God should judge it.

a reply to: NOTurTypical

If that's your argument you have no proof. You just are saying no he wasn't without a verse to go by. I have provided several textual reasons for my analysis of Satan and you have given your opinion that superstition is correct.

The Bible doesn't support superstition or your opinion, just the religion of Christianity itself (supports your opinion) and not scripture itself. Not even the NT.

And Jesus said Satan's language is to lie.

I think I have the right idea but thanks anyway.

originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: Muffenstuff

Satan wasn't lying in the gospels, it would not have been a temptation of Christ in the wilderness if Satan didn't have the authority to give Christ all the kingdoms of the world if He would worship Him.

If he had been granted the power to give it in temptation by God for that 40 days but not for keeps or actual ownership it would have been (temptation). Is that beyond God's power?

It's not a temptation if I offer you to own the moon, I don't own it to give to you.

If you work for its owner and says you can do it then it is.

I guess you don't like how I approach the Gospel but truth is Satan helped the whole time. He tested Christ making perfection possible. He entered Judas to ensure that the prophesied by Christ betrayal went down and God's plan SUCCEEDED.

You chose to concentrate on other parts of my comment and didn't address what was most important, that Satan isn't working against God and is his emissary.

a reply to: Muffenstuff

"Get thee behind me Satan, for you savor the things of man and not the things of God."

The Bible doesn't say Satan is God's emissary, it says God constantly uses what he meant for evil and turns it into good. I once heard a man say that if Satan realized what would happen to him at the cross he would have spent his time trying to murder every person who was trying to kill Christ.

a reply to: NOTurTypical

Depends if it's righteous wrath or unrighteous wrath. If you saw a woman being raped in an alley and went into a rage to stop the assault that would be righteous anger/wrath.

Sir you're still DEFENDING someones right not to be abused. There's
no difference in defending yourself, or another person. The point
I was seeking to convey is that defending yourself, or anyone else
is in disobedience to Christ commandment of RESIST NOT EVIL.

When Christ taught RESIST NOT EVIL that command in inclusive. It
does not mean we can resist evil if the evil is being perpetrated on
someone else.

In Christ no disciple is justified to resist evil outside of resisting
Satan under any circumstance. And we don't resist Satan
physically.

originally posted by: MrBlaq
a reply to: NOTurTypical

Depends if it's righteous wrath or unrighteous wrath. If you saw a woman being raped in an alley and went into a rage to stop the assault that would be righteous anger/wrath.

Sir you're still DEFENDING someones right not to be abused. There's
no difference in defending yourself, or another person. The point
I was seeking to convey is that defending yourself, or anyone else
is in disobedience to Christ commandment of RESIST NOT EVIL.

When Christ taught RESIST NOT EVIL that command in inclusive. It
does not mean we can resist evil if the evil is being perpetrated on
someone else.

In Christ no disciple is justified to resist evil outside of resisting
Satan under any circumstance. And we don't resist Satan
physically.

i think its a little much to ask us all to be martyrs just because "it looks good". those who stand by and watch harm come to others are just as complicit as if they had done the harm themselves. its called being kraven. some would call it sloth, even.

originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: Muffenstuff

"Get thee behind me Satan, for you savor the things of man and not the things of God."

That's Jesus calling Peter an adversary, not THE Satan A satan. Textually you have no evidence that God gave the world to Satan, just the words of the liar himself. Like I said before Jesus says he can only lie, that is what he was created for.

The Bible doesn't say Satan is God's emissary, it says God constantly uses what he meant for evil and turns it into good.

That IS an emissary. He uses him to HIS WILL. Satan is DISPATCHED to tempt Job, who was righteous and needed testing. Satan didn't say "How about my servant Job?" That was Yahweh who then SENT Satan to test him over and over.

Sounds like a pretty good description of an emissary to me.

You are relying on a technicality that I chose to use a term not in the Bible. Messenger (Malakh) or angel means messenger as does the Greek angelos have a like definition that isn't specific to what we call angels. Satan is an angel. A messenger or as I like to say "emissary" and assists Yahweh. This IS what the Bible says. You don't understand his role in Judaism or his alteration by Catholicism well enough to understand what I am even talking about and are relying on superstition and myth.

I once heard a man say that if Satan realized what would happen to him at the cross he would have spent his time trying to murder every person who was trying to kill Christ.

If he was the enemy of God, absolutely he would have. But he isn't and didn't but DID realize everything that was happening and helped.

Sounds like that guy knows what I do and created a not clever excuse for the why he helped and didn't try and prevent God's plan.

But he can't claim to know the thoughts of Satan so going by the text I am on point and he is being apologetic on a point of confusion that is easily explained by the fact that Satan is subservient to God.

I find his reasoning faulty, bias sounding and guess he is a fundamental. Fundamentalism and logic are oil and water and the reason for the existence of apologetics.

Theology doesn't match what Jesus taught and Satan is not the enemy of God. Just man. He was created to do what he does and I have shown that the Bible agrees with what I am saying.

The New Testament is a cluster**** of contradictions, one thing is clear though. Satan HELPED at the crucifixion when Judas had second thoughts and insured success of God's plan.

I have my facts straight, you can debate for days and I will show you every time that Satan as the cause of evil and enemy of God is not Biblical while you use obscurities like Jesus calling Peter an adversary or satan, a title and adjective in Hebrew but not a name.

a reply to: Muffenstuff

That's Jesus calling Peter an adversary, not THE Satan A satan. Textually you have no evidence that God gave the world to Satan, just the words of the liar himself. Like I said before Jesus says he can only lie, that is what he was created for.

that is exactly what a liar would say though. a liar would create a red herring to keep people from suspecting him (or her) of lying. satan is the red herring...?

a reply to: TzarChasm

I don't know what you are getting at, who is the liar you speak of?

Satan wasn't Peter, and a satan is an adversary.

He didn't call Peter THE Satan just A satan because he was being adversarial and that was not the plan.

Christians tend to ignore the fact that the Bible in Hebrew uses satan many times to describe non angelic human adversaries.

Probably because it confuses them, they think the word satan is a name when it's the title of a specific angel. Ha Satan or the Satan is an angel who tempts.

A satan is any enemy or adversary.

Do you understand?

a reply to: TzarChasm

Because most Christians assign every evil thing in the world to The Satan they forget about the millions of demons created when the Nephilim were wiped out.

Angelology and demonology is more complex than The Satan. Satan is in good standing because he is following orders.

I know that would not fly at Neourembourg but this is God, not Nazi Germany so it is actually a valid point. Satan follows orders, he has been ordered to lie and tempt.

We have free will, he doesn't. If you need proof just read Job.

a reply to: Muffenstuff

I don't know what you are getting at, who is the liar you speak of?

Satan wasn't Peter, and a satan is an adversary.

He didn't call Peter THE Satan just A satan because he was being adversarial and that was not the plan.

Christians tend to ignore the fact that the Bible in Hebrew uses satan many times to describe non angelic human adversaries.

Probably because it confuses them, they think the word satan is a name when it's the title of a specific angel. Ha Satan or the Satan is an angel who tempts.

A satan is any enemy or adversary.

Do you understand?

i dont understand any part of the bible. or maybe i understand just a little too much. hard to tell sometimes.

originally posted by: Muffenstuff
a reply to: TzarChasm

Because most Christians assign every evil thing in the world to The Satan they forget about the millions of demons created when the Nephilim were wiped out.

Angelology and demonology is more complex than The Satan. Satan is in good standing because he is following orders.

I know that would not fly at Neourembourg but this is God, not Nazi Germany so it is actually a valid point. Satan follows orders, he has been ordered to lie and tempt.

We have free will, he doesn't. If you need proof just read Job.

all i know is its pretty funny to think of a giant smug cockroach sitting up there judging all the little fleas here on earth.

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: Muffenstuff

I don't know what you are getting at, who is the liar you speak of?

Satan wasn't Peter, and a satan is an adversary.

He didn't call Peter THE Satan just A satan because he was being adversarial and that was not the plan.

Christians tend to ignore the fact that the Bible in Hebrew uses satan many times to describe non angelic human adversaries.

Probably because it confuses them, they think the word satan is a name when it's the title of a specific angel. Ha Satan or the Satan is an angel who tempts.

A satan is any enemy or adversary.

