RSS

Is Satan an Archangel or an Angel?

03 Aug
Archangel

from Google Images

Some believe Satan is an archangel, but one may search Genesis and read on until the end of Revelation, but one would never read that Satan is an archangel. In order to discover any information about Satan being an archangel, one must read extra-biblical literature. It simply is not in the Bible.

What about an angel? If Satan is not an archangel could he be an angelic being? Well, 2Corinthians 11:14 might be claimed by some to say so.

2 Corinthians 11:14 KJV (14) And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.

However, when one considers the context, 2Corinthians 11:13 says men were troubling the church at Corinth, claiming to be apostles, yet Paul calls them false apostles. No one would conclude from this Scripture that by virtue of their power to transform their appearance, they became actual apostles. They were not apostles at all, for Paul calls them false apostles” and later (v.15) refers to them as ministers of Satan, who transformed themselves to appear as though they were ministers of righteousness.

Using this same reasoning, can we say for certain that verse-14 claims Satan is an angelic being when it calls him an angel of light? This, itself, is an oxymoron. How could we ever believe, by the virtue of his power of deception, that Satan is an angel of light. The whole idea of his transformation is for deception or to impersonate the reality. The act of transformation does not make Satan or his ministers the real thing. However, if Satan is not an angel of light, could this Scripture be construed to indicate that he is at least an angelic being? That is, could Satan be one of those spirits that God created before He created mankind (Job 1:6; cf.38:4, 7)? Nowhere else in Scripture are the words Satan, devil, serpent, wicked one or dragon associated with the word angel. Many believe Job chapters one and two and Revelation chapter 12 show that Satan is an angelic being, but even in these Scriptures Satan is not called an angel or an archangel. They do not say he is not an angelic being, but the point is, these Scriptures cannot be used to support the assumption that he is, indeed, an angel.

The word satan is from the Hebrew satan (H7854) and simply means “adversary” or “enemy.” Christians have used the word for a title of a rebellious angelic being, but we cannot prove that this being was ever angelic, if we use only God’s revealed word. In 1Samuel 29:4 David is called the Philistine’s satan (H7854). In 2Samuel 19:22 one of David’s close associates acted as his satan by giving him bad advice. 1Kings 5:4 reveals that God gave Solomon peace on all his borders, and he had no satans or enemies! Later, however, God stirred up several satans, because of Solomon’s unfaithfulness (cf. 1Kings 11:14, 23, 25). We can even find that the Angel of the Lord, who later became Jesus Christ, was Balaam’s satan or adversary (H7854, cf. Numbers 22:22, 32)! In each case the same word is being used. Therefore, just because we see the word satan (H7854) in Scripture, it does not necessarily indicate some evil and powerful being is revealed in the text. On the contrary, what would we do with David or the Angel of the Lord in the Scriptures above? For that matter, what would we do with Peter? The Lord called him a satan when Peter tried to say Jesus was wrong about the necessity of dying on the cross (Matthew 16:23).

The facts are, if we consider Scripture as accurate testimony, not only can’t we prove Satan is an archangel, but we cannot even say he is an angel. 2Corinthians 11:14 simply cannot be used to show he is an angelic being. The context places this proposition in doubt, and there are no other Scriptures in all the Bible that claim Satan is an angel. So, why all the hype concerning this being we call Satan (see: The Invincible, Omnipresent Satan)? For the next study in this series see Satan as the Serpent.

Advertisements
 
16 Comments

Posted by on August 3, 2009 in Religion, Satan

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

16 responses to “Is Satan an Archangel or an Angel?

  1. AMG

    July 11, 2011 at 21:02

    Eddie,
    Now you know communicating with me is better than staring at a wall! Maybe we can struggle to find things we are like-minded in and still get along. Is it worth it to you? It gets boring here. How about I read your blogs and try to find things I like about what you write…and you read and try to find things you like and agree with in my blogs? I would like to keep you as a person with whom I communicate online. I think you are dealing with sin in your life according to the Lord Jesus Christ, as I am, and we should keep in touch. What say you?
    Blessed are the peacemakers.
    In His Love,
    AMG

     
    • Ed Bromfield

      July 12, 2011 at 10:36

      AMG, greetings, and as I have said before, you are always welcome here. I struggle in my spirit when brethren don’t get along well together. I don’t enjoy discussions that degenerate into innuendo etc., but even then I cannot foresee that I would ask you not to respond to my blog. I only ask the person to look at what he is doing and ask if “he” wishes to continue. Sometimes this approach will cause a person to cease discussing at all with me. Fortunately, you have chosen a different approach, and I do appreciate that.

