelation 9:1).

We are also told that one third of an “innumerable company of angels” (Hebrews 12:22) chose to rebel with him. John saw this great wonder in heaven, “…an enormous red dragon…His tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth…the 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” (Revelation 12:3-9).

Since Satan is referred to as a star which fell or was cast down to earth, and Revelation 12:4 says a third of the stars were cast out with him, then the conclusion is that the stars in Revelation 12 refer to fallen angels, fully one third of the heavenly host. If the one-third number is in fact accurate, what assurance that is! Two thirds of the angels are still on God's side, and for followers of Christ, they are on our side as well.

Recommended Resource: Unseen Realities: Heaven, Hell, Angels, and Demons by R.C. Sproul..

You can disagree with his interpretation but to me it is pretty accurate.

NO cause Lucifer is a MAN King of Babylon(Nebby)if you study that out--so how could 1/3rd of angels fall with a man lol.

also there is no scripture anywhere to indicate 1/3rd of angels fell from heaven--you can use the 1 scripture in revelation,but it is symbolic language anyways

 

[HisWitness]

Question: "Did one third of the angels fall with Lucifer?"

Answer: While there is no verse that says a "third of the angels fell from heaven," some verses, when put together, lead us to that conclusion. Sometime after their creation, and most certainly after the sixth day when everything was declared “very good” (Genesis 1:31), Satan rebelled and was cast out of heaven. “How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!” (Isaiah 14:12). When Lucifer sinned, Jesus said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (Luke 10:18), and in the book of the Revelation Satan is seen as “a star that had fallen from the sky to the earth” (Revelation 9:1).

We are also told that one third of an “innumerable company of angels” (Hebrews 12:22) chose to rebel with him. John saw this great wonder in heaven, “…an enormous red dragon…His tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth…the 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” (Revelation 12:3-9).

Since Satan is referred to as a star which fell or was cast down to earth, and Revelation 12:4 says a third of the stars were cast out with him, then the conclusion is that the stars in Revelation 12 refer to fallen angels, fully one third of the heavenly host. If the one-third number is in fact accurate, what assurance that is! Two thirds of the angels are still on God's side, and for followers of Christ, they are on our side as well.

Recommended Resource: Unseen Realities: Heaven, Hell, Angels, and Demons by R.C. Sproul..

You can disagree with his interpretation but to me it is pretty accurate.

Hebrews 12-22 has nothing to do with fallen angels--it was reffering to the city of God,and we know evil is not in the city of God

 

[HisWitness]

Question: "Did one third of the angels fall with Lucifer?"

Answer: While there is no verse that says a "third of the angels fell from heaven," some verses, when put together, lead us to that conclusion. Sometime after their creation, and most certainly after the sixth day when everything was declared “very good” (Genesis 1:31), Satan rebelled and was cast out of heaven. “How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!” (Isaiah 14:12). When Lucifer sinned, Jesus said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven” (Luke 10:18), and in the book of the Revelation Satan is seen as “a star that had fallen from the sky to the earth” (Revelation 9:1).

We are also told that one third of an “innumerable company of angels” (Hebrews 12:22) chose to rebel with him. John saw this great wonder in heaven, “…an enormous red dragon…His tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth…the 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” (Revelation 12:3-9).

Since Satan is referred to as a star which fell or was cast down to earth, and Revelation 12:4 says a third of the stars were cast out with him, then the conclusion is that the stars in Revelation 12 refer to fallen angels, fully one third of the heavenly host. If the one-third number is in fact accurate, what assurance that is! Two thirds of the angels are still on God's side, and for followers of Christ, they are on our side as well.

Recommended Resource: Unseen Realities: Heaven, Hell, Angels, and Demons by R.C. Sproul..