Do you understand?

i dont understand any part of the bible. or maybe i understand just a little too much. hard to tell sometimes.

probably too much. I can relate, what's to understand? Billions of fools walk around thinking this idiot of a god is a loving, merciful and just god? You can not understand foolishness en masse, it's a curse of some sort. Rude but true you have to be a fool to worship Yahweh or Ialdabaoth as the logically inclined Gnostics called him. Evil wins.

originally posted by: Muffenstuff
a reply to: TzarChasm

Because most Christians assign every evil thing in the world to The Satan they forget about the millions of demons created when the Nephilim were wiped out.

Angelology and demonology is more complex than The Satan. Satan is in good standing because he is following orders.

I know that would not fly at Neourembourg but this is God, not Nazi Germany so it is actually a valid point. Satan follows orders, he has been ordered to lie and tempt.

We have free will, he doesn't. If you need proof just read Job.

all i know is its pretty funny to think of a giant smug cockroach sitting up there judging all the little fleas here on earth.

I have just resigned myself to the fact that "God" was best described as "The Great Invisible Spirit" by those same Gnostics who denied having knowledge of God but didn't stop trying to and for this not knowing they are called Gnostic.

Does anything ever make sense? I am just starting to dig through ancient philosophy but I find it more honest than theology. And why not, philosophy is the love of wisdom?

a reply to: MrBlaq

Well, you stay on holy mountain if you want, but if I see someone innocent being abused I will defend them and repent for my evil of stopping the abuse afterward.

originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: MrBlaq

Well, you stay on holy mountain if you want, but if I see someone innocent being abused I will defend them and repent for my evil of stopping the abuse afterward.

I guess M Blaq thought this a thread worthy topic and made one, I thought I was in it for a second.

But damn straight. Anyone who harms the ''little ones" or innocent is condemned and refusing to help because of a failure to understand meaning behind the statement made by Jesus is harming them by doing nothing to help.

Good Samaritan comes to mind as a Biblical description of anyone who comes to anothers aid. Jesus was willing to violate Sabbath law, the death penalty in the OT, to heal the sick.

I think Blaq failed to get the message.

a reply to: Muffenstuff

Good Samaritan comes to mind as a Biblical description of anyone who comes to anothers aid.
Jesus was willing to violate Sabbath law, the death penalty in the OT, to heal the sick.

I think Blaq failed to get the message.

I'm at a lost for words how you twisted the Scripture of the Good Sammaritans
kindness in helping a sick man in need, as suggesting he fought against, or
somehow defended against those who attacked the man and left him for
dead. You have a strange way of understanding the scriptures.

The Son of God never broke the Sabbath Law, he only transgressed the
religious leaders INTERPRETATION of it. If Christ truly broke the Law
of God then the following scripture would be a lie:

1Pet 2:22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth

In your need to justify SIN, it now influences you to accused Christ of SIN!
What a bizarre doctrine you follow. But I'm not surprised as orthodox
Christianity has followed this same practice since the days of the Apostle Paul.

Acts 20:29-30 For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous
wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.Also of your own selves shall men
arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.

Because you and others within Christendom advocate and teach this falsehood
MILLIONS of people have been slaughtered in military conflicts. Under the false
notion they are justified for taking someones life. Which is antithetical to
Christ teaching that his people ARE TO LOVE THEIR ENEMY.

You stand in the same position as the works of evil who twist the scriptures so
that they can KILL, MURDER and MAIM their fellow man. Is it any wonder the
ungodly despise the majority of Christendom.

You have no idea who you're following, it definitely isn't the Son of God.

originally posted by: Muffenstuff

originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: MrBlaq

a reply to: Muffenstuff

Good Samaritan comes to mind as a Biblical description of anyone who comes to anothers aid. Jesus was willing to violate Sabbath law, the death penalty in the OT, to heal the sick.

I think Blaq failed to get the message.

I'm at a lost for words how you twisted the Scripture of the Good Sammaritans
kindness in helping a sick man in need, as suggesting he fought against, or
somehow defended against those who attacked the man and left him for
dead. You have a strange way of understanding the scriptures.

The Son of God never broke the Sabbath Law, he only transgressed the
religious leaders INTERPRETATION of it. If Christ truly broke the Law
of God then the following scripture would be a lie:

1Pet 2:22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth

I find it fascinating in your post you stated you'd be willing to disobey Christ
commandments, and thenask for forgiveness afterward. In your need to justify
SIN, it now influences you to accused Christ of SIN! What a bizarre doctrine you
follow. But I'm not surprised as orthodox Christianity has followed this
same practice since the days of the Apostle Paul.

