Posted on 04/11/2023 8:25:49 PM PDT by Morgana
No, I’m not using the term loosely. Yahweh Him self called them god(s). It’s the 1st commandment. Study the Bible. Read anything by Michael Heiser, and read The Return of the Gods by Jonathan Cahn.
I suggest it is a huge mistake to put things like money, celebrity, social position, other persons, etc. in the same category as fallen angels (gods, little "g").
Paul tells us who our enemy is. It's these gods, spirits, daemons, evil beings.
This is why playing with a Ouija board is more dangerous by an infinite order of magnitude than working or playing golf on a Sunday morning instead of going to church.
And BTW, this isn't "metaphorical."
My understanding is that it is metaphorical, because nobody else can be a literal God.
It is a word, when using small g, that can mean anything that leads you away from worshipping God.
The Hebrew word is אֱלֹהִים 'ĕlōhîm (plural, as Mike Heiser has illustrated)...and it doesn't mean God our Father.
I thought he was called the prince of this earth.
That is something that has been taught in seminaries around the world for a very long time...and then preached from the pulpit.
Many people have theorized why that was done but the most common reason is probably to remove the paranormal-sounding elements from the Bible so that it was more easily accepted by modern man.
But, unfortunately, changing the message of the Bible to make it appeal to modern man is/was an act of great deceit.
The Old Testament (and the New Testament rests of the Old) tells us quite plainly who the enemy is. And even if modern man has a problem with it, our enemy is quite real and comes from the spiritual realm.
I believe He was. If it is a large G, it means Him. If it is a small g, it can be anything that we choose to do that gets in thevway of Him.
That's unfortunately incorrect. But as said above, that's been pushed by the pulpit for a long time now.
If it is a large G, it means Him. If it is a small g, it can be anything “
Except Biblical Hebrew and Greek don’t have capital letters. This difference can only exist in English versions, not the original.
As some very honest preachers have said, "If we told the truth, the congregation would head for the door like stampeding buffalo. People don't want to hear about the 'daemonic'."
I used the term "daemon" (same as "daimon") because some people want to argue about the term "demonic" being related to "spirits of the dead Nephilim" and thereby derail the discussion. Daemon/daimon refers to a being from the spirit world, not a "demon" specifically.
Oh, so let’s just pause and sideline discussion of paganism and demonic influences in society and government until we first learn Hebrew and Greek?
Distraction and diversion much?
Wow! Everyone’s a seminarian here, fresh out of Divinity School!
p
How stupid is that?
That's almost like saying you have to have a degree in nutrition to discuss food.
Here's an article on what goes on in some seminaries. Is this the kind of seminary you are talking about?
Seminary President Admits She Doesn’t Believe in Heaven, Miracles or Christ’s Resurrection.Here's an excerpt:
Serene Jones, president of Union Theological Seminary in New York, made the comments in an interview with Nicholas Kristof of The New York Times for an article published Easter weekend. Although the author’s intent may have been to inspire readers, it also served to spotlight the leftward drift of many seminaries.
Union Theological Seminary’s founding constitution stated the seminary’s goal was to “promote” the “Kingdom of Christ.” Professors were required to affirm they believed “the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be the word of God” and the “only infallible rule of faith and practice.”
But as Jones made clear, the seminary is a very different school today.
She rejects a literal bodily resurrection of Christ.
“When you look in the Gospels, the stories are all over the place. There’s no resurrection story in Mark, just an empty tomb. Those who claim to know whether or not it happened are kidding themselves,” Jones said. “… Crucifixion is not something that God is orchestrating from upstairs. The pervasive idea of an abusive God-father who sends his own kid to the cross so God could forgive people is nuts. For me, the cross is an enactment of our human hatred. But what happens on Easter is the triumph of love in the midst of suffering. Isn’t that reason for hope?”
She rejects the idea that God miraculously heals through prayer.
“I don’t believe in a God who, because of prayer, would decide to cure your mother’s cancer but not cure the mother of your nonpraying neighbor,” she said. “We can’t manipulate God like that.”
Who is Jonathan Chan?
“Wow! Everyone’s a seminarian here, fresh out of Divinity School!”
Funny that too! I post an article about one thing and it starts a debate about the title.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.