Page 3 of 3 <123
Topic Options
#54417 - 05/14/11 03:46 AM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: The Zebu]
Lil Rag Offline
Banned
stranger


Registered: 04/11/11
Posts: 28
yes, exactly Mohammed Edited & Fixed Many Parts of Islam. While Islam Still has alot of problems, but i think islam is the Final Version of Abrahamic Religions (Baha'i Faith needs Somewhere else to talk about) but The True Abrahamic Religion's Job was to show that the Other People Before Them Were Evil like when Islam Was Found they Called Zoroastrians "Kafir" which means Atheist! they Called Them Evils and Killed All Of them! When Abrahamic Religions Show up, it means somebody is going to be the evil again!
_________________________
i choose Hell, cause i can smoke my lucky strike!

Top
#54441 - 05/14/11 03:20 PM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: Lil Rag]
Meph9 Offline
member


Registered: 04/02/11
Posts: 161
I'm curious about how Muhammed "edited and fixed" parts of a religion he invented...

Anytime two peoples who disagree you'll see conflict and warfare. The labelling of foriegn peoples and ideas as dangerous or evil extends far beyond the historical and dogmatic confines of xtianity and its semetic roots.

I find it interesting that despite the hostilities between the early Islam and its neighboors, between xtianity and the middle east and roman pagan religions around it incorporate concepts and characters from these other religions that they're attempting to demonize

Top
#54443 - 05/14/11 05:06 PM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: Meph9]
The Zebu Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/08/08
Posts: 1647
Loc: Orlando, FL
Islam was never exactly set in stone; throughout Muhammad's lifetime, his religion was very much a "work in progress". As he gained followers, he adapted some of their beliefs and practices into his own doctrine to curry their favor, inasmuch as these adaptions did not undermine his own authority or monotheism.

The Kaaba, for instance, houses an ancient pagan relic. Muhammad simply claimed it was actually from Eden, handed down by Abraham, and this actually Islamic. So Muhammad didn't mind his followers venerating at a heathen shrine, so long as they changed the sign on the door.

But not everything went through, it would seem. He wrote a part of the Quran praising Al Lat, Al Uzza and Manat, three divinities venerated by the Meccans, whom he hoped to bring into his fold. The whole ordeal didn't go over well and as his relations with Mecca soured, so he changed his mind and excised the segment, claiming the lines were actually Satanic Verses inspired by Iblis.
_________________________
«Recibe, ¡oh Lucifer! la sangre de esta víctima que sacrifico en tu honor.»

Top
#54453 - 05/15/11 02:04 AM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: The Zebu]
Jake999 Offline
senior member


Registered: 11/02/08
Posts: 2230
Actually... The Kaaba houses the Hajre Aswad (black stone), some think it's a meteorite, and is supposedly a relic from all the way back to Adam and Eve. It's seven smallish shards that are in a silver frame and is mounted in one of the corner stones, although the exact one eludes me at present.

The stone is smooth to the touch from the millions of pilgrims who have touched it over the years.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_TuseS_84DVI/TOFawSfA3gI/AAAAAAAAAj8/KSDi_jcIXMY/s1600/kaaba-3-large.jpg
_________________________
Bury your dead, pick up your weapon and soldier on.


Top
#54455 - 05/15/11 02:19 AM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: The Zebu]
SkaffenAmtiskaw Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 06/24/09
Posts: 1318
Weren't those segments in the Hadith? You know, the Qu'ran's version of the chapters of the bible we don't really buy into? Well, I say 'we' loosely...

For example, the Jews are actually the only ones who follow the ten actual commandments. Like "Thou shalt not seethe a kid in its mother's milk". The Muslims have long passages of the Qu'ran excised and put into a separate text. Almost like they're uncertain about those stories.
_________________________
"I'd rather be right than consistent" - Winston Churchill

Top
#54462 - 05/15/11 07:24 AM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: SkaffenAmtiskaw]
Hegesias Offline
active member


Registered: 02/16/11
Posts: 725
Come on people, the Qu'ran and Bible are no where near as dispassionately bestial as the Talmud, that book is full of anti-human material exceeding extremely profane black metal lyrics along the lines of Profanatica— Jesus is in hell, boiling in excrement and semen? Satisfyingly vicious for art but I'd never be able to take that seriously unless I wanted to use it for humiliation to those who do take it seriously.

Indeed religious extremism is more than a foul parody and more along the lines of justified polar-malignity behind solemn soothsayers eyes and holy garments. The sinisterness and advocacy of racial supremacy, both passive aggressive, and direct, to Golems, is rather extreme even compared to The Inquisition.

