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.

 

I Would Side With the Serpent

page: 14
18
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 31 2009 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by miriam0566
you just want it to be because its give you room to believe whatever it is you want to believe.


If the passage in stated in a way that allows several different beliefs to agree with it, then I'm not the one who says the passage is wrong. What you tell me is that because you might have a belief that agrees with it and I have a belief that agrees with it and both of our beliefs are different, and then you make suggestion like above that it is just "whatever."

OK. At least you finally agree that several beliefs exist and all could be true. I didn't ask you to believe in them all or find them all true. For those that look for a path, there is obviously more than one path to find that all end the same.



that is the silliest attempt at side stepping a point i have ever heard


It's just silly how easily you make such accusations and take things for granted.



so jesus called satan a lye (musical instrument) because you dont want to believe that he lied.


I gave you a possibility. It is hard for me to consider you open minded since you seem to take such possibility and turn it into an accusation like above. You don't know what I do and don't believe.



you know how to read but you seem to flavor everything with your feelings instead of reading whats right in front of you.


I know how to read, and I don't let my feelings get in way to limit the possibilities.

If it is so true that it is "right in front of you" then you wouldn't even need to post in this thread. What happen to your faith and beliefs? Are you afraid of a serpent? Or why else would you post in this thread and make *silly* accusations?


no its not. the scripture has nothing to do with the afterlife, paul is saying that to be like god, we need to imitate jesus.


How would you imitate Jesus? The name Christ could also be translated as "the anointed." So then, become anointed and practice, at least that is what the law requires in order for it to be official. There are many churches because people don't practice the same. Hmmm, if you are good with the bible then you know how the serpent plays it role here, and you wouldn't say the serpent 'lied.' Either you don't see this, or you don't want to testify to any knowledge of it, which is common.



Doesn't it appear that maybe the bible is the fruit?


where would that begin to make sense?


Some want to compare the dragon to an empire, even though that is just an interpretation. Some bibles are built with paper and leather. Paper comes from a tree, which could be compared to the Tree of Knowledge, especially when the Word is written upon it. What comes from a tree at times is considered fruit. When it is bound in leather, it has been bound by the skin of an animal, which transgresses one of the commandments. which is said to be 'forbidden'. Therefore... the 'forbidden fruit'. Look at the destruction it causes, not for the Word, yet because of the resources used.

I never did like those leather bound bibles... not that I didn't like the Word.

Now, the simple solution is to use other means to store the Word that wouldn't be considered 'forbidden fruit'. The digital age provides some means to accomplish such, yet how often do you see people take an iBook to church instead of a 'forbidden fruit'?

Maybe someone wants to side with the serpent because they rather have that iBook instead of the forbidden fruit.


[edit on 31-8-2009 by dzonatas]




posted on Aug, 31 2009 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by CJaKfOrEsT
I already answered that one:


Yes, noted. I merely made it clearer what was my first question.



Either way, it would be more profitable to our mutual understanding of each other to ask for clarification, than to attempt to trip up my words.


Did I not make it clearer to point out my second question? By your explanation, in your last post, it seems you have not yet answered it.



[edit on 31-8-2009 by dzonatas]



posted on Aug, 31 2009 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by JayinAR
reply to post by miriam0566
 


You don't have free will.
No matter which way you cut it God created you with advanced knowledge of everything you would ever do and when he created you, and everyone else, he knew precisely how everything would end.

Meaning, nothing you do can thwart God's plan.



Your initial questions are very valid! It looks like you took the red pill. The OT has so many contradictions that nobody can answer them to your satisfaction. Remember the OT was written by humans and not God or gods. The canon was somewhat clumsily put together by vote ...

"Meaning, nothing you do can thwart God's plan." The 1st Law of Thermodynamics will answer the question.

I was once hung up on "free will" as well. Here is my spin: I don't think that the time/space limitations do apply to the Creator. She knows all the states of every atom at any given time, but as long as there is no intervention on her part, you can act out your "free will" as you wish. "Free will" doesn't mean "private will" LOL.

More importantly though. If you want to know God you don't need a religion. Just listen to the birds sing and watch the tree on which they sit.



posted on Aug, 31 2009 @ 05:05 PM
link   
reply to post by miriam0566
 


Are you the girl in the middle of your avatar? Pretty smile



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by dzonatas
If the passage in stated in a way that allows several different beliefs to agree with it, then I'm not the one who says the passage is wrong. What you tell me is that because you might have a belief that agrees with it and I have a belief that agrees with it and both of our beliefs are different, and then you make suggestion like above that it is just "whatever."

OK. At least you finally agree that several beliefs exist and all could be true. I didn't ask you to believe in them all or find them all true. For those that look for a path, there is obviously more than one path to find that all end the same.


this is the only part of your post im replying to because its the only part that displays careful thought

your analogy has the key. there may be multiple roads, but there is ONE destination. one, not two, or five, or five thousand. one.

how do we arrive at one, when a scripture could possibly be interpreted multiple ways?

the bible provides the answer...

matt 18:[16] But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.

can a bible passage be a witness? of course it can!

so when trying to understand what a passage means, its important to cross-reference. its also important to be keenly aware of contradictions that an interpretation can create if its wrong.

i didnt just cite genesis 3:19 and say 'see! dust to dust, adam didnt ascend'. instead i also included ezekial, and ecclesiastes to help show that this was what the bible was really saying.

the bible has its own system that prevents false interpretations. its not a free for all to just believe what you like.



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by miriam0566
this is the only part of your post im replying to because its the only part that displays careful thought


Oh, that is mutual. I'm sure if I tried to speak/write fluent Español, my style would seem rude since I'm really not that fluent.
.


the bible has its own system that prevents false interpretations. its not a free for all to just believe what you like.


That system also includes: when to know to put the bible aside so you can testify to your own beliefs. If you don't have your own beliefs, then you really don't believe -- in fact, it's impossible.

The bible is not about belief. You don't need faith to believe. The bible is about faith, and you can believe in faith.

When you actually are more careful to read and consider the words I have written here, then I consider that you have actually carefully put thought into what you wrote in this thread. Mutual.



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 01:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by CJaKfOrEsT

In the this Sumerian pantheon, did Enki and Yahweh have a father, or were they just pre-exist in their fraternal relationship? I guess what I am asking is were they eternal beings, without beginning, or were they the spawn of an even "Higher Being"?

I do know that Greek mythology traces its pantheon's lineage to an unknown god, who preceded Zeus. In fact, the Olympians were preceded by gods like Terra, Cosmos and Chaos, which were also preceded by the unknown god (possibly even a mother and father).


The most amazing thing about the Sumerian pantheon is that you can find this same set of deities in places separated from Sumer by thousands of years and miles. It is easy to find them in the Greek pantheon and the Norse pantheon. Not to mention the Egyptian, Celtic, Mayan and Roman pantheons.

But, back to Sumer.
Yahweh and Enki do have a father. The tablets call him Anu.
Are they eternal beings? Yes.



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 05:59 AM
link   

reply to post by DaisyAnne
 

Yahweh and Enki do have a father. The tablets call him Anu.
Are they eternal beings? Yes.


Thank you for getting back to me on this. Someone along the way mentioned that I wouldn't get a straight answer on my question, which I thought was a bit strange.

I am curious as to how Yahweh and Enki could have a father, and yet also be eternal. I understand eternal to mean without beginning or end. Perhaps they define it differently.



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 06:20 AM
link   
reply to post by JayinAR
 


Simply consider this...

when did man ever ask God about anything in the beginning?

In the beginning, man never bothered to ask God whatsover and to this day, few do.

We have the freewill to do as we choose and man chose the serpent over God after being asked not to, we still had the choice.

Hence, why we are all here.

If God wanted slaves we would not be here, we would not have free will and the serpent would not have existed in the first place.

So God created a serpent that was a mistake, which in turn makes god a failure?
That logic is flawed if you look at what that gave us, it gave us choice, what does choice give? It gives experiences, we are learning, we are on the path of knowledge after having the free will to choose this life through another being that God created.
Look at this again and you might find that it is man that is flawed, we were given a chance and we blew it. We are learning the hard way that our choices have consequences.

You are saying that you would side with the serpent. That is the equivalent of saying "the world is great just the way it is with nothing wrong at all and I have learned nothing at all". In other words you are admitting you are stupid for what of a better way to put it but that is a start and you are far from alone on that boat.

As for church spin, dont believe in what a church says then but it does not mean what the bible says is void just because you disagree with a churches or preachers stance. We are all here to make choices that are our own after all.

[edit on 2-9-2009 by XXXN3O]



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 06:38 AM
link   

reply to post by dzonatas
 

When you actually are more careful to read and consider the words I have written here, then I consider that you have actually carefully put thought into what you wrote in this thread. Mutual.


In Australia, English is our first language, but I have to admit, I agree with what Miriam has written here. The Bible is extremely easy to understand, and I have never seen two people come to differing conclusions, when reading it at face values, on any major issue (like the identity of God, Satan, and Jesus; the sinfulness of mankind; and the purpose of Christ's death, burial and resurrection). The main points of contention tend to revolve around issues of predestination/election and eschatology. Now considering that speculation over these issues are largely philosophical, and are of little consequence, in regard to either day to day life, and doctrines of salvation, it doesn't really matter.

The idea that the Bible is open to interpretation and there are multitudes of "roads" to go down, when reading it, tend to be embraced by people who think it ok to force their own meanings on its words, and indiscriminately decide whether they want to apply literal or figurative interpretive methods. I don't understand the need to do this, and why people feel the need to blame other people for their opinions, by inserting their own meanings of those others' words.

Oh, and if I've got the right question, that you say I haven't answered, I don't think that I am a god. In fact I know that I am not. Mind you, feel free to keep saying that I do, and that I am a false witness, and that I bow to peer pressure. After all, if you think that the Bible should be treated in such fashion, I should take it as a compliment.



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 08:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by CJaKfOrEsT
The idea that the Bible is open to interpretation and there are multitudes of "roads" to go down, when reading it, tend to be embraced by people who think it ok to force their own meanings on its words, and indiscriminately decide whether they want to apply literal or figurative interpretive methods.


that is pretty much exactly what i see.

worst part is, many dont see the paradox of this type of thinking. the bible is not a revelation from god if you are going to simply pick and choose what parts you like and dont like.

how would the bible then be any different from any other self help, philosophical, or religious text?



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 10:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by CJaKfOrEsT

Thank you for getting back to me on this. Someone along the way mentioned that I wouldn't get a straight answer on my question, which I thought was a bit strange.

I am curious as to how Yahweh and Enki could have a father, and yet also be eternal. I understand eternal to mean without beginning or end. Perhaps they define it differently.


I think the reason they felt it would be difficult to get a straight answer, is because of the way the tablets are written. The Sumerian language is not expressed the same way as others, it is easy to render in many different fashions. I speak only of my own translations.

As to your second question: How to have been born and yet considered eternal? The stories of the lineage and birth of Gods always exist outside of time, outside of this creation. They exist as both incarnate and disincarnate. For instance, after the Gods Dumuzi and Ningishzidda of Sumer go missing from the earthly plane, we can still find them in the Underworld, or guarding the gate of heaven. When the Norse God Balder is killed, we find him in the Underworld, waiting to be resurrected after Ragnarok. When Osiris is slain, we find him taking over for his son Anubis in the Underworld. They are not born as we are, and they do not live as we do.

[edit on 2-9-2009 by DaisyAnne]



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 10:14 AM
link   
reply to post by XXXN3O
 


Well, I see it a bit differently.
I don't see freewill in the equation at all.
Thanks for insulting me, though.



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 11:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by JayinAR
reply to post by XXXN3O
 


Well, I see it a bit differently.
I don't see freewill in the equation at all.
Thanks for insulting me, though.


It was not an insult.

Not if you look at the logic of it.




posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 12:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by CJaKfOrEsT
The Bible is extremely easy to understand


You are rich if you think it is so extremely easy. Many people spend years to learn a language that enables them to read the bibles. Some spend many more years to trace down the original content and context. To have that given to you at face value is rich.



and I have never seen two people come to differing conclusions,
[...]
The idea that the Bible is open to interpretation and there are multitudes of "roads" to go down,


There are passages that are structured in a way that the only way to read it is by interpretation it in order to get some idea out of it. To just read it at face value is not an interpretation if what you read is correct scripture. It is not that people don't want to take it literally, it is that some passages are setup so you can't take them literally. Those that do, time and time again, have clearly fallen into interpretations of man and not Words inspired by God.

Some mistake the "Word" meant "the written words," and even the bible shows that is not true with example where people have taken "Word" to literally mean "written words" and other times where "Word" meant "Jesus" and so on. We know today that Word means a delineation of fundamental ideas that we can identify.

If everybody was born with intrinsic memory so the fundamental ideas are known and that everybody identified them the same, then you could say it is "extremely easy." Instead, like most, I'm sure you had to learn.... unless you want to be considered a Computer that possesses such intrinsic memory!

Be sure to reflect upon that when you read Matthew-19:26.



Oh, and if I've got the right question, that you say I haven't answered, I don't think that I am a god. In fact I know that I am not. Mind you, feel free to keep saying that I do, and that I am a false witness, and that I bow to peer pressure. After all, if you think that the Bible should be treated in such fashion, I should take it as a compliment.


You would not find it a compliment when others start to test your degree of perfection. You would have avoided a few paradoxical statements -- with grace.

Peace & Love



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by JayinAR
He made us in his image apparently, but he couldn't handle having a creation that shared intellect. He wanted slaves.

Give me knowledge and freedom!


Everyone has complete freedom to believe in themselves. If one cannot even do so little as that, then one is only a man. Some, however, haven't realized they are to do that much on their own will without anybody else's free will.

Gotta have your own will to live. *wink*

Peace & Love


[edit on 2-9-2009 by dzonatas]



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 08:01 PM
link   
reply to post by JayinAR
 


I keep meaning to thank you for starting such an interesting thread, and allowing me to participate!

I have also found your posts to be intelligent.



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by DaisyAnne
 


Well thanks for that. Those remarks don't come lightly, I'm sure.
Your posts have been... what can I say? Scholarly.

Yeah, it is a question that I formed internally a long time ago and through subsequent research, I have realized that the entire Biblical tale is... basically a propaganda piece ran by the Roman Empire, as you have said.

I enjoy your contributions!

"Allowing me to participate"?!!!

As if I could stop you if I wanted to



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by JayinAR
 


Just because the church is evil and wrong doesn't mean the serpent is right friend.



posted on Sep, 2 2009 @ 08:54 PM
link   
reply to post by muggl3z
 


I disagree there as well.
2nd line.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join