You can't make this stuff up

[OzSpen]

No, what I am saying the stuff that people are now believing.

I never in 43 years as a Christian and a Baptist have heard this before.

God Bless

Till all are one.

Dean,

You don't have to go to a GT class to hear or read about it. It's right here in posts on CF.com. I read some strange doctrines here, so strange that I don't have the energy to refute many of them biblically.

This has led me to write a few articles to address this matter:

1. The Internet: A great place to promote false doctrine
2. Growing weary of constantly correcting false teaching
3. False Christian teaching on Internet forums

Oz

 

[DeaconDean]

Dean,

You don't have to go to a GT class to hear or read about it. It's right here in posts on CF.com. I read some strange doctrines here, so strange that I don't have the energy to refute many of them biblically.

This has led me to write a few articles to address this matter:

1. The Internet: A great place to promote false doctrine
2. Growing weary of constantly correcting false teaching
3. False Christian teaching on Internet forums

Oz

This one time, I am in full agreement with you.

It just strikes ne funny, that these are Christians who are saying, teaching, promoting this stuff.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[DeaconDean]

Here is another one for you guys.

All this time, we read, and were taught that it was Lucifer/Satan, who tricked Eve, into eating the apple, which eventually caused Adam to sin.

Buy, how wrong have we have been. This is all a lie!

"It does say Gadre'el, but in the hebrew text, what the OT is written in. It only ever talks of satan while putting the word "the" in front of it (aside from once), obviously the hebraic equivalent of the word the - "Ha" - e.g. HaShatan. It's not referring to "satan" being one being. It always refers to satan being many. The satan.

When we look at what satan means in hebrew, it means enemy, or adversary. So it's literally saying, the enemy or the adversary when it refers to satan in the bible. The enemy, or the adversary isn't indicative of one individual, it's indicative of many. As the book of Enoch talks about, the many fallen, each responsible for different things that are unrighteous. Azazel however, was responsible for much more, as Enoch 8 shows, and during the scapegoat sacrifice, Azazel is the name of the goat with which all sin is to be ascribed in the books of Moses."

So let me provide Enoch's scripture:

"And the name of the third is Gadreel; this is the one that showed all the deadly blows to the sons of men. And he led astray Eve. And he showed the weapons of death to the children of men, the shield and the breastplate, and the sword for slaughter, and all the weapons of death to the sons of men." -Enoch 69:6

All this time, when in Genesis, it speaks of the serpent in the Garden, it was not Lucifer/Satan. It was one of the "fallen angels".

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[now faith]

Here is another one for you guys.

All this time, we read, and were taught that it was Lucifer/Satan, who tricked Eve, into eating the apple, which eventually caused Adam to sin.


Buy, how wrong have we have been. This is all a lie!

"It does say Gadre'el, but in the hebrew text, what the OT is written in. It only ever talks of satan while putting the word "the" in front of it (aside from once), obviously the hebraic equivalent of the word the - "Ha" - e.g. HaShatan. It's not referring to "satan" being one being. It always refers to satan being many. The satan.

When we look at what satan means in hebrew, it means enemy, or adversary. So it's literally saying, the enemy or the adversary when it refers to satan in the bible. The enemy, or the adversary isn't indicative of one individual, it's indicative of many. As the book of Enoch talks about, the many fallen, each responsible for different things that are unrighteous. Azazel however, was responsible for much more, as Enoch 8 shows, and during the scapegoat sacrifice, Azazel is the name of the goat with which all sin is to be ascribed in the books of Moses."

So let me provide Enoch's scripture:

"And the name of the third is Gadreel; this is the one that showed all the deadly blows to the sons of men. And he led astray Eve. And he showed the weapons of death to the children of men, the shield and the breastplate, and the sword for slaughter, and all the weapons of death to the sons of men." -Enoch 69:6

All this time, when in Genesis, it speaks of the serpent in the Garden, it was not Lucifer/Satan. It was one of the "fallen angels".

God Bless

Till all are one.

Do you believe the Book of Enoch should be Canon?

 

[now faith]

The only reasonable way to believe that the serpent was Satan or a
Extension of Satan , is to look at the promise of Christ.

Genesis 3: 14. And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: 15. And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

 

[now faith]

Do you believe the Book of Enoch should be Canon?

Strong's Concordance
satan: adversary, also the name of the superhuman adversary of God
Original Word: שָׂטָן
Part of Speech: Noun Masculine
Transliteration: satan
Phonetic Spelling: (saw-tawn')
Short Definition: Satan

 

[DeaconDean]

Do you believe the Book of Enoch should be Canon?

No sir.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[now faith]

That has been my argument all along.

