Why Masons do not worship Lucifer (or Satan)

page: 11
37
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 09:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by SUBKONCIOUS
You see, Hall discovered many masonic secrets without having to get his hand held through the masonic process..


Did you bother to read what Hall said about himself in retrospect? That he was a 'foolish kid'? Most of what he wrote about Masonry prior to joining was his own speculation which he admitted was unfounded once he joined and learned first hand.


Ultimately... Lucifer, in the appropriate context related to secret societies and masonry, is a form of symbolism that stands for knowledge.. It has nothing to do with being an evil devil worshiper..


Let me make this real simple, there is no mention of Lucifer in Masonic ritual or instruction where the name is refered to or implied in regards to anything, knowledge included.




posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 09:50 PM
link   


Which your own sources repudiate as evidenced by the quotes that codyoutlaw and myself linked. The Biblical Hebrews did not believe that Satan (big 's') was a being, they believed ha-satan (small 's') was a job and that job was directed by God.

The Stone Edition of the Tanach. I have already given you extensive quotations from both the Tanach (Jewish Old Testament) and the Jewish Siddur (prayer book) that shows quite clearly that the Jewish Sages believed that Satan took human form (i.e., a "sentient being") when he fought against Jacob. You have offered no Jewish or theological source as refutation.

Typically, in a debate, if one quotes from a reputable theological source, the other person responds in kind with a reputable or even scholarly source.

Please show me anywhere that the Jewish Sages deny that Satan came in the guise of a sentient human being to wrestle with Jacob in the Book of Genesis. I am all ears.

I have quoted from traditional Jewish sources. Satan took the guise of a sentient being. He wasn't just a "directive" from G-d. He took the form of a live, human being.



That is exactly what I and they would tell you. They do not believe in Satan.


So, you mean to tell me that Orthodox Jews, who refer to Satan every night in their night time prayers, have no conceptual understanding of Satan? You would have us believe that they borrowed the term, "Satan", from Christianity and then adopted that term into their bedtime prayers? This is laughable, my friend!

So, even though the Jewish Sages teach that Satan takes the form of a human being, you honestly believe that the Orthodox Jews today do not believe this to be so? Again, I am afraid you are in far left field on this suggestion. The concept of Satan as a sentient being is written all over their prayer books, and in their biblical commentaries.



It follows quite well. It would really help if you understood the Hebrew translation prior to accusing me of misleading people. That was a rather profound error that you could have avoided.


No, your logic does not follow. You are spreading misinformation in this thread.

The term used in the Jewish prayer books is "the Satan", not "hasatan", which is simply an anglicized version of a Hebrew pronunciation. The term "hasatan" is never used in the English translation of Orthodox Jewish prayer books nor in their biblical commentaries.

When translated into English, the term "hasatan" is always referred to as either "Satan" or "the Satan" - with a capital "S". You will not see the Orthodox Jews use the term "hasatan" with a small "s" in any of their English translations from Hebrew.

And yes, the term "ha" refers to "the", as this is an anglicized (English) version of a Hebrew pronunciation, as in the term, "HaShem", or "The Name". You would actually have to write the term in Hebrew font to be completely accurate, not English font.



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 10:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by CookieMonster09
You have offered no Jewish or theological source as refutation.


Really? You must have missed the sourced quotes by several Rabbis a few pages back. Go check them out.


Please show me anywhere that the Jewish Sages deny that Satan came in the guise of a sentient human being to wrestle with Jacob in the Book of Genesis. I am all ears.


Codyoutlaw already supplied a source.


So, you mean to tell me that Orthodox Jews, who refer to Satan every night in their night time prayers, have no conceptual understanding of Satan? You would have us believe that they borrowed the term, "Satan", from Christianity and then adopted that term into their bedtime prayers? This is laughable, my friend!


*Sigh*:


Ask the Orthodox Rabbi - Jewish Beliefs and Laws - Torah and Talmud

Orthodox Rabbi Ari Enkin provides halachic answers to questions about the Jewish beliefs and laws as provided in the Torah (Hebrew Bible) and Talmud.

Do Jews Believe in Satan?

Satan is a character that appears in the belief systems of many religions, including Christianity and Islam. In Judaism "satan" is not a sentient being but a metaphor for the evil inclination – the yetzer hara – that exists in every person and tempts us to do wrong.

