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.

 

Yahweh is a DEMON

page: 13
20
<< 10  11  12    14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 20 2007 @ 10:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by s3b4k
dude in the bible it doesnt say jesus is god


You must have found a different bible.




posted on Mar, 20 2007 @ 04:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by s3b4k
in the quaran it doesnt say jesus is god


This part is correct though, if my memories serves correctly. Those who did not know the difference between Christianity and Islam do now. It is this difference right here.

[edit on 20-3-2007 by saint4God]



posted on Mar, 20 2007 @ 08:01 PM
link   
I was originally under the assumption you were reffering to Adachi's slanderous piece linked here : educate-yourself.org... , rather than the one about the Protocols of Zion.

Anyway, from the piece you DID link to, he makes a deceitful claim that Amitakh implies that "If the above postulate by Amitakh is true, then Free Will does not exist." She had never implied that.


I am not here to convince you of anything, and I did not force anybody to read, write or do anything.







The Creator is also the Sustainer, and you owe your very breath to that sustaining grace.


Any existence in a material dimension would be spiritual slavery to the inhabitant. Besides entrapping the spirit, and inhibiting its freedom, all matter decays no matter what. Any being using a body must suffer, no matter what, from decay, and eventually die. Any existence in a material body or universe of decay, death, and suffering, as i said, is evil slavery

Yahweh is not my True creator. While he may have created my body and the material creation, Yahweh's "kingdom," is inherintly evil. By it's very inherint and evil mechanisms, it forces all beings to decay, suffer and die.

More than 30,000 people starve to death every day. Half of the world lives in poverty.The innocent suffer and are deceived and exploited every day. All beings on this planet are forced to suffer extremely, decay, and die. I am righteously disgusted that evil exists. The demon Yahweh, king of the material universe, not only allows these things to occur, but has created the mechanisms by which they CAN occur.

Yahweh, who you refer to as "the creator," created suffering, decay, slavery, and death.

Yahweh forces the innocent to suffer, such as babies thrown into dumpsters or children getting raped. Therefor, Yahweh wants the innocent to suffer.

Anyone who wants the innocent to suffer is evil. Not only does he want the innocent to suffer, he actually created the mechanisms by which the innocent CAN suffer.


Therefor, Yahweh is obviously evil.






----



As i had said, Amitakh is neither sociologically disturbed nor suffers from "a spiritual pathology," as you ridiculously put it.


You, matyas, wrote

Actually it may not be entirely sociological, but more of a spiritual pathology that Amitakh shares with society, thus removing her from being a cause and becoming a symptom instead...

Just because I look like "the enemy" does not mean I am actually out to destroy your precious beliefs and make personal attacks on people I do not know.


I responded that, I never called you "the enemy," or accused you of anything. As for personal attacks, you obviously DO attack others personally (and fallaciously) who you don't know. You have accused and diagnosed, in your own ignorance and arrogance, Amitakh as having a sociological or spiritual sickness.


You did, in fact, lie. You state on one hand that you do not make personal attacks against people that you don't know, yet on the other hand, label Amitakh as being spiritually ill. Instead of simply admitting your error, you accuse me now of attempting to entrap you. You even deceptively state that I "railroaded the issue of social and spiritual pathology from Amitakh's work to the person of Amitakh herself," while it is clear that you actually said, "it may not be entirely sociological, but more of a spiritual pathology that Amitakh shares with society." You have diagnosed Amitakh has a "spiritual pathology," or illness, whether you consider yourself an expert or not.

This is precisely why i feel you have a bigoted attitude towards Amitakh 's work, and i assume it arises from your lack of understanding and the discomfort it causes you.


Defending the truth from your apparently deliberately confusing semantics and deception is precisely what i am trying to do.



posted on Mar, 20 2007 @ 08:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by DerekOneSeven17
Yahweh is not my True creator. While he may have created my body and the material creation, Yahweh's "kingdom," is inherintly evil. By it's very inherint and evil mechanisms, it forces all beings to decay, suffer and die.


Heyhey, I recognize this voice. It's been almost two decades since I heard it. Tell your master I say howdy. On second thought, don't.


Someday when you "got yer ears on" maybe we can talk.

[edit on 20-3-2007 by saint4God]



posted on Mar, 21 2007 @ 07:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by DerekOneSeven17 I was originally under the assumption


No you weren’t. And what is this about an assumption?


you were reffering to Adachi's slanderous piece


So on top of being deceitful, it is also slanderous? You yourself said:


As for your link to the Ken Adachi piece, it is just a list of ideas from Amitakh 's work that he feels uncomfortable with. There are not even actual accusations against Amitakh, just ideas which the auther, Ken, feels uncomfortable with.


