|
|
 |
|
|
Pages: 1
Satan vs. the Devil
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)
Posted by: uh...ok
Before I write this, I ask those who do not believe in God (in terms of Jewish, Christian, etc.) to refrain from saying "This thread is pointless because God doesn't exist." I still invite input from you, but I don't want to hear arguments about the point of this thread simply because not everyone here is religious, or even if religious, someone who believes in God. I'm putting this up as more of a theological debate than anything else, so any input to that regard is certainly more than welcome.  (Of course, Laggy or any other mods, if you feel that this makes it R&R material, feel free to move it over, although I don't think this belongs in R&R.)
I'm sure that most people (who believe in God and have some working knowledge of the Bible, etc.) here will disagree with what I'm about to write, since most people I talk to do not share my view. That's partially why I'm posting this, because I'd like to see exactly how outnumbered I am on this respect.
Anyhow, to cut to the chase. As I mentioned in the "Merry Xmas" thread, I had a really kickass Scripture teacher during my freshman year of high school. He was an extremely... technical sort of teacher - one who would show that the story of Creation matches up with the theory of evolution, or how the ten plagues that Moses brought onto the Egyptians occurred in a VERY natural way (which I could write out upon request, if I can still remember it.  I have the notes at home though so I can't give a fully detailed explanation until I get there). He was well versed in the Jewish language (I'm pretty sure he studied the "original" version of the Bible as well), and pretty much to me was a very reliable (and often fun) source for religious triviata.
But cutting to the real chase... (this thread is titled "Satan vs. the Devil" for a reason). What he taught us was the difference between "Satan" and the Devil. The widely common mistake is the belief that they are the same. People say "Satan is the fallen angel Lucifer who is more commonly referred to as the Devil."
Wrong.
Satan was and still is an angel who works for God. His role? As the Tempter/Temptress/TemptIT(I dunno) who helps strengthen the relationship between God and His People. Basically to test people and their resistance to tempation and sin. So the people either give in to temptation, get punished, repent, are forgivne, and thus come out with a stronger relationship with God, or they defeat the temptation and come out feeling really close to God.
The Devil is the fallen angel Lucifer, who in the not-so-forgotten past led a rebellion against the Lord. He was ultimately defeated and punished, sent to the burning region now commonly referred as "Hell". The Devil does not tempt people to do bad things or cause them to do bad things - his/her/its role is merely now a keeper of Hell.
Nowhere in the Bible will you see the words "Satan" and "the devil" linked together. The word "Satan" actually does not appear much to begin with... of course the most memorable passage would be Jesus' time in the desert. When he is tested, he says, "Begone Satan!" or something of the like. Yet he does not say that "Satan" is the devil. In fact, one can easily argue that he knows that Satan is an angel sent by God to test him.
I haven't brought this up for awhile, and talking to some religious friends the other night - I found that they didn't share this same perspective. They hold and continue to hold onto the view that Satan = Lucifer = The Devil.
I don't mean to say they are wrong, because when it comes to theological topics, the most you can come away with is "I believe". So in a sense, I believe that they, along with a large majority of the religious world, share the mistaken belief of equating the Devil with Satan.
Thoughts?
-uh...ok
Posted by: Canis Lupus
 Quote:
Originally posted by uh...ok
So in a sense, I believe that they, along with a large majority of the religious world, share the mistaken belief...
|
You ARE aware that this is the root of all fundamentalist religions everywhere, are you?
Religions and sects are not based on different Gods, just different interpretations of who or what God is. Even atheists and agnostics believe in an unforeseen force guiding their destinies (they usually call it "dumb luck" or "the voice inside their heads" or something mundane).
As any good Bible-toting Christian would tell you, no one's interpretation is ever wrong... it's faith that counts. However, when one starts focusing on facts and small details, then this undermines the whole basis of faith
I know it doesn't answer your question, but in a way it does 
Posted by: bLaCkOuT
I never actually thought about it, but now that you mention it, when ever "Satan" is mentioned, its about some sort of tempting or something of that nature ... "Get thee behind me Satan" or however that verse with Peter speaking to Jesus about saving himself.
I've always been under the assumption that Satan = Devil, but thats because I've never had cause to question it. I'll shoot an email out to my pastor to get his take on it.
I'm curious to what he has to say.
I can understand how most people would have the Satan = Devil view point, its almost like tradition.
:edit: Agreed Laggy, this sounds more like a grey area rather than a doctrinal difference.
Posted by: Canis Lupus
Quote:
Originally posted by bLaCkOuT
We can't delete our own posts? We can't delete our own posts? Thought about it afterwards and tried to merge my posts and it wouldn't let me delete this one even as logged in as bLaCkOuT.
|
Nope I'll merge it for ya then...
Posted by: uh...ok
GG Laggy. Nice response. Although I don't mean to say that one's a better Christian than the other simply because one has a better interpretation. Once again, it was more of a theological pursuit than anything else - and last I checked, theology as a whole isn't petty.
Oh another thing I forgot to mention is that the First Story of Creation shows that man and woman were created at the same time. Another small detail most people tend to or like to overlook.
-uh...ok
Posted by: Canis Lupus
Here is an interesting link, uhawk:
http://www.questionthis.org/VarietiesSatanism.htm
Posted by: uh...ok
Nice link... but after doing a search on Google on the topic myself earlier (before I made this post), I disregarded the Internet as a valid source for theological research.
Although I must say that this line is pretty damn cool:
Here's a God who has three sets of people following him (Jews, Christians, Muslims) and doesn't seem to mind they have been at each other's throats for centuries. Or that they slaughtered polytheistic and animist faiths by the score. Blah. This is the most genocidal and maniacal deity on earth and he won't rest until all his enemies are dead.
Oh and... THAT SITE SAID "MAGIC APPLE" ROOFLES!!! 
