Page 2 of 3 <123>
Topic Options
#48895 - 02/15/11 11:15 PM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: Lamar]
GeorgeDeadson Offline
stranger


Registered: 02/15/11
Posts: 10
Loc: Dallas, TX
Well, according to the xtian bible, angels, like humans also have freewill. So obviously, your aunt doesn't know what it says. And even if it did say that, lets be honest, the bible is full of nonsense, it says that the earth is 5000 years old, it says that man was made from dirt, and that woman was fashioned from the rib of a man. It also says that a man, was able to build a big boat and put two of every species of animal on it and have enough food to survive on that boat for 40 days and 40 nights. It says that a man, can survive in the belly of a whale. And it says that the dead can come back to life.
The xtian bible is nonsense. Its best not to think about it. Xtianity is old hat.
_________________________
George Deadson

Top
#50245 - 03/01/11 07:47 AM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: The Architect]
JMM Offline
stranger


Registered: 02/28/11
Posts: 29
Loc: Michigan
There's a lot of different "literature " scenarios that claim to depict the true "war in heaven" and explain the fall of lucifer. In ]aradise lost he wouldn't bow down to jesus, in the diabolocon h evolved almost as a natural opposing force to god from chaos, in ann rice's "memnoch the devil" she depicts him as some sort of crusader for the little guy (us) and god banishes him to hell until all human souls are worthy of entrance into heaven. But in ALL of these lucifer was not only an angel but the first, the strongest, and the most beautiful of angels. And the main question of why would god create a flawed thing that is capable of opposition to his will?

Why did he create us? If god really wanted to crete us in his image we would be gods? Why create a lower species? Maybe a little insecure? (That's silly I know) or ...maybe he COULDN'T. Now that questions omnipotence. Maybe angels were a rough draft. Then the physical world was the next step. Then combining the flesh with angelic beings was the next. Of course this would make us more of a science experiment than anything. But then again. Where does "god " come from? Maybe another science experiment gone wrong somewhere else. Maybe he's trying to reproduce this to have a mate...this is getting too "isaac asimov-ey" but anyhow. Yes in all the literature....lucifer was the top dog. Free will was his undoing.(if lucifer were to truly lament leaving gods site...and if any of this nonsense were real in the first place)
_________________________
- J.M.M.

Top
#52319 - 04/06/11 09:01 PM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: JMM]
Meph9 Offline
member


Registered: 04/02/11
Posts: 161
I think in terms of the bible that there is clearly a great number of silly statements and contridictions. I would submit that this is due to the foolish decision to compile a series of texts, written in different ages, by different authors, with entirely different intentions, in different languages being lumped to into the mini library that is the bible.
Top
#53540 - 04/26/11 11:14 PM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: Meph9]
JMM Offline
stranger


Registered: 02/28/11
Posts: 29
Loc: Michigan
 Originally Posted By: Meph9
I think in terms of the bible that there is clearly a great number of silly statements and contridictions. I would submit that this is due to the foolish decision to compile a series of texts, written in different ages, by different authors, with entirely different intentions, in different languages being lumped to into the mini library that is the bible.


I like the way you worded that. It does seem that if a person were to just pick up the bible and read it cover to cover like a novel, it would make NO sense. Its always been funny to me that it is the most popular book in the world, but it does blatently contradict itself. I guess the only true philosophy and wisdom I have ever really gotten from it (and I do give it credit for having some very good philisophical value in SOME of the books, while at the same time find other parts of it so ridiculous its hard to credit it as "the good book" as a whole) have always been from reading specific books and chapters as stand-alone books unto themselves rather than reading the whole thing.

And in particular...back to the original subject of the thread starter question...the timeline never has made sense to me as well as the creation of "lesser beings" by ONE omnipotent being, and then the criticism of the lesser beings behavior. It would seem that if "god" were so omnipotent, he/it would have created another "god" for company, thus iliminating the need for disciplinary action all the time, and that way he/it would have a "partner" or buddy to hang out with rather than a bunch of dummies that needed constant corrective action. But the "angels" each in their own order of power still did retain free will, so by design there is always that ABILITY to defy the creator, so if that's such a big hair accross gods ass, why design the beings that way? Or US for that matter?