      I would be glad to continue under the terms you put down here.

      May the Lord bless you and yours,

      Eddie

       
  2. AMG

    July 10, 2011 at 20:08

    You said, “If your definition of reincarnation is not the typical definition, why is it “laughable” if I have misunderstood you? In what sense would you conclude that Jesus was “alive and existed before God prepared him for a human body”?”

    I have already gave you scripture concerning Jesus existing before he had a human body.

    You said, “It is about all Israel will be saved…” If I say “all Israel will be saved”, why am I wrong when the Bible says “all Israel will be saved, yet when you say “all Israel will be saved, you are correct? What form of logic are you using, or could it be you are not telling me the complete story here?”

    You are wrong because you think God saving all Israel means all Israelis, but the Bible tells us who and what Israel is. The Bible also says not all from Israel are Israel, yet you say ALL Israel will be saved, everyone.

    You said, “Oh, okay, now you offer what perhaps to you appears to be the rest of the story. So, let me understand this before I comment on Romans 9. Are you saying that only those Israelites who believe will be saved, or, in other words: faith in Christ = salvation? If this is so, I would also like to know from you from where does anyone—Israelite or Gentile—get this faith. Reply to this and I will give my reply concerning not all Israel is Israel.”

    Are you not a Calvinist?

    You said, “The first time the phrase “sons of God” is mentioned in the Bible is in Genesis 6. When Moses wrote the first five books of the Law, the Israelites had nothing to compare this phrase with except for Deuteronomy 14:1 where Moses called them the children (sons—same word as in Genesis 6: H1121) of the Lord their God. On the other hand you don’t have a single verse in the Bible which says an angel is a ‘son’ of God or angels are the ‘sons’ of God. On the contrary Hebrews 1:5 would seem to belie them being specifically called a child or son of God. If one would not allow the references in Job to the “sons” of God to be angels by the fact of creation, they couldn’t even be generally understood as “sons” of God in the Scriptures. You have no Scriptural foundation for your understanding of Genesis 6 except for an implication in Job. All specific references in Scripture to the “sons” of God are to men.”

    Since you are TELLING me instead of asking…I will not go through the time to show you the scripture. You would not believe them anyways.

    You said, “Nephilim is the Hebrew word for “giants” (H5303). It is simply not translated and carried over into the English language unchanged. When the translator does this, he gives the appearance of mystery. “Oh! Wow! What does this mean?”

    You again put yourself above others, even when you do not know for sure what they know or believe. The Nephilim are giants, and that is what I said. Pay attention.

     
    • Ed Bromfield

      July 10, 2011 at 22:48

      I have already gave you scripture concerning Jesus existing before he had a human body.

      That was not my question. I asked in what sense would you consider Jesus alive before his human birth. Some believe he existed as the “plan” of God. Some believe he was an angelic being. Some believe he was a god, but not God. You might be surprised what others believe about him. I was curious about your understanding, given the discussion we are having.

      You are wrong because you think God saving all Israel means all Israelis, but the Bible tells us who and what Israel is. The Bible also says not all from Israel are Israel, yet you say ALL Israel will be saved, everyone.

      Well it doesn’t seem to be such a great revelation if all Paul is saying is “all the Saved will be saved!” Why mention it at all if that is the logic behind his statement.

      Are you not a Calvinist?

      No! Are you a Calvinist?

      Does this have any bearing upon my question or this discussion?

      Since you are TELLING me instead of asking…I will not go through the time to show you the scripture. You would not believe them anyways.

      You know what, my friend, I really don’t care what you believe, but I did think you were here for the purpose of discussion. Why don’t you stop this adolescent behavior here and now,,and then consider whether or not you wish to continue. What began as a fairly interesting discussion has eroded into something I’d rather not be a participant in. I could think of many more things I’d rather be doing than replying to your cute quips, like staring at the wall, for example.

      You again put yourself above others, even when you do not know for sure what they know or believe. The Nephilim are giants, and that is what I said. Pay attention.

      Like I said above, think about whether or not you wish to continue.

