Massorite

You Got that Right! God never intended for us to have any denomination at all because they are a satanic method of separating or fracturing the body of Christ into little pieces. And indeed to day most of these denominations have now seriously compromised there integrity by excepting or sanctioning the gay life style, to mention just one example. This makes the body of Christ one that has crippled body parts that need to be healed or cut off. For those that say that Christ is soon coming back, they should take a good look at what they are saying Christ is coming back to get because He is not coming back for a crippled, decaying body that stinks to high heaven. Until these diseased body parts are healed or cut off from the body Christ will not be returning for us.

First of all we must remember that the bible says that the "devil entered into Judas" so by this we know that Judas was possessed at the time that he betrayed Jesus and was still possessed at the moment he was dipping the bread in the bowl with Jesus. The question here is "how is it that the devil was able to possess Judas while Judas was with Jesus and one of His disciples? The answer is in the actions of Judas. He did it for the money. In spite of the teachings of Jesus there was a part of Judas that he never turned over to God for rebuilding. He had his own reasoning and his own plan of action on what should be done and thought he could control God and His actions. And his motivations was money and self centered so satan was able to possess him and have an influence on his actions. Jesus didn't call down the angels because it was not in the plan of God for Him to do so and He practiced what He preached. Which was obedience to the Father at all costs. Besides that if Jesus and the angels killed off all of the Romans who would have been there to crucify Him? Who would have been there to force the Gospel to be spread through out the world? Had it not been for the persecution of the early church by the Romans the Gospel would have gone nowhere. If Jesus had called down the angels the Jew would never have killed Him because He would have proved that He was indeed the son of God with the power to call down the angels. We should remember that the Jews misinterpreted the scriptures. They understood what the bible was saying as speaking about an outward war on earth with all the same stuff they always had. But they were wrong Just a point about your statements with regard to Judases personality and motives. Firstly if he was so dishonest why did Jesus have him as a disciple? As Jesus knew that Judas would betray him (the same as he predicted that Peter would deny him) he must have known that Judas was money-grubbing and possessed by the devil so why did he put up with it? Or are you saying that as Jesus had taken on the body of a mortal, he was just as vulnerable as any of us, to deception? Which brings up another point: Do you think that Jesus was "in on the plan" from the beginning, i.e. from when he was first baptized and started his ministry? Or maybe even from childhood? Good question. Jesus did according to the while of His Father and the will of His Father was to let Judas do as he had intended. Was Jesus vulnerable to deception? Obviously not because he knew what Judas was going to do before he did it. When Judas first became a disciple he was not possessed. That happened later according to scripture. Was Judas imperfect when Jesus took him under His wing? Yes he was and so were the rest of them. The difference is that in side, Judas never changed from what he was before Jesus came along and that was the his choice. Peter on the other hand did change but out of fear he denied Jesus. But Jesus knew Peters heart like He knew the heart of Judas. Peter came back to Jesus and Judas hung himself.

First of all we must remember that the bible says that the "devil entered into Judas" so by this we know that Judas was possessed at the time that he betrayed Jesus and was still possessed at the moment he was dipping the bread in the bowl with Jesus. The question here is "how is it that the devil was able to possess Judas while Judas was with Jesus and one of His disciples? The answer is in the actions of Judas. He did it for the money. In spite of the teachings of Jesus there was a part of Judas that he never turned over to God for rebuilding. He had his own reasoning and his own plan of action on what should be done and thought he could control God and His actions. And his motivations was money and self centered so satan was able to possess him and have an influence on his actions. Jesus didn't call down the angels because it was not in the plan of God for Him to do so and He practiced what He preached. Which was obedience to the Father at all costs. Besides that if Jesus and the angels killed off all of the Romans who would have been there to crucify Him? Who would have been there to force the Gospel to be spread through out the world? Had it not been for the persecution of the early church by the Romans the Gospel would have gone nowhere. If Jesus had called down the angels the Jew would never have killed Him because He would have proved that He was indeed the son of God with the power to call down the angels. We should remember that the Jews misinterpreted the scriptures. They understood what the bible was saying as speaking about an outward war on earth with all the same stuff they always had. But they were wrong

