What is the meaning here?

[Invicta]

There are hernias and hernias. My wife has an hiatus hernia, which she has had most of her life. It does cause promblembs with eating at times and when she was pregnamt theonly thing she could eat and keep down was milkshake with raw egg in it. Early this year she had a small hernia which caused a strangled intestine. Our GP could not find the cause, when it got so bad and she could not keep anything down, I call the emergency doctor, but she could not find the cause but sent her to hospital, the first doc she saw there could not find what it was, so he called the registrar, who discovered it and she was operated on about 1 hour later that evening.

[JerryNumbers]

Back in the 80’s I found out I had a hiatus hernia, after finding out I them found out that it was a very common, that many had this problem. It gave me much misery. Much Gaviscon helped the problem, plus I raised the head of my bed, it hardly brothers me any more. Although I do know some that had to have surgery.

[Calvary]

Thanks Rick.

It's nice to have the last word in a complex interpretation discussion, but it would be nicer if those unable to reply further acknowledged that my teaching is the truth, rather than simply abandon the thread.

I would say that a reply to your post was not needed, certainly not in the category of "unable" to reply. Sort of a self serving statement really. But I am aware that several of my posts went unanswered by both heartstrings and standing firm.

5 classes of sons of God found in the Bible. I gave scripture for every last one.
Sons of God at creation that are not believers in Christ in the NT sense.
Jesus preaching in the heart of the earth (one poster said that phrase does not show up in the Bible)
Jesus leading captivity captive. No answer from anyone on the identity of those that were captive, where they were captive, who led them from captivity and where were they led. Not a peep.
Ans of course I could name a few other items.

But I don't assume they can't answer or are "unable" as if I am some great one. I merely assume that it's not that important to them and move on. That's the nature of forum based discussions. Some take off, others die quickly, some more slowly, but all threads die. This one died. And not because no one couldn't answer you, but only because no one wants to.

God bless,
Calvary

[heartstrings]

I would say that a reply to your post was not needed, certainly not in the category of "unable" to reply. Sort of a self serving statement really. But I am aware that several of my posts went unanswered by both heartstrings and standing firm.

5 classes of sons of God found in the Bible. I gave scripture for every last one.
Sons of God at creation that are not believers in Christ in the NT sense.
Jesus preaching in the heart of the earth (one poster said that phrase does not show up in the Bible)
Jesus leading captivity captive. No answer from anyone on the identity of those that were captive, where they were captive, who led them from captivity and where were they led. Not a peep.
Ans of course I could name a few other items.

But I don't assume they can't answer or are "unable" as if I am some great one. I merely assume that it's not that important to them and move on. That's the nature of forum based discussions. Some take off, others die quickly, some more slowly, but all threads die. This one died. And not because no one couldn't answer you, but only because no one wants to.

God bless,
Calvary

Discussions involving politics and religion almost never end in one's changing his mind to agree with the other's point of view. But it isn't that I don't care to answer your posts; It's just that I have more important fish to fry at the moment. I will get back to you later....Lord willing. Edited December 21, 2011 by heartstrings

[Covenanter]

I would say that a reply to your post was not needed, certainly not in the category of "unable" to reply. Sort of a self serving statement really. But I am aware that several of my posts went unanswered by both heartstrings and standing firm.
I was hoping that John 81 would comment on the answers - he started the thread.

5 classes of sons of God found in the Bible. I gave scripture for every last one.
Sons of God at creation that are not believers in Christ in the NT sense.
The idea of angels marrying women is not credible - marriage is man/woman.

Jesus preaching in the heart of the earth (one poster said that phrase does not show up in the Bible)
The argument that because Jesus would spend 3 days & nights in "the heart of the earth" means that Paradise is there - becasue of Jesus' promise to the dying malefactor is not proof. He was in the tomb, while his spirit was commended to his Father.

Jesus leading captivity captive. No answer from anyone on the identity of those that were captive, where they were captive, who led them from captivity and where were they led. Not a peep.
Does Eph. 4 support the idea of Jesus preaching in hell to rescue dead believers there incarcerated?
⁷But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ.
⁸Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.
⁹(Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?
¹⁰He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)
¹¹And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
¹²For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

I suggest that "captivity" personifies Satan - the strong man to be bound. All mankind are his captives, but that does not mean that the OT saints were held by Satan in the lower parts of the earth. The context of Paul's quote from Psa 68 is the deliverance from Egypt. God came down to earth to rescue &redeem his people - as did Jesus, God with us. He rose, ascended, & poured out the gifts of his Holy Spirit on his church. The redeemed are the freed captives, freed from Satan, but never spiritually in the heart of the earth. Our bodies may be buried deep in earth, or in the sea, or up in smoke, but dead believers are alive with God in heaven. God is God of the living.

Paul didn't write that to offer proof of some novel doctrine, but to prove Christ's victory of the power of Satan & his consequent gift of the power of the Holy Spirit.

Ans of course I could name a few other items.

But I don't assume they can't answer or are "unable" as if I am some great one. I merely assume that it's not that important to them and move on. That's the nature of forum based discussions. Some take off, others die quickly, some more slowly, but all threads die. This one died. And not because no one couldn't answer you, but only because no one wants to.
I don't think anyone has challenged my answer, just offered other suggestions.

[John81]

I apologize if some have been looking for comments from me. I've been reading each post and weighing what's been said. I've been trying to stay out of the way so the flow between those presenting their views would be unhindered.

After reading Covenanter's post above I recall that I've heard it postulated that the "marriage" between demons and women was actually a matter of demons possessing men which then married the women. I don't recall where I heard that or who said it but the above post brought it to mind.

I've actually found the exchange in this thread to be engaging and thought provoking.

[Calvary]

[Covenanter]

Thanks for your further reply, Calvary. I must apologise for missing your post on the end of Page 1 which was a reply to mine.

You mention angelic beings & quote Psa. 82

Psalm 82:⁶I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.
⁷But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.
⁸Arise, O God, judge the earth: for thou shalt inherit all nations.

Psalms 82 mentions a group of angels that fell and died like men, children of the Most High. Job 4:18 says, behold, he put no trust in his servants; and his angels he charged with folly.
When they died in the flood, these spirits were sent to hell where they were “reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.”

Jesus used Psalm 82 in John 10:
³³The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
³⁴Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
³⁵If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
³⁶Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

In the Ps. 82 context, Israelite human judges are being rebuked - men who have the Word of God & should judge accordingly. Instead they oppress the poor. They will die like (wicked) men. They are not angels but elohim which is defined & translated in many ways according to context.

(Blue letter Bible)
God 2346, god 244, judge 5, GOD 1, goddess 2, great 2, mighty 2, angels 1, exceeding 1, God-ward + 04136 1, godly 1

The various possiblities for "sons of God" must, in the context of marriage, mean men. Demon possession (as John suggests) could result in extraordinary progeny (like Legion with his superhuman strength) & on a universal scale lead to the absolute wickedness of the antediluvians. As Jesus pointed out: Luke 17:²⁶And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man. ²⁷They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.

[Brother Rick]

When are we going to start talking about aliens?

[Salyan]

Lol! We're not. :frog:

[Guest]

When are we going to start talking about aliens?

I'm pretty sure I saw an alien last summer. I was having a shed built and was taking pictures of the construction. Except the supervisor, I noticed that all the workers kept their heads down and/or away from the camera. They were a crew of five. Except the supervisor, I think they were all illegal aliens and they were all from Mexico.

[Brother Rick]

We have aliens all over the place here in Idaho.

[Calvary]

Thanks for your further reply, Calvary. I must apologise for missing your post on the end of Page 1 which was a reply to mine.

You mention angelic beings & quote Psa. 82

Psalm 82:⁶I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.
⁷But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.
⁸Arise, O God, judge the earth: for thou shalt inherit all nations.


Jesus used Psalm 82 in John 10:
³³The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
³⁴Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
³⁵If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
³⁶Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

In the Ps. 82 context, Israelite human judges are being rebuked - men who have the Word of God & should judge accordingly. Instead they oppress the poor. They will die like (wicked) men. They are not angels but elohim which is defined & translated in many ways according to context.

The various possiblities for "sons of God" must, in the context of marriage, mean men. Demon possession (as John suggests) could result in extraordinary progeny (like Legion with his superhuman strength) & on a universal scale lead to the absolute wickedness of the antediluvians. As Jesus pointed out: Luke 17:²⁶And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man. ²⁷They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.