So how does this suddenly translate to deceitful and slanderous? Did you change your position?


rather than the one about the Protocols of Zion.


This looks like a rabbit out of your hat. There is no way you could have been confused as you claim, since the link does work. Nice try, but no cigar.


Anyway, from the piece you DID link to, he makes a deceitful claim that Amitakh implies that "If the above postulate by Amitakh is true, then Free Will does not exist." She had never implied that.


Implies what, the postulate as true, or Free Will does not exist? This seems to me something Ken implies, not Amitakh. Again, where is the deceit you are claiming?


I am not here to convince you of anything, and I did not force anybody to read, write or do anything.


This is a blanket statement. The first part is untrue since you are attempting to convince me I somehow made a diagnosis which has become your hobby horse. The second part is true as far as your attempt to convince me you have no real influence in cyberspace. Or do you? This could be misleading.


Any existence in a material dimension would be spiritual slavery to the inhabitant. Besides entrapping the spirit, and inhibiting its freedom, all matter decays no matter what. Any being using a body must suffer, no matter what, from decay, and eventually die. Any existence in a material body or universe of decay, death, and suffering, as i said, is evil slavery


So you are claiming there is no extropy? Do you have children? And if you do, don’t you think it is miraculous to see new human units downloaded from the cosmic mainframe and observe the joy their new little programs bring into our operating system?


Yahweh is not my True creator. While he may have created my body and the material creation, Yahweh's "kingdom," is inherintly evil. By it's very inherint and evil mechanisms, it forces all beings to decay, suffer and die.


This looks deceiving to me. First you say:


My human interpretation has no signifigance with the fact that the creator of this universe is a torturer, liar, murderer, and sadist. Whether you believe these are qualities representative of an evil being or not, i KNOW that any being with these qualities is evil


Then you imply there is another “True” creator as opposed to one that “created my body and the material creation”. So now there are two Gods and we have not even accepted much less proven the existence of one?


More than 30,000 people starve to death every day. Half of the world lives in poverty.The innocent suffer and are deceived and exploited every day. All beings on this planet are forced to suffer extremely, decay, and die.


And that is all there is in your worldview, right? What about those millions that show courage to live every day in face of overwhelming odds and are truly thankful for the opportunity to do so? What about gratitude, that commodity you appear to lack so desperately?


I am righteously disgusted that evil exists. The demon Yahweh, king of the material universe, not only allows these things to occur, but has created the mechanisms by which they CAN occur.


Being “righteous” might have a bit to do with your outlook. I say these items you label as “evil” are in part due to anger, greed, and stupidity, all human sins. The rest is the cycle of life, or there would be no change. That would be the real death. So don’t be going about making up a demon and laying all the blame on it.


Yahweh, who you refer to as "the creator," created suffering, decay, slavery, and death.


And little fuzzy white bunny rabbits, and flowers, and rainbows, sparkly diamonds, your mother’s smile, that inspiring piece in the Blue Danube Waltz, that flutter in your chest when you first saw her walk by, the first time you rode a bicycle without training wheels, the sunlight filling your bedroom on a quiet Sunday afternoon, the pitter patter of rain, the infinite variations of snowflakes, yes, that Creator is mine too.


Yahweh forces the innocent to suffer, such as babies thrown into dumpsters or children getting raped. Therefor, Yahweh wants the innocent to suffer.


Again, these are human deeds, not the doing of some nebulous aspect of your imagination, and coupling that with faulty logic does not make it factual.


Anyone who wants the innocent to suffer is evil. Not only does he want the innocent to suffer, he actually created the mechanisms by which the innocent CAN suffer.


What is innocence? If I know better than to commit a crime, then do it anyway, then am I innocent? Shall we make the entire human race ignorant so that they may be innocent? And furthermore, how can one come to know compassion without suffering?


Therefor, Yahweh is obviously evil.


Therefore the variety of Creator God you follow has no compassion.

---------spacer following the form of mental kombat used here---------------


As i had said, Amitakh is neither sociologically disturbed nor suffers from "a spiritual pathology," as you ridiculously put it.


Here you go on your hobby horse again. This is an obsession with you, at the expense of studying all the fertile knowledge I have place in this thread. It leaves me to wonder, what does he have to gain?


I responded that, I never called you "the enemy," or accused you of anything. As for personal attacks, you obviously DO attack others personally (and fallaciously) who you don't know. You have accused and diagnosed, in your own ignorance and arrogance, Amitakh as having a sociological or spiritual sickness.


You do indeed treat me as if I am “the enemy”, and you are accusing me of making a diagnosis. I did not claim I was making a diagnosis. I did not claim I had the authority to make a diagnosis. I clarified my statement as you requested me to do, and that was including her in the human family which carries the human condition, a spiritual pathology as is evident in her work and here today. That is not a personal attack, nor is it fallacious, and it does not harm her character, nor is it intended to be understood as such or to do any of these things. Just because you keep repeating it over and over is not going to make it factual, nor is it going to wear me down to the point where I will accept such a misconstrued reinterpretation of my statements.


You did, in fact, lie.


Ah-ha! The pot calls the kettle black!


You state on one hand that you do not make personal attacks against people that you don't know, yet on the other hand, label Amitakh as being spiritually ill.


O-K, two can play this game. Let’s take the title of one of your threads as an example:

E.g., replacing “Amitkah” with “Freemasons (and Monotheists)” and replace “spiritually ill” with “worship Satan”

Now, according to your logic, I would guess you are making a personal attack on people you don’t know. Shall I use Ken as another example? Or do you want to stop here?


Instead of simply admitting your error, you accuse me now of attempting to entrap you.


Now this is precisely what you are looking for, right?


You even deceptively state that I "railroaded the issue of social and spiritual pathology from Amitakh's work to the person of Amitakh herself,"


I stated it forthrightly, not deceptively.


while it is clear that you actually said,


No it is not clear. You are trying to build a case by putting me under tort through the use of subterfuge and innuendo. This is entrapment, and the excessive use of deceptive tactics. You will loose in a poll, and you will loose in court. Which, hopefully, you are not taking this to?



"it may not be entirely sociological, but more of a spiritual pathology that Amitakh shares with society."


This was in reference to her work, as I said before several times now. Do I have to repost everything again?


You have diagnosed Amitakh has a "spiritual pathology," or illness, whether you consider yourself an expert or not.


No. It is you who states I did, I made no such statement about a diagnosis. That is subterfuge and deceptive tactics you are using to push your nefarious agenda.


This is precisely why i feel you have a bigoted attitude towards Amitakh 's work,


Here this time it is you that freely admits I have a such-and-such attitude towards Amitakh’s work, not the person of Amitakh. Is this a typo? Because if it isn’t, you have blown yourself clean out of the water.


and i assume it arises from your lack of understanding and the discomfort it causes you.


I don’t understand many things, and I am uncomfortable with as much too. But right now you are on top of my list for both of these categories.


Defending the truth from your apparently deliberately confusing semantics and deception is precisely what i am trying to do.


The truth speaks for itself, it doesn’t need you to do it. It will still be around long after you and I are gone. And acting like you don’t understand what I am saying because I am supposedly trying to confuse you, this from the one who knew how to use the word “deprecatingly” in a sentence, is a weak defense at best.

After I post this I plan to put you on "ignore". I have learned as much as I can from you and I see no possible outcome of any benefit to anybody from further mental kombat. And I am putting Wisesheep on "ignore" as well, because a greater enemy cometh than hithertofore we have known, and I will need to muster all my reserves.



posted on Mar, 21 2007 @ 03:58 PM
link   
Leafing through the OT, you get the feeling that YHWH wasnt rele much of a cheery chappy, to say the least.
I dunno wether the author meant Demon in the sense of a wholly evil, malevolent being, or rather "just" a false god, but these are by no means new ideas...
As had been wisely mentioned, the early christian Gnostics held the belief that this physical universe that we inhabit (only a fraction of creation as a whole) was created by an immensley powerful, but ignorant "god", called the Demiurge, who had in turn been created or spawned by the true god, which is all-knowing and all powerful. Early Xtians belived that the OT god (with a small "g") was YHWH. He was not so much evil, as ignorant, which in itself caused what we would consider to be "evil
YHWH, or the demiurge, was ignorant about his own true nature and upon creating the physical universe belived himself to be the one true God. YHWH was the ultimate archetype of the Ego, of which we inherit ("God made man in his own image") and hence he forbade worship of any other Gods.
It is this ignorance and insecurity that made made things like blasphemy so irritating to YHWH:
After all, why would a supposed "supreme god", give a monkeys arse if his feeble human creations swore when they stubbed their toes, or forgot to worship him on a sunday? indeed, why would a supreme god be so insecure as to need worship in the first place?

YHWH was not belived to be wholly evil, after all he created the Earth and its inhabitants, But by his despotic rule of obedience and suppression of free thought, he posed an obstacle to humans realising their full spiritual potential.

For the record though, ppl in this thread have been using the Ten Commandments to highlight their point about Yahweh, positive or negative. These most of us are familiar with, spoken of in Exodus 20, 3-17.
But only one place in the Bible are the Ten Commandments referred to by that name, in Exodus 34,14-26, which are as follows;

1. For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God
2. Thou shalt make thee no molten gods.
3. The feast of unleavened bread shalt thou keep.
4. All that openeth the matrix is mine; and every firstling among thy cattle, whether ox or sheep, that is male.
5. Six days thou shalt work, but on the seventh day thou shalt rest: in earing time and in harvest thou shalt rest.
6.And thou shalt observe the feast of weeks, of the firstfruits of wheat harvest, and the feast of ingathering at the year's end.
7. Thrice in the year shall all your menchildren appear before the LORD God, the God of Israel.
8. Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leaven; neither shall the feast of the Passover be left until the morning.
9. The first of the firstfruits of thy land thou shalt bring unto the house of the LORD thy God.
10. Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother's milk."

Indeed, Moses recived the orthodox "commandments" on top of mount sinai, but it was the above that was recorded on stone tablets and placed in the Ark of the Covenant.

So whats it to be?.....................

[edit on 21-3-2007 by TheSilentProtagonist]



posted on Mar, 21 2007 @ 08:17 PM
link   

There is no way you could have been confused as you claim, since the link does work.

Are you implying that you can read my mind? I was confused, and i admitted my error.



Implies what, the postulate as true, or Free Will does not exist? This seems to me something Ken implies, not Amitakh. Again, where is the deceit you are claiming?

Ken implies, that Amitakh implies, that free will does not exist, that is what i was trying to construe.



This is a blanket statement. [I am not here to convince you of anything, and I did not force anybody to read, write or do anything.] The first part is untrue since you are attempting to convince me I somehow made a diagnosis which has become your hobby horse. The second part is true as far as your attempt to convince me you have no real influence in cyberspace. Or do you? This could be misleading.

I am not trying to convince you of anything, and i did not force anybody to read, write, or do anything. I am not trying to convince you that you did or did not say something. You clearly said, "it may not be entirely sociological, but more of a spiritual pathology that Amitakh shares with society."

I did not say anything about convince you that i have no "real influence in cyberspace." I am confused as to how you gathered that from my words.



So you are claiming there is no extropy?

I never said or implied anything remotely related to that.



you imply there is another “True” creator as opposed to one that “created my body and the material creation”. So now there are two Gods and we have not even accepted much less proven the existence of one?

I never attempted to prove anything to you. I KNOW within that there are two "gods," a spiritual God of unconditional Love and goodness, and the usurper "Yahweh," who created suffering, evil, and the decaying material universe. I feel it is hypocritical that you imply that i am acting deceptively and appear to question myself and my intentions because i have not presented you with evidence for the existence of "god," yet you seem to accept and promote the idea of a "cosmic mainframe" without any qualms, or material evidence that you question my authenticity based upon.



And little fuzzy white bunny rabbits, and flowers, and rainbows, sparkly diamonds, your mother’s smile... yes, that Creator is mine too.

I believe and know within that all beauty and goodness in this world is stolen from the True God of Love when the usurper Yahweh overtook this universe and entrapped all concioussness in matter. These are my beliefs and i am not forcing them on anybody. I also beleive, and know within, that Yahweh (according to the bible and experiencing this universe) had created ugliness, torture, pain, misery, suffering, death, decay, injustice, and all evil etc...



Again, these are human deeds [babies thrown into dumpsters or children getting raped]

Considering that Yahweh could prevent these deeds, which i believe he could have, they are his deeds, as well as the deeds of the evil beings HE CREATED.



No. It is you who states I did [ diagnosed Amitakh has a "spiritual pathology," or illness], I made no such statement about a diagnosis. That is subterfuge and deceptive tactics you are using to push your nefarious agenda.

First of all i have no nefarious agenda, it is you who acts hypocritically, with duplicity.

Let's review the definition of the word, "diagnose." (Mirriam Wesbters Dictionary)
1 a : to recognize (as a disease) by signs and symptoms b : to diagnose a disease or condition in
2 : to analyze the cause or nature of

You wrote "it may not be entirely sociological, but more of a spiritual pathology that Amitakh shares with society."

You obviously implied that you "recognized the signs and symptoms of a spirtual pathology."



posted on Mar, 21 2007 @ 08:45 PM
link   

O-K, two can play this game. Let’s take the title of one of your threads as an example:

E.g., replacing “Amitkah” with “Freemasons (and Monotheists)” and replace “spiritually ill” with “worship Satan”

Now, according to your logic, I would guess you are making a personal attack on people you don’t know. Shall I use Ken as another example? Or do you want to stop here?


It is true that i did "attack," Freemasons and monotheists, by correctly and justly labelling them Satanists. I DID NOT, on the other hand, hypocritically claim that i do not "make personal attacks on people i don't know."

That is the primary difference. I wanted to specifically point out your hypocracy. That was one lie that i pointed out.



how can one come to know compassion without suffering?


I know within that evil is not a neccesary oppostive to good, and that compassion and goodness can exist without suffering and evil, and DO exist, in the realm of the True God of Light. I know that i originate from that place and that existence that forces you to suffer is a hellish experience.

Goodness is self-suffiecient. Evil is a parasite.

I know these things within my being, and am not trying to convince or force anybody to believe or do anything.



Therefore the variety of Creator God you follow has no compassion.


That is not true, i know my spiritual creator is a being of infinite compassion. You base your flawed assumptions on the neccesity of evil to expose goodness, which i KNOW within is not true. As i said, goodness is self sufficient.


What about gratitude, that commodity you appear to lack so desperately?


You barely even know me and it offends me that you attempt to measure the depth of my gratitude, especailly considering you are wrong in your assertions. How would you even attempt to measure one's gratitude based on the limited perception you have from our brief interaction on an internet forum?


I feel i have responded to you enough for now. You have lied multiple times and falsely claim that i attempt to entrap you or decieve people. People can surely read all my posts and our discourse and make a decision for themselves. I know that my words and implications stand for themselves without the usage of confusing semantics, wordings, and implication, apparently deliberate hypocracy, deceitful personal attacks, and plain deception and lies. If you need me to specifically show you where each of these occured in our discourse, i will gladly show you.


Defending the truth from your apparently deliberately confusing semantics (such as your erroneous interpretation of the word "diagnose") and deception is precisely what i am trying to do.



posted on Mar, 26 2007 @ 07:48 PM
link   

dunno wether the author meant Demon in the sense of a wholly evil, malevolent being, or rather "just" a false god, but these are by no means new ideas...
As had been wisely mentioned, the early christian Gnostics held the belief that this physical universe that we inhabit (only a fraction of creation as a whole) was created by an immensley powerful, but ignorant "god", called the Demiurge, who had in turn been created or spawned by the true god, which is all-knowing and all powerful. Early Xtians belived that the OT god (with a small "g") was YHWH. He was not so much evil, as ignorant, which in itself caused what we would consider to be "evil

-TheSilentProtaganist


I meant demon, specifically, as evil entity. Yahweh is also a "false god."


Yahweh, the supreme being of evil, created the very mechanisms by which evil, in all its forms and expressions, could express itself, and all evil beings of whom he created. Yahweh, also known as the "Grand Architecht of the Universe," and in gnostic texts as the "Demiurge," usurped this universal realm from the True God of Love and Goodness, and entrapped within it many of the True God's children, beings of Love, Truth, Purity, and Light. Yahweh was originally a relatively "high" being of Light, but due to a "celestial error," became "arrogant," and "egotistical," and hence, the error of evil was formed. Evil was NEVER meant to exist. These are concepts that are not easily understood by using the physical mind, but those of the Light, with the inner knowing, will understand on an inner level, within their heart and deep within their being.

Yahweh, and his kingdom, the material universe, and evil in general, exist only because they parasiticly drain energy from the The True God of Light and his children. One of the primary functions of this universe, in order to sustain itself, is to drain the children of the Light through suffering, exploitation, torment, and torture, mentally, emotionally, physically, and spiritually. The True God poured energy into the error of Yahweh, and his "kingdom," hoping to convert the evil back to good. All that is good and beautiful in this realm is a reflection of the True God's Love, which he poured into this universe, to sustain his children, and to hopefully "convert" evil. It was eventually realized that the evil error could not be corrected or "converted" with the True God's unconditional Love, and it was decided that it is neccesary for it to be destroyed, along with all evil, PERMANENTLY...

...Matter, which was created by Yahweh, is inherintly evil, and all concioussnesses that exist in this universe are entrapped in physical shells composed of Matter, which will, DECOMPOSE, inevitably and invariably. Nothing in this universe is infinite. All beings in material bodies are enslaved by it's mechanisms. The natural decay of matter is a direct and unavoidable imposition of suffering which all beings of all creations, are forced to endure, and by which Yahweh and his minions, which are the majority of people on the planet, gain their energy needed to sustain their existence. All beings are forced to die and reincarnate to suffer the torment of existence in this putrid realm, over and OVER, and if it wasn't for the Light's valiant correction mission, this cycle would continue unabated.

Yahweh created and sustains suffering and slavery, in all its forms, injustice, exploitation, greed, cruelty, deception, decay, and death. All beauty and goodness is stolen loot and plunder from the True God of Love. Those who have been faithful to Goodness and Light will be returning VERY SOON, to their home of unconditional Love, Purity, Truth, Beauty, and infinite Good.


Any interested in the TRUE Jesus and Yahweh should read:

www.xeeatwelve.net...

www.xeeatwelve.net...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

and all my posts on this thread



posted on Mar, 27 2007 @ 05:24 AM
link   
My take on Yahweh from the descriptions in the O.T and from other sources is that there where a bunch of elitistic people or priests (Levant ?), who wanted power and desired to rule the different tribes who occupied the area.My guess is that they took some mixed elements from allready existing deitys and cooked up one hell of a sick bastard of a god.Having a active volcano in the vincinity wich they applied to their God made things easier for them.Controling and manipulating people with terror and fear...still working today..If anything we are witnessing the actions and behaviours of Adam Behamit.



posted on Mar, 27 2007 @ 05:41 AM
link   
Hi DerekOneSeven17,

Check this site out,
www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

War in heaven by Kyle Griffith

Claims that there are soul sucking vampires in the afterlife called the theocrats pretending to be God to decieve moral man in life to obey them in death, making it easier for them to enslave and feast on the souls without any resistence.

Doing so gives them great power and the ability to exist eternal in the astral planes as long as there is a constant supply of food.

An interesting theory which may explain why God seems so egoistic and cruel.



posted on Apr, 7 2007 @ 04:52 AM
link   
God (Yahweh) isnt responsible for mans actions

we individually have freedom of thoughts & actions

Adam was made in perfection , he lost that , he handed on a sinfull state of existence to his children

every single human is living in this imperfect , sinfull state



posted on Apr, 10 2007 @ 10:10 AM
link   
Just read through most of this thread, very interesting.

I am very keen on the theory that the Bible speaks of two gods. One being Yahweh in the OT and the all mighty God who sent Jesus in the NT.

The Bible does state that God is the "God of all gods", meaning that there is more than one god out there. Even Satan has be called god of this world

www.bible-research.org...
www.lightplanet.com...



posted on Apr, 10 2007 @ 06:56 PM
link   
I have always liked the Arcan Caelestia to turn to for a treatise on the concept of God's love and His anger. Emanuel Swedenborg's greatest work dealt in large part with the concept of the Angry God.

GOD WILLS THE DAMNATION OF NONE
If men could be saved by immediate mercy, all would be saved, even those in hell; and indeed there would be no hell, because the Lord is mercy itself and good itself. Therefore it is contrary to His Divine Nature to say that He can save all immediately, and does not save them. We know from the Word that the Lord wills the salvation of all and the damnation of none.

—Heaven and Hell, n. 524

In this quote, Swedenborg explains the nature of Free Will. Think of God as a parent with a willfull, wayward child. Despite the good intent of the parents, their wishes and advice for their child becomes a source of contention and strife. Just as most of us hated our parents during adolescence and went out of our ways to hurt them or act contrary to their wiehes, so does man. When things fall out, the child blames not himself, but the parents.

"I'm NOT like you." "My ways are higher than your ways, and my thoughts (are higher) than your thoughts." (Isaiah 55:8,9). Just like a small child or certain things said by a parent, we are totally unprepared to understand God. My dog is pretty smart, but when I punish her for misbehavior, does she react from true understanding or a belief that her 'daddy' is upset with her and is punishing her? I don't know.

A quote from Bart Ehrlman's 'Lost Christianities'
The God of the Old Testament [...] was not evil, but he was rigorously just. He had laws and inflicted penalties on those who did not keep them. But this necessarily made him a wrathful God, since no one kept all of his laws perfectly. Everyone had to pay the price for their transgressions, and the penalty for transgression was death. [...] " pp 104-105.
This is one explanation. And ther is some merit to this when you consider Isaiah. If you believe - that is, if you have Faith that God exists - you believe that God spoke to men. Men - by the quote from Isaiah - was warned that they really cannot understand God. This means that they may not understand God's explanations for his actions. Human speech may be too limited. I have been told that there are no less than 8 Hebrew words that translate to 'wrath' in English for no other reason than that this is the most expedient term. As the Bible has been translated from Hebrew to Greek to Latin to the various vulgate languages, who knows how terms like wrath may have slipped in. I believe that the Bible is divinely inspired. I also don't question man's ability to screw up the plan - look at the story of Adam and Eve and the Garden.....

God is just. God is perfect in all ways. He knows the past, the future, the hearts of the men He created. If He is perfect and loving, how can we reconcile His perfection with a seeming lack of ability to predict that man will screw up and plan accordingly? Why did He punish so many?

Many theologians have applied the principle of Free Will to these issues. If man persists in sinning, in turning away from God's plan, then the consequences will lie on our shoulders - by our own choice. As a medic, I used to have to triage patients. This meant that some would suffer and die while I attended to those I felt I could save. Any medic in that situation will tell you that this is a dreadful burden, but neccesary. A parent will sometimes harshly punish a child with the best intentions in mind. Can we extend this metaphor to God's 'wrath' being an instrument of correction and a means of curbing greater transgressions?

One of the wonderful things about topics like this one is the truly fluid medium of the discussion. Reconciling these seemingly incompatible concepts is indeed daunting. I prefer to think of the injunction given in Isaiah - we simply cannot comprehend God.



posted on Apr, 17 2007 @ 03:00 AM
link   
Perhaps there´s an esoteric meaning behind these stories of Yahweh in action?
Not meant to be taken word for word.As I have come to understand Yahweh is not much of a name,but more of a designation..

I think there might be a possibility that it is a story depicting the inner struggle of initiates who have embarked on the spiritual path.Where Yahweh ( The higher or the True I in humans) is raging a full war against the lower nature (Adam Behamit in humans) and it´s forces in the form of it´s desires,passions and illusions..

Just thinking out loud here,but anyone who embarks on a road to change a behaviour or breaking a habit knows of the inner struggle that can/will pop up inside of your mind...almost making one schizofrenic..




posted on Apr, 18 2007 @ 11:38 AM
link   
One thing that always had me thinking. Adam was not made perfect. Eve was not made perfect. Evil was made along with those two people.

If they were perfect & were not evil in the first place, they wouldn't have even thought about eating the forbidden fruit/fruit of knowledge. You wonder why they call it the fruit of knowledge?

'Cause that's what it was! But ofcourse, that's just what the Bible says. So I won't know.



posted on Apr, 19 2007 @ 01:47 PM
link   
Lol. Anything in Leviticus and Deuteronomy is dealing with OLLDDD SCHOOOOL texts. Old Jewish books from the B.C. times. The Jewish Tanakh, which is the Old Testament of the Bible.

When you look at the New Testament, it's all about love and forgiveness, but the Old Testament, its all about fear and exacting revenge and such.

All I can simply say is that the texts are a product of their time. At that time, people in other societies, like Babylon for instance, or even the Egyptians or Greeks, had similarly wicked rules. It was the norm to have very brutal rules and people had to obey the authorities or they are killed. Look at Yahshua (Jesus). He was simply preaching an alternative version of their Jewish religion, and they killed him because of it. So clearly they'll kill you for less.

I recall reading about human sacrifices to Molokh, or is that Melekh, i dont know. The bull headed idol. And also, Baal .. child sacrifice was a part of that Temple's practices.

Anywhere you turn in Antiquity and earlier to the earliest human writings that we still have, you will see the violence imbedded. So it is not just the Jewish God, YHWH, but rather the way he was interpreted by the Jewish people of the time who wrote the texts down, you see. And in that day, the people were the way that they were, and life was the way it was, and the writing reflects that. It's not just Monotheists that had crazy rules and violence, all cultures did at the time.

There's one notable exception, and that is the Minoan culture on Crete and Therra (Santorini). They had a Matriarchal society where men and women were equal as far back as 2500 BC. They had NO weapons, they did not conduct warfare in any way, shape, or form. They simply.. built ships, and crafted fine goods, sailed the seas, traded with other peoples (especially the Egyptians), and had at home events where the competitors would dance with Bulls, jumping over them and such. No sacrifices, no warfare, no killing, nada. But they stand alone in that respect as far as cultures with enough scientific evidence to back it up. It's likely that they were this way due to being isolated on their Island(s) cities. Then Santorini/Therra erupted, and the Myceneans came in and mopped up what was left of the Minoans, taking their land and goods. But anyways..

My point is all people were like that except the Minoans. While the Ancient Jews did have their fair share of violence and killing and strange things woven into their religion, so did all cultures of the time, the Jews at least believed in "doing good" and not breaking the 10 commandments, ie; sinning. So when the death and violence occoured im sure it was tragic and senseless but, im sure it was happening on alot less frequent basis when compared to say.. the precursor culture of the Canaanites who were Baal worshippers, or the Babylonians who were also Baal worshippers. All of those sacrificed people to their "Gods", their Idols.

You won't find that anywhere in the Jewish, Christian, or even Muslim religion except for one story. One story that Abraham was told by YHWH to sacrifice his son instead of the usual lamb or cow or w/e animal was used, to test his obediance. This was the ultimate test of obedience, his own flesh and blood son. And he was going to do it, but when God saw that, he was pleased with it as he had planned and told Abraham not to go through with it and to stop. And so he did, and then an animal made itself available nearby for sacrifice. That is the single mention of human sacrifice to the Monotheistic, One God, Allah/YHWH in all 3 of the Abrahamic religions.

I think it's pretty groovy that the Old Testament Jews would burn Marijuana as part of their burnt offerings. In old Hebrew it was called Qaneh Bos'm. If you pronounce it, you can tell how similar to Cannabis it sounds. Anyway, I doubt you'll find it in the text nowadays unless you have a really, really good translation/version, and thats on purpose too, a conspiracy over the centuries. The Old Testament Jews would burn it and let the smoke rise up, along with frankensence, myrrh, and some others. They'd stand around it and frankly I'm sure they'd be getting stoned!!

Also, the honey bees that lived in the Galilee area would take the pollen of the Qaneh Bos'm flowers and go back to the Hive, over and over. These Hives were then cleared of their honey when it was ready, and that honey would be turned into Mead, an alcoholic beverage made out of Honey. But this Mead had active THC in it! Yikes..

Those Old Testament dudes were on some sh#t, man!


P.S.: Yahshua (Jesus) the Anointed taught that followers of God no longer needed to follow the rules given in Leviticus, many of which are absolutely ridiculous when looked at in modern times. However, when doing this, one can see the original intent of the rules, Leviticus rules are mostly intended to keep the believer in good health and in good standing with the community. Now that we know what we know, we have more effective ways to keep healthy and thus these rules aren't necessary.

[edit on 4/19/2007 by runetang]



posted on Apr, 19 2007 @ 02:28 PM
link   


Those Old Testament dudes were on some sh#t, man!


Lol..made me chuckle..

[edit on 19-4-2007 by 11an]



posted on Apr, 20 2007 @ 04:33 PM
link   
I find it very strange that a God would test a followers faith by asking if they would sacifice their own offspring to it.

It was a test, in my opinon that was done in poor taste. A God of love, in my opinion, would never use or see a need for such a test of their followers, even if their intentions were good.

Why would the God still require an animal sacifice after conducting this test? Why does it need sacifice at all, a continuous test to see when it's followers may lose faith in it by stopping or refusing to sacifice life to it?

There seems to be a very large Ego and pride problem here, the God of the old testimony seems very different from the new one. Are they the same God or are they separate beings?

[edit on 20-4-2007 by ixiy]



posted on Sep, 17 2007 @ 02:50 PM
link   
reply to post by DerekOneSeven17
 


you see God made this world in perfection and his servants has a responsibility from God, Our father God Almighty isn't one whom you mess with, for example: Elijah told God he would get people for Him but he came back with none then God destroyed the city because no one worshipped Him, today we have Jesus that paid for our sins and that gives us a relationship with God, also there was some guy who burned offerings to gods in a temple then God struck him to death right there and there was children who mocked a guy from God then he cursed the kids and they died, pretty evil isn't it?

but evil works this way, God has his eye on everything he knows all, satan actually askes God if he can hinder you then if you come to repentance with the light and love of God demons wont knock you down, that easily no more.

by the way you speak you really don't know God and his ways



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 10  11  12    14  15 >>

log in

join