So ill ask another question on top of the original one...if god wanted gods, why didn't he just create them? Either he couldn't, which would pose the question: if he COULDN'T, then is he/it TRULY omnipotent, what else CAN'T he/it do? Or are we (angels AND humans alike) created to be flawed and "weaker" on purpose, so god could rule over us? Wouldn't that be kind of an ego boost for him/it? Maybe compensating for low self esteem? (That sounds silly,but really, why create something JUST to dominate it unless maybe he/it were from a race of beings similar to himself, and maybe he was the geek always getting picked on by the other "gods" or godlike beings, and we're some sort of means for overcompensating for his own weakness, again bringing into question his omnipotence?

There IS always the possibility that maybe god isn't all he's cracked up to be, and we take this shit too seriously...just a thought....
_________________________
- J.M.M.

Top
#53574 - 04/27/11 06:29 PM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: GeorgeDeadson]
Hegesias Offline
active member


Registered: 02/16/11
Posts: 725
Where the gospels disagree, I generally try to avoid using the quotes altogether, so I'll just do a well deserved satire.

The dead come back to life all the time, the eternal recurrence, people just think they are new and special, all manner of delusions denude each individual into thinking he is unique. The re birth of the Christ would simply be the ideal of a compassionate and wise man recurring (or narcissist depending on your stance of morality). This is why consciously or unconsciously, the worshippers try to emulate yet do so out of idolatry instead of inexplicably feeling what is intrinsic about wisdom, compassion, virtues etc.

However, will to power was not considered a worthy admission in the bible and instead moral justification for genocide is in place. Religion is characterised by obsessive adherence to fixed beliefs outside the normal perceptual range of a person's ecosystem, or by a hallucinatory experience or by what is "thought disorder" thinking that does not follow rationality. False beliefs that cause a person to suffer, produce conflict with others or render a person unable to adapt to progressions in society. The Biblical texts are full of emotion-laden-wordings, when these emotion-laden wordings are processed, the susceptible brain of the Christian lights up with activity, particularly in the areas around the ventromedial frontal cortex and amygdala. The former plays a crucial role in controlling impulses and long term planning. If the delusions are not realised to be delusions when the person is presented with adequate evidence to the contrary, this allows for the idiosyncratical meme to be passed into the beliefs of others. The fact that Bible texts are so old is indicative of both noteworthy historical evidence but also of evolutionarily-retarded morality.

For instance, a positive connotation/signification I could make with evolutionary evidence would be the great deluge, referenced in many sundry traditions and ancient cultures, in metaphor, stone carvings and whatnot primitive art. In Old Norse lore, when Thor battles Jormungandr with the victor being Thor, this is man's triumph over the elements, natural disaster or some other cosmic cataclysm, plague whatever it was to be. For a lack of better words to describe nature and the cosmos, Norsemen, Sumerians, Babylonians or otherwise ancient peoples, created metaphorical references we can piece together by researching as many ancient sundry traditions as we can, forming a holistic picture, although the Sumerian texts are something else. The eternal recurrence is something to contemplate in relation to science, religious metaphor and what your own two eyes tell you.

That man was made from dirt is more true than we might want to believe. All matter in the universe is simply matter. We are subatomic particle waves and not solid as we would perceive but merely vibrating at more or less the same frequency as what we perceive as impassable "objects" out of necessity to survive in our "ecosystem". We perceive infinity both macrocosmically and microcosmically, as clearly we are focused in on what is necessary to sustain us in the ecosystem, hence what is not necessary is out of focus appearing vast, yet as infinity is bilateral to our perception both down through quark size and up through cosmic size there is nothing to measure upon so everything in the universe is actually the same size, as above so below.

If you can subtract the defunct morality from the texts you can merit religious terminology to all manner of scientific discoveries to help memorise something and give meaning to the barren hylic universe of particle energy exchange which is slowly dying through the impersonal dark force within nature known as entropy or Satan.
_________________________


Top
#53579 - 04/27/11 07:12 PM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: Lamar]
Evin Offline
stranger


Registered: 04/25/11
Posts: 19
 Originally Posted By: Lamar

Lucifer was an *angel*. If angels cannot think in opposition of God, how then was he able to rebel against God?


Where does it say that Lucifer was an angel? Nowhere.

That word is found only 1 time in the bible. That is in Isaiah 14. That whole chapter is just another bloodbath in the 'good book'.

Verse 4 of that chapter states that it is a parable against the king of Babylon. It has nothing to do with Satan.

Here it is, to verify it.

Lucifer is not a hebrew word. It is Latin. Here is a source that shows this.

It is also capitalized, denoting a proper name. It deserves no such recognition.

When you equate Lucifer with Satan, you are basing it on xtian dogma. And in that context, where I always knew, even when I was still a xtian, that atheists in general and Satanists in particular know more than the vast majority of xtains about the bible, I could never figure out how they made that mistake. Or perhaps it's me that made the mistake? Maybe I'm missing something.

Top
#53582 - 04/27/11 08:17 PM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: Evin]
Hegesias Offline
active member


Registered: 02/16/11
Posts: 725
We can take what we will from biblical scriptures and value whatever we want according to positive attributions we may find progressive to our understandings of ourself in interactions with others but we can also have a good laugh. To take the key of knowledge and turn it within the self to unlock understanding (or humour). After all, Jesus laughs a great deal in the Gnostic gospels when his disciples are worshipping him.

I look at Lucifer as being disgusted with YHWH's Narcissism, if YHWH was all powerful then surely he could make Lucifer not rebel, this was not so or at best a hubris baiting unto Lucifer, yet knowing this, Lucifer chose to be cast down to earth rather than to be 2nd to somebody else who would not reason, needlessly, even though Lucifer was most attractive he/she was not so shallow nor did Lucifer devise to plot or contrive, but faced YHWH face to face with a valid argument. Lucifer the light bearer was demonised as Satan the enemy.

The same as Qayin was disgusted with Abel's hubris Narcissism which lead to needless murdering and burning of the farm animals, for which Qayin was a farmer and Abel a Sheppard with meagre responsibilities compared to Qayin's farming duties, hence Abel thought nothing of needlessly burning Qayin's livelihood to the ground. Qayin was driven to murder Abel in the fields after his attempt to show Abel that burning plant matter was more practical, after failed to convince Abel, and after killing Abel, Qayin probably incinerated Abel to the demiurge for irony sake.

Jesus had grandiose compensatory delusions too, and fantasies of omniscience, omnipotence, this was his magical thinking like Abel's. A firstborn, he was much pampered by his guilty whore mother. He was a prodigy, highly intelligent and and more comfortable in the company of high ranking scholars than with his lowly peers. The bastard Christ is the Narcissist archetype and we can learn much from observing his ignominious disclosure of his shadow projections with disgust. Thus we crucify this archetype intellectually (or physically) when we encounter his hubris pathological behaviour. Jesus healed only those who publicly and repeatedly worshipped him. He worked his miracles only to his sources of narcissistic supply. Jesus bargains with the afflicted and demands in anger, unconditional adoration for this is when he is happiest, any who do not feed his narcissistic supply are compartmentalised as "swine".
_________________________


Top
#53938 - 05/04/11 12:33 PM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: Evin]
The Zebu Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/08/08
Posts: 1647
Loc: Orlando, FL
 Quote:
When you equate Lucifer with Satan, you are basing it on xtian dogma.


This also begs the age-old question of why we would use the name "Satan" in the first place if the word is "owned" by our avowed enemies. Of course, we can play all the semantic games we want, pointing out how we simply use it to mean "adversary" (of Greco-Phoenician descent, for all you anti-Judaists) and therefore has nothing to do with Christianity or Judaism. Then we are left with the problem of explaining why the aspects of "our" Satan so closely parallel that of the Abrahamic Faiths.

Instead of untangling such futile etymological knots, it is much more efficient to look at Satan as being a meta-sigil, having both an exoteric and esoteric meaning.

The exoteric aspects of Satan cannot be disputed; they have been firmly established by our civilization and culture; he is a being of Evil, he tempts mankind, and brings chaos and suffering. He rebels against the perceived cosmic order, and is venerated by degenerate scoundrels who commit horrendous acts in his name.

This Satan is a mixture of Christian, Pagan, and Jewish elements-- but how these attributes came to be is of little importance. The Satanist seeks the ESOTERIC aspects of Satan, which cannot be grasped solely through mythos or contemplation. The Satanist experiences Satan as a reality via the Left Hand Path, at which point such names and labels have little relevance except as a vehicle for explaining and challenging ideas.

Satan is an ideal embodiment of the LHP because his exoteric nature so closely parallels the esoteric essence. But even Christ can be seen as an aspect of the Sinister. One needs only to take a look at gnosticism, antinomianism, and other such heresies which reach out towards the darkness.
_________________________
«Recibe, ¡oh Lucifer! la sangre de esta víctima que sacrifico en tu honor.»

Top
#53939 - 05/04/11 12:40 PM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: The Zebu]
6Satan6Archist6 Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2509
 Quote:
This also begs the age-old question of why we would use the name "Satan" in the first place if the word is "owned" by our avowed enemies. Of course, we can play all the semantic games we want, pointing out how we simply use it to mean "adversary" (of Greco-Phoenician descent, for all you anti-Judaists) and therefore has nothing to do with Christianity or Judaism. Then we are left with the problem of explaining why the aspects of "our" Satan so closely parallel that of the Abrahamic Faiths.


Maybe I am looking at this too simplistically but I see the use of Satan as an archetype and its relevance to the Abrahamic faiths as intentional. For it (read: Satanism) stands directly opposed to the aforementioned Abrahamic faiths. Yes, it is also stands in opposition to all the slave religions but the Christian religions were and indeed still are, the predominant ones in the country where Satanism "started".
_________________________
No gods. No masters.

Top
#53942 - 05/04/11 01:19 PM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: 6Satan6Archist6]
Diavolo Offline
RIP
stalker


Registered: 09/02/07
Posts: 4997
It surely isn't too simplistic 6. Satan is perfect to represent opposition to the Abrahamic worldview and that what is promoted or even elevated as good by them. He is all they are not and in that, is the perfect archetype in our culture. Elsewhere he might make less sense.

D.

Top
#53944 - 05/04/11 02:01 PM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: Diavolo]
SkaffenAmtiskaw Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 06/24/09
Posts: 1318
Try flipping it on its head?

The Abrahamic religions promote self-negation, collectivism and everything that is contrary to personal growth and happiness. They, in short, promote the death of the individual. Satan is the opposite, or pro-Man.
_________________________
"I'd rather be right than consistent" - Winston Churchill

Top
#53945 - 05/04/11 02:19 PM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: 6Satan6Archist6]
Hegesias Offline
active member


Registered: 02/16/11
Posts: 725
I would agree there are traces of the "fear of Satan" in the Bible. Shadow projections, remnants of irrationality we can build a holistic picture of how the fear of Satan is only something leading to it's source and not a valid description. Never believe the compartmentalised story of a coward but learn to see what it is he is afraid of in simplicity.

Some of us who deal with Satanism do not call ourselves LaVeyan nor theistic Satanist yet we can affirm that we are all connected by expressing strength, this affirmation is not to call oneself unique but to affirm that we all work toward the ultimate ideal to express the Nietzschean maxim and dare to be ourselves. For some of us, Satan is not consigned to the Christian approach of Satan either for a negative presentation of what the herd fears is simply a shadow projection and not good enough to aspire to, instead we can affirm it is the Satan of all time—a mystery dimly understood by science as entropy yet inexplicably felt by life itself, much more, beyond formalities. If we observe Satan scientifically, as either part of, or emanating from entropy, we can see that it is in and of us; it is the darkness all around, permeating everything and guiding it. It is not consigned to any singular æon or place nor namesake. It is an occult secret expressing many aspects, the effects of which are working all around, of which the existence of is as disputable as the reality of our own civilisation. For some of us, Satanism deals with the non-existence, the centre of which is personified by Satan, this phenomenon of Satanism, has left traces of archæological and written evidence around the world, by many names, the presence is emitting from both within our dark unconsciousness and from the outer dark dimensions (eleven dimensional shadow projection, we perceive as the stream of causality). Our every day lives are endarkened as Satan comes into focus. "At the darkest night of the soul, only that by of it's own luminescence, shines."

There are few who feel the dark force within nature and experience this secret thoroughly for want to reach their full potential on the Left Path. To work toward recognising naturally occurring entropy as the dark force in nature and as a symbol or archetype is not important—natural aristocracy is restored by the truly strong regardless. The former cannot be emulated yet why dismiss the egoistic expression drawn from symbolic recognition of Satan? Certainly to devalue the promising plentitude of what LayVey and others present is a good thing in order to manifest our own dark visions of Satan, those abstract causal forms receive revaluation through self understanding, to see potential in propensity. Yet it is the affirmation of a lacking that causes the Satanist to "always" strive for stronger alignment with the darkest force within nature. And as we all inevitably find out "knowledge is not the same as understanding".