But there is a movement (look in the GT area) calling for the re-opening of the OT canon to include Enoch. For no other reason than the Ethiopian Church, has it in theirs. But they forget, they only included it around AD 1300, some 15-1600 years after it was written.

As far as I know, there are maybe 3 different renderings of the book of Enoch.

One version has the "giants" at 3000 ells. (ell=45 inches) Do the math.

One version has the "giants" at 3000 cubits. (cubit=roughly 18 inches) Do the math.

One version has the "giants" at 300 cubits. (cubit=roughly 18 inches) Do the math.

Wait until I tell what one member said about Adam and the Garden of Eden.

I'll tell you later.

God Bless

Till all are one.

Ok I got it , for a minute I thought you were validating the book of Enoch.
My Bad ,but we are in agreement.
My concern is this belief is being widely taught ,it seems to compel
People to think God's Word was not complete.

 

[DeaconDean]

The only reasonable way to believe that the serpent was Satan or a
Extension of Satan , is to look at the promise of Christ.

Genesis 3: 14. And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: 15. And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

Strong's Concordance
satan: adversary, also the name of the superhuman adversary of God
Original Word: שָׂטָן
Part of Speech: Noun Masculine
Transliteration: satan
Phonetic Spelling: (saw-tawn')
Short Definition: Satan

Here again, the serpent that was in the Garden is identified in the Book of Revelation:

"And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him." -Rev. 12:9 (KJV)

"And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years," -Rev. 20:2 (KJV)

Both verses tell us "that old serpent" was/is Lucifer/Satan.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[now faith]

We have discussed another topic as well.
This a a new twist, it's called mid Acts dispensationism.
Only the Pauline Epistles apply to Gentiles.
Here's the kicker they deny 1st and 2nd Timothy as well.
I suppose because of the all Schripture verse.

 

[DeaconDean]

We have discussed another topic as well.
This a a new twist, it's called mid Acts dispensationism.
Only the Pauline Epistles apply to Gentiles.
Here's the kicker they deny 1st and 2nd Timothy as well.
I suppose because of the all Schripture verse.

Your right.

I was involved in about 5 different debates on the Book of Enoch.

It's really depressing what some people now believe.

Then again, its not:

"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;" 2 Tim. 4:3 (KJV)

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[now faith]

This is a touchy question...
What do you think of John Macauther, and His teaching on taking the mark of the beast?

 

[now faith]

As well I am not too pleased with Kenneth Copeland either

 

[DeaconDean]

This is a touchy question...
What do you think of John Macauther, and His teaching on taking the mark of the beast?

Haven't read that.

But I have my own opinions in that area.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[DeaconDean]

As well I am not too pleased with Kenneth Copeland either

I really don't want to offend you, but I have zero respect for K. Copeland and his theology.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[now faith]

I really don't want to offend you, but I have zero respect for K. Copeland and his theology.

God Bless

Till all are one.

You do not offend me one bit ,you must know by now I place God's Word above all else.
I listened to Macauther tell people those left behind will have to buy and sell so God will not judge them harshly for taking the mark.
Revelation is clear that all those who take the mark will be cast in the lake of fire.
Jimmy Deyoung agrees that it's ok to take it as well.
It's insanity ,as well Copeland has move to a universal theology , with the Pope.
It's insanity as well

 

[now faith]

God Bless you and yours on this Thanks giving.
I think we need to start making plans to move up.
Good night

 

[DeaconDean]

You do not offend me one bit ,you must know by now I place God's Word above all else.
I listened to Macauther tell people those left behind will have to buy and sell so God will not judge them harshly for taking the mark.
Revelation is clear that all those who take the mark will be cast in the lake of fire.
Jimmy Deyoung agrees that it's ok to take it as well.
It's insanity ,as well Copeland has move to a universal theology , with the Pope.
It's insanity as well

Kenneth Copeland's theology on what happened during the three days Christ was in the grave...I don't know where he learned that.

I believe the mark is the rfid chip. It is not new. The U.S. government has been playing with that technology since the late 1960's.

Taking the mark? Scripture is very clear, at least I think so, what happens if you do.

Well, its 0425 am here, I'm leaving work 2 hours early. I gotta go home and fire up my smoker. I got a 23 lb turkey to smoke this morning.

I sincerely hope you have a very safe and Blessed Thanksgiving.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[now faith]

Yes Sir I completely agree with you on Christ suffering in Hell because he was our atonement but not a sinner.
The Bible simply does not teach what Copeland said.
Christ did not suffer in Hell he was victorious over it all

 

[DeaconDean]

I think we need to start making plans to move up.

My reservations were made years ago.

God Bless

Till all are one.