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.

 

Why is sorcery considered so bad by so many?

page: 5
13
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 01:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by undo

yet the prophets could see into the future via the intervention or interaction between themselves and spirit beings such as angels and so forth.

You beat me to it, by getting this in while I was editing my previous post.
I realised that my incomplete definition left me open to this argument, so I combined it with my previous definition of "appealing to powers that are not God". That clarifies the difference between the two situations.




posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 01:41 AM
link   
ever wonder why women were admonished to wear a veil? and why the ark of the covenant was hidden behind a veil? and why the muslims do hajj to touch a rock that looks like a woman's private parts (ever seen it?)? and why the shekkinah was originally referred to in the feminine?

a quote on the subject


English spelling of a grammatically feminine Hebrew language word that means the dwelling or settling, and is used to denote the dwelling or settling presence of God (cf. divine presence), especially in the Temple in Jerusalem.


en.wikipedia.org...

wouldn't it be a shocker if the real twist on all this is that all along, the big lie was that women are evil personified, that they should be hidden, told to be quiet and divested of their power, influence, opinion, and in many cases, their lives? and that the laws regarding sorcery were set to isolate women from the power source, in that men were told they could practice the "arts" but women can not. if a man practiced it, it was religion, following the priesthood or having wisdom. if a woman practiced it, she was a witch and a sorceress. perhaps the words themselves change when the gender changes.



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 01:43 AM
link   
So...let's take Harry Potter and those books. Are they evil? Because it "IS" a school of Wizardry etc etc etc. It is a work of fiction but does it promote scorcery and if so is that evil as well. Taken a step further, is J. K Rowlings Evil? Is her publisher? Are those who read it being plied by the Devil?

My thoughts are no..these books are not evil and that scorcery in general is not evil. It is considered bad by so many because of organized religion.

But lets take this a step further and ask the question: Is scorcery real? Is it possible? Has it ever happened and can any one prove it to me or anyone else?

Let's play devils advocate so to speak and assume that scorcery is not real, therefore the question of "Why is something that isn't real, considered bad by so many?" answers itself quite completly I would think. Only a fool fears that which is not real.

If we consider that scorcery is real though, this changes things. For that I would need some type of proof and definition. As I don't know any real wizards and I know some very strange and odd people of every kind imaginable, I'm going to have to make the next statement.

Although I believe that anything is possible, I believe that I know enough people of the sort who would be scorcerers if it was possible to be one, and none of them are, that I'm going to have to say that there is no such thing or that if there are they were born that way and in such a minority and so secluded that it would be next to impossible for anyone to become one. Thus, if scorcery is evil, but the attainment of the status of scorcerer is impossible, why ask the question in the first place?



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 01:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by undo
the laws regarding sorcery were set to isolate women from the power source, in that men were told they could practice the "arts" but women can not.

I don't think the Old Testament tolerates male sorcerers any more than it tolerates female ones. I'm sure I could find passages in which sorcerers etc are described as "he", but I would need a little time to check.



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 01:48 AM
link   
reply to post by MikeboydUS
 


well as i've said before and will say again, if you do a bit of etymology research you will find that G_d is an english word, from a german word (gott) from a latin word from a greek word from a hebrew word. the real word is ELOHIYM or EL.

and the etymology of the real word is as follows

EL is
IL is
LIL is
EN.LIL

EN.LIL's name became the one size fits all, generic word for a "God" in mesopotamia.

michael s. heiser, phD hebrew and semitic studies, describes the entire process of what an elohiym is in his paper SO WHAT IS AN ELOHIYM?
www.thedivinecouncil.com...



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 01:53 AM
link   
reply to post by DISRAELI
 


my question was and still is, what if the word changes with the gender? if a woman does what a man does as far as prophecy, in the old testament, she's a witch or sorcerer. if a man does, he's a prophet. you see what i mean? it's only been since the advent of christianity that the topic has been fine tuned to the extent where male sorcery is hidden amongst the teachings of the secret societies.

i dunno. generalization and specification, these two things can easily be used to isolate out people, depending on race, gender and so on.



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 02:00 AM
link   
p.s. don't get me wrong on the topic of worship. i'm not saying we should go worship a tree or something. all i'm saying is: if a woman has a vision of spirit beings in the old testament, is she a prophet or a sorceress? deborah is about the only one mentioned that isn't called a sorceress, as if women simply could not be trusted with divine information.



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 02:06 AM
link   
reply to post by undo
 

In 2 Chronicles ch33 v6, we are told that king Manasseh (who was male, of course) practised soothsaying and augury and sorcery- that is, he did it himself, as well as having dealings with others (mediuma and wizards). This is all part of the criticism levelled against him.
Also the magicians and sorcerers and wise men consulted by Pharaoh in Exodus appear to be male- we're told that "all the men" threw down their rods in the competition with Moses.

I've just noticed that "burning his sons as an offering" is one of the sins attributed to Manasseh. Just as "anyone who burns his son or his daughter as an offering" is actually the first item in the Deuteronomy list (I didn't bother quoting it before). As though burning children in sacrifice was one of the common accompaniments of sorcery in the practice of the time.



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 02:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by undo
p.s. don't get me wrong on the topic of worship. i'm not saying we should go worship a tree or something. all i'm saying is: if a woman has a vision of spirit beings in the old testament, is she a prophet or a sorceress?

Apart from Deborah, there was also "Huldah the prophetess", who was consulted when the sacred book was found in the Temple in the reign of Josiah. 2 Kings ch22. So I think the issue is the source of the information, not the sex of the people doing it.



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 02:16 AM
link   
reply to post by DISRAELI
 


yes, that's an example where the sorcerer is someone the priesthood doesn't agree with, for whatever reason. so they have a wizard's duel, as it were. moses wins in his example, because he's channeling jehovah (who is himself, two different gods at the very least! and if we include the "shekkinah", three different gods). word usage and applying negative connotations to some words when directed at someone you disagree with, can befuddle the entire picture.

jehovah is from the roots:

hayah (see Ea (enki) pronounced Ayah)
hava (see Enlil, to breathe (lil means air, breath, sky)

i mean, we are talking about guys who rolled dice in some cases, to predict the future.



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 02:17 AM
link   
reply to post by DISRAELI
 


any other examples? cause that's news to me. in fact, i was never taught about deborah either. had to learn about her while discussing why it's crazy to say women should not be allowed to talk in the church.



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 02:21 AM
link   
reply to post by undo
 

Luke ch2 v36. "There was a prophetess Anna" in the temple when the child Jesus was taken there.



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 02:23 AM
link   
reply to post by DISRAELI
 


so why does paul say women should not be allowed to speak in the church? why were women not allowed on the main floor of the synagogue?



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 02:29 AM
link   
addendum: remember, i don't believe the word sorcery is correctly applied in many of these cases. for example, sorcery is not idolatry. two different things. so worshipping other gods and delivering their messages, is not sorcery, it's idolatry. sorcery is the practice of ingesting hallucinogenic drugs during a sacred rite, in order to "see into the spirit realm", which could be argued is simply a hallucination anyway.



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 02:33 AM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


And I still say En(Lord of the) Lil(Loft) isn't El.

El and En-Lil's creator Anu are both Deus Absconditus.

Elohim and Annunaki in the same way are the Sons of the Deus Absconditus.

En-Lil is merely the chief of the gods who rules from his mountain Kur-gal, serving as a nexus between Anu and earth, just like Baal-Hadad with Sapan in Canaanite myth.



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 02:38 AM
link   
reply to post by undo
 

I'm not going to stand up and defend Paul's comment.
I've got a commentary in front of me which argues that the passage was an "interpolation" (I.e. that Paul didn't write it).
Either way, it's in conformity with the way social custom had developed at the time the New Testament was being put together.
All I'm saying is that this newer social custom was not the original and fundamental reason for rejecting sorcery.

By the way, digging into my commentary's reasons for arguing that Paul did not write that comment, I see they include the point that ch11 of the same letter takes it for granted that women will be both praying and prophesying in church.



[edit on 4-7-2010 by DISRAELI]



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 02:44 AM
link   
reply to post by MikeboydUS
 


it isn't myth. they are talking about the same gods. they just have their own spin on it. in fact, it is my belief pretty much every belief system on this planet started out referencing the same group of gods.

and yes, enlil is el, who is from the elohiym. in histories that predate the written biblical text, enlil is in the role of jehovah and so is enki.


LORD OF THE AIR, BREATH, SKY, STORMS = Enlil. It makes sense that the electrical properties of the ark were connected with Enlil. Lightning flashing from the east to the west, etc.

LORD OF THE WATER, EARTH = Enki.

Bab-ILU is Bab-EL, means Gate of the God(s). There's even more specific data but that should suffice for now

ILU is in enlil's etymology.

enlil
lil
il (ilu, ilah)
el
al



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 02:54 AM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


I'm in a similar boat in the sense, they are based on the same archtypes and there are consistent themes amongs myths around the world.

I think the issue here with your line of thought is semantics and language.

I'm looking at consistent themes and archtypes and your looking at linguistics.

The problem with that is humans and human languages are fallible.

The themes and archtypes are consistent regardless of semantics or linguistics.

I have been looking at Egyptian myth recently and it is full of that kind of nonsense. Four different cities, dynasties over thousands of years, two kingdoms and it is entirely convoluted until you start looking at themes and archetypes instead of names.

[edit on 4/7/10 by MikeboydUS]



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 02:58 AM
link   
reply to post by MikeboydUS
 


and if you study the etymology of the names, you'll eventually go right back to the original mesopotamian gods. i did an etymology on ANU for example, and found him in egypt under the guise of AMEN.



posted on Jul, 4 2010 @ 03:04 AM
link   
i did some research on why this guy's chart (see below)

EnLIL = god

LIL (drop gender prefix)

ILAH=god (semitic, arabic)

AL'ILAH=the god (add "the")

AL'LAH=the god (contract the semitic form)

didn't include EL. i studied and studied, and realized he was wrong and that EL is in there too, right between ILAH and AL'ILAH



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join