I doubt that common-folk Jews are anything but equally unpredictable people, individuals, like any other race, creed they will fall in line according to natural aristocracy, the dominant males inspire the others to move toward progressive goals whilst the dregs attempt to backstab and steal. If we look at Himmler's retaliatory dark-ironic satire toward the Jewish elites racial supremacy, Himmler's article cannot rival the genuine article of racial supremacy of the Talmudic fanatics, I say again, not the Jewish people in the streets but the sectarian money-mongers.

It is the same with Muslims, the west is afraid of "all Muslims" because they are seen to have the potential to be posing as humane ready to blow up at any moment... Surely it is not rational to eradicate a religiously fanatical threat through extermination of common-folk who simply want to get on with their lives.

Yet I reserve the right to detest the unnaturalness of slave morality and look upon them persons as untrustworthy, I am an enemy of slave morality, but far more than conceited slave moralists can understand.— upon a revaluation of virtues there emerges ones own instinctual master morality. When a certain threshold of understanding is reached through devaluation and revaluation, there revealed, tragedy, the wrenched miasma of pity and dishonourableness all around those still pottering about in the graveyard of God, I can still make conversation with these people yet there is a strong sense that they have intimacy and empathy issues in my experience.

Natural aristocracy has been stifled by society, for the weak and negative are all too often glorified. I take malicious delight in revealing that nature's raw ugliness is beautiful.

A genuine and honest man? Clearly the slave moralist refers to a solemn eyed soothsayer, contemporary herdsman, repressed, compromised enfeebled will, buckled spirit, buckled lapdog spine. Why? For when one is genuine and honest in expressing the will to power, animalistic desire and amoral (not immoral) understandings beyond the promising plentitude of black and white moral compartmentalisation— one will appear almost psychopathic in a derogatory context. I am met with compartmentalised justifications without validity of argument, as to why I am, as if by a fluke of nature, somehow magically shallow or magically incapable of empathy. Despite my flaws which are never addressed, the behaviour stemming from envious equality pathos, the attempt to pull me down to their level, continues. I am ordinary and nothing special, I really can't see why my laughing and confidence angers so many as I most often help others who are helping themselves and dismiss negative and weak passive persons, still not after a good motivational speech has failed to inspire them.

I do not consider mature, an infantile display of tears, deliberate loss of control, or otherwise emotive forms of parasitism, there is control here, self discipline, emotional and cognitive intelligence working toward self mastery— poor impulse control would be used in a derogatory context within what passes as contemporary psychology to describe my expression of the will to power because expression gets confused with the weak loss of control that those tantalised by fantastic mediocrity are so overwhelmed by.

The Satanist will issue himself commands of his will, even denying himself lapses of indulgence in steadfast thought of attaining the main goal of progressing in body and mind, he is pragmatic and will apply perspectivism not blind faith in the orders and suggestions of others. This mastery of the self is not submitted to under indoctrinated breaking of the will but learned as one individuates, eventually realising where strength lies— the will.

In this we see that the will to power is not consigned to man made morally abstract fixations, and also that the internal recognitions of empathy is necessity, of nature, like any other living response, empathy within the animal kingdom is as debatable as the existence of our every day lives. I assert that most complete emotional recognition of other being's is intrinsic for perfectly natural living functioning— for mastery of ourselves lies in understanding, knowing that knowledge is not the same as understanding.

I look upon those who champion self professed superiority in compassion, pity and selflessness, and I look with profound suspicion. The moralist declares "His Satanic reasoning is warped and not humane! there is no compassion in his words!".

Take a look at this NS retaliation to the antiquitous Talmudic tyranny.

"The subhuman is a biological creature, crafted by nature, which has hands, legs, eyes and mouth, even the semblance of a brain. Nevertheless, this terrible creature is only a partial human being."— Himmler

Clearly this is a fight fire with fire tactic, to mock and reveal the racial supremacist ethos that has been covered up through propaganda. Why? Well look at the lines in the Talmud and compare it to Himmler's satire.

If all you have to be proud of is the colour of your skin or the faith you were indoctrinated into then obviously you have achieved nothing with your own life to be personally proud of. These beings are what I call subhumans. The elite would be those who are of any race or creed, who by their will, attain the goals they "themselves" set in for their lives. Who tries to interfere with others lives whilst ruining his own is a parasite.

Talmud is not Judaism you say? It belongs to an extreme sect you say? Indeed I agree, but all religion conceals unnatural and unnecessary prejudice against the human species and so anyone who follows a monotheistic religion is met with profound suspicion in my eyes, not because of exiting things like terrorism or Nazism but because of the natural repulsion I have for anyone who cannot think for themselves, they are unstable, prone to mood swings and dishonourable justifications, blamers, backstabbers are they.

There is no need for a natural man to follow like a lapdog and be open to prejudice, simply move on with science and psychology, sociology etc.and leave the dark ages behind as historical learnings to go beyond. It 's not big and it's not clever to hide secret superiority fantasies that your religion cultivates, we all know it's to do with a especially intimate God relationship, clever wording buries the god complex super ego deep down under the self deceit of pretentious modesty and humbleness, hubris and dispassionate righteousness. This hubris is transparent to those of master morality, it only makes the religious appear unstable and dishonourable, delusional liars, derailing what is natural using emotive words like "equality" and "peace", simply because they cannot intrinsically feel their own master morality, the religious man conceals a conceited ego who hates all who do not reflect his beliefs back to him— the religious discard what they see as lowly and in place there are feelings of grandeur, what they have discarded is natural human functioning, yet the religious man feels he has earned his place in the eyes of God through giving up all that is natural, there is no faith in his own nature to be affectionate to women and children. Why? I don't know and I don't care, anyone who needs guidelines to respect their own species is fucked in the head.

The best thing to say to religious people when they try and spoon feed you watered down variants of what we value already in all obviousness, is to simply say "Well obviously, did you have to learn that virtue from a book? At your age? how worrying."

The righteous envier declares "Egoism!" without a moments thought about what kind of hubris ego they have failed to identify in themselves, yet they feel compelled to envy a man who can think for himself, attempt to drag him down, for anyone who is such a threat to the slave moralist ego, it is more than enough to shower what they covet with derogatory negative remarks— equalising themselves through pessimism and ignorance.

If I am to make a slightly detailed analysis that goes beyond the promising and contenting closure of black and white moral dualism, it is most often dismissed as manipulation, clever talking, or evilness, for their moral closure and appeasement, the amoral (not immoral) man is compartmentalised as evil due to an infantile cognitive dissonance in the minds of those who cannot see past black and white moral blind spots, no matter how virtuous ones deeds, all will be ignored by the religious bigot who has decided he will envy your natural inclination to be progressive.

Trying to have a conversation with those who are deliberately ignorant and dismissal of what is beyond their experience can be the most frustrating and tragic encounter, it is like trying to throw somebody a rope to get out of quicksand whilst they are shrieking nonsense and panicking, sinking to their death while the rope was there all along. They refuse to release the stable weight of the book which is actually making them sink into the abyss.

I am ordinary and do not consider myself superior to anyone else by default, I am not compelled to convey a complex mind at work nor am I compelled to convey a morally sound heart, though some of us are pure of heart, certainly not in the way a slave moralist would even care to glance at in themselves.
_________________________


Top
#54471 - 05/15/11 10:47 AM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: Hegesias]
SkaffenAmtiskaw Moderator Offline
veteran member


Registered: 06/24/09
Posts: 1318
My dear Hegesias, I was not intending any kind of moral superiority with regards to any one of the Abrahamic religions. They are all riddled with inconsistencies, and they're morally bankrupt in every practical sense. Which is exactly what they don't need. The Hadith are so obviously doublespeak it's untrue.
_________________________
"I'd rather be right than consistent" - Winston Churchill

Top
#54474 - 05/15/11 11:18 AM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: Hegesias]
The Zebu Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/08/08
Posts: 1647
Loc: Orlando, FL
 Quote:

Clearly this is a fight fire with fire tactic, to mock and reveal the racial supremacist ethos that has been covered up through propaganda. Why? Well look at the lines in the Talmud and compare it to Himmler's satire.


I'm sure all the ghettos, pogroms, and witch-hunts were just satire too.

Yes, Judaic extremism is worrying, but not particularly more so than their Christian or Muslim counterparts in their own respective eras.

 Quote:

Natural aristocracy has been stifled by society, for the weak and negative are all too often glorified. I take malicious delight in revealing that nature's raw ugliness is beautiful.


How is this possible? Truly natural things cannot be stifled, as nothing can exist outside of nature- "res" - the natural order of things. Who else has the right to declare what human civilization should be besides Nature herself?

The glorification of weakness and negativity is currently the perfect expression of mankind's nature. By claiming that it corresponds to anything beyond your personal distaste is a submission to abstraction.


Edited by The Zebu (05/15/11 11:20 AM)
_________________________
«Recibe, ¡oh Lucifer! la sangre de esta víctima que sacrifico en tu honor.»

