Demons

[duxrow]

OFFERED his daughters? Doesn't read that way to me -- he got drunk and hormones took over. The daughters seemed to think they weren't any more men left to be their husbands -- that the S&G destruction was world-wide maybe.. Makes for interesting and thoughtful reading, to me.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

OFFERED his daughters? Doesn't read that way to me -- he got drunk and hormones took over. The daughters seemed to think they weren't any more men left to be their husbands -- that the S&G destruction was world-wide maybe.. Makes for interesting and thoughtful reading, to me.

Rose was talking about the time when Lot offered his daughters to be raped by the mob ...

NIV Genesis 19:8 Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you can do what you like with them. But don't do anything to these men, for they have come under the protection of my roof."

[Charisma]

Hello - Kathryn, Rick, dux, Richard and all,

Beginning back on p7 I'm checking in to see if there are points I could or should answer.

To Kathryn,

You asked when you had ever said God is divided.

Well, because I'm basing my thesis on scripture only, you did by that standard, when you said:

No...the Serpent is Wisdom. Wisdom had to be divided . Wisdom is the tree of Life...the divided tree, the knowledge of good and evil.

First, I don't accept that the serpent in Wisdom with a capital w, nor that wisdom has ever been divided - depending on how you're defining 'wisdom' - as long as not 'the serpent'. The NT says that all wisdom is hidden in Jesus Christ. There is also a spiritual gift of wisdom, and, Jesus said: But wisdom is justified of her children. Matthew 11:19 By 'children', Jesus means fruit.

Jesus spoke of fruit on a tree being the means to know which is a good tree, and which is an evil tree.

He most particularly never suggested that trees of different kinds would become one. He uses that picture as an irony, because he was speaking to those who KNEW what He was telling them was true in their own experience.

It seems ironic to be telling 21st century people the same thing, in an attempt to bring them out of fantasy, to reality. Luke 6:44 For every tree is known by his own fruit. For of thorns men do not gather figs, nor of a bramble bush gather they grapes.

Regarding the trees, in the Bible, the tree of life is Jesus Christ, and by association, so is the Tree on which He died.

In the Garden of Eden, the tree of life was reached by a different path than the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, even if there is a common path leading to where a choice has to be made to finish the journey at one tree or the other.

That's why Paul can say assuredly, that those who do not receive the love of the truth (love of the tree of life) can never find the tree of life. 2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3 without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, 4 traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; 5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. 6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, 7 ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. 2 Timothy 3.

2 Thessalonians 2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. This is a group of verses which militate entirely against universalist interpretations.

So, when you emphatically state, 'No, the Serpent is Wisdom', followed by 'Wisdom is the tree of Life...the divided tree, the knowledge of good and evil,' you are speaking an entirely different language from scripture - but you seem unaware that you are.

You then say:

Satan is a divided spirit that has no agreement with the Holy WHOLE/ONE Spirit.

This I can agree with you there, because the Holy Spirit only ever testifies of the Father, and the Son, and Jesus said: Mark 4:23 And he called them [scribes and Pharisees] [unto him], and said unto them in parables, How can Satan cast out Satan? 24 And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. 25 And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand. 26 And if Satan rise up against himself, and be divided, he cannot stand, but hath an end.

We eat of his fruit, until we finish the refinement stage.

This I don't agree. I am not eating of the tree of the knowledge of evil at all, although I may be lopping off its branches ready for burning. (Note, Jesus says 'men gather them'.) When John Baptist said: Luke 3:9 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: every tree therefore which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire, he was speaking ahead of the work of the cross, to cut down the tree of the knowledge of good and evil which the serpent once inhabited. Titus 1:15 Unto the pure all things [are] pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving [is] nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled. Now, those who identify with Christ's death, have been released from the power of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and they abide in the true Vine, Jesus Christ, and they bring forth fruit unto holiness (Rom 6:22) - fruit unto God (Rom 7:4)- fruit that will remain. John 15:8 Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit; so shall ye be my disciples.

Romans 6:22 But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.

I hope you're beginning to see how different your 'gospel' is from Jesus Christ's and Paul the apostle's?