I'll try not to take you to task. You completely skipped over the entire thrust of my last post which was Eph. 4. Typical. No answer to very important flaws in your exposition of Eph 4.
Psalms 82 is where the "dull of hearing" bomb out.
Vs. 1 - The congregation of the mighty is not any congregation of earthly judges, and when "he judgeth among the gods" there is no reference to Israelite judges, or Aaron's seed or anything else. You might try looking at 1 Kings 22:19 for the Holy Spirit's description of the "congregation of the mighty".
Psalms 82:6 is where the scholarly crew lost their footing, and if you followed them, you did too. (We'll come back to that in a sec)
Did anyone notice the "Selah"? in verse 2? That is a date line for us. It is not some customary expression of a judge as he sits down in judgement to hear a case. At least not one time in the following verses (Ps. 3:7; 7:6; 9:19; 10:12; 12:5; 17:13; 44:23, 26; 68:1; 74:22) - most of you will not take the time to actually check those verse, and you wonder why you can't answer simple questions about What possible reason would Jesus have for hauling the devil back up to heaven with him, that is if you followed Covenant theologian who just mimicked the dead old Bible correcting commentaries he has on his shelf)
Vs. 8 gives us the 3rd clue as to time "For thou shalt inherit all nations" and Covenant missed it. he couldn't see the 2nd Advent because he can't see the literal, physical reign of Christ on earth for 1000 years, so what did you expect? So he limits the verse to human judges before the Church Age. Covenant couldn't see that there will be "gods" here during the Tribulation and that they will be reigning not only as kings, but as absolute authorities over all judicial matter on earth (Rev. 17:12) They will be in the same position as in Gen. 6:1-6. (Did you see the word "MIGHTY" in verse 1 of Psalm 82?)
When Christ applied the verse to human judges to prove his own deity (Johns 10:34-36), At no time did he ever say "all you Israelite judges are children of the most High". The fact is the judges in Israel were Levites, (Mal 2:4, 7, 8, Deut. 1:16, 21:5) and not one of them was a "child of God". When John uses the expression (Jn 11:52) he uses it in a Jewish sense that was not at all doctrinal. Jesus Christ Himself allows that the Jews of that time were not only NOT the "children of God" (Jn 8:42-44) they were not even the children of Abraham! (Jn 8:39)
And that's not all, "all the foundations of the earth (vs.5) were not "out of course" at any time between Asaph and Paul, and they are not "out of course" now, nor were they when Moses appointed human judges over Israel (Ex. 18:22, 25; Num 11:16-17).
Your problem Covenant is Exodus 22:28. With this, John 10:34, the teachers you follow took the opportunity to toss out the context of Psalms 82 since they couldn't understand it. The context, vs. 1, 5, 6, 8, was the 2nd Advent, and the type was "the days of Noah", for there the "gods" drowned like men (see vs 7), at least according to 2 Peter 3:6; Jude 6; Job 22:16, and Rev. 20:13.
It's called "dual application" : The judges in Israel could be "gods" in the sense that Moses was a "god" to Pharaoh and Aaron (Ex 7:1). You could be a "son" of God because you represent THE Son of God. The human judges could judge "the poor and the fatherless... the afflicted and needy... the poor and the needy." so they acted as 'gods" for these people. When Jesus quotes the passage to show that they have no right to accuse him of claiming to be something that He is not, he doesn't tell you one thing about the Psalms or what it was dealing with. When Christ said that it was written in their Law, "ye are gods" the "ye" doesn't have anything to do with anyone he is talking to.
Vs 7, BUT... listen to 4th grade English. The disjunctive conjunction "but" shows us that we are not dealing with men: there are no human judges in verse 6, 7. The contrast is between someone who might truly be a 'god" but he will die like a "man" - not a god.
The judges in Gen 6 corrupted the earth with their decisions. These supermen are identified as "gods" in Gen 3:5; Exodus 15:11; Psalms 86:8; 95:3; 136:2 (note that last one! Imagine thinking that these gods are Israelite judges!) and Jeremiah 10:11. They are called "sons of God" in Job 38:7 and Gen 6:2, so the only way most good godly Bible commentators could erase the "children of the most High" from Psalms 82:6 was to pretend that the "gods" were not literally "the sons of God" but were the "sons of Seth"!!?


Oh, well. I'm good. I know what I believe and why. I quoted enough scripture to keep one busy if they truly wanted to study it out. But I am guessing that not one person that reads this post will actually take the time to look up the verses given, and therein lies the problem. Too much time spent in books by men instead of time in the book by God.

