Jump to content
  • Welcome to Online Baptist

    Free to join.

No Nicolaitans

GenevanPreacher, do you?

Recommended Posts

GP, you've been so adamant about how wrong people are for "reading Satan into" the Lucifer account (and the king of Tyrus account in Ezekiel 18). Yet, I have to say, even if those who apply Lucifer and the king of Tyrus to Satan are wrong...that pales in comparison to your reading Satan and the devils into the creation account due to the use of the terms darkness and light. God defined what the light and darkness were in Genesis 1:5...and it's not good and evil, angels and devils, or whatever this residue is that you've theorized.

I also must say that your application of (and reading into) man being both created and falling on the sixth day and God's acknowledgment of it also pales. GP, God saw everything that he had made, and it was very good...he then stated that the sixth day was finished, Everything was very good when the sixth day was finished. Now read the very first word of Genesis 2...it's the word "Thus". That means "as a result or consequence of this". A consequence of what? A consequence of God's creative acts...which were very good! A a result of God's creative acts (which were very good), everything was finished, and God rested on the seventh day.

I still say it comes down to this...

If applying Lucifer and the king of Tyrus are wrong, what are the consequences of that? Are there really any detrimental consequences that will harm other doctrine? No. I know that you believe there is the consequence of "giving glory to Satan" by doing so, but at the same time, I do believe that you're the only person that thinks that.

HOWEVER...

What is the consequence of applying God's creation of Satan and the devils as wicked? The consequence is this...God is a sinner. If he created Satan and the devils as sinners, that makes God a sinner, because the sin had to come from him. He had to put that in them. It had to come from him; therefore, it had to be in him too.

 

Edited by No Nicolaitans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, No Nicolaitans said:

GP, you've been so adamant about how wrong people are for "reading Satan into" the Lucifer account (and the king of Tyrus account in Ezekiel 18). Yet, I have to say, even if those who apply Lucifer and the king of Tyrus to Satan are wrong...that pales in comparison to your reading Satan and the devils into the creation account due to the use of the terms darkness and light.[1]  God defined what the light and darkness were in Genesis 1:5...and it's not good and evil, angels and devils, or whatever this residue is that you've theorized.

I also must say that your application of (and reading into) man being both created and falling on the sixth day and God's acknowledgment of it also pales.[2] GP, God saw everything that he had made, and it was very good...he then stated that the sixth day was finished, Everything was very good when the sixth day was finished. Now read the very first word of Genesis 2...it's the word "Thus". That means "as a result or consequence of this". A consequence of what? A consequence of God's creative acts...which were very good! A a result of God's creative acts (which were very good), everything was finished, and God rested on the seventh day.

I still say it comes down to this...

If applying Lucifer and the king of Tyrus are wrong, what are the consequences of that? Are there really any detrimental consequences that will harm other doctrine? No. I know that you believe there is the consequence of "giving glory to Satan" by doing so, but at the same time, I do believe that you're the only person that thinks that.

HOWEVER...

What is the consequence of applying God's creation of Satan and the devils as wicked? The consequence is this...God is a sinner. If he created Satan and the devils as sinners, that makes God a sinner, because the sin had to come from him. He had to put that in them. It had to come from him; therefore, it had to be in him too.

[1] We are defined as such when the Lord said  -

"For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light: (For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth;) Proving what is acceptable unto the Lord. And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret. But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light."

And -

"And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil."

Seems rather common sense to me.

In the first few verses in Genesis I see good messengers and evil messengers existing from the mass of creation, from which the Lord commanded all life out of, (except man, who was formed by Gods hands). Everything else was spoken into existence.

[2] I really am confused by this statement. I never said man fell. Just quoted God, and what he himself said. He knew good and evil from somewhere or he would not have said what he did. Don't you think?

Besides, don't you think that man fell after the 7th day?

Now as for evil existing - the scripture says that the serpent was more subtil than any other beast of the field?

Subtil - deceitful. 

That is evil before the fall. AND it WAS a serpent, not the Devil. The Lord would not compare the Devil to the other beasts of the field.