You can disagree with his interpretation but to me it is pretty accurate.

there again revelation is symbolic language--when it says cast down to the earth--it could refer to in all of its glory and honor it was cast down to shame and weakness before the nations or people--this language is used in the old testament also--even with King of Babylon(Nebby)

 

[psalms109:31]

NO cause Lucifer is a MAN King of Babylon(Nebby)if you study that out--so how could 1/3rd of angels fall with a man lol.

also there is no scripture anywhere to indicate 1/3rd of angels fell from heaven--you can use the 1 scripture in revelation,but it is symbolic language anyways

King Tyre was not in the Garden. If you take your logic then Satan would also be Peter. There were believing the lies of Satan filled with His lies but was not Him. I agree with Spruol

 

[HisWitness]

King Tyre was not in the Garden. If you take your logic then Satan would also be Peter. There were believing the lies of Satan filled with His lies but was not Him. agree with Spruol

that text is speaking of location read the text again--and how do you know he or his city wasnt in the location where the garden was ???

it is about the king and his city and those round about him,his glory and honor and his city's glory and honor--it was judgement being pronounced on them as in all the other kings and thier cities--

as iv stated before its just NOT there no matter how men will add to scriptures to try and produce it

 

[HisWitness]

King Tyre was not in the Garden. If you take your logic then Satan would also be Peter. There were believing the lies of Satan filled with His lies but was not Him. I agree with Spruol

if that was so called fallen angel satan in the garden--then logic would have hes still there cause scripture never states God putting the serpent forth from the garden BUT ONLY MAN.

 

[psalms109:31]

if that was so called fallen angel satan in the garden--then logic would have hes still there cause scripture never states God putting the serpent forth from the garden BUT ONLY MAN.

Ezek 28:
11 The word of the Lord came to me: 12 “Son of man, take up a lament concerning the king of Tyre and say to him: ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says:

“‘You were the seal of perfection,
full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.
13 You were in Eden,
the garden of God;
every precious stone adorned you:
carnelian, chrysolite and emerald,
topaz, onyx and jasper,
lapis lazuli, 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

Matthew 16:23
Jesus turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns.”

 

[HisWitness]

Ezek 28:
11 The word of the Lord came to me: 12 “Son of man, take up a lament concerning the king of Tyre and say to him: ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says:

“‘You were the seal of perfection,
full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.
13 You were in Eden,
the garden of God;
every precious stone adorned you:
carnelian, chrysolite and emerald,
topaz, onyx and jasper,
lapis lazuli, 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

Matthew 16:23
Jesus turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns.”

its your right to believe as you will

But you have just proven what i say what the word Satan means (Adversary)
Peter was called Satan because he became an Adversary to the purpose of Christ-- the word Satan has always been given to people when they stood as Adversaries to someone or something

I do marvel though at how hard people defend a so called fallen angel named satan--i am almost persuaded that people actually worship demonology and idols like in the old testament rather than the Only True God .

 

[HisWitness]

Ezek 28:
11 The word of the Lord came to me: 12 “Son of man, take up a lament concerning the king of Tyre and say to him: ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says:

“‘You were the seal of perfection,
full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.
13 You were in Eden,
the garden of God;
every precious stone adorned you:
carnelian, chrysolite and emerald,
topaz, onyx and jasper,
lapis lazuli, 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

Matthew 16:23
Jesus turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns.”

the scripture earlier in that chapter that proves who the text is written about you chose to leave out where it stated that the King of tyrus was a MAN--read it again friend

 

[HisWitness]

Ezek 28:
11 The word of the Lord came to me: 12 “Son of man, take up a lament concerning the king of Tyre and say to him: ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says:

“‘You were the seal of perfection,
full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.
13 You were in Eden,
the garden of God;
every precious stone adorned you:
carnelian, chrysolite and emerald,
topaz, onyx and jasper,
lapis lazuli, 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

Matthew 16:23
Jesus turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns.”