References to "satan" can be found in some Orthodox and Conservative prayer books, but they are viewed as symbolic descriptions of one aspect of mankind's nature.source


'Not a sentinet being'. Is Orthodox Rabbi Enkin wrong too? Did I mention he is Orthodox? Catch the prayer book part too?


You are spreading misinformation in this thread.


Yeah, me and Orthodox Rabbi Enkin are both total misinformers, unlike you who seems to somehow miss the concept that Jews do not believe in Satan.


The term used in the Jewish prayer books is "the Satan", not "hasatan", which is simply an anglicized version of a Hebrew pronunciation. The term "hasatan" is never used in the English translation of Orthodox Jewish prayer books nor in their biblical commentaries.

When translated into English, the term "hasatan" is always referred to as either "Satan" or "the Satan" - with a capital "S". You will not see the Orthodox Jews use the term "hasatan" with a small "s" in any of their English translations from Hebrew.

And yes, the term "ha" refers to "the", as this is an anglicized (English) version of a Hebrew pronunciation, as in the term, "HaShem", or "The Name". You would actually have to write the term in Hebrew font to be completely accurate, not English font.


You are playing semmantics. Read more:


Who is Satan? Is he the devil, the source of all temptation and evil who shows up later in the Judeo/Christian tradition?


Here in the Book of Job the answer to that question is no.


"ha satan" is the hebrew phrase to be translated here, and the most literal translation is "the adversary." "Adversary," in this context, is a courtroom metaphor and refers to the advocate on the other side of the argument (i.e., the prosecution or the defense, depending on which side we're looking from). The Hebrew "ha" is simply the definite article, "the" in English.

"ha satan" is thus a common noun, not a proper noun; it is not someone's name, as in George or Harriet.

Nor is it, for example, especially in these early books of the Hebrew scriptures, the person "Satan," the evil being who is the source of all evil and temptation.


There is even some suggestion, though I do not personally take it very seriously, that this "ha satan" may be one of the "sons of God" who the Prologue says were there with God when this conversation with the adversary begins. Tom Kerns PhD


Once more, Jews do not believe in Satan, they believe that good and evil desires (yetzer hatov/yetzer hara) exists within us all and that is the struggle we are having, not with the Devil but within ourselves.






edit on 15-9-2012 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer because he is a rotten Luciferian and Lucifer makes you drink tea instead



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 11:12 PM
link   
From a Pastor who 'gets it' and does not believe in the silly Christian fantasy of Satan, Pastor K. Dwayne James:



The first thing we discover is that ‘ha-Satan’, which is Hebrew for "the Adversary" came into Yahweh’s presence reporting for service. We also discover that he comes into Yahweh’s presence with many other angelic sons of God, like him.

Later in this teaching we will deal with the topic of ben-Elohim (sons of God) who are of this angelic realm. They are also called ‘Watchers’. Don’t confuse ben-Elohim with low rank demons and unclean spirits. They are not the same thing. We’ll cover this in another teaching. I pray that your eyes are being opened to a few key points here:

    1) All angels, even the wicked angelic host serve the Lord.
    2)They must report to the Lord, serve Him.
    3) Ha-Satan is fully accountable to Yahweh, he is a servant of Yahweh and is required to give account of his whereabouts and activities.
    4)Ha-Satan has limitations and restrictions placed on him. Ha-Satan can only do what God gives him permission to do.


Five Satans?!? Really?


For example, in the Book 1 Enoch, there are 5 ha-Satans. The first and second are said to have been responsible for leading astray the angels and for bringing them down to earth, where they sinned with the daughters of men (69:4), while the third brought about the fall of Adam and Eve (69:6). The ha-Satans are allowed to access heaven in order to accuse men, but they are not confined to heaven.


How can there be five Lucifers? Is one not enough? Where will I ever get enough fresh virgins?

A little more from the Pastor:


The more study one does on ha-Satan it becomes clear that ha-Satan in nothing more a servant of God, an instrument or person used to carry out the purposes of Yahweh. We must never forget that ultimately God exercises sovereign control over both good and evil.


