It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
VHB:
Lets look at the dictionary definition of 'dem-i-urge' "New World" second college edition. (dem'e'urg') n. Gr. demiourgos, one who works for the people skilled workman, creator ;demos, (the people) plus ergos, worker, (see ERG) 1. [often D-] a) in Plato's philosophy, the deity as creator of the material world in Gnostic philosophy; a deity subordinate to the supreme deity, sometimes considered the creator of evil. 2. GR. History: a magistrate in certain states, 3. a ruling force or creative power. I see your theorem as being definitely plausible Akragon. Waving "HI JOE" at you! (you know I am not a scripture junkie).
Joecroft (templeman): Are you another one of these “demiurgian theorists”, you guys really get around…lol
Has it ever crossed your weary mind, that if the demiurge is correct, then the higher God did a pretty bad job of keeping the lesser god under control…jeeezz…maybe he was on vacation or something, during the really bleak periods lol
(HI Waves back!)- JC
Joecroft: Still going with the demiurge theory eh…?
Akragon: More or less... As I did post in a later reply... It is either a false god, or men with agenda's fabricating god
Originally posted by Vethumanbeing
Me? I admit to NOTHING but you have to agree the theory/premise of the demiurge is very provocative and not that easily dismissed; how can you disagree with Plato.
VHB:
Me? I admit to NOTHING but you have to agree the theory/premise of the demiurge is very provocative and not that easily dismissed; how can you disagree with Plato.
Joecroft: “I admit to nothing”…well, good luck with trial lol
“have to agree”!!!…what do you mean, I have to agree…? Or else the lower God will eat me for breakfast…
Joecroft: But your right about one thing, I shouldn’t be disagreeing with Plato, “Sooo Crates” maybe, but not Plato…
But just what exactly did Plato say in regards to the demiurge…?
Joecroft: Btw - I only waved back out of courtesy an all…you seem strangely familiar some how, could it be your handle name hmmm or could it be your avatar hmmm not sure…LOL JC
Originally posted by Vethumanbeing
When I stand before my creator defending my life (soul destination determination I suppose) I will actually be looking at myself; God is me I am God. So, pass go (might contribute $200.00 to the 'watcher' fund).
Originally posted by Vethumanbeing
He said the demiurge is a deity responsible as creator of the physical world subordinate to the prime creator; its actually (surprise) the Gnostics think it can/is responsible for the creation of evil.
Originally posted by Vethumanbeing
Courtesy returned in kind. My Handle name is VERY common, (collie dog head avatar is in stasis-cant figure out how finesse it) you may have mistaken me for an imposter.
VHB
When I stand before my creator defending my life (soul destination determination I suppose) I will actually be looking at myself; God is me I am God. So, pass go (might contribute $200.00 to the 'watcher' fund).
Joecroft: Standing before your own God/self, is right up there with trying to bite your own teeth lol.
VHB:
He said the demiurge is a deity responsible as creator of the physical world subordinate to the prime creator; its actually (surprise) the Gnostics think it can/is responsible for the creation of evil.
Joecroft: Yes but did Plato believe in it, or was he just describing it etc…?
Joecroft: I personally think the Gnostics were trying to reconcile with a God in the OT which was committing atrocities and so forth, and imagine a truer higher God above that one…
Joecroft: I’ve kind of moved on from the flesh being evil; the flesh is only evil when you don’t live in the knowledge of the Spirit, it’s that lack of knowledge which leads to the evils of this world IMO…
I mean take the Gospel of Judas for example, there’s a verse in there which talk about other kingdoms which exist in a boundless realm; I’m pretty sure we will go on existing in bodies within other kingdoms/mansions, so it’s not really the body/flesh that is evil per se IMO…
VHB:
Courtesy returned in kind. My Handle name is VERY common, (collie dog head avatar is in stasis-cant figure out how finesse it) you may have mistaken me for an imposter.
Joecroft: Phew; the old “lassie come home”, avatar test, worked like a charm…
It’s REALLY you, you have returned!!! lol… bring out the fattened calf; open up the vintage wine, maybe even crack open an egg and chop down a tree…
And yes your handle name is not common, but your signature, location and mood are, apparently lol
- JC
originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
Demiurge, Satan, Baal, Yahweh, etc. aren't real "entities" but figments of men's imaginations. They are personifications of the evil that men commit and the lies they push. The demiurge/Satan aren't actual things, just concepts created in the mind. Just as "Father" is a concept of the mind, they are all labels put onto concepts by men, even "God" is a man-made concept, though all of these labels do represent things that are very real, as in man's ego or his humbleness etc.
There isn't any "outside" force acting on the world, it is all us in one way or another in my opinion. Seeing these concepts as actual entities separate from our minds is superstition in my opinion.
Just my two cents.
Originally posted by Vethumanbeing
He was philosopher, so was "pondering the possibility" of such a thing and unfortunately thought it was worthwhile enough an idea HE actually DOCUMENTED his RANDOM thoughts.
Originally posted by Joecroft
I personally think the Gnostics were trying to reconcile with a God in the OT which was committing atrocities and so forth, and imagine a truer higher God above that one…
Originally posted by Vethumanbeing
What is an OT? If you do not define it I cannot answer you.
Originally posted by Vethumanbeing
Flesh is not evil. If anything adrenal glands are to blame as they produce the hormones that act upon the brain that causes the flesh to do things it might regret. The Kingdoms exist in boundless relentlessness.
Originally posted by Vethumanbeing
Of course you will go on existing in eternity as you have tirelessly with perseverance; self defined an 'identity' known as YYY that is ETERNAL/FOREVER. Body is not evil its just a temporary physical vessel (specifically designed for this experience 3D on Earth).
Originally posted by Vethumanbeing
IAM as always the same sure footed path (no sneaky drop offs or hair pin turns ahead). Consistently irreverent.
originally posted by: Joecroft
a reply to: ImaFungi
Originally posted by ImaFungi
"Satan (Hebrew: שָּׂטָן satan, meaning "adversary";[1] Arabic: شيطان shaitan, meaning "astray" or "distant""
- wiki
So the 2nd bolded quote of yours can mean "adversary" rose up against Israel.
I think because the bible is a mishmash of myths and stories, the concept of early uses of evil angels and satan as a singular entity, maybe was a part of early myths, and then the words evolved to mean generally, and so in other parts the word was intended that way.
Thanks, that’s an important aspect to point out; Satan is indeed an adversary and not necessarily the individual entity known as Satan, in every instance throughout the OT
The problem I pointed out in an earlier post, still exists though, because if 1 Chronicles 21:1 is a rewrite (and most believe it is) from the original, found in 2 Samuel 24:1, then the Lord, should not be seen as an adversary at all, especially if God is actually acting in a righteous manner in the original Samuel 24:1 verse…?
- JC
Originally posted by ImaFungi
in the one quote it doesnt mention satan, it mentions the lord getting angry right, which occurs a lot in the old testament.
originally posted by: Joecroft
a reply to: ImaFungi
Originally posted by ImaFungi
in the one quote it doesnt mention satan, it mentions the lord getting angry right, which occurs a lot in the old testament.
Yes, but in that particular verse (2 Samuel 24:1) in my personal opinion, the LORD is angry for a righteous reason (unless you see it differently ?) because of an Evil taking place; but of course how David reacts to that evil, is what is unrighteous IMO;
But my overall point is that the rewritten verse (1 Chronicles 21:1) has it as Satan or the Adversary inciting David to act, which makes it unrighteous anger, that incites David to act, instead of the Lord. And on top of that, Gods name has been taken out of the story…
Either…
(1) God was righteous in being angry, in the original verse before the rewritten version.
or…
(2) Gods anger was unrighteous in the original verse (2 Samuel 24:1) and the rewritten version reflects that.
But (2) wouldn’t make any sense, because God is not an enemy or unrighteous…
And (1) requires an explanation for the rewritten version putting Satan/Adversary centre stage…
- JC
Originally posted by ImaFungi
David reacts by taking census? Which i am not sure what that means, I assumed going door to door and checking on people.
The way I interpreted was that the area, is it Israel, was undergoing a spell of unrighteousness, as in satan had some of the people of israel in grips, members of israel were becoming adversarial, so this forced David to take action. So evil, satan, adversary, caused David to attempt to combat the situation. Thats how i initially read the quotes in op.
Originally posted by Joecroft
Anyone have an coherent explanation for these 2 verses below, that actually works and makes sense…???
Joecroft:
I personally think the Gnostics were trying to reconcile with a God in the OT which was committing atrocities and so forth, and imagine a truer higher God above that one…
Originally posted by Vethumanbeing
Why would Gnostics reconcile themselves to even bother admitting by (contesting) ALL scripture that is valueless. NO RECONCILIATION possible as that scripture is not recognized as being even close to a truism at all.
Originally posted by Vethumanbeing
God does not commit atrocities, Man (as its proxy *given the gift of freewill*) does. You misunderstand the definition;
Originally posted by Vethumanbeing
Gnostic nomenclature, what it means: (to be in knowledge of all things---salvation through gnosis). Jesus was a huge proponent of this; his teachings were of this discipline (Christ Consciousness) as the Hindi also describe it.
originally posted by: HarryJoy
I did not read all of the replies in this thread...so I'm not sure if what I'm about to say has been said already or not. The way I see this matter is....if we see Satan as the "justice" side of God then we can understand why he is called the accuser of the brethren. Justice apart from mercy can be cruel and unforgiving. Qualities that would be attributable to Satan and yet they are as much a part of righteousness as is mercy. Psalm 89:14 Justice and judgment are the habitation of thy throne: mercy and truth shall go before thy face.
HarryJoy: So in my eyes for God to apply unforgiving "justice" to Israel is allowing Satan ( the justice side of God ) to rise up against them. I think of the two covering Cherubs over the mercy seat as representing the justice side of God and the mercy side of God.
originally posted by: akushla99
As 'spaghettied' in the OP question...pared down to the blindingly obvious...
...neither was 'written' by a Source...
...and neither was 'inspired' by a Source..edit.
originally posted by: vethumanbeing
originally posted by: akushla99
As 'spaghettied' in the OP question...pared down to the blindingly obvious...
...neither was 'written' by a Source...
...and neither was 'inspired' by a Source..edit.
The writers of such scripture should have been 'Vetted" by the RCC .These could all be content notes; 'make believe' script writing for the future Grandiose Epics..Masada, Ben-Hur, Ten Commandments, Spartacus, The Robe, Jesus Christ Superstar that have a more important purpose as funster 'FILMATICS" influencing common movie goers (no idea of diabolical intent); subliminally force feed a message as entertainment.