Two Messiah?

[TheBibleIsTruth]

And as a guest, you have shown yourself not here to learn.

you are teaching heresy!

to show that I am wrong, lets see ONE Scripture that supports what you say

 

[Steve Petersen]

The title of this thread (and OP) is nothing short of a brazen attack on the God of the Holy Bible, and Its Teachings. It opens up the door for "doctrines of demons" as Paul puts it, and judging by the comments on this, many who know little or nothing about Biblical Doctrine are trying to forward their heresies on Atonement of the Lord Jesus Christ, and His Uniqueness as The Messiah of mankind, and our ONLY Hope.

You seem to be mistaking your interpretation of the scapegoat and its symbolism with actual biblical truth.

People are not the only things that need atonement: the Tabernacle needed atonement because in some fashion, the sins of the people had contaminated it. The entire chapter is Leviticus 16 is about the Day of Atonement:

Leviticus 16:16 In this way he will make atonement for the Most Holy Place because of the uncleanness and rebellion of the Israelites, whatever their sins have been. He is to do the same for the tent of meeting, which is among them in the midst of their uncleanness.​

 

[Joy]

MOD HAT ON

Thread has been

Posts in Violation of Forum SoP and Responses have been Removed.

When Posting Please remember

Do not teach or debate in any Congregational Forum
unless you are truly a member and share its core beliefs and teachings. Questions and fellowship are allowed, proselytizing is not.

Thank You

MOD HAT OFF

​

 

[Dave-W]

The “2 Messiahs” theory is based on refusal to accept that the Messiah would come to us twice in 2 different roles: 1 time as the suffering servant who was killed and raised from the dead, and the 2nd time as the conquering Davidic king who rules the world.

Not exactly. In the first century there was much debate as to whether the Son of David (conquering king) and Son of Joseph (suffering servant) were the same person or 2 different people.

The scriptures were not clear enough for that to be determined before hand.

 

[Dave-W]

So AZAZEL was the name Satan had before he become fallen angel ?

No.

 

[Chinchilla]

No.

But Ezekiel is saying that Lucifer walked in garden of eden untill he sinned .

So who depted Eve , Lucifer or Azazel ?

 

[Dave-W]

So who depted Eve , Lucifer or Azazel ?

The devil was never called "Azazel."

It was lucifer inhabiting a snake that deceived Mrs Adam. She was not named Eve until after the fall.

 

[dfw69]

But Ezekiel is saying that Lucifer walked in garden of eden untill he sinned .

So who depted Eve , Lucifer or Azazel ?

Lucifer was Latin word....the Hebrew word was Heylel ...translated Lucifer...

 

[Chinchilla]

Lucifer was Latin word....the Hebrew word was Heylel ...translated Lucifer...

so Heylel turned into Satan the devil ?

 

[dfw69]

so Heylel turned into Satan the devil ?

The passage in Isaiah where it says Lucifer is actually Heylel in Hebrew....not sure if Heylel is a name or a adjective describing the person in question ..

.....Lucifer means light bearer. .yet Heylel means something else....

Satan means adversary...Lucifer was a poor translation of Heylel ..which means the howler or the wailer...

The letters in his name may say something about this person in question ..

I believe Heylel is a picture of the final antichrist ...and not Satan ...nor does the passage refer to Satan...but refers to a future king of Babylon....

 

[Chinchilla]

The passage in Isaiah where it says Lucifer is actually Heylel in Hebrew....not sure if Heylel is a name or a adjective describing the person in question ..

.....Lucifer means light bearer. .yet Heylel means something else....

Satan means adversary...Lucifer was a poor translation of Heylel ..which means the howler or the wailer...

The letters in his name may say something about this person in question ..

I believe Heylel is a picture of the final antichrist ...and not Satan ...nor does the passage refer to Satan...but refers to a future king of Babylon....

It refers to king od persia which was created , not born .
Or rather to the power behind the king of persia , as we see in NT Satan tempted Jesus wich all kingdoms of earth , you can't tempt somebody with something if you do not own it or if it does not exist .

 

[dfw69]

It refers to king od persia which was created , not born .
Or rather to the power behind the king of persia , as we see in NT Satan tempted Jesus wich all kingdoms of earth , you can't tempt somebody with something if you do not own it or if it does not exist .