Thank you My friend. We are good. I am going through some real stressful stuff with my 77 year old mother whom my wife and I are trying to take care of. But it is hard to take care of someone who wants to fight you tooth and nail about it and it is even harder when she lives down stairs in a finished basement. She just got back from a 2 month friend visiting and gambling trip. My wife and I took care of her dog and plants while she was gone. We even had to take her dog to the vet. The agreement we had with her was that we would pay $500 a month and all of the utilities. For the past two months she has only payed $300.00 and when she got back she refused to pay any of the house payment. Leaving me stuck with putting out an additional $500 a month. If I had it that would be fine but I work on new houses and you know what is happening there. My mother has a reprobate mind and is going to die that way unless she changes. She has COPD and still smokes up a storm. She can't see and needs an eye operation but she is still driving and I can do nothing to stop her. I am going to start the process to get guardianship but I haven't got the money so I am forced to put it on a credit card. I have got to do something before she has a wreck and hurts or kills herself or someone else. All of this is happening just when I was going to spend the money to get my new book published and marketed. I guess I have already said to much and I am a little to touchy. Robert

Sister, when it come to money the only one you can depend on is the Lord God Himself. The Catholic church has been paying out huge sums of money because of the pedophile law suits for several years now and as I understand it here in Atlanta they just tried to sell off most of their nonessential realistate assets. They are hurting because of their own choices.

. unred typo replied, . ____________________________________________________ I'm with you all the way unread typo' Good answer mate, good answer. The Bible is a simple book to understand because it was given by God to be understood by the simple. Jesus thanked God that the truths of the Bible were hidden from the worldly wise who refused to believe, and stated that God has "revealed them unto babes" (Matt. 11:25-27). Thats us mate, "babes." Jesus gives the reason the truths are hidden from anyone. Its because they refuse to humble themselves to believe and conform to the Bible (Matt. 13:10-17), not because they never had an EXPERT to interperate every word. Jesus speakes of the devil taking the Word from the hearts of men lest it should bring forth fruit (Matt. 13:19-23). No man can get the vastness of the Bible all at once, we know that much. But the most simple beginners can understand the Bible one line at a time, for this is the way it was given, and it is the best way to understand it (Isa. 28:9-13). One does not have to be a Rhodes Scholar to understand the truths of the Bible, nor does one need an expert to explain it all. Nor do we need a degree of expertise in the field of biblical manuscript/textual, understanding and interpretation. Imagin God punishing people for not obeying Him because he wrote a book which needed interpretating by professors, which they never had access to? God can not judge people based on a book written in such a way as to confuse people, or which needs interpretation by experts before it is understood. Let the experts read again what Jesus said; "Jesus thanked God that the truths of the Bible were HIDDEN from the WORLDLY WISE who refused to believe, and stated that God has "REVEALED them unto BABES" (Matt. 11:25-27). Jesus gives the reason the truths are hidden from anyone because they refuse to humble themselves to believe and conform to the Bible (Matt. 13:10-17)." Anyone who CAN READ and understands the most simple human language, can undserstand what it says. Every time any group of persons reads a particular part of the Bible they all read the same thing. If they should read it again, it would still be the same. If they were asked what the passage says they could all do it without exception. If they can tell what it says, and if they can read what it says, then they can all believe what it says; and that is all that is necessary to understand the Bible. A God who could not make Himself clear, or had to be interpreted evey time He said something, would be no God at all. Almost any human being can express themselves clearly enough to be understood. Furthermore, a God who could could make Himself clear and chose to do otherwise in such a way as to confuse and hide from man those things He seeks to reveal to man, would not be worth hearing. A God that gave man a revelation and deliberately sought to hide it from man, and then judge him for not being able to understand it, would be a tyrant and not a God of love and justice. Actually the bible is geared to be understood by anyone with at the least an eighth grade education .

