Demons

[kathryn]

Hi Kathryn,

I don't know if my reply to this question will arrive before or after Rick's, but we'll all know what the other thinks soon enough!

First, I want to point out that your second sentence is based on the false premise that unless 'we' can see things the way you 'see' them, we cannot proceed further in the discussion.

What is to prevent you, Kathryn, seeing things the way Rick and I see them?Hi Charisma...I'm really sorry if I'm sounding arrogant in this. I'm just trying to get to some foundational definitions here, because if we don't , we're just throwing out our understanding without a foundation of agreement underneath us. And what if, there is more consistency in the way we see them?

The Holy Spirit says 'Amen', or, He doesn't say 'Amen', and that is part of His function. If there is no truth in the words coming forth - not just from you, but from any poster, the Holy Spirit cannot witness to it.

I do agree that it's possible to make little bits of the Bible say things they don't, especially if we cut out huge chunks so as to be left with a particular doctrinal recipe. But, we should know better than that, that God is not impressed when we treat His word that way, and we should know HIM better than that, that He has set His word above His name, and it will endure for ever. It is we who have to find out what He's saying.

When debz arrived on BWF, and posted in the thread about about Male Bias in the Bible, I agreed with her post. I didn't carry on reading the thread though, so I can only vouch for her first post (which was about Adam and Eve).

The best rule for understanding scripture is in Genesis 1:1 - In the beginning, God.

If we begin there, it is possible to get through the whole book with less rather than more misunderstanding.

So, Elohiym made Adam in His own image - male and female created He them. The 'model' for Adam, was the Son of God - the One who would become a perfect Man, even though when He did come, Paul dubs Him the last Adam. But that's because of the changes which took place in Adam because of the fall, and that afterwards, instead of bearing children in God's likeness, he bore children in his own likeness.

So, are you suggesting that Adam didn't have a soul? That only Eve had a soul? And that Eve didn't have a spirit? Or, something else?Hopefully you'll see what I was saying in my post to Rick

Anyway, which verses in the Bible suggest what you suggested above?

[heb13-13]

Hi Kathryn,

I really don't have time to clean your post up so that is why you see nothing here regarding your latest post. I could have sworn that you figured it out because that one post (#83) looked great.

I did understand quite a bit of what you were talking about in your post. See, if you talk like the Bible communicates I can understand. I did not say I agree with everything, but I do understand that language.

I do have a few questions and I think you are right, we should put it off till after Christmas. Better still, until the New Year.

Have a great rest of the year and thanks for hanging in there with Charisma and I,
Rick

[heb13-13]

Adam was innocent...but he wasn't purified. He had a corruptible heart. The heart is an aspect of the mind. There are 3 stages to redemption. Adam was in day 1.

Why would Adam need to be purifed if he was already pure and innocent. Do you mean that Adam needed to be tested, like our faith is tested? You think God wanted Adam to learn obedience by denying his flesh (Heb 5:9)?

Ok..if you like separation better , that works for me.

It's not that I like separation better, but that is what the Bible speaks about.

The whole process of cutting Covenant is seen in the passing of the light through ONE animal. If we want to understand how the process of redemption moves in us, through the Old Covenant...into the New...the 1st Adam to the 2nd...and old man to new..we need to understand what this means.

Yes, that would be great to know what "Passing of the light through ONE animal" is about. I may understand it already, but evidently not in your words/language. Charisma came up with a pretty good phrase for your language when she called it a meta-language. I agree with her, but as long as you are giving me language lessons then I will hang with you.

We see this division or separation beginning in the Genesis account, when Eve is taken from the rib of Adam.

We see separation on many levels don't we? We see separation throughout Creation. We read what God says is GOOD. This theme of separation is what God eventually uses to teach us about Holiness. Evil and Good separated. Holy from the Unholy and Profane. Ok, I am getting off on a tangent. Back to your statements.

Eve was taken from Adam but they were If you look at the word for "side" in the Holy Place..or soul realm...it is "rib".

You lost me here. Did you mean to type some more words? Can you show me a scripture or two. What do you mean by Holy Place? Tabernacle, Temple? Are you talking about the side walls in the Temple are called a "rib". How do you know this?

These are all spiritual concepts that we must understand before we can go anywhere with the study of satan/demons. As I said...I think it best that we leave it for after Christmas. Once you begin to see that it is all laid out on a grid of 3, corresponding to our triune nature...spirit, soul, body...it becomes much clearer. It's just establishing the grid that takes a bit of time and the plummet has to begin in the Law to see what was fulfilled and how.

Ok, after Christmas, we'll talk, I mean the New Year. New Year is better for me. I really want to see why the "plummet line" begins in the Law, especially since we are all children of Abraham by faith and he was before the Law. And the law of separation was given to us in Creation and many other things were introduced to us in Genesis.