-uh...ok
Posted by: Canis Lupus
Quote:
Originally posted by uh...ok
but after doing a search on Google on the topic myself earlier (before I made this post), I disregarded the Internet as a valid source for theological research.
|
Uhm, don't use Google or any site that uses Google's technology if you wanna search for topics in the same vein ... Google has been know to filter some content that isn't "moral", so you won't see a lot of links to sites focusing on Satanism, which are usually the ones that offer a better insight into Satan, the devil, and Lucifer
Posted by: Ion Silverbolt
The bible is so littered with symbolism that it would be hard to say either way. For one, God is incapable of sinning according to almost all beliefs. So for him to have an Angel in his employment to tempt mortals into sin goes against everything he stands for. Regardless of the outcome. It would be similiar to a white lie.
Then you could argue the point about creation. Why make the human race perfect and then put forth a tree of knowedge of evil? Why even allow Satan or Lucifer either one tempt mankind into sin to begin with? Why not just wipe people out and make them anew without sin again?
Personally I don't see it being unreasonable to assume they are different entities. Their existence is as vague as everything else in the bible. I think most of the descrepencies come from all the symbolism. Most believe there was an actual tree of life and eating a silly apple gave mankind sin.
You also need to look at the time period between when the old testament and the new testament was written. A lot of biblical references are directly influenced by the Jewish way of life during that time period. A lot of the symbolism for example in Revalations is directly related to Roman symbolism which appears on many of their structures and in their beliefs.
Quote:
|
Comment: God had created Lucifer a perfect spirit being, but He also gave him free moral agency, that is, the ability to choose to follow good or evil. Lucifer chose to become Satan the Devil, the Adversary, by allowing sin to mold his character. His rebellion against God sealed and hardened his evil nature, and now he opposes all that is good, right and godly (Matthew 13:38-39; I Peter 5:8; Revelation 9:11; 12:9-10).
|
Posted by: uh...ok
I wish I brought my Bible with me, but I left it at home. I'd really like to look up those passages. Thanks for the reference Lon.
-uh...ok
Posted by: bLaCkOuT
http://www.blueletterbible.org/
Posted by: Null Actor
Quote:
Originally posted by uh...ok
Wrong.
Satan was and still is an angel who works for God. His role? As the Tempter/Temptress/TemptIT(I dunno) who helps strengthen the relationship between God and His People. Basically to test people and their resistance to tempation and sin.
<snip>
The Devil is the fallen angel Lucifer, who in the not-so-forgotten past led a rebellion against the Lord.
<snip>
Thoughts?
|
If you are saying that Satan is an agent of god, then the bible based view of god just became a lot more sinister in my eyes. What you argue is that god lays traps in order break people down, and force them to conform. It's like a sting operation, except instead of being like the police officer who just waits for someone to approach him and try to buy drugs, the officer approaches people and says "come on, buy the drugs, everything will be fine, you'll have fun, they are GOOD!", and then arrests them when they give in. Then they spend ten years in jail being reformed (being punished), get out and choose not to do it again (repent), and then are accepted back in to society (forgiven).
Does that not sound very wrong to you? If that were the truth, it would mean that god forces people to be punished and to repent for sins they otherwise may not have committed. Sure, you can argue that the weakness was in the person, and they should have been strong enough to resist. But when the trap is being specifically layed in order to net someone... that is a pretty far stretch.
And if this were all true, then I could sympathise with Lucifer for rebelling against God's own dirty tricks. I would not support a government who told me something was okay with one agency, and then punished me with another for believing them. On that same vein, I'd not follow a god who did the same.
Posted by: uh...ok
That's one way to look at it.
I was taught and still believe that Satan's purpose is to strengthen God's relationship with his People. I mean, in all reality, bonds get strenghthened most through hardship... tests, in a certain way. You can view those as constructive or as utterly self-contradictory.
-uh...ok
Posted by: Null Actor
Building off Ion's quote:
Quote:
|
Comment: God had created Lucifer a perfect spirit being, but He also gave him free moral agency, that is, the ability to choose to follow good or evil. Lucifer chose to become Satan the Devil, the Adversary, by allowing sin to mold his character. His rebellion against God sealed and hardened his evil nature, and now he opposes all that is good, right and godly (Matthew 13:38-39; I Peter 5:8; Revelation 9:11; 12:9-10).
|
Perhaps Lucifer chose the true path of good. Food for thought.
Posted by: Bored
Quote:
|
Satan was and still is an angel who works for God. His role? As the Tempter/Temptress/TemptIT(I dunno) who helps strengthen the relationship between God and His People. Basically to test people and their resistance to tempation and sin. So the people either give in to temptation, get punished, repent, are forgivne, and thus come out with a stronger relationship with God, or they defeat the temptation and come out feeling really close to God.
|
Sorry man, that's plain blasphemy. I can find several dozen scriputes that directly link Satan=Lucifer=Tempter=Devil in a very short time, and also state that God does not tempt men with evil. He doesn't do evil, he didn't create evil, he cannot abide in the presence of evil. Which is why Lucifer HAD to be cast down. It was an automatic result of the very nature of God.
"Let no man say when he is tempted, 'I am tempted by God': for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither does He tempt any man: Every man is tempted when he is drawn away by his OWN lust and enticed."
-James 13-14.
"The Lord knows how to deliver the godly out fo temptations and to reserve the unjust untill the day of judgment to be punished."
-2 Peter 2:9
"You believe that there is one God. You do well. The devils also believe and tremble."
-James 2:19 (see also Mathew 8:29)
"Submit yourselves to God. Resist the Devil and he will flee."
-James 4:7
Well, if the Devil isn't the tempter then just what is James encouraging you to resist?
"Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the Devil."
-Mathew 4:1
Oh, so he IS the tempter.
"Get behind me Satan, you are an offense to me, for you do not savour the things that are of God, but those that are of men."
-Mathew 16:23
Doesn't look like a servant of God to me.
"To open their eyes and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may recieve forgiveness from sin, and inferitance among them which are snctified by faith this is in me."
-Acts 26:18
Devil, capitalized, is ALWAYS referring to Satan/Lucifer directly.
devil(s), lower case, is always referring to a lesser fallen angel.