Acts 20:29-30 For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous
wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.Also of your own selves shall men
arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.

Because you and others within Christendom advocate and teach this falsehood
MILLIONS of people have been slaughtered in military conflicts. Under the false
notion they are justified for taking someones life. Which is antithetical to Christ
teaching that his people ARE TO LOVE THEIR ENEMY.

You stand in the same position as the works of evil who twist the scriptures so
that they can KILL, MURDER and MAIM their fellow man. Is it any wonder the
ungodly despise the majority of Christendom.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

You know I totally agree. It's difficult for me not to see the gross and vile side of human nature and what it's doing.

But you're right in that to see the good, means you have to look for it rather than always looking at the bad.

Recently I saw a video about a young deaf girl who got a deaf puppy and they love each other like they were meant to be together. She's even teaching it sign language so they can communicate with each other. The dog never leaves her side and she never leaves it behind.

Seeing stuff like that leaves me no choice but to admit there are amazing things happening everywhere that are bursting with love and good and kindness that most of us never realize because we're all looking at what's wrong.

originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: MrBlaq

Well, you stay on holy mountain if you want, but if I see someone innocent being abused I will defend them and repent for my evil of stopping the abuse afterward.

I'm not surprised you follow the status quo of Christendom who justify
disobedience to Christ with statements such as "I will defend them
and repent for my evil of stopping the abuse afterward"

You and others who follow this practice fail to understand it's
ramifications and subsequent justification for starting military
conflicts and then killing millions of people in war after war -
under the notion you are justified for DEFENDING someone.

What a HORRIBLE doctrine!

And you and those who believe this Satanic philosophy will continue
to MURDER, MAIN & SLAUGHTER their enemies in contradiction to
Christ teaching that WE ARE TO LOVE OUR ENEMY, NOT KILL HIM.

You appear to be a very religious man as the Pharisees who also
justified SIN. But this is of course the response of those who have not the
Spirit of God, for ONLY those who have the Spirit of Christ have the willingness
and ability to obey Christ teachings.

originally posted by: MrBlaq
a reply to: Muffenstuff

Good Samaritan comes to mind as a Biblical description of anyone who comes to anothers aid.
Jesus was willing to violate Sabbath law, the death penalty in the OT, to heal the sick.

I think Blaq failed to get the message.

I'm at a lost for words how you twisted the Scripture of the Good Sammaritans
kindness in helping a sick man in need, as suggesting he fought against, or

Ok, I will have to explain. It's a relatively common expression to call a hero of ANY kind who goes out of their way to help a stranger in need a "good Samaritan." Get it?

somehow defended against those who attacked the man and left him for
dead. You have a strange way of understanding the scriptures.

The Son of God never broke the Sabbath Law, he only transgressed the
religious leaders INTERPRETATION of it. If Christ truly broke the Law
of God then the following scripture would be a lie:

1Pet 2:22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth

In your need to justify SIN, it now influences you to accused Christ of SIN!
What a bizarre doctrine you follow. But I'm not surprised as orthodox
Christianity has followed this same practice since the days of the Apostle Paul.

Acts 20:29-30 For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous
wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock.Also of your own selves shall men
arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.

Because you and others within Christendom advocate and teach this falsehood
MILLIONS of people have been slaughtered in military conflicts. Under the false
notion they are justified for taking someones life. Which is antithetical to
Christ teaching that his people ARE TO LOVE THEIR ENEMY.

You stand in the same position as the works of evil who twist the scriptures so
that they can KILL, MURDER and MAIM their fellow man. Is it any wonder the
ungodly despise the majority of Christendom.

You have no idea who you're following, it definitely isn't the Son of God.

Yawn. I pretty much already explained this twice now so I think I will leave you and your anger to subsequent denial of said anger and further harassment of non agreeable people, as if that is a virtue. Christians make the world laugh.

a reply to: MrBlaq

I never said anything about killing someone or starting a military conflict, you invented those things. I said if I see someone hurting a woman or a child I will stop it. I will stand up and protect abuses from happening.

originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: MrBlaq

I never said anything about killing someone or starting a military conflict, you invented those things. I said if I see someone hurting a woman or a child I will stop it. I will stand up and protect abuses from happening.

Because that's what a man does.