Bible Verses: Fill-In-The-Blank

[M30USA]

I have studied the whole Bible extremely intently.

 

You could argue that point, and I could argue one too: Jesus Himself said we'd be like the angels, neither marrying nor partaking in marriage. That implies a lot. You seem frustrated. It is good to study one thing, it shows a keen interest in it. However, there is plenty more in the Bible to show otherwise as well.

 

I know when a person is frustrated: That's usually when they say my name, lol. I am positive a spirit cannot reproduce. You could use said spirit entering a body, then reproducing. Yet, it wouldn't be the spirit's children.

 

I already know well what you believe on this subject, and you probably can see where I stand. I highly doubt any one of us is about to convince the other. Besides, these giants where destroyed by God, in the Wars of the Lord. As well as by Israel later.

 

Sorry, I'm not frustrated.

 

Jesus said the angels do not marry in heaven. The context of his quote was when he said that we, humans, shall be like the angels in heaven who do not marry. It says nothing of the angels on earth who fell. Additionally, since Jesus paralleled humans to angels in this manner, if we currently reproduce on earth yet will not in heaven, the angels do the same: reproduce on earth yet not in heaven. (The only reason they currently don't is because the fallen angels do not have bodies anymore as the holy angels do. There is Biblical support to say that God disembodied fallen angels FOR THIS VERY REASON so that they could not reproduce with humans as they did pre-Flood and shortly thereafter. This is why you do not see physical demons to this day, and the only angels who appear physically are the holy ones.)

 

I am always the first to admit when a Biblical subject is nebulous and up to interpretation. Read some of my posts on other subjects. But I can confidently tell you that the only way a person will have any view other than the angel view of Genesis 6 is if they haven't researched well enough.

 

A list of a few people who support angel view of Genesis 6:

 

Dr. John MacArthur

Josefus

Justin Martyr

Ambrose

Tertullian

Iranaeus

Dr. Francis Schaeffer

Moses

Paul the Apostle

Peter

Edited March 28, 2013 by M30USA

[Toddbt12y1]

To ascribe that God disembodied angels? Where does it say this at? Disembodied would first requore them to have a body: spirits needn't a body. You imply I haven't researched enough is funny. I guess anyone whp disagrees hasn't researched enough.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Can they explain how a spirit can reproduce? I actually was expecting you to list these people, as well, as use the "in heaven" part.

 

Angels abide by rules in Heaven, and the same on Earth. What humans, who are mortal must do, eternal angels needn't do. A spirit, whether demon or not, cannot reproduce. They cannot create life: life that God can create. I highly doubt God would allow such a fantasy.

 

You may list these people, and believe what you will. But until you can show me a scripture saying a spirit can have sex, I cannot believe that concept.

 

You are allowed to believe how you will, as am I though. (I imagine that the Angels here on Earth, who came from Heaven, would follow the same route as Heavenly angels. There is no need to make an eternal being or allow an eternal being to mate).

 

 

God created a law in gensis as well: "Each creature shall reproduce after their own kind." Angels are of their own kind. A fallen angel, wouldn't have desire for women neither. Anti-christ doesn't, he's a devil in the flesh. As well, you should notice where God says "My spirit will not always strive with man." That man part is rather key.

 

Just because something says sons of God, does not make them solely angels. Christians are a son of God.

 

Also note verse 4: "There where giants in those days and also afterward when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men." This implies that giants existed both before and afterward.

Either case: believe what you will. We all have this right.

Edited March 28, 2013 by Toddbt12y1

[M30USA]

Todd, you bring up good points. You ask all the right questions. I am going to reply with a very long post, but I believe the mods will delete these posts since they are off topic. Can you start a new thread?

[M30USA]

Quick joke, even my secular gradeschool taught me that the rise of refined tools, language, writing, religion, advanced art, and government was a sudden and drastic thing. Honestly you're just being the devils advocate. Everybody knows my point is true.

[pie2]

This is the Answer: Yes cities existed. But for Lucifer and his angels, whom where tenders of Earth. It is found in Jeremiah, and backed up in Jude.

 

I can site evidence: I.e. scripture if you wish: I just don't know it off the top of my head.

 

Nonetheless: It is found in Jeremiah, backed up by Jude.

 

Thanks Todd

 

Yes, if you get a chance...where is this found? Is it in Jeremiah 4?