[Sorry that's all for now. Our wedding anniversary today. 28 years btw.]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Genevanpreacher said:

Our wedding anniversary today. 28 years btw.

Happy Anniversary!

1 hour ago, Genevanpreacher said:

[1] We are defined as such when the Lord said  -

"For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light: (For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth;) Proving what is acceptable unto the Lord. And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret. But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light."

And -

"And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil."

Seems rather common sense to me.

You're taking the descriptive characterization of light and darkness and applying it to literal light and darkness. That would be like me taking every reference to an ark in the Bible and saying they all describe a huge wooden water craft...or no, they all describe a small water craft made of bulrushes that could only hold a baby...or no, they all describe a wooden box overlain with gold. 

We don't have to go looking in the New Testament to find what God meant by light and darkness when he clearly and plainly defined it at the beginning...

Genesis 1:5
And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

Are references to light and darkness used to describe "good and evil"? Yes. Are references to light and darkness used to describe day and night? Yes. The difference is context...

 

1 hour ago, Genevanpreacher said:

[2] I really am confused by this statement. I never said man fell. Just quoted God, and what he himself said.

Well, here's what you said...

1 hour ago, Genevanpreacher said:

 Well Dave, you might consider the fact that there WAS evil before the sixth day by Gods own words -

"And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil:"

Okay, when I first saw that, I thought that since you said "sixth" day and included the words of God, you were saying that God said those words on the sixth day. However, if you're inferring that since God referred to good and evil; therefore, evil existed prior to man's fall...I don't disagree. It did exist prior to man's fall...because Satan had already fallen.

 

1 hour ago, Genevanpreacher said:

The Lord would not compare the Devil to the other beasts of the field.

You mean like this...

Revelation 12:9
And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

...or this?

Revelation 20:2
And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,

...or this?

1 Peter 5:8
Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:
 

Who says God wouldn't compare the Devil to the other beasts of the field? Looks like he does to me. He compares man to sheep, goats, foxes, serpents, doves, etc. Even the Lord Jesus Christ is compared to a lamb and lion too...but the Devil is off limits?

Did not the Lord cast out devils and they entered into swine? So is it so hard to believe that Satan entered the serpent? If not, perhaps you can tell me when the serpent...the same serpent that beguiled Eve...

Genesis 3:15
And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

...when did that serpent bruise the Lord Jesus' heel...when did it slither up and bruise the Lord Jesus' heel? That was a pretty old serpent by that time! Unless you also don't believe that's a prophetic reference.

GP, you're free to believe what you want; I can see that chances are you won't change your views about this and many other things. However, you might want to reign in some of your slams toward others here for what they believe, because friend...some of this stuff you're espousing is just plain out whacka-doodle.
 

Edited by No Nicolaitans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Geneva - please provide Scripture to support your claims.  There was a list of 4 questions that were asked for clarification, which you answered, but you gave no Scripture for them.  Perhaps if you build your thesis from those questions, and provide Scriptural support so we can understand where you are coming from, it might make things easier.

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, No Nicolaitans said:

Happy Anniversary!

Thanks!

You're taking the descriptive characterization of light and darkness and applying it to literal light and darkness. That would be like me taking every reference to an ark in the Bible and saying they all describe a huge wooden water craft...or no, they all describe a small water craft made of bulrushes that could only hold a baby...or no, they all describe a wooden box overlain with gold. 

I didn't say nor imply every time it's used.

We don't have to go looking in the New Testament to find what God meant by light and darkness when he clearly and plainly defined it at the beginning...

Genesis 1:5
And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

Are references to light and darkness used to describe "good and evil"? Yes. Are references to light and darkness used to describe day and night? Yes. The difference is context...

 

Well, here's what you said...

Okay, when I first saw that, I thought that since you said "sixth" day and included the words of God, you were saying that God said those words on the sixth day. However, if you're inferring that since God referred to good and evil; therefore, evil existed prior to man's fall...I don't disagree. It did exist prior to man's fall...because Satan had already fallen.

A verse somewhere that states that without making up a story?

 

You mean like this...