The term "Satan" is actually a "loanword," twice removed. A "loanword" is essentially a "transliteration," rather than a translation. A "transliteration" is to change a natural word to achieve a spelling and pronunciation that is compatible with another language. This was done with the Greek term "baptizo," which, if translated, would be "to immerse, to plunge, or to dip." However, the directives of King James necessitated that the translators of the King James Version protect the existing baptismal practice of the Church of England; therefore, they "transliterated" the Greek word "baptizo" by dropping the "o" and adding the letter "e," which gave it an English appearance and pronunciation. This made the term generic and applicable to any mode or practice that one may wish to employ. To arrive at the term "Satan," a double "transliteration" was necessary. The Hebrew term was "ha-Saa-Taan;" and its meaning is in accord with definition #1. Between the 3rd and 1st centuries BC, the Hebrew writings were translated, by stages, into the Greek language. This translation is known as the Septuagint. During this process it was found that there was no Greek equivalent for the Hebrew term "ha-Saa-Taan;" hence, they transliterated the Hebrew term into the Greek word "satanas." "Satanas" was later transliterated into the English word "Satan." Hence, the term "Satan" is not a translation at all, but one that was created to perpetuate an existing bias. Therefore, if one wishes to view a given text as it was actually written, the term "Satan" must be replaced by one of the terms listed in definition number one



•1. Slanderer, tempter, deceiver, adversary, destroyer, false accuser, opposer, one who is contrary or against all, to stand against.

 

[psalms109:31]

the scripture earlier in that chapter that proves who the text is written about you chose to leave out where it stated that the King of tyrus was a MAN--read it again friend

He was referring him symbolically has the murdering from the beginning the liar Satan. Satan is the murderer from the beginning in the Garden of Eden. We know this because king Tyre wasn't there.

Symbolizing someone as some thing or someone is to teach a lesson to change and Peter did.

 

[DHK]

there again revelation is symbolic language--when it says cast down to the earth--it could refer to in all of its glory and honor it was cast down to shame and weakness before the nations or people--this language is used in the old testament also--even with King of Babylon(Nebby)

Your premise seems to be:
Where there is symbolic language, there is no truth.
That is a sad approach to the Bible.

 

[psalms109:31]

The term "Satan" is actually a "loanword," twice removed. A "loanword" is essentially a "transliteration," rather than a translation. A "transliteration" is to change a natural word to achieve a spelling and pronunciation that is compatible with another language. This was done with the Greek term "baptizo," which, if translated, would be "to immerse, to plunge, or to dip." However, the directives of King James necessitated that the translators of the King James Version protect the existing baptismal practice of the Church of England; therefore, they "transliterated" the Greek word "baptizo" by dropping the "o" and adding the letter "e," which gave it an English appearance and pronunciation. This made the term generic and applicable to any mode or practice that one may wish to employ. To arrive at the term "Satan," a double "transliteration" was necessary. The Hebrew term was "ha-Saa-Taan;" and its meaning is in accord with definition #1. Between the 3rd and 1st centuries BC, the Hebrew writings were translated, by stages, into the Greek language. This translation is known as the Septuagint. During this process it was found that there was no Greek equivalent for the Hebrew term "ha-Saa-Taan;" hence, they transliterated the Hebrew term into the Greek word "satanas." "Satanas" was later transliterated into the English word "Satan." Hence, the term "Satan" is not a translation at all, but one that was created to perpetuate an existing bias. Therefore, if one wishes to view a given text as it was actually written, the term "Satan" must be replaced by one of the terms listed in definition number one



•1. Slanderer, tempter, deceiver, adversary, destroyer, false accuser, opposer, one who is contrary or against all, to stand against.

The Armor of God

10 Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. 11 Put on the full armor of God, so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes. 12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. 13 Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand. 14 Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place, 15 and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace. 16 In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. 17 Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.

 

[HisWitness]

The Armor of God

10 Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. 11 Put on the full armor of God, so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes. 12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. 13 Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand. 14 Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place, 15 and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace. 16 In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. 17 Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.

Take the texts of satan,devil and apply them to the enemy of the church in that day and time and you have it being the High Priest and those under him(adversaries)

 

[HisWitness]

He was referring him symbolically has the murdering from the beginning the liar Satan. Satan is the murderer from the beginning in the Garden of Eden. We know this because king Tyre wasn't there.

Symbolizing someone as some thing or someone is to teach a lesson to change and Peter did.

you are doing no better by making assumptions,because theres no CLEAR evident scripture that will support a fallen angel what i give has more scriptural truth than what you say about the word Satan