[M30USA]

Everybody knows that when somebody appeals to "everybody knows I'm right", they don't have an argument.

 

Seriously, do you even know the meaning of these words in their proper context? "Sudden and drastic" in geology could refer to upwards of hundreds of thousands of years. Sorry mate, your hand is weak and your bluff has been called.

 

What's the highest level biology or genetics class you've taken, quickjoe? Your comments imply that I, along with others, are unlearned--when in fact the opposite could be the case. You will counter this statement by saying that academic education doesn't mean anything and it's no substitute for criticial thinking. I will counter by saying that, yes, anyone who completes a class in genetics or biology at the very least can't be ignorant on the subject.

Edited March 29, 2013 by M30USA

[pie2]

yes, anyone who completes a class in genetics or biology at the very least can't be ignorant on the subject.

 

Well, everybody knows that when somebody says anyone who takes a course in genetics or biology can't be ignorant on the subject...they're clearly not talking about me!

 

[M30USA]

One last comment:

 

I would say that with 90% certainty you will one day accept Jesus Christ as Lord, quickjoe. I know because anyone who continuously engages in a discussion with Christians on such subjects is obviously being drawn to it. My own sister did this for over a decade. She is finally realizing the truth. Good luck to you and I hope you find the truth soon, and find it in a way that answers all your questions.

[M30USA]

To ascribe that God disembodied angels? Where does it say this at? Disembodied would first requore them to have a body: spirits needn't a body. You imply I haven't researched enough is funny. I guess anyone whp disagrees hasn't researched enough.

 

Disembodied, as a word, does not occur in the Bible. But the concept does. Just look at how Jesus drove the demons out of Legion and they desparately sought new bodies to host, so they found a herd of swine. You never see this same concept in reference to holy angels because holy angels are able to manifest physically. Find me one example of a post-flood demon showing up physically. On the contrary, I can show you over 100 examples of a post-flood holy angel showing up physically, in multiple forms including most commonly as men.

 

When were they disembodied? When God punished them by locking them up in "chains of darkness". This is a reference to God creating a rift between the physical and spiritual world for fallen angels, where they cannot cross into the physical, but most work entirely through spirit and mind influence. If they had physical manifestation, they would be capable of too much damage--as was evidenced by the events in Genesis 6.

 

Can they explain how a spirit can reproduce? I actually was expecting you to list these people, as well, as use the "in heaven" part.

 

Angels abide by rules in Heaven, and the same on Earth. What humans, who are mortal must do, eternal angels needn't do. A spirit, whether demon or not, cannot reproduce. They cannot create life: life that God can create. I highly doubt God would allow such a fantasy.

 

It might not be rational, but it's Biblical. Please explain to me why, in Genesis, God tells Eve that not only will there be emnity between her and the Serpent (as a concept), but also between HER SEED and the SERPENT'S SEED? This concept is quite disturbing. The word for "seed" is the same idea as what we would call genetics or lineage in modern science. So the Bible says Satan, somehow, has a "seed". Many people don't like to consider this. It's frightening.

 

You may list these people, and believe what you will. But until you can show me a scripture saying a spirit can have sex, I cannot believe that concept.

 

If the angel view of Genesis 6 is, in fact, correct, then it should be corroborated in more than one place in the Bible. So is it? Yes. Please read the following verses:

 

"And the angels who did not stay within their own position of authority, but left their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness until the judgment of the great day--just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire." (Jude 1)

 

Dr. Michael Heiser, who holds a PhD in ancient linguistics, has analyzed the Greek in this passage and shown that, beyond any shadow of doubt, the comparison is between the Sodomites going after homosexuality and the angels going after humans. Both went after "strange flesh". The passage even says the angels left their proper abode. As an additional point, why would the Sodomites in Genesis attempt to have sex with these angels if the angels couldn't actually do that?[/sIZE]

 

God created a law in gensis as well: "Each creature shall reproduce after their own kind." Angels are of their own kind. A fallen angel, wouldn't have desire for women neither. Anti-christ doesn't, he's a devil in the flesh. As well, you should notice where God says "My spirit will not always strive with man." That man part is rather key.

 

The holy angels obey this commandment to not mingle with God's other species. The fallen ones did not. This is why they received such drastic punishment.

