henryrna@juno.com (HENRY L BUNCH): Re: Melchizedek

• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

Brother Brown wrote:
[snip]
>      5 And they called <07121> (8799) unto Lot <03876>, and said <0559>
>     (8799) unto him, Where [are] the *MEN* <0582> which came in <0935>
>                                       ^^^
>     (8804) to thee this night <03915>? bring them out <03318> (8685) unto
>     us, that we may know <03045> (8799) them.
> 
> 
> Note that Ge 19:1 calles these beings "angels", yet v5 calls them
> "men".  
> 
> Come on, Bro. Gossett, you can't have it both ways; which is it?  Were
> they angels, or were they men?  And was Melchizedek a man, yet without
> controversy even like unto a theophany?  I think so.
[snip]

In point of fact, it was the wicked men of Sodom who called 
the angles 'men'.  Perhaps it was because they, being evil, 
did not recognize the supernatural aspect of these beings.

In v.8 does refer to them as men also, but in the context 
of speaking with the wicked men of Sodom to whom 
perhaps he did not want to reveal their true nature; or 
he spoke of them as men to them because they, being 
evil, could or would not understand their true nature.

Kathy Dimick
Falkville, Alabama
kdimick@colsa.com
kedimick@hotmail.com
http://members.tripod.com/~coffeepleaz/index.html

"For to me to live is Christ"