Covenant People's Ministry

by **Adam Pureblood** » January 6th, 2008, 11:01 am

If you do not believe in a literal Satan - What, or how do you interpet "Demons"????? What did Jesus cast out when the Bible says He cast out demons????? If according to your interpretation it is some type of sickness; than how could a disease talk ?????? :shock:

by **Pastor Visser** » January 9th, 2008, 5:01 pm

Adam Pureblood wrote:If you do not believe in a literal Satan - What, or how do you interpet "Demons"????? What did Jesus cast out when the Bible says He cast out demons????? If according to your interpretation it is some type of sickness; than how could a disease talk ??????

Adam,

I wouldn’t really expect an answer to this question.

The "no-devil" jews are more concerned with spreading their disinformation than actually backing up their faulty stance. In fact, I wish one of them would even try - I've recently offered a $50 reward if they can prove this non-Biblical nonsense.

This jewish doctrine and the false prophets that push this Talmudic agenda are covered in the next ANSWP Spiritual Hour (where I call a few out by name) – I’ll be sure to post the download URL in this thread when it goes live.

Any "no-devils" want to try substantiating that there’s no literal demons (or even Satan) using the scripture?

Like usual, your silence says much.

:roll:

War for Christ,

by **Pastor Visser** » January 10th, 2008, 11:01 pm

Pastor Visser wrote:This jewish doctrine and the false prophets that push this Talmudic agenda are covered in the next ANSWP Spiritual Hour (where I call a few out by name) – I’ll be sure to post the download URL in this thread when it goes live.

Here's that program:

http://www.vonbluvens.org/answpsh010808.mp3

(mp3 [high] / 7.22 mb)

http://www.archive.org/download/answpsh ... 010808.wma

(wma [low] / 3.19 mb)

http://answpspiritualhour.blogspot.com/

:blip:

Enjoy!

by **PILGRIM** » January 16th, 2008, 12:55 am

The "no literal devil" nonsense is a perfect example of how people just "play" at "religion". There are so many things in the Bible that are stated quite clearly but most judeo "pewers" are quite content to attend their church social events, to be "nice" people and to attend church on Sunday and figure they have done what is required of them to "earn" their way into "heaven". They pretty well accept whatever the Baal priest in the pulpit tells them. If they read in the Bible (or more likely have a verse read to them from the pulpit) that states "The wall is black" and the Baal priest then tells them that it means the wall is white, they accept it as absolute doctrine without uttering any real doubt about what they have just heard. This blind condition is why the jew has been able to be so successful in its program of deception.

by **Red Ryder** » January 17th, 2008, 7:16 am

Adam Pureblood wrote:If you do not believe in a literal Satan - What, or how do you interpet "Demons"????? What did Jesus cast out when the Bible says He cast out demons????? If according to your interpretation it is some type of sickness; than how could a disease talk ??????

Downey's Phony No-Satan Dogma #1
Downey's Phony No-Satan Dogma #2
Downey's Phony No-Satan Dogma #3
Downey's Phony No-Satan Dogma #4
Downey's Phony No-Satan Dogma #5

:wink:

Michael S. Burks wrote:He denies angels, demons and Satan

A Jewish view of "satan"
by Gretchen S.

Here is a bit about the Jewish view of Satan, as opposed to the Christian devil. Again, Judaism has no devil, there is no embodiment of evil who tempts us, as in Christianity. The Jewish view is very different than that portrayed by Christains. I hope this will be clear by the end of this post.

First of all, the Hebrew word satan (sin-tet-nun sofit) means an adversary or accuser. It is used this way in Numbers 22:22. "And G-d’s anger was kindled because he went; and the angel of the L-rd stood in the way as an *adversary* against him...." The word marked with *'s and translated as adversary is satan (actually l'satan, l' being a prefix that in the context gives the meaning "as"). Likewise in Numbers 22:32, part of the same story about Bilaam.