 

Just because something says sons of God, does not make them solely angels. Christians are a son of God.[/QUOE]

 

There are only 4 correct usages of the phrase "son of God" or "sons of God":

1) Adam was listed as a "son of God" in Genesis

2) Angels are "sons of God". Many modern translations of the Bible even translate the phrase "sons of God" right into angels since the meaning is well established.

3) Jesus Christ was the only begotten son of God. The difference with him, however, is he was never created. He had no beginning. This is important to realize. Otherwise he loses his status as God and Lord.

4) People who are reborn by the Holy Spirit are called "sons of God". However, Paul tells us that believers' true natures and identity will not be revealed until Christ returns. We are, in essence, walking incognito on earth. Paul wrote that all of creation groans in anticipation for the revelation of the sons of God. We look the same as other people, but we are spirituall the same as angels (as Jesus said).

 

Also note verse 4: "There where giants in those days and also afterward when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men." This implies that giants existed both before and afterward.

Either case: believe what you will. We all have this right.

 

Correct, and you will notice in both cases it was becase the sons of God came in to the daughters of men. It happened after the flood too. This is why God ordered the extreme genocide of that area in Canaan. Don't you find it highly interesting that that 2 examples of God's most extreme judgement (the flood and the genocide in Canaan) both relate to the events of the Nephilim when angels had offspring with humans? This is no coincidence.

[M30USA]

M30, I know you claim to be educated, though your many comments here betray a lack of even a high school level understanding, so I really don't know. It's eminently possible for people to earn degrees without absorbing much. And even if you have a familiarity with the subject matter, that's no guarantee whatsoever that you will uphold scientific data over your religious convictions or commit some other kind of abuse of reason. I don't care one way or the other.

 

Contrary to your assertion, I do think that an academic education counts for quite a bit, but it doesn't count nearly as much as being a professional in the field. I am quite assuredly certain that you are not and have never been a professional scientist. And the views you expound run very contrary to people who do the actual work and have far more credentials than you could ever bring to the table. To repeat, your views are in the overwhelming minority of scientific consensus.

 

The difference between us is that I lack the hubris to claim that I, with no experience and minimal education, know with certainty that I am right and every expert in the field is wrong.

 

Good luck man.

[pie2]

We are, in essence, walking incognito on earth.

 

What do you mean? Incognito from who?

[M30USA]

What do you mean? Incognito from who?

 

Meaning we appear as ordinary humans like all others, but spiritually we are literally new creations with an identity that is not of this world. Ironic, it is, that the same can be said of the holy angels (they walk around as men but are not). Paul said we believers shall be revealed as "sons of God". If something is yet to be revealed, it means its currently hidden.

[pie2]

Paul said we believers shall be revealed as "sons of God". If something is yet to be revealed, it means its currently hidden.

 

God, Satan, angel and demons all know who is who, yeah? Where did Paul say that believers will be revealed as "sons of God"?

 

1 Corinthians 4:5 says that "God will bring light to what is hidden in the darkness, and will expose the motives of the heart". Charles Stanely explains that the verse refers to God's promise to reveal privately, to each individual, the true nature of our hearts (i.e. showing us sins over our lifetime).

 

What are your thoughts?

[Toddbt12y1]

That verse isn't talking about angels mating with humans. I do not care about fancy so-called doctor titles. That means nothing to God and certainly to me. That verse in Jude is referencing Jeremiah: the original inhabitant was those cities in jeremiah, where sata and his followers followed him.

 

As well: that does not even confirm gen. 6 at all, that's so obvious.

 

You know seed doesn't just mean a genetic off spring: it can indeed mean satan's followers, he is their father, much like God is our Father.

 

You should stop worrying about people with fancy titles, as if that makes them something big in His eyes. He used fishermen and tax collectors and the low, not the high and mighty.

 

You give way to gender strifing, that is not good. If I was on my comp, I'd be glad to link Jeremiah, but on my phone it's a chore to do so. Believe me, I can do so. You should cite things for yourself, not what drs. Tell you as if they are somehow above the rest.

 

God uses the abase to confound the strong. I still say this is pointless, you'll never believe me nor will I you, and that is never a good thing.

 

P.S. Everyone has their gifts in God(mine happens to be understandings the prophecy books extremely well, and you have your gifts too.)

 

Sorry if this is rambling, but I am on my phone and split between many different sources. Sgill, you haven't showed how a spirit can have sex nor have these so called gods in the flesh.

