How do you handle Jesus words about him. He calls him a liar and the father of lies and there is no truth in him ?
I don't really see what is the connection with being a liar and knowing the Scriptures really well. As the temptation of Jesus in the wilderness clearly demonstrated, he tried to use God's words against Jesus. Jesus outsmarted him. When he tried it with Eve, she didn't do so well.
I think like any good liar he mixes the truth with the LIE. That's always easier for people to swallow. Jesus straight up gave him the truth and they didn't want to hear that. It's like that old saying "A spoonful of sugar makes the medicine go down in the most delightful way". The truth can be painful.
Jesus said there is no truth in Him and Gods word is truth. So how can he know the truth since he is a liar by nature ?
Are you asking this as a serious question? Or just baiting?
Jesus said there is no truth in him. So how can he know the truth ? he is not an omniscient being but is limited. Man gives him way more credit than deserved. Is he powerful yes but nothing like God. Power, knowledge and presence are limited unlike with God who is Omni All.
Did I say he was omniscient? Did I say he was like God? No. Not at all. But he is very likely the second most powerful being in the universe. He is the cherub who covers. He was the supreme of creation. The "truth" you keep bringing up is not what I am referring to. The definition of "liar" is the very important point to dissect in this understanding.
But power is not knowledge of the truth . I agree he is powerful but his knowledge is limited and filled with lies and like Jesus said - there is no truth in him. He is blinded to the truth. He twists the truth like cult leaders twist the truth , are deceived and do not know the truth.
But again, and this is the significant point, one HAS to know the truth in order for someone to lie about it. If one does not have "truth", then that is called "ignorance". The Accuser is not ignorant. He has the understanding beyond human capability and then twists and distorts and states untruth. See the difference?
Not true as someone can be blinded to the truth of the Trinity and Deity of Christ never once believing it is true and tell others it’s not true. I see this happen allot.
It is a very different thing when you talk about humans being blinded and not having truth and trying to equate that with one of the most powerful and aware creations of God who lives in the spiritual realm. It's not the same situation at all.
This statement really bothers me because it is such a twisting of what is meant. For example, here is what James said:
Believing God exists is not the same as knowing the truth. For example Peter didn’t know the truth that Jesus was the Son of God. The Father revealed this truth to Peter otherwise he wouldn’t on known this truth.
So you are implying that the Accuser does not know the truth that Jesus is the Son of God? Which truth is that? The factual truth? Or the saving truth?
No I was using Peter as an example of revealed truth.
pawn.Maybe "encoded" was the wrong word. But if you read the rest of my explanation in #376, I think you would know what I meant. That it is highly symbolic, not plain and easy to understand sentences, with some exceptions, like the 7 letters to the 7 churches, and a few other places. It is unlike the way we speak here. (at least most of us) Of course it was revealed by Jesus Himself to show His disciples "the things which must soon take place". Just that sentence alone, tells us that, for the most part, Revelation is not a reference to the end times, as much as it is about things that happened in that generation, as Jesus confirmed in Matthew 24:34 "Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place." In that passage it is plain that Jesus was answering the 4 disciples question about when would the temple be destroyed, because He had said that "one stone would not be left on another." So it appears that much of Revelation is about the coming judgment on Jerusalem and the Jews. Jesus used literal, hyperbolic, and apocalyptic language in both Mat. 24 and Revelation.
Again, what you write proves exactly my original point. The Accuser had the factual truth that was stated in the word of God. He knew it intimately. He knew the seed of the woman would crush his head. That is why he has sought to destroy the chosen of God through the Old Testament history. That is the entire reason for the existence of the enemies of God who are the descendants of Esau and Ishmael (those nations as a whole). The world is experiencing the results of that hatred right at this very minute as evidenced by Hamas.No I was using Peter as an example of revealed truth.
The accuser did not know or understand the gospel and Jesus death. That’s for sure. Since he entered judas to do his dirty work which actually backfired on him and destroyed his power over sin and death snd was defeated by the very act he did by having Jesus killed and betrayed playing right into Jesus hand like a
That is the point: man does not know it, and neither does Satan, and neither did Jesus. NO ONE knows the time of the Lord's return except the Father.
And there is the rub. This passage has been discussed recently in another thread and shown that it does not mean what most think it means. English translations do not give the right sense of the original text. One MUST study the original language of the New Testament.
So you are saying that you know the time of the second coming?