And still don't know if you think Satan and demons are fallen angels which are spiritual beings. But I guess we'll get to that because you can't really say that right now, right? You want to develop something that shows me what they are (to you), I don't know, something else, thoughts or something.

OK, let this discussion rest till later,
Rick

[kathryn]

Hi Rick....Your first question was "Why did Adam have to be purified when he was already pure and innocent."

He was innocent...as we all are when we're born but in order for God to Glorify/purify/perfect His Sons/Daughters....the light which was separated from the darkness, had to then "move through the pieces" of our Atoms/Adams. This (the Glorification of matter) was why all Creation had to be separated or divided. This is the process of the cutting of the Covenant...and the passing of the smoking torch/light, between the pieces.

Both men and women, when they have finished the refining process, will have a consummated or integrated heart/mind. Both Adam and Eve had a male/heart spirit and feminine soul. However...in type, Adam represents the male/spirit...Eve, the feminine soul...which is separated. In the 3rd phase or day of redemption, "Eve" is moved back into Adam. We become One, as Jesus prayed to the Father, before the Cross. When He was pierced in his side...it broke through or separated (pierced) the membrane of the heart, bringing forth blood and water. This allowed His Bride/Body to "return"...or be re-mem-bered back to Him, in At-one-ment.

This separation included our virgin subconscious mind, from our conscious mind. (or Holy of Holies, from the Holy Place). This was why Jesus said we must become "like a child". A child is born thinking inductively, from the subconscious. When David's Tabernacle is "raised" from its "fallen" state...the outer court (mortality) and the Holy Place is no longer standing. We become the Mind of Christ, within a fully integrated body/soul/spirit. (David's Tabernacle, unlike Mose's Tabernacle, only had a Holy of Holies. There was no veil, no curtains...no sacrificial system. BOTH men and women were allowed to enter. Both Tabernacles were in use at the same time.)

Rick: You lost me here. Did you mean to type some more words? Can you show me a scripture or two. What do you mean by Holy Place? Tabernacle, Temple? Are you talking about the side walls in the Temple are called a "rib".yes How do you know this? It is the definition of the word "side" in the description of the Holy Place. I will find it and include it when I've finished this. By the Holy Place...I mean the second or MIDDLE part of the layout of the Temple/Tabernacle: the outer court/Holy Place/Holy of Holies. (keep that "middle" in mind, because it is one of the most important concepts in typology. It describes our "midst" which must be purified. It is the "midst" of the Jordan, the "midst" of the candlesticks...etc. It is where the Light passes between our "pieces" that have been separated.)

[quote}These are all spiritual concepts that we must understand before we can go anywhere with the study of satan/demons. As I said...I think it best that we leave it for after Christmas. Once you begin to see that it is all laid out on a grid of 3, corresponding to our triune nature...spirit, soul, body...it becomes much clearer. It's just establishing the grid that takes a bit of time and the plummet has to begin in the Law to see what was fulfilled and how. [/quote]


Ok, after Christmas, we'll talk, I mean the New Year. New Year is better for me. I really want to see why the "plummet line" begins in the Law, especially since we are all children of Abraham by faith and he was before the Law. And the law of separation was given to us in Creation and many other things were introduced to us in Genesis.
After the resurrection, Jesus opened the disciples eyes by revealing Himself in the Law of Moses. He wasn't taking them back under it; He was revealing Himself in it and showing them what had just been given back to them, and what He had fulfilled at the Cross. Remember David said he loved God's Law. It is far from just a set of rules. You can't understand the Revelation of Jesus Christ, without the plummet.

And still don't know if you think Satan and demons are fallen angels which are spiritual beings. But I guess we'll get to that because you can't really say that right now, right? You want to develop something that shows me what they are (to you), I don't know, something else, thoughts or something. I didn't say they weren't fallen angels...I just want to get on some common foundation first.

OK, let this discussion rest till later,
Rick

[kathryn]

Rick, this was taken from a post on the Matt. 17:27 thread . It will explain the "rib" .


[QUOTE=Bob May;36707]Hi Kathryn and all,
First, let me ask where is the description of David's Tabernacle?
Hi Bob..sorry for the delay in answering this. As you've already noticed, there is little in scripture describing the physical appearance of David's Tabernacle. What is to be found is in 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles. We know it was a tent pitched on Mt. Zion...a curtain or curtains stretched out, encircling the ark which stood in the midst of the tent/tabernacle. There was no outer court or Holy Place and no sacrificial system in place. It is a type of the Holy of Holies, as it held the ark and therefore we must look at the pattern given for the Holy of Holies in the Tabernacle of Moses,(which was in use at the same time with the sacrificial system in place) to understand it.