       
  3. AMG

    July 10, 2011 at 19:19

    You said, “Friend, you have misunderstood me, as you have often done in our discussion. I have never claimed that angels are illusions. They are real spirit beings. They simply are not human, nor do the procreate whether as angels or when they appear as humans. When they appear as they actually are, men are very afraid. Daniel, although, he had a number of visions of angels, simply had no strength in him. He was in awe of them.”
    Really now, what does Daniel’s vision of an angel appearing as an angel have to do with this discussions? Lol… You will not let go of your false beliefs and admit to learning something new. Angels that appear as humans do have a human body, wherefore they can even eat! You deny the scriptures. Admit the scriptures that say angels eat, sleep, and so on when they are appearing as humans….admit that then you would have to admit they may even have sexual intercourse in these human bodies.

     
    • Ed Bromfield

      July 10, 2011 at 22:42

      Really now, what does Daniel’s vision of an angel appearing as an angel have to do with this discussions? Lol…

      I might ask you what this question has to our discussion. Might I remind you that you had accused me of believing angels are illusions? I was merely pointing out how real they are. Daniel had no strength in the angel’s presence—no illusion here!

      You will not let go of your false beliefs and admit to learning something new.

      I have merely pointed out where you had been wrong about my understanding of the reality of angels. Not only have you not admitted your error, but you accuse me of error without even presenting one Scripture to support your argument.

      Angels that appear as humans do have a human body, wherefore they can even eat! You deny the scriptures.

      When angels eat, must they relieve themselves after awhile? If they do, must the Lord also since from time to time he also appeared in a body. If angels could have sexual relations while under the influence of bodily appearance, could the Lord? Don’t you see where this type of thinking leads? You haven’t a shred of evidence in Scripture to support your conclusions. Yet you go on and on about things that matter so little in the scheme of things.

      Admit the scriptures that say angels eat, sleep, and so on when they are appearing as humans….admit that then you would have to admit they may even have sexual intercourse in these human bodies.

      On the contrary, they eat only at the invitation of mortals. It is to be cordial that they accept our invitation. It is not because they have needs to be satisfied. The Lord claimed the angels do not engage in sexual relations, but you contradict his statement, while I am accused of denying the Scriptures! Why should that be so? All I have done was believe what my Lord had told the Sadducees.

      Have a good evening, and may the Lord bless you with clarity of understanding,

      Eddie

       
  4. AMG

    July 10, 2011 at 14:34

    Thank you for the greetings and saying I am always welcome.

    You said, “I understand you have spoken Scripture to me, but, whether you are aware of it or not, you have not spoken **only** Scripture. You have added to it. For example, nowhere in Scripture will you read that Jesus was created before creation, but you have specifically stated that before God created anything else, he created Jesus. In fact, you have claimed that Jesus is reincarnated, and the Bible never teaches anything about reincarnation. These things are examples of your insertions.”

    I have not ever added to scripture. Jesus is firstborn over all creation, period. That IS what the scriptures says, and that is ONLY what I said. It is laughable when you say I added scripture. Jesus is the firstborn over all creation.

    It is also laughable that you think I was using the word reincarnation in the typical way. All I was trying to get you to understand is that Jesus was alive and existed before God prepared for him a human body….lol

    You said, “I look to the Greek, because men have tried to tell me the meaning of the Scriptures, and they were wrong. I proved several wrong by looking at the original language.”

    Yes, you look outside the bible, the written word, so that you can go by what a man says in a dictionary, or you go by what a man says in a commentary. Furthermore, you have not seen the original bible scriptures….lol…

    You said, “Friend, if I am blind to the truth, no one (including you) could possibly have **shown** me where I am wrong!”

    Spoken just like a blind man.

    You said, “And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes. For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.”

    The bible tells us who and what Israel is. That passage is about Jews not cut off forever. It is about all Israel will be saved because true believers who are Jew, they will not be left out.

    You said, “Where does the Bible say this? Are you not inserting your belief? Paul claims that God made a covenant with **Jacob** (meaning the whole people called **Jacob** or Israel) that he would take away their sins. He didn’t say he would take away the sins of **part** of Jacob. He mentions only Jacob, so we must assume he means **all** and Paul says **all**. What am I supposed to believe? Paul even claims that the very ones whose sins will be removed are our enemies as far as the Gospel is concerned.”

    Not all who are descended from Israel are Israel! For you to believe that the scriptures then say that God saves even those Israelis who are evil unbelievers just because they are Israelis is ridiculous.

    Romans 9:6 It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel.