In I Samuel 29:4. "And the princes of the Philistines were angry with him; and the princes of the Philistines said to him, Make this fellow return, that he may go back to his place which you have appointed him, and let him not go down with us to battle, lest in the battle he be an *adversary* to us; for how should he reconcile himself to his master? should it not be with the heads of these men?" Agian, the word translated as an adversary is satan. Later, in II Samuel 19:23. "And David said, What have I to do with you, you sons of Zeruiah, that you should this day be *adversaries* to me?..." Again the word is satan and is translated as adversary. I could contiue through the Tanach with this. In each case, the word satan is translated as adversary.

Now, there is the term ha'satan, meaning the adversary. It is used to indicate a definite adversary. It is used in this way in the book of Zecharaih. Zecharia 3:1-2, for example, is sometimes translated as "And he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the L-RD, and *Satan* standing at his right hand to thwart him. And the L-RD said to Satan, The L-RD rebukes you, O *Satan;* the L-RD that has chosen Jerusalem rebukes you. Is not this a brand plucked out of the fire?" The word translated here as Satan is ha'satan. In other translations, this is translated as the adversary. In the historical context of the prophet, it is used to avoid using the name of the true adversary who was trying to keep the Jews from rebuilding the Temple in Jerusalem. The adversary was the Samaritans and a highly placed official in the Persian government. In order to avoid reprisals, Zechariah uses the term "the adversary" or "the accusor" (as the Jews were accused of building the Temple in order to rebell). Now, later in Jewish history, this was interpreted in another, somewhat metaphorical level, as if a prosecuting angel of the heavenly court were accusing Joshua ha-Kohen (the priest), and not the Samaritains that the highly placed Persian official.

The only other occurance of ha'satan is in the book of Job. The book, first of all, is one of the Writtings. It is one inspired Jews attempt to understand why bad things happen to good people. He writes a story about Job's suffering in order to explore the suffering of righteous people in general. The conculusion of his book, the moral of the story, is that only G-d knows why good people sometimes suffer. Satan in this book is a literary tool. That being said, out of this book arose the aggadic (kind of like legendary--there are many legends written in the Talmud to teach a lesson of one kind or another, but are not literally true) idea of Satan as the prosecuting attorney of G-d. Satan here is completely obedient to G-d and he NEVER rebells against G-d. He has a roll just as does the angel of death, in G-d's plan. His job is to act in the heavenly court as the prosecutor of those who recently died. He is in no way evil, he just has a job that some might find distasteful. That is the aggadic idea of Satan, which no Jew is obligated to take litterally, but we are supposed to learn the lesson that all of our actions will be known to G-d and that we will be judged.

The adversary in Zechariah was a very real, very human one, the adversary in Job is a teaching tool, as is the Satan of the aggadah. Humans have within them a yetzer hara and a yetzer hatov, a bad impulse and a good impulse. We need no outside, powerful, ultimate evil force to tempt us, the impulse lies within ourselves. By following G-d's will, we can overcome this temptation. There is no power to rival G-d. All angels in Judaism are obedient servants of G-d.

This is in contrast to the Christian idea of the "devil" and their "satan". In Christianity, "satan, aka the devil" is viewed as the "god of this world". He has enormous power and he opposes G-d. He is seen as a "fallen angel".

This brings me to the explaination of "Lucifer". Some say that Isaiah 14:12. "How are you fallen from heaven, O bright star [or shining one], son of the morning [or son of dawn]! how are you cut down to the ground, you who ruled the nations!" is about the "devil". Part of this is due to the fact that the term bright star or shining one is translated in Latin to lucifer, which means shining one. Now, the context of the verse and a bit of knowledge of history reviels that this is about the Babylonian empire. One of the main dieties of Babylon was "Ishtar", who was the "god" who was the morning star. Shining one, son of dawn is the morning star. The prophet was avoiding the use of the name of the not-god Ishtar. Reading verse 4, "That you shall take up this proverb against the **king of Babylon,** and say, How has the oppressor ceased! the golden city ceased!", it becomes clear that this is the king of Babylon and his nation that is being spoken of here. There is no Lucifer, no devil in the Tanach, but there are many, many adversaries and accusers of the Jewish people.

http://geocities.com/~alyza/Jewish/satan.html

:lol:

by **Amy Rose** » March 9th, 2008, 7:21 am

Mark Downey wrote:Pete Peters Is Satan by Pastor Mark Downey

http://www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php?t=189671

After reading ‘Scriptures for the Devil’ newsletter ‘The Dragon Player’, Vol. 3 – 2005, from the La Porte Church of the Antichrist, anybody at all familiar with the antics and sordid history of the pied piper of the pusillanimous, Pastor Pete Peters, can only come to one conclusion and that is, he’s the Satan we’ve heard so much about.

This article won’t take too long to dispatch the nonsense that other kinder, gentler scholars have critiqued at length. If you removed everything that Peters has carefully framed, all that you would have left is mediocre fluff. Some call framing a ‘straw man’ technique in debate (stating a misrepresented version of an opponent's argument for the purpose of having an easier target to knock down). One can take a fancy gold gilded frame and put it on a lousy picture and hang it on the wall, thinking it makes a living room look better. However, remove the frame and scotch-tape the image on the wall and guess what? It looks like garbage!

Law enforcement has been known to plant evidence in order to prosecute the innocent and when they are sent to prison, they say they were framed. This is the whole point of the biblical satan, devil or framer if you will. The best biblical definition of a satan is an adversary, a false accuser and a slanderer. As such, we are talking about PEOPLE who are liars, deceivers and make it their business to bear false witness. They have to frame everything to convince other people that they’re right, rather than just stating the simple facts. A chronic and habitual framer was anticipated by God and that’s why a liar is compared to the worst of fictional monsters, not an advocacy for such fanciful notions. Otherwise, they would become gods, which the Word of God tells us do not exist (Is. 45:5) and warns us in the very first commandment “Thou shalt not have any other gods before Me” (Ex. 20:3). Yet, this is what the born-again Satanist, Pete Peters, wants you to believe in, by framing every proposition with fluff and nonsense.

Why does this Pastor Peters need his precious devil so much? His repeated theme is “no god, no victory.” In other words, if you don’t believe his Satan is a reality and exists as a god, we will have no victory over real life people who are the adversaries of God (by their pathological propensity to deceive). I guess it’s not good enough for him to say “no Jesus Christ, no victory.”

Excuse me; maybe I’m just an amateur theologian, but having any other god before God smacks of deception. And if a deceiver is the devil, then Pete Peters is Satan. Peters keeps trying to frame the debate by saying his god doesn’t want people to think he’s real. However, this is based on the false assumption that the devil-monster-god is real. For someone who deceives, this is a perfect deception to mislead people from their lies. It diverts people’s attention away from a real person (who lies) to a fictional entity. This is politely called a scapegoat and it’s no joke.

Are we to believe Peter’s conclusion of the matter that, “It is Satan, not the masons [sic], Jews, bankers, government, illuminati [sic], Hindus etc., etc., who is the head of the evil about us and no conspiracy as is upon us could exist and function as it does without him.” Who died and made Pete Peters God? Where does Peters get the authority to allocate the power of evil to a fictional god? How convenient for the jewish conspirators to have Peterites chasing after invisible phantoms. The only spell being cast is by Peters himself making his followers think it’s an invisible enemy that must be fought and conquered. I’ll tell you what; you devil believers, fight the visible enemies and see what’s left!

Peters has never stomped any snake, but he’s willingly let them in his church. Indeed, he now gives quarter via doctrines of devils. He says, “If evil is made to be seen as good, then good men will not fight against it. I say deceived men will not fight. Peters thinks his devil god is a good Christian teaching and that his good followers will not stand up against his authority. I can’t think of anything more insidious than the blind leading the blind.