Revelation 12:9
And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

This has nothing to do with Lucifer/Satan falling because of a rebellion where a former angelic being decided he was jealous of God and tried to take his throne. Does it?

...or this?

Revelation 20:2
And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years,

...or this?

1 Peter 5:8
Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:
 

Who says God wouldn't compare the Devil to the other beasts of the field? In Genesis God did not compare the devil or Satan nor a Lucifer to any other beast of the field. He was comparing a serpent to the other beasts of the field. Very easy to see, if you read the verses without using mans teachings and pervert the meaning of the text. Looks like he does to me. He compares man to sheep, goats, foxes, serpents, doves, etc. Even the Lord Jesus Christ is compared to a lamb and lion too...but the Devil is off limits?

Did not the Lord cast out devils and they entered into swine? So is it so hard to believe that Satan entered the serpent? If not, perhaps you can tell me when the serpent...the same serpent that beguiled Eve...

Genesis 3:15
And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

...when did that serpent bruise the Lord Jesus' heel...when did it slither up and bruise the Lord Jesus' heel? That was a pretty old serpent by that time! Unless you also don't believe that's a prophetic reference.

Yes it was a prophetic verse, but also a literal verse. No problem at all.

GP, you're free to believe what you want; I can see that chances are you won't change your views about this and many other things. However, you might want to reign in some of your slams toward others here for what they believe, because friend...some of this stuff you're espousing is just plain out whacka-doodle.

Thanks. I shall add that word to my vocabulary for someone who actually believes the scriptures.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GP, I give up. Having an exchange with you is like trying to pet a cat that stays just out of arm's reach...you can call the cat, motion to it with your fingers, and gently tap the floor while talking to it. However, the cat refuses to move and stays in its place...taunting you...because you can still see it, but you can't get to it...and it won't budge.

Like the cat, you don't answer direct questions, clarify your statements, or provide biblical proof of your assertions...you just stay in the corner under the furniture...letting your presence be known and obvious but refusing to come forth.

I find that a broom handle makes the cat move...so now you see one reason as to why it seems that others take the broom handle after you here.

I used to wonder why you had a cat preaching in your videos. Now I understand that the cat is actually quite fitting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/30/2016 at 9:24 AM, Steve Schwenke said:

I would really like it if you could provide Scripture to support each point.  You lecture us for just following the teaching of man, but then when asked to clarify what you believe, you provide no Scripture to support it.  Further, each one of your points flies in the face of very clear Scripture (except for point one...)

My scriptural support is known already by all here, you just refuse to see it because you are taught that it means something else.

1. He is a real entity because of all the times he is mentioned in scripture. A look in a Strongs Concordance will suffice.

2. There is no scriptural support that he was ever not evil, as per our Lords words "He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil."

3. Satan never chose anything. He was ALWAYS darkness. ALWAYS evil. From the beginning! You read the Bible? You know what I am saying.

4. Show me where the fall of Satan and devils occurred in the history of Genesis or before. It exists no where but in the mind of men years ago who tried to explain the existence of the thing named Lucifer and a marvelous story was created AND made doctrine in the Churches.

Why should it be an amazing thing for us to believe in the creation of devils when God made everything else for its purpose?

The nature of a created being is just that...its nature.

And NO, since God created devils, that DOES NOT MAKE GOD A SINNER, Dave! That is a silly thing to even think, much less say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Genevanpreacher said:

And NO, since God created devils, that DOES NOT MAKE GOD A SINNER, Dave! That is a silly thing to even think, much less say.

Just to clarify...

Unless I missed it in Dave's posts, I'm the one who said that...not Dave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Genevanpreacher said:

My scriptural support is known already by all here, you just refuse to see it because you are taught that it means something else.

1. He is a real entity because of all the times he is mentioned in scripture. A look in a Strongs Concordance will suffice.

2. There is no scriptural support that he was ever not evil, as per our Lords words "He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil."

3. Satan never chose anything. He was ALWAYS darkness. ALWAYS evil. From the beginning! You read the Bible? You know what I am saying.

4. Show me where the fall of Satan and devils occurred in the history of Genesis or before. It exists no where but in the mind of men years ago who tried to explain the existence of the thing named Lucifer and a marvelous story was created AND made doctrine in the Churches.

