- This topic has 417 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 5 months ago by
.
- Posts
Hi nate, Is 1:18
About Joshua 5…
Quote (Is 1:18 @ Sep. 18 2004,21:46)
The context of the passage, to me, indicates that Joshua was in the presence of someone much greater than an angel.
I think the angel was probably the one who bore the name of God from Exodus 23, and spoke and acted on his behalf:Quote 20 ¶ Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared.
21 Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him.
22 But if thou shalt indeed obey his voice, and do all that I speak; then I will be an enemy unto thine enemies, and an adversary unto thine adversaries.
“The great prince which standeth for the children of thy people”, alias the angel in Joshua 5, Exodus 3, Genesis 18, and Zechariah 3 etc, is named as Michael in Daniel 12:1. Happily, this fits perfectly with my understanding of Jude 9, which also identifies Michael.Sam
hey is 1:18,
yeh i find christophany interesting too… i think the ot is full of it, if we but search…
hey sam,
Quote
I checked the Septuagint, and the word for “thee” (in “the Lord rebuke thee”), soi, is definitely in Zechariah as well as Jude.the septuagint is a greek translation of the hebrew, and there's no guarantee that it is a) accurate or b) seeing as it originated in egypt, that it was used by the apostles… but whether or not is irrelevant – the hebrew phrase in zechariah differs from the greek phrase in jude.
Quote
“The great prince which standeth for the children of thy people”, alias the angel in Joshua 5, Exodus 3, Genesis 18, and Zechariah 3 etc, is named as Michael in Daniel 12:1. Happily, this fits perfectly with my understanding of Jude 9, which also identifies Michael.i have to disagree – daniel refers to michael as you say, but josh 5 refers to the captain of the god's hosts, exodus 3 is the angel of the lord, and genesis 18 refers to the lord appearing as a man… there is no indication, or even similarity to suggest that this is michael as spoken of by daniel…
as to the pigs… i can't see why jesus would give the man a sign that he'd been healed other than that he was healed, seeing as he refused to give the scribes and pharisees a sign…
what i want from you sam is:
evidence that the devil does not exists.
evidence that the devil was not once an angel.
evidence that the devil did not fall from heaven.
an explanation of why god is used to describe the one true god and the men and other beings (which apparently do not even exist).
evidence that god exists.
evidence that the bible is true.
evidence that you exist in anything more than a metaphorical sense.
…and this list could be longer – in fact it could go on forever, because it is a useless list. “faith is the evidence of things unseen”. i'm sick of trying to prove what i believe, and listening to you try to prove what you believe, when each of our arguments sound faulty in the other's ears, and when i don't really care whether you agree with me or not anyway…
cheers,
nate.
Hi nate,
Quote (nate @ Sep. 20 2004,01:12) the septuagint is a greek translation of the hebrew, and there's no guarantee that it is a) accurate
Except for the places where it's quoted by the apostles, I agree.Quote (nate @ Sep. 20 2004,01:12) or b) seeing as it originated in egypt, that it was used by the apostles…
Sure there is, the apostles quoted from it all the time – 90 times I'm told: http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Quotati….stamentQuote (nate @ Sep. 20 2004,01:12) but whether or not is irrelevant – the hebrew phrase in zechariah differs from the greek phrase in jude.
I doubt if you know enough about languages to back that up, and if he was quoting from the Septuagint, which apparantly NT writers generally did, then I don't see much of a discrepancy.There's also an allusion to Zechariah 3:5 in Jude 23, which fits nicely.
Why don't you do a search on google? You'll find there's very wide support that Jude quotes Zechariah, across many (wildly disagreeing!) denominations.
Quote (nate @ Sep. 20 2004,01:12) i have to disagree – daniel refers to michael as you say, but josh 5 refers to the captain of the god's hosts, exodus 3 is the angel of the lord, and genesis 18 refers to the lord appearing as a man… there is no indication, or even similarity to suggest that this is michael as spoken of by daniel…
Well, I think there is:- There was an angel that went before Israel in the wilderness, bearing God's name and speaking for God (Exodus 23:20-22).