In all fairness Brother, the same holds true of the reverse of this request. There is no undeniable, unquestionable scripture that is going to prove that this is indeed the same Lazarus that's being spoken of. Other than assumption and coincidence regarding the name of Lazarus, we have no incontrovertible evidence in the scriptures telling us that this is indeed the same man. Blessings to you Brother, in Christ, Christian Yes that is true. My point in asking for scripture like you said works both ways. To assume that I was assuming that Lazarus in the parable is a real man and accusing me of believing that which will lead me into believing a false doctrine was simply an assumption in and of itself. I asked for the scripture because I knew there was none and I knew there was no way to prove one way or the other. I know that it was a parable and was an example of that which is real but not actually real. The point of the parable is to say that a man who was a righteous man, died and went to rest in the bosom of Abraham and a man who was rich and an unrighteous man, died and went to a place of burning torment. Though Lazarus and the rich man might not be real what happens to the righteous and the unrighteous is real and that is I believe the point of the parable in that when we die we either go to a place of burning torment or we go to rest in Paradise/ bosom of Abraham just as the thief did. And just as scripture said. The real Lazarus was not dead but was asleep and if the real Lazarus was not dead and only sleeping then his brain was not dead either. Maybe my logic was not the best here but you know me. Don't try to tell me I am speaking something that is not scriptural unless you have some scripture to prove me wrong. By the way. I just took delivery of a Geneva Bible which is translated just as it was translated into English and printed in 1599. I have already found some changes that King James made that would change certain scripture meaning or understandings and re-enforce some of my research findings. Be Blessed

Again I say. What about the rich man and Abraham? Abraham was long dead before the rich man but both of them were thinking, reasoning and carrying on a conscious conversation in death. Scripture tells us that both the rich man and Abraham were dead. If you can not produce any scriptural back up for your belief that death brings a dead mind also then Abraham and the rich man had an active mind that was working perfectly good even after death. And to say otherwise is a contradiction of what the word of God says about the two dead people.

Greetings Brother Massorite, I hforeknowledgeJudgmentreceivingMasoniteave one question regarding your statement above. It is referenced, or inferred, more than a few times in the Scriptures that all the dead "not in Christ" will be raised for judgment in the end (at the Great White Throne judgment), as we discussed in our other thread. If your statement above is true, then why would the dead that are "not in Christ" need to be raised again to be judged again in Revelation 20:11-13? Blessings to you dear Brother, in His service, Christian I never thought of that before. However there is a difference between suffering torments like the rich man was doing and the second death. The rich man is in what is considered to be "Hell" and as we know from scripture. Hell is also cast into the lake of fire so we know that hell is a separate place from anywhere else. I am afraid I don't have a concrete answer for you because I don't think there is any scripture I can glean from. There is no doubt that the rich man has already been judged because he is already suffering the rewards for his choices and Lazarus is being comforted by Abraham. We also know from scripture that those who die in Christ will not take part in the great white throne judgment but everyone else will. We also know that the book of life will be opened also so there will be those who's names are written in the book of life that will take part in the great white throne judgment. To bad the bible doesn't tell us if Samuel was in the bosom of Abraham or not when he was conjured up. It would be interesting to know where he was.

