Lucifer = Planet Venus, not Satan - PROOF

page: 7
69
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 10 2010 @ 11:03 AM
link   
You should see this video www.youtube.com...
The uploader has many more videos which i think you should all see...




posted on May, 10 2010 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by BeastMaster2012
 


Satan, also for your information ...biblically is not evil ..Satan was the accuser, or inquisitor for God. In other words he works for GOD as a lawyer.

Your Venus information is spot on. Something I read once was that it was venus that entered the solarsystem as a rogue planet creating the asteroid belt, destroying life on Mars and forming our moon or some such...your relating of this information reminded me of that and got me scratching my head a bit as perhaps that could be related to a fall from heaven



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Shadowfoot
 


I really think that some kind of life was on Mars or Venus. I also wonder about the asteroid belt, it seems like that was once a planet that was destroyed.

Mars and Venus are just too earth like to not have some kind of life. Mercury seems like it was a moon of some kind.



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Shadowfoot
 

I think you are right. Also if today's world is controlled by a secret society they would probably want us to believe that satan is evil...all those movies and books about Satan being evil and absolutely nothing about Lucifer. In fact i think that Lucifer is the evil one.



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 05:18 PM
link   
reply to post by donotcopymyname
 


do you believe lucifer is the white man? i don't think lucifer is a man at all.
since i've been studying the ancient texts of cultures contiguous with and adjacent to, sumer, i've found alot of additional data on the subject, and it's even weirder than you might suspect.



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 05:44 PM
link   
reply to post by BeastMaster2012
 


Very interesting thread, and nice point to make. While being a Christian myself, I personally know the use of Lucifer as a name for Satan to be incorrect. Many, as you pointed out, do not know this and the confusion often comes from certain translation of the book of Isaiah.

While the name Lucifer may not be accurate or truthful, it is odd that it kinda plays itself to be, seeing as the Devil masquerades as an angel of light, or the light-bringer, and also brought wisdom/knowledge to Adam and Eve by deceiving them so that they choose to eat from the tree of knowledge. I find it interesting that even a wrong name could be so accurate in description.

There are many wrong names that Christians use out of tradition since they have not had any formal or even proper training/study. Translators keep using the name Jehova for some reason, even though more and more people are becoming aware of the more accurate pronouncement of the Tetragrammaton as being "Yahweh."

We also keep using the name Jesus even though a more proper pronouncement would be Yeshua.

Names carry with them power, especially in countries where voodoo and such are common practice. For this reason, I do think that using names correctly and respectfully is more than appropriate. At the same time, I don't see the confusion in the name only as being a major doctrinal issue. You won't see me calling the Devil "Lucifer."

PS: Sorry if all of this has already been said, as I just read like the first couple posts. God Bless.



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 05:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mykahel
reply to post by BeastMaster2012
 


Very interesting thread, and nice point to make. While being a Christian myself, I personally know the use of Lucifer as a name for Satan to be incorrect. Many, as you pointed out, do not know this and the confusion often comes from certain translation of the book of Isaiah.

While the name Lucifer may not be accurate or truthful, it is odd that it kinda plays itself to be, seeing as the Devil masquerades as an angel of light, or the light-bringer, and also brought wisdom/knowledge to Adam and Eve by deceiving them so that they choose to eat from the tree of knowledge. I find it interesting that even a wrong name could be so accurate in description.

There are many wrong names that Christians use out of tradition since they have not had any formal or even proper training/study. Translators keep using the name Jehova for some reason, even though more and more people are becoming aware of the more accurate pronouncement of the Tetragrammaton as being "Yahweh."

We also keep using the name Jesus even though a more proper pronouncement would be Yeshua.

Names carry with them power, especially in countries where voodoo and such are common practice. For this reason, I do think that using names correctly and respectfully is more than appropriate. At the same time, I don't see the confusion in the name only as being a major doctrinal issue. You won't see me calling the Devil "Lucifer."

PS: Sorry if all of this has already been said, as I just read like the first couple posts. God Bless.


Thank you! Out of the 30 or so christians that have replied, only a handful are saying what you have said. Some have called me a wacko when it's obvious they are just reading their bible and will not hear anything else. Anyways thanks for the post!



posted on May, 10 2010 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by BeastMaster2012

Originally posted by Mykahel
reply to post by BeastMaster2012
 


While the name Lucifer may not be accurate or truthful, it is odd that it kinda plays itself to be, ........... I find it interesting that even a wrong name could be so accurate in description.

There are many wrong names that Christians use out of tradition since they have not had any formal or even proper training/study. Translators keep using the name Jehova for some reason, even though more and more people are becoming aware of the more accurate pronouncement of the Tetragrammaton as being "Yahweh."

We also keep using the name Jesus even though a more proper pronouncement would be Yeshua.


Thank you! Out of the 30 or so christians that have replied, only a handful are saying what you have said. Some have called me a wacko when it's obvious they are just reading their bible and will not hear anything else. Anyways thanks for the post!


And that is a problem. Mykahel is correct in the Linguistics, since of course, the Hebrew and Greek have been Translated, apposed to Transliterated into English.

The Point is Words have meaning. They are fixed, and specific in most cases, BUT this has changed or for the darwinist's, evolved into meanings which maybe 100% different than the Original Meaning.

An Example would be Myth, which had an intended and specific meaning which commited the term to descibing a truth, but now, it's considered lore and heresay.

This is something people should realize, especially when considering Ancient Texts in the Modern Times. It takes study to verify the intent of Scripture.

Case at hand.

King Jame 1611 Bible Opened with the Following.

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

Taking or making any effort to study the Original text clearly offers another story line, which goes as

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
1:2 And the Earth became a Waste and a Desolation............Waters.

Now this make many things different in comprehension when it comes to the Genesis Account.

Why would this not have been addressed properly?

Fear of the Stake?
Fear of the Church?
Dogma, Doctrine and Theology already overwhelmed the mindset to make such consideration mute?

The point is, the Second offering I placed above is more accurate than the 1611 Version. The Version ALL OTHER BIBLES base there translations from.

Just food for thought, when considering such things.

Ciao

Shane



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 12:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Shane
 


if you look at the words that were actually in genesis 1:1, it goes something like this:

First Elohim (plural) created heaven and earth



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 01:02 AM
link   
that next verse (genesis 1:2) is wild.

Earth was

("was" is same root, hayah, as that of jehovah, who i believe is equivalent in this form to the sumerian Ea (pronounced ayah), who is also known as sumerian Enki, which means LORD EARTH)

desolate emptiness. Dark (or secret) surface of abyss (see sumerian abzu), (whirl) wind of Elohim (plural) hovered over the surface of abyss.

theoretically, this may be suggesting this:


Google Video Link





[edit on 11-5-2010 by undo]



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 03:01 AM
link   
I don't really get this...

I agree it's an interesting find, and a pattern I never noticed before - but then again I had no reason to think about it.. Anyway, wouldn't that same pattern be reflected in ANY two concentric circles / orbits? I mean I guess it might not be a perfect pentagram but it will definately make a Star figure... Now you got me thinking... is there another one with a 6 pointed star such as the star of David?

Or are the orbits of Venus and Earth the only 2 that are "parallel" / have this particular ratio (however you want to describe it)?
Sorry, I'm no math major or anything, but I usually am pretty good at seeing patterns in things such as this.

I also find it amusing that people are comparing Satan / Lucifer to Venus... Isn't Venus the goddess of Love? Strange.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 09:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by sum1one
I don't really get this...

I agree it's an interesting find, and a pattern I never noticed before - but then again I had no reason to think about it.. Anyway, wouldn't that same pattern be reflected in ANY two concentric circles / orbits? I mean I guess it might not be a perfect pentagram but it will definately make a Star figure... Now you got me thinking... is there another one with a 6 pointed star such as the star of David?

I also find it amusing that people are comparing Satan / Lucifer to Venus... Isn't Venus the goddess of Love? Strange.


Yes, almost every ancient culture makes mention of Venus. This is why i am trying to protect her from the evil label of Satan. She is a goddess, not the devil! Da vinci code get's into this subject. Men have tried to put down women as much as they can to let the men rule the world. I think it could be time to let women back into control.

en.wikipedia.org...


As one of the brightest objects in the sky, Venus has been known since prehistoric times and as such has gained an entrenched position in human culture. It is described in Babylonian cuneiformic texts such as the Venus tablet of Ammisaduqa, which relates observations that possibly date from 1600 BC.[105] The Babylonians named the planet Ishtar (Sumerian Inanna), the personification of womanhood, and goddess of love.[106]

The Ancient Egyptians believed Venus to be two separate bodies and knew the morning star as Tioumoutiri and the evening star as Ouaiti.[107] Likewise, believing Venus to be two bodies, the Ancient Greeks called the morning star Φωσφόρος, Phosphoros (Latinized Phosphorus), the "Bringer of Light" or Ἐωσφόρος, Eosphoros (Latinized Eosphorus), the "Bringer of Dawn". The evening star they called Hesperos (Latinized Hesperus) (Ἓσπερος, the "star of the evening"). By Hellenistic times, the ancient Greeks realized the two were the same planet,[108][109] which they named after their goddess of love, Aphrodite (Phoenician Astarte).[110] Hesperos would be translated into Latin as Vesper and Phosphoros as Lucifer ("Light Bearer"), a poetic term later used to refer to the fallen angel cast out of heaven. The Romans, who derived much of their religious pantheon from the Greek tradition, named the planet Venus after their goddess of love.[111] Pliny the Elder (Natural History, ii,37) identified the planet Venus with Isis.[112]

In Iranian mythology, especially in Persian mythology, the planet usually corresponds to the goddess Anahita. In some parts of Pahlavi literature the deities Aredvi Sura and Anahita are regarded as separate entities, the first one as a personification of the mythical river and the latter as a goddess of fertility which is associated with the planet Venus. As the goddess Aredvi Sura Anahita—and simply called Anahita as well—both deities are unified in other descriptions, e. g. in the Greater Bundahishn, and are represented by the planet. However, in the Avestan text Mehr Yasht (Yasht 10) there is a possible early link to Mithra. The Persian name of the planet today is "Nahid" which derives from Anahita and later in history from the Pahlavi language Anahid.[113][114][115][116]

The planet Venus was important to the Maya civilization, who developed a religious calendar based in part upon its motions, and held the motions of Venus to determine the propitious time for events such as war. They named it Noh Ek', the Great Star, and Xux Ek', the Wasp Star. The Maya were aware of the planet's synodic period, and could compute it to within a hundredth part of a day.[117] The Maasai people named the planet Kileken, and have an oral tradition about it called The Orphan Boy.[118]


As for the Star of David, Mercury does supposidly do this:


This is a stunning fact, but there is more. Mercury, like Venus has a shorter orbit than Earth; in the case of Mercury, very much shorter. Mercury completes three orbits in just under 50 weeks, so that there are six conjunctions ­ three ³inferior² and three ³superior² in each year. If all six are marked on the circle of the zodiac and the three inferior joined by lines drawn 1-2-3-1 and the three superior joined 1-2-3-1. The result is a hexagram ­ the Star of David or Seal of Solomon. What makes this an even more striking image is that, as you will all recognise, the order of drawing the triangles is the same as that used in the dedication of the temple prior to a Martinist meeting.


There is not a cool fancy animated gif that i have found yet, but on this website you can see a picture of the star of david, it is not convincing. I'm trying to confirm this.

www.mikecrowson.co.uk...



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 10:20 AM
link   
By quickly using the following website, i confirmed that Mercury and Earth make a Star of David.

www.gunn.co.nz...



Now please know i QUICKLY made this by estimating the inferior and superior conjunctions. I did not look up the dates of the conjunctions, using that program i just guessed because i do not have much time. I will spend more time and make a better one later unless someone else wants to do this.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 11:18 AM
link   
hmm.. interesting stuff, perhaps Mercury the Messenger and Venus the goddess of Love are trying to tell us that Lucifer is hiding under the guise of a woman leader? Sounds pretty far out but hey... who knows, I've seen too much strange stuff lately.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by BeastMaster2012
 


i did some research on astarte.

she is isis, inana (or inanna), ishtar and astoreth. this is where the astarte etymology derives from



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 11:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by sum1one
hmm.. interesting stuff, perhaps Mercury the Messenger and Venus the goddess of Love are trying to tell us that Lucifer is hiding under the guise of a woman leader? Sounds pretty far out but hey... who knows, I've seen too much strange stuff lately.


It's Oprah Winfrey


She is said to be the most powerful woman in the world.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by BeastMaster2012
 


i did some research on astarte.

she is isis, inana (or inanna), ishtar and astoreth. this is where the astarte etymology derives from


You know what is INSANE. i mean really really crazy?

Venus of Wilendorf is one of the oldest statues ever to be made by human hands. It is around 24,000 YEARS old.

irrationalgeographic.files.wordpress.com...

Now if you look at statues of Inanna, you can see similarities.

This statue could be from 2000BC:

mivweb.com...

Look at how similar it is. Super wide hips with the arms holding the breast. Venus of Willendorf is doing the same thing.

Here is another:

www.crystalinks.com...

How fascinating is this? I have always been interested with the Venus of Wilendorf since i took a Art History class in college. I didn't realize the similarities until a few days ago.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by BeastMaster2012
 


the venus of willendorf is not a human being. humanoid statues before 3900 BC are all reptilian bipedal or amphibian bipedal. they also have some mammalian characteristics. when they found the statues, they assumed they were human females ,probably because the texts seemed to indicate there was a few prominent goddesses in the way back. but the assumption lead them to do things like create a human head for a statue that was missing a head, which is a huge assumption. in that time frame, no statues depict humans.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by BeastMaster2012
 


the venus of willendorf is not a human being. humanoid statues before 3900 BC are all reptilian bipedal or amphibian bipedal. they also have some mammalian characteristics. when they found the statues, they assumed they were human females ,probably because the texts seemed to indicate there was a few prominent goddesses in the way back. but the assumption lead them to do things like create a human head for a statue that was missing a head, which is a huge assumption. in that time frame, no statues depict humans.


what? I have never heard of that. That is a female fertility statue, atleast what i learned in Art History. It's something like you would worship this idol when you wanted to become pregnant. Did you look at the image or have you seen it? That is the definition of a woman, it just does not have a face. It isn't bipedal, you can see the arms on top of the breasts, you can even see the hands. If you can provide some evidence to back up that claim i would appreciate it, because that sounds way too crazy to me.



posted on May, 11 2010 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by BeastMaster2012
 


see next page

[edit on 11-5-2010 by undo]





new topics

top topics



 
69
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join