Top
#54479 - 05/15/11 01:43 PM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: The Zebu]
Hegesias Offline
active member


Registered: 02/16/11
Posts: 725
 Originally Posted By: The Zebu
 Quote:

Clearly this is a fight fire with fire tactic, to mock and reveal the racial supremacist ethos that has been covered up through propaganda. Why? Well look at the lines in the Talmud and compare it to Himmler's satire.


I'm sure all the ghettos, pogroms, and witch-hunts were just satire too.

Yes, Judaic extremism is worrying, but not particularly more so than their Christian or Muslim counterparts in their own respective eras.

 Quote:

Natural aristocracy has been stifled by society, for the weak and negative are all too often glorified. I take malicious delight in revealing that nature's raw ugliness is beautiful.


How is this possible? Truly natural things cannot be stifled, as nothing can exist outside of nature- "res" - the natural order of things. Who else has the right to declare what human civilization should be besides Nature herself?

The glorification of weakness and negativity is currently the perfect expression of mankind's nature. By claiming that it corresponds to anything beyond your personal distaste is a submission to abstraction.


"I'm sure all the ghettos, pogroms, and witch-hunts were just satire too."

I don't think everything is satire Zebu, I just see something very odd about the whole Nazi and Jew thing, I despise everything I read about it all as untrustworthy representations as everything conflicts, I only trust what I can see with my own eyes and ears in front of me, in person— separate individuals no matter what colour you are you get the same manners from me.

Basically the Talmud is old and Himmler's "Der Untermench" article just seemed to parody the Talmud in retaliation? Also, it seems almost like it was being presented out of context in our times, hiding the motivation for it. I really don't care though, as 99% of humans have proved to be dishonourable except me in my experience up to now. I find things like this terribly disgusting as I hate lies.

I'm not for or against anything except to respect individuals of any race or creed in accordance to their deeds. Why? because I don't regard any human being as being more worthy of contempt than any other, nobody is special enough to merit revenge or passionate hatred, I am indifferent and see enemies as chores to be done.

All comers are met with up front suspicion and accusations, except my personal allies, actually even they get a grilling from me time to time and so do I from them. So I'm definitely not part of a group or anything like that, never was and never will be, I would consider it weak to be proud of others achievements that are not my own, anything that isn't my personal achievement is not worth anything to me. Religion is for lapdogs to drag on the coat tails of a Mr. perfect idol. Many things are like religion, football is the same, it's all lackluster in my view. A voyage of discovery in science, with purpose and progressive direction, that I can vouch for or even support, but not for anything so lacking in aesthetic such as drab religions being negative and putting everyone down, how depressing and morosely boring, doing the same thing over and over again, being negative, it's not hard nor does it take any effort to be positive with your community and you don't need a holy book to feel positive and have a sense of humour. I actually feel unwell talking about religion, it's all very alien to me, all I see are beige rags, rape, chopping off heads, crying children, OCD murmuring— monotonous absurdity.

I only tried to add some colour and humour to this thread, I'm going to read the better articles on this site for which there are lots. I am going to have a bath, this topic has made me feel compelled to.
_________________________


Top
#54578 - 05/16/11 10:45 PM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: Lamar]
Ghostly1 Offline
member


Registered: 04/10/11
Posts: 147
Loc: NY
 Originally Posted By: Lamar
 Originally Posted By: William Wright
All right, it was pride that got Lucifer tossed out of heaven. Makes sense – after all, pride is one of the seven deadly sins. But if pride is so terrible, why does God want us to worship him? Wouldn’t that make him a hypocrite?


I'd like to add to your speculation that, as the Christians say, God is a jealous God. Jealousy, isn't that a sin as well?


I have a book which states that "Jealous" is actually Gods name, and that God is a Jealous God. So Lucifer wanting to steal some of the glory wouldn't go over big with the one who supposedly created everything in 6 days.

The inconsistencies, double truths, and hypocrisies are only some of the many reasons I left white light religion. If you put a piece of shit in a silken ribbon, and garnish it with gold tinsel, its still a piece of shit. But not judging the book for its cover, reading and understanding its a load of crap is the first step to cutting the chains placed on you from childhood.
_________________________
Become a force of nature.

Top
#59462 - 09/25/11 12:32 AM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: The Architect]
ShadowSirius Offline
stranger


Registered: 09/24/11
Posts: 9
I've heard the story about Lucifer as well. But according to Roman Mythology the name Lucifer is a Latin name for "Morning Star, The Bringer of Light." The translation of "lucifer" comes from Jerome's Latin Vulgate. In the Latin Langage at that time, "lucifer" actually meant Venus as the morning star. Isaiah from the bible was using it as a metaphor for a bright light, although it wasn't the greatest light to illustrate the apparent power of the Babylonian king which then faded."