King of Persia?....Isaiah 14

Speaks of king of Babylon...right?

 

[Chinchilla]

King of Persia?....Isaiah 14

Speaks of king of Babylon...right?

Yea mistaken from King of Persia from Daniel where the angel said that he will fight against king of persia . Daniel 10:13

It's not like physical person - king of Persia put chain around angel's neck and forced him to not come , there is war in spiritual realm .

 

[dfw69]

Yea mistaken from King of Persia from Daniel where the angel said that he will fight against king of persia . Daniel 10:13

It's not like physical person - king of Persia put chain around angel's neck and forced him to not come , there is war in spiritual realm .

Oh ..yeah...

In Isaiah 14 is where the translation of Heylel to Lucifer took place....

 

[AbbaLove]

It was lucifer inhabiting a snake that deceived Mrs Adam. She was not named Eve until after the fall.

Eve was Ms Adam when she ate of the forbidden fruit. Adam would have never allowed Eve to take a bite if she were Mrs. Adam ​

 

[Dave-W]

Eve was Ms Adam when she ate of the forbidden fruit. Adam would have never allowed Eve to take a bite if she were Mrs. Adam

Gen 3:1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said to the woman, “Indeed, has God said, ‘You shall not eat from any tree of the garden’?” 2 The woman said to the serpent, “From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat; 3 but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, ‘You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die.’” 4 The serpent said to the woman, “You surely will not die! 5 For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” 6 When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate.

Gen 3:20 Now the man called his wife’s name Eve, because she was the mother of all the living.

 

[AbbaLove]

Gen 3:6 When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate.

Gives the impression that Ms Eve Adam was by no means subservient or unassertive. She was her own woman to do as she pleased without Adam's consent.

When Eve saw the tree how did see know it's fruit was desirable to make one wise? How did she even have a concept of "wise" when she hadn't yet ate of the fruit?

If Adam was what we might refer to as a real man or a Man's man why would he have even accepted the fruit from Eve, let alone eat it? Are we to deduce that a woman can so easily entice a man to do something he shouldn't and therefore Adam was like putty in the hands of Eve?

 

[dfw69]

​

Gives the impression that Ms Eve Adam was by no means subservient or unassertive. She was her own woman to do as she pleased without Adam's consent.

When Eve saw the tree how did see know it's fruit was desirable to make one wise? How did she even have a concept of "wise" when she hadn't yet ate of the fruit?

If Adam was what we might refer to as a real man or a Man's man why would he have even accepted the fruit from Eve, let alone eat it? Are we to deduce that a woman can so easily entice a man to do something he shouldn't and therefore Adam was like putty in the hands of Eve?

The fruit Satan offered them to partake in was really tempting for both ....

Eve was simply first to give in....it took Adam a little longer but eventually he couldn't resist the great temptation ...

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

​

Eve was Ms Chavah Adam when she ate of the forbidden fruit. Adam would have never allowed Eve to take a bite if she were Mrs. Adam ​

"Mrs. Adam" (colloquially) There was always a very clear distinction between married and unmarried women ........ never the ungodly vagueness of "ms" ....

 

[gadar perets]

​

Gives the impression that Ms Eve Adam was by no means subservient or unassertive. She was her own woman to do as she pleased without Adam's consent.

The serpent deceived her and broke down the barriers of obedience to not only YHWH, but to her husband as well. Any one of us who are supposed to be subservient to YHWH or man can fall prey as well.

When Eve saw the tree how did see know it's fruit was desirable to make one wise? How did she even have a concept of "wise" when she hadn't yet ate of the fruit?

The serpent told her that in verse 5 by saying she would be like Elohim.

If Adam was what we might refer to as a real man or a Man's man why would he have even accepted the fruit from Eve, let alone eat it? Are we to deduce that a woman can so easily entice a man to do something he shouldn't and therefore Adam was like putty in the hands of Eve?

I believe he was such a man's man that he was willing to suffer the consequences of Eve's sin with her. Adam knew she had eaten the forbidden fruit and was not willing to have her suffer alone. So he ate it as well. IMHO.