[Toddbt12y1]

Thanks Todd

 

Yes, if you get a chance...where is this found? Is it in Jeremiah 4?

 

 

It is: Jeremiah 4 22:- Before any wise-smart person says, that isn't what it is talking about mind this part, in Verse 22: "I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and avoid; and the heavens, they had no light."

 

That kinda reminds me of Genesis. During our time, human's time: The Earth has never been void and without a form. One could argue the earth was destroyed three times; and made over three times. First by the fall of Lucifer, then by the flood. Last by a powerful fire. Even then, the Earth will be remade, as the Bible says.

 

The Floating City: New Jerusleam. It has many tree of lifes in it, and one main tree of life. From that tree, flows the flood of water: it pours out unto the land, the nations that is, and heals the land.

 

Think: Fire is all about destruction and rebirth.

 

Anyway, me and M3 have totally different beliefs in how God works, and the spiritual realm, it is obvious. That is why I said it is pointless to debate this, neither or us will believe the other, even if we presented a thousand different view points to defend our case.

 

I, personally, believe that it is impossible for a spirit to have offspring. S/he does not. S/he has their viewpoint based around what S/he has learned, or discovered for themselves.

 

I may not be educated by some school in the Bible, nor have a Dr. Title, but before my fall, I depended solely on God teaching me, via the Spirit. I didn't learn from a preacher, nor did I learn from source material. I merely studied on my own with God's help.

 

Not everything that is Holy, or says it is Holy, is Holy. Not everyone who claims to be an expert, even though, obviously they know a lot, makes them something great. Simply not how God has operated. Many of these men, think they are the final authority on God. That we should readily believe them(us christians, and we, many of us do...and there are good ppl out there who know this stuff, and use it well)...But we should learn to look for ourselves, beyond what we see.

[Toddbt12y1]

Anyway, M3, I did promise I would start linking scripture to show you my viewpoint. I understand yours, so take no offense at mine. We all follow Jesus Christ, despite these "gender strifes" as the bible calls them.

 

So, here we go:

 

After the creation of the earth, and before the creation of man, the earth was apparently inhabited by angels and prehistoric birds and animals.There are Scriptural references to the fact that angels inhabited the earth.Jude 6 (KJV): And the angels which kept not their first estate but left their own habitation. "Some interpret Jude, verse 6, to mean that the angels left their "condition" of habitation and married the daughters of men. According to Jesus (Matt. 22:29), those who teach this doctrine "err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God." Matt. 22:30 "For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven. "See also Mark 12:24, 25 and Luke 20:35, 36. Paul, the apostle, records that it is impossible for man and other creations to mate (I Cor. 15:39-41).

Edited March 30, 2013 by Toddbt12y1

[M30USA]

God, Satan, angel and demons all know who is who, yeah? Where did Paul say that believers will be revealed as "sons of God"?

 

Romans 8:

 

18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us. 19 For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God. 22 For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now. 23 And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies. 24 For in this hope we were saved. Now hope that is seen is not hope. For who hopes for what he sees? 25 But if we hope for what we do not see, we wait for it with patience.

 

26 Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness. For we do not know what to pray for as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words. 27 And he who searches hearts knows what is the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints according to the will of God. 28 And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose. 29 For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 30 And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

 

***

 

Many people who read that passage just glance over it and think that "sons of God" is just a generic phrase which means "we are all children of God". That is incorrect. This is why a brief devotion-type reading of the Bible is a problem. It never lets you really understand the meat of theology. In verse 23, it's clear that the revelation of us, as sons of God, has not happened yet. As I've said before, we walk in this world but, since the world is opposed to God and does not follow the Spirit but rather follows the flesh, nobody knows our true identity and they will never know it until Christ returns and it becomes completed. Then, as Jesus himself said, "we shall be like the angels". Paul even went so far as to say, "Do you not know that we shall JUDGE the angels?"

Edited March 30, 2013 by M30USA

[M30USA]

Todd, you simply need to read this passage carefully. It's literally the smoking gun which seals the issue.

 

"And the angels who did not stay within their own position of authority, but left their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness until the judgment of the great day--just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which likewise indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural desire, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire." (Jude 1)

 

The bolded clause contains a grammatical antecedent that is masculine in Greek. Antecedents always have to agree in gender with their nouns. The only nouns you have in confusion here are "cities" and "angels". Cities is a feminine noun. Thus it is immediately eliminated. We are left with angels since angels is a masculine noun. Therefore in the bolded section when it says "which likewise indulged..." it is 100% factually referring to angels. The comparison is between what the sodomites were doing and what the angels did. Both indulged in sexual immorality, both went after unnatural desires, and both are reserved for judgement.