Quote:
|
The Devil is the fallen angel Lucifer, who in the not-so-forgotten past led a rebellion against the Lord. He was ultimately defeated and punished, sent to the burning region now commonly referred as "Hell". The Devil does not tempt people to do bad things or cause them to do bad things - his/her/its role is merely now a keeper of Hell.
|
Lucifer is not a "Keeper of Hell". He is in eternal agony and cursing his every breath, as well as yours, right about now.
Look here:
"And the great dragon was cast out of Heaven, that old serpent called the Devi and Satan, who decieved the whole world. He was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him."
-Revelation 12:9(see Genesis chapter 3)
"And I saw an angel come down from Heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. He laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, who is the Devil called Satan, and bound him a thousand years."
-Revelation 20:1, 2
I can also find several Old Testament scriptures on this subject as well, it just takes a little more time to find it because the passages aren't as easy to cross-refrence.
Posted by: Null Actor
Quote:
Originally posted by uh...ok
I was taught and still believe that Satan's purpose is to strengthen God's relationship with his People. I mean, in all reality, bonds get strenghthened most through hardship... tests, in a certain way.
|
There are differences between tests and tricks. People's faith strengthens through hardship, yes, I would agree with that. But people's faith would be broken by tricks and lies.
How long would you trust a friend who constantly tricked you in to getting in to trouble? Not long, I'd hope.
Posted by: uh...ok
But Nova, if you go under the assumption that (well first of all that God exists) and that Satan is the tempter acting for God, then it wouldn't be a trick. You'd know that the temptation is there for a reason.
Oh, and Bored - thanks for the quotes. I'll look them up when I get home and actually have my Bible with me. I want to see if it's a matter of translation or if it's the general case for all Bibles.
-uh...ok
Posted by: Ion Silverbolt
Well, I don't think Satan is Gods agent personally. That would mean God uses entrapment. I mean it's obvious some people don't repent from temptation, so that means they burn for eternity. That sounds pretty evil to me.
Posted by: Null Actor
Quote:
Originally posted by uh...ok
But Nova, if you go under the assumption that (well first of all that God exists) and that Satan is the tempter acting for God, then it wouldn't be a trick. You'd know that the temptation is there for a reason.
-uh...ok
|
So as a parallel, you would be all for governments working in the way I described earlier? Using entrapment, as Ion mentioned?
Posted by: uh...ok
But Ion, there also exists the belief that God is all-forgiving.
Which, once again, leads to my question of - if that's the case, why would Hell exist in the first place?
-uh...ok
Posted by: uh...ok
Nova, do governments operate under the assumption that the people KNOW about the existence of the trap?
When you go into politics/government, you never know when your government is telling the truth or is downright lying to you.
-uh...ok
Posted by: Null Actor
All the evidence points to god being a sadistic trixter, if you ask me. Or I could argue another point, which is sure to be deleted, even though it would be on topic. PM me if you want, and I'll give it to you.
Posted by: Null Actor
Quote:
Originally posted by uh...ok
Nova, do governments operate under the assumption that the people KNOW about the existence of the trap?
|
Sure they do. After all, people know that the government runs stings. People still buy drugs. It's just a small step to make their operations run in a bit more like you mention.
True, the government lies to people all the time... but then again, so does the church.
Edit: To refine my point, the argument is passive vs active entrapment.
Posted by: bLaCkOuT
Good research, Bored. Thanks.
Posted by: justinious
for a totally different perspective:
http://www.churchofsatan.com
Posted by: tkron
And, as in Satanism, we have atheists who see Lucifer as a mere symbol while others see him as an actual entity. But what unites most of them would be a spiritual evolution to attain full knowledge of Self and the universe, to use knowledge as a means of living life deliberately and honorably and breaking free of the delusions others try to inflict for their own gainhe won't rest until all his enemies are dead.
However it is perceived, most would concede the symbol of Lucifer as something worthy to emulate; one who attains knowledge and uses it to help others, even in the face of oppression.
Lucifer was an emissary from a higher power, a better power, who brought light and knowledge to humans by showing Adam and Eve the fruit of knowledge. When the two ate the magic apple, they attained knowledge - becoming fully human, and were able to think for themselves, thus potentially extracting the means to break free of YHWH's lies. For this service to humanity Lucifer suffered under YHWH's wrath.
Hmm most Christians believe that the entities that they gave the names Satin/Lucefer are not honorable, do not want to help others, and that they are self serving.
But I can understand why the worshipers of Lucifer and Satin, if they profess them to be the same entities as the Christians claim would claim otherwise.
Posted by: Shalome
Without the presence of the concept of evil, it is impossible to know the concept of good. Basic Cartesian concept. There is no possibility for the conceptulization of "lack" if the concept of "have" does not exist.
If God exists and loves humanity, and Satan exists, then God is not all-powerful, since he cannot wholly destroy Satan or Satan's influence. Even the most pious of Christians admit to being greviously tempted to sin, including Jesus himself, who while fasting in the desert withstood Satan's offerings of ultimate power (and I can no longer quote the exact testament -- its been too long). Unless, of course, you consider the granting of free will to be part of love -- no free will would be control, which is in direct opposition to trust and love... Brain hurt yet?
If God exists and allows Satan to exist in order to allow free will in humanity, then God does not trust in his own creation and needs affirmation -- hardly the actions of a supreme being. Read Genesis to hear the consequences of God's wrath when his children defy him in order to become more like him. Why would it require temptation? If God's children were going to fail, would they not do it on their own without temptation from a higher power (and yes, Satan is a higher power than man, although man is granted the ability to transcend Satan)? Does the devil have to be present for there to be a concept of right and wrong, and therefore the choice between? Go back go the Cartesian logic.
If God exists, he rolled the dice a long, long time ago and left us to our way. You can see it in the testaments, how God in the beginning had his hands on every portion of creation, how he spoke directly in audible voice to his children, and how over eons became more and more distant.