"WHEN I be lifted up...AS THE SERPENT/SON OF GOD...I will drag all men to myself

Kathryn, the only 'dragging' of anything is the serpent, who goes on his belly, in the dust.

Men, burdened by sin, may seem to be dragging themselves to Jesus, but they do so willingly, when they see in Him the end of all their sorrows.

While we're talking about him (the serpent), Ezekiel 28 has a great deal to say about his mindset. I'm particularly fond of where he meets his end (which some through worship of him also experience), 18 Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick; therefore will I bring forth a fire from the midst of thee, it shall devour thee, and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee. 19 All they that know thee among the people shall be astonished at thee: thou shalt be a terror, and never [shalt] thou [be] any more. And so -

Death is swallowed up in victory. 1 Corinthians 15:54, Isaiah 25:8;

Our God is a consuming fire. Hebrews 12:29.

[duxrow]

My error -- jumping to conclusions, thinking of the OTHER.. Scuse, plz. That WAS a horrific account and one I'm not wanting to justify in any way. But about the Seed of Gal 3, and the notoriety you speak of, it's the first I've heard of it. My view of the seed is that it was passed down from father-to-son all the way from Adam to Noah to David to Zorobabel -- but never to Jesus, because the seed from God was what impregnated Mary. *If I'm not on the wrong page again - ha* ?

[Richard Amiel McGough]

My error -- jumping to conclusions, thinking of the OTHER.. Scuse, plz. That WAS a horrific account and one I'm not wanting to justify in any way. But about the Seed of Gal 3, and the notoriety you speak of, it's the first I've heard of it. My view of the seed is that it was passed down from father-to-son all the way from Adam to Noah to David to Zorobabel -- but never to Jesus, because the seed from God was what impregnated Mary. *If I'm not on the wrong page again - ha* ?

No worries bro! We all make mistakes. I'm glad you don't want to try to justify the unjustifiable. But it does evoke the question about why the Bible so strongly emphasizes that Lot was "righteous" -

2 Peter 2:7 and delivered righteous Lot, who was oppressed by the filthy conduct of the wicked 8 (for that righteous man, dwelling among them, tormented his righteous soul from day to day by seeing and hearing their lawless deeds) -- 9 then the Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of temptations and to reserve the unjust under punishment for the day of judgment,

What kind of "righteous" man would offer his two daughters to be raped by a mob? Something just ain't right here ...

As for Galatians 3:16 ~ that verse bugged me from the first time I read it because I knew it was bad logic. And as it turns out, it's bugged pretty much everyone who has ever read it, and it's extra weird because Paul himself frequently used the word "seed" in the singular to refer to all believers and not just Christ himself so he seemed to contradict himself on top of making a bad argument! Now it looks like a train wreck.

As for the "seed of David" - if the "seed" was passed down father to son, then the chain was broken at Mary and so how could Christ be called the "seed of David?" She was "David's see" but Christ was not. I don't know how folks solve this problem.

[CWH]

Rose was talking about the time when Lot offered his daughters to be raped by the mob ...

NIV Genesis 19:8 Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you can do what you like with them. But don't do anything to these men, for they have come under the protection of my roof."

What kind of "righteous" man would offer his two daughters to be raped by a mob? Something just ain't right here ...

Genesis 19:6 Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him 7 and said, 'No, my friends. Don’t do this wicked thing.

Homosexual sex with angels was considered as "this wicked thing" by righteous Lot.

I have said before and it is easy to understand why Lot offered his daughters. In the back of his head, Lot probably knew the homosexuals would not be interested in the opposite sex and that offer was probably a distraction so as to buy time for the angels to escape. The two men were angels (representatives from God), and it will be less sinful to let the men have sex with the opposite sex (in the event that they were interested in Lot's daughters) than to have sex with the same sex who were God's representatives. Lot would have offered himself if he was much younger then but the mob were only interested in the two young angels. Homosexual relationships with angels would have incur greater sin and wrath from God on these perverted homosexual men.

