Satan: Humanity's Hero

page: 3
29
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 07:59 PM
link   
First of all Get drunk with me and think...

What you are saying is that the scripture that reads "Beware of the false shepherd," and the constant depictions of hell being ruled by a... "Satan" whose name was Lucifer.... And we know Satan is Evil... At least that is what we echo from what another person says. But they never defined evil.... So God kills millions of people and gets away with it... but god says hell is about torture?


Go back to that quote.... Don't you think the false shepherd is the bible itself? I mean think about it like this for a second:

When you were a kid and you had a friend who suddenly stopped hanging out with you. And you found out he was hanging out with another kid who rebelled against you... Or for what ever reason stopped liking you... Wouldn't you play the jealous game and call him a demon, who is a false shepherd, who will only lead your life to ruin so you can have your friends back?


Seriously this is why I am AGNOSTIC. Not Atheist.




posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 08:03 PM
link   
reply to post by FriedBabelBroccoli
 


I say animals have souls. You want to challenge me...Come at me bro lol



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 08:06 PM
link   
Anyone seen Jim Jefferies stand up comedy on religion?
He raises some valid points but the thing people should realise is, The devil never brought out a book, God brought out a book like he had something to try and prove to everyone. If you ask Jim, the devil was being a bigger man letting god talk crap about him lol



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 08:15 PM
link   
reply to post by FriedBabelBroccoli
 


If there are souls then animals definitely have them.

Anyway, I looked it up and the consensus is with most bible scholars that Eden was indeed on earth.

Here is an excerpt from one article.



Over the years, many have claimed the Garden of Eden has been found. Of course the location of each "discovery" is in a different location. The Bible describes the area around the Garden in Genesis 2, even using recognizable place names such as Ethiopia. It mentions a spring in the Garden which parts into four major rivers, including the Euphrates. This has led many, including Bible scholars, to conclude that the Garden of Eden was somewhere in the middle eastern area known today as the Tigris-Euphrates River Valley, with its remains long ago vanishing. the Institute for Creation Research


also Google search on the subject

So it certainly seems as though those who would be considered experts on the subject say Eden was on earth. Maybe I am missing something.



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 08:18 PM
link   
Well, there is the doctrine that says that Lucifer's rebellion was caused by his refusal to accept God's plan for mankind. He saw all of the suffering that mankind would go through and thought that it was not what a loving God should allow, so he left Heaven for Earth to set up an alternative plan-where mankind would be allowed to thrive and pursue his greatest potential. It was Lucifer who gave mankind much of its knowledge and even tried to help him improve his physical limitations by cross-breeding with incarnate "fallen" angels-producing the "men of renown" that the Bible speaks of, and are also mentioned in other mythologies. Apollo, Hercules, Thor, etc. were all real beings, half angel and half man, and many of the stories about them have a grain of truth. There are also the repeated stories in many cultures of miracle-working men who came from elsewhere and taught people agriculture, metal-working, etc. Lucifer, again.

If such stories are true, then perhaps Lucifer believes that he can present man at his most accomplished state and God will change HIs mind and accept that Lucifer's way is better. Unfortunately, this will never occur. Lucifer's hubris and limited understanding has made him believe his own propaganda, just as it makes many wise people who seek humanism as the salvation of mankind believe the same. But this is not the way of things. Read my signature quote, but read in with a loving, compassionate tone and see if you understand my point.



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by GiulXainx
 


The Bible is the Old Serpent. Throw it on the floor and stand on it: You will tread on the lion and the adder; the young lion and the serpent you will trample underfoot. Psalm 91.



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 08:55 PM
link   
Simple, God crested everything. He created spiritual beings that are called angels and part spiritual part material called man.

We are the superior "model" if you want and some angels thought we looked good and didn't want to serve us. They made a pact and defied Gods word, hundreds came down in the physical plane all over the planet (Annunaki), they taught us war, math, writing, architecture (amazing structures all around the world namely the pyramids, ziggurats on every continent) wearing make up, created religions, manipulation of metals, charms, etc all ungodly and unrighteous things that we never needed in the first place and made some babies with human woman. They were far more intelligent then us and took advantage that is why God was not happy like paedophiles who take advantage of a child (wonder why this is practiced so much by those on the dark side). The woman bore children that were hybrids aka known as the nephilim.

The giants were out of control and destroyed the planet, Noah was without blemish and was mandated by God to repopulate the planet after the deluge.

This is what I pieced together so far however, I don't understand how after the deluge we still have the same influences on earth even though the planet was given a reset. I thought the fallen angels were banished\sealed\chained or something?

