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.
Originally posted by newworld
Originally posted by starwarp2000
reply to post by newworld
These passages refer to the fall of Lucifer!!!
Ezekiel 28: 12 - 15
12 Son of man, take up a lamentation upon the king of Tyrus, and say unto him, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty.
13 Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.
14 Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.
15 Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.
And also references in Revelations, about the Dragon's tail sweeping down a third of the Angels.
I will read your reference and get back to you.
the key word there is "son of man". this can't possibly be referring to the fall of satan, since he is an angel/archangel (i forget which) and not a human being. And I see that you checked the source and came to the conclusion that the translations could be wrong. but the thing is that scholars have looked at the issue between Lucifer and Satan in the original texts and that's why the general consensus seems to be that they are different beings that were confused into one as time went on.
however, i believe you are right in that the bible needs to be translated again, without errors using the best translators out there. a new, authoritarian version of the bible needs to be printed (basically the definitive final version) without errors and as accurate as possible.
Originally posted by dzonatas
Satan is multiple personalities with multiple bodies. You can say Satan has one soul. The bible only provides hints, yet the rest of said "evil" Satan is so said to be so "evil" only by peer pressure into false witness. By peer pressure, people repeat what is wrote and heard. They fear what they really don't know about Satan.
Easier to think of Lucifer as a personification than to pinpoint somebody. There are very romantic and lustful experiences to be found about this. Discover them if you explore.
There is another Satan, and maybe this is where some confusion comes from. Think of yourself in a mirror. When you read the bible and read about Satan, then consider any personal judgment you make about that Satan in the bible is actually a mirror of you. In effect, you judge yourself. Now you got to live with such judgment until you can overcome it.
Life gets better when you can learn not to bare false witness. *wink*
How many of you can say absolutely positive things about Satan? Hmmm. Oh the virtue of love and compassion...
Oh look, I didn't say anything 'far out there' in this post. *smile*
[edit on 31-7-2009 by dzonatas]
Originally posted by inregardstoo
There are many references to a morning star in the EAST in reference to Lucifer. There are many other ancient cultures and religions who also make reference to an eastern star like Zoastarianism and the Egyption Horus/Osirus Story. The Horus story shows the star Sirius as the Eastern star in this latter generation as it really used to be the North Polar Star above the the capstone in the ancient times before the deluge.
Originally posted by newworld
reply to post by gwynnhwyfar
that's the EXACT source i posted in the beginning of the thread. People either don't read it or simply dismiss the information. I thought the issue of the difference between Satan and Lucifer was already clarified in this thread? did i miss something???
(thanks for posting it here though, it will help those who decide to read from the last pages. and sorry if the tone of my post seems to be anger, it's actually neutral )
Originally posted by prevenge
Originally posted by starwarp2000
Well firstly Lucifer doesn't exist anymore! His name was changed to Satan, so any reference to Lucifer is just a historical reference.
Satan is an Arch-Angel (albeit a fallen one) and is made of spirit.
silliness.
make up children's book conceptualizations of archetypical characters all you want.
still silliness and lacks depth and literal practical meaning that one can gain anything worth-while form spiritually.
Satan sits on the throne of the Earth at this moment!!! He will remain there until Christ returns and removes him.
true.. but in a symbolic sense.
satan being the current form of body/mind we're in right now...
christ as in the future liberated body/mind we will in habit with awakening to a literally new body and consciousness.
no "people" or "spirits" named jesus and satan..
I know it's kinda sad when you have to let go of that perception of them.. saying bye-bye to the gossip-oriented action-film type interpretation... might leave you feeling a lil hollow inside...
because they're actually SYMBOLIC PSYCHOLOGICAL AGGREGATES.
who represent something you can "learn from" in a very deep sense.. and PRACTICAL MANNER in which you can derive actual literal unimagineable ascendance from...
NOT actual "beings"
nothing personal.. but i pray for the death of your type of perception of the mythology.
Originally posted by starwarp2000
Originally posted by newworld
reply to post by gwynnhwyfar
that's the EXACT source i posted in the beginning of the thread. People either don't read it or simply dismiss the information. I thought the issue of the difference between Satan and Lucifer was already clarified in this thread? did i miss something???
(thanks for posting it here though, it will help those who decide to read from the last pages. and sorry if the tone of my post seems to be anger, it's actually neutral )
Yes you did miss something!
The issue hasn't been clarified.
That article was written by a Theosophist which has nothing to do with the Christian religion.
For a Theosophist to comment on religious matters, would be like next time you want your car fixed you take it to a bicycle mechanic. You may get your car fixed but it wont be as good as a real mechanic and it will probably break down sooner than later.
LOL Like this argument
Originally posted by undo
reply to post by starwarp2000
it's possible that it was his domain and he lost it to jesus. (venus i mean). it's a title. like a title of royalty.
Originally posted by newworld
Originally posted by starwarp2000
Originally posted by newworld
reply to post by gwynnhwyfar
that's the EXACT source i posted in the beginning of the thread. People either don't read it or simply dismiss the information. I thought the issue of the difference between Satan and Lucifer was already clarified in this thread? did i miss something???
(thanks for posting it here though, it will help those who decide to read from the last pages. and sorry if the tone of my post seems to be anger, it's actually neutral )
Yes you did miss something!
The issue hasn't been clarified.
That article was written by a Theosophist which has nothing to do with the Christian religion.
For a Theosophist to comment on religious matters, would be like next time you want your car fixed you take it to a bicycle mechanic. You may get your car fixed but it wont be as good as a real mechanic and it will probably break down sooner than later.
LOL Like this argument
So you don't think a theosophist who probably spent his/her whole life studying religion is capable of tackling down this issue? so who, in your opinion, is capable of answering this question correctly?
Originally posted by undo
reply to post by newworld
well the problem i've noticed with some of the older thoughts on the topic is that they don't incorporate all the data, only those portions that fit their theory or the theories of their predecessors. what about the rest of the info? as archaeology progresses, more data is being dug up that seems to make big holes in everybodies theories on these subjects. the only possible solution is to look at the whole picture and not just the parts that will continue to bolster your position or the positions of the scholars that have come before you. in short, the only best and possible solution is to look at the entire thing, from the perspectives of the various ancient texts, read them for yourself, do comparative analysis and never discount anything. by assuming such and such was not or is not possible, you've set yourself up for lack of revelation.
Originally posted by starwarp2000
reply to post by newworld
Ezekiel 28: 12 - 15
12 Son of man, take up a lamentation upon the king of Tyrus, and say unto him, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty.
13 Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.
14 Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.
15 Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.
Let's take the points one by one:
1) Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty.
2) Thou hast been in Eden
3) Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth
4) thou wast upon the holy mountain of God
1. He is the most perfect creation of God.
2. He was in Eden
3. He was one of the covering Cherubim (Ark of the Covenant)
4. He was at God's throne.
Now how, oh how, can anybody equate this to a "HUMAN" king or anything mortal?
What man has God said these things to???
So it must only be talking about an immortal being and the only logical recipient is Lucifer.