For the sake of brevity, I'll just examine one area, one word ..."side". The word "side" in the description the Outer Court is "katheph". In relation to the human body, this is the "shoulders" (3802)
In the Holy Place, the word "side" is "tesla" which is the "rib". (6763)
For the Holy of Holies, it is "yerekah" (3411) from root (3409) ..to be soft/loins or generative part..."thigh" .
The Tabernacle/temple as we've discussed in previous posts, is a type of the feminine body. The ark, (a type of egg/ovum) in which were the rod (penis) tablets of TESTImony (stones.testes..testicles) and manna (seed..like coriander)

When you remove the outer court and the Holy Place, you are left with the two sides or "thighs" at the western end and the "womb"/Holy of Holies containing the Ark. Keep in mind that there was no access to the Holy of Holies, from the Holy Place. The only way in was between the sides or thighs of the western curtain or veil.

Hopefully this will be enough to give you the gist of it for now.
I'll try to comment on the rest of your posts evening. Weekends are hectic around here...and I've already been bumped off twice trying to post this:-)
Edit Post Reply With Quote

[kathryn]

Rick: I really want to see why the "plummet line" begins in the Law, especially since we are all children of Abraham by faith and he was before the Law. And the law of separation was given to us in Creation and many other things were introduced to us in Genesis.

Just wanted to mention that God's Law is describing the eternal character and purposes of God. Jesus was slain before the foundation of the World. We are so used to reading the written Logos sequentially from our conscious mind which reasons deductively.

So...looking at it from this perspective, the plummet line goes down in the eternal heart of His character and purposes. The knowledge of the Law was given for the same reason the Tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil was placed in Adam's "midst"....to RIPEN the condition of iniquity (separation) within mankind, so the "tares"(carnal mindsets) could be removed and burnt and the "wheat" harvested and placed in the "barn".


The knowledge of good and evil wasn't bad in itself. It was death to Adam/Eve because their heart/mind had yet to be consummated with Light (integrated) to understand it. The Law is Spiritual..of the HOLY, WHOLE Spirit, and can only be understood by Him. The whole process of redemption is a "weighing" of thoughts/spirit, with our inner divine Law in our virgin subconscious. The Word made Flesh has always been "in and through" us. As we grow in knowledge and understanding of God Love, this Law is made flesh on the tablets of our Heart.

The 1st Adam had to die, just as the 2nd Adam. However, the "seed" of the 2nd Adam, when fully matured, turns around that "integrated circuit" and raises the "seed" of the 1st Adam.

[heb13-13]

Hi Kathryn,

I just wanted to acknowledge that I read your posts and will re-read later when I have some time. I guess we will continue , but maybe at a slower pace.

Have a great day,
Rick

[kathryn]

Hi Kathryn,

I just wanted to acknowledge that I read your posts and will re-read later when I have some time. I guess we will continue , but maybe at a slower pace.
Thanks Dear Bro...and thanks again for your patience, willingness and openness. You are an inspiration! PS...5th week and still holding with that prayer
Have a great day,
Rick

[Beck]

Hi Beck,

I've just read your short thread on Jude 1:6 and other verses in Jude and elsewhere, such as this which you said:
For me, it is very simple to sort out the discussion which Christians seem to entertain themselves by, about men and angels; this way. This is the teaching of Jesus Christ. We do not need to guess, and there is not higher authority.

Mark 12:23 In the resurrection therefore, when they shall rise, whose wife shall she be of them? for the seven had her to wife. 24 And Jesus answering said unto them, Do ye not therefore err, because ye know not the scriptures, neither the power of God? 25 For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven. 26 And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? 27 He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err.

What we learn from this passage is, that angels are not given in marriage. That is a complete declaration of truth. It is not open to negotiation.

Therefore (just in passing), in Genesis 6:4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare [children] to them, the same [became] mighty men which [were] of old, men of renown. The same became men which were of old, men of renown.

Regarding angels, we learn what they are in Hebrews 1:5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son? 6 And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him. 7 And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire. 8 But unto the Son [he saith], Thy throne, O God, [is] for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness [is] the sceptre of thy kingdom. 9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, [even] thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. 10 And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands: 11 They shall perish; but thou remainest; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment; 12 And as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail. 13 But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool? 14 Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation? See also Psalm 2.


This is an important passage of scripture for those who have been taught (or want to believe) that Jesus was an angel, or, that He was not a complete man, or, that He was not completely God. The writer sets angels in one category and 'the Son' in another - higher than the angels. 'Let all the angels of God worship Him'.

