Can I?

page: 9
6
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 1 2012 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
How do I find out who I am?


My answer: introspection.




posted on Aug, 1 2012 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 


And I shall respond with another question: "What classifies as introspection?"

Is it thoughts about a particular subject, such as personal faults, past experiences in life, troubles of the day? What shall I exactly inspect about myself? This is always a big problem I have during my meditations. I do a lot of thinking during that time, and focusing my mind power on enhancing my mind and my body. However I worry that I may or may not be asking myself the right questions and thoughts during this time.

Other times I'll think about odd things like how did we know to name numbers like one, one, how did we know what to name letters.

Like how did we get the name A for A? I don't know if I'm making sense.

Any answers or replies are appreciated.
edit on 1-8-2012 by VeritasAequitas because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 1 2012 @ 08:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
However, here is my question: How do I find out who I am?

I'm not as eloquent as Augustus, but basically, he got it with "introspection". Only one can define who they are. You must look at yourself and decide who you are, and where you want to be.



posted on Aug, 1 2012 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
Is it thoughts about a particular subject, such as personal faults, past experiences in life, troubles of the day?


Yes, yes, and yes, and than some. I hate to sound vague but only you can help you find you.

You made find other subjects that are of value to you or additional avenues of thought that motivate you but they may or may not rise to the forefront at the same time or even quickly.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 02:38 AM
link   
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 


Much thanks for the clarification; have a star.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
You need to have a direct translation of the Aramaic and Hebrew texts and you will see that there is no 'Devil' mentioned. The Hewbrew texts alone have multiple entities, both supernatural and human, that can be corrolated to the modern concept of Satan. The modern concept of Satan is purely a Christian one and is the reason why I say it is a fictitious entity.


Wait a minute.If you really believe that the translations we use now are wrong then how come you didn't say that from the very beginning when i asked you "how do you know satan doesn't exist"? I mean,if it was me believing that i definitely wouldn't bother mentioning anything else. If i'd be the one thinking that the translations are wrong,using them to talk about any similarities between satan and various mythological entities would be completely unnecessary.
I also don't understand why you mention a part of the Old Testament (about Job) while right before that you said that the translations are wrong.

Anyway,about what you said here:



The being in Job is not the ruler of Hell but an entity charged to tempt human beings and report back to God. He reports to God and is therefore not a fallen angel and does not fit the contemporary view of the Devil.


I'm afraid you're way off.When people presented themselves before God,satan went along with them.Then God said this: Job 1:7 The LORD said to Satan, "Whence have you come?" Satan answered the LORD, "From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking up and down on it." (i underlined the part i was talking about)
If satan was working for God then God wouldn't ask him that,he'd already know that.
Also we read this: Job 1:8 And the LORD said to Satan, "Have you considered my servant Job, that there is none like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, who fears God and turns away from evil?" It's crystal clear here that God is 100% satisfied with Job. It's satan who claims that Job isn't that good and worthy as we read here: Job 1:11 But put forth thy hand now, and touch all that he has, and he will curse thee to thy face."
I wouldn't just say that he "fits the bill",i'd say this is the usual devil we know and despise. By the way,you said satan reports back to God. Could you pin-point it for me? I can't find it.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Oceanborn
Wait a minute.If you really believe that the translations we use now are wrong then how come you didn't say that from the very beginning when i asked you "how do you know satan doesn't exist"? I mean,if it was me believing that i definitely wouldn't bother mentioning anything else. If i'd be the one thinking that the translations are wrong,using them to talk about any similarities between satan and various mythological entities would be completely unnecessary.


I thought it would be clear by my saying it was an amalgam of others, you now, as in a mash-up. Mistranslation is a part, misappropriation is a part, etc, etc. It is not just one thing.


I'm afraid you're way off.When people presented themselves before God,satan went along with them.
I wouldn't just say that he "fits the bill",i'd say this is the usual devil we know and despise. By the way,you said satan reports back to God. Could you pin-point it for me? I can't find it.


In the passage you quoted. If Satan is a fallen angel how exactly does he just saunter up to God and strike up a deal to ruin Job's life to prove a point to God? He obviously did not sneak in, being that God is ominscienent and all, so what, he was fallen, but God let him 'un-fall' so Satan, the Devil, ruler of Hell, could pop back in and screw with God by testing Job? My further question to you; after Job is deprived of his children and livestock is further permission later asked to now torment his body? Does someone reapproach God at this point? Hint, Job 2:1.

Additionally, when the Book of Job refers to the 'sons of God' they are not refering to people but more a council of supernatural beings. Thus his ability to come and go before God and this also affords him the opportunity to test Job.