Anyway the past is not clear. If we can clearly identify where we come we will know where we want to go.



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 09:09 PM
link   
reply to post by FriedBabelBroccoli
 


I have a few questions, if you don't mind taking the time to try to answer them.

First, a bit of background information on me. I was raised Baptist. My grandfather is a preacher, my grandmother is supremely devout and my mother raised me in church. I used to sing solos in church and was a MAJOR witness to people up until I turned 19. Of course, I hadn't really read my Bible. I listened to the feel good stories, I sang the uplifting gospel songs and I prayed diligently for anyone that hadn't come to know the Lord.

Then something happened. I started questioning. Simple questions at first, along the lines of "why are there so many other religions in the world if this is the right one?" Or... "how do we know the Bible is the text we're supposed to be reading?" At this point, I can say that I am beyond a crisis of faith and the more of the Bible I actually read, the more I question.

So please, understand that none of this comes from a mocking stand point. I'm genuinely curious and thus far, all of the preachers I've reached out to simply haven't been able to provide sufficient answers.




I think you are forgetting that humanity is on Earth as a PUNISHMENT . . . .


Why? What did humanity as a whole do to deserve this punishment? The original two people supposedly created by this higher power, and created in His image, made a mistake. A mistake that could have been prevented if the Lord simply didn't place an obstacle in their way.

If the creator is all knowing (according to scripture, He is - Psalm 139:4 "Even before a word is on my tongue,
behold, O LORD, you know it altogether.", Psalms 139:16 “All the days ordained for me were written in Your book before one of them came to be.” ), then he knew that the mistake would be made from the jump off, yet he deliberately placed a catalyst in his fallible creation's paths. Why? If the creator is not all knowing, then it contradicts the Bible, and if the Bible is the word of God, there should be no contradiction, especially regarding the Lord's abilities.




Most folks here talking about how horrible the Biblical God is because "He" allows pain, suffering, war and all that goes along with it to go on completely ignore this point.

The original sin was disobeying God because he was the true incarnation of the "philosopher king," perfect in wisdom and providing all that is required.


So one sin, committed by two people, damned an entire universe of people to suffering. One single sin, that could have been prevented by God in the first place. And that is acceptable to you?

Do you believe in a Hell? And do you think Hell is an appropriate punishment for a finite crime? Burning, tortured for eternity, possibly for something as simple as having a different creator God. Being born in the "wrong" part of the world and growing up with a different faith, or perhaps no faith at all. That crime should be punishable by torture for all of eternity?




All this boo-hooing about the Biblical God being horrible and evil just further demonstrates how completely ignorant of, or biased against, the text folks really are.


People can commit evil against one another. Unspeakable acts of violence are perpetuated by human beings daily. However, the great flood was not an act of human beings. If you believe the Bible literally, then the flood was caused by God himself. This flood not only killed the humans that were evil and unjust, but the children and unborn babies that had yet to cause evil. This act is considered okay by most Christians, simply because Noah, whose lineage was perfect in generations, and his family were saved?

What about Job? Human beings had no hand in the terrible atrocities committed against one of the Lord's most dedicated followers. Sodom and Gomorrah? There were no other righteous or innocent people in either city? No child that was worthy of being saved?

This is not coming from a place of ignorance. I have read these stories. I am currently studying the text passionately, trying to regain an ounce of faith that I feel has been lost from my life. Unfortunately, the exact text I'm reading is making it incredibly difficult.



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Utnapisjtim
reply to post by QueenofSpades
 


One thing the whole "Tree of good and evil knowledge" has taught us, is that determining what is good and what is evil is difficult, with good and evil being highly relative concepts. The divine principle says "You shall not kill", but what if someone killed a notorious child molester or a serial killer? Wouldn't that, or even shouldn't that turn the table? Or atleast to some extent?



Actually that is not meant the way it sounds. It means thou shall not MURDER. Killing to protect someone or yourself is not Murder in His eyes according to the meaning. If we could not Kill humans would had starved out a long long time ago. Still if you kill someone WITH PREMEDITATION or FOR HATEFULLNESS that is breaking that rule.

Soldiers are not murderers under this in his eyes either.



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 09:14 PM
link   

Wandering Scribe
reply to post by FriedBabelBroccoli
 


I was responding, more, to the personality of Satan, over the supposed actions. My goal wasn't to tear down the OP's thread, but instead to open them up to the historical, mythological, and canonical elements of Satan that I felt their post was lacking.




You did a rather poor job of it.



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 09:21 PM
link   

Akragon
reply to post by QueenofSpades
 


Christianity doesn't say much about satan actually... Just that hes the bad guy...




Yea it does actually. Once again Akragon is passing himself off as a biblical scholar. Getting all stared up by folks that let Akragon do the reading for them. Don't take my word for it, study it yourself.
edit on 12-3-2014 by Logarock because: n



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Grimpachi
reply to post by FriedBabelBroccoli
 


If there are souls then animals definitely have them.

Anyway, I looked it up and the consensus is with most bible scholars that Eden was indeed on earth.

Here is an excerpt from one article.

Over the years, many have claimed the Garden of Eden has been found. Of course the location of each "discovery" is in a different location. The Bible describes the area around the Garden in Genesis 2, even using recognizable place names such as Ethiopia. It mentions a spring in the Garden which parts into four major rivers, including the Euphrates. This has led many, including Bible scholars, to conclude that the Garden of Eden was somewhere in the middle eastern area known today as the Tigris-Euphrates River Valley, with its remains long ago vanishing. the Institute for Creation Research


also Google search on the subject

So it certainly seems as though those who would be considered experts on the subject say Eden was on earth. Maybe I am missing something.


It is possible, but Genesis II is the only place where Eden is referenced as a geographic location, ALL other references indicate it to be an other-worldly location. If you want to use that interpretation that is up to you, but the rest of the book seems to repeatedly denounce that notion. The strongest association comes from the Sumerian epic of Gilgamesh where Eden is an actual place on Earth (or at least thought to be) meaning "fertility."

IE: Book of Ezekiel
en.wikipedia.org...



In regards to God as being Enki or Enlil, y'all are forgetting the titles associated with God in the Bible. Anu (en.wikipedia.org...) most closely fits the Biblical God's description as Lord of Heaven and creator of the world and the gods. He is in control of the constellations (see Job where God challenges him to command the stars) the same as the biblical God.

Satan is the lord of the earth or waters and that is the same title as Enki.
Lucifer or the principalities of the air is the title of Enlil.
en.wikipedia.org...


He was one of the oldest gods in the Sumerian pantheon and part of a triad including Enlil (god of the air) and Enki (god of water). He was called Anu by the later Akkadians in Babylonian culture. By virtue of being the first figure in a triad consisting of Anu, Enlil, and Enki (also known as Ea), Anu came to be regarded as the father and at first, king of the gods. Anu is so prominently associated with the E-anna temple in the city of Uruk (biblical Erech) in southern Babylonia that there are good reasons for believing this place to be the original seat of the Anu cult. If this is correct, then the goddess Inanna (or Ishtar) of Uruk may at one time have been his consort.


-FBB



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 09:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


The gnostics called him the demiurge... a false god posing as the God of creation.

Are you sure? Hmm. I am fairly sure he was literally believed to be the being that created this World. An evil god and an evil World. The true god didn't make the World. The World was never meant to be. One has to attain gnosis in order to transcend this crummy existence. Or something like that



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 09:46 PM
link   
reply to post by jacktorrance
 

Do you think that life on Earth is the only life that exists?
The Bible seems to say otherwise does it not?

The very concept of free will means that at some point one would have to oppose the God. Then, later it is mentioned that only the God knows all the secrets of Heaven (ie: how everything works) so one must assume that any conclusions they reach can not be based on a complete understanding of how things work (ie: how can the children of the original sinners be "punished" when the parents committed the sin).

Again the concept of freewill means that eventually every single person in existence would do the same given enough time. So one could argue or entertain the thought that this way everyone gets their rebellion out of the way early on so they can enjoy the fruits later of living by the perfect law.

In regards to your theory of going to hell for growing up in a different region with different gods, who is to say that God judges people on whether they chose the correct book or image (idol). It really seems that if they follow the law of thou shall not kill, commit adultery, worship false gods, etc they would be fine.

The whole NT is summed up when Yehoshua says, "Forgive them father for they know not what they do." The Bible would have one believe that every single being on the planet is given the chance to hear the word of God, you know with the whole Jesus going to preach to the dead, before they are judged on whether they follow that teaching or not. Intent seems to be FAR more important than appearances in this text.

Punishment appears to be reserved for those who know what is right (justice) and consciously do wrong.

Anyways that is just 2cents off the top of my head.

-FBB



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 10:02 PM
link   

yuppa

Utnapisjtim
reply to post by QueenofSpades
 


One thing the whole "Tree of good and evil knowledge" has taught us, is that determining what is good and what is evil is difficult, with good and evil being highly relative concepts. The divine principle says "You shall not kill", but what if someone killed a notorious child molester or a serial killer? Wouldn't that, or even shouldn't that turn the table? Or atleast to some extent?



Actually that is not meant the way it sounds. It means thou shall not MURDER. Killing to protect someone or yourself is not Murder in His eyes according to the meaning. If we could not Kill humans would had starved out a long long time ago. Still if you kill someone WITH PREMEDITATION or FOR HATEFULLNESS that is breaking that rule.

Soldiers are not murderers under this in his eyes either.


You're splitting hairs here. Kill, murder, slay, put to death, assasinate, execute-- it's all semantics and your assumption is based on an idiomatic distinction between 'murder' and 'killing' in modern English which is not the same in 5th century BC Biblical Hebrew. And what's with the shouting? Calm down buddy, no need to go bananas.
edit on 12-3-2014 by Utnapisjtim because: syntax



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 10:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Logarock
 


You did a rather poor job of it.

What an absolutely enlightening response!

I can clearly see where everything in my post was wrong!

How beautifully you illustrated all of your corrections!

But for all those other people out there who might have missed your responses, why don't you go ahead and repeat them?

I'm sure everyone else would like to see them as well.


~ Wandering Scribe



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 10:53 PM
link   

FriedBabelBroccoli
reply to post by Wandering Scribe
 


Thanks for the input Wandering Scribe.

I must admit I am surprised you didn't point out the glaring logical fallacy the OP agrees with of "Satan gave mankind free will."

How can mankind not have free will and then be coerced into eating of the forbidden fruit? If mankind had no free will then they would not have been able to commit such an action without God willing it.

So many holes in this theory.

-FBB


???? At what point did I mention "free will" in my OP?

He advanced/ upgraded humans. That was symbolized in the "apple in the tree of Knowledge".



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 10:54 PM
link   

dodol
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


interesting


now i want to file a lawsuit against god for what he did in OT: slaughtering, slavery, etc.

ohh wait.... it's just a fiction, isn't it.... nvm

peace



Actually, I was going to write my thesis in that very format: as a defense attorney for Satan...



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 11:06 PM
link   
reply to post by QueenofSpades
 


I'm afraid you're a bit late. Below is the complete movie God on Trial, set in a concentration camp during WW2 where Jews set up a rabbilical trial accusing God for negligibility and breaking the covenenant:



Haven't seen it meself so I can't really recomend it just like that, but it seems like an interesting idea for a film.

God on Trial at www.imdb.com...



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 11:20 PM
link   

QueenofSpades

FriedBabelBroccoli
reply to post by Wandering Scribe
 

Thanks for the input Wandering Scribe.

I must admit I am surprised you didn't point out the glaring logical fallacy the OP agrees with of "Satan gave mankind free will."

How can mankind not have free will and then be coerced into eating of the forbidden fruit? If mankind had no free will then they would not have been able to commit such an action without God willing it.

So many holes in this theory.

-FBB

???? At what point did I mention "free will" in my OP?

He advanced/ upgraded humans. That was symbolized in the "apple in the tree of Knowledge".

Actually I never said you put forth the idea.

However, I was wrong in citing that you agreed with it, you clearly did not agree with it so I apologize for claiming that you did.

But I am curious as you are claiming that the adversary "upgraded" humans, doesn't the Bible say that the adversary lied to Adam and Eve claiming that they would not die, but would be "like" God. The results of that seems to be extreme polar opposites. Especially when the creation says that mankind was created in the image and likeness of God, which would mean that mankind was already existing in the fashion which is described in the "lie" of the serpent.

Could you expand on how you twist a lie clearly meant to get people to disobey God into advocating the "upgrading" of mankind?

Why didn't the serpent just eat the fruit and show Adam and Eve that he had become an all knowing god like the God? Why didn't he just eat the fruit (apple as translated simply means any fruit) and bestow that on Adam and Eve since he would then be "as God."

How could God then exile mankind if they had become gods themselves? How could the God still have sway over them? How do you explain people then dying? Why doesn't the adversary eat of the fruit and become equal to God before the events of Revelation which has him being cast out of Heaven?

Your thesis argument still doesn't make much sense to me.

-FBB

EDIT
Furthermore, how do you possibly interpret Adam and Eve being slaves?

Really? There is no mention ever of mankind toiling away, they literally don't have to work for anything. They chill out and eat fruit whenever they want. What texts are you getting the whole idea of slavery from?

If anything could be interpreted as being enslaved it would be the angels. But then again the whole story talks about ruling the hearts and minds of men and it is indicated that the God is the perfect philosopher king so "His" rule (ie: principles and actions) would be flawless.
edit on 12-3-2014 by FriedBabelBroccoli because: 101





new topics
top topics
 
29
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join