This mirrors my thinking when asking about the silence of Lazarus, and how there is no unquestionable, incontrovertible "words" spoken by him in Luke's parable. Only cross-"rationalization" and "assumption" makes one arrive at the position that he is an active part of the interaction. Here Samuel, upon "rising" possesses a conversational ability, but only upon being disturbed/disquieted to be "brought up". We do not haveunquestionable, incontrovertible scriptural verse evidence which allows us to know if he possessed and utilized this ability while he was "down" where he was (grave/paradise). I don't think it impossible to comprehend that the "good" get to "rest" and await Christ, and the "bad" get to be "awake" so that their punishment/torment may be felt. What is also interesting about 1 Samuel 28:19 is that whether "awake or asleep", Samuel "rises" having a foreknowledge of events that have not yet occurred relating to Saul, his sons, and the Israelites. Blessings to you brother, in His service, Christian That was a great point about Samuel having foreknowledge about certain events that were to take place. I believe that when we die saved or unsaved Judgment takes place at the moment of death which is why the rich man is already suffering eternal torment and Lazarus is resting. Both were receiving their just rewards from the choices they made before their death. Samuel always had that knowledge from God while he was alive. So being brought back to life by the witch why wouldn't he have it still. Everyone who has ascended into heaven ascended alive not dead. Christ came back to life to ascend into heaven. Enoch was taken up alive. Elijah was taken up into heaven alive. As a mater of fact there is not one single person who has went to heaven when they die. This is why there is a resurrection from the dead at Christs return. That is a good point and here is a bit of trivia. Look for a record of the death of Ezra. I think you will find that it does not exist. Some of the research I have done has shown me that the word Esdras which is the name ascribed to a couple of the Apocryphal books which are not in the bible we read from is another word for Ezra and those books claim that Esdras was taken up. I do not abide by these books but they are interesting. I do read them with my heart/Holy Spirit and I believe that some of them should never have been removed from the bible.

This mirrors my thinking when asking about the silence of Lazarus, and how there is no unquestionable, incontrovertible "words" spoken by him in Luke's parable. Only cross-"rationalization" and "assumption" makes one arrive at the position that he is an active part of the interaction. Here Samuel, upon "rising" possesses a conversational ability, but only upon being disturbed/disquieted to be "brought up". We do not haveunquestionable, incontrovertible scriptural verse evidence which allows us to know if he possessed and utilized this ability while he was "down" where he was (grave/paradise). I don't think it impossible to comprehend that the "good" get to "rest" and await Christ, and the "bad" get to be "awake" so that their punishment/torment may be felt. What is also interesting about 1 Samuel 28:19 is that whether "awake or asleep", Samuel "rises" having a foreknowledge of events that have not yet occured relating to Saul, his sons, and the Israelites. Blessings to you brother, in His service, Christian That was a great point about Samual having foreknowlegde about certain events that were to take place. I believe that when we die saved or unsaved Judgement takes place at the moment of death which is why the rich man is already suffering eternal torment and Lazarus is resting. Both were recieving their just rewards from the choices they made before their death.

Yes! As I was pondering on this post today I remembered about Samuel, Saul and the witch of Endore. When Samuel was conjured up He said "Why have you disquieted me"? The word "Disquieted" means to be angered or disturbed or irritated, agitated and so on. And since Samuel asked the question we know that in death he was able to think, get angry, to reason and ask questions. He was shall we say semiconscious. My opinion on this is that Samuel was resting in the same kind of sleep that Lazarus was but was awakened which made him angry or agitated. I believe that when we die it will be like taking a nap. And when we wake up it will be time to stand before the Lord in heaven as an acceptable gift from His Son.