Imagine the President of the United States visiting your house and the men outside your house were forcing and insisting to have sex with him, what would you do? Perhaps offer yourself or your children or other alternatives so as to buy time for the President to escape or be rescue from the perverted homosexual mob (that would be a very heroic act!). It is a greater crime to rape the President of the United States than to rape a common US citizen.

God Blessed and wishing all a Happy New Year.

[heb13-13]

No worries bro! We all make mistakes. I'm glad you don't want to try to justify the unjustifiable. But it does evoke the question about why the Bible so strongly emphasizes that Lot was "righteous" -

2 Peter 2:7 and delivered righteous Lot, who was oppressed by the filthy conduct of the wicked 8 (for that righteous man, dwelling among them, tormented his righteous soul from day to day by seeing and hearing their lawless deeds) -- 9 then the Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of temptations and to reserve the unjust under punishment for the day of judgment,

What kind of "righteous" man would offer his two daughters to be raped by a mob? Something just ain't right here ...

Hi Richard,

I too, had never thought of Lot as Righteous, but upon further reflection and more miles under my feet, I think I may understand a bit more than I previously did.

When Abraham answered the Lord's call and left Haran, Lot also left with him. This act by Abraham to leave his home (Haran) by faith for "the promised land", is referred to by Paul in Hebrews 11:8 as one of the great acts of faith. Lot was the nephew of Abraham and left Haran, also.

Heb 11:8
By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.

If Abraham is credited with faith for leaving Haran, then why not Lot, too? It doesn't work to say he was younger and had no choice because his sister Milcah was left behind. So, Lot did have a choice and chose to leave with Abraham. This is no less faith than what Abraham exhibited. I think the only reason that Lot's faith was not talked about is because he did not continue to grow/mature spiritually. You could even say that his faith was deteriorating with his ongoing association with the Sodomites. Peter judges him "just" and "righteous" but as you continue to read about Lot you realize that "righteous" does not necessarily equate to being right. We see that in David's life, also. David's and Lot's righteousness is related to their heart's intent. The word vexed is used twice in 2 Peter 2:7-8. The first time it means that Lot was oppressed and the second time it means that he was tormented by the wickedness that surrounded him. However, his decisions were not right/correct decisions. So, Paul gives Abraham praise concerning his faith, but does not mention Lot. Abraham's faith continued to grow and mature.

Also, unlike Lot's son-in-laws, Lot did leave Sodom. His son-in-laws chose to stay but they thought Lot was mocking when he said they should leave. So, they probably thought Lot was a hypocrite. Yeah, why leave now, Lot? Also, Lot sat in the gate (Gen 19:1) and one that sat in the gate of a city was someone that usually had a place of prominence or is an elder or leader in the city. So, it seems that Lot had much invested in Sodom and must have had the acceptance of many in order to be raised up to "sit in the gate." Unlike his wife who looked back at Sodom, longingly, Lot did not look back. He also lied about his two daughters saying they never knew any men, Gen 19:8 (because he had son-in-laws), but he told the men outside "not to do this wicked thing". Lot seems very inconsistent and made a lot of bad decisions and was not right in many things. I think he was a man of weak faith whose heart was mainly captured by prosperity and position. He had moments of faith, but they were few and far between. Lot did not mature in the Lord.

Great question, Richard. My family and I had a very lively discussion about this tonight. My oldest daughter and wife don't know why Peter calls him righteous except maybe because Peter says Lot was vexed from the wickedness around him. I see that Lot had moments of faith in his life but he was not consistent. He made many wrong decisions, but God knows the heart and will always and only be the Judge of men's hearts.

We don't know about Lot's judgment in the Lord's eyes but we do know that God does not hide the story of Lot from us and we can learn from his mistakes (not to repeat them). But regarding Lot's judgement or ours, Paul's words in 2 Cor 8:12 are comforting. "For if there be first a willing mind, it is accepted according to that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not."

I did see your other rather lengthy question to me, today and it touches on many subjects so hang tight.

All the best my friend,
Rick

[kathryn]

Rick:
Why was a Serpent used in the garden? Because that is what Satan was. A "Nachash", Seraphim, Serpent. It is very clear that Satan is a fallen angel.