Edited March 30, 2013 by M30USA

[Toddbt12y1]

And if you read the first set of verses, all that he is listing is seperate examples of where God punished or destroyed certain creations, for their wickedness. Or sin. That is a seperate verse, and isn't saying that the Angels were like those two sinful cities. Just another one of Jude's warnings to the churches, that are giving heed to perverse teachings. How God did not spare any of these other evil people.

 

He gave famous references, one of the Egypt, of the Angels, and of Sodom. Sodom's sins was going after strange flesh, and other things. The Angels was leaving their "first inhabitation.

 

Otherwise, you have just made the Bible - every translation a total lie, and therefore confirmed all these people who disagree with it. If Paul mentions the impossibility of the different creations of God being able to mate, and thus, produce off-spring, and yet another part says that it does? I imagine anyone can piece together that error.

 

The "likewise" only includes these cities in the destruction that God dished out for their evils. All following the chain of events.

[pie2]

Not everything that is Holy, or says it is Holy, is Holy. Not everyone who claims to be an expert, even though, obviously they know a lot, makes them something great. Simply not how God has operated. Many of these men, think they are the final authority on God. That we should readily believe them(us christians, and we, many of us do...and there are good ppl out there who know this stuff, and use it well)...But we should learn to look for ourselves, beyond what we see.

 

Closely examining scripture and the spirits is so crucial. And you're so right, looks may be deceiving. That being said, you seem to know a lot about the bible, and I hope you continue to share around here.

 

It is: Jeremiah 4 22:- Before any wise-smart person says, that isn't what it is talking about mind this part, in Verse 22: "I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and avoid; and the heavens, they had no light."

 

At first glance, parts of Jeremiah 4 seem to be a prophecy about what could come...rather than a literal interpretation of what had already been. But, as you've mentioned, you may have one interpretation, and I another.

[Toddbt12y1]

Forgot to add, sorry:

 

I gave you the smoking gun that sealed the issue. Arrogancy isn't very becoming. I do study the bible very carefully, you must be implying I do not? Paul knows more about God and His will than any of us; if he said that it is impossible for two seperate creations of God to mate with one another, by this, produce offspring, then it is impossible. Now, this does not mean that humans cannot have sex with something, but to produce anything from it...

 

Besides, we have literally just driven this whole thread way off-topic, over a mere passage that neither of us are gonna change our views, based on what we have studied and read, and what translation we use. That is not a good thing. It is pointless debate. It wouldn't be pointless if we could convince the other, but, that will not happen...Although, we have made our points very clearly here. You are well studied, but do not think of me as someone who merely "holds a short devotional."

[Toddbt12y1]

Closely examining scripture and the spirits is so crucial. And you're so right, looks may be deceiving. That being said, you seem to know a lot about the bible, and I hope you continue to share around here.

 

 

 

At first glance, parts of Jeremiah 4 seem to be a prophecy about what could come...rather than a literal interpretation of what had already been. But, as you've mentioned, you may have one interpretation, and I another.

 

 

True, and I knew and was waiting for you to say something about it being about a future interpretation. But there are several things to despute that: One, the Earth will not go back to being void: It going to be burnt up. New Jerusleam will be between the Earth and Heaven, and will give healing water to the Earth.

 

I also with-held a lot of the creation information, as you can use Job and various other books to show my case, but I was waiting for this. I love talking about the Bible, and certainly am trying my best not to offend any of you, and hope I do not offend M3, who is keen in his belief as I am in mine.

 

Here is the rest:

 

Gen. 1:2 (KJV):

"And the earth was without form [TOHU], and void [bOHU]; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. "

In the King James Version of the Bible, Gen. 1:2, the Hebrew word "TOHU" is translated as "without form", and the word "BOHU" is translated as "void" in describing the condition of the earth at that particular time.

The American Standard Version translates "TOHU" as "waste". The New International Version reads: "Now the earth was formless [TOHU] and empty [bOHU]." A footnote states that the word translated "was" could possibly be translated "became" formless and empty. The translators thereby lend credence to the theory that the formless condition of the earth in Gen. 1:2 was not the original condition of the earth at the point of its creation in Gen. 1:1.

