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.

 

Revelation; Satan fell from Heaven

page: 5
9
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by DISRAELI
I want to offer some thoughts on Revelation ch12 vv 7-11

This is about the downfall of "the great dragon", alias "the ancient serpent", alias the Devil, alias Satan, alias "the deceiver of the whole world", alias "the accuser of the brethren".

I'm going to be asking the question; when. and how, did Satan fall from heaven?

We can find one version of the story in Paradise Lost.
We learn about the great rebellion before the foundation of the world.
We learn about the hard-fought battles in heaven, and how Satan's force was driven off the edge of Heaven and fell into the Abyss;
"Him the Almighty Power
Hurled headlong flaming from the ethereal sky
With hideous ruin and combustion down
To bottomless perdition, there to dwell
In adamantine chains and penal fire
Who durst defy the Omnipotent to arms".

Paradise Lost may well be the greatest poem of its length in the English language.
Nevertheless, Paradise Lost is not scripture.

Possible Biblical parallels for the event;

There's a frequently quoted source in Isaiah ch14 v12;
"How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, son of Dawn"- traditionally quoted in the "Lucifer, son of the morning" translation.
This really says nothing, though, about the timing of the event. The prophet is not talking about the past, necessarily, but foretelling what people will be able to say at some point in the future.
In any case, the verse is clearly labelled in the context as part of the prophet's taunt against Babylon.

There's a less ambiguous example in Luke's gospel. This comes out of the episode of the seventy disciples, chosen by Jesus and sent out ahead of him. They return from the mission "with joy", telling him that "even the demons are subject to us in your name."

His immediate response to this report is the declaration "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven"- Luke ch10 vv17-18

We need to understand that claim in a way that fits the context; that is, as a response to what his disciples have just told him.

If we assume that he's describing a Milton-style fall "before the creation of the world", then it's not easy to make sense of the reference as part of the conversation. It seems to be a little "off-topic", as they say in these parts.

It would make much more sense if there were some kind of connection between the Fall itself and the success they've been reporting, if he was describing the cause (or perhaps the effect) of their success in the mission field. That would be possible if the phrase "fall from heaven" could be understood as referring to a degree of fall from power.

How can Satan fall from power?

Well, where does his power come from, in the first place?

The name "Satan" come from the Hebrew phrase meaning "The Adversary".
It's also significant that he's described in Revelation ch12 as "the Accuser of the brethren".
Part of the Jewish understanding of Satan is that it's his function, as it were, to make our sins known to God, and draw them to his attention.
That makes him the kind of "Adversary" who would stand against us in a court of law.

That seems to be what he's doing in Job, walking up and down the earth, and reporting back to the presence of God (he seems to have forgotten about any previous "expulsion", and nobody bothers to remind him).

That's certainly what he's doing in Zechariah ch3.
Joshua the high priest stands in the presence of God.
Satan stands at his right hand to accuse him.
The intended accusation is certainly not a false accusation, because Joshua's iniquity is clearly visible, symbolised by his filthy garments.

In this episode, we can see a picture of the power which an Accuser can hold over humanity. It is not much different from that of an informant or a blackmailer.
Effectively, the power is based upon the possession of damaging information about human Sin.
Or, to be exact, it is based on the existence of human Sin, about which damaging information can be possessed.

The best way to deal with a blackmailer is to make his information useless.
That is exactly what happens in Zechariah ch3.
The Lord says to Joshua, "Behold, I have taken your iniquity away from you"-Zechariah ch3 v4.
The filthy garments are removed, and replaced by clean ones. Satan's evidence has been taken away from him- he stands rebuked and silenced.

When you take away the Sin, you necessarily take away the power of the Accuser.

It's time now to turn to Revelation ch12, and see what it tells us about the downfall of Satan, and the way "the Accuser of the brethren" was overcome.

The chapter begins with a "great portent" seen in heaven, a woman giving birth to a child who is to "rule the nations with a rod of iron" (I looked at the "woman in heaven" in my previous thread). The child is born and then "caught up to God and to his throne". The defeat and downfall of Satan follows immediately afterwards.

This goes a long way towards answering at least one of my original questions; the downfall of Satan occurs in the immediate context of the birth and ascension of Christ himself.

We are then told by a loud voice from heaven that the brethren have conquered him "by the blood of the Lamb".

The meaning of this phrase is well-understood by reference to the rest of the New Testament. "The Lamb" is a title given to Christ himself, in this book and in John's gospel, because of his death. "The blood of the Lamb" is a more specific reference to the same death.

So an Accuser who has been conquered "by the blood of the Lamb" has been conquered by the fact that Christ died on the cross.

The key to his defeat, as in Zechariah ch3, is the removal of Sin. We are told elsewhere that the Lamb of God "takes away the Sin of the world" (John ch1 v29).
And it is, of course, the central teaching of the New Testament that his death- his blood- was the means of achieving it.
"We have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses." -Ephesians ch1 v7

And, as I said before- when you take away Sin , you necessarily take awy the power of an Accuser.

So the brethren conquered the Accuser "by the blood of the Lamb"- they destroyed his power over their own lives by accepting the offered forgiveness.
They also conquered him "by the word of their testimony"- they were continuing to destroy his power over others by spreading the news of the offered forgiveness, even if it brought danger to themselves "for they loved not their lives even unto death".

The real meaning of the "battle in heaven", then, is what happened on the cross.
And the real meaning of the "fall from heaven" is that forgiveness became available because of what haopoened on the cross.
And that was how "the salvation and the power and the kingdom" of God and his Christ (v10) came into the world.

So, whatever Milton says, the story of the battle in heaven and the "Great Fall" is really nothing more- and nothing less- than a dramatised version of the doctrine of the Atonement.

In my previous thread, I described this chapter as a "flashback", interrupting the main flow of the story. How does it fit into the the plan of Revelation?

Firstly, it shows us the root of the apparent animosity of the powers of evil towards the followers of Christ, evident all through this book. That is to be understood as a reaction to Satan's "downfall".

But it also shows us the root of the power which defends them. It is not a coincidence that the "slain Lamb", in ch5, was responsible for setting these saving events in motion. The power which defends the persecuted church in this book is based on the same power which originally defeated those ultimate enemies, Sin and Death.

The Atonement would thus be the driving force at the heart of the Revelation, just as it is the driving force of the rest of the New Testament.



[edit on 30-5-2010 by DISRAELI]


The great Dragon (888) in Chinese culture and (666 and 999) in Western culture is Satan who rules over humans with knowledge. He gave Adam and Eve the choice. This was given to people to start a cycle of life which is the begining of our spiritual journey from life to death.

Mangod is the making of Lucifer. We are all under the system of pyramid or triangular shape where the top supports the bottom in direction (Banks, Kings and Queens, Presidents, Captains, Generals ect) and the bottom supports the top in labour (General Public). It is this system due to our external circumstances in life where everything is under three points of operation which is fuel, heat and oxygen. (Fire). All animals, plants and humans are this externally. Fire burns us and It has a negative effect on our state of mind by the circumstances that arrive in life to test us emotionally.

Water is what we are internally. This is zero point energy from the Sun as the closer you go it evaporates and the further away you go it freezes. Water gives us life! This is why Christians use this element for baptisment. Water is considered a positive element due to the fact it gives us life.

A positive and a negative makes humans like living batterys.

The Sun is considered Male and the Earth Female (Mother nature) giving us life. This is the natural procreation of every species in life and got humans to where we are now.

Jesus was considered King of the Jews because he was preaching this information and the knowledge of the Star of David. This interprets a triangle pointed upright and one pointed downwards. The triangle pointing upwards represents mankinds effort to reach the stars in learning which was the age of man (666). The triangle pointing downwards represents the age of women (999) which is the technology age. This is where humans are now on the cusp of both energys. The Star of David is on Israels flag. This was the original home of Jesus.

The number 6 comes from the three external negative elements of Fuel, Heat and Oxygen and the three internal positive elements of our spiritual self being Mind, Heart & Soul.

The number 9 represents the mirror of 6 which is done to recreate the cycle of life so it is eternal. The Pyramids were made using a previous cycle of technology humans created to reset or cycle of life. The pyramids have the Sphinx which is a human head in a Lions body which represents humans King of the domain in learning and knowledge.
When you reach the top of the Pyramid we reach the golden age. This is where humans are now with technology and electrical systems. Gold is also the best form of a electrical conductor.
Man and women kind are the software while the Sun and Earth are the hardware like a macro computer in action!

This is the age of enlightenment. Jesus stated he was the light out of darkness.

Sunworship is where humans developed time by calander rotation of the Earth around the Sun.
Numbers are a universal information and knowledge from what everything is created. Money has supported humans to achieve what we have. All countrys and customs have this in common due to the Law of trade.

Banks recieved there name by private familys that owned the BANKS of their country commenced trade for the people of their country which is considered Law of the sea or International waters where no country owns. Law of the Land is each countrys own law. Law is required to assist us all in the negative aspects of life!

All this teaches us to learn spiritually for wisdom in death.