Hi Rick...could you explain why you believe satan is a fallen angel?

[kathryn]

[QUOTE=Charisma;39979]Hello - Kathryn, Rick, dux, Richard and all,

Beginning back on p7 I'm checking in to see if there are points I could or should answer.

To Kathryn,

You asked when you had ever said God is divided.

Well, because I'm basing my thesis on scripture only, you did by that standard, when you said:
First, I don't accept that the serpent in Wisdom with a capital w, nor that wisdom has ever been divided - depending on how you're defining 'wisdom' - as long as not 'the serpent'. The NT says that all wisdom is hidden in Jesus Christ. There is also a spiritual gift of wisdom, and, Jesus said: But wisdom is justified of her children. Matthew 11:19 By 'children', Jesus means fruit.

Hi Charisma....It is divided in how it is appropriated by the carnal mind. By the same token, it gives birth to divided thought. Please note...I never said that wisdom was the serpent; I said the serpent was wisdom divided.

Jesus spoke of fruit on a tree being the means to know which is a good tree, and which is an evil tree.

the tree of the knowledge of good and evil wasn't an "evil" tree. It was death to Adam and Eve because they lacked the ability to integrate the knowledge.

He most particularly never suggested that trees of different kinds would become one. He uses that picture as an irony, because he was speaking to those who KNEW what He was telling them was true in their own experience. No...He never said this because at that point in their progress of the renewal of mind, they couldn't "bear" the knowledge. Few can bear it still. Let me ask you something Charisma...have you ever wondered what the many things were that Jesus said He had to tell them, but they couldn't bear it at the time? Doesn't this suggest to you that the obvious you seem to demand, isn't all there is? It will NEVER contradict the written Logos but the Word made Flesh will transcend it.

It seems ironic to be telling 21st century people the same thing, in an attempt to bring them out of fantasy, to reality. Luke 6:44 For every tree is known by his own fruit. For of thorns men do not gather figs, nor of a bramble bush gather they grapes.

Regarding the trees, in the Bible, the tree of life is Jesus Christ, and by association, so is the Tree on which He died. Yes...and it's the river of Life that brings us death. What ultimately crucified Him was the carnal mind of man working in accordance with the will of God. I'm glad you're beginning to see the "two sided coin" concept.

In the Garden of Eden, the tree of life was reached by a different path than the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, even if there is a common path leading to where a choice has to be made to finish the journey at one tree or the other.

They were both in the MIDST of the garden. This is key in understanding the concept of the two trees. When Adam and Eve ate of the fruit of the tree of good and evil, they appropriated Godly knowledge that they couldn't interpret or integrate. The knowledge of God is Life.

That's why Paul can say assuredly, that those who do not receive the love of the truth (love of the tree of life) can never find the tree of life. 2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3 without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, 4 traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; 5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. 6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, 7 ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. 2 Timothy 3.

2 Thessalonians 2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: 12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness. This is a group of verses which militate entirely against universalist interpretations.

divided from rhema and other scriptures, yes.

[kathryn]

Just a few more comments on your post Charisma...you mentioned the "thorns" not producing figs (etc). It was the crown of thorns placed on Jesus' head that symbolizes the narrow way we are birthed into the Mind of Christ. (and it is indeed a wall or ring of fire)
It was Paul's thorn in his side, which God refused to remove, that was used as a tool to buffet his carnal mind.
Sinai, where the Law was given, means: my thorns.
There is nothing in creation that is evil in and of itself except a lie.
You can tame a serpent (James) but a tongue speaking lies(vain imaginations) from a carnal mind/uncircumcised heart, is evil and defiles us.


Pro 15:4 A WHOLEsome tongue is a tree of life: but perverseness therein is a breach in the spirit.

Another question: Have you ever had a rhema/revelation word, that a person is a "child of wrath" or "damned" and therefore excluded in redemption? Or any rhema, for that matter, that did anything but enlarge your understanding of God's Love for you and His Creation? I assume you've been a believer for some time. If the answer is no, and I trust it is, don't you think it's time you questioned why?