A little know fact is that the KJV doesn't hold true to the Textus Receptus. And there are several versions of the Textus Receptus. It was revised several times to correct the "errors." Also of interest, the KJV diverges from the TR in some verses and mirrors the Latin Vulgate. I have nothing against the King James Bible, if anything I would be more apt to question the Textus Receptus. God Bless, K.D. It is probably a little known fact because it is false. Satan has been doing his best to cause people to turn away from the true Word of God, and accept the numerous false modern English translations, and this is yet another assault. I am not saying that you are of the devil, but only that the devil is behind this slanderous accusation against the KJV and the Textus Receptus. To DDavidfromNC, I accept the KJV Bible by faith, just as others choose to place their confidence in modern English translations. This much I can say for sure. If you compare the numerous translations available, they all vary in what they say. If one is as good as another, then you are conceding that there is no absolutely reliable translation, and God was not able to fully preserve his Word. I choose to believe otherwise. By the way, I don't expect to persuade the modern English enthusiastes. I know that is futile, but it is just as futile to attempt to persuade me I am wrong when it comes to holding to the KJV Bible only. I gave my opinion, as others have, take it or leave it. Very Good Butero. I believe the same thing. I am currently waiting delivery of the Geneva Bible which will be in it,s original form as it was translated into English and printed in 1550. It is the same bible that the Pilgrams brought with them to America when they settled here and used to establish church doctrine for the first time in this country in defience of the European churches. Which is one reason why King James ordered a newer translation to be done. I am looking forward to doing some compareing with the King James bible. I use the Companion Bible which is the authorized K.J. version of 1611. It is base on the Textus ReceptusPilgrimsdefiancecomparing

You do what I expect they are doing. The women arE preaching and teaching. As I have already said. God has always used a woman when there was not a qualified man.

Speaking from personal experience and many comparisons I believe that we should not trust any of the newer versions of the bible because they have been retranslated to suit the false doctrinal teachings of men. Compared with the King James and other older versions there are many words have been changed or watered down. There has even been whole sections of verses that have been removed or changed all together in the name of a more perfect translation. Even King James made changes that effect our more intimate understanding of many sections of scripture. Languages change over time and many words that were used 3 or 4 hundred years ago are not used any longer and so on.

Trust is correct. But a woman can have a ministry as long as she in under the cover her husband or a male pastor. Joyce Myers for example has a very wonderful and large ministry but she operates under the cover of her husband.

over 90% of them fall away completely it will be a huge "HALLELUJAH!!!!" Thank you Lord I was wrong. Your point is well taken though. Every person is responsible to find the truth for themselves and not to rely on someone else's "promise" I think the AC is rising already and will be revealed as such in the extremely near future. Almost everyone on the planet has heard his name but don't remember it because it was inconsequential to them personally....so far. My point exactly Yod. I know a woman who once believed that God wasn't going to allow a certain thing to happen but it did. To day she has lost her children and is a meth addict. You should have seen the truly heart felt look of one who believes that they have been betrayed by one whom they love very much. She was wounded to the soul. But she believed in that which was not scriptural as if it were. We don't even have to wait for the great tribulation to get here to be persecuted in the name of Christ. Some 250,000 Christan's or more are tortured or in some way killed because they believe in Jesus. I like to ask people if that sort of persecution is the wrath of God or tribulation. All anyone has to do to see how our brothers and sisters in Christ are being disfigured, tortured, hanged put in jail or suffering any number of other forms of persecution, is to go to "The Voice of the Martyrs" Web site and they can read about it and see for them selves how bad it gets.

If when one dies all brain activity ceases then how is it that the rich man was able to know and fell that he was in torments. How is it that he was able to talk to Abraham and how was it that he was able to reason and ask Abraham to send Lazarus back to warn his family about the torments? Wasn't the rich man dead also? And if he was dead what was it that was suffering the torments? As you said the flesh turns back to the dust which means that the brain was no longer. Right? What was the difference between the rich man and Lazarus? If death is death then how can you account for the defeat of death by Jesus on the cross. In other words when we die in the flesh, death in the after life has already been conquered or swallowed up by Christ so Lazarus was not dead but in a state of peaceful sleep where he will rest until he is raised from the grave alive as he was already raised once. If Lazarus was dead and couldn't feel or know anything then the rich man should have been in the same state because both of them were dead because death is death. But they weren't. Again I say. If it is not written in the bible that Lazarus's soul was dead then it was not. If our soul is not an immortal soul then why does the bible teach us that we will be abiding with God and His son in the New Jerusalem on a new earth for ever and ever. And why does the bible tell us that who ever is not written in the Lambs Book of Life will suffer in eternal torments or fire for ever and ever in the lake of fire? What you are teaching does not line up with scripture at all because scripture says the opposite of what you are saying. How ever if you can show some scripture that tells us that Lazarus's soul is or was dead and will not exist for an eternity (or the rich man for that matter).

