Featured Is Satan, Lucifer and the Devil differing names for the evil one?

Peter was Satan,Dragon was Satan,God was Satan in the old testament,High priest was Satan(false angel of light)

the point is that the Satan is always a word which describes other men or kingdoms or empires being the Adversaries to God and his church

the prophecies of Christ in the old testament are pointing to that time that he would come--and we have the plain evidence in scripture of his coming in the flesh that is written for us the full account of his birth and everything.

now you say that a few texts out of the whole old testament maybe is a double prophecy of a man and of a entity called Satan(your view)BUT i ask you where is it in scripture pointing out that event of that entity fell from heaven and sinned--there are ample scriptures in reference to Christ coming which the prophecies foretold.
But where is the scripture evidence of the Angel sinning against God and the whole event taking place in scripture--its NOT there--now if a prophecy is telling about someone or an event just as Christ--where is the proof in the complete scriptures we have of that even happening.its clearly there with Christ--- BUT NOT THERE WITH YOUR ANGEL SINNING VIEW:wavey::wavey:

 

Wow. Much error here. Much.

 

on your part maybe---but explain away what you think is error on my part ?

 

If I teasingly call a cousin a little diablo, am I assigning a title of who he is to him?

Jesus said to Peter, "get me behind me Satan" is more literal get behind me adversary.

Jesus isn't saying Pete you are Satan. Jesus was saying, "That attitude is adversarial, Pete, and is why men stumble and not of God."

Of course, Jesus, unlike me, could write and talk in much more precise and concise terms.

There is no proof from Scriptures that there is not a literal enemey of God, who was a high authority figure in God's original scheme, was found with iniquity of overthrowing the authority of the most high, was forcefully removed from the original estate, and is undiminished in power, deceit, and wickedness.

Your statement that there are no angelic or satanic hosts is equally invalid and unsupported in Scriptures.

BTW, the high priest and his angels didn't tempt Christ for 40 days in the wilderness. They hadn't even the slightest concern for Him, until He returned and was more effective than John the Baptizer. And then it was a matter of jealousy and envy that brought Christ to their attention. Doctrine wasn't an issue until they were looking for an excuse to destroy Him.

 

Peter was Satan---the adversary against Christ in his false tradition
your failure is to see that Satan is a word not a name that means adversary.

Then you say that from scripture that there is no proof that there is not a entity angel that sinned and fell from heaven--- (according to the way the entity is believed to be)theres tons of evidence in scripture that it doesn't exist.

i say unto you also that from scripture there is NO proof of an entity or that event even happening at all.But you choose to throw it in scriptures disregarding that God did not put in in them--

You cant offer any scripture to prove that that event even happened in the scriptures--but you still hold to it happening when God did not say that it did.

 

I beg you pardon friend --they had the upmost concern for him--even at his birth--they were sore afraid of losing their power and authority that this new KING would take from them--that's why children were killed i believe 3 years and down--trying to kill the Christ.

They did tempt him trying to find fault with him to publish before the people--they were trying to protect their throne and power and authority over the people--they had lots of concern for him friend :love2::love2:

 

Let's see if I got your thinking correct.

If the Scriptures do not say specifically something happened, but still gives the results of what happened, then the "something happened" is purely speculative?

For instance: Five loaves and two fish were put into baskets that fed the five thousand. Something specifically happened to keep the baskets full but it is not stated, only the results are given in Scriptures. So by your thinking, the we can only speculate that the people were under mass hypnotism or delusional from hunger and thought they had eaten?

 

It wasn't a "they" it was Herod - who murdered his own family for fear of loosing his authority. It was Herod who inquired of the priests, and Herod who attempted to deceive the wise guys into returning and telling where Jesus was. It was Herod who sent the spies because he didn't trust the wise guys, and Herod who sent the military to dispatch the lives of the Bethlehem children.


Jesus lived quietly (with approval of God and man) in Nazareth for some thirty years, and the only record of note is the priests marveled at his schooling when He was 12. Do you not recall folks surprise that "anything good could come from Nazareth?"

 

Friend the scriptures plainly state that the people DID eat of the loaves and fish in the basket--

the scriptures does NOT say anywhere where the event of an angel sinning happened---plain as that--you only speculate with no scriptural evidence.

you try and use the scriptures and throwing in that fallen angel where the scriptures do NO such thing--theres plenty of scriptural evidence in all the bible of MEN being adversaries to God and his people.

im not speculating on what im saying--theres plenty of scriptural evidence.
You are speculating on what you are saying because there's NO scriptural evidence of a angel sinning and falling--plain as that :godisgood::godisgood:

 

the High priest and his angels were concerned over him gathering all the people against them and over taking them--they are the ones who continued to harass Christ and tempt him and was also the Church's main adversary also