Why Did Jesus Sweat Blood?

[Pegg]

Pardon my ignorance, my appologies there.
Agian I didn't know either that, my appologies

no apology necessary. I hope you dont mind me continuing on in this discussion. I wont go into the trinity because you are entitled to your beliefs, but I would like to clear up some other misunderstandings by showing you some evidence and reason...you dont have to believe me, but at least you'll have a clearer picture of where we stand of some of these points.

I dont agree with the tampering part to add favoruable scriptures to the trinity,

I need to clarify that because i've worded that incorrectly. Verses have not been 'added', rather what I should have said is that the bible translators have translated in such a way to make the trinity appear accurate.

For example, the removal of the name of God from their translations means that the only god they read about is Jesus.
How do we know that they have done that? Because in passages of NT verses where the writer is quoting from the hebrew scriptures, those original hebrew manuscripts actually have the tetragrammaton in them. But the translators have chosen to use the word 'GOD' or 'LORD' in capitals rather then the name of God because that would confuse people....especially if people believe that Gods name is Jesus.
This is altering the original text in favor of making it appear that Jesus is God the Father.

nor do I believe the KJV was taken from other translations - it was taken from the Greek and Hebrew and possibly built upon the work of other translations. It was not the only translation of course just one more translation.

The translators of the KJV were given the instructions to use the 'Bishops' Bible' as the basis for the new translation. The bishops bible had been in use for a very long time prior and it was based on the original hebrew and greek texts. But the KJV came primarily from that translation....not from the original languages.

I know the NWT changed "in the beginning was the word the word was with God and the word was God" -to "the word was a god" - very subtle and very sinister indeed if you ask me.

It may surprise you to know that other translations before the NWT did the same thing. The reason they did so was because in that verse there are two distinct individuals mentioned. One is called 'ho theos' and the other 'thoes' and although the greek has no definite articles (a, the) the translators of the interlinears did put definite articles into the literal reading of this verse because its the only correct way to translate it into english.

An example is found in the less recent editions of Benjamin Wilsons Emphatic Diaglott where the verse reads: “In a beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God, and a god was the Word. This was in a beginning with the God.”
The original greek has no definite article, but the translator put definite articles into the verse.

And did you realise that the same trinitarians who reject using the definite article in John 1:1 will use it in other verses that have no definite article? For instance, take the case of the word 'spirit'. There are many instances where they insert the definite article “the” to make it read “the spirit” and “the holy spirit.” They even capitalize the word “Spirit” where it is not capitalized in the original greek text.

Maybe a good question to ask is why they readily use the definite article in verses that do not have a definite article in some places but not in others.

Impossible to you maybe. The bible perverters change "begotten" to "only" - which is also a very subtle change - begotten is an important word, it doesnt refute the trinity. I am God's son, so Jesus is not Gods only son.

that is because lexicographers define the Greek word mo‧no‧ge‧nes′ as a “single of its kind, only,” or “the only member of a kin or kind.”
At Luke 7:12 the KJV says
"Now when he came nigh to the gate of the city, behold, there was a dead man carried out, the only son (monogenes) of his mother, and she was a widow"
This verse uses the same word at 1John 4:9 which reads in the NWT
"By this the love of God was made manifest in our case, because God sent forth his only-begotten (monogene) Son into the world that we might gain life through him."

And the KJV renders it exactly the same way
"In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten (monogene) Son into the world, that we might live through him."

 

[angellous_evangellous]

i've heard people could tear blood as they cry. but this? seriously? is it physically possible?

.

Hematidrosis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[doppelganger]

Hematidrosis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Though, technically speaking, it's a simile. The story in Luke does not say Jesus was actually sweating blood.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Though, technically speaking, it's a simile. The story in Luke does not say Jesus was actually sweating blood.

I've already said that.

[see above... post #2]

 

[doppelganger]

I've already said that.

[see above... post #2]

Yeah, I noticed that after I posted. And what a bizarre response you garnered . . .

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Yeah, I noticed that after I posted. And what a bizarre response you garnered . . .

hahaha -- I know, right?

 

[IKNOWNUFFINK]

To all the wonderful contributors to the thread who have very kindly pointed out that a simile has been used, you will receive a lolipop and be able to sit in the front during the next lesson on similies, however, it's not really the topic of the disciussion. Have a look at what some of the brighter contributors have been saying and hopefully you will catch up on what the point of the thread actually is.

God bless you

PS. For your home work please create a simile of God Bless You

PPS I'm very sorry Im knew here I wasnt aware that this was the "under fives" section.

 

[IKNOWNUFFINK]

no apology necessary. I hope you dont mind me continuing on in this discussion. I wont go into the trinity because you are entitled to your beliefs, but I would like to clear up some other misunderstandings by showing you some evidence and reason...you dont have to believe me, but at least you'll have a clearer picture of where we stand of some of these points.


I need to clarify that because i've worded that incorrectly. Verses have not been 'added', rather what I should have said is that the bible translators have translated in such a way to make the trinity appear accurate.

For example, the removal of the name of God from their translations means that the only god they read about is Jesus.
How do we know that they have done that? Because in passages of NT verses where the writer is quoting from the hebrew scriptures, those original hebrew manuscripts actually have the tetragrammaton in them. But the translators have chosen to use the word 'GOD' or 'LORD' in capitals rather then the name of God because that would confuse people....especially if people believe that Gods name is Jesus.
This is altering the original text in favor of making it appear that Jesus is God the Father.




The translators of the KJV were given the instructions to use the 'Bishops' Bible' as the basis for the new translation. The bishops bible had been in use for a very long time prior and it was based on the original hebrew and greek texts. But the KJV came primarily from that translation....not from the original languages.



It may surprise you to know that other translations before the NWT did the same thing. The reason they did so was because in that verse there are two distinct individuals mentioned. One is called 'ho theos' and the other 'thoes' and although the greek has no definite articles (a, the) the translators of the interlinears did put definite articles into the literal reading of this verse because its the only correct way to translate it into english.

An example is found in the less recent editions of Benjamin Wilsons Emphatic Diaglott where the verse reads: “In a beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God, and a god was the Word. This was in a beginning with the God.”
The original greek has no definite article, but the translator put definite articles into the verse.

And did you realise that the same trinitarians who reject using the definite article in John 1:1 will use it in other verses that have no definite article? For instance, take the case of the word 'spirit'. There are many instances where they insert the definite article “the” to make it read “the spirit” and “the holy spirit.” They even capitalize the word “Spirit” where it is not capitalized in the original greek text.

Maybe a good question to ask is why they readily use the definite article in verses that do not have a definite article in some places but not in others.



that is because lexicographers define the Greek word mo‧no‧ge‧nes′ as a “single of its kind, only,” or “the only member of a kin or kind.”
At Luke 7:12 the KJV says
"Now when he came nigh to the gate of the city, behold, there was a dead man carried out, the only son (monogenes) of his mother, and she was a widow"
This verse uses the same word at 1John 4:9 which reads in the NWT
"By this the love of God was made manifest in our case, because God sent forth his only-begotten (monogene) Son into the world that we might gain life through him."

And the KJV renders it exactly the same way
"In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten (monogene) Son into the world, that we might live through him."

Hi No problem, but I think we had better do this in another thread as I have just realised this is a thread for discussing the use of "Like or as" in a sentence.

God bless you

 

[URAVIP2ME]

I know the NWT changed "in the beginning was the word the word was with God and the word was God" -to "the word was a god" - very subtle and very sinister indeed if you ask me.
Salvation comes through believing not just in Jesus Christ, but in believing who and what He was and is. Satan himself believes in Jesus Christ and knows that He is mans only saviour, but is satan saved?
quote]

Only those of Matthew [12v32] and Hebrews [6vs4-6] are Not 'saved'.
Since according to Hebrews [2v14 b] Jesus destroys Satan, then Satan is not saved. This will also prove true for those of Psalm [92v7].

As far as: subtle and very sinister about the letter 'a', please notice Acts [28v6 b]. The same Greek grammar rule applies at that verse as at John [1v1]. If the letter 'a' was omitted at Acts [28v6 b] would that make it subtle and very sinister, or rather simply not enough research was done at the time of the KJV?

Do you agree God had no beginning? ____ Psalm [90v2] says God is from everlasting to everlasting. That would mean only God was before the beginning. Whereas John [1v1] says Jesus was in the beginning and not before the beginning.

Jesus gave the Revelation [revealing] to John decades after God resurrected Jesus to heaven. Yet, the heavenly resurrected Jesus at Rev [2v18] still considers himself as the Son of God. Jesus still believes at Rev [3v14b] that he is the beginning or start of the creation by God. At Rev [3v12] Jesus also still believes he has a God over him.

 

[IKNOWNUFFINK]

Only those of Matthew [12v32] and Hebrews [6vs4-6] are Not 'saved'.
Since according to Hebrews [2v14 b] Jesus destroys Satan, then Satan is not saved. This will also prove true for those of Psalm [92v7].

As far as: subtle and very sinister about the letter 'a', please notice Acts [28v6 b]. The same Greek grammar rule applies at that verse as at John [1v1]. If the letter 'a' was omitted at Acts [28v6 b] would that make it subtle and very sinister, or rather simply not enough research was done at the time of the KJV?

Do you agree God had no beginning? ____ Psalm [90v2] says God is from everlasting to everlasting. That would mean only God was before the beginning. Whereas John [1v1] says Jesus was in the beginning and not before the beginning.

Jesus gave the Revelation [revealing] to John decades after God resurrected Jesus to heaven. Yet, the heavenly resurrected Jesus at Rev [2v18] still considers himself as the Son of God. Jesus still believes at Rev [3v14b] that he is the beginning or start of the creation by God. At Rev [3v12] Jesus also still believes he has a God over him.

It would make it easier if you actually posted the scriptures you are addressing here. Other wise I kind of have to do your homework aswell as my own?

 

[URAVIP2ME]

IKNOWNUFFINK-

Why would you have to do 'my' homework? I already did my homework by showing the reference Scripture where I got my information.

Here goes:

Matthew 12v32...whoever speaks a word against the Son of man [Jesus] it will be forgiven him, but whoever speaks against the holy spirit is will not be forgiven him in this world or the world to come.

Hebrews 6vs4-6 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the holy spirit and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the world to come, if they should fall away, to renew them again unto repentance........

Hebrews 2v14 b that through death he [Jesus] might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil.
I'll add in Romans 16v20 for you to read that the God of peace will bruise Satan under your [Jesus] feet shortly.
This is in fulfillment of Gen 3v15 b that her seed [Jesus] will bruise Satan's head.
Jesus deals a fatal death bruise to Satan's head.

Acts 28v6 b says .........and said that he was 'a' god.
The letter 'a' is not missing at that verse in Acts as it is missing at John 1v1 although the same Greek grammar rule applies in both verses. Why is the 'a' in one verse and not the other?

Psalm 90v2 b says ...even from everlasting to everlasting you are God.
I also know what Psalm 41v13 says and Psalm 106v48 says.
Do you want that typed out also or is one reference enough?

Rev 2v18 says .....these things says the Son of God [resurrected heavenly Jesus]
Rev 3v12 shows Jesus saying about his God ....my God....my God...my God...my God
I'll add Psalm 89v26 that he [Jesus] will cry unto me, you are my Father, my God, and the Rock of my salvation.
Rev 3v14 b says of Jesus the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation by God.

Psalm 92v7 says when the wicked spring as the grass, and when all the workers of iniquity do flourish; it is that they will be destroyed forever.

As we know grass or vegetation covers the whole earth so when the wicked spring up or cover the earth they will be annihilated forever. I'll add Psalm 145v20 b for you that all the wicked will he [God] destroy. Permanent destruction or annihilation as at 2nd Thess 1v9a which says....who will be punished with everlasting destruction......

 

[IKNOWNUFFINK]

IKNOWNUFFINK-

Why would you have to do 'my' homework? I already did my homework by showing the reference Scripture where I got my information.

Well obviously I mean looking up all the scripture notes you posted (and there are many) - do yo really think I have no life at all?

Here goes:

Matthew 12v32...whoever speaks a word against the Son of man [Jesus] it will be forgiven him, but whoever speaks against the holy spirit is will not be forgiven him in this world or the world to come.

This means rejecting the holy spirits leading to Christ as saviour - thats all. In other words if you die a non Chrisatian you have rejected the only salvation possible - therefor there is no forgiveness opportuity left to you IE your dead in your sins.

Hebrews 6vs4-6 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the holy spirit and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the world to come, if they should fall away, to renew them again unto repentance........

This means those who have been brought near to Christ, so close that they have seen that He really is the saviour but they have still chosen to reject it.

Hebrews 2v14 b that through death he [Jesus] might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil.

Jesus took satans power to take evry human being to hell with him away, thats what this means.

I'll add in Romans 16v20 for you to read that the God of peace will bruise Satan under your [Jesus] feet shortly.

The proto evangel first seen in Genisis 3: 15

This is in fulfillment of Gen 3v15 b that her seed [Jesus] will bruise Satan's head.
Jesus deals a fatal death bruise to Satan's head.

Not a death blow a bruised head doesn't mean death - satan is an eternal heavenly fallen angel whose desitiny is eternal hell.

Acts 28v6 b says .........and said that he was 'a' god.

In your bible maybe - not mine - Christ is God with a captital G not a god with a small g.

The letter 'a' is not missing at that verse in Acts as it is missing at John 1v1 although the same Greek grammar rule applies in both verses. Why is the 'a' in one verse and not the other?

small g refers to men - earthly rulers, judges etc.

Psalm 90v2 b says ...even from everlasting to everlasting you are God.
I also know what Psalm 41v13 says and Psalm 106v48 says.
Do you want that typed out also or is one reference enough?

Type it all out, Im not looking up your scripture verses period. Cut n paste it form Blue Letter Bible, you don't need to type it

No idea what you mean here are you saying this Psalm means you as in you and I are God?

Rev 2v18 says .....these things says the Son of God [resurrected heavenly Jesus]
Rev 3v12 shows Jesus saying about his God ....my God....my God...my God...my God

This was the Holy SPirit praying To God, Jesus Christ always referrred to God as Father Adnoai - daddy. And himself as the Son of Man.

I'll add Psalm 89v26 that he [Jesus) will cry unto me, you are my Father, my God, and the Rock of my salvation.

This is referrring to David not Christ​

Psalm 89.20 I have found David my servant; with my holy oil have I anointed him: (stop bending spoons mate)​

Rev 3v14 b says of Jesus the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation by God.

Thats an interesting one, I'll grant you that, your saying this means Jesus was the first creation of God....okay what about this then....

Col 1:16 For by him (Christ) were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him (Christ), and for himChrist)

Eve was created as a bride for adam. Humanity was created as a bride for Christ.

Isaiah 40:26 Lift up your eyes on high, and behold who hath created these things, that bringeth out their host by number: he calleth them all by names by the greatness of his might, for that he is strong in power; not one failed

Eph 3:9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

Rev 4:11 Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things and for thy pleasure they are and were created.

from these (among 100s of other scriptures we know Christ the Holy Sprirt and God are equal AKA one and the same thing in different manifestations to carry out different functions.

Psalm 92v7 says when the wicked spring as the grass, and when all the workers of iniquity do flourish; it is that they will be destroyed forever.

Destroyed from off the earth, meaning they will not be allowed to exist on earth. This happend during the days of Noah.

As we know grass or vegetation covers the whole earth so when the wicked spring up or cover the earth they will be annihilated forever. I'll add Psalm 145v20 b for you that all the wicked will he [God] destroy. Permanent destruction or annihilation as at 2nd Thess 1v9a which says....who will be punished with everlasting destruction......[/

The bible doesnt ever teach the total anihalation of the wicked - the bible clealry teaches eternal torment.

quote]

 

[dmgdnooc]

King James 1611 Version

This is an exceedingly interesting scene, Christ is praying that this cup is removed, an Angel is even sent to strengthen Him, He is in agony to the point of sweating blood.

Why do you think this is? What was at stake here? What cup did he wan't to have removed if at all possible?

I suppose it to be significant to the ideas of the verse that 'the life of the flesh is in the blood'.
Jesus' life had, in a figure, begun to be poured out in the garden.
　
The cup, I suppose, is significant for its contents, which appear to be the subsequent events, his betrayal, the desertion by his friends, the mock trial under the direction of God's High Priest, his crucifiction at the people's insistence, being cursed by the Law, forsaken of God, et al.
It may strike a chord with some that the prospect of betrayal, desertion, perversion of Godly office etc was every bit as much an agony (of mind) to him as the events of the crucifiction were to his physical senses.

 

[IKNOWNUFFINK]

I suppose it to be significant to the ideas of the verse that 'the life of the flesh is in the blood'.
Jesus' life had, in a figure, begun to be poured out in the garden.
　
The cup, I suppose, is significant for its contents, which appear to be the subsequent events, his betrayal, the desertion by his friends, the mock trial under the direction of God's High Priest, his crucifiction at the people's insistence, being cursed by the Law, forsaken of God, et al.
It may strike a chord with some that the prospect of betrayal, desertion, perversion of Godly office etc was every bit as much an agony (of mind) to him as the events of the crucifiction were to his physical senses.

Some great thoughts there. Thanks. Christ never seemed to get angry when people mocked him but he did tend to light up like a Roman Candle when God and His Temple was disrepected, quite right.

The thing I really wanted to bring out in this thread was what Oswald Chambers brought out it, and it;s that, in the main, He was most concerned that everything He was about to do would in actual fact be a suitable and acceptable sacrifice to save mankind, in otherwords, He was grieving exceedingly deeply for the lost souls of men and He was supremely and keenly concerned that He could and would be able to save us.

Satan knew that God can die on the cross and raise himself from the dead, big deal, God can do anything but satan knew that this would not save us, as did Christ. Christ had to sacrifice himself as the the Son of man, not as God the Son, it is the son of man who is the first born son of many, just as by one man (Adam) sin entered the world and just by one man (the last Adam) many where made righteous.

To simply put it - God was worried that the man part was gonna pull through - the reality is God made himself become a man just like you and me. And He did pull through, which is all that saves us - nothing else can.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

2nd Thessalonians 1v9 does not teach eternal torment.
Who will be punished with everlasting destruction?

Who is destroyed forever at Psalm 92v7?
Psalm 92v7 was written after the Flood of Noah's day.
Please notice the 'future tense' used.
When the wicked spring as the grass, and when all the workers of iniquity do flourish,
it is that they will be [future] destroyed forever.

Isn't Psalm 145v20 also future tense?
The LORD preserves all them that love him, but the wicked will he destroy.

What is God not willing at 2nd Peter 3v9 b?
God is not willing that any should 'perish' but all should come to repentance.
It does not say God is not willing any should be in eternal torment, but perish as in destruction.

How can there be eternal torment when emptied-out hell, vacant, void-of-people hell dies a symbolic second death according to Revelation 20vs13,14?

And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell 'delivered up' the dead which were in them and they were judged according to their works.
And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

Can you think of anyone that was sinless that was in hell?

 

[IKNOWNUFFINK]

2nd thessalonians 1v9 does not teach eternal torment.
Who will be punished with everlasting destruction?

Who is destroyed forever at psalm 92v7?
Psalm 92v7 was written after the flood of noah's day.
Please notice the 'future tense' used.
When the wicked spring as the grass, and when all the workers of iniquity do flourish,
it is that they will be [future] destroyed forever.

Isn't psalm 145v20 also future tense?
The lord preserves all them that love him, but the wicked will he destroy.

What is god not willing at 2nd peter 3v9 b?
God is not willing that any should 'perish' but all should come to repentance.
It does not say god is not willing any should be in eternal torment, but perish as in destruction.

How can there be eternal torment when emptied-out hell, vacant, void-of-people hell dies a symbolic second death according to revelation 20vs13,14?

And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell 'delivered up' the dead which were in them and they were judged according to their works.
And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.

Can you think of anyone that was sinless that was in hell?

off topic

 

[URAVIP2ME]

The letter 'a' is used at Acts [28v6b]
Why does the letter 'a' appear at Acts 28v6b when it does not appear at John 1v1?
The same Greek grammar rule applies at both verses.
So why the letter 'a' in one verse and not the other?
Why the inconsistency ?

 

[URAVIP2ME]

I suppose it to be significant to the ideas of the verse that 'the life of the flesh is in the blood'.
Jesus' life had, in a figure, begun to be poured out in the garden.
The cup, I suppose, is significant for its contents, which appear to be the subsequent events, his betrayal, the desertion by his friends, the mock trial under the direction of God's High Priest, his crucifiction at the people's insistence, being cursed by the Law, forsaken of God, et al.
It may strike a chord with some that the prospect of betrayal, desertion, perversion of Godly office etc was every bit as much an agony (of mind) to him as the events of the crucifiction were to his physical senses.

Interesting that you should mention 'Jesus' life, in a figure, began to be poured out the garden' because the first prophecy uttered by God at Gen [3v15]
proves Jesus to be the 'seed' of that verse who deals the serpent [Satan] a fatal death bruise to his head as Romans [16v20] also mentions because Jesus, as Hebrews [2v14 b] says, destroys Satan.


'Cup' in Scripture is often symbolic of divine retribution of God's anger that 'cup' or portion wicked individuals, cities, nations might drink.
However, the symbolic 'cup' or portion for Jesus was: the doing of God's will.
Jesus was charged with blasphemy, sedition, treason, injured majesty.
Since it was God's assigned cup or portion for Jesus to die the way he did as you mention in your above post those contents were significant.
Jesus did not want to bring reproach on his Father's name but only to hallow or sanctify it, so to die labeled as a blasphemer would have seemed unbearable.
Jesus' assigned cup or portion would also include God resurrecting Jesus to immortal heavenly life, and as Psalm [116v13] says the 'cup of grand salvation'. Because of that 'cup' then salvation or deliverance could also be ours.

 

[dmgdnooc]

Interesting that you should mention 'Jesus' life, in a figure, began to be poured out the garden' because the first prophecy uttered by God at Gen [3v15]
proves Jesus to be the 'seed' of that verse who deals the serpent [Satan] a fatal death bruise to his head as Romans [16v20] also mentions because Jesus, as Hebrews [2v14 b] says, destroys Satan.


'Cup' in Scripture is often symbolic of divine retribution of God's anger that 'cup' or portion wicked individuals, cities, nations might drink.
However, the symbolic 'cup' or portion for Jesus was: the doing of God's will.
Jesus was charged with blasphemy, sedition, treason, injured majesty.
Since it was God's assigned cup or portion for Jesus to die the way he did as you mention in your above post those contents were significant.
Jesus did not want to bring reproach on his Father's name but only to hallow or sanctify it, so to die labeled as a blasphemer would have seemed unbearable.
Jesus' assigned cup or portion would also include God resurrecting Jesus to immortal heavenly life, and as Psalm [116v13] says the 'cup of grand salvation'. Because of that 'cup' then salvation or deliverance could also be ours.

Ahh, Gen 3.15.
I was not referring to that garden (Eden) but to Gethsemane.
Seeing as you mention it, I do think that there is a relationship between Jesus' sacrifice and that first sacrifice in Eden (the one that provided the coats of skins) for Adam and Eve.
And I do think of Jesus as being the woman's seed mentioned there.
　
My referrence was to Leviticus 17.11 'the life of the flesh is in the blood' for I also discern a relationship between the sacrifices of the Law and Jesus' sacrifice.
Leviticus seemed more to the point as it mentions the blood.
If the subject had been a covering for sin I might have referred to the Edenic coats. But I don't suppose Jesus to have required a covering for sin.
　
I think it is right to recognise the agony of mind, that Jesus suffered in Gethsemane, was not merely from contemplation of the physical pains that he was soon to suffer.
Judas' kiss was painful to receive and the first of many blows (not merely physical blows) that fell upon Jesus.
Things like those mentioned in Ps 22.14 and 42.4 were in my mind when making my comments.
　
I'm curious at your references, if this Satan and that Devil are equivalent, then how do you reconcile that in Romans 16.20 the Satan is soon to be (future) bruised under the feet of the Roman brethren; while in Hebrews 2.14 the Devil had been (past) destroyed by Jesus?
　
I agree with what you say concerning the 'cup' and thanks for the referral to Psalm 116.
　

 

[URAVIP2ME]

I'm curious at your references, if this Satan and that Devil are equivalent, then how do you reconcile that in Romans 16.20 the Satan is soon to be (future) bruised under the feet of the Roman brethren; while in Hebrews 2.14 the Devil had been (past) destroyed by Jesus?

I agree with what you say concerning the 'cup' and thanks for the referral to Psalm 116

You're welcome, and thank you for your reply.

Romans 16v20 does not mention the Roman brethern but God.
And the God of Peace will bruise Satan under your [Jesus] feet.
Just as Gen 3v15 does not mention Roman brethern involved in the bruising.

Why do you say Hebrews 2v14 B is past?
Through Jesus death....Jesus might bring to nothing the one having the means to cause death, that is, the Devil. Please also notice 1st John [3v8 b] because. the devil who was sinning from the beginning of his doing wrong, the Son of God....might destroy [ break apart] the works of the devil. So Jesus destroys more than Satan but destroys his works which are still with us [present] not past. 'Death ' according to 1st Cor 15v26 is our last enemy that will be [future] brought to nothing.

Revelation means a revealing. The book of Revelation is a revealing of the future. The happy climax for righteous mankind. Before Satan is destroyed he is abyssed for one-thousand years, or during Jesus peaceful millennial reign over earth. Before Satan goes into the pit please notice what Satan is doing now at Rev 12vs9,12. Satan the Devil is cast out of heaven and also notice he brings 'woe' for a limited time to earth.

Hope the above is of some help.