Many readers interpret the first two verses of the first chapter of Genesis thus: "In the beginning . . . the earth was without form, and void", omitting a portion of the Scripture that is essential to the understanding of the condition of the earth at the time of creation. An analytical reading reveals that two distinct declarations are made. The first verse states, "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." The second verse states, "And the earth was without form, and void." But these Scriptures do not state that the earth was created without form, and void -- only that the earth was "created" and that at some time after creation it "was" (or became) "without form, and void."

As previously mentioned, Isaiah emphatically states that God did not create the earth in the condition of "TOHU" (without form, ruin). The expression "in vain", used in Isa. 45:18 (KJV), is the same Hebrew word (TOHU) translated "without form" in Gen. 1:2. That is, although the earth was in the condition of "TOHU" (without form) in Gen. 1:2, God had not originally created the earth in the condition of "TOHU" (without form). The translators of the Revised Standard Version state this even more clearly:

Isa. 45:18 (RSV):

". . . he did not create it a chaos [TOHU], he formed it to be inhabited! . . . "

These and other Scriptures establish the fact that, according to the Scriptures, the earth was not created "without form, and void" but indicate that some catastrophic event altered the face of the earth between the time of creation (Gen. 1:1) and the formless, void condition of the earth as described in Gen. 1:2.

If, as the Scriptures state, God created the earth to be inhabited, it is readily apparent that the condition described in Gen. 1:2 as being "without form, and void" was not as originally created because, at that time, it was not in a condition to be inhabited.

 

Now, what would have then caused the Earth to become void?

 

Jesus saw this happen.

Luke 10:18 (KJV):

"And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven."

When lightning strikes, it disfigures whatever it strikes. Apparently, it was Lucifer's presumptuous desire to "be like the most High" that caused him (Satan) to fall as lightning to the earth from heaven, causing destruction as described by Jeremiah.

Jer. 4:23-27 (KJV):

"I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form [TOHU], and void [bOHU]; and the heavens, and they had no light.

I beheld the mountains, and, lo, they trembled, and all the hills moved lightly.

I beheld, and, lo, there was no man, and all the birds of the heavens were fled.

I beheld, and, lo, the fruitful place was a wilderness, and all the cities thereof were broken down at the presence of the Lord, and by his fierce anger.

For thus hath the Lord said, The whole land shall be desolate; yet will I not make a full end."

Notice that before the world became "without form, and void" (the condition of the earth in Gen. 1:2), there were mountains, hills, fruitful places, cities, birds--"but no man". Jeremiah stated that the birds "were fled"; therefore, birds had been in existence before the destruction of the earth described by Jeremiah. However, he simply stated that "there was no man".

Living in a world inhabited by men, Jeremiah noted the fact that there was "no man". However, guided by the Holy Spirit, he made no attempt to explain this fact but stated it in such a way that it would be in harmony with the fact that man had not been created before the destruction of the earth between Gen. 1:1 and Gen. 1:2. Such harmony can only be explained by divine inspiration of the Scriptures.

Now the original creation had become formless, and void, and the earth sank beneath the waters. Isaiah identifies the cause of this terrible destruction as Lucifer (Satan).

Isa. 14:16, 17 (KJV):

"They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;

That made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof; that opened not the house of his prisoners?"

When did Lucifer make the world as a wilderness and destroy the cities thereof?

Lucifer did not do this in Noah's day because God flooded the earth with water in Noah's day. Such destruction of the earth has not occurred since Gen. 1:2. Therefore, the destruction described by Isaiah must refer to the destruction of the earth as originally created--between Gen. 1:1 and Gen. 1:2.

[johan]

"And the Lord sayeth unto johan, post ye not in the dating section lest ye head..."

 

A) explodeth

B) goeth gray

C) swelleth beyond recognition

[OpenBook]

I am positive a spirit cannot reproduce. You could use said spirit entering a body, then reproducing. Yet, it wouldn't be the spirit's children.

 

Well, it happened to the Virgin Mary.

[TaraMaiden]

Well, it happened to the Virgin Mary.

 

Well...yeah.... So the Catholic Council decided in 430AD.... Mary's visitation by the Holy Spirit is not an original Biblical premise....

 

(Read also '1950' and '1954'......)

Edited March 30, 2013 by TaraMaiden