Satan

[Dak]

Weren't you just saying how people contradict the plain meaning of passages? What isn't plain about the passage when it says "the sun stood still and the moon stopped"? Isn't it obvious that this passage presupposes that the sun rotates and not the earth?

Even though we know that the earth orbits around the sun while rotating, no one looks up at the sky and goes "well we have now rotated to the point where the sun dropping below the western horizon". No, the sun is "rising" or "setting", or in that case, not moving at all.

Going back to your suggestion of the "NT" establishing a hierarachy, if you notice there was no actual hierarchy established, but merely two positions: deacons and elders. Deacons were given a very specific job function and didn't have to report to the "elders" any moreso than anyone else in the assembly.

As far as the other passage about "positions" it says:

(NASB)Eph 4:11 - And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers,

This is not a hierarchy, but a listing of various talents some people have. Priests/Cardinals/Popes/etc. are entirely absent in either case.

Christianity puts a "pastor" and/or "teacher" in every church, but most denominations do not allow for apostles and prophets anymore, and evangelists are few and far between, so they are screwed up on this as well.

This was a list of various individual talents, not a church structure.

 

[Thoth-Amon]

Even though we know that the earth orbits around the sun while rotating, no one looks up at the sky and goes "well we have now rotated to the point where the sun dropping below the western horizon". No, the sun is "rising" or "setting", or in that case, not moving at all.

Going back to your suggestion of the "NT" establishing a hierarachy, if you notice there was no actual hierarchy established, but merely two positions: deacons and elders. Deacons were given a very specific job function and didn't have to report to the "elders" any moreso than anyone else in the assembly.

As far as the other passage about "positions" it says:



This is not a hierarchy, but a listing of various talents some people have. Priests/Cardinals/Popes/etc. are entirely absent in either case.

Christianity puts a "pastor" and/or "teacher" in every church, but most denominations do not allow for apostles and prophets anymore, and evangelists are few and far between, so they are screwed up on this as well.

This was a list of various individual talents, not a church structure.

1. If it was the earth that stopped rotating then why did the moon also stop? I really don't buy into your interpretation for a number of reasons. Firstly it goes against the plain meaning of the passage. Secondly NO ONE in church history interpreted that passage that way until after geocentrism was soundly disproven. Next there are many passages in the bible that imply that the earth does not move (i.e. 1 Chron. 16:30; Ps. 93:1, 96:10, 104:5, et al). Lastly if such an event as the earth and moon not rotating there would be enormous natural disasters occuring. Furthermore the Chinese who kept detailed astrological records from the time period in question have no record of an extra long day. You'd think something that monumental would have been noticed.
2. The NT also mentions Overseers (in the greek it is the same word as where we get Bishop from) and Presbyter (I.e. priest). Cardinals; patriarchs et al are just different kinds of bishops that the church invented as the church and its role in society expanded. Also if you read the writings of the early chrisitans like Ignatius of Antioch (ca. 107 ad) and later in the century Justin Martyr you'll find that the church did in fact have a hierarchy centered around the bishop/overseer. There aren't apostles anymore for the obvious reason that all of the apostles died.
I don't have time for this anymore but thank you for your interest in this discussion. I'll let you have the last word.

 

[Dak]

This is a cart before the horse/ chicken vs the egg problem, not only because you are looking at it from the perspective of the church basically "inventing" god, but looking at things with a current perspective, absent context of when things were written, etc.

Overall the difference is Greek vs Hebrew, and the Greek perspective is as different from the Hebrew as night is from day. This contention will be brought up in the "end-times" according to prophecy (Zech 9:13).

YHWH made the covenant with the Hebrews which was everlasting, and Jesus was the eternal sin (blood) sacrifice for that covenant. To properly understand the NT, it must be read through the lens of the Abrahamic covenant, not this church replacement theory.

 

[Fortvivlaan]

Hi, I'm a Satanist so I thought I'd drop in this thread and take a look at what people are saying. Just a foreword to anyone of Abrahamic denomination, "No, I do not worship your concept of Satan. I don't even believe in your God, or your Devil. I believe in reality and that's it; I am an Atheist at heart."

To the Satanist, Satan is not a deity of hate and greed who wants to as OP said "Wreck my shit". To the Satanist, he is merely a metaphor for the primal lusts and desires of the human species. We don't view our actions as good or bad, nor do we trouble ourselves with the worry of eternal damnation by a so-called 'merciful' father figure.

We are free to question any part of reality, we use logic and common sense to guide our actions, not the pages of a book written by generations of misguided and misinformed psychopaths and schizophrenics.

Contrary to popular belief (Except in the case of LaVeyan-type Satanists) Satanists do not perform any rituals or sacrifices as Hollywood would have you believe. Any rituals or sacrifices that do take place, are symbolic and personal actions that the individual Satanist has taken upon himself to do (Perhaps a small blood letting to make an oath of free will? (This is entirely for example purposes; I've never heard of anyone doing a blood-pact. If you ever do, they're most likely just Emo, or a LaVeyan who is too caught up in his fantasy of being a Scary alley-way lurking Occult member).