    You said, “You are implying that this is what occurred in Genesis 6. However, the plain statement of Christ is they are sexless. If they seem to have a human body when they appear to men, they are still what God created them to be. They are no more human than God who also appeared to Abraham in human form. He was not human then. He didn’t become human until John 1:14. What you say above is another example of your own insertions into the Scriptures—something you accuse me of doing! “

    I am not inserting my own beliefs. There are more than one scripture saying the sons of God are called angels. Furthermore, you are the one inserting that once these angels can become human that they do not really have working human parts. Show me scripture that says that. If you cannot, then you are the one inserting.

    You said, “Yes, I would need Scriptures to show me that angels can make themselves human. I have no trouble understanding that they can appear as men, but they are no more human than before their appearance. The Scriptures never tell us that a creation of God can make himself into something he is not. Men can “appear” good when they are evil, and angels can “appear” as men when they are truly angels. The Scriptures support this, but Genesis 1 denies your claims of Genesis 6.”

    You probably think that the sons of God were humans…lol…is that why the “human children” called Nephilim became unlike normal humans, that they actually became “giants”….lol….

     
    • AMG

      July 10, 2011 at 15:03

      I want to discuss more about angels… You are claiming that angels who appear as human are just an illusion. Tell me; when you are being hospitable to an angel, will you not offer the angel food and drink?

      Hebrews 13:1 Keep on loving one another as brothers and sisters. 2 Do not forget to show hospitality to strangers, for by so doing some people have shown hospitality to angels without knowing it

      Genesis 19:2 2 “My lords,” he said, “please turn aside to your servant’s house. You can wash your feet and spend the night and then go on your way early in the morning.”

      I guess the angels had real feet that needed washing.

      3 But he insisted so strongly that they did go with him and entered his house. He prepared a meal for them, baking bread without yeast, and they ate.

      The angels ate, Eddie. Did they have real mouths with teeth, an esophagus, and a stomach?

      4 Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom—both young and old—surrounded the house.

      The angels were going to go to bed; I guess if I believe you then I would have to believe they would fake sleep? …lol

       
      • Ed Bromfield

        July 10, 2011 at 18:48

        Friend, you have misunderstood me, as you have often done in our discussion. I have never claimed that angels are illusions. They are real spirit beings. They simply are not human, nor do the procreate whether as angels or when they appear as humans. When they appear as they actually are, men are very afraid. Daniel, although, he had a number of visions of angels, simply had no strength in him. He was in awe of them.

        Lord bless.

         
    • Ed Bromfield

      July 10, 2011 at 18:39

      Greeting AMG; I’m glad to see you are responding.

      I have not ever added to scripture. Jesus is firstborn over all creation, period. That IS what the scriptures says, and that is ONLY what I said. It is laughable when you say I added scripture. Jesus is the firstborn over all creation.
      It is also laughable that you think I was using the word reincarnation in the typical way. All I was trying to get you to understand is that Jesus was alive and existed before God prepared for him a human body….lol

      If your definition of reincarnation is not the typical definition, why is it “laughable” if I have misunderstood you? In what sense would you conclude that Jesus was “alive and existed before God prepared him for a human body”?

      Concerning what you have not added to the Scriptures, below is a quote from you
      “There are topics you brought up and I would like to discuss them more with you. What do you think of the possibility that God, who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see, only Jesus has seen Him, the invisible God, created an image of Himself, before the creation of the world, and who is the reincarnate Jesus?” [AMG quote (emphasis mine); July 5, 2011 at 8:58 PM (EDT) on What I Believe]

      Concerning using the original Greek to understand a passage:
      Yes, you look outside the bible, the written word, so that you can go by what a man says in a dictionary, or you go by what a man says in a commentary. Furthermore, you have not seen the original bible scriptures….lol…

      I suppose the English Bible you read is the only Bible Jesus ever wrote!

      I said, “Friend, if I am blind to the truth, no one (including you) could possibly have **shown** me where I am wrong!”
      Spoken just like a blind man.

      You are very kind, and as usual very insightful!

      You said, “And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes. For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.”

      No, actually I was quoting the Bible there in Romans 11.

      The bible tells us who and what Israel is. That passage is about Jews not cut off forever. It is about all Israel will be saved because true believers who are Jew, they will not be left out.

      “It is about all Israel will be saved…” If I say “all Israel will be saved”, why am I wrong when the Bible says “all Israel will be saved, yet when you say “all Israel will be saved, you are correct? What form of logic are you using, or could it be you are not telling me the complete story here?