More 'misinformation' or the truth?




edit on 15-9-2012 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer



posted on Sep, 15 2012 @ 11:44 PM
link   
Ruler of this world: Jn 12:31; 14:31; 16:11
Prince of the power of the air: Eph 2:2
The god of this world: 2 Cor 4:4
He promises the world to those who will obey him: Mt 4:8-9
His domain is a sinful world under evil power: 1 Jn 5:19
Satan rules the world through deception and sin, not legitimately by God: Rev 12:9
Satan did not abide in truth: Jn 8:44
Satan fell into condemnation: 1 Ti 3:6
Angels (demons) were cast into Hades when they sinned: 2 Pe 2:4
Angels didn't keep their own domain...abandoned their proper abode...were cast down: Jude 6-7
War in heaven against Satan's army vs. Michael & angels...Satan cast out of heaven: Rev 12:7-9

That's who Satan is but:

God is more powerful than Satan: 1 Jn 4:4



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 12:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
Did you bother to read what Hall said about himself in retrospect?

Of course they didn't!



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 01:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by KSigMason

Who are you to presume to know our relationship with God?



I know your relationship with God. You have none.



Who are you to know what is in our heart?


I see what is in your heart, you write it here.




It is not you who decides what my religion is so don't even attempt such a foolish act.


You have no clue who I am or what I am capable of. How then can you determine wisdom or folly?




Freemasonry isn't a religion for a great many reasons:


And yet there are "regular" Freemasons who have said Freemasonry is actually a religion.



- Freemasonry advocates no sectarian faith or practice.


In other words, Freemasonry does not advocate any of the religions that God has set upon the earth.




- We have no dogma or theology. Religious discussion is forbidden in a masonic lodge thereby eliminating the chance for any masonic dogma to form.


But, like most cults, Freemasonry has it's own language, collection of special terms and phrases, and unique meanings for words that are in more general use in the outer society. Like every religion, one must learn this new language to adopt the new dress, whether you call it "religion", "philosophy", "spiritualism", or "whatever". Every cult has a "special language" that members have to learn to speak to be part of the group.





- It offers no sacraments and does not claim to lead to salvation by works, by secret knowledge, or by any other means.


There are prayers, there is a temple, there are the "seekers of more light", and there is the belief in reincarnation, there are all the things that make up a "religion".



The secrets of Freemasonry are concerned with the modes of recognition only and not with the means of salvation.


The secrets of Freemasonry are secrets. That means you cannot be expected to tell what those secrets are. And you must deny them, if any non-mason mentions them. That itself, tells us that it's more than modes of recognition that is being kept secret.



- By any definition of religion accepted by our critics, we cannot qualify as a religion.


Ye are a religion, but not onto God, therefore ye think of yourselves as not a religion, for that would suggest that ye worship God. But since ye do not, and proudly declare that no God is worshiped within the halls of Freemasonry, then ye think that therefore makes the practice of Freemasonry, being contrary to religion, not classifiable as religion. But the "idea of religion" is just a collection of accepted morals and ethics that is accepted, being given by someone else, that is, not made up by oneself, that recognizes powers beyond oneself as being more knowledgeable and intelligent than oneself, and therefore capable of directing one's path to the betterment of one's soul. Now if one "invents" the principles oneself, then it becomes a "philosophy". But, if one accepts the principles from another, then it becomes a "religion". A religion, because one must put "faith" in the principles given by another, who has more light.





- Freemasonry supports religion. Freemasonry is far from indifferent to religion. Without interfering in religious practice, it expects each member to follow his own faith.


Freemasonry raises no money for any religion. So, how does it support any religion?

Freemasonry does not "distribute" the message of any religion. So, again, how does it support any religion?




So what instructions of Freemasonry are wrong?


Not to spread the word among the brethren, is wrong. Not to share the light, that the brethren might see it, is wrong.



No man, when he hath lighted a candle, putteth it in a secret place, neither under a bushel, but on a candlestick, that they which come in may see the light. KJV Luke 11:33

Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house. KJV Matthew 5:15



bible.cc...
bible.cc...



Nothing in Freemasonry contradicts my Christian beliefs. If anything my religious faith has only strengthened since I joined the Freemasons (not sure if it causation or correlation).


When you are able and encouraged to share your light, rather than admonished for doing so, then Freemasonry will be in harmony with the Christian belief.




Once a mason, always a mason.

False.


A quote directly from many a mason who has come before. And saying "He was never a mason, in his heart, even though entered, passed, and raised," doesn't undo the raising.



Also note, there is no rebirth or resurrection. You are putting out lies.


Surely, there is rebirth, the Buddhists believe in it. And a Christian would never deny the resurrection.



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 02:23 AM
link   
reply to post by GreatOwl
 

By all reasoning you cannot know my relationship with God. Who are you to say I don't? I know my Faith and you are no one to tell me otherwise.

I have posted nothing to suggest I have no relationship with God. My faith is in the Almighty, I just refuse to bow to men who spew poison and call it wisdom.


You have no clue who I am or what I am capable of. How then can you determine wisdom or folly?

You are a person, man or woman, and thus incapable of telling me what my relationship with God is. I could care less who you are or what you are capable of as that is inconsequential to my relationship with God.


And yet there are "regular" Freemasons who have said Freemasonry is actually a religion.

Please name them.


In other words, Freemasonry does not advocate any of the religions that God has set upon the earth.

That's not what I said, so don't put words in my mouth. This is just further proof of the deceit and malice practiced by your ilk.


But, like most cults, Freemasonry has it's own language, collection of special terms and phrases, and unique meanings for words that are in more general use in the outer society.

Special terminology doesn't make us a cult or a religion. How can one think such nonsense?

You're just so Hell bent on labeling us with your lies. That is a sad life to live in such hate and bigotry. I like to live a life where I don't have to validate my beliefs by tearing down others because of my own ignorance.


There are prayers, there is a temple, there are the "seekers of more light", and there is the belief in reincarnation, there are all the things that make up a "religion".

We believe as we are men of faith that we should always enter into prayer to our own individual gods. So prayer is bad? The term "temple" is used as every Lodge is a representation of King Solomon's Temple, it's not that hard to understand. We refer to knowledge as Light. Should we not enlighten ourselves?

Where do we say we believe in "reincarnation"? Please show in our ritual where this is true?


The secrets of Freemasonry are secrets. That means you cannot be expected to tell what those secrets are. And you must deny them, if any non-mason mentions them. That itself, tells us that it's more than modes of recognition that is being kept secret.

Incorrect as usual.


But since ye do not, and proudly declare that no God is worshiped within the halls of Freemasonry, then ye think that therefore makes the practice of Freemasonry, being contrary to religion, not classifiable as religion.

As you have no authority to make such a declaration this is utterly meaningless and without merit.


Freemasonry raises no money for any religion. So, how does it support any religion?

Then you're not very familiar with all of our charities. Here's two that come to mind automatically:

Holy Land Pilgrimage

Eastern Star Training Awards for Religious Leadership (ESTARL)


Not to spread the word among the brethren, is wrong. Not to share the light, that the brethren might see it, is wrong.

Through my actions do I hope that they may follow in my faith, but I do not need to shove my beliefs down people's throats to force them under my direction of thinking.


When you are able and encouraged to share your light, rather than admonished for doing so, then Freemasonry will be in harmony with the Christian belief.

I wouldn't call what you do "sharing", but rather forceful shoving. Nor have I ever been admonished for my religious beliefs.


Surely, there is rebirth, the Buddhists believe in it. And a Christian would never deny the resurrection.

I was speaking of Freemasonry not religious beliefs.

Is this really the best you have? It's nothing more than the same recycled nonsense.

Masonry is not a religion. He who makes of it a religious belief, falsifies and denaturalizes it.
- Albert Pike
edit on 16-9-2012 by KSigMason because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 07:37 AM
link   
reply to post by TheGreatDivider
 


Why are you quoting me the New Testament when the topic is about the Old Testament and the original interpretation of ha-satan and not the Christian concept that did get not codified until 1213?




edit on 16-9-2012 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 09:18 AM
link   


Codyoutlaw already supplied a source.


He does not. Read the thread yourself. He does not quote from any Orthodox Jewish theologian.



'Not a sentinet being'. Is Orthodox Rabbi Enkin wrong too? Did I mention he is Orthodox? Catch the prayer book part too?


First, the source of this quote is from Ariela Pelaia, not Rabbi Enkin. She studied at a Conservative Jewish seminary, not an Orthodox one (She graduated from the Jewish Theological Seminary, which is Conservative, not Orthodox). Click on the link yourself that you posted.

This is the link you provided, citing it as a source, and erroneously stating that it was a quote from Rabbi Enkin:

judaism.about.com...

There is a huge theological difference between the Orthodox - the most rigorous and strict version of Judaism and the only version accepted in Israel today as being legitimate - and the other strains of Judaism, such as Reform, Conservative, Reconstructionism, etc. You are quoting from a liberal, or progressive version of Judaism that isn't considered authoritative by traditional Jews.

Ms. Pelaia - with all due respect - is not a Jewish Sage. Rashi and Rambam are Jewish sages. I am quoting from the Jewish Sages, not modern day authors with questionable credentials.

Please quote from an Orthodox Jewish theologian that states that Satan is not a sentient being. If the best you can do is a web link to "about.com" - if that is truly your superficial understanding of traditional Judaism - then I am afraid you have revealed quite clearly to everyone on this thread that your theological understanding of these matters is ridiculously uninformed. How about quoting an actual Orthodox Jewish commentary?

Frankly, it's ridiculous to debate further because you clearly haven't read any Orthodox Jewish sources.



Once more, Jews do not believe in Satan, they believe that good and evil desires (yetzer hatov/yetzer hara) exists within us all and that is the struggle we are having, not with the Devil but within ourselves.


Not according to Orthodox Judaism. According to Orthodox Judaism, Satan became a sentient being - Evil incarnated in the form of a human guise - that wrestled with Jacob in the book of Genesis.
edit on 16-9-2012 by CookieMonster09 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 10:00 AM
link   
In response to CodyLaw:



These Jewish sages were not real good with the scholarly stuff then, were they?


Rashi is considered to be the foremost expert and commentator on the Hebrew Scriptures, bar none.



So, moving on to verses 25, 26, 27: Jacob was winning, but with one touch, his opponent causes him to become lame. Then he asks for Jacob's name: And he said, Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel: for thou hast striven with God and with men, and hast prevailed. (Genesis 32:28, ASV) And Jacob asked him, and said, Tell me, I pray thee, thy name. And he said, Wherefore is it that thou dost ask after my name? And he blessed him there. (Genesis 32:29, ASV) And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for, said he, I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved. (Genesis 32:30, ASV)


First and foremost, you are quoting from the American Standard Version of the Bible. Bad idea. Better to go to original Orthodox Jewish sources if you are going to review an English translation. So, let's do that, and review the verses that you cite. This is important that we get this story right, because it is one of the most important stories in Jewish theology, and a bit complicated. According to the Stone Edition of the Tanach, the verses you cite are translated into English as follows:

Verse 25-31:

Jacob was left alone and a man wrestled with him until the break of dawn. When he (i.e., Satan) perceived that he could not overcome him (i.e., Jacob), he (Satan) struck the socket of his (Jacob's) hip; so Jacob's hip socket was dislocated as he wrestled with him. Then he said, "Let me go, for dawn has broken."

And he said, "I will not let you go, unless you bless me."
He said to him, "What is your name?"
He replied, "Jacob."
He said, "No longer will it be said that your name is Jacob, but Israel, for you have striven with the Divine and with man and have overcome."
Then Jacob inquired, and he said, "Divulge, if you please, your name."
And he said, "Why then, do you inquire as to my name?" And he blessed him there.
So Jacob called the name of the place, Peniel --- "For I have seen the Divine face to face, yet my life was spared."

According to Rashi, the "man" that Jacob wrestled was the guardian angel of Esau, Jacob's brother. At this point in the story, Jacob and Esau are brothers, but also at great odds with each other. Jacob fled for his life from Esau years earlier after securing Esau's birthright as the firstborn, and Jacob was about to meet Esau face to face. Jacob was about to confront his archenemy and brother, Esau.

Esau's guardian angel was Satan. The guardian angel of Esau - Satan, evil incarnate - took the guise of a human being - a sentient being- and wrestled with Esau during the night.

Incidentally, the name Israel is a combination of "yisrah", meaning "to prevail", over El, "the Divine", i.e., the angel of Esau -- Satan incarnate. Metaphorically, Esau is oftentimes associated with Rome in Jewish theology - the archenemy of the Jews.



His own God, not Satan.

See above. Jacob was wrestling with Esau's guardian angel, Satan.

To really understand the Hebrew Bible, you have to read Jewish commentaries, such as commentaries by Rashi, Rambam, and the like. You have to be versed in the Midrash, and in the Talmud. Otherwise, you are reading the story only superficially, and not getting the full background of the text.

We see throughout the Old Testament that angels take the guise of human form. We see Abraham meeting with 3 angels, and serving these angels food. The angels even speak to Abraham, and tell him that his wife - barren thus far - will bear him a son.

We see angels taking human form that spend the night with Lot in Sodom, before these 3 angels destroy Sodom and send Lot out of the city of Sodom before its destruction. These angels, upon entering Sodom, even attack and blind some evil Sodomites that are causing a rancorous fuss outside of Lot's door.

My point is simple - The story of Jacob wrestling with the angel in human form is not unique. We see other instances in the Bible where the same thing happens over and over again. Even in the New Testament, we see an angel in human form approaching Mary to announce to her that she will bear the Christ child. This is all biblical.

Why anyone would suggest that angels cannot take human form is beyond me - The Bible is flush with references to such occurrences, and they are not so difficult to find in the text.
edit on 16-9-2012 by CookieMonster09 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 11:03 AM
link   
reply to post by CookieMonster09
 


I can read, write, and speak Hebrew. It is part of my job to be able to do so. I quote in English for the purposes of those in this discussion who do not. Your post above only further supports my point. The trouble here is that you are placing the commentary of "sages" above the actual words inscribed. In the translation that you posted, it is clear that the meaning is the same. In the Hebrew, also, the clear meaning is the same: that Esau was not the real enemy, but the real enemy lay within Jacob himself - thus he wrestled with his God in a visionary episode until he saw the truth. Not Satan, but his own God, who then blessed him and named him Israel.

I'm starting to wonder if you are actually reading any of the posts that AugustusMasonicus and myself are making.



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by CookieMonster09
He does not. Read the thread yourself. He does not quote from any Orthodox Jewish theologian.


Considering this is his area of professorial expertise I would take his educated explanation over many others.


First, the source of this quote is from Ariela Pelaia, not Rabbi Enkin. She studied at a Conservative Jewish seminary, not an Orthodox one (She graduated from the Jewish Theological Seminary, which is Conservative, not Orthodox). Click on the link yourself that you posted.

...

There is a huge theological difference between the Orthodox - the most rigorous and strict version of Judaism and the only version accepted in Israel today as being legitimate - and the other strains of Judaism, such as Reform, Conservative, Reconstructionism, etc. You are quoting from a liberal, or progressive version of Judaism that isn't considered authoritative by traditional Jews.


Fine. Here is Orthodox Rabbi Ari Shishler on the topic:


The one and only time that Satan is mentioned in the "Five books of Moses" is as a VERB.

It's part of the story of Balaam, who was hired to curse the Jews. En route, he gets blocked by an angel, whom G-d sent [this doesn't work as well in English as in Hebrew:] "to Satan him". In other words, Satan means to hinder or mislead.

In Hebrew an "S" and an "SH" are often represented by the same letter. So, the term Satan is also related to the Hebrew term Shtut, which means foolishness.

The Talmud teaches that a person only "sins" when a "spirit of foolishness" enters them. If a person was always rational, he/she would always do the right things. So "Satan" is the internal foolishness that gets us to do wrong- and then to defend our misbehavior. (In classical Jewish terms, we call this the "Evil inclination".)

We do encounter references later in the Bible to a "Satan" (like at the beginning of the book of Job). This is the angel that G-d created to act as the Accusing Voice in Heaven. So, when a person (whether alive or dead) is judged in Heaven, Satan has the job of digging up the dirt on them.

One thing is very clear in Judaism- Satan, the angel, is a CREATED entity. Like any other angel, he can only act in accordance with G-d's will.

Basically, Satan's got a dirty job, but someone's got to do it.


Is he wrong?


How about quoting an actual Orthodox Jewish commentary?


Here is more. From Judaism 101:


The information in this site is written predominantly from the Orthodox viewpoint, because I believe that is a good starting point for any inquiry into Judaism:

....

The yetzer ra is generally seen as something internal to a person, not as an external force acting on a person. The idea that "the devil made me do it" is not in line with the majority of thought in Judaism. Although it has been said that Satan and the yetzer ra are one and the same, this is more often understood as meaning that Satan is merely a personification of our own selfish desires, rather than that our selfish desires are caused by some external force.


More from Rabbi Shishler:


There is no question that there will be no evil when Moshiach comes (see Zechariah 13), Satan included. The notion of throwing an angel into Hell is odd. Angels are not only beings without a yetzer hara, but they have are actually just bursts of G-d's energy and can never separate from Him, let alone be punished.



Frankly, it's ridiculous to debate further because you clearly haven't read any Orthodox Jewish sources.


Would Rambamsuffice?


Rambam's Moreh Nevuchim Book III, chap. 22 discussing sefer Iyove

"...the Talmud says as follows: "Rebbe Shimeon ben Lakish, says: "The adversary (satan), evil inclination (yezer ha-ra'), and the angel of death, are one and the same being." Here we find all that has been mentioned by us in such a dear manner that no intelligent person will be in doubt about it. It has thus been shown to you that one and the same thing is designated by these three different terms, and that actions ascribed to these three are in reality the actions of one and thesame agent. Again, the ancient doctors of the Talmud said: "The adversary (satan) goes about and misleads, then he goes up and accuses, obtains permission, and takes the soul." You have already beentold that when David at the time of the plague was shown the angel" with the sword drawn in his hand stretched out overJerusalem."

Rambam and Rebbe Shimeon ben Lakish teach that "satan" as discussed in Iyove and other instances, refers to a person's own instincts. Not "part" of God, or another force in the universe.


More from and on Rambam:


Strikingly, Maimonides quotes the saying of the Talmud, "Rabbi Simon ben Laqish said: Satan, the evil inclination, and the angel of death are one and the same."32 This somewhat enigmatic equation seems clearer given Maimonides’ assertion that Satan stems from a root meaning "to turn away;" thus, turning away from the Law is perverting what knowledge of God one has. Therefore:


I find this to be a very clear rebuke of ascribing any belief in a sentient Satan in Hebrew religious beliefs.



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by KSigMason

By all reasoning you cannot know my relationship with God. Who are you to say I don't? I know my Faith and you are no one to tell me otherwise.



Well, this line of dialog is not fruitful.



I have posted nothing to suggest I have no relationship with God. My faith is in the Almighty, I just refuse to bow to men who spew poison and call it wisdom.


But, here we see, I can shed a little light. The words of a man come from his heart. So, when you write, you reveal your heart. When you reveal your heart, you tell us of your relationship with God.



And Jesus said, Are ye also yet without understanding?

Do not ye yet understand, that whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught?

But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man. KJV Matthew|15:16-18


By inspecting the words we get evidence of the man.

Does he find offense, when none is given? Does his mind conjure up imagined persecutions, where no man persecuteth him? Does he start defending, where no one has attacked? These things tell us of his relationship with God. For it is only God, that can put there in front of him the things that no one else has put, and make him see what is not really there. God's ways are subtle, and he places each man into situations that provoke the man to respond, and as soon as the man reacts, HE gives that man the words to say in the heat of the moment. So that each man, by reflecting on his own words, can find the message God put there for himself.

This is why, the Muslims, for example, praise God five times a day.By uttering praise to the Lord, it is the Lord that is praising them.

So if a man finds himself in conflict, constantly defending, he can easily come to understand the nature of God by re-reading his own words, and reflecting on why he said them. Why was he provoked, in that moment, to speak certain particular words? What does it reveal, about his own nature? And who has the power to make him speak, by provocation, other than the Almighty himself?

Other people witnessing the communications, also get to see the nature of each man being revealed, and they too learn of the mysterious ways of the Lord.

So, in the end, all benefit.

But, some still sleep, while others are half-awake, few are fully awake to the reality of the nature of speech.





edit on 16-9-2012 by GreatOwl because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by GreatOwl
 

Fact remains, you cannot define my relationship with God. I know my faith and am plenty comfortable with it.



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 03:51 PM
link   
"I tell you now that Freemasonry is one of the most wicked and terrible organizations upon this earth. The Masons are major players in the struggle for world domination. The 33rd Degree is split into two. One split contains the core of the Luciferian Illuminati and the other contains those who have no knowledge of it whatsoever."

Bill Cooper [Behold A Pale Horse , p. 78]



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 03:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheGreatDivider
Bill Cooper [Behold A Pale Horse , p. 78]


Wow, Bill Cooper. Maybe you can cite another reliable source like David Icke for your next off topic post.




edit on 16-9-2012 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus

Originally posted by TheGreatDivider
Bill Cooper [Behold A Pale Horse , p. 78]


Wow, Bill Cooper. Maybe you can cite another reliable source like David Icke for your next off topic post.




edit on 16-9-2012 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer


How's that off-topic? He says the masons are made up of Luciferian Illuminati.



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheGreatDivider
How's that off-topic? He says the masons are made up of Luciferian Illuminati.


Because it is his unsourced opinion. Try using verifiable sources and not random people's viewpoints.



posted on Sep, 16 2012 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by swan001
reply to post by AugustusMasonicus
 


I should read less Dan Brown...


Everyone should read less Dan Brown. I read "The Lost Symbol" and I felt like a complete idiot for having invested the time.

Fitz





new topics
top topics
 
37
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join