In lamens terms, Satan is a symbol of free will, individuality, anarchy, and nothing more.

Hail Satan

 

[Dak]

If you are so logical, why do you require the use of a [mythological] symbol/personality as a bannerman?

Why not just absolve yourself of the song and dance of mythology entirely?

 

[Necroraven]

Hi, I'm a Satanist...

Should have stopped reading right there

Your post is full of shit, your usage of the word "we" in YOUR beliefs makes no sense, and to your knowledge, many satanists DO practice rituals, they don't have to be human sacrifice though.

In lamens terms, Satan is a symbol of free will, individuality

This is mostly correct.

...and nothing more.

And this is horseshit. For me (and most satanists), Satan represents a lot more. Maybe not for you, but you speak universally, like every satanists holds the same beliefs as you. You sound like one of those Zeitgeist-atheist-kids, you call themselves satanists because it sounds cool.

Your whole post sounds like a Wikipedia-quote.

 

[Djöfull]

I once asked a satanist what satanism exactly is and he replied: Whatever you want is to be.

I thought, geee..hmm so a satanist can hold christan and whichever beliefs. In essence it is like www.zombo.com

So it doesn't seem like an organized belief/ life stance.

But of course there are some appealing parts I saw quoted by some satanic literature( the satanic bible perhaps). But others that seem too selfish and violent.

Me.. I adhere to atheism and humanism. And I agree with the one who mentioned Satan as a metaphor.

I haven't read the bible but I've seen quotes and discussion about it. Who decides what to take literally or not? Most people cherry-pick from the bible the parts that rhyme with their personality and opinions. And most people haven't even read the damn thing (at least where I live) they just follow tradition and the majority. Most atheists I know know more about the bible than most people.

 

[Unholy Sodomizer]

That is if you are trying to systemize/corporatize the faith. Why should "Dr. soandso" have any more validity on matters of faith than anyone else?

Because most people are retards who will interpret any doctrine as is convenient for them personally in the short-term.

See Evola's critique of Christianity for a fuller statement of this idea.

-|-

 

[Dak]

Even "non-retards" do that, titles and education just make them more adept at twisting things to their own ends.

 

[crimsonfloyd]

Satan is a fictional character, just like Jesus, God and the lot of metaphysical entities, spirits, presences etc. I think they are all thoroughly unbelievable characters in the truest sense of the word.

 

[EerieVon]

I dont see in the bible why Lucifer is so evil..The sole act he committed in the bible against humans was that he lead us to the tree of knowledge. Why was that a sin? Why does god consider knowledge bad? In fact in the bible God seems to commit more acts of random terror against us than Lucifer does. I dont see Lucifer kicking people out of the garden for seeking knowledge, or flooding the earth, or even flattening cities---umm, I thought he was a kind and compassionate God??? Doesn't seem very good natured to me, in fact he kinda seems bipolar. And why are we (humans) referred to as fish (I will teach you to be fishers of men) or sheep?? Perhaps its me but I dont like being referred to as food--after all the Shepard only protects his flock until he leads them to slaughter and consumption

 

[Dak]

I dont see in the bible why Lucifer is so evil..The sole act he committed in the bible against humans was that he lead us to the tree of knowledge. Why was that a sin? Why does god consider knowledge bad? In fact in the bible God seems to commit more acts of random terror against us than Lucifer does. I dont see Lucifer kicking people out of the garden for seeking knowledge, or flooding the earth, or even flattening cities---umm, I thought he was a kind and compassionate God??? Doesn't seem very good natured to me, in fact he kinda seems bipolar. And why are we (humans) referred to as fish (I will teach you to be fishers of men) or sheep?? Perhaps its me but I dont like being referred to as food--after all the Shepard only protects his flock until he leads them to slaughter and consumption

Well, kind and compassionate is relative. Many pagan dieties reserved the right to just fuck you up no matter how many of your babies and animals you sacrificed.

The punishments were for doing what the opposite of what he said (IE following Lucifer). If you ever have kids you might understand.

 

[XxSNAPxX]

I'm kinda new to this thread so I'll just give my opinion on satan. Feel free to reply. Satan, to me, is a kind of life force, flowing through you. The force that pushes you toward carnal desires, and makes you want to do the things that all humans naturally want to do (Having sex out of any purpose, taking revenge, being able to have uncontrolled thought and emotion.......i could go on.). And since it's related; God. Anything that brings good to your life could be considered God, or an "Angel". Therefore, the things bringing pain and sadness into your life could be considered Devils, or "Demons". So....thats my piece.

 

[Necroraven]

Satan is a fictional character, just like Jesus, God and the lot of metaphysical entities, spirits, presences etc. I think they are all thoroughly unbelievable characters in the truest sense of the word.