- Therefore, whenever we read an angel speaking as if he were God himself (Genesis 18, Exodus 3, Zechariah 3), then chances are that it's this same angel of Exodus 23. I mean, where else do we read of an angel of whom God specifically says, “He speaks as if he's me”?
- The angel in Joshua 5 was the “captain of the LORD's host”. Since the Exodus 23 angel has led Israel all the way through the wilderness for 40 years, it seems pretty reasonable to see him still leading Israel at the very climax of their wanderings.
- He also makes reference to “holy ground” (Joshua 5:15), just like in Exodus 3. It would fit nicely if these were the same angel, which we've already identified as the angel of Exodus 23.
- So who is the “captain of the LORD's host”? There's a similar phrase used of Michael in Daniel 12: “the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people”.
- The Exodus 23 angel appears in Zechariah 3, because he speaks as he if is God himself. This angel is identified as Michael in Jude 9.
Don't you think it all ties together perfectly?
Quote (nate @ Sep. 20 2004,01:12) as to the pigs… i can't see why jesus would give the man a sign that he'd been healed other than that he was healed, seeing as he refused to give the scribes and pharisees a sign…
Fine if you had a withered hand – you'd just look down at your hand, and see you were healed. Fine if you were blind – you'd be able to see. It would be a little less obvious if were schizophrenic or something, and I can well imagine the man's desire to see a physical sign as proof he really was ok now. As to Jesus not giving signs, surely every miracle he did was a sign (Acts 2:22)?Quote (nate @ Sep. 20 2004,01:12) what i want from you sam is: evidence that the devil does not exists.
- We never read of its history, ever, in the entire Bible. Not once do we read that he was an angel; not once do we read that he fell from heaven. Mythology fills the gaps.
- Man is tempted when he is drawn away of his own lust (James 1), and is more than capable of doing this on his own. A devil would be completely redundant.
- In fact, when James describes the process of temptation, he doesn't even mention the devil.
- Satan is clearly not a proper noun for an immortal being. It is used of a righteous angel, men and God himself. It's just a word that means “adversary”.
- Devil is clearly not a proper noun for an immortal being. It is used of regular men and women. It's just a word that means “slanderer”.
- However, often in the New Testament, sin is personified as the devil (eg compare Hebrews 2:14 with Hebrews 9:26, Romans 5:21, 6:23). This is not unique – wisdom is personified too – and is a very powerful metaphor.
Quote (nate @ Sep. 20 2004,01:12) evidence that the devil was not once an angel.
The Bible never claims that the devil was an angel. Don't you think that's compelling?Quote (nate @ Sep. 20 2004,01:12) evidence that the devil did not fall from heaven.
The Bible never claims that he did.Quote (nate @ Sep. 20 2004,01:12) an explanation of why god is used to describe the one true god and the men and other beings (which apparently do not even exist). evidence that god exists.
evidence that the bible is true.
evidence that you exist in anything more than a metaphorical sense.
Honestly, I'm not with you.Quote (nate @ Sep. 20 2004,01:12) …and this list could be longer – in fact it could go on forever, because it is a useless list. “faith is the evidence of things unseen”.
Yeah – but faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. That's why I can't accept that a supernatural devil exists, I just don't see it in God's word, I really don't.Quote (nate @ Sep. 20 2004,01:12) i'm sick of trying to prove what i believe, and listening to you try to prove what you believe, when each of our arguments sound faulty in the other's ears, and when i don't really care whether you agree with me or not anyway…
Well then, I guess that's that
God bless you nate,
SamAngel means messenger.In the Bible the terms 'Angel of the Lord' and 'Angel of God' occur nearly 80 times and that is in the NT and OT.Those that say it is a term for the Lord are distorting scripture. If it is then every one of the references must apply to the Lord or there is confusion. In which case then there are no true Angels of God-who believes that?
The messengers bring God's words to men as well as fulfilling the will of God in other ways. But they give that message in different ways. In some verses they act as mouthpieces, God speaking directly through them and at other times they quote the message from God.
It does confuse the recipient at times and many times in the OT people thought they had spoken with and seen God and were surprised they had survived. Also Joshua is said to have wrestled with the Lord but in another description he is said to have wrestled with an angel.
These are mighty beings and superior to natural man and also even to Jesus [Heb 1]when He lived among us. But when we are baptised into the resurrected Lord we are above them and they serve us and carry our prayers into God's presence.
hey sam,
Quote
Honestly, I'm not with you.Quote (nate @ Sep. 20 2004,01:12)
…and this list could be longer – in fact it could go on forever, because it is a useless list. “faith is the evidence of things unseen”.
Yeah – but faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. That's why I can't accept that a supernatural devil exists, I just don't see it in God's word, I really don't.
what i mean is that we don't agree with each other's arguments, and i can't see how this is going to change for all the different ways we phrase it… as you say, faith comes through hearing and hearing through the word of god, but different understandings occur in our interpretation of the scriptures, and our faith (in jesus, etc) is based on that understanding. you think demons and the devil are metaphorical, but i think they're real… presumably both of our understandings are based on the word of god, so who's interpretation is correct? based on your interpretation all references to satan are metaphorical or symbolic, and you have therefore decided that he doesn't exist. based on my interpretation, some references to satan are metaphorical, but many refer to an actual being of that name, and i have therefore decided that he does exist. i see the ezekiel passage about the king of tyre as a metaphorical reference to satan, but you see it as a literal reference to the king of tyre… you see jesus' casting out demons as a metaphorical reference to heling the sick, but i see it as a literal casting out of demons… you see the job passage as taking place on earth, whereas i see it as taking place in heaven… and so on, and so forth…
…and so we could go on like this forever – what you see as metaphorical, i see as literal and vice-versa… the fact is that we just don't see eye to eye… if you can think of a better way of solving this interpretational conflict, i would gladly participate, but as neither accepts the validity of the other's arguments, it seems a waste of time to persist…
i would say rather that we agree to disagree, and hope that god shows us the truth (if it is really important)…
cheers,
nate.
Quote (nate @ Sep. 20 2004,21:48)
i would say rather that we agree to disagree, and hope that god shows us the truth (if it is really important)…
Yeah, I can second that – I think we've both presented our views and will be going round in circles soon (if not a little already).Obviously we both think we're right – that's not uncommon. But I guess as long as we're “searching the scriptures daily, whether these things are so”, and sincerely asking for God's help, then that's about the best that can be asked of us.
So let's both keep up the Bible study!
Sam
Hi Sammo,
I am aware that Christadelphians believe that heaven is not a place but a state of good thought and hell is the opposite. I am also aware that they do not believe in literal angels and a literal devil.
But we both have to admit that the scriptures are full of references to persons who are angels, demons and Satan.
Yes I agree with you that satan, devil and demon can be used as as adjectives.
E.g. “One of you is a devil” is what Jesus said to his apostles once. Of course he wasn't saying that one of you is Satan (the person) or one of his servants, but he was saying that one of you is diabolical. In other words one of you has the nature of a devil.
In Greek a person is referred to with a definate article such as the or a. If the article is not present then the word is used as an adjective.
John 1:1 is an example of this.
“In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with the God and the Word was god.”All mentions of the word “God/god” are referring to a person because the article is present, except for the last one.
It's the same in English to a degree. I could say to you, “You are an angel”. In Greek it would be rendered “you are angel”. This would mean that you are like an angel. But if I said you are the Angel. Then I would identifying you as an actual angel/person.
So in Greek Jesus is referred to as 'the Jesus' meaning that he was a person.
If I said “I am man”. Then I am using the word 'man' as an adjective. But if I said I am the man. Then I would be using it as a noun and therefore identifying myself as an actual person of the human race.
So of course satan, devil demon and even god can be used as an adjective where the article is not present. But they also refer to persons when the article is present.
Even to this day we say things like he is a real Johah, when talking about an unlucky person, or he is a doubting Thomas. Of course these people existed, but their qualitive nature or character can be referred to others as an adjective.
So going back to John 1:1, we see that Roman Catholics and those under her influence render John 1:1 to say that the Word was the God (the person) and JWs render it to say that the Word was a god (a person). But both are wrong. It simply says that the Word was god in a qualitive sense and this fits with the fact that Jesus has divine nature, but is not the divine in person.
If we understand this, we can read the scriptures with a greater understanding and avoid all references to 'theos' as meaning the most high God. We can also know without a doubt that Satan is a person just as Gabriel and Michael are real. Finally we can also know that God is not just a force or some state of unity of the universe, but that he is actually a person or mind and that he is one and that he is the great I Am.
Hi t8
Quote (t8 @ Sep. 21 2004,18:56) I am aware that Christadelphians believe that heaven is not a place but a state of good thought and hell is the opposite. I am also aware that they do not believe in literal angels and a literal devil.
Yeah?
We do believe that heaven is a place, and that Jesus is there as we speak, on God's right hand. We also believe in literal angels.
Our understanding of hell is probably different to most – we believe sheol and hades to mean the grave, and gehenna to mean the rubbish dump outside Jerusalem. This is related to our not believing in immortal souls – our hope is to be bodily raised from the grave upon Christ's return to the earth when he establishes his Father's kingdom. I'm happy to clarify any of this, but maybe another thread would be the place.
However, yes it is true that we don't believe that the devil is a supernatural being.
Quote (t8 @ Sep. 21 2004,18:56) In Greek a person is referred to with a definate article such as the or a. If the article is not present then the word is used as an adjective.
.
.
It's the same in English to a degree. I could say to you, “You are an angel”. In Greek it would be rendered “you are angel”. This would mean that you are like an angel. But if I said you are the Angel. Then I would identifying you as an actual angel/person.
Interestingly, this is exactly what Jesus does in Matthew 16:Quote 23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.
This is Satan with a definite article, right? So by your reasoning, Jesus is calling Peter the Satan, the devil himself. Which will be a challenge for you to explain…Sam
Hi Sammo,
Of course there is the possibilty that the words “get thee behind me Satan” were in fact addressed to Satan. It says that the mouth speaks whatever the heart is full of.Peter had just expressed the first sign of humanism. He had preferred the will of man to the will of God-a form of rebellion against the first commandment-and that thought originated from Satan who has been doing it ever since.
Satan entered Judas at the last supper and 7 demons had to be driven out of Mary Magdelene. All of us have the roots of every sin naturally in our hearts so we cannot judge others.
Jesus said whatever plant My Father did not plant will be rooted out and I believe He started with Peter.
Yes I agree with Nicks post.
Also, if Satan here has an article then Jesus was talking to Satan the person. Remember Jesus said that Satan desires you Peter to sift you as wheat. Satan the person is the inspiration behind all evil and lies. In fact he is the god of this Age. The reason Jesus came to earth was to destroy his works.
Surely Satan inspired Peters words and Jesus knew the root of them and correctly rebuked Satan from where they originated. This was part of Jesus mission.
In other words he pulled the weed up from the roots, in order for the weed to stop growing.
Quote (Sammo @ Sep. 23 2004,12:00) Yeah? We do believe that heaven is a place, and that Jesus is there as we speak, on God's right hand. We also believe in literal angels.
I knew a lady who was a Christadelphian. When I mentioned Heaven she corrected me with the words “good thoughts” and likewise Hell as bad thoughts.So I guess that she was not a fair representitive of that organisation.
As I understand it Christadelpians are not aware of the wonderful gift of the Holy Spirit available through prayer to all who are baptised into Him. I have seen one such lady come alive when she recived that promise.
hey guys,
sam said:
Quote
Our understanding of hell is probably different to most – we believe sheol and hades to mean the grave, and gehenna to mean the rubbish dump outside Jerusalem. This is related to our not believing in immortal souls – our hope is to be bodily raised from the grave upon Christ's return to the earth when he establishes his Father's kingdom.i think i would have to agree with your definition of sheol, but hades in the classical greek sense, was definitely a restingplace for the immortal soul… also i don't think jesus was being literal when he said “gehenna” (interestingly, gehenna means something like “valley of the proud”)… btw what do christadelphians think the “outer darkness where there will be gnashing of teeth” is?…
as to the immortal soul (or not), why does jesus say to the criminal – today you will be with me in paradise… if the criminal was to die and be buried?
nick said:
Quote
Peter had just expressed the first sign of humanism.i guess we have a different understanding of humanism, because according to my definition, jesus was the “great humanist” in that he showed us what humanity was meant to be (he was the second adam according to paul)… however, i think i understand what you're saying – peter was being “human” in the sense of not being mindful of the things of god… yeh?
cheers,
nate.
Hi Nick, t8
Quote (t8 @ Sep. 22 2004,18:14)
Also, if Satan here has an article then Jesus was talking to Satan the person.
But that's not what it says – it doesn't say “he turned and said unto Satan“. It says “he turned and said unto Peter“.I should have mentioned in my last post that whether or not a definite article is used doesn't challenge my interpretation, so far as I'm concerned. I'm saying that sometimes sin is personified as the devil and Satan, so clearly in such a case a definite article would be appropriate.
I agree when Nick says that Peter's fault was to prefer the will of man to the will of God, and that that was why Jesus rebuked him. At that moment in time, Peter was figuratively embodying the will of man; if Satan here is the personifcation of sin, then temporarily giving Peter this title would not be out of place. Or maybe Jesus just meant Satan in it's most basic sense – “Peter, you are being my adversary, get out of my way”.
In either case, if Satan were a proper noun for an immortal being, then there's no way that Peter could be addressed as 'Satan'. Both of you have suggested that he was really talking to 'Satan', and not to Peter, but that's simply not what the text says.
Quote (t8 @ Sep. 22 2004,18:14) Satan the person is the inspiration behind all evil and lies.
Prove it
Quote (t8 @ Sep. 22 2004,18:14) In fact he is the god of this Age. The reason Jesus came to earth was to destroy his works.
Well, did he? (Hebrews 2:14) And if he did, who's tempting us now? (I believe that man tempts himself, and always has done, externally influenced or not – James 1:14)Quote (t8 @ Sep. 22 2004,18:14) Surely Satan inspired Peters words and Jesus knew the root of them and correctly rebuked Satan from where they originated. This was part of Jesus mission.
Here's an implication of believing in the devil: how do you truly repent of sins you can't feel wholly responsible for? After all, if “the devil made you do it”, it's not really your fault then, is it…Quote (nick @ Sep. 22 2004,17:45) All of us have the roots of every sin naturally in our hearts so we cannot judge others.
Exactly, that's what I'm trying to say. We don't need the help!But perhaps before discussing any of this, I want to establish whether or not this being even exists. Can you prove that the devil was an angel that fell from heaven, or can't you? If this doctrine is based on scripture, then now's your chance to show me how.
We all agree that the trinity is a non-biblical belief, heavily influenced by paganism. I've seen both of you rightly point out that the weight of scripture just doesn't back that doctrine up. I hope you can apply the same rigour to your belief in the devil.
God bless,
SamHi guys,
Quote (t8 @ Sep. 22 2004,18:58) I knew a lady who was a Christadelphian. When I mentioned Heaven she corrected me with the words “good thoughts” and likewise Hell as bad thoughts. So I guess that she was not a fair representitive of that organisation.
That's not the way it's sounding, anyway.Quote (nick @ Sep. 22 2004,20:56) As I understand it Christadelpians are not aware of the wonderful gift of the Holy Spirit available through prayer to all who are baptised into Him.
That's true – we don't believe that gifts of the Holy Spirit are available today. If you have the time, here are some articles that explain our belief.Quote (nate @ Sep. 22 2004,23:47) i think i would have to agree with your definition of sheol, but hades in the classical greek sense, was definitely a restingplace for the immortal soul… also i don't think jesus was being literal when he said “gehenna” (interestingly, gehenna means something like “valley of the proud”)… btw what do christadelphians think the “outer darkness where there will be gnashing of teeth” is?…
I don't know (there is no “Christadelphian view” on this, nor does there have to be for me to say something!), but I get the impression it's not so much a literal place as a picture of those who are turned down at the judgment. There are some articles here that explain our beliefs about heaven/hell/death etc more fully.Quote (nate @ Sep. 22 2004,23:47) as to the immortal soul (or not), why does jesus say to the criminal – today you will be with me in paradise… if the criminal was to die and be buried?
“And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee To day, thou shalt be with me in paradise.” Change the position of the comma and whole meaning changes. Besides – did Jesus go to heaven the day he died? More about immortal souls if you follow the link I gave above.I'm quite happy to discuss any of these points further, but please start a new thread.
Take care,
SamI guess that is possible that Jesus said to Peter get behind me adversary. But that seems a bit strong a word to say to his own disciple though. But I strongly suspect that he was adressing the Spirit that inspired his words.
Also I haven't had time to look up the Greek to see if the article is present or not, so I really cannot make a final judgment on it for now. But regardless of this, I believe that the Devil is a person and an adversary of God. He is an Angel that took 1/3 of God's Angels with him in his adversity.
The Devil tempted Jesus, he wanted to sift Peter like wheat and when cast to the earth from heaven after the battle with Michael and his angels, he runs around like a roaring lion.
I think that to de-personalise Satan or the Devil requires that we read most verses regarding him not as it is written, but through a different meaning. I think this would not only be a mammoth task, but would be similar to justifying a doctrine like the Trinity. In other words one would need to interject all the time and insert a certain meaning whilst reading the scripture to remind the reader what to believe, to make up for that inadequate description in scripture.
Of course I do not promote such thinking and believe that the truth can be seen from reading scripture as it is, without forcing an outside philosophy or view on it to interpret it correctly.
Hi t8
Quote (t8 @ Sep. 23 2004,16:49) I believe that the Devil is a person and an adversary of God. He is an Angel that took 1/3 of God's Angels with him in his adversity.
Then prove it.Quote (t8 @ Sep. 23 2004,16:49) I think that to de-personalise Satan or the Devil requires that we read most verses regarding him not as it is written, but through a different meaning.
Thanks to our friends the KJV translators, I almost agree. But wisdom is personified too, it's not unique. Both are a powerful metaphor.If everywhere “devil” was written, “slanderer” was written, would it still be so clear cut to you?
Sam
Hi Sammo,
As you said these are not your thoughts but those of others you are sharing. You seem to be presenting your denominations teachings . Like the Sadducees you share these fixed doctrines and prefer to challenge the simple understandings and twist them to suit your doctrine.
I have dealt with demons and know their effects. I went to see a friend incarcerated in a mental institution once. When we met he was totally confused ,did not know me and speaking gibberish. I spoke to him aloud and bound the spirit affecting him in the name of Jesus. My friend was suddenly thrown backwards in his chair but then sat up and said 'Hello Nick. Where am I ? ” and was completely normal and went home the next day.
Forget your fanciful intellectualisations and wake up and see for yourself. Follow Jesus not man is the wiser course as there is an enemy who prefers you do not recognise him. He uses those people to hide the truth from those who sincerely are searching.Quote (Sammo @ Sep. 24 2004,12:10) Then prove it. Matthew 4:11
Then the devil left him, and angels came and attended him.Matthew 13:39
and the enemy who sows them is the devil. The harvest is the end of the age, and the harvesters are angels.Matthew 25:41
“Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.Revelation 12:9
The great dragon was hurled down–that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.If you read 'slanderer' where the word 'devil' is, it would render these scriptures unreadable. Also I am sure that the arguments you will make in support of there being no Devil could just as easily be made for angels too. Notice that all the scriptures above also references angels. So why just de-personalise the Devil, but not angels. I am suspicious on that note alone.
BTW Wisdom is indeed a person, it is Christ. But wisdom is also an adjective or attribute that comes to us from him.
Also attributes come from people not the other way round. From Satan comes adversity. From the Divine comes divine nature. From the Light comes light. From The Father of lies comes lies. From the wicked comes wickedness. From the righteous come righteousness.
Hi Nick,
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Sep. 23 2004,17:35) As you said these are not your thoughts but those of others you are sharing.
I don't think I said that. And just because I share my beliefs with others doesn't make them any less mine.Quote (Nick Hassan @ Sep. 23 2004,17:35) I have dealt with demons and know their effects. I went to see a friend incarcerated in a mental institution once. When we met he was totally confused ,did not know me and speaking gibberish. I spoke to him aloud and bound the spirit affecting him in the name of Jesus. My friend was suddenly thrown backwards in his chair but then sat up and said 'Hello Nick. Where am I ? ” and was completely normal and went home the next day.
I don't disbelieve you, but I would have liked to see that for myself.If you want to convince me that the devil is an immortal supernatural being, an evil angel fallen from heaven, then prove it to me from the Bible.
Sam
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