Merry Christmas!
God bless,
Calvary

[John81]

I'll try not to take you to task. You completely skipped over the entire thrust of my last post which was Eph. 4. Typical. No answer to very important flaws in your exposition of Eph 4.
Psalms 82 is where the "dull of hearing" bomb out.
Vs. 1 - The congregation of the mighty is not any congregation of earthly judges, and when "he judgeth among the gods" there is no reference to Israelite judges, or Aaron's seed or anything else. You might try looking at 1 Kings 22:19 for the Holy Spirit's description of the "congregation of the mighty".
Psalms 82:6 is where the scholarly crew lost their footing, and if you followed them, you did too. (We'll come back to that in a sec)
Did anyone notice the "Selah"? in verse 2? That is a date line for us. It is not some customary expression of a judge as he sits down in judgement to hear a case. At least not one time in the following verses (Ps. 3:7; 7:6; 9:19; 10:12; 12:5; 17:13; 44:23, 26; 68:1; 74:22) - most of you will not take the time to actually check those verse, and you wonder why you can't answer simple questions about What possible reason would Jesus have for hauling the devil back up to heaven with him, that is if you followed Covenant theologian who just mimicked the dead old Bible correcting commentaries he has on his shelf)
Vs. 8 gives us the 3rd clue as to time "For thou shalt inherit all nations" and Covenant missed it. he couldn't see the 2nd Advent because he can't see the literal, physical reign of Christ on earth for 1000 years, so what did you expect? So he limits the verse to human judges before the Church Age. Covenant couldn't see that there will be "gods" here during the Tribulation and that they will be reigning not only as kings, but as absolute authorities over all judicial matter on earth (Rev. 17:12) They will be in the same position as in Gen. 6:1-6. (Did you see the word "MIGHTY" in verse 1 of Psalm 82?)
When Christ applied the verse to human judges to prove his own deity (Johns 10:34-36), At no time did he ever say "all you Israelite judges are children of the most High". The fact is the judges in Israel were Levites, (Mal 2:4, 7, 8, Deut. 1:16, 21:5) and not one of them was a "child of God". When John uses the expression (Jn 11:52) he uses it in a Jewish sense that was not at all doctrinal. Jesus Christ Himself allows that the Jews of that time were not only NOT the "children of God" (Jn 8:42-44) they were not even the children of Abraham! (Jn 8:39)
And that's not all, "all the foundations of the earth (vs.5) were not "out of course" at any time between Asaph and Paul, and they are not "out of course" now, nor were they when Moses appointed human judges over Israel (Ex. 18:22, 25; Num 11:16-17).
Your problem Covenant is Exodus 22:28. With this, John 10:34, the teachers you follow took the opportunity to toss out the context of Psalms 82 since they couldn't understand it. The context, vs. 1, 5, 6, 8, was the 2nd Advent, and the type was "the days of Noah", for there the "gods" drowned like men (see vs 7), at least according to 2 Peter 3:6; Jude 6; Job 22:16, and Rev. 20:13.
It's called "dual application" : The judges in Israel could be "gods" in the sense that Moses was a "god" to Pharaoh and Aaron (Ex 7:1). You could be a "son" of God because you represent THE Son of God. The human judges could judge "the poor and the fatherless... the afflicted and needy... the poor and the needy." so they acted as 'gods" for these people. When Jesus quotes the passage to show that they have no right to accuse him of claiming to be something that He is not, he doesn't tell you one thing about the Psalms or what it was dealing with. When Christ said that it was written in their Law, "ye are gods" the "ye" doesn't have anything to do with anyone he is talking to.
Vs 7, BUT... listen to 4th grade English. The disjunctive conjunction "but" shows us that we are not dealing with men: there are no human judges in verse 6, 7. The contrast is between someone who might truly be a 'god" but he will die like a "man" - not a god.
The judges in Gen 6 corrupted the earth with their decisions. These supermen are identified as "gods" in Gen 3:5; Exodus 15:11; Psalms 86:8; 95:3; 136:2 (note that last one! Imagine thinking that these gods are Israelite judges!) and Jeremiah 10:11. They are called "sons of God" in Job 38:7 and Gen 6:2, so the only way most good godly Bible commentators could erase the "children of the most High" from Psalms 82:6 was to pretend that the "gods" were not literally "the sons of God" but were the "sons of Seth"!!?


Oh, well. I'm good. I know what I believe and why. I quoted enough scripture to keep one busy if they truly wanted to study it out. But I am guessing that not one person that reads this post will actually take the time to look up the verses given, and therein lies the problem. Too much time spent in books by men instead of time in the book by God.

Merry Christmas!
God bless,
Calvary

Be careful with your lumping, as I've indicated, I for one am reading and weighing (which includes studying what's presented) the arguments presented here.

[Brother Rick]

I read all the Scriptures, brother Calvary. Don't assume that we don't! :-)