So you are saying all angels are descended from angels Hi onwingsaseagles, Don't you think that's a pretty silly remark. We all know angels don't marry and have children. What I asked was do you think all giants are descended from angels. And if you realize that angels do not reproduce then why do you support the absurd idea that they reproduced with people? Hi onwingsaseagles, If angels left their spiritual realm and entered the earthly realm as the Bible so stipulates then I am quiet sure they are able to produce children with women. It is the word of God that states this fact, if you can not see the truth in God's Word then I suggest you go to the one who can show you the truth. I am not here to argue the point with you, the Bible is crystal clear in what it says you just have to believe what it says. God's wisdom is far beyond our wisdom we will not understand everything but we have an eternal God and Father who can teach us the truths of His Word through the Holy Spirit. To your first remark,you are wrong angels can not and did not reproduce with women. To your 2nd remark God's word does not state the angels had reproduced with women as a fact,it is your false interpretation of who the sons of God are that causes you to believe this myth. To your 3rd remark if it is ''crystal clear'' then show me where it says angels reproduce at all much less with humans. To your 4th God wisdom is far beyond mens,I suggest you start applying that thought to your life instead of being swayed by every wind of doctrine you hear. In the Holman bible dictionary the word "giants" is rendered from the hebrew word Nephilim which means "fallen ones" IE fallen angels. Are you telling us that all of the scholars who did the research for the Holman dictionary are wrong? How about all of the other research tools that say the same thing? Are all of those scholars wrong also. How about Joel or Peter? Are they lairs or are they wrong also? Here a challange for you. If there were giants in the land in the book of Genesis and then the flood came and killed every living soul on the earth except the 8 souls on the ark. Where did the giants come from in the book of Joshua. If Noah and his family repopulated the earth. How is it that Noah and his family repopulated the earth with Isrealites, Egyptians, Etheopians and son as well as degeting giants who had six fingers and six toes? Hi Massorite, That's a very good post and I would like to see onwingsaseagles answer it if he can. Thankyou Isa. It is a question many never consider and one certainly worth pondering about.