God foreknew His adversaries who would have no love of the truth “And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie” (II Thes. 2:11). The word ‘satan’ is merely synonymous with a liar. Yes, the Bible talks about god(s) and they’re all delusional. Not one of them is real. The real culprit is the evil of man blaming his sins on something else. Perhaps the day of shame is coming for Peters when his failures are revealed for all to see and all he’ll be able to say is “The devil made me do it” and his sheeple will sympathize with his troubled soul.

Meanwhile, the adversaries in government, the media, and the apostate church and within our culture get a free pass and a good laugh. I don’t think Peter’s article ‘no god, no victory’ is worthy of laughter. I think it’s sad and pathetic that someone so once highly esteemed in the CI community has devolved to such depths of theological depravity.

Each and every scripture that he has exploited has been addressed and explained years ago by men who ordained him into our Movement. Many have been freed from the oppressive, delusional world and mental prison of devils and demons. Maybe Peters wants to get into the lucrative exorcist business and cash in on people’s fears and gullibility.

Peter’s once asked his audience at his summer camp, “What does it take to be an overcomer?” and his answer was “Something to overcome.” Duh. So I ask, “What does it take to be a devil stomper?” and the answer Peters must give is “A real incarnated devil god.” Are we to believe Peters or the Word of Truth? What was the reason for the advent of Christ? “For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the works of the devil” I John 3:8. The mission of Christ was to destroy the devil and guess what? The devil had the power of death (Heb. 2:14). Surely Scripture can interpret itself in this matter when we can understand that Christ came to destroy sin (Heb. 9:26) and that sin was the original cause of death (Romans 6:23). From this simple evidence, it is obvious that the devil is a synonym for sin. Jesus came to deliver us from our sin nature.

Abe Foxman and his outfit must love it when these armchair generals are directing their Gideon armies into the ditch. When Peters invents and puts words into the mouth of God by saying “The fool hath said in his heart, there is no god” he is in essence adding unto the Word of God (Rev. 22:18; Deut. 4:2, 12:32). Again, who died and made Peters God? “Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator” Romans 1:25. The creature in this verse is all the euphemisms for the serpent, satan, devil etc. This creature includes preachers who preach the doctrine of devils as well as the object of their mythological superstitions identified as gods.

When men give anything the power to do great things, that is equal to worshipping that thing. Peters promotes the worship of god, not God. You cannot serve two masters. Through his own delusions, Peters has become an adversary of Jesus Christ and thus another two-bit, two-faced satan. After Peters cranks out 20 sermons framing this subject, if you remove the glossy frames of hyperbole, you’ll get to his premise, which is garbage.

Pastor Mark Downey

I thought there was no Satan Mr. Downey.

by **PILGRIM** » March 9th, 2008, 11:49 am

I thought there was no Satan Mr. Downey

Well, like all twisters of the Word - words, concepts and doctrines blow with the wind, useful as and for whatever they need them to be at the moment.

Just exactly who and what is this Downey character? Does he actually have any substantial numbers of people "following" his "teachings"? I hope he doesn't actually "pastor" some church somewhere - don't need his poison being spread any farther than can be avoided. I hope he is merely another loudmouthed gasbag spewing his own false ideas wherever he has the opportunity.

I have had only limited exposure to this guy and know he is apparently connected somehow at Stormdrain, but every time I have seen his name come up it is always in connection to some bizarre ideas and he is attacking legitimate teachers. He is most certainly someone to avoid at all costs.

Well, as we approach the end it is not surprising that antichrists and false teachers abound more and more.

by **Pastor Visser** » March 11th, 2008, 8:20 am

PILGRIM,

PILGRIM wrote:Just exactly who and what is this Downey character? Does he actually have any substantial numbers of people "following" his "teachings"? I hope he doesn't actually "pastor" some church somewhere - don't need his poison being spread any farther than can be avoided.

Mark Downey is the self-ordained (I say this because Pastor Robb teaches a literal Satan) webmaster at Kinsman Redeemer Ministries. In addition to teaching against water baptism, he holds to many other creeds of Sadducees like the denial of angels, demons, heaven, hell and so forth. Fortunately for CI, he has neither following nor support as he recently stated @

http://christianfrauds.blogspot.com/200 ... pport.html

He also has trouble with pronouns.