I don't understand atheist's "I don't believe in God, because it's hasn't been proved, that He exists. They miss the whole idea of religion, which is about belief. God and Satan exit for everyone who believes in them, it doesn't matter if they "really" exists in this universe.

For me Satan is mostly a symbol of rebellion and hate against christian (and many other "right hand") morals and teachings, and the "key" to the hidden power and ability to see through the christian "truths" and their morals which have shaped a large part of humanity today. I don't think Satan as a red guy who lives in Hell and has a fetish for pitchforks.

 

[crimsonfloyd]

I don't understand atheist's "I don't believe in God, because it's hasn't been proved, that He exists. They miss the whole idea of religion, which is about belief. God and Satan exit for everyone who believes in them, it doesn't matter if they "really" exists in this universe.

The whole point of belief is that the thing believed in really exists. I can imagine all sorts of fictitious entities-- lets say I imagine a lion with wings flies by my window every morning. This is fine. But I don't believe in it as a real being. Therefore I have no expectation for others to recognize this winged lion. Nor do I have expectations for the winged lion in-himself.

However, with a belief, I have an expectation that others will also recognize the reality of the entity, if certain conditions are fulfilled (knowledge, experience, faith etc.)

Therefore, I don't see how you can say it doesn't matter whether or not God, Satan or any other metaphysical entities really exist. Ask a monotheist whether or not it makes a difference whether or not God exists. Virtually all of them will say "of course it does!"

 

[Necroraven]

I was mostly referring to people, who don't think themseves, and don't believe, because "scientists haven't found tangible proof of supernatural".

 

[crimsonfloyd]

I was mostly referring to people, who don't think themseves, and don't believe, because "scientists haven't found tangible proof of supernatural".

Science studies the domain of the natural. The "supernatural" is definitively outside the domain of science. When scientists start speaking about the "supernatural" they have stopped doing science and begun doing metaphysics. Unless god is a natural being amongst other natural beings (and if this were true, we would not be discussing the god of the Judeo-Christian-Islamic traditions), he would not be subject to scientific discovery.

Now, how can we understand the term "supernatural"? We are, after all, natural, organic, living organisms. It seems one has to believe in a nonorganic "mind" or "spirit" if the supernatural is to even be a sensible concept. For we cannot comprehend what we have no experiential access to whatsoever. I reject to notion of a nonorganic mind or spirit. Therefore, I consider the term "supernatural" to be an empty and nonsensical term.

 

[modernsappho]

I personally don't believe in Satan as a living entity. Personally, I need evidence in order to believe in any such thing. Which is why I am not a part of any religion. I wouldn't spend my existence in reverence of something I don't even know exists, any more than I would believe that some random person I have met is a trusted friend. Those things require proof. I think the possibility of the supernatural is exciting...And I have spent a lot of time researching metaphysics, anomalies of physics, string theory(Emphasis on theory)...I'm very much into science and the paranormal(And if they exists, it makes sense that perhaps science cannot study the paranormal. At least not with current methods.). But I don't let the paranormal cloud my knowledge of what is real.

As many others have said throughout history, Satan is "The opposer".

But I don't think that means that he is simply "Against God", or his opposite extreme. In the Garden of Eden, "He" represents knowledge, and, in a way, he also represents the inner conscience of man. Many Fundamentalist view the Garden of Eden as a utopia. Yet it seems pretty limiting that man was to be forever locked in a "Relationship" with God, wherein they knew nothing, except that which he told them. There was more to the world than the facade of the Garden that man did not know. When the serpent offers the apple to Eve, he offers the possibility for her mind to be opened from the ignorance which enslaved her. I believe the part about "Dying" upon eating the apple is not meant to be taken literally. It's like a snake shedding it's skin...She would become a new human, having knowledge of good and evil(Being like "One of us", as God and the angels had communicated. I believe that he meant for man to eat of the apple so that men would become like him. I don't believe the "Evil woman tempting and destroying the innocence of man", as most believe.).

Many times in the Bible, the idea of a Destroyer is mentioned. He or she comes in many forms, but mostly represents the idea of different cultural views. Sometimes the words originally used are vague, yet translated to mean something else entirely. There is a lot of "They're not like us" being said, and then before you know it, the Biblical "Christians" start a war simply because another group of people do not practice circumcision. Most times those other people don't try to intermingle will the Hebrews, Israelites, or whatever...They simply are, and yet the God-fearing cannot let them be.

"The other" is mainly just different in the Bible. And the Christians get the retarded idea that that means those who are different from them shouldn't exist at all and call it the Will of God.

 

[BLACKYS]

Morning Star, second only to God, named for the Big Bang that God had Him explode to start everything off, is in God's service then & forever.

 

[Jimmy... Dead.]

Belief is the absence of truth. Not wanting to know what is true