the Battle of Armageddon and the battle of Gog and Magog, are two different battles, but the same war,..... in the Battle of Armageddon satan is defeated and cast into the abyss and sealed up there for 1000 years. After that 1000 years, satan is released for a short season and is allowed to do his deception thing again, and then comes the battle of Gog and Magog, where satan is defeated for the final time for then the Great White Throne Judgment, where those that have not been found to be with Christ will be thrown into the lake of fire. and that ends the war forever. as far as the anti-Christ, there has always been at least one anti-Christ on the scene since Christ ascended. why? because, satan has to have his man ready to be in power when the time comes.... being that NO MAN, NOT EVEN THE SON, knows the day or the hour (only the season) satan has to be prepared. in the last 50 years, i have heard many times of people trying to pick out who the anti-Christ is..... is the anti-christ alive today? Yes, who is it? I have no idea, for tomorrow the anti-christ that satan has ready for today, may not be the one for tomorrow. this is why it is so important, not to be deceived, and to keep our wedding garments spotless.... what will we be do when the antichrist rises to power? I am planning on being at a wedding feast with the BrideGroom. mike Hello Mike Prove it! Show me some scripture that says that the battle of Armageddon is not fought with Gog and all of his allies. It is not Gog and Magog. It is Gog from the land of Magog. Many teach that the battle of Armageddon is described in Ch. 38 and 39 of the book of Ezekiel and indeed ch 39 lines up with the dissipation of the battle of Armageddon in the book of Revelation. But both ch 38 and 39 are addressed to Gog of Magog. Again show me some scripture that says that we will not be here when the antichrist comes to power. If it is not written in the word of God it is not. the scripture references have been given and given again on this site for pre, mid and post trib rapture arguments. I am not going to open it up and make this thread another one. the reason is, whether the rapture is a pre, mid or post trib thing is not a salvation thing.... even if a person does not believe in the rapture, it does not mean they are not sanctified by the Blood of The Lamb.... how a person decides to interpret the prophecies, has no bearing on whether or not they are saved. telling some one that they will not see paradise if they do not believe the same way another does, is not a good thing. through the studies i have done over the last 40 years, formal and informal, I believe that there is a rapture, and will not get into another debate as to whether their is or is not a rapture, i believe there is. I believe the rapture is prior to the great tribulation at the first resurrection, whether some one else does or does not is irrelevant. where those that are dead in Christ will rise, and those that are alive and in Christ will follow to meet Christ in the air, not on earth.... and for a week those found righteous in Christ will stand before the Judgment seat of the Lamb, there will be a wedding feast, that of the Bride Groom and the Bride (The Church) and during the same week the Great Tribulation is on going..... after the Great Tribulation, that is when CHRIST actually returns, on a white horse, with His Army dressed in white, thus the battle of Armageddon.... satan is defeated, ..... those that were left through the tribulation, and did not take the Mark, worship the beast, take his number or name will be with Christ for the 1000 years, but will not rule with him.... after the 1000 years, satan is released for a short season (a few years, which are not actually numbered) to try and win souls again. and then the final battle, after which comes the Great White Throne Judgment.... and eternity with the one each person chooses... Christ or the lake of fire..... if you choose to believe differently does not mean you are wrong, or i am wrong or anyone else is wrong.... salvation is not on the line for this issue.... I believe that if a person is not ready prior to the tribulation, not walking with the Lord prior to the trib, that person will not find it very easy what so ever to pick up stakes and walk with Christ during it.... so if a person is thinking they have time, they are totally wrong.... no matter if it is pre, mid or post, those not ready are in deep kimchi...... mike Ooh I disagree. I believe that what one believes about the end times will dictate thier reaction to the event when it gets here and is very much eternally significant. For example. If a believer believes that they will be raptured out of this world before the antichrist shows up on the world seen and suddenly finds themselves in the midst of great persecution and face to face with the antichrist. What do you think their reaction will be to the fact that what they have been taught was wrong and now they are suffering that which they have been taught God said would not happen to them. And now they have to decide again what is the truth and what is a lie? On the other side of the coin. What if a believer believes that they will be here to suffer for a period of great tribulation and suddenly find themselves in the glorified body and being transported up to heaven by a angel. What do you suppose their reaction would be when they realize they have been taught wrongly? Now you are making statements as if they are biblical facts and re-enforced by scripture and I am simply asking you to back up your statements with the biblical facts. Which you are refusing to do. The reality here is that when a statement is made that influences the way a young or new believer believes. It effects their upbringing and future decisions regarding their walk with God. Would you teach your children a lie and let them grow up believing a lie? No I don't think so and neither does God. But when a teacher of the word of God teaches a lie they not only bring themselves down they also mislead a young or new believer. Studying scripture for forty years means nothing if what you are teaching is a lie. Even some of the most notable high profile preachers teach that which is not written in the word of God. Look at Mitt. He and the rest of his Mormon believers teach a great lie and he might even be our president. So here is what I believe. If you are going to make statements on this web site as if they were truth according to the word of God the least you can do is provide scripture to back up your statements because not everybody has been studying scripture for forty years. Who are young and impressionable. Any time I find that something is making statments here as if it is the truth that I know are not written in the word of God I always challenge that person to back up what they say with scriptural proof. According to the word of God if someone teaches that which is not written in the word of God. They are teaching a lie. It really is very simple. If it is not written in the bible it is a lie and satan is the author of all lies.