Therefore, Lucifer wasn't equated with Satan until after Jerome. Jerome wasn't in error. Later Christians (and Mormons) were in equating "Lucifer" with "Satan".



Edited by ShadowSirius (09/25/11 12:34 AM)
_________________________
Beyond the moon and stars, between light and darkness. Darkness is what and where it lies

Top
#107360 - 06/28/16 08:08 PM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: ShadowSirius]
antikarmatomic Offline
BANNED
stalker


Registered: 09/22/13
Posts: 3208
Loc: El Mundo
Here is where it gets all sorts of tangled and, quite honestly, unfuckingtenable.

How does one arrive at this:
 Originally Posted By: SkaffenAmtiskaw
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.

From this:
 Originally Posted By: The Zebu
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.


*quoted, simply because they are well-stated and generally agreed-upon observations of the mentality of the religions from whence this archetype originates as well as the archetype itself.

Everything that is supposedly evil is actually good for you? We've been lied to?

Maybe so. This is likely - very likely - true.

But it is a pretty big fucking stretch to assert that it is the existence of evil itself that we have been lied to about. Even if “good's what you like and evil's what you don't like” that's cool, but it still exists, and satan is intended to embody whatever that is. If evil were good, it would be good and therefor, not evil. If evil is a mere illusion, then there's really no sense in dealing with its personification in any way shape or form at all, now is there? Pro-man? This might be a bitter pill to swallow, but it's a pretty safe to bet that the personification of evil or shit-you-don't-like, if you prefer, likely doesn't like you as an “individual” either. It too promotes the death of the individual.

No matter which way you slice it, one is faced with having to make evil somehow good. This is, by definition, flatly absurd and doomed to failure; being every-bit as paradoxical as a lake of fire. 'doesn't matter if priesthoods are paid-for, how much time you spend out in the woods alone, or talking to aardvarks, or what obscure cultural references you drudge up to fill the void - evil is not good. Perhaps that is the point: that the knotted evolution of the philosophy itself, even as a thought-experiment, becomes a sort of meta-narrative of the archetype and its attributes as well as its inevitable and irreconcilable fate because of the very nature of the beast itself, so-to-speak.
_________________________
Angelic harlequins and sinister clowns.

Top
#107378 - 06/30/16 01:46 AM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: antikarmatomic]
Dimitri Offline
stalker


Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3147
It is but a matter of perspective.
What I do benefits me. It does not matter what society thinks.

Take the case of Gerard Depardieu for example.
A self-made actor whom is known for stating out-loud what any normal thinking person would do when confronted by the idiocy of public opinion. When France came up of taxing millionares with 75% on their payroll many of them decided to flunk out and take on citizenship in another country. Liberals were cheering for the perceived "equality" and "justice", booing at the same to people like Depardieu for taking a stand and proudly proclaiming "fuck that shit, I'm out".

In the eyes of society, that's pure greed. A cardinal sin. Evil. In reality, it's just a man who is protecting his hard-earned assets against the idiocy of the biased collective.

The same case can be made for CEO's of big industries who get a few millions in bonuses when they leave or retire from the company. There's a reason they need it... but to the collective that is called "society" it's simply unfair and unjustified. Perceived as simple "greed".
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat

Top
#107379 - 06/30/16 06:03 AM Re: Bible Time! - Riddle Me This [Re: Dimitri]
antikarmatomic Offline
BANNED
stalker


Registered: 09/22/13
Posts: 3208
Loc: El Mundo
 Originally Posted By: DI
What I do benefits me. It does not matter what society thinks.
And inasmuch as it benefits you it is not evil. It is beneficial and hence doesn't warrant satanic attribution except as an offhanded (and perhaps hyperbolic) quip – a social commentary predicated upon by inverting the norms of one's milieu, presumably for fun and profit. What Satan has to do with any of that hinges on the often grossly overstated complaint of living in a Christian society – an observation that doesn't carry much substance in secular nations beyond pointing out that, like, “Christian churches exist” and we have, ummm, “laws”; as if it is pure chaos and anarchy (read: better-off) elsewhere in the world lacking exposure to the 10 commandments. In that case it is, essentially, a reaction to what is offhandedly deemed evil by authoritative decree or popular consensuses rather than to what is, in fact, genuinely evil.

But fuck what they say, anyhow. It's not as if individual suffering is something aptly characterized as being a matter open to debate. That my niece calls moose rhinoceroses(us) somehow has never prompted me to consider moose hunting in Africa.
_________________________
Angelic harlequins and sinister clowns.

Top
Page 3 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 27 queries. Zlib compression disabled.