Satan and the Devil are one and the same. They're derived from the same word in Aramaic, the original language of the old testament, over centuries of linguistic evolution. The word is Mammon. See here for more information: http://www.bbie.org/english/Study06...ilAndSatan.html (total side note -- "Baal" originally was a title meaing "lord," "master," and "husband" -- not demon or devil, and I CAN'T POSSIBLY figure out where the dual meaning might have come from).
Any religious theory, however, is just that -- a theory. We won't know until we die, and then its too late. It is ther perverse combination of faith and apathy that get us through day after day, and whatever names we give to that struggle, well, that's our own perception and manifestion of the god-concept. That goes for the satan/devil concept as well.
Posted by: Shalome
Do What Thou Will and Harm None.
That's all I gotta say.
Posted by: redwench
Quote:
Originally posted by Bored
Sorry man, that's plain blasphemy.
|
no. its a different interpretation from yours.
blasphemy != different idea
Posted by: Null Actor
Well, depends on if he's Catholic or not...
Posted by: Shalome
blasphemy
1.
a) A contemptuous or profane act, utterance, or writing concerning God or a sacred entity.
b) The act of claiming for oneself the attributes and rights of God.
2. An irreverent or impious act, attitude, or utterance in regard to something considered inviolable or sacrosanct.
Posted by: uh...ok
Posted by: Erekose
Quote:
Originally posted by Shalome
Do What Thou Will and Harm None.
That's all I gotta say.
|
heh that simple thought is the closest ive come to a religion (aye i know it is a religious teaching, i even know which one ) if only because ive no one to teach me... so maybe i do have a religion? bah i dunno youre all making my head hurt.
oh just a thought. when jesus said 'get behind me satan' (think i got that right) wasnt he talking to peter?
Posted by: Ion Silverbolt
Quote:
Originally posted by Shalome
(total side note -- "Baal" originally was a title meaing "lord," "master," and "husband" -- not demon or devil, and I CAN'T POSSIBLY figure out where the dual meaning might have come from).
|
I believe the term is associated with Baalzebub. Who is described as the Prince of Devils and the God of the Philistine city of Ekron. It's also spelled Beelzebub too depending on the translation.
On a topic related note, a lot of Christians also associate Baalzebub as being Lucifer and Satan but there are no other mentions of the name outside of 2nd Kings.
Posted by: Kdr Kane
uh...ok,
You've got devout atheists agreeing with your "scripture teacher" about Satan being on the left-hand of God. They love to jump all over those things that seem to give credence to their views.
And that's ok.
I didn't notice whether you said you were Christian or not. But, I'll tell you the way I heard it.
In the Old Testament, Moses brought God's law. Jesus brought God's love. So, the tone between the Old Testament and the New is quite different.
So, don't always take a certain scripture or line to work on it's own. There's always a translation problem. Look at the full context of the Bible and then ask yourself. You don't really need other people to figure it out all the time.
After all, if you had only read the Book of Job, you'd probably be living underground in a cave as a hermit.
Posted by: uh...ok
Very true Kane, thanks.
That's exactly what I said in reply to Bored's post - he did provide much Biblical evidence to refute what I was taught and still believe, but the resource he's using is a Bible that was translated to English. My Scripture teacher, most likely, read the "original" (I put it in quotes because it's not like he did read the original version) Jewish version of the Bible and perhaps some of his arguments arise from there.
Nonetheless, the Bible he had us use was pretty consistent, so when I go home, I will make sure to check.
As to my religious identity, the most I can say is that I'm a Christian, but am in no way associated with organized religion. Never baptized, confirmed, or any of those sacraments. I've always questioned whether or not I should, but I know that I'll never be able to keep to the duties of a member of the Church (e.g. going to Church every Sunday, etc. etc.). I simply carry the basic beliefs that God exists, as did Jesus, that the only requirement for you to go to Heaven is simply believing in Him and being a good person, and that ... in the words of my Scripture teacher, "If you had a choice to do one thing or another, and one thing benefited others and the other benefited yourself - choose the former." A very hard doctrine to live by, but I can say that I honestly try.
-uh...ok
Posted by: Ion Silverbolt
Quote:
Originally posted by Kdr Kane
You've got devout atheists agreeing with your "scripture teacher" about Satan being on the left-hand of God. They love to jump all over those things that seem to give credence to their views.
|
I think the term devout Atheist applies to maybe one member that has posted in this thread. Just because someone (Like me) chooses to not believe a lot of what is in the bible does not mean I or anyone else in this thread have any valid input in its discussion. It also does not mean I have no belief in god or the possibility of. I have more knowledge of the bible than a lot of "Devout Christians". So I would hardly say my input is insubstancial. Or anyone elses so far for that matter.
The entire book is based on faith alone. No one person will ever have the same identical views as the next. Whether they believe in god or not isn't even relevant to this discussion.
And i'm not mad. I'm just making a point.
Posted by: uh...ok
Oh, and I've always had a fancy for Zen Buddhism.
-uh...ok
Posted by: Ion Silverbolt
A friend of mine does a lot of translating and research into biblical stuff. He says the term hell was actually referred to the city dump outside Jeruselem. Which was a smelly smoldering pit of garbage.
Posted by: justinious
Quote:
Originally posted by Ion Silverbolt
A friend of mine does a lot of translating and research into biblical stuff. He says the term hell was actually referred to the city dump outside Jeruselem. Which was a smelly smoldering pit of garbage.
|
http://www.pantheon.org/articles/g/gehenna.html
Posted by: redwench
Quote:
Originally posted by Ion Silverbolt
I think the term devout Atheist applies to maybe one member that has posted in this thread.
|
minimum of 2.
Posted by: uh...ok
Yea, that's pretty much the kinda stuff my teacher taught. It was really cool. Like Moses and the ten plagues.
-uh...ok
Posted by: Null Actor
Quote:
Originally posted by uh...ok
I simply carry the basic beliefs that God exists, as did Jesus, that the only requirement for you to go to Heaven is simply believing in Him and being a good person
|
Which is exactly how it should be. People shouldn't need organized religion, or a certain set of rules, or a certain person to look up to in order to back up their faith. You don't need to prove your faith, and as such, your faith is probably stronger than that of people who believe that faith/spirituality and organized religion are intertwined.
All that really matters is what you believe in. That applies to anyone of any faith, including atheism.
Posted by: justinious
Where do you place your faith being atheist Nova? I, myself, am agnostic. There is a "higher order" of intelligence at work in the universe. Maybe it's God, maybe it's Fate, maybe it's the grouping of all thought forming our existence. There is something.
On the other hand, you could all be figments of my imagination.
Posted by: Null Actor
My faith is in science and scientific theory.
Posted by: Xtren
uh...ok it's a very interesting theory you brought up. When thinking of the devil I would often picture a good and bad conscience in my head, one telling me to do one thing and the other, the devil (or by your statement Satan), to do something bad or something that I shouldn't do. However, I never once think I have questioned whether or not Satan and the Devil are the same thing. It's an interesting point therefore because it seems to make quite a bit of theological sense, and personally I think, after reading what you've said, you are probably right.
However one can also imply the counter arguement in this case that God has a pure heart, and his angels only believe in the good doing. Despite Satan supposedly drawing the people closer to God you might think that the Lord would not allow such a thing since he would never tempt people to do something that is wrong or shouldn't be done.
As you said though, nothing in the Bible suggests that they are one.
Posted by: uh...ok
Err.. thanks for "agreeing", although the stances on this are rather personal... so thanking is rather inappropriate. Read the whole thread first though.
-uh...ok
Posted by: TotalRecall
Quote:
"Get behind me Satan, you are an offense to me, for you do not savour the things that are of God, but those that are of men."
-Mathew 16:23
|
The former verse makes it appear as if humans are set from the beginning to fail. Rather pessimistic, don't you think? And what about this little thing...?
Quote:
"And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."
-Genesis 1:26
|
Posted by: uh...ok
TR, one of the most used quotes for putting a spin on.
I've seen way too many AIM profiles that go along the lines of, "If God made us in His image, how f*cked up is He?"
Or, on the flip side, "If God made Man like Him, does that make me perfect?"
-uh...ok
Posted by: Null Actor
Who are you to say what spin is and isn't? 
Perhaps the popular opinion is flawed.
Posted by: Null Actor
Maybe we're just a little civilization in the petri dish, and god is just Lisa, who accidentally gave us life... Satan is Bart the Destroyer.
Posted by: Kdr Kane
I have just a little bit more wisdom to impart having been a former atheist for most of my life.- God doesn't punish us. Never. He isn't petty.
God watches us with some interest. He also has other things to do.
God only answers our prayers if they are for someone else. He doesn't take to selfish wishes.
God interferes only rarely. Mostly when someone has asked for something for someone else.
We are responsible for making our own lives better and better for others. Not God.
How do I know this?
I started listening.
The rest of the trappings of religion are there to get you to understand these things.
- or -
To take your money and control you.
So, you can make of it what you will. But, don't scream at the top of your lungs thinking everyone but you is an idiot. You are probably wrong.
Posted by: uh...ok
I like the screaming at the top of your lungs part.
-uh...ok
Posted by: Xtren
It's true that you can't always pray for something to God and expect it to come true, especially if whatever you prayed for is very farfetched. However I don't agree with what you said about God only answering prayers for someone else. Just because you pray for yourself doesn't make you selfish. There's nothing bad about asking for good health, or for success in the future. If you really deserve it you'll get it (which basically means you have to do something on your own part because it isn't just going to come like that).
Posted by: redwench
Quote:
Originally posted by Xtren
If you really deserve it you'll get it (which basically means you have to do something on your own part because it isn't just going to come like that).
|
I see. so all those people that pray for good health (which are most of the people that pray) and dont get it either dont deserve health, or deserve illness? interesting theory there. what is the point of doctors again?
Posted by: Ion Silverbolt
Quote:
Originally posted by redwench
what is the point of doctors again?
|
Yeah, and the best part about that is you can file a malpractice suit if your prayer doesn't get answered.
Posted by: uh...ok
In the end, it all comes down to how you sue God.
-uh...ok
Posted by: Xtren
Quote:
Originally posted by redwench
I see. so all those people that pray for good health (which are most of the people that pray) and dont get it either dont deserve health, or deserve illness?
|
It doesn't mean they don't deserve good health. Most people that have a serious illness are simply unfortunate, or in some cases they would be ill due to old age (which you can probably say is normal). You just have to remember that if you do good things for other people you will be repayed. God will repay you as well. Maybe not by instantly ridding you of a disease, but in other ways. When ill it really comes down to the strength of your own organism and the treatment you get from doctors. A strong faith in God can probably only neurish you spiritually.
Posted by: Iownyourmom
wow this is deep stuff.... well i dont beleive in god but if there is a god i hope its your version cause i am definatly going to hell...
Posted by: AngstMerchant
Some of you might have noticed a conspicuous lack of input from me in this thread. If there is a good old-fashioned debate going on here, I'm usually right up in there. The reason:
When it comes to the divine, logic and reason hold no relevance.
None of you (and in fact, no mortal period) has any idea what the rules are governing this crap or if even one among us could even comprehend the circumstances if they were made available to us. Bottom line, I prefer literal masturbation to metaphorical masturbation.
Posted by: Xtren
Your absense was definitely noticed in the thread Angst Sure nobody can truly understand exactly what was written in the Bible thousands of years ago, but we can always try to better comprehend. There are numerous theories that can be drawn from the Bible that are worth discussing, like this one.
Posted by: uh...ok
Angst, it's not much a debate but rather more of a discussion of sorts. A "share your view or opinion of the topic at hand," not, "let's see who can prove this point best."
Although at some points we did get some biblical evidence, but that was more a theological pursuit than anything else.
Oh and Xtren, the whole "If you do good, you will be rewarded" kind of thing always makes me wary. As my friends, teachers, and I have discussed many times before, it really leads to the question of, "Do people do good for the sake of doing good? Or do they do it so that they'll get rewarded? Or do they do it to FEEL good about themselves (which in a way is a reward)?"
I'd like to think of doing good as not something you get rewarded for, but simply something you must do.
-uh...ok
Posted by: Xtren
When it comes to good deeds or helping other people out of kindness I don't think anybody does those things to get rewarded. Is it not frequent that you might give somebody a present or even as little as a card and they feel that they have to repay you, even though you did not intend on getting something back? Unless you are doing a job (as in profession), or perhaps working overtime you do not intend on getting a reward in most cases.
I have to stress most cases though, because there are those people that will do a favor for you and then think you owe them for the rest of your life.
Posted by: Erekose
...its called the mob
Posted by: Arwen
As I understood things Satan was a mistranslation (lack of) into Greek of Ha'satan - the oppressor. Hell was a term which referred to laying into the earth.. buriel I guess.
I'm a bad Catholic in so far I do not believe in the literal Bible, nor do I agree with all of Rome's teachings. But we have purgatory to spend time before St Peter et al decide where we're going..a second second chance! You have to remember that our knowledge is far superior than that available to the extremely controlling patriarchal days in which the Bible books were written. Symbolism is most likely to be the "correct" way of looking at and understanding it's teachings. otherwise it is contradictory in places ( I can't quote chapter and verse). If you understand the Bible is symbolic especially of time scales (even we have problems fully comprehending geological time) then evolution etc is not a problem. I have no problem being a christian and a scientist.
There is no alturism.. if doing a good thing induces a sense of well-being or happiness then the act can't be alturistic.
A final thought....all paths lead to the truth: if followed faithfully.
Posted by: Bored
Quote:
Did you ever hear of The Fall of Man? That is the Sole reason for the writing of the Bible and Jesus coming to earth. To save man who cannot even see his own plight, let alone save himself.
I am not Catholic, and rather resent the idea of being associated with them because for the most part they have become apostate since about the first two or three generations.
One other fquote from Revelation.
"As many as I love I also chasten."
Posted by: Xtren
What do you mean "apostate since about the first two generations"? I don't agree with that at all...
Posted by: Bored
By that I mean that since, according to the Bible, God's plan was to save man by our faith in his sacrificek, Jesus, being suficient for our salvation and sanctification. The church has, for the most part, left this doctrine and begun adding many things to the original teachings that have no Biblical grounds. Don't get me wrong, I am not just opposed the Catholic church, but to what is going on in a large portion of the protestant church world too, because they have turned to this false teaching of "pay all your tithes and give money to the Lord and he'll give you everthing you need." I've even heard lies such as "Give a thousand dollars and God will give you back ten thousand."
This is going to be a very long post as I am going to try and be thorough, yet at the same time devote as equal time as possible to each major denomination and point out the major flaws in their current teachings. I'd just like to point out that "protestant" means to protest, more specificly protest what the Catholic church was, and is still, doing. The idea that the Catholic chuch is apostate is not something new, it has been around for centuries.
For examples, the Catholic church has almost from the beginning called its priests "Father" and had confession to him as well as believing that he is more suitable to pray to God for them. Also, priests are forbidden to marry. See quote two paragraphs down. Yet Jesus' own words
"I am the way, the truth and the life. No man comes to the Father except by me."
"Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings the Lord has perfected praise."
Then there is the tradition of Lent, in which each person abstains from red meats and various other things, some of their own choosing, as a form of fasting. Now there's nothing wrong with fasting and pray, its totally scriptural. However what is wrong with it in this case is that it is done almost solely for the purpose of tradition, and 'because I'm supposed to do it' and with the attitude that 'this good work will draw me closer to God'. There is a verse, often a whole passage of scripture, for everything.
"Now the Spirit speaks expressly that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils. forbidding to marry and commanding to abstain from meats, which God has created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. Every creature of God is good and nothing to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving. It is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.-1 Timothy 4:1-5(written by the apostle Paul/St. Paul)
What a deacon/bishop/church leader should be like according to Paul as the Spirit led him to write.
"This is a true saying. If a man desires the office of a bishop he desires a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviuor, given to hospitality, apt to teach. Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre, but patient, not a brawler, not covetous. One that rules well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity. If a man does not know how to rule his own house how shall he take care of the church of God?" 1 Timothy 3: 1-5
Next comes the manner in which catholic christians are taught to pray. You pray two major prayers: One to the Father, which is taken directly from the Bible, and one to Marry, which I cannot find any refrence to in any Biblical text. There are many who are taught to pray x number of Rosaries in various situations and that will make God hear them and answer. I'm not making this up, I know it because we have a family friend who was catholic for over 40 years and has told us (my familly) all of this. Let me quote the whole passage from which the Model Prayer is taken, and we shall see what is wrong with this. The first half of this applies to all giving of tithes and is equally, if not moreso, targetted toward the other denominations of the church.
"Take heed that you do not do your alms before men, to be seen of them. Otherwise you have no rewared of your Father which is in heaven. Therefore when you do your alms do not sound a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets that they may have glory of men. Verily I asy unto you They have their reward. But when you do an alms let not your left hand know what your right hands does. That your alms may be in secret and your Father which sees in secret shall reward you openly."
Again protestants, this does not say "you'll get back ten times as much." it doesn't even say you'll be rewarded with wealth at all. Continuing now.
"And when you pray, do not be as the hypocrites are, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets that they may be seen of men. Verily I say they have there reward. When you pray enter into your closet and when you have shut your door pray to the Father which is in secret and the Father who sees in secret shall reward you openly. When you pray Don't use vain repetitions as the heathen do, for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking. Be therefore not like them for your Father knows what things you have need of before you ask him."
The Model Prayer.
"After this manner therefore pray. Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread, and forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen."
This was an example of how prayer should be framed. First, acknowledge the Father as such. He is set aside. He is Holy. There is none other like Him.
Second, you are submitted to His will, and not your own. You don't seek God for selfish reasons. You seek God for His reasons and to learn what those are...
Third, 'daily bread' is referring to the word of God, and more specificly "Man shall not live by bread alone(a small portion of the word), but by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God." It is an intreaty for God to continue to teach you the word with each passing day.
Fourth, God only forgives you according to the same forgiveness you show to others.
Fifth, Imporing that God help you avoid temptation since you are not capable of doing it yourself.
Last, further acknowledgement of God.
And then the topic of fasting comes in.
"Moreover when you fast, be not as the hypocrites are, with a sad countenance that they may appear to fast before men. Verily I say they have their reward. But when you fast annoint your head and wash your face that you appear to men not to be fasting, but to you Father who is in secret an dyour Father who sees in secret will reward you openly."
This passage sinks the whole Lent ship before it even gets out of the harbor.
So just how much praying is enough? How many times can you pray the same tired thing, often not even understanding what you say, and expect anything in return? Pauls answer in 1 Thessalonians is to "Pray without ceasing."
These are just some of the major grounds from which the protestant churches diverged from the catholic church.
That being said, I will now turn my focus to the Pentecostal and Charismatic protestant denominations, which have since diverged equally from what Jesus taught.
Televangelists and pastors are fond of quoting the parable of the sower, but they somehow manage to skip Jesus' own interpretation of it: saying that it means that if you give x amount of money to the church God will return it to you 30, 60, 100 fold. Let me quote the real passage as it is written.
"A sower went out to sow his seed, and as he sowed, some fell by the way side and it was trodden down, and the fowls of the air devoured it. Some fell upon rock, and as soon as it was sprung up, it withered away because it lacked moisture. Some fell among thorns and the thorns sprang up around and choked it. Other seed fell on good ground and sprang up and bare fruit a hundred fold....Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God. those by the wayside are the ones that hear, then comes the devil and takes away the word out of their hearts lest they should believe and be saved. Those on the rocks are the ones who when they hear, recieve the word with joy. Yet they have no root, and for a while they believe and in time of temptation fall away. Those that fell among thorns are the ones who, when they have heard. go forth and are choked with cares and riches and pleasures of this life and bring no fruit to perfection. (Did you ever see the pastors riding around in the finest cars and having the finest houses, yet the people are all strugling just the same?) Those that fell on good ground are the ones who in an honest and good heart, having heard the word keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience."
So we see then that many Pentecostal, Baptist, and Charismatic churches have abandoned the core teachings of the Bible as it regards faith and how people accept Christ, and have instead imbraced the idea of using God to attain what they want. They love to interpret the word of God based on their situation, and take passages out of context, when they should be interpreting the situation based on the word of God. We all do this to an extent. I am currently a member of a Pentecostal church, so I am very familliar with this thing, but I do not consider myself to be of any denomination.
Posted by: Shalome
Clarification:
Quote:
|
For examples, the Catholic church has almost from the beginning called its priests "Father" and had confession to him as well as believing that he is more suitable to pray to God for them.
|
Untrue. You do not pray to a priest. You ask a priest to intercede on your behalf.. to put in a good word with God, as such. Praying to a priest, or any other living human being, would be sacrilege.
I don't have the time right now, nor the inclination to refute some of Bored's other statements about the Catholic church. Suffice to say that Bored's understanding of Catholic dogma and ritual (especially involving prayer, intercession, the Rosary, Lenten Devotions and fasting) does not come from being taught these things as a Catholic, but from observation and interpretation by someone who is not and has never been Catholic.
Bored, praying the Rosary is a meditative act. Confession and penance are cleansing ritual acts, which you either don't understand or choose to view through a very warped lens.
Note: I'm not defending Catholicism. I'm just saying it's really easy to pick apart something you have no actual experience with.
It's also terribly easy to calmly and rationally spit out personal opinion, personal interpretation, and blatant misinformation as fact.
Posted by: Canis Lupus
Quote:
Originally posted by Shalome
It's also terribly easy to calmly and rationally spit out personal opinion, personal interpretation, and blatant misinformation as fact.
|
Amen
Frankly I find that any argument of what religion and worship "should be like" is flawed to begin with. Any "god-fearing" person who has the audacity to interpret God's purpose and maintain that their interpretation is the right (and only) one comes out as ironically blasphemous.
Remember the Pharisees?
Anyway, since this thread has strayed away from the main topic, with no chance of ever coming back, and with the apparent conflicts in beliefs that might lead to something really ugly, this topic is hereby closed
Do I hear sighs of relief?
Posted by: Bored
Well, I lost a whole half hour of typing again thanks to topics being closed. If anyone cares, refer to "Satan vs. the Devil" Thread and pick up on the last few posts.
Yes, I remember the pharasees, and it is equally ironic that you should bring that up because I had addressed a situation similar to that in the reply that I had attempted to make to Shalome before the other thread was closed. I will attempt to recreate that post here and start this discussion in a thread that it is specificly on topic in, and gives anyone who disagrees with my point of view a chance to respond fairly, as I am open to discusion from people who at least believe in God to begin with, since it would be meaningless for a non-believer to claims about what wrong with individual doctrines of something he doesn't believe anyway.
I have not made blattant oppinions, I have used scripture to back up everything I've said: scripture that is EXACTLY the in the same context as the situation I am applying it to. Also I will clarrify that I'm not saying nobody in the catholic church is saved either, I do think that there are many who are living by faith in Jesus, the same goes for other denominations, but what I'm talking about is some key core doctrine teachings that are wrong and cause confusion, especially among unbelievers, about just what christianity is supposed to be about.
Quote:
|
Untrue. You do not pray to a priest. You ask a priest to intercede on your behalf.. to put in a good word with God, as such. Praying to a priest, or any other living human being, would be sacrilege.
|
lets see...how did I start before... Oh yes...
I never said you pray to the priest.
You say that the priest puts in a 'good word' for you. I ask a simple question: How is his word any better than yours or mine? How does he know your situation better than you know it? Better than God knows it? Of course the answer is his word isn't better than yours, and he doesn't know your situation better than you do and certainly not better than God. I had related a series of Biblical texts in the post I attempted to make, so I will get them again in short order.
Parable of the lost son, who left his father's house(symbolic of faith in Jesus, the son of God) and went into the world(simbolic of sin nature and acts of sin) as he is returning to his father, broken and alone. He didn't go to a servant, he didn't go to his brother, and he didn't go to his mother or anyone else, he went to his father.
"And he arose and came to his father. But when he was yet a great distance off his father saw him and had compassion and ran and fell on his neck and kissed him. And the son said to him, 'Father, I have sinned against heaven and in thy sight, and am no more worthy to be called thy son.' But the Father said to his servants 'Bring forth the best robe and put it on him, and put a ring on his hand and shoes on his feet.'"
"And whatever thing you ask in my name, that I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you shall ask any thing in my name I will do it. If you love me keep my commandments and I will pray to the Father and shall give you another Comforter who will abide with you forever."
Where then does the need to have another pray for you on your behalf, or put in a good word, arise? Is Jesus's own word not good enough? He said that whatever you ask in my name it will be given. Adding something, or someone to this two way relationship with God does not make it better, it takes away from it. Leaving a he said, "She said..." situation...
Now I will relate more about what my family friend's experiences were with the Catholic church. He was, as I mentioned in the other thread, a member of the catholic church for more than 40 years. He would tell anyone that he was an adulterer, a thief, a habitual liar, a drunk, etc. all the while being in church regularly. He grew up in Catholic private schools. He recalled, he told us, that on many occasions he would read the Bible and discover that what it said did not line up with the teachings he was subjected to. He also discovered that according to the scriptures he was not saved. On one occasion he related the story of how he often went to the priests and discussed this topic with them. Even after telling them everything about the way he lived and how he did not believe he was saved, they repeatedly responded with "Don't worry about it, you are a Roman Catholic and are saved."
"But I knew I was not saved." He would tell us, and the priests had no further encouragement or help to give because they did not know what to say. Now this man is 71 years old and relates that he was in the Catholic church for over 40 years and has only been saved for 23 years now, by his own account. I wish that this story was a lie, or a nightmare or some sort of fantasy, but it is not.
"Can the blind lead the blind? Will they not both fall into the ditch?"
The story of the pharisees is one in which we have a situation of someone who basicly believes "Do more good than harm" or who thought himself to be "good enough, and certainly better than that other guy over there." As it concerns sin. And while I am not talking about sin and what is right and wrong in terms of morality in this thread, I will step aside and address this as well. Everyone is good in his own eyes...if they are lying to themselves and others.
I will admit that I am a sinner and do wrong far too often. I have been caught in more than one lie in my life, I have coveted to commit adultry and other acts of sexual nature, and there is no Biblical distinction between doing and wanting to do(read into that whatever you will). I have wished I could kill someone and get away with it. I could write far, far more on all of my faults. I am high-minded, I am logical and study math and science as often as anything else. I have done some foolish things such as trying to prove God's existence by proving that science could not disprove his existence, spent several weeks in that endeavor and am no less a believer now than before. I am full of pride, one of my biggest problems, if not the biggest one. I want to be right and to have the last word.
However the difference is that I freely admit this and strive to change with God's help and based on my faith in Jesus, as should everyone. I'm trying to point out what is wrong with doctrine and freely admit my faults to friends and strangers alike while they, the pharisees, were mocking other people who they thought were less worthy of grace than themselves, and they tried to kill Jesus for pointing that out to them. I am not trying to mock people or anything like that, and I would rather anyone who reads this to go read the Bible for themselves rather than take my word for anything, because once again I am no better than the next person, and even if I am then there is still original sin to deal with.
I am not worthy of grace at all. That's what makes it grace to begin with. If I were worthy it wouldn't be grace, it would be something I deserved, which again it isn't. As it is written, "Our righteousness is as filthy rags." Yet we are forgiven and justified of that filth by faith in Jesus, not by good works, prayer, fasting, giving all our money to the church, the clothes we wear, or any other nonsense, good deeds though they are. This is not a license to do wrong things intentionally, repeatedly and come back and say "Oh God I'm so sorry." However it is equally proclaiming that you must have faith in Jesus and be willing to admit that you can't do good continuously on your own, and even the good you do is not good enough.
Our family friend knew he was an evil man and that he was going to hell, yet the church could not help him because they did not know the answer themselves. So to compare him to a pharisee could not be farther from the truth, and to compare me to a pharisee may well be true in your eyes, but again I am not mocking people, I am trying to point out a flaw in doctrine that has resulted in a lapse in morality and in the understanding of Jesus from right within the church. "As many as I love I rebuke and chasten. Be zealous therefore and repent." So then how can I say that I have love for someone and not point out an error in what they believe, especially if I believe there is a danger of them being mislead? Same goes for wrong in their life style? I wish someone would have come to me at various points in my life and made it clear that what I was doing was wrong, and many times they did, but I did not listen. I love the ones who did come to me all the more for it now though.
Now that I've covered the topic and the non-topic, lets have some replies. I am eager to see some scriptural evidence to refute what I've said.
Posted by: Spider
beep beep
Posted by: redwench
Quote:
Originally posted by Bored
can I say that I have love for someone and not point out an error in what they believe
|
yes. its called respect for others belief systems.
Posted by: Canis Lupus
I thought I already closed this topic? Creating a new topic as continuation of another topic (which has been closed for a reason), even tho a different title is concocted in order to mask it is not really a wise decision on your part, Bored. It is clear that this discussion will not merit any compromise, and will just repeat the same arguments over and over again. In other words, it is pointless, because no side will budge. Hence, it was closed.
Open another topic like this and consider yourself A "Suspended" Member in addition to being a Censored Member, as you eloquently put as your user title.
Thank you, now move on please ... the air is great outside...
|
|
|
|
|