When all humans realize this, they will understand we are all one and original sin will be abolished. All countrys and cultures will come to a point where they must respect eachother for who they are internally. Our positive internal spirit lives eternally. Jesus died on the Cross which is the symbol of positive energy for our sins in life which we all commit one time or another.

Religion has been taken out of context from the different interpretations it has. Jesus stated while on the cross he will return with a sword, making all humans realize their true nature in life and clense humans of sin. This will be a spiritual war which will effect every living person on Earth.

Mary was not a physical virgin but a virgin in love when Jesus was conceaved! She later meet Joseph who supported her with the birth. Love of the spirit is what we all require and should appreciate.

The physical cycle of life is Mangod in action which is the beast. God is the next dimension of life.

This cycle of life is nessasary for all of us!


edit on 1-1-2011 by Archangelelijah because: Added info




posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 02:26 AM
link   
reply to post by dontreally
 


Ugghh... Romans did not create Christianity, they bastardized it, and inserted their own doctrines through "tradition". They kept the populace ignorant of the true message of Christ and let them know just enough to get them mad at Jews (i.e. "they killed our Christ!"). The texts are far older than the time when Christianity was being bastardized, however and have remained to guide the remnant towards the teachings of Ya'hshuah. All of these supposed Pagan parallels to Christianity are extremely shallow. This hypothesis that Christianity is a hodgepodge of Zoroastrianism, Mithraism (Justin Martyr accused them of copying us actually), Gnosticism, and Buddhism is decades old and a debunked minority position.

Many people believe that when Ya'hshuah said "But in vain they do worship me, teaching [for] doctrines the commandments of men" he was speaking prophetically of the Roman Church... maybe, it can certainly be applied, but he was speaking to the Pharisees who are the ancestors of Rabbinic Judaism. He is speaking of the Oral Torah which would later become known as the Talmud. The Oral Torah is the traditions of men, not the recorded word of YHWH. The Pharisees clung to this tradition, because the Sadduccees were using the Torah to refute claims of the ressurrection. Ya'hshuah later shows that the Torah is sufficient to support the doctrine of the Ressurrection when he says "And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err". He refuted the Sadducees without having to resort to the word of man. You can see now why Ya'hshuah was opposed to the doctrines of men. The Talmud is as you admitted, a momentous collection of 80 volumes. Within you find wisdom, yes, but between conflicting ideas, derogatory references to Ya'hshuah, confusing ideas, justifications of pedophilia, and racism. The Oral Torah is not the words of the prophets and Rabbinic Judaism has been carrying it's wisdom and horrendous faults since Babylon. Perhaps this is corrupting your ideology? Look at what Maimonides' expectation of the Messiah is: "And if a king shall arise from among the House of David, studying Torah and occupied with commandments like his father David, according to the written and oral Torah, and he will impel all of Israel to follow it and to strengthen breaches in its observance, and will fight Hashem's [God's] wars, this one is to be treated as if he were the anointed one." First of all there is no mention of the Oral Torah in the written Torah and the Oral Torah didn't even exist when David was alive. Also, isn't the Messiah supposed to bring a message of peace? Aren't soldiers supposed to put their swords in pruning hooks?

Furthermore, how can you possibly criticize the supposed Pagan beliefs of Christianity and the Trinity and stand behind the Kaballah? As an Orthodox Jew, whose name escapes me, once said "Those who teach Kabbalah are worse than the Christians, for they divide God into ten!". Oh and if you are about to justify this by saying, "it's ten natures in one will" then you have arrived at the Church Fathers' explanation of the Trinity. Then there is the doctrine of reincarnation which is an obvious pagan influence.

There is no duality in Christianity. Duality implies equality and Revelations makes it very clear that the Beast cannot hope to win against YHWH. Yet you have perfect duality in Kabbalah with the Sephiroth and it's equal and opposite Sitra Achra. Anyways the concept of fallen angels is far older than Christianity, the Dead Sea Scrolls proved that it was a common belief at the time.

Where are your Prophets? Where has Rabbinic Judaism gone in the last 2,000 years? Christianity has spread the Torah and NT to billions of people and some of these people even observe the laws of Moses (Messianic Jews). Meanwhile, Rabbinic Judaism weakens, adherants fall for secular Restoration movements, and the Karaite Jews who follow ancient tradition alone are persecuted by their brethren. Isaiah said the Messiah would not be as the Jews expected and he would be largely rejected. Ya'hshuah came, spread the word of God, "strengthened breaches in observance", never raised a hand against anyone, and died altruistically for the atonement of our sins. The Jews thought Ya'hshuah was a deciever and a test, but followed many other Messiah claimants, many of whom lead their followers to destruction.

If you don't accept the Messiah, fine, adhere to the Torah. He will come again and the Jews will recognize Him this time.
edit on 2-1-2011 by kallisti36 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 12:23 PM
link   
reply to post by kallisti36
 





Justin Martyr accused them of copying us actually


Oh yes. Satan 'mocked' christianity by creating religions before it that resembled it. Yes. What a very logical and intelligent thing to believe. G-d forbid you actually think their myths contained a theological interpretation (which it did!!).

This is why i emphasized towards the end of my post "only those who understand cornerstone Greek Texts like Hesiods theogony and Homers Illiad appreciate the theological kinship between the pagan greeks and the christians. Zoroastrianism btw is an exact parallel of christianity. It is actually quite amazing how alike both traditions are. Both put a heavy emphasis on duality - Ormuzd vs. Ahriman, G-d/Jesus Vs. Satan. Both speak of the ressurection in the exact same context (as opposed to Judaism, which has a completely different understanding of Moshiach.) In this way, it is very apposite that 3 persian magi visited Jesus upon his birth. It was THERE tradition he was fullfilling - not the Jews. Also, the Rabbinic sages note that when Abraham sent Katurah and her children off to the east, the 'presents' he gave to them were occult/spiritual knowledge. Thus, Christianity recyled this motif by 3 zoroastrian mystics 'returning' the presents or offering their own. Thus, the 3 gifts are symbols for an esoteric doctrine.




debunked minority position.


It is a minority position because christians cant bear the emotional strain of logically arriving at the fact that christianity is a hybrid of pagan/jewish influences. Debunked? No.. It will never be debunked, because it is true.




justifications of pedophilia, and racism


You really are stupid if you think Rabbinic Judaism or the Talmud justifies pedophilia. Again. And yet again, you messianic "jews" (youre not the first one ive butted heads with) need this thought rammed through your head, its ALLEGORY. METAPHORICAL. The Talmud is speaking in METAPHOR. The Talmud almost always uses metaphor and simile to make its point, which is why it is such a thrilling intellectual endeavor. Theres also much Kabbalah in the Talmud (that is, metaphorical allusion to metaphysical ideas)



PLEASE read this so you can understand the nature of Talmudic dialectic.


The Accusation

Yebhamot 11b: "Sexual intercourse with a little girl is permitted if she is three years of age."



The accusation here is quite nefarious. It implies that Judaism permits pedophilia, has no respect for women, and generally advocates loose sexual morals. To those familiar with the Talmud, this claim is patently ridiculous. However, the majority of people — particularly those making this claim — know little to nothing about the Talmud, its contents, or its methodology. On our website The Real Truth About The Talmud, we elaborate on these issues. However, for now, we will focus on the accusation at hand. It is, in fact, easily verified as being incorrect.

The Text

Talmud Ketuvot 11b (The citation mentioned is evidently in error. Talmud Yevamot 11b has no relevant passage)


Rav Yehudah said in the name of Rav: A male child who has relations with a female adult causes her to be like one who was injured with a stick... Rava said: This is what was meant - an adult male who has relations with a female child has not done anything because less than this [three years old] is like sticking a finger into an eyeball.



While those unused to these Talmudic discussions might be taken aback by the use of euphemisms, the discussion here relates to the dowry for virgins and non-virgins. It has nothing to do with what acts are allowed, encouraged, forbidden, or discouraged. It is, indeed, ironic that this passage has been manipulated from its original context of a financial discussion into one of a religious discussion. While there are numerous talmudic passages of a religious nature, this one discusses dowries and not forbidden and permitted relations!

The Talmud relates that a virgin is entitled a higher dowry. While the tell-tale sign of virginity is the release of blood due to the breaking of the hymen on the wedding night, there are occasions when the hymen has already been broken such as when the woman suffered an injury. The Talmud here quotes Rav Yehuda in the name of Rav that a sexual act with a male minor is not considered to be a loss of virginity because one of the participants is not fully active. While the female's hymen may have been broken, she has not engaged in what can be classified as a sexual act (although it is certainly child abuse).

The Talmud continues and quotes Rava as saying that a sexual act between a male adult and a female under the age of three is also not considered a loss of virginity (although it is child abuse). Since the girl is too young for her hymen to be broken, she is still considered a virgin.

Nowhere is the Talmud permitting such behavior. Sex outside of a marriage is strictly forbidden (Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Ishut 1:4, Hilchot Na'arah Betulah 2:17; Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 26:1, 177:5) as is this obvious case of child abuse. The Talmud is only discussing ex post facto what would happen if such a case arose.

That non-marital sexual relations is prohibited is stated explicitly by Maimonides in the following passage from his ground-breaking legal code Mishneh Torah:

Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Ishut 1:4



Whoever has licentious relations with a woman without marriage bonds is lashed by biblical mandate.



The claim that the Talmud, or normative Judaism, permits sexual relations with a minor is almost entirely incorrect. The slight truth in it is that, in certain societies in history, people were sometimes married as young as ten. While this was most recently done in Czarist Russia in order to avoid being drafted into the Czar's army (which was made especially difficult for Jews), it is not currently done. However, even in that case, marriage is required before having sexual relations. Judaism as a religion prohibits sexual relations, indeed even minor touching such as holding hands, outside of marriage.

It is certainly true that there are individual Jews who do not follow the teaching of the Talmud. That is their personal choice, just like many Catholics choose to use birth control and have premarital relations despite their religion's teaching against it. This does not mean that Catholicism permits premarital relations and it does not mean that Judaism (and the Talmud) does either. The personal choices of people whether to follow completely their religion does not reflect on what their religion teaches. Similarly, the fact that certain Muslims drink alcohol and frequent prostitutes does not mean that their religion permits it. It means that these individuals choose to defy their religion.

We leave it to others to deduce why some people would make baseless accusations against the Talmud and, by implication, Judaism and Jews.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 12:24 PM
link   
And if you have the time, check out this site.

www.angelfire.com...



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by dontreally
 


Fair enough. I take issue with the Talmud in it being the doctrine of men and having influenced Jewish thought for a millenia. I believe it hobbles hermetics and is a huge reason why Jews don't accept Ya'hshuah. Jews at the time of Ya'hshuah were much more open to the prospect of him being the Messiah and yet today even proposing that he is the messiah brings you to an obstinate wall. I suggest you check out Rabbi Sitchin Perlmutter (not a messianic jew), if you believe Ya'hshuah is a pagan messiah and don't want anything to do with supposed pagan influences.

I disagree with your stances on Christianity. I've done my research, I've read pagan mythology, I've read Homer, I've studied Zoroastrianism, and any comparison to Christianity is skin deep. No religion I've ever come across even comes close to the core spirit of Christianity.

I don't really want to continue this argument. I don't like "butting heads" with Jews, it accomplishes nothing. There are enough people arrayed against Christianity and Judaism without them turning on each other.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 03:07 PM
link   
Why don't we try to step out of the "religious box" and look at this Satan thing from a different angle. Realize that the bible was written in an age where free thought was considered Heresy. A time where the writings of a few men litterally dominated the spiritual ideals and beliefs of the world.

Logic had no place in this time....Now consider the idea of the "fallen angel"... Gods favorite most beautiful angel decided to rebel against him because of pride. Pride is a human condition, and thinking that an angel would be driven by a human condition isn't logical. If angels exist they are beings that are far beyond human emotions or even the so called "sins" that plague us. The bible was writen by man, not by God. So the writings are also subject to human inturpretations. For instance the "Great Flood" was thought by many to be a world wide flood, but its known now that it was a regional flood. Or even the exodus where moses parted the sea...its known now that the area that he crossed could be litterally parted with the right wind. Now im not saying it wasn't an act of God but im saying its logical, it could actually happen.

Consider the idea that Satan isn't a demon trying to end the human race or even enslave us (as if we arn't already) Lucifer is the "opposer' or the "adversary"...he isn't against God. This is human inturpretation and again illogical. How does one challenge the power of the creator, especially a being that must be intelligent beyond anything imaginable by human minds.

Even with the example where he tried to tempt jesus in the wilderness, he was simply doing his job. The very idea that an angel would attempt to overthrow the one who created him is just rediculous. The fact is (imo) lucifer works with God to tempt humans to not follow their spiritual path. To believe in materialism, selfishness, greed and hatered, because without faith and knowledge of the spirit theres no progression. IF theres no progression in your spiritual development you'll be comming back for another round in the cycle of reincarnation because you haven't learned your lessons.

Satan isn't against God hes one of his greatest allies! He's definately not on our side, but he doesn't want us to fail! His job is to make it as hard as possible to learn our lessons in this life. To tempt us to turn from God, and even believe there is no God, but just like any other angel he loves us and wants us to pass our tests.

So again human inturpretation from hundreds of years ago has no logical basis. People lived in fear of God and under extreme pressure from the so called "religious authorities" back when the bible was written. Anyone who went against what the churches said was true was killed. So you didn't have a choice in what you believe, at that point anything the head of the church said had to be true regardless of how logical it might have been.

Personally i find it hilarious that anyone would even consider an angel trying to overthrow God. It makes no sense what so ever. IF he created all that exists, how could an angel try to challenge him.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon
Personally i find it hilarious that anyone would even consider an angel trying to overthrow God. It makes no sense what so ever. IF he created all that exists, how could an angel try to challenge him.

As far as I can tell, you are responding to the title of the thread, and not to the content of the OP.
I don't think you've actually read the OP, which has nothing to do with the "rebellion against God" myth which you're criticising.
(Yes, I quoted Milton at the beginning. That was by way of introducing the fact that I was presenting a completely different view)



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 03:34 PM
link   
Actually you're right...

I assumed this thread was exactly how it sounded in the title.... Im used to reponding to threads like this in an attempt to put a logical spin on whats in the bible


I appoligise...
edit on 2-1-2011 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 

Apology accepted.
You're by no means the first person to do this on my Revelation threads (e.g. see JakiusFogg on the first page of this one), which is why I could recognise the phenomenon so quickly.
Your penance is to read the whole series.
Some people think they're worth reading.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 03:43 PM
link   
So this post was actually a critique on the story of revelations...

Perhaps i should have started a new thread...

Which area would i post this in, i haven't quite figured out where to start a post like this....its not really a conspiracy, its more of a logical opinion

Edited: Nevermind i found it
edit on 2-1-2011 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 

There's a forum for purely "religious" topics in the "off-topic" half of the site.
On the "forums" page, icons for those forums are near the bottom of the page.
Perhaps quicker- click on the "off-topic" tag in Recent Posts, and then get onto the "Religion and Theology" forum via one of the threads listed as from that forum.





edit on 2-1-2011 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by kallisti36
 





"Those who teach Kabbalah are worse than the Christians, for they divide God into ten!". Oh and if you are about to justify this by saying, "it's ten natures in one will" then you have arrived at the Church Fathers' explanation of the Trinity. Then there is the doctrine of reincarnation which is an obvious pagan influence.


Orthodox Jews who reject the study of kabbalah are often not very educated Jews, and they are in the vast minority.

10 is a special number. G-d made 10 statements when he created the world, gave ten commandments. 10 is seen as the completion of all physical reality. G-d is one and there is no doubt about it. However, those who havent studied other religions (i have, again, im not a Jew) dont quite understand why the 10 sefirot to amount to polytheism(in the orthodox Jewish context) whereas religions like hinduism/tibetan buddhism and ancient pagan religion was completely idolatrous and wrong. The issue is context. For instance, one can easily argue that G-d is polytheistic because this world is pluralistic; theres an endless variety of phenomena and thinhs in general. Plurality exists. Thus, because plurality exists, plurality must be apart of G-ds essential unity.

The 10 sefirot are 10 spiritual attributes that make up G-ds "image". When created the world he gave it a spiritual form. This form however is not to be worshipped, and it isnt in Rabbinic Judaism. Take for instance, Chesed. The Greek deified Chesed as 'jupiter'. More or less, this archetype was worshipped by them. Hence "jovial" (from Jove , another name for Jupiter). jovial means 'happy and upbeat'. Chesed, means love or kindness or any expansive state. Jews worshipped G-d alone. Even after the promulgation of kabbalah, there is still no emphasis other than on G-ds essential unity. When we talk of his attributes its understood that they are one whole. albeit, made up of different parts. Just as we have head, torso hands and legs, and phallus, we are still one essential whole (that is why our body is made in G-ds "image". Our body is the physical cystalization of the 10 sefirot).

Pagans separate and put their emphasis and focus on one aspect, thereby destroying the unity of G-d.




There is no duality in Christianity. Duality implies equality and Revelations makes it very clear that the Beast cannot hope to win against YHWH. Yet you have perfect duality in Kabbalah with the Sephiroth and it's equal and opposite Sitra Achra. Anyways the concept of fallen angels is far older than Christianity, the Dead Sea Scrolls proved that it was a common belief at the time.


So now you deny the existence of duality? Is there not a conscious mind and a physical observable reality? Is there not right, left, up, and down, forward and back? Everything is a matter of a dualism. without a duality we cant even think - that is, we need a self consciousness to "know".




Where are your Prophets? Where has Rabbinic Judaism gone in the last 2,000 years? Christianity has spread the Torah and NT to billions of people and some of these people even observe the laws of Moses (Messianic Jews). Meanwhile, Rabbinic Judaism weakens, adherants fall for secular Restoration movements, and the Karaite Jews who follow ancient tradition alone are persecuted by their brethren. Isaiah said the Messiah would not be as the Jews expected and he would be largely rejected. Ya'hshuah came, spread the word of God, "strengthened breaches in observance", never raised a hand against anyone, and died altruistically for the atonement of our sins. The Jews thought Ya'hshuah was a deciever and a test, but followed many other Messiah claimants, many of whom lead their followers to destruction.


Well i explained already that the obious success of christianity has been due to the Roman and holy Roman empire. If it werent for their political influence, christianity wouldnt have spread.

And as for 'where have Jews been". Have you not heard of the Ba'al Teshuva movement? More and more Jews return to Judaism everyday. Also, 70% of Israeli 2nd Graders are Haredi, indicating that the future israel will most likely be a religious state, with the Law of Moses as state Law (this being an indication of the messianic times were living in).




He will come again and the Jews will recognize Him this time.


Or, to quote Jeremiah the worlds christians will realize “Our fathers have inherited nothing but lies, worthless things in which there is no profit.".

Or the much more explicit "In the future days, there will be ten people from each of the nations of the world that will hold on to the corner of the garment of one Jewish person and they will say "let us go with you, for we have heard that G-d is with you".

Of course.. youll say "Jews" means everything but Jews and Judaism, which it both explicitly and simply refers to.

Also. Im not a Jew. Im a gentile. Im what some call 'a noahide', or a bnei noach.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by kallisti36
 


Frankly i dont really believe that youve studied pagan thought. Reading mythology doesnt mean understanding the esoteric theology of it. You actually have to dig into the material, read other explanatory materials to understand the message. Id recommend reading up on Joseph Campbell, or CG Jung as a good place to start.

I will look up this Rabbi if you read some articles of prof Eugene Narret at Israelendtimes.com. Heres a pithy article on the noahide laws as delinated in Talmud noahidenations.com...:noahide-laws-laws-enabling-humanity-pt-1&catid=88888945:noah ide-laws&Itemid=88989006

Id like to make clear that i have no antipathy towards christians. I understand that we are on the same side. However, i do not like this messianic Jew movement and im actually quite close with a man who deals with people just like you. Its called JewsForJudaism and it essentially deals with the conniving conversion methods of christians who dedicate themselves to converting Jews (a practice Jews have the respect not to reciprocate).

When i talk with christians i do not shove Jewish beliefs down their throats. I take it they already have them, since christianity is a branch from Judaism. What i find frustrating is that i cant talk about G-d with them without them massaging Jesus and Christ into the conversation. Its a virtual worship of the man. G-d is all thats needed and as the Torah emphasizes "you saw no form" - that is, G-d has no visual form. Even the human is made only in his 'image'. G-d is ineffable and it is only proper to speak of G-d and not any earthly Tzaddik. Of course, we can look to others as great examples of service to G-d, but should be careful that youre adulation for them is only as a way to praise G-d. Not them inthemselves or them to the point where G-d is put in the background.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 08:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by DISRAELI

There's a frequently quoted source in Isaiah ch14 v12;
"How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, son of Dawn"- traditionally quoted in the "Lucifer, son of the morning" translation.

[edit on 30-5-2010 by DISRAELI]


Jesus called himself the "Morning Star" in Revelations 22:16.

That would make him Lucifer!

I am wondering how you managed to miss that with all of your "careful study".



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 11:12 PM
link   
reply to post by dontreally
 


I misspelled the Rabbi's name it's Simcha Perlmutter and you will often find him on Youtube as "Pearlmutter".
Anyways, I'm not a Messianic Jew, I just like to call YHWH/Ya'hshuah by his real name. I've considered it, but they seem to be hung up on making their practices as Jewish as possible (to convert Jews probably), meaning they treat the NT like an after thought and hardly acknowledge Paul. I've also considered Eastern Orthodoxy, but they are so steeped in Iconography (how is that not idolatry?) I'm retiscent to look into them. I also use a number of Biblical texts (nothing gnostic, just some apocrypha that few people use) that are unused by all but the Ethiopian Orthodox and Coptic churches. All I know is that I am a Christian. I find Ya'hshuah's teachings to be the best. I also like Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, and Elijah, but Ya'hshuah surpasses them on so many levels and really reaches out to me. I love the Jewish people, their traditions and stories had alot of influence on my life, but Christianity is where I belong.



posted on Jan, 3 2011 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by kallisti36
 


Thats fine with me


You seem to have a solid head on your shoulders - very Jewishesque in that you resist the influence of idolatrous practices like making statues in commemoration to saints (which in my book is the exact same thing as the hindu or buddhist practice. Catholics can argue differetly all they like, the fact is; hindu statues are visual represenations of archetypal concepts, and likewise, saints are 'patrons' of certain things; or concepts. Theyve simply been deified in this capacity and according to Torah that is absolutely 100% idolatry and a tacit indication of polytheism) and a toned down attitude about Jesus.

I like those christians who emphasize G-d more than they do Jesus. I can tolerate him being looked at as a prophet, as an Elijah or a Joshua, but theres definitely a point where Jesus just stands in front of G-d like the moon blocks the light of the sun. It becomes an entirely different thing. Thats what the bible means and this is explained in kabbalah, when it talks about idolatry. We are spiritual creatures. Our minds are our souls (or apart of it) and therefore our thoughts are a form of action relative to G-d. The Torah emphasizes over and over again that YHWH is Elohim. In Gematria (numerical value) Elohim has the same value as HaTeva(nature). Meaning, G-d is present in nature through the diminishing influence of the name Elohim. But the point is that we should realize this and look past the garb and see the king who stands behind it. When we put a man - Jesus, infront of us when talking about G-d, we have put up a concept or idea in front of G-d, a thing G-d explicitly says in Torah not to do. Thats the point. A concept is a thing, and when referring to the majesty of G-d it is incumbant upon all people to sense only the omnipresence and omnipotence of the Holy One, without recourse to any intermediary (dont get me wrong, priests can help one in their serivce of G-d, but they arent necessarily an intermediary. One can pray and confess his sins to G-d in prayer, though it is also a biblical practice to confess ones wrong doings before a good friend or a mentor - as this is spiritually helpful). Jesus when broken down into simple mechanical terms is a concept that is placed between G-d and man. That is apparently the idea (only through me can one access the father) and that is the simple reason why i rejected christianity, because i was born and raised a catholic and the whole idea just seemed very illogical to me.

But, that being said (and i hope you arent put off by my criticisms) I love all people who love G-d and who love the Torah and Jewish people. in general, i ltry to love all people, but those who embrace the same things i do obviously are closer to me, and when it coms to spirituality, christians and Jews are very close with each other. A side mention also to those G-d fearing moderate muslims. Theyre very good and loving people as well (they do exist, even if we dont hear too much of them).

Shalom.



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 04:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheTimeMachine
Jesus called himself the "Morning Star" in Revelations 22:16.
That would make him Lucifer!
I am wondering how you managed to miss that with all of your "careful study".

Nothing was "missed".
It was just irrelevant.
I was studying the word "Satan", and examining in what sense someone called "Satan" could be said to have "fallen".
The various meanings available for "Lucifer" and "Morning Star" were not relevant to that purpose.



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 12:31 AM
link   
reply to post by DISRAELI
 


Are you really saying it's not relevant that Jesus called himself the morning star, aka Lucifer, in Revelations 22:16?

You would think Jesus calling himself Lucifer would be of some importance, but not to you apparently.

Lucifer and Satan are one and the same thing to Christians, so of course Lucifer is relevant to a discussion of Satan. To say otherwise is ignorant.

You've been posting for many months about the NT and Revelations, but in all that time you never once mentioned this about Jesus.

It's a ground shaking revelation which you totally missed. But then again, many other people with far more knowledge of the Bible than you missed it as well.



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 12:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheTimeMachine
reply to post by DISRAELI
 


Are you really saying it's not relevant that Jesus called himself the morning star, aka Lucifer, in Revelations 22:16?

You would think Jesus calling himself Lucifer would be of some importance, but not to you apparently.


What makes you think that because it was written that Jesus called himself "the morning star" in Revelations, that he actually made that statement....

Revelations was written by a man, which like the rest of the bible was written by people inspired by God....not By God or anything close for that matter... Actually it was written 95-6 years after his death... Hardly a reliable sorce all things considered...

Hes not even the same John which was in the NT....Just another old man...."inspired" by God
edit on 7-1-2011 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 04:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheTimeMachine
Lucifer and Satan are one and the same thing to Christians, so of course Lucifer is relevant to a discussion of Satan. To say otherwise is ignorant.

It is a mistake to make broad sweeping statements. You mean "many Christians".
Just as many Christians assume that the Miltonic story of the fall of Satan "before the creation" is Biblical.
I'm aiming at what I hope is a more accurate understanding of the Biblical teachings.
So, yes, If I'm examining the word "Satan", the word "Lucifer" is not relevant.
Knew about your point already. Not interested.


You've been posting for many months about the NT and Revelations, but in all that time you never once mentioned this about Jesus.

You've been scouring every single word I've written, waiting to see if I was going to mention this point?
I'm honoured.
Also sympathetic-who set you this penance?






edit on 7-1-2011 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join