Devil's eyes

Discussion in 'General Discussions' started by Flavio, Sep 27, 2015.

  1. Here I am, talking about satan again but knowing the enemy is always sensible.

    I once looked at a possessed woman in the eye and it was the most disturbing experience ever. She just stared at me in complete silence, her eyes were lifeless and black - almost like shark's eyes.

    And what's even more disturbing, I've seen that same look many other times - whenever someone does or says something vicious or spiteful.

    It's like these people are 'momentarily possessed' by the enemy, I really do believe that possession is much more frequent than we think, demons just keep entering and leaving us all the time.
  2. Lol! No they don't!!
    Fish Catcher Jim and Apologia say Amen and like this.
  3. What do you mean by "us"? That is false, Flavio.
    Apologia likes this.
  4. There is a very real danger in entertaining and giving too much attention to the enemy. We are told to "resist the devil, and he will flee..." (James 4:7). Knowing your enemy is knowing the truth that is in Christ and being able to discern such; anything that does not align with Christ is the enemy.

    Look at what Jesus and the apostles did; they went about preaching the hope that is in Christ and when they came across evil, it was dealt with via simple and authoritative rebuke. No Hollywood theatrics or any of that, just a faithful and stern rebuke of the devil/demon(s). Knowing your enemy is one thing, but giving the devil power where power can be avoided is quite another. Saying demons possess us constantly is not correct and I would challenge you to show scripture where a person is constantly be bombarded with demonic possession once delivered, over and over again.
    Euphemia and Grant Melville say Amen and like this.
  5. Greetings:
    Banking off Luke 11:34:I've been scared off from arguments when the other's eyes became turning inward,as if they're listening to something down below.Aside (1)-birds(HG) like to perch.
  6. What are you talking about here:

  7. Brother I love you very much and this is not even close to be 100 percent truthful at all.
    Deamons can not simply enter in and out of a born again spirit filled beliver. They can oppress and influence but they can not simply do what they wish. They have not the power brother.

    I agree it is always wise to know your enemy - so please seek God in this with His word and learn about your enemy.
  8. Brian your quote on James is only half - Submit your self to God is the first part and key. If you are not walking in His ways and doing what His word says then you can resist the devil all you want and it wont change much at all.

    I only brought this up for it seems like christians every where use half this verse as if it is all that is needed. It is sad but true.
  9. :D Everyone is knocking you for saying ''us'' with possession. But I believe there is such a thing as a carnal Christian who can be possessed.

    Paul always spoke giving the benefit of the doubt to all. When he addressed the church in 1 Cor 5 he said ''there are some of you comitting evils that even the unsaved do not do''. Now just read the first verse of 1 Cor 5 and ask yourself if a Christian should ever be able to do that :eek: :giggle:.

    We can look at it one of two ways. 1. These wolves are not Christians but attend church as they have found preachers and certain cherry picked scriptures pleasing. 2. These were Christians who have fallen from grace. Paul alludes to this in 1 Cor 5:11-13.

    I believe in 2. Which would mean that when someone is 'handed over to the devil' 1 Cor 5:4....I believe they could be possessed. Most here who disagree with you believe a Christian cannot fall from grace. That is fine as long as they then read Paul as simply being kind to the wolves among the sheep.
  10. Your title got me thinking about how our eyes always expose us.

    Matt 6:22 The eye is the lamp of the body. So, if your eye is healthy, your whole body will be full of light.
    Prov 21:4 Haughty eyes and a proud heart, the lamp of the wicked, are sin.
    Job 31:7 If my step has turned aside from the way and my heart has gone after my eyes,
    Psalm 38:10 My heart throbs; my strength fails me, and the light of my eyes it also has gone from me
    Grant Melville likes this.
  11. I would definitely agree, the incestuous man here was a believer. That makes the situation very serious, and so he is "delivered to Satan for the destruction of the flesh". This is something done in the Name and power of the Lord Jesus Christ. Paul decided it, but the assembly was with him in it: "(ye and my spirit being gathered together, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ)" (1 Corinthians 5:4). I don't believe that it would be an allowance of demonic possession, but rather an allowance of evil to come upon the man, so that the flesh in him which was the source of his bad behaviour would be destroyed. Satan only has the power to destroy, not to make anything. He defeats his own ends, by destroying the thing (the flesh) which he could appeal to, after which he has no hold on the man.

    This is a difficult passage to understand, and I think many believers are essentially opposed to the idea that God allows the devil any scope of operation. I believe that He does allow the enemy some scope, because the enemy would have no scope unless it was permitted. This does not, by any means, make God complicit with evil - perish the thought! However, nothing is outwith divine control and nothing can exceed the boundaries set by God. I think we see an example of that here in this man being delivered to Satan - it was with divine authority. If I start to do something awfully wicked and carry on doing it unrepentantly, the Lord might allow something bad to happen to me in order to bring me up, to stop me in my tracks - I might be delivered to Satan for a limited time. The Lord would allow this sort of trial to destroy that element in which sin is. Of course, we must be clear that the work of God in me would never be delivered or surrendered to Satan (and Satan could never harm that!) - it's my flesh, what I am naturally, which is given over. That might involve some suffering in the body, an illness perhaps. In the case of the incestuous man, it's for the total destruction of the flesh. Once this trial was completed, I believe he would be delivered from the power of sin in his flesh.
    KingJ likes this.
  12. #12 KingJ, Sep 28, 2015
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2015
    I agree with you if the incestrous man is saved, he cannot be possessed. But can a saved person commit incest? This is the pinnacle of the OSAS debate.

    1 Cor 5:11 But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister.

    That is the blur right there. Paul is not isolating 'saved vs unsaved' but 'claim to be saved vs not claimed to be saved'. Why does Paul do this? Why not just say the unsaved among you?

    This tells us that someone we really believe to be a Christian can be possessed. Saved vs unsaved can only be known by God. So we can be forgiven for believing a saved person can be possessed. Not even Paul professed to discern who among us is saved and unsaved. This is very interesting.
  13. We could say, without any doubt at all, that if a person is in the Church then they are saved. But, as you point out here, mixture has come in. If we look around us today, we can see that mixture - the sphere of Christendom, which contains everyone who professes to be Christian, real and unreal, and then within that sphere the Church, the body of Christ. The wheat and the tares are growing together at the moment in the same field.

    So, wolves have come in, "false brethren brought in surreptitiously, who came in surreptitiously to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage" (Galatians 2:4), "spots in your love-feasts, feasting together with you without fear, pasturing themselves..." (Jude 1:12). They're here, they would try to get in amongst us, but we're not to mix with them - they're to be put out. We have to withdraw from their iniquity (2 Timothy 2:19). These are unconverted people, not part of the Church, but interlopers.

    You're absolutely right that Paul distinguishes between the wolves and, we might say, the straying sheep. We get that in verse 9-13.

    "I have written to you in the epistle not to mix with fornicators; not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the avaricious and the rapacious, or idolaters, since then ye should go out of the world." (1 Corinthians 5:9-10). These are the unbelievers, the worldly people, people "of this world". We can't keep company with them, because we should go out of the world.

    "But now I have written to you, if any one called brother be fornicator, or avaricious, or idolator, or abusive, or a drunkard, or rapacious, not to mix with him; with such a one not even to eat." (1 Corinthians 5:11). One called a brother would be a believer, and as such he is held to a higher standard - there are further things introduced here which would be grounds for his exclusion from fellowship.

    "For what have I to do with judging those outside also? ye, do not ye judge them that are within? But those without God judges. Remove the wicked person from amongst yourselves." (1 Corinthians 5:12-13). When a brother is caught up in these things, he must be removed, he has to be put under assembly discipline. We are responsible to guard the fellowship, to judge them that are within, and to remove wickedness from among us. Unbelievers, worldly people, Paul does not judge - their conduct is between them and God. But when someone is saved and comes into fellowship, then they are responsible to keep themselves from wickedness. If they don't, they can expect that their brethren must take action to remove wickedness from their midst - it cannot be tolerated. This is a substantial subject in itself, of course, one which we could go into a lot deeper. But I feel it's important to emphasise that love governs the dealings with a brother, no matter what he's done or is doing. Love and faithfulness go on together, and if we love the Lord and are acting in faithfulness to Him, we have to remove the wicked person. But if that person is a believer, we love them. It's not a matter of kicking them out, shutting the door and having done with the matter. It's an intensely sorrowful matter if a brother (or sister) gets into this state and has to be excluded from fellowship. We see that in the type of leprosy in the Old Testament - corruption in the flesh, the activity of man's will. The leper had to be excluded from the camp of Israel, but God gives detailed instructions with a view to their restoration. We should always have restoration in view, because we love the person, and we want to see them restored to their place. Moreover, the Lord loves the person, and it grieves His heart when any believer has to be excluded from practical fellowship because of wickedness - we should do what we can to restore them, as quickly as possible. In Leviticus where we get instructions about leprosy, it's the priest who cleanses the leper. We need brethren to have a priestly spirit, to have spiritual power to restore someone who's got away into a sinful course.
  14. Agreed. I edited my post after you replied. I noticed how in v11 Paul distinguishes between those who ''profess to be saved vs not profess to be saved'' as opposed to ''saved vs unsaved''.
  15. Yes - he uses the expression "any one called brother". It isn't "any brother". Would that mean, perhaps, that such a one has a position, and the name or title of 'brother', but they aren't answering to - or living up to - that name or title at the moment? Paul doesn't go as far as to say 'saved or unsaved', he refers to the outward position rather than the soul salvation.
  16. 1. I think its just Paul being respectful. He doesn't want us to isolate the unsaved among us based on belief. Anyone who goes to church has to have some form of Christian belief. We remove them only according to their evil works.

    2. Yes. Now if Paul doesn't distinguish between the saved and unsaved, we shouldn't either. The blur it creates is that someone called a brother can be possessed.
  17. Should there be unsaved persons amongst us? Anyone who is unsaved couldn't be in fellowship. I'm not talking about unsaved people coming to hear the gospel - of course, that's very much to be desired. But, practically, we can't have fellowship with an unsaved person, even if they were very upright and respectable. That would be a diverse (or 'unequal') yoke (2 Corinthians 2:14-17). I think Paul would assume that one called brother would be saved - one who wasn't saved couldn't be called brother. I wouldn't like to say more than that, because I feel as though I'm venturing out of my depth. The title 'brother' is most definitely a dignified one, however - not one which would be applied to someone who was not practically walking in fellowship. When Ananias went to Saul, he addresses him as, "Saul, brother" (Acts 9:17). When Paul later on relates the incident, he changes the order of the words, and quotes it as "Brother Saul" (Acts 22:13). It is as if Paul sees himself as a brother first and as Saul, or Paul, second - the position is greater than the person, in his own eyes.
  18. Christians can not be possessed by demons, but we are told not to yield "our members" unto unrighteousness.

    Rom 6:13 Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God.
    Rom 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.
  19. Many Jews whether saved or not called their country men "brother". There are many in the Church today who are called brother(s) but are not saved. The parable of the "sower" teaches us 1 out of 4 people in the Church are truly saved.

    1Jn 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
    1Jn 2:19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.
    Grant Melville likes this.
  20. Indeed. My post was based on the assumption that Flavio has already submitted to Christ. You bring up a good point though on the other part of James; if one does not submitted themselves to God, how would they ever expect to have the devil flee from them when they are still walking about in the flesh.

Share This Page