Why should it be an amazing thing for us to believe in the creation of devils when God made everything else for its purpose?

The nature of a created being is just that...its nature.

And NO, since God created devils, that DOES NOT MAKE GOD A SINNER, Dave! That is a silly thing to even think, much less say.

Why don't you study the real Bible and stop following apostate women's teaching, in this case a lady named Jeannie Weyrick

Dispense with her nonsense and study the numerous passages already explained to you and study Eze 28

15, Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.

The beginning in your passage means God's foreknowledge as it always does. He knew what would happen with His Angels who would sin and who would not. God in His Perfect Righteousness will not create sin. How silly is your stance friend, God will not tolerate sin but He created it??? How delusional. Freewill is the central theme of God's Word and it lies on every page of It.

Your misinterpretation is the "avoidance" of Battle Cry for every calvanite.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, wretched said:

Why don't you study the real Bible and stop following apostate women's teaching, in this case a lady named Jeannie Weyrick

Dispense with her nonsense and study the numerous passages already explained to you and study Eze 28

15, Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.

The beginning in your passage means God's foreknowledge as it always does. He knew what would happen with His Angels who would sin and who would not. God in His Perfect Righteousness will not create sin. How silly is your stance friend, God will not tolerate sin but He created it??? How delusional. Freewill is the central theme of God's Word and it lies on every page of It.

Your misinterpretation is the "avoidance" of Battle Cry for every calvanite.

Never heard of her. So don't go blaming what I believe upon some woman's teaching just because you need someone to use to cast my beliefs down on the ground on this forum.

Um...what is a calvanite?

Just a reminder here, angels are created beings, just like animals. They are messengers and protectors from God for mankind. Their job is to serve their creator and be with those who are to be heirs of salvation.Yes, all animals have the ability to pervert their ways, to a degree, but they mostly stay to their nature as God has intended them. That doesn't mean God created them TO sin.

Man is the ONLY special creature. His free will is the only thing that has changed nature BECAUSE of his choice to not follow God and bring sin upon the world - upon human creatures.

Creation was made for man to be the head over. Never angels.

So equating angels and their free will with man's doesn't even make sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, wretched said:

Why don't you study the real Bible and stop following apostate women's teaching, in this case a lady named Jeannie Weyrick

Dispense with her nonsense and study the numerous passages already explained to you and study Eze 28

15, Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.

First off - I looked her up!

Shame on you!! That's just like cursing!

Second - everyone is born perfect until the choice to sin comes upon them - that sin is named "iniquity". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Genevanpreacher said:

First off - I looked her up!

Shame on you!! That's just like cursing!

Second - everyone is born perfect until the choice to sin comes upon them - that sin is named "iniquity". 

Another one for posterity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Genevanpreacher said:

Never heard of her. So don't go blaming what I believe upon some woman's teaching just because you need someone to use to cast my beliefs down on the ground on this forum.

Um...what is a calvanite?

Just a reminder here, angels are created beings, just like animals. They are messengers and protectors from God for mankind. Their job is to serve their creator and be with those who are to be heirs of salvation.Yes, all animals have the ability to pervert their ways, to a degree, but they mostly stay to their nature as God has intended them. That doesn't mean God created them TO sin.

Man is the ONLY special creature. His free will is the only thing that has changed nature BECAUSE of his choice to not follow God and bring sin upon the world - upon human creatures.

Creation was made for man to be the head over. Never angels.

So equating angels and their free will with man's doesn't even make sense.

Decided this one was worth keeping too.

Edited by DaveW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Brethren,

In the above posting, presented earlier in this thread, I suggested unto Brother "Genevanpreacher" that he might engage with me concerning Ezekiel 28:11-19 through a study of the grammar and context therein.  Since that posting, it does not appear that he has an interest in so doing.  Therefore, I present the following as such a study for all to consider --

Concerning Ezekiel 28:11-19

Ezekiel 28:1-19 presents two different prophetic utterances against two different individuals of governing authority over the land of Tyrus.  On the one hand, Ezekiel 28:1-10 presents a prophetic utterance against an individual who is designated as “the prince of Tyrus.”  According to Ezekiel 28:2 this “prince of Tyrus” was under God’s hand of judgment because his heart was lifted up with pride and because he had made the claim, saying, “I am a God, I sit in the seat of God, in the midst of the seas.”  Yet the Lord God Himself responded to this individual’s claim, saying, “Thou art a man, and not God, though thou set thine heart as the heart of God.”  As such, this governing individual over Tyrus, this “prince of Tyrus,” is clearly revealed by the Lord God Himself to be nothing more than a human individual.

On the other hand, Ezekiel 28:11-19 presents a prophetic utterance against an individual who is designated as “the king of Tyrus.”  Furthermore, in Ezekiel 28:14 the Lord God Himself provides an additional designation for this “king of Tyrus,” saying, “Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so.”  Now, the singular noun “cherub” and its plural form “cherubims” are found ninety-five times throughout the Bible.  Of those, two times the word “Cherub” is given, not as a descriptive designation, but as the actual name of a human individual. (See Ezra 2:59; Nehemiah 7:61)  Of the other times, the words “cherub” and “cherubims,” given as a descriptive designation, always refers unto an angelic individual.  As such, this “king of Tyrus” is thereby referenced by the Lord God Himself in Ezekiel 28:14 & 16 as an angelic being.

Yet what about the designation that he was “the king of Tyrus”?  Certainly that designation would indicate that this individual was a human individual in the government over Tyrus, right?  Not necessarily, for designations of governing position are employed in God’s Word for angelic individuals also.  In John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11 our adversary the devil appears to be designated by the Lord Jesus Christ Himself as “the prince of this world.”  Again in Matthew 9:34; 12:24 & Mark 3:22 our adversary the devil appears to be designated as “the prince of the devils.”  Yet again in Ephesians 2:2 our adversary the devil appears to be designated as “the prince of the power of the air.”  Furthermore, in Ephesians 6:12 we believers are informed that those against whom we must spiritually fight and wrestle are NOT “flesh and blood,” human individuals, but are spiritual, angelic beings who are designated with the terminology of governing authority as “principalities,” “powers,” “rulers of the darkness of this world,” and “spiritual wickedness in high places.”  Finally, in Daniel 10:13 Michael, “the archangel” (See Jude 1:9), is designated as “one of the chief princes.”  So then, angelic individuals can indeed be referenced and designated in God’s Word with the terminology of governing authority.

Yet in Ezekiel 28:12 “the king of Tyrus” is specifically designated as a governing official over a specific group of people, that is – the people of Tyrus.  Certainly an angelic being would not be designated as having governing authority over such a specific group of people, right?  Again, not necessarily; for in Daniel 9:21 & Daniel 12:1 Michael the archangel is revealed to be “the great prince which standeth for the children of thy [Daniel’s] people,” that is – the angelic prince for the children of Israel.  So then, angelic individuals can indeed be referenced and designated in God’s Word with the terminology of governing authority over a specific group of people or national group.  Even so, Ezekiel 28:11-19 speaks concerning an individual that is descriptively designated as “the king of Tyrus,” which is a designation that could refer unto either an angelic being or a human being, and that is descriptively designated as “the anointed cherub that covereth,” which is a designation that can only refer unto an angelic being.  As such, we conclude that Ezekiel 28:11-19 is speaking concerning an angelic being.

What then does Ezekiel 28:11-19 teach us about this angelic being? 

1.  He is a created being. (Ezekiel 28:13 & 15)

2.  He was “full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty” when he was created. (Ezekiel 28:12)

3.  He had been “in Eden the garden of God.” (Ezekiel 28:13)

4.  He was “the anointed cherub” that covered the throne of God. (Ezekiel 28:14)

5.  He was set in that position by the Lord God Himself. (Ezekiel 28:14)

6.  He was “upon the holy mountain of God.” (Ezekiel 28:14)

7.  He was “perfect” in his ways at the time of his creation. (Ezekiel 28:15)

8.  Sometime after his creation he chose the path of sin and iniquity. (Ezekiel 28:15-16)

9.  He was motivated to sin when his “heart was lifted up” because of his beauty. (Ezekiel 28:17)

10.  He corrupted his wisdom by reason of his “brightness.” (Ezekiel 28:17)

11.  He has continued to defile himself more and more “by the multitude” of his iniquities, by the iniquity of his traffick. (Ezekiel 28:18)

12.  He will be cast by the Lord God “as profane out of the mountain of God,” and will be destroyed by the hand of God’s judgment. (Ezekiel 28:16)

13.  He will be judged by God through the means of a devouring fire. (Ezekiel 28:18)

14.  He will be judged by God in the sight of mankind. (Ezekiel 28:17-18)

A few questions Bro. Scott -

1] Just what is this verse about then:

"By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned:"

Is this his 'fall'? Was he trafficking in a trade?

Uh...yeah! 

"Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick;"

What about this verse:

"I will cast thee to the ground, I will lay thee before kings, that they may behold thee."

Just where Bro.Scott is this mentioned anywhere else that the Lord God would do this to Satan?

Nowhere. Because he is talking to a real man the King of Tyrus.

You are making it sound like God was being deceptive when he told the Prophet - "Son of man, take up a lamentation upon the king of Tyrus, and say unto him..." when there was no such king.

But here is the explanation for the sin that the King of Tyrus committed as per the above quoted verse -

"Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick;"

He was sinning in his 'trade' by building up multiple amounts of what was causing his iniquity. Period. 

Satan never did that. And never will.

These are verses after the mention of the king and not referencing the prince. (In theory.)

Edited by Genevanpreacher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Brethren,

I present the following as such a study for all to consider --

Pastor Markle, that was a great study brother! I've never looked up the difference between the words "prince" and "king" in these scriptures before, but your study prompted me to do so. It was fruitful. Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pastor Markle,

Your above two expositions on Ezekiel 28:11-19 is excellent and are doctrinally correct. It is probably the best exposition on this scripture, and the subject of the fall and work of Satan,

1 hour ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Yes, after his "fall" from righteous perfection into iniquity, this "fallen" cherub has engaged and continues to engage in the trafficking of some form of "merchandise."  Ezekiel 28:16, 18 makes this clear.  In fact, these two verses reveal the following about his "trafficking" --

1.  He engages in this trafficking with abundance -- "the multitude of thy merchandise"
2.  By nature his trafficking is filled with iniquity -- "the iniquity of thy traffick"
3.  The abundance of his iniquity-filled trafficking expands his accountability of iniquities -- "by the multitude of thy iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick"
     (That is -  A multitude of merchandise-trafficking = A multitude of iniquities -- specifically because the trafficking is iniquity-filled.)
4.  The abundance of his iniquity-filled trafficking fills him with an accountability of violence -- "by the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled thee with violence"
5.  The abundance of his iniquity-filled trafficking expands the defilement of his sanctuaries -- "thou has defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities"

So then, in what "merchandise" does this "fallen" cherub so abundantly traffick?  Our adversary the devil so abundantly "trafficks" in the abundance of deception and lies against the truth, which by nature produce the results of both spiritual and physical violence, murder, and death.  Indeed, in John 8:44 our Lord Jesus Christ rebuked the Pharisees, saying, "Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do.  He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him.  When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it."  His "merchandise" is deception and lies; "for he is a liar, and the father of it [that is -- of all deception and lies]."

 that I have seen.

The short study on "the multitude of thy merchandise," is spiritually enlightening and I am sure is a help to a lot of folks who are interested in spiritual matters.

The subject of, "the multitude of thy merchandise," is a study in itself. I may further add, if a word study is done on "devise," devised," and "deviseth," and "instruments," a person can see a connection with Satan / Lucifer, in the study of, "the multitude of thy merchandise."  As one example, ponder Isaiah 32:7, "The instruments also of the churl are evil: he deviseth wicked devices to destroy the poor with lying words, even when the needy speaketh right."

I would like to encourage you to either continue this study in another thread, or, if the Lord leads you to provide a PDF file on the lesson for us on OnLine Baptist  that would be a blessing also.