Hi Charisma,


Have you considered the discussion by Rose in the thread Luke 20:27-38 and the resurrection. She refers back Don Preston's book "Then comes the End". Which I think is a great insight into what Jesus was saying about marriage in the new age, But as to angels (Messengers) it relates to those that bring the word of God to his people. In many of these cases that 'angel' is used it denotes these Messengers to which some are known as False Messengers. Case in point is those in the wilderness that taught that they couldn't take the promise land (Heb.3-4) and in Noah's day to which Peter said that there were angles ( False Messengers/ Prophets) among them even as there shall be false teachers among you. (2 Peter 2:1-22)

The high places that these Messangers had was that of the likes of a Prophet or those of the Temple like unto the Preist of even the High Preist. These Messengers are therefore in higher positions that man. Paul taught that they were rulers in high places of darkness.

Regarding the placing of angels instead of people into the text in Ephesians, there is nothing in the context to justify that. Paul is writing to a church - a group of believers. From start to finish he anchors them in Christ, now part of the commonwealth of Israel with access by the Holy Spirit to the Father, and now separate from Gentiles who don't believe in Jesus. By the time Paul gets to chapter four he has prayed for them twice, (We don't pray for angels.) and begun to give them practical advice about how to comport themselves to the glory of Christ.

In chapter five, v 9, he refers to the fruit of the Spirit. This is something that only those who are grafted into Christ, can bear. Only in chapter six, v 12, does he specifically mention non-human powers - and principalities (realms of domination by spiritual powers) - and the rulers of darkness of this world.

The people in Ephesians aren't demons, if that's what you're asking.

I believe you missed understood me. I agree that Paul was teaching the Ephesians that they should walk by faith through the Spirit and that they would come against the wickeness of this world. That they would battle not against flesh and blood, but against evil spirits, spiritual wickedness. The power of the rulers of darkness those that sit in high places governing over them. So I'm not saying that the saints at Ephesians were demons, but that those children of disobedence having not Christ in them is what brings about their persecutions as an evil spirit (demon) having their father Satan. Therefore put on the whole armour of God for it is an spiritual warfare.

It is true that 'angel' means 'messenger', and this is a key meaning picked up at the end of Hebrews 1, 'Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?' v 14 So, we see that in general, angels are lower than both Jesus Christ, and people, although they are much stronger than us.

We all should be able to discern the spirits to see which it is, good or evil.

God has permitted demons to afflict people who refuse to bow to Him in obedience, and sometimes He directs them, but usually, it's simply a spiritual law in action. The earth has been infested with demons (since before Adam was formed), and the whole globe parceled up (divided) under Satan's command, so that those who do not come under the shadow of God's wings, are vulnerable to them.

In time past, the Law represented the shadow of His wings. Now, Jesus Christ Himself is our strength, if we abide in Him and walk in the light as He is in the light.

Do you see how Paul spoke of the evil spirits that sit in high places. Paul just had told the Ephesians that they would sit together with Christ in heavenly (high) places. What to you are these high places from a scriptual point of view?

[Beck]

Hi Beck,

This same reference gives them the power of sights: "And when they saw Him." The philosophy of it we can not explain. We believe the record. But there is no more difficulty in believing that demons can see, than believing that the eyes of the Lord, who is without body or parts, who is a Spirit, can run to and fro through the earth beholding the evil and the good: "Thou God seest me." The fact is, Jesus addressed demons as seeing, hearing, intelligent personalities, with powers of judgment, discrimination and memory, like any other personality. He charged the demons not to make him known. To fulfill such a charge they must be intelligent personalities, with powers of mind and communication. Demons are not mere Satanic influences. They have all the characteristics attributed to them that go with personality. The replies of the demons to Jesus were couched in intelligent language. Matt. 8:29.

Hi Rick,

You do realize that you are using metaphoric language (eyes of the Lord, who is without body or parts, who is a Spirit, can run to and fro through the earth beholding the evil and the good) and trying to deem it to be literal.

[/U]Destructiveness
The demon teareth him, throweth him into the fire, and into the water and driveth into violent, unreasonable rage (it may perchance be about some very trifling matter). The Garadene illustrates the destructiveness of evil spirits. He was forced to lacerate himself. Again, demons lack the sense of decency and inspire their victim to go nude, to wear no clothes. This fact may throw some light on nudity in modern dress and styles, as also the nudity in so-called high art, which is low art. Demons are unclean and lustful. Christ calls them "foul spirits," "unclean spirits." Thus they work in the realm of lust.

http://www.swartzentrover.com/cotor/...n/DALindex.htm

All the best,
Rick

As I go over more from that book it seems that I disagree more and more. Case in point is his understanding of Luke 16 about the Rich man and Lazarus He tries to apply that literally when it's a parable and here how he attemps to apply not wearing clothes and nudity to lustfullness of the physical body. I don't see that at all, but rather see that to mean they were showing their sins.(symbolically) The same application that Jesus used in Revelation to the church at Laodicea if they bought of God in that they would be given white reinments (righteousness) rather than showing their nakeness (sins).

So from the very start (if you agree with him) his applications are in error.