PILGRIM wrote:I have had only limited exposure to this guy and know he is apparently connected somehow at Stormdrain, but every time I have seen his name come up it is always in connection to some bizarre ideas and he is attacking legitimate teachers. He is most certainly someone to avoid at all costs.

Outside of $camfront Downey would be unknown. He moderates the CI subsection there through his jezebel wife Debbie “Kneepads” Downey and has banned virtually every seedliner that once graced that section (myself included). There’s a lot of information about these two false prophets to be had all over the internet and even more can be heard @

http://www.vonbluvens.org/answpsh010808.mp3

PILGRIM wrote:Well, as we approach the end it is not surprising that antichrists and false teachers abound more and more.

Amen. Yet Downey would say there IS NO END just to justify his serpentile twistings. What surprises me is no matter how many times these snakes have been disproven they still somehow inject their venom on fledgling Christians. I’ve challenged the guy to a debate several times over the years but I suppose his “wife” hasn’t given him permission yet. The curious should read Clifton A. Emahiser’s “Downey's Phony No-Satan Dogma #1-5” @

http://www.israelect.com/reference/Clif ... r/studies/

My advice to all reading is let Downey be Anathema Maranatha – it’s not one of us.

I apologize for my absence from this forum as of late. I intend on spending some extra time here this weekend and answering any questions that might have been overlooked. Rest assured, CPM has plenty of new materials forthcoming.

War for Christ,

by **Pastor Visser** » July 30th, 2008, 1:51 pm

Arnold Kennedy in WHATEVER IS SATAN wrote:Literally, "adversary;" "opponent." The Hebrew word "satan' is not a name, but merely a transliteration, meaning simply "an opponent or adversary". In the O.T. it is transliterated as though it were a proper name (Satan) 19 times, with 14 of these occurrences in Job. Other O.T. passages correctly translate it as "adversary", or "be an adversary", "resist", or "withstand". In the N.T., the translators have rendered it as a proper name, in spite of the fact it is the same transliterated Hebrew word which in no way implies a supernatural being such as is conjured up in the modern mind.

No-devil nonsense! Here are the meanings of Satan from Strong's:

H7854
שׂטן
śâṭân
saw-tawn'
From H7853; an opponent; especially (with the article prefixed) Satan, the arch enemy of good: - adversary, Satan, withstand.

"Especially (with the article prefixed) Satan" - not flesh.

G4567
Σατανᾶς
Satanas
sat-an-as'
Of Chaldee origin corresponding to G4566 (with the definite article affixed); the accuser, that is, the devil: - Satan.

"With the definite article affixed: Satan" - not flesh.

It's judaism that has no devil and calls Satan (the arch enemy of good) "yeẓer ha-ra" or the "evil inclination" of the flesh.

by **swordofYHWH** » August 15th, 2008, 10:01 pm

[quote=

- I've recently offered a $50 reward if they can prove this non-Biblical nonsense.

,[/quote]

Only $50?
Seems to me you would be safe to offer every penny that you could possibly scrape up!

This belief qualifies as one of the most absurd idiocies I have ever come across.

This pitiful world alone testifies to the filthy devils existence!

Who gets cast into the bottomless pit in chains?

Who was it that accused Job? on and on adinfinitum.

It truly amazes me the moronic junk that mankind can come up with some times

Covenant People's Ministry

A Question for you "No Satan" believers (sic)

A Question for you "No Satan" believers (sic)

Re: A Question for you "No Satan" believers (sic)

Re: A Question for you "No Satan" believers (sic)

Re: A Question for you "No Satan" believers (sic)

What is "Pastor" Mark CLowney? A reptile, of sorts

Re: A Question for you "No Satan" believers (sic)

Re: A Question for you "No Satan" believers (sic)

Who is online