Alan

Edited by Alan
grammer spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the fact that the overwhelming majority of Pastor Markle's argument is ignored, and the GP response is based on some perceived contradictions that are actually answered in Pastor Markle's first post of this argument.

I also love the fact that Pastor Markle's argument is based solely on Scripture, thereby contrasting the pure speculative and non-scripture based positions that GP has constantly presently largely without ANY scripture reference, or in the rare instance Scripture has been used by GP it has had no reference to angels (with one irrelevant exception referencing Satan but then irrelevant to his origin).

 

Well done Pastor Markle on solid, Scripture based presentation of argument - again.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, DaveW said:

I love the fact that the overwhelming majority of Pastor Markle's argument is ignored, and the GP response is based on some perceived contradictions that are actually answered in Pastor Markle's first post of this argument. No they weren't. And any guests can clearly see it.

I also love the fact that Pastor Markle's argument is based solely on Scripture, thereby contrasting the pure speculative and non-scripture based positions that GP has constantly presently largely without ANY scripture reference, or in the rare instance Scripture has been used by GP it has had no reference to angels (with one irrelevant exception referencing Satan but then irrelevant to his origin). His verses had nothing to do with the questioned verses.

Well done Pastor Markle on solid (i.e. traditional), Scripture based presentation of argument - again. Yes, his normal 'follow the traditions' type of teachings that lead to fantasy.

I love how birds of a feather flock together. Thanks Dave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Genevanpreacher said:

I love how birds of a feather flock together. Thanks Dave.

When someone clearly expounds Scripture, I will happily agree with him.

Do you care to actually SCRIPTURALLY address any of his points?

You haven't so far.

You have presented very little Scripture in support of any of your propositions in this thread, and the few Scriptures you did use was not relevant to your proposition regarding the origin of Satan.

Your arguments as presented in this thread have been presented without relevant Scripture and with much conjecture, supposition, guesswork, and imagination.

All the while you accuse others of making up stories.

Well then, present your 'much study' that we are supposed to believe you have done on this subject, and answer the posts that have been posted presenting the "traditional view", in particular Pastor Markle's well presented and Scripturally supported arguments, and DO SO WITH RELEVANT SCRIPTURE as you have failed to do up to this point.

You have up until now basically said we should believe you because you are right and everyone else is wrong.

Give a full and complete SCRIPTURE BASED argument supporting your position.

We will wait for it.

And I suspect we will have to wait a very long time for you to present such a thing.

Edited by DaveW
Phone spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Genevanpreacher said:

I love how birds of a feather flock together. Thanks Dave.

 1Co 1:10  Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DaveW said:

I love the fact that the overwhelming majority of Pastor Markle's argument is ignored, and the GP response is based on some perceived contradictions that are actually answered in Pastor Markle's first post of this argument. No they weren't. And any guests can clearly see it.

I also love the fact that Pastor Markle's argument is based solely on Scripture, thereby contrasting the pure speculative and non-scripture based positions that GP has constantly presently largely without ANY scripture reference, or in the rare instance Scripture has been used by GP it has had no reference to angels (with one irrelevant exception referencing Satan but then irrelevant to his origin). His verses had nothing to do with the questioned verses.

Well done Pastor Markle on solid (i.e. traditional), Scripture based presentation of argument - again. Yes, his normal 'follow the traditions' type of teachings that lead to fantasy.

25 minutes ago, Genevanpreacher said:

I love how birds of a feather flock together. Thanks Dave.

Brother "Genevanpreacher,"

The most foundational premise of my position on Ezekiel 28:11-19 concerns the designation of "the king of Tyrus" by the Lord God Himself as "the anointed cherub that covereth," with the Lord God indicating that He Himself had set this individual to be so.  Can you provide ANY Biblical evidence (excluding the very passage under question) that the descriptive designation of "covering cherub" does not refer unto an angelic being, but unto a human being? 

You see, if you can bring Biblical evidence against my most foundational premise, then you have some solid doctrinal ground upon which to stand.  However, if you cannot, then . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 31 Guests (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...