      Not all who are descended from Israel are Israel! For you to believe that the scriptures then say that God saves even those Israelis who are evil unbelievers just because they are Israelis is ridiculous.
      Romans 9:6 It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel.

      Oh, okay, now you offer what perhaps to you appears to be the rest of the story. So, let me understand this before I comment on Romans 9. Are you saying that only those Israelites who believe will be saved, or, in other words: faith in Christ = salvation? If this is so, I would also like to know from you from where does anyone—Israelite or Gentile—get this faith. Reply to this and I will give my reply concerning not all Israel is Israel.

      I am not inserting my own beliefs. There are more than one scripture saying the sons of God are called angels. Furthermore, you are the one inserting that once these angels can become human that they do not really have working human parts. Show me scripture that says that. If you cannot, then you are the one inserting.

      The first time the phrase “sons of God” is mentioned in the Bible is in Genesis 6. When Moses wrote the first five books of the Law, the Israelites had nothing to compare this phrase with except for Deuteronomy 14:1 where Moses called them the children (sons—same word as in Genesis 6: H1121) of the Lord their God. On the other hand you don’t have a single verse in the Bible which says an angel is a ‘son’ of God or angels are the ‘sons’ of God. On the contrary Hebrews 1:5 would seem to belie them being specifically called a child or son of God. If one would not allow the references in Job to the “sons” of God to be angels by the fact of creation, they couldn’t even be generally understood as “sons” of God in the Scriptures. You have no Scriptural foundation for your understanding of Genesis 6 except for an implication in Job. All specific references in Scripture to the “sons” of God are to men.

      You probably think that the sons of God were humans…lol…is that why the “human children” called Nephilim became unlike normal humans, that they actually became “giants”….lol….

      Nephilim is the Hebrew word for “giants” (H5303). It is simply not translated and carried over into the English language unchanged. When the translator does this, he gives the appearance of mystery. “Oh! Wow! What does this mean?” This is why we must compare Scripture with Scripture in order to interpret, so our imaginations don’t get carried away. The very same Hebrew word is used for the sons of Anak in Number 13:33. If God sent the Flood to destroy all these wicked Nephilim, how is it they survived? Although the Scriptures don’t say specifically, no doubt Goliath was a nephilim or a giant.

      Moreover, the Scripture merely mentions that these giants were present about the time that the sons of God married the children of men. The Scriptures do not come out and say that the ‘nephilim’ were the progeny of this marital relationship. They specifically say that the children of these marriages were mighty men of renown, but the understanding that the children are ‘nephilim’ is imposed upon the Scripture by the interpreter.

      Lord bless and have a good evening,

      Eddie

       
  5. AMG

    July 6, 2011 at 10:46

    Greetings,
    Surely, there is much more studying I could do on cherubs and angels, but there is nothing that
    would convince me the whole time the bible speaks of Adam, that he is really that ancient serpent. It just is not biblical, you are projecting too much of your own thoughts and feelings. There is not a hidden message there.
    You said, “Both Scriptures seem to conclude **he** has similar spiritual problems that humans have. If he is not flesh, how could this be?” You are struggling with something that you should just accept. Just because he is not flesh does not give us reason to question God’s word about what spiritual problems Satan may have. The bible says the sons of God found the daughters of man attractive. We should just believe the written word, lean not on your own understanding.

    As you say, it is not a big deal as far as salvation goes on what we believe about Satan, but the big deal is in how carefully we try to stay in the line of the Word.

    You said, “I don’t know where you have gotten the idea that I believe Jesus is or was an angelic being.” You said Jesus was the angel of the Lord, that is where I got the idea.

    You said,” Men are called messengers (meaning of the word ‘angel’).” I think what you say here is very telling…I think that you are getting into a swirl with studying Greek.

    Thank you so much for taking the time to reply.

     
    • Ed Bromfield

      July 6, 2011 at 11:48

      AMG, thank you again for your interest. At times I simply stop replying in a discussion, simply because I don’t wish to appear too aggressive with what I believe. I certainly don’t wish to push what I believe upon others, because most of what we will differ concerning does not pertain to Jesus or our salvation.

      I sense you are not willing to consider these proposals and that is fine. One way or another, all it means is one of us is in error in how we perceive our enemy. What has that got to do with salvation? One thing that caught my eye is that you say, “You are struggling with something that you should just accept.” What should I accept—what man tells me concerning the meaning of Scripture? I’ve done that decades ago and found a man had led me astray. I vowed a vow to God that I would never let another man believe for me again. I do struggle in the Scriptures, but I think this is a good thing. Jacob struggled with the One who became Jesus and prevailed. I like to think God lets me prevail here in the Scriptures that I struggle in. Up to now, I haven’t found anyone who could show me in the text where I am wrong. Many people tell me I am wrong, but why should I bow to popular opinion? If what I have written is wrong. I would wish to change, because I have a vested interest in telling the truth. I don’t wish to teach error. However, if no one is able to show me in Scripture that I am wrong, what am I supposed to think? I pray that God guides me. Shouldn’t I assume he has guided me if no one is able to show me my error? As I have said, many have claimed I am in error, but no one has the Scriptures to prove it.

      You refer to Genesis 6 above and that the sons of God (angels) found the daughters of men attractive… The doctrine that angels raped or married women is not sound for two reasons. First, according to Jesus’ reply to the Sadducees concerning men and women in the resurrection, they are like angels, implying no sexual relationships will occur. Secondly, Genesis 1 implies that “kind” produces after “kind”. Angels simply have no way of marrying or raping women and producing an offspring. The Scriptures seem to denounce such an idea. I cannot get a dog to produce an offspring with a cat or a horse. It simply cannot be done. How much less should we believe that a spirit being could produce an offspring with flesh? This may be done in Greek mythology, but it cannot be done according to the word of God. Men have tried to produce offspring with similar species like donkeys and horses, but their offspring cannot reproduce. Men and angels are not similar creatures.

      Concerning Jesus being the “Angel of the Lord”, many commentators of the Bible also believe Jesus is the “Angel of the Lord”. However, this does not mean the “Angel of the Lord” is an angelic being. The Angel of the Lord is called YHWH (the name of God) in the Scriptures. The term ‘angel’ in this connection simply means he brings something from God (the Father); usually this means he brings the word of God to someone.

      Lord bless,

      Eddie

       
      • AMG

        July 10, 2011 at 00:49

        I know I told you that I would not discuss with you anymore, but when I see someone lost and confused, I cannot help but respond.

        You said, “I certainly don’t wish to push what I believe upon others, because most of what we will differ concerning does not pertain to Jesus or our salvation.”

        I wonder how much a believer can obey when they cannot read the scriptures correctly.

        You said, “What should I accept—what man tells me concerning the meaning of Scripture?”

        God reveals to others too, and not just you. We should study the scriptures to see if what a person tells us is true. I have only spoken the scriptures to you. You are the one who believes you can add and change what the scriptures say. You think that studying Greek will lead you to the Truth, but that is not so. You change what the bible says with your Greek interpretations. You cannot see the obvious message of the scriptures because the Greek study is throwing you off. It is not the learned whom God reveals His Truth. We do not have to learn another language, in fact, the studying Greek is a Calvinist’s staple. If it were not so serious…I would laugh about it. I believe there is some kind of spirit Calvinists follow, and that is not of God, it makes you all frantic scholar wannabes, and you Calvinists follow the spirit of maybe Calvin himself.

        You said, “I do struggle in the Scriptures, but I think this is a good thing. Jacob struggled with the One who became Jesus and prevailed.”

        Of course, it is good to struggle with the scriptures! However, you struggle with certain words and look for the Greek. In addition, you keep struggling and do not accept scripture.

        You said, “I like to think God lets me prevail here in the Scriptures that I struggle in. Up to now, I haven’t found anyone who could show me in the text where I am wrong.”

        I have shown you were you are wrong, but you are blind to the truth. You actually think that the Bible says all Israelis will be saved! I explained it to you plainly, but you will not accept the truth.

        You said, “Many people tell me I am wrong, but why should I bow to popular opinion?”

        So are you just trying to be a rebel? In addition, that is ridiculous to say that my beliefs are “popular opinion”.

        You said, “However, if no one is able to show me in Scripture that I am wrong, what am I supposed to think? I pray that God guides me. Should not I assume he has guided me if no one is able to show me my error? As I have said, many have claimed I am in error, but no one has the Scriptures to prove it.”

        I have shown you the scriptures. You blame me for your blindness.

        You said, “You refer to Genesis 6 above and that the sons of God (angels) found the daughters of men attractive… The doctrine that angels raped or married women is not sound for two reasons. First, according to Jesus’ reply to the Sadducees concerning men and women in the resurrection, they are like angels, implying no sexual relationships will occur.”

        This is a perfect example of your mistakes with the scriptures. You will not even consider listening to someone else unless it is said what you already believe. For one, angels DO NOT have sexual intercourse, UNLESS OF COURSE IF THEY TURN THEMSELVES INTO HUMANS. The scriptures tell us angels CAN turn themselves into humans.

        You said, “Secondly, Genesis 1 implies that “kind” produces after “kind”. Angels simply have no way of marrying or raping women and producing an offspring.”

        Again, the angels turned themselves into humans. In addition, these angels did not give the human women normal children; they gave them giants. The name of the children from the half-human half angel was the Nephilim. Do you need scriptures to show you that angels can appear as humans?

         
        • Ed Bromfield

          July 10, 2011 at 08:19

          AMG, greetings, and you are always welcome here. :-)

          I know I told you that I would not discuss with you anymore, but when I see someone lost and confused, I cannot help but respond.

          Whatever the reason for your return is fine with me.

          I wonder how much a believer can obey when they cannot read the scriptures correctly.

          God is a good parent. He is patient and helps us along as we are able to receive, not wishing to judge anyone unnecessarily.

          God reveals to others too, and not just you. We should study the scriptures to see if what a person tells us is true. I have only spoken the scriptures to you. You are the one who believes you can add and change what the scriptures say. You think that studying Greek will lead you to the Truth, but that is not so. You change what the bible says with your Greek interpretations. You cannot see the obvious message of the scriptures because the Greek study is throwing you off. It is not the learned whom God reveals His Truth. We do not have to learn another language, in fact, the studying Greek is a Calvinist’s staple. If it were not so serious…I would laugh about it. I believe there is some kind of spirit Calvinists follow, and that is not of God, it makes you all frantic scholar wannabes, and you Calvinists follow the spirit of maybe Calvin himself.

          I am aware that God speaks with all Christians. I never tried to imply I was unique. If you understood me in that manner, I am sorry, but that is just not what I believe God does. I am not unique in any way in my relationship with him.

          I understand you have spoken Scripture to me, but, whether you are aware of it or not, you have not spoken **only** Scripture. You have added to it. For example, nowhere in Scripture will you read that Jesus was created before creation, but you have specifically stated that before God created anything else, he created Jesus. In fact, you have claimed that Jesus is reincarnated, and the Bible never teaches anything about reincarnation. These things are examples of your insertions.

          Of course, it is good to struggle with the scriptures! However, you struggle with certain words and look for the Greek. In addition, you keep struggling and do not accept scripture.

          I look to the Greek, because men have tried to tell me the meaning of the Scriptures, and they were wrong. I proved several wrong by looking at the original language. Every English Bible is a translation from the original Greek and Hebrew and Aramaic. Nothing was written in English, so I appreciate the work of the translators who give me a general knowledge of what God has said, but I don’t trust them wholly to have done a perfect job. They too have their prejudices and it comes out in their works. I don’t believe most have deliberately tried to deceive, but deception is there at times. Some translators specifically do the work for their particular denomination, so why wouldn’t I suspect prejudice in a work like that?

          I have shown you were you are wrong, but you are blind to the truth. You actually think that the Bible says all Israelis will be saved! I explained it to you plainly, but you will not accept the truth.

          Friend, if I am blind to the truth, no one (including you) could possibly have **shown** me where I am wrong!

          Concerning Israel, I said: “All Israel will be saved.” Romans 11

          And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes. For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. (Romans 11:26-29 KJV) [emphasis mine]

          Concerning this Scripture you said: “You misunderstand that scripture, just like many do. When Paul says that all Israel will be saved, he means because God did not harden the Jews forever that they still have a chance at salvation along with the Gentiles…”

          Where does the Bible say this? Are you not inserting your belief? Paul claims that God made a covenant with **Jacob** (meaning the whole people called **Jacob** or Israel) that he would take away their sins. He didn’t say he would take away the sins of **part** of Jacob. He mentions only Jacob, so we must assume he means **all** and Paul says **all**. What am I supposed to believe? Paul even claims that the very ones whose sins will be removed are our enemies as far as the Gospel is concerned.

          So are you just trying to be a rebel? In addition, that is ridiculous to say that my beliefs are “popular opinion”.

          I was not implying that what you believe about the Bible is popular opinion. I meant that what you believe about **me** is popular opinion! :-)

          As far as my rebellion is concerned, I am confident in my Savior and Parent to root out all evil in me. In him alone will I put all my trust.

          I have shown you the scriptures. You blame me for your blindness.

          I have quoted above where you have shown me more than Scriptures. As for my blindness, I never claimed to be blind. My blindness is an accusation I receive from others.

          This is a perfect example of your mistakes with the scriptures. You will not even consider listening to someone else unless it is said what you already believe. For one, angels DO NOT have sexual intercourse, UNLESS OF COURSE IF THEY TURN THEMSELVES INTO HUMANS. The scriptures tell us angels CAN turn themselves into humans.

          You are implying that this is what occurred in Genesis 6. However, the plain statement of Christ is they are sexless. If they seem to have a human body when they appear to men, they are still what God created them to be. They are no more human than God who also appeared to Abraham in human form. He was not human then. He didn’t become human until John 1:14. What you say above is another example of your own insertions into the Scriptures—something you accuse me of doing! :-)

          Again, the angels turned themselves into humans. In addition, these angels did not give the human women normal children; they gave them giants. The name of the children from the half-human half angel was the Nephilim. Do you need scriptures to show you that angels can appear as humans?

          Yes, I would need Scriptures to show me that angels can make themselves human. I have no trouble understanding that they can appear as men, but they are no more human than before their appearance. The Scriptures never tell us that a creation of God can make himself into something he is not. Men can “appear” good when they are evil, and angels can “appear” as men when they are truly angels. The Scriptures support this, but Genesis 1 denies your claims of Genesis 6.

          Have a good day, my friend, and may the Lord bless you and yours,

          Eddie

           
  6. AMG

    July 6, 2011 at 00:43

    You say, “We cannot prove that this being was ever angelic.” However, what do you think of these two scriptures:

    Ezekiel 28:16 In the abundance of your trade you were filled with violence in your midst, and you sinned; so I cast you as a profane thing from the mountain of God, and I destroyed you, O guardian cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire.

    Ezekiel 28:14 You were an anointed guardian cherub. I placed you; you were on the holy mountain of God; in the midst of the stones of fire you walked.

    guardian cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire.
    Ezekiel 28:14 You were an anointed guardian cherub. I placed you; you were on the holy mountain of God; in the midst of the stones of fire you walked.

    I am so disappointed that you think Jesus was an angel before.

     
    • Ed Bromfield

      July 6, 2011 at 10:11

      Greetings AMG.

      First of all, what is a “cherub”? The text doesn’t say—does it? Cherubim seem to be spirit beings, and if I understand the Scriptures properly, they have the face of an ox (compare Ezekiel 10:14 & Revelation 4:7). They also have what appears to be hands like that of men (Ezekiel 10:8), and of course they have wings. Are they akin to angels or are they beings of a class by themselves? Nevertheless, concerning Ezekiel 28:14, there is a problem with the text in Hebrew. The pronoun “you” in the clause “you are the anointed cherub” is feminine, but elsewhere the ruler of Tyre is referred to in the masculine gender. It is thought that this is a corruption in the text and should actually be written as the preposition “with” as is the case in the Septuagint, the Greek Old Testament. It appears as:

      Ezekiel 28:14 LXX (14) From the day that you were created you were with the cherub; I set you on the holy mount of God; you were in the midst of the stones of fire.

      Compare this with one of our more modern translations:

      Ezekiel 28:14 NET. I placed you there with an anointed guardian cherub; you were on the holy mountain of God; you walked about amidst fiery stones.

      Finally, many biblical scholars believe that Ezekiel 28 and Isaiah 14 point to Satan. Whether this is so or not, I have no opinion, because it changes nothing about Satan if he is Adam. Both Scriptures seem to conclude **he** has similar spiritual problems that humans have. If he is not flesh, how could this be?

      Anyway, I don’t perceive this as that big a deal as far as Christian doctrine is concerned. Whether Satan is a spirit being or a man, he is the enemy of God. All enemies will be brought into subjection and finally repent. The main thing about Christianity is what we do with Jesus. Satan is not all that important.

      I don’t know where you have gotten the idea that I believe Jesus is or was an angelic being. I do not nor have I ever believed this. He is called the “Angel of the Lord” in the Old Testament, but this doesn’t make him an angelic being. Men are called messengers (meaning of the word ‘angel’). “Angel of the Lord” simply means that Jesus carried the message or word of God to mankind. Jesus is not an angel.

      Hope this helps,

      Eddie

       

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: