The God of Enlightenment is not Satan

a reply to: Abednego

read the surrounding texts. why were their eyes suddenly opened and they were suddenly ashamed of being naked? cause they were procreators for the first time and they saw each other's naked bodies and had physiological reactions (flushed cheeks, etc). VISUAL stimulation. not some high muckety muck esoteric knowledge. sure, the guy who gave them procreation was a high muckety muck, but these two things shouldn't be confused.

originally posted by: undo
a reply to: wasaka

yahweh is all over the place in ancient egyptian religion as well.

contradictionsinthebible.com...

This assimilation between Yahweh and El, or El into Yahweh, is present in much of the Priestly material as well. In fact, the Priestly source largely advocates this assimilation. In Genesis 17:1, the Priestly writer states that “Yahweh appeared to Abram and said to him: ‘I am El Shaddai.’” And Exodus 6:2-3, in contradiction to J (#11), has Yahweh assert: “I am Yahweh. And I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as El Shaddai, and I was not known to them by the name Yahweh.” Although the verse suggests an identification between Yahweh and El “of the mountain,” the verse also subtly recognizes an ancient distinction between the god of the patriarchs (El) and the god of the Mosaic era (Yahweh). But the assimilation is clear here: the patriarchs who worshiped El in the past were actually worshiping Yahweh, claims the Priestly writer.

I have a question concerning the usage of numerous names for God. I have been reading that Yahweh developed from the word El which was a Canaanite god. In addition El Elyon was a different deity from Yahweh and was a Caananite god in the city of Salem inhabited by the Jebusites. Why would Melchizedek bless Abraham in the name of Elyon? Also I have read that El Shaddai, namely the Shaddai portion is also just another Canaanite god. Lastly the usage of Baali for God is very unusual due to its similarity to Baal which is a Canaanite god. So I search for an answer and the best enlargement I can find is this one:

Many have tried to use the fact that El, Adonai and Baal were generic names for local deities as proof that the Jews considered their God such a local deity. This is a logical fallacy. We should decide how the Jews conceived of their God by reading what they said about their God. Unless scholars can show actual evidence that the Jews ever considered YHWH anything other than the one true, universal Creator of the universe (which they cannot do) we should reject their arguments based on the etymology of the word.

By the way, the same should apply to Muslims. The name of God to the Muslims in the Qu’ran is Allah. It just so happens that one of the gods in Mecca at the time Muhammad was Allah. Some have used this to “prove” that Allah is just a local god who Muhammad turned into the single God of the universe. This charge is unfair. We should let Muhammad tell us how he viewed God, who he happened to call Allah. There is no doubt at all that Muhammad viewed Allah/God as the one true Creator of the universe. Let us not do to Muslims what some unfairly do to the Jewish idea of God.

a reply to: ItalianDressing
Well is quite hard to identify this "bad" entity. Satan means adversary, so nobody knows for sure who is this guy. That is if you only read the bible.

a reply to: undo

You make a good argument, but in the end
the idea of God is merely a meme. It is just
an idea that has evolved over time. Yes,
it might be the Supreme Meme, but it is
just an evolutionary idea none the less.

We are all free to create our own idea
of GOD, and give him/her any name
and attributes we want to.

My "GOD" is named OM.MA.AH
AKA, "the Great Spirit"

a reply to: undo
Their eyes were opened because they acquire consciousness, they became aware of themselves. I mean dogs have sex, but they don't care (they don't "know").

imagine if you will 2 competing egyptian royals of ancient times, both vying for the throne of egypt. they both wear crowns with serpents sticking out of the front. they both can be identified as serpent kings, but only one of them is actually a bad person, like the story of osiris and set. this is the type of issue we are dealing with.

originally posted by: Abednego
a reply to: ItalianDressing
Well is quite hard to identify this "bad" entity. Satan means adversary, so nobody knows for sure who is this guy. That is if you only read the bible.

It comes from the book of Job, which was a stage play.
This Satan/adversary was dispatch by El to test humans.
He was a messanger/angel of God working in His employee.

Job is the oldest book in the Bible, so it is a good place
to start when looking for clues. What idea we in the
modern world have about "Satan" are irrelevant.

originally posted by: Abednego
a reply to: undo
Their eyes were opened because they acquire consciousness, they became aware of themselves. I mean dogs have sex, but they don't care (they don't "know").

eve's name even shows that this is what changed as a result of the fall narrative: "mother of all living"
they became procreators. all over the bible there are hints, that the god of this world is a bad bad baaad guy, yet he shows up in the old testament in some places, as jehovah.

a reply to: undo
At least I agree about the bad guy thing. But the bible fail to differentiate between one and the other.

a reply to: wasaka

okay my tracking of the el word. here goes:

READ ALL OF THIS . "trust me" - han solo

moses wrote one of the versions of the torah (pentateuch, deutorocannonical texts)
presumably, the E version (is that the oldest?). he was given information about the world from the scholars of pharaoh, as the pharaohs adopted son, and by his own mother who was his nanny. now, let's back track to noah.

noah had a bunch o' sons. one of them was named ham. ham RE-settled egypt after either the black sea flood (which is more contemporary) OR after the cataclysm we know as the events that caused the ice age. either way, ham took the information about the pre-catacylsm world, with him to egypt. over time, it took on its own language variants and style. this is called generational layering. this information centered around events in ancient sumer. so this egyptianized version was taught to moses, along with the spelling variants.

his mother, who was more recently from the land of shinar (sumer = mesopotamia), gave moses the ancient sumerian version as it had evolved over time in mesopotamia.

the egyptian version stated that ATUM was the creator. i thought maybe atum = adam. this would make sense if the created people were named after their creator, but then why didn't it say that in the creation account of the bible, i wondered. so i got busy to find a reason and i think i found it:

the first name on the sumerian kings list is alulim, which, over time, became elohim, IN MESOPOTAMIA.
however, in egypt, it became atum. moses, realizing these were referring to the same thing (alulim=elohim=atum=adam), decided to remove the confusion by using the mesopotamian name of the creator for the creator, and the egyptian name of the creator for the created.

a reply to: wasaka


For using the right name (EL) and not YHWH (bible tend to use this name way too much).

originally posted by: Abednego
a reply to: wasaka

For using the right name (EL) and not YHWH (bible tend to use this name way too much).

oohh be careful with that one. jehovah is yahweh. and both are h-ayah, who is EA, who was Enki in sumerian texts. enlil is not actually the creator god, he's the god of this world. remember, the fall narrative is borked.

a reply to: undo
YHWH is mostly a title, I AM WHO I AM

originally posted by: Abednego
a reply to: undo
YHWH is mostly a title, I AM WHO I AM

hayah asher hayah.

i am = ea who is enki, who, according to sumerian texts, created humans from his own dna and the dna of several birth goddesses. we use to have their dna, till the god who owns this planet (enlil), demanded we be nerfed so that we wouldn't overpopulate the place. he didn't want to let us expand into the rest of the solar system, so he withheld the information that made such things possible and then demanded, via some kind of divine planetary law, that our dna be changed so that we no longer had full body regeneration that our creator had gifted us. seriously, the adversary of humans, is the very guy people are mistaking for god in some places of the old testament.

full body regen = tree of life. it was blocked (nerfed), so it no longer unzipped (the serpent lost its legs)

if the dna doesn't unzip for a function, the function can no longer make copies (regenerate)

John 3
14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.

There you have your serpent.

originally posted by: undo
full body regen = tree of life. it was blocked (nerfed), so it no longer unzipped (the serpent lost its legs)

The tree of life shows the way to become one with the father, the broken column needs to be restore in order to be able to "zipped" back the tree. The flaming sword is another symbol for the serpent (the spiral).

a reply to: Abednego

interesting. how is the flaming sword a spiral? that is innnnnteresting

a reply to: Abednego

serpent wrapped staff = staff of asclepius (doctor of medicine, who must 've gotten it from even older example, going all the way back to the garden symbols. )