Satan: One can appear possessed by it's study, and of it's exercise; they are those who fear the natural aristocratic expression of the will to power. The Satanist is of overflowing strength, of mind, body, egoistic, brimming vitality; will to power aspires full potential. The Satanist has always believed a noble life lies in freedom, no remorse.
_________________________


Top
#53954 - 05/04/11 11:28 PM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: Hegesias]
Lamar Offline
member


Registered: 02/03/10
Posts: 226
Loc: Alabama
To add further, Satan is a label of opposition and iconoclasm, a motivator of the human spirit. He certainly is the closest to what man is.
Top
#54248 - 05/10/11 09:57 AM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: Lamar]
Lil Rag Offline
Banned
stranger


Registered: 04/11/11
Posts: 28
dudes you're talkin about xtians, lets talk about Quran.

in Quran it says Human is for 6994 years ago!(damn what an exact time!) while the researchers found humans for about 20,000 years ago. also Quran says "You are Free to choose your religion" but in the same time it says "Any Other Religion exept islam is not accepted to god and if you convert to another religion you will goe to hell" (and the rule is to cut off your head :D) this religion is completely based on Peace (yeah of course) when islam was found by mohammed, They attacked persia because they didnt follow their Based-on Peace religion, so they burned persia to ashes, they attacked rome, Spain, Jursalem & ...
so not only Bible is based on non-sense but The Whole Abrahamic Religions are based on Nonsense things. Islam says Live Poor and you will have a Grrrrrreat life in heaven with you 72 virgins and rivers of honey and milk! LOL
well if you wanna be a martyr and die for your beliefs or your country nothing is more important than what you're dying for, but when you wanna die for 72virgins, Dude then thats abso-F*ckin-Lutely different from being a Martyr!
_________________________
i choose Hell, cause i can smoke my lucky strike!

Top
#54322 - 05/11/11 12:02 PM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: Lil Rag]
The Zebu Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/08/08
Posts: 1647
Loc: Orlando, FL
Islam itself is a distorted caricature of Christianity and Judaism.

Numerous things that we take for granted in Christianity-- such as a clear-cut doctrine of hell, an account of the rise and fall of Satan, pilgrimages and spiritual practices-- actually have no biblical basis. They are, however, conveniently written in the Quran, as Mohammad designed Islam to resemble the current world religions as a marketing tactic.

Even the idea of "the One True Holy Book" that we think so central to Christianity has no objective basis either, as the Bible itself is a giant scrapbook with bits and pieces stitched together from numerous authors over the centuries. Mohammad, however, wrote his own Holy Book himself, both out of expediency and to cement his own ultimate spiritual authority.

Coming back to the thread topic, another advantage of the Quran was that Mohammad was able to gloss over and 'correct' numerous scriptural and ideological contradictions that had caused theological roadbumps in other religions. The fall of Satan is perhaps the most well-known of them.

In the Torah, Satan is a minor enigmatic character who appears to serve as a tester of faith for the Most High. This does not reconcile well with the New Testament's portrayal of Satan as some sort of apocalyptic force of pure evil that rivals God, even less so with the legend that he was some sort of Promethean angel cast down for his pride. This raises numerous problematic questions, one of which is...

 Quote:

Lucifer was an *angel*. If angels cannot think in opposition of God, how then was he able to rebel against God?


It was commonly held in the ancient world that angels are pure beings that cannot oppose God because they have no free will. Mohammad sidestepped this problem by claiming that Shaitan was actually a djinn (fire-demon), a lesser creation capable of sin.

Of course, the Quran still has innumerable contradictions in its theory and practice. In my opinion, the Baha'i faith does the best job of fixing these (but of course that's another area of discussion entirely).


Edited by The Zebu (05/11/11 12:03 PM)
_________________________
«Recibe, ¡oh Lucifer! la sangre de esta víctima que sacrifico en tu honor.»

Top
Page 2 of 3 <123>


Moderator:  TV is God, fakepropht, SkaffenAmtiskaw, Woland, Asmedious, Fist 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.03 seconds of which 0.002 seconds were spent on 28 queries. Zlib compression disabled.