So you are saying all angels are descended from angels Hi onwingsaseagles, Don't you think that's a pretty silly remark. We all know angels don't marry and have children. What I asked was do you think all giants are descended from angels. And if you realize that angels do not reproduce then why do you support the absurd idea that they reproduced with people? Hi onwingsaseagles, If angels left their spiritual realm and entered the earthly realm as the Bible so stipulates then I am quiet sure they are able to produce children with women. It is the word of God that states this fact, if you can not see the truth in God's Word then I suggest you go to the one who can show you the truth. I am not here to argue the point with you, the Bible is crystal clear in what it says you just have to believe what it says. God's wisdom is far beyond our wisdom we will not understand everything but we have an eternal God and Father who can teach us the truths of His Word through the Holy Spirit. To your first remark,you are wrong angels can not and did not reproduce with women. To your 2nd remark God's word does not state the angels had reproduced with women as a fact,it is your false interpretation of who the sons of God are that causes you to believe this myth. To your 3rd remark if it is ''crystal clear'' then show me where it says angels reproduce at all much less with humans. To your 4th God wisdom is far beyond mens,I suggest you start applying that thought to your life instead of being swayed by every wind of doctrine you hear. In the Holman bible dictionary the word "giants" is rendered from the hebrew word Nephilim which means "fallen ones" IE fallen angels. Are you telling us that all of the scholars who did the research for the Holman dictionary are wrong? How about all of the other research tools that say the same thing? Are all of those scholars wrong also. How about Joel or Peter? Are they lairs or are they wrong also? Here a challange for you. If there were giants in the land in the book of Genesis and then the flood came and killed every living soul on the earth except the 8 souls on the ark. Where did the giants come from in the book of Joshua. If Noah and his family repopulated the earth. How is it that Noah and his family repopulated the earth with Isrealites, Egyptians, Etheopians and son as well as degeting giants who had six fingers and six toes?

the Battle of Armageddon and the battle of Gog and Magog, are two different battles, but the same war,..... in the Battle of Armageddon satan is defeated and cast into the abyss and sealed up there for 1000 years. After that 1000 years, satan is released for a short season and is allowed to do his deception thing again, and then comes the battle of Gog and Magog, where satan is defeated for the final time for then the Great White Throne Judgment, where those that have not been found to be with Christ will be thrown into the lake of fire. and that ends the war forever. as far as the anti-christ, there has always been at least one anti-christ on the scene since Christ ascended. why? because, satan has to have his man ready to be in power when the time comes.... being that NO MAN, NOT EVEN THE SON, knows the day or the hour (only the season) satan has to be prepared. in the last 50 years, i have heard many times of people trying to pick out who the anti-christ is..... is the anti-christ alive today? Yes, who is it? I have no idea, for tomorrow the anti-christ that satan has ready for today, may not be the one for tomorrow. this is why it is so important, not to be deceived, and to keep our wedding garments spotless.... what will we be do when the antichrist rises to power? I am planning on being at a wedding feast with the BrideGroom. mike Hello Mike Prove it! Show me some scripture that says that the battle of Armageddon is not fought with Gog and all of his allies. It is not Gog and Magog. It is Gog from the land of Magog. Many teach that the battle of Armageddon is discribed in Ch. 38 and 39 of the book of Ezekiel and indeed ch 39 lines up with the disciption of the battle of Armageddon in the book of Revelation. But both ch 38 and 39 are addressed to Gog of Magog. Again show me some scripture that says that we will not be here when the antichrist comes to power. If it is not written in the word of God it is not.

So you are saying all angels are descended from angels Hi onwingsaseagles, Don't you think that's a pretty silly remark. We all know angels don't marry and have children. Matthew 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven. Mark 12:25 For when they rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. Angels in heaven do not have children. Even Demons ( fallen angels) need to take on human form to be able to accomplish this task. To answer your question. No angels are not descended from angels, they were all created by God and they were all created at the same time, even Lucifer (Satan). Angels didn't marry and have children. Angels took of what human women they chose and then human women had their children.