The being in the Job myth is not the contemporary Satan and must be viewed in the context of the original language, which the King James is most certainly not. The literal Hebrew translation for that passage is 'ha-satan', 'the accuser' (lower case) not The Accuser (Satan, proper name).



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
I thought it would be clear by my saying it was an amalgam of others, you now, as in a mash-up. Mistranslation is a part, misappropriation is a part, etc, etc. It is not just one thing.


I understand that you meant a mash-up. The way you said it though made it seem like you meant it stands for the original,non-translated scripts too. My bad.
You're saying that they're mistranslated. Then how come they haven't corrected them until this very day?





In the passage you quoted. If Satan is a fallen angel how exactly does he just saunter up to God and strike up a deal to ruin Job's life to prove a point to God? He obviously did not sneak in, being that God is ominscienent and all, so what, he was fallen, but God let him 'un-fall' so Satan, the Devil, ruler of Hell, could pop back in and screw with God by testing Job?


He didn't un-fall in any way.He fell on earth and there he was.He just walked along with the people who went to present themselves to God.





My further question to you; after Job is deprived of his children and livestock is further permission later asked to now torment his body? Does someone reapproach God at this point? Hint, Job 2:1.


Once again we read this: Jon 2:2 And the LORD said to Satan, "Whence have you come?" Satan answered the LORD, "From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking up and down on it."
Once again God does not know satan's whereabouts (sp?) which shows that satan isn't connected with God.
It's not the way you say it. Once again we see God being satisfied with Job here: Job 2:3 And the LORD said to Satan, "Have you considered my servant Job, that there is none like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, who fears God and turns away from evil? He still holds fast his integrity, although you moved me against him, to destroy him without cause." He's not only,once again, completely satisfied but He's telling satan that his accusations were wrong,Job is indeed worthy. Then,satan isn't asking for a "permission",he's not asking of anything. Once again he accuses Job that he's not worthy which we can read here: Job 2:5 But put forth thy hand now, and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse thee to thy face."

EDIT: I forgot something.
You said this:



Additionally, when the Book of Job refers to the 'sons of God' they are not refering to people but more a council of supernatural beings. Thus his ability to come and go before God and this also affords him the opportunity to test Job.


How do you know that? The way i see it they're ordinary human beings.
edit on 2-8-2012 by Oceanborn because: To add.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Oceanborn
Then how come they haven't corrected them until this very day?


Why should they? Do you think anyone really cares?


He didn't un-fall in any way.He fell on earth and there he was.He just walked along with the people who went to present themselves to God.


No, they were not people. According to Rabinical Scholars the original Hebrew refers to a type of 'divine council'.


Once again we read this: Jon 2:2 And the LORD said to Satan, "Whence have you come?" Satan answered the LORD, "From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking up and down on it."


This is irrelevant. Ha-satan returns after depriving Job of his livestock and children to get further permission from God. He does so in person, hence he is reporting that the previous trials he inflicted on Job were not enought to dissuade Job from his faith in God. God is then one permitting ha-satan to do this to Job, he could not have done this without God's say so.


Once again God does not know satan's whereabouts (sp?) which shows that satan isn't connected with God.


If God is omniscienent, omnipresent and omnipotent than how could he possibly not know ha-satan's whereabouts?


Then,satan isn't asking for a "permission",he's not asking of anything. Once again he accuses Job that he's not worthy which we can read here: Job 2:5 But put forth thy hand now, and touch his bone and his flesh, and he will curse thee to thy face."


And what happens in Job 2:6? God gives ha-satan the permission to punish Job's body, but spare his life.


How do you know that? The way i see it they're ordinary human beings.


It stems from the Classical Antiquity translation of the phrase:


The Book of Enoch and the Book of Jubilees refer to the Watchers who are paralleled to the "sons of God" in Genesis 6.[21] The Epistle of Barnabas is considered by some to acknowledge the Enochian version.

Since Classical antiquity, Biblical expositors such as Justin Martyr, Eusebius, Clement of Alexandria, Origen and Commodianus have held the view that the "sons of God" in Genesis 6:1-4 were fallen angels who engaged in unnatural union with human women, resulting in the begetting of the Nephilim. Modern Christians have argued against this view by reasoning on Jesus' comment in Matthew 22:30 that angels do not marry. source



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by Oceanborn
Then how come they haven't corrected them until this very day?


Why should they? Do you think anyone really cares?


Yes,i do. If the scripts were mistranslated then they'd care because of their beliefs. If we want to make extreme assumptions based on nothing and say that not even a single one of them believes then they'd care for the people who do believe. If we'll again go to the extreme and claim not a single one of them cares for the people then they'd care for the recognition they'd get by being the ones to correct the scripts. If again we'll be extreme and say not a single one of them cares for recognition then they'd care for the money (by asking funds for the correction of the scripts etc).
One way or the other they'd care.




No, they were not people. According to Rabinical Scholars the original Hebrew refers to a type of 'divine council'.


I saw also your last quote and link and you're right. I also re-read Job today and i realised how bad the connection that i made was. Sorry about that.





If God is omniscienent, omnipresent and omnipotent than how could he possibly not know ha-satan's whereabouts?


I rushed my post and i expressed myself poorly. What i wanted to say was that God asked a question that only someone who doesn't know somebody else's whereabouts would ask. So why did he make such a question? To show that satan is not under his commands. That's why me quoting Job 2:2 isn't irrelevant. It makes clear that satan isn't working for God.





Ha-satan returns after depriving Job of his livestock and children to get further permission from God. He does so in person, hence he is reporting that the previous trials he inflicted on Job were not enought to dissuade Job from his faith in God. God is then one permitting ha-satan to do this to Job, he could not have done this without God's say so.


Appearing in person anywhere,in front of anyone is not by any means a report of any kind. We don't see satan reporting anything since he's not saying or writing anything.
In a previous post of mine i asked you to point out to me where satan reports to God and you gave me Job 2:1. I thought that you made a mistake and meant Job 2 in its entirety but now i realise it wasn't a mistake. This is Job 2:1 Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came among them to present himself before the LORD . Where is satan reporting anything? Noone is saying or writing down anything (or delivering something allready written).

You're right that God is giving permission to satan to trouble Job but that's not God's idea or mission by any means.





And what happens in Job 2:6? God gives ha-satan the permission to punish Job's body, but spare his life.


Yes,God gives his permission because satan claimed that Job is not all the things God says he is and he can prove it. Before that we see God going ahead and,after reminding to satan Job's virtues,pretty much saying to him "See?You were wrong about Job.": "Have you considered my servant Job, that there is none like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, who fears God and turns away from evil? He still holds fast his integrity, although you moved me against him, to destroy him without cause."



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 08:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Oceanborn
Yes,i do. If the scripts were mistranslated then they'd care because of their beliefs.


I sure you can see that by a quick internet search that numerous mistranslations abound. This tool is available to many but it does not seem to be a factor. My opinion is people do not want to have their beliefs called into question so they instead opt to remain purposefully ignorant.


I saw also your last quote and link and you're right. I also re-read Job today and i realised how bad the connection that i made was. Sorry about that.


No worries.


I rushed my post and i expressed myself poorly. What i wanted to say was that God asked a question that only someone who doesn't know somebody else's whereabouts would ask. So why did he make such a question?


How can anyone know? Maybe because that Old Testament God is a prick and he justed wanted to be passive agressive and ask a question he obviously already knows the answer to because he is omniscient.


Appearing in person anywhere,in front of anyone is not by any means a report of any kind. We don't see satan reporting anything since he's not saying or writing anything.
In a previous post of mine i asked you to point out to me where satan reports to God and you gave me Job 2:1. I thought that you made a mistake and meant Job 2 in its entirety but now i realise it wasn't a mistake. This is Job 2:1 Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came among them to present himself before the LORD . Where is satan reporting anything? Noone is saying or writing down anything (or delivering something allready written).


You do not need to say or write something to 'report' to someone. If I say to you, 'Report to the bridge at 14:00 hours Ensign.", do you need to write or deliver a speech of some sort? No, you just show up and report as ordered.

Timothy 2:15:


Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth. NIV


You do not 'present' yourself to people whom you are not either subservient or seeking favor from or to please.


You're right that God is giving permission to satan to trouble Job but that's not God's idea or mission by any means.


Huh? Not 'God's mission'? The whole damn thing is 'God's mission'. God is God, it is all his 'divine plan'. Testing Job (and everything else in the Bible) is his doing, from creation to appocalypse.


Yes,God gives his permission because satan claimed that Job is not all the things God says he is and he can prove it. Before that we see God going ahead and,after reminding to satan Job's virtues,pretty much saying to him "See?You were wrong about Job.": "Have you considered my servant Job, that there is none like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, who fears God and turns away from evil? He still holds fast his integrity, although you moved me against him, to destroy him without cause."


Either way, God gives his permission to ha-satan because as a subordinate ha-satan could not do these things to Job without God allowing him. God is omnipotent, ha-satan is far from that.



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
I sure you can see that by a quick internet search that numerous mistranslations abound. This tool is available to many but it does not seem to be a factor. My opinion is people do not want to have their beliefs called into question so they instead opt to remain purposefully ignorant.


I respect your opinion but i don't agree. If someone believes then will definitely want the scripts to be correct. "Why?" Because if the scripts are false the believer will be misleaded and the result of that is to be excluded from God's Kingdom. What kind of believer would want to be out of it?





How can anyone know? Maybe because that Old Testament God is a prick and he justed wanted to be passive agressive and ask a question he obviously already knows the answer to because he is omniscient.


Noone can know (this is what started this dicussion in the first place,isn't that so?
) . With common sense you can make good guesses though. What's more possible? God being a prick and fooling around like you said or,because He's all-knowing,asking that question on purpose so people would be able to tell that satan isn't under his commands?





You do not need to say or write something to 'report' to someone. If I say to you, 'Report to the bridge at 14:00 hours Ensign.", do you need to write or deliver a speech of some sort? No, you just show up and report as ordered.


But you said that satan "is reporting that the previous trials he inflicted on Job were not enought to dissuade Job from his faith in God." .For such a thing you do need to write or deliver a speech,something that satan never does.





You do not 'present' yourself to people whom you are not either subservient or seeking favor from or to please.


If you're being in anyplace with a way that you can be seen then by all means you're presenting yourself. No need to be connected to anyone anyhow. If i'll be in public without hiding myself i am presenting myself.
Let me make this simple: Imagine i sneak in a military unit (yes,i sneaked in,i'm a ninja lol) and when the soldiers present themselves to their superior officer,i pop up and go along with them (stupid thing but now i did it,too late to change my mind
). Am i not presenting myself? Can't the soldier's superior (or anyone else for that matter) talk to me? I'm there,i presented myself and yet i'm probably gonna get arrested (unless they think of me as a loon and let me leave
)
When you're making your presence known to others,you are presenting yourself.





Huh? Not 'God's mission'? The whole damn thing is 'God's mission'. God is God, it is all his 'divine plan'. Testing Job (and everything else in the Bible) is his doing, from creation to appocalypse.


Free will. Things have to happen,things have to be said,everybody can make choices etc etc etc. God lets satan "move him": Job 2:3 And the LORD said to Satan, "Have you considered my servant Job, that there is none like him on the earth, a blameless and upright man, who fears God and turns away from evil? He still holds fast his integrity, although you moved me against him, to destroy him without cause." God lets satan choose to either admit Job's virtues (the ones that God Himself mentions) or to argue and "move" God to give permission to satan to test Job.
We can choose between doing good or bad but when some people choose bad then they refuse to take responsibility for it and curse God for....letting them choose!





Either way, God gives his permission to ha-satan because as a subordinate ha-satan could not do these things to Job without God allowing him. God is omnipotent, ha-satan is far from that.


That's wrong. Satan can't trouble Job without a permission NOT because satan is a subordinate but because Job is God's "servant" as you can read in Job 2:3.



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 08:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Oceanborn
If someone believes then will definitely want the scripts to be correct.


In that case you should have them start with the King James and work backwards, removing the words 'Satan' and 'Devil' from the Old Testament since they were not there to begin with.


Noone can know (this is what started this dicussion in the first place,isn't that so?
) . With common sense you can make good guesses though. What's more possible? God being a prick and fooling around like you said or,because He's all-knowing,asking that question on purpose so people would be able to tell that satan isn't under his commands?


How could God be ominpotent and not have ha-satan under his command? You can not be partially omnipotent.


But you said that satan "is reporting that the previous trials he inflicted on Job were not enought to dissuade Job from his faith in God." .For such a thing you do need to write or deliver a speech,something that satan never does.


The Bible is not a history book with verbatim conversation contained therein, there is implied transactions and interactions that are not included. Ha-satan from the Torah is among the 'sons of God' which is believed by Rabbinical Scholars to be a type of divine counsel. It can be extrapolated at this point that ha-satan (and the other sons of God) frequently consult with God as they are on this council.


When you're making your presence known to others,you are presenting yourself.


And being that ha-satan was on God's council he presented himself, along with the others, before God. You can not 'sneak in' like a ninja before God. God either lets you in or he does not, again, you can not be a little omnipotent.


Free will.


In the persona of ha-satan (the accuser) he is tasked to take the adversarial position and test Job.


That's wrong. Satan can't trouble Job without a permission NOT because satan is a subordinate but because Job is God's "servant" as you can read in Job 2:3.


So you are still insisting that ha-satan was some sort of rebel angel and that Jews at that time and the present believe in the Devil? Ha-satan was God's 'servant' and took the role of adversary as that was his job given to him by God.



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by Oceanborn
If someone believes then will definitely want the scripts to be correct.


In that case you should have them start with the King James and work backwards, removing the words 'Satan' and 'Devil' from the Old Testament since they were not there to begin with.


They were included.The scripts are correct.





How could God be ominpotent and not have ha-satan under his command? You can not be partially omnipotent.


God is omnipotent which means He can do anything.It also means He can do nothing if He wishes so. He doesn't have satan under His command because God gave free will. Noone is forced to be under His commands.





The Bible is not a history book with verbatim conversation contained therein, there is implied transactions and interactions that are not included. Ha-satan from the Torah is among the 'sons of God' which is believed by Rabbinical Scholars to be a type of divine counsel. It can be extrapolated at this point that ha-satan (and the other sons of God) frequently consult with God as they are on this council.


It is known that satan was an angel of God and he fell because of his pride. Using that to make pure speculations isn't right though. Job is quite clear,everything we need to realise that satan is not under God's commands has been given to us and i've allready pointed them out.





And being that ha-satan was on God's council he presented himself, along with the others, before God. You can not 'sneak in' like a ninja before God. God either lets you in or he does not, again, you can not be a little omnipotent.


I didn't say satan sneaked,i said i sneaked when i was making an example. God did let him present himself,it's obvious. "Why?" So God could eventually ask from satan to admit Job's virtues. Once again God doesn't force satan to do anything,He wants satan to admit it by his own free will.





In the persona of ha-satan (the accuser) he is tasked to take the adversarial position and test Job.


Satan is tasked by nobody. He makes the claims and God lets him prove them.





So you are still insisting that ha-satan was some sort of rebel angel and that Jews at that time and the present believe in the Devil? Ha-satan was God's 'servant' and took the role of adversary as that was his job given to him by God.


I insist on what the script says,nothing more and nothing less.Everything i've said is backed up by the script itself.
Satan is not God's servant and no job is given to him by God.



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Oceanborn
They were included.The scripts are correct.


Huh? How can you justify that Biblical Era Jews did not believe in Hell or Satan and you think that the post-Christ retranslations of the Bible are correct since the Old Testament includes the proper noun, 'Satan'?

This was not a belief held by them and at no point in the Torah was there a being with similar charateristics to the modern Christian concept of Satan. Nor was there a place correlating to the modern Christian concept of Hell.


God is omnipotent which means He can do anything.It also means He can do nothing if He wishes so. He doesn't have satan under His command because God gave free will. Noone is forced to be under His commands.


Is that so? Then how do you explain the 'sons of God' and their purpose?


It is known that satan was an angel of God and he fell because of his pride. Using that to make pure speculations isn't right though. Job is quite clear,everything we need to realise that satan is not under God's commands has been given to us and i've allready pointed them out.


It is known how? From the New Testament. There was no concept of Satan when the Job poem was written. This is obvious because the Hebrew word used was 'ha-satan', lower case, as in a common noun, not a proper one signifying a specific person or entity's name.


God did let him present himself,it's obvious. "Why?" So God could eventually ask from satan to admit Job's virtues. Once again God doesn't force satan to do anything,He wants satan to admit it by his own free will.


The fact that he presented himself is the telling aspect, it shows the heirarchy of the relationship. God did not go to ha-satan, ha-satan went before God.


Satan is tasked by nobody. He makes the claims and God lets him prove them.


Biblical scholars disagree with you. Notice the bolded portion.

O xford dictionary of the Jewish religion


Satan (adversary) a term used in earliest Biblical contexts to refer to a human opponent but also occasionally to suggest evil influence opposing human beings. Satan is personified as a character three places in the Bible, always subordinate to the greater power of God, and he appears to function in support of the divine plan.



I insist on what the script says,nothing more and nothing less.Everything i've said is backed up by the script itself.
Satan is not God's servant and no job is given to him by God.


Really? What does the 'script' say ha-satan is in the original Hebrew?



edit on 5-8-2012 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Huh? How can you justify that Biblical Era Jews did not believe in Hell or Satan and you think that the post-Christ retranslations of the Bible are correct since the Old Testament includes the proper noun, 'Satan'?

This was not a belief held by them and at no point in the Torah was there a being with similar charateristics to the modern Christian concept of Satan. Nor was there a place correlating to the modern Christian concept of Hell.


And yet here we are discussing about satan in Job,acting like the "modern" satan.

You simply said "noone cares" to correct the scripts and i gave you not one but four logical reasons to show you why people would care to correct the scripts if they were mistranslated and also i showed you that it's flawed to think that they'd keep em mistranslated for the sake of ignorance as you claimed. With other words,it makes no sense to leave them mistranslated (as you claim).

About hell: You're confusing "hell" with the "lake of fire" or (if i remember correctly) "eternal fire". Hell is where satan reigns and that's right here on earth.





Is that so? Then how do you explain the 'sons of God' and their purpose?


The sons of God are angels,you corrected me and i agreed with you there. Their purpose in Job isn't mentioned so i'm not gonna make assumptions.
And now the part that you're expecting to read: The angels presented themselves to God and,yes,satan was among them to do so too but that's it. Taking that to start making speculations that do not agree with the script itself (as i've allready shown) is wrong.





It is known how? From the New Testament. There was no concept of Satan when the Job poem was written. This is obvious because the Hebrew word used was 'ha-satan', lower case, as in a common noun, not a proper one signifying a specific person or entity's name.


But everything we read here in Job agrees with what is known. An angel(satan) not under God's commands accusing a very special,for God,human.We see him claiming that,through sufferings,Job will curse God.
It's the very same entity who always believes that humans are not worthy and tries to destroy them and lead em away from God's Kingdom and also antagonises(foolishly) Him.





The fact that he presented himself is the telling aspect, it shows the heirarchy of the relationship. God did not go to ha-satan, ha-satan went before God.


It shows what it shows which is: satan presenting himself to God.Everything else is speculations and your speculations are not in agreement with the script itself.





Biblical scholars disagree with you.


They're made from flesh and blood like i am and yet you take their word allthough i proved through the script itself that i'm right. If i didn't then go ahead,find what i said and didn't back it up and let's discuss it like i did with you.
I'm surprised however that you need "scholars" to tell you what to think and understand of the script. Try on your own,it feels much,much better.





Really? What does the 'script' say ha-satan is in the original Hebrew?


I can't read hebrew but it doesn't matter since you never disputed Job's translations.



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 01:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Oceanborn
And yet here we are discussing about satan in Job,acting like the "modern" satan.


Ha-satan from Job was acting the part scripted for him by God, he was the 'accuser', it was his job to test men on God's behalf. The modern Satan is much more than this as the mythology built around him invloves falling from grace, ruling in hell, etc, etc.


You simply said "noone cares" to correct the scripts and i gave you not one but four logical reasons to show you why people would care to correct the scripts if they were mistranslated and also i showed you that it's flawed to think that they'd keep em mistranslated for the sake of ignorance as you claimed. With other words,it makes no sense to leave them mistranslated (as you claim).


I agree it makes no sense to leave them mistranslated, but mistranslated they remain.


About hell: You're confusing "hell" with the "lake of fire" or (if i remember correctly) "eternal fire".


I am not confusing anything, there is no 'lake of fire' in the Hebrew Bible either. This is from the New Testament also. As I have said repeatedly, Biblical Jews had no concept of or for Hell.


The sons of God are angels,you corrected me and i agreed with you there. Their purpose in Job isn't mentioned so i'm not gonna make assumptions.
And now the part that you're expecting to read: The angels presented themselves to God and,yes,satan was among them to do so too but that's it. Taking that to start making speculations that do not agree with the script itself (as i've allready shown) is wrong.


There is no speculation, Hebrew mythology casts ha-satan in the role of 'accuser' which roughly translates as a prosecutor. It is ha-satan's mission to test men's faith by trial.


An angel(satan) not under God's commands accusing a very special,for God,human.We see him claiming that,through sufferings,Job will curse God.


When you say, 'not under God's commands' you are completely ignoring the relevance of the 'sons of God' which was the divine council answerable to God. Stop relying strictly on the Bible for information, the Hebrew mythology is covered in other places where the roles are quite clear and places ha-satan in a better context.


It shows what it shows which is: satan presenting himself to God.Everything else is speculations and your speculations are not in agreement with the script itself.


The Job poem falls under the Hebrew religious mythology that had a clear and defined role for ha-satan; serve God by testing men ('accusing').


They're made from flesh and blood like i am and yet you take their word allthough i proved through the script itself that i'm right. If i didn't then go ahead,find what i said and didn't back it up and let's discuss it like i did with you.
I'm surprised however that you need "scholars" to tell you what to think and understand of the script. Try on your own,it feels much,much better.


Firstly, I do not read Hebrew, if I did I would have read the Bible in its original language, so my reliance on others to make proper translations is logical. This is why I mentioned willful ignorance earlier, your stance of 'the book is right because I feel that way' does not work. It ignores the fact that others have given a more detailed and accurate translation of the Bible by going back to the source material. They understand there are critical mistranslations and errors in the choice of language and explain what the original passages tried to convey.

Secondly, your apparent disdain and contempt for using scholarly sources only mimics the small-minded Christian thinking that keeps the Bible in its mistranslated state. Christians can plug their ears with their fingers and go 'la, la, la' but it does not change the fact that the Biblical Jews did not believe in the Christian Satan or Hell. They are strictly New Testament fabrications that have been morphed into the modern concept of the Devil, presiding over the lake of fire, pitchfork at the ready, waiting to torment your soul for all eternity.


I can't read hebrew but it doesn't matter since you never disputed Job's translations.


What!? I am disputing the translation. The King James has 'Satan', capital 'S', the Hebrew Bible has 'ha-satan', lower case 's', one means a proper name (Satan-ruler of hell) and the other does not.

Now address my question regarding this.



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by Oceanborn
And yet here we are discussing about satan in Job,acting like the "modern" satan.


Ha-satan from Job was acting the part scripted for him by God, he was the 'accuser', it was his job to test men on God's behalf. The modern Satan is much more than this as the mythology built around him invloves falling from grace, ruling in hell, etc, etc.



Speculations. You said this before and yet the script backed me up,not you.





I agree it makes no sense to leave them mistranslated, but mistranslated they remain.


Only your opinion.






I am not confusing anything, there is no 'lake of fire' in the Hebrew Bible either. This is from the New Testament also. As I have said repeatedly, Biblical Jews had no concept of or for Hell.


In Job we read that satan was roaming the earth. Later we see him troubling Job,a man only full of virtues (yes,with God's permission because satan claimed the opposite of what God said). That is hell,there's no denying it.





There is no speculation, Hebrew mythology casts ha-satan in the role of 'accuser' which roughly translates as a prosecutor. It is ha-satan's mission to test men's faith by trial.


We see him as accuser and persecutor but we don't see God giving him that role.





When you say, 'not under God's commands' you are completely ignoring the relevance of the 'sons of God' which was the divine council answerable to God. Stop relying strictly on the Bible for information, the Hebrew mythology is covered in other places where the roles are quite clear and places ha-satan in a better context.


You labeled everything as "mistranslated" and picked Job. I'm merely doing what you wanted me to do and now that i'm proving you wrong you don't like it.
I'll keep relying on the text since that's what we're discussing and that's what gives us the details we need to tell who's who etc. I'm not gonna rely on "scholars" who obviously have misinterpreted the script.





The Job poem falls under the Hebrew religious mythology that had a clear and defined role for ha-satan; serve God by testing men ('accusing').


We discussed Job repeatedly and it proved the exact opposite.





Firstly, I do not read Hebrew, if I did I would have read the Bible in its original language, so my reliance on others to make proper translations is logical. This is why I mentioned willful ignorance earlier, your stance of 'the book is right because I feel that way' does not work. It ignores the fact that others have given a more detailed and accurate translation of the Bible by going back to the source material. They understand there are critical mistranslations and errors in the choice of language and explain what the original passages tried to convey. Secondly, your apparent disdain and contempt for using scholarly sources only mimics the small-minded Christian thinking that keeps the Bible in its mistranslated state. Christians can plug their ears with their fingers and go 'la, la, la' but it does not change the fact that the Biblical Jews did not believe in the Christian Satan or Hell. They are strictly New Testament fabrications that have been morphed into the modern concept of the Devil, presiding over the lake of fire, pitchfork at the ready, waiting to torment your soul for all eternity.


and




What!? I am disputing the translation. The King James has 'Satan', capital 'S', the Hebrew Bible has 'ha-satan', lower case 's', one means a proper name (Satan-ruler of hell) and the other does not. Now address my question regarding this.


If you are disputing Job's translation why,oh why did you pick it to make the argument that satan is actually a nice guy? You had allready said that the translations are wrong and then you picked Job as if it's right!

As for who has his ears plugged etc it's painfully obvious here.


I came in this thread with a very simple question and instead of sharing your "knowledge" with me you made me jump through every hoop you felt like (and i did jump). Well,i'm not going to keep this up.

I asked "how do you know satan doesn't exist?" and you gave me practically nothing:


Because the Biblical Satan is an amalgamation of several mythological entities.


The second time i asked you you just gave me a general direction (not much from someone who "knows"):



Look up pre-Caananite Hebrew, Phonecian, Egyptian, Babylonian, etc. Anything predating Christianity will have an entity or entities that may have some semblance to the contemporary Satan but may not share all of the attributes.


Then you claimed that the Holy Scripts are mistranslations and yet you picked Job to make an argument about satan (the dude that doesn't exist).

Then you also called "mistranslated" the script you picked for discussion yourself!


I'm done here.



posted on Aug, 5 2012 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Oceanborn
Speculations. You said this before and yet the script backed me up,not you.


How can the 'script' back you up when you are using the King James while I am citing Hebrew? Ha-satan does not equal Satan. You keep circumventing the fact that Biblical Hebrews did not believe in the Devil.


Only your opinion.


And the opinion of many others who have studied the Biblical translations. Again, jow can you attempt to tell anyone that they believed in Satan when to them it did not exist? You are putting your Christocentric viewpoint on a poem written centuries before there even was a Christ and millenia before the medieval concept of Satan and Hell took hold.



Job we read that satan was roaming the earth. Later we see him troubling Job,a man only full of virtues (yes,with God's permission because satan claimed the opposite of what God said). That is hell,there's no denying it.


The concept did not exist when Job was written, revisionist history on your part not withstanding.


We see him as accuser and persecutor but we don't see God giving him that role.


And being that God is omnipotent how exactly did ha-satan get that role?


I'm not gonna rely on "scholars" who obviously have misinterpreted the script.


Fine, do not rely on scholars. As you admittedly do not read Hebrew how do you propose to find the true meaning of what they wrote? Why, I know. You are gonna use your trusty King Jimmy and keep insisting that the original language did not matter. King Jimmy knows all, King Jimmy is always correct, King Jimmy has every word translated precisely.


We discussed Job repeatedly and it proved the exact opposite.


So what is your definiton of the Hebrew character 'ha-satan'? What is his function?


If you are disputing Job's translation why,oh why did you pick it to make the argument that satan is actually a nice guy? You had allready said that the translations are wrong and then you picked Job as if it's right!


I am not making anyone out to be a nice guy, there is no one to make out to be nice in that story. God comes across as a mean-spirited bastard and ha-satan is his trusty, misery-inducing sidekick.

The translation is obviously incorrect as I pointed out and you continually ignore, Satan with a capital 'S' is not the same as ha-satan with a lower case 's'. They are two different things but every person who reads their King James gets to enjoy the mistranslated version and perpetuate the Satan myth in their hearts and minds.


I asked "how do you know satan doesn't exist?" and you gave me practically nothing:


Because the Biblical Satan is an amalgamation of several mythological entities.


And that still holds true as the Hebrew Bible's use of language proves. Again, since you seem to not like to answer this question; how can there have been a Satan if the Biblical Jews did not believe in one?


The second time i asked you you just gave me a general direction (not much from someone who "knows"):


Because it appeared you would be proactive and look these things up for yourself instead of relying solely on the Bible. I was sorely mistaken, it will not happen again, trust me.


Then you claimed that the Holy Scripts are mistranslations and yet you picked Job to make an argument about satan (the dude that doesn't exist).

Then you also called "mistranslated" the script you picked for discussion yourself!


Uhm, yeah. The reason I picked it was because it is mistranslated and proves the point. Satan did not exist when the Old Testament was written. Satan is a modern Christian concept. Sorry if the facts cause you such spiritual trouble, but they are still the facts. Your purposeful obtuseness is to blame, the Bible is not a history book and to cite from it as if it were and avoid getting knowledgable interpretations from those who study language will only lead you to understand the book less.


I'm done here.


Suit yourself.



posted on Oct, 27 2012 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by network dude
 


Originally posted by network dude

Originally posted by giugliot
... We must differentiate. I’m no expert on this, but from what I read, one can assume that “low level” freemasons can be ‘ordinary’ decent people, no problem. Of course also depending on the actual oaths they take. Probably no deep secrets here yet. But the higher the masonic levels, the more “real” secrecy seems to be involved, the more illuminazi-oriented it gets. Now don’t the HIGHEST masons cooperate with the Illuminazi? So, IF one interprets a “complete” mason as a very high level mason, Beni81 might be correct stating: “to be complete part of their cult .. you need to sell your soul to the devil” (post by Ben81)

Ahh, the dreaded Higher Levels.Amazingly enough, only a non mason is allowed to possess the knowledge of these higher levels. Since you are in on the whole thing, could you please tell me where I might contact a higher level mason, or attend a higher level meeting? I am interested in gaining the ultimate power in the universe. (it's an ego thing)

Oooohh, and here's just one of the COUNTLESS documentations on their higher levels.






top topics
 
6
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum