Either you address the responses and replies...or go away.
I spent a lot of time addressing you and I'm not going to waste anymore of my time addressing your cult concepts.
I’ve demonstrated that the common view of Satan is wrong, and that Christ witnessed the hatred of Satan and this revelation will lead to the end of the world. This has profound implication and it supports all the other pieces of the puzzle I’ve laid out. All the other pieces of the puzzle are supported by the Bible as well. I could demonstrate this, but what’s the point? If I show you all the trees you still won’t be able to see the forest.
Isaiah 14:12-15 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
In Isaiah 14 the passage of which your quote forms part is introduced with the words -
You shall take up this taunt against the king of Babylon.
So the passage is ridicule addressed to the king of Babylon who has recently been overthrown.
That's to say, it couldn't be plainer that the KJV's 'Lucifer' is NOT Satan.
All you had to do was read it.
And then you dodge all the points in my post.
If you're just here to lecture and not to listen, then you'll have to present material of a vastly higher standard of research and insight than anything you've shown so far.
Like Led Zeppelin said, sometimes words have two meanings.
Like Led Zeppelin said, sometimes words have two meanings.
If you can't make reasoned replies to reasoned points, there's no point to conversing.
I have to spell it out for you? A word can have two meanings and a story can have two meanings. Isaiah 14 can be referring to both the devil and the king of Babylon.
I was asked to deal will several issues, but this is a completely different view of the Bible and it cannot be done justice in a sentence or two. I have shown how one fundamental part of this revelation is overwhelming supported by the Bible…even if you take away Isaiah 14. If you consider the ramifications of this new understanding of Satan then you will realize that I have supported much of the op.
Another fundamental aspect of this revelation is that we are redeemed by separating that part of us which is good from that part of us which has failed to live up to the Law. Separation is a common theme in the Bible much more so than the idea of transferring responsibility. Separation is often associated with redemption in the Bible. Here are some Biblical references to separation:
(Ge 1:4-18) God created the world by separating light from darkness, day from night, the waters under the firmament from the waters above the firmament.
(Ex 14:16-21) God separated water from water when Israel was delivered from Egypt.
(Jos 3:16-17) God separated water from water when He brought the Israelis across Jordan.
Numerous passages in Exodus, Numbers and Leviticus describe blood, water or oil being sprinkled (separated) in rituals.
(Nu 19:9) The sacrifice of the heifer was referred to as a water of separation.
(Ex 12:12-13) Israel as a nation was born in bondage to Egypt, but in the Passover the Israelis were separated.
(Ge 17:10-11) Circumcision is when 'unclean' flesh is removed.
(Col 2:11) The apostle Paul referred to the circumcision of Christ, saying it puts off the 'body of the sins of the flesh.'
(1 Ki 13:2-3) The Old Testament said the altar would be rent.
(Mt 27:51) When Christ was crucified the veil (Christ) was torn into two pieces and the rocks (us) were also rent.
(Mt 5:29-30) Christ said if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out. If thy right hand offend thee, cut it off. In other words, if a person is part good and part evil, throw away the part that is evil and keep the part that is good.
(Re 1:4-18) Revelation refers to God as Him which is, and which was, and which is to come. Revelation refers to Christ as Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, the first and the last. Unlike the description of God, the description of Christ does not mention the middle. The middle is different. In the end He will be as He was at the beginning.
(Isa 62:2; Re 3:12) Both the Old and New Testaments mention that the Lord will receive a new name suggesting that the Lord will go through some kind of change just as when Abram became Abraham or Saul became Paul.
(Lu 22:19) Christ said He would give up His body for us. He did not merely say that He would die, or that He would lay down His life. He said that He would give up His body for us.
(Lu 24:39-40) After His resurrection, Christ showed His apostles that He has not yet given up His body.
(Isa 52:15; Mt 25:32) The Old Testament said the nations would be sprinkled; the New Testament said the nations would be separated.
(Mt 13:24-30) In the parable of the enemy sowing tares, the wheat is to be separated from the tares.
(Ro 8:1-10; Ro 8:23; 1 Co 15:42-44; 1 Co 2:14) The apostle Paul talked about flesh verses spirit, natural verses spiritual, carnally minded verses spiritually minded. Paul never talked about Christian verses heathen. Good verses evil is not one group of people verses another…it is a struggle within us. The apostle Paul talked about the "inward man," about those who "groan within ourselves."
(1 Jo 3:9; 1 Jo 5:4) The spirit of God within the child of God is perfect and has lived up to the Law. The spirit of love within us is the true child of God.
StashLazarus: Since God created and transcends time
Hi! Have you noticed we are but temporary flashes in the pan and we feel we have the skills to assess eternity?
Think about it: if you are a fruit fly and only live a day or so, how can you say you know what living a week, a month, or a year is like?
God Himself mocks Job re: knowledge of Creation. I consider this a hint of just how seriously we should take Genesis.
God created a world of good and evil in order to experience emotions.
Interesting (and certainly Christianity loves to say that's part of the reason Jesus' plot happened). However, when Yahweh is throwing His little "You can't handle the truth" speech to the divine counsel (of which He was PART OF A PANTHEON, NOT THE SOLE MEMBER), He seems pretty mad (or at least, indignant). I concede I'm not clear on the timeline, but wouldn't we need to see more of God's pre-Earth past before we judge Him to "need" emotions?
We had to be evil so we would die
Can a tomato be evil? 'Cause, you know, it can die.
When Jesus was on the cross God looked away and the devil felt safe unloading his hatred on Christ.
I didn't see Satan in that story. I saw a bunch of Roman executioners, though.
Jesus was perfect
Ah, you haven't been all over this board, yet.
It is fair that our flesh also be discarded and our spirit judged as a separate person.
I'm reading some about gnosticism. I can admire some of the general gists, but I am afraid I just find anti-material stuff quite silly.
The Bible says that we are judged by our works, but we only make it to Heaven through Christ, and God predetermined who would go to Heaven.
When Jesus was speaking to the crowds, He mentions in parable (admittedly, not a literal story) a poor guy who dies and goes to Heaven. Now, I'm assuming since the future tense isn't used, Jesus hasn't died yet by the time the story takes place. How is the poor guy in Heaven, then?
Changing the words is basically saying that God made a lot of poor word choices as He wrote or inspired the writing of the Bible.
Where does God say He wrote it? All I see are the names of human authors, both real and imagined.
The true solution to a riddle must be consistent with all the clues...without changing any definitions.
Or acknowledge there isn't any real riddle. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, you know.
It makes sense that God was a harsh disciplinarian in ancient times since this encouraged Satan to be aggressive in his condemnation of humanity which ultimately led to his downfall.
This makes NO sense. If Satan is being punished for not liking humanity, God could simply not encourage evil. Boom! Problem solved.
As Satan learns the truth, he will be hostile and is cast from Heaven causing Armageddon.
You know, Satan is called this Father of Lies thing, but funnily enough, for the life of me I can't think of any instance where Satan actually does that. In any scene where he actually DOES show up (no, not in A&E's story), he's manipulating, "tempting" as it were, people with THEIR OWN Freudian bullcrap. NEVER does he tell a falsehood. So, I'm curious where this "Father of Lies" thing came about, since it's just not there.
The clues to support this revelation are so abundant in the Bible that only Divine intervention can explain why no one has notice them.
Or it could mean basic reading comprehension skills have to be taught and aren't intrinsic to humanity.
Blu: Really? Where and when was he before time? Without time, how was he able to change things so as to create time?
The only thing I can think of is that God was present before the celestial bodies started moving, so was sorta "before time", as you need planets to rotate to get days and you need planets to revolve to get years and such. *shrugs*
This would only be true if 'God' were a synonym for physics
I can be fine with that.
What law is that, exactly? Where is it stated in the bible?
I'm thinking it's implied, what with everyone all doing the Care Bear Stare after the Judgement or whatever. I mean, if suffering and evil are conquered, that somehow means people are suddenly following the rules, right? Of course, how God hasn't been able to force universal compliance with rules so far and yet somehow does after grounding some demons in their room, I'm not certain.
StashLazarus: Other than the bitter atheist
Meh, don't be so petty. He's probably one of the most rational people on here. He's also not the kind of atheist to go on endlessly with multiple threads about how we're all stupid about every day. So, cut him some slack.
most of the counter points are all about reinforcing the traditions of men.
With all due respect, your opinions come from men's traditions as well.
Revelation foretells the events of the end times, and this is when Satan is cast out of Heaven.
The book takes place sometime during the Roman Empire. The world hasn't ended. Oh well.
This passage is believed to be directed at Mary
Possibly because it flat out says "Simeon told MARY".
but it was Jesus whose side was pierced
But Simeon doesn't mention a side. He mentions a soul. In other words, Mary's gonna be heartbroken over the events.
It is also said that through His death Christ will destroy Satan.
How has that worked out so far?
Christ demonstrated His ability to discern and communicate with unseen spirits on many occasions before He was crucified. Christ felt and witnessed the hatred of Satan when He was on the cross.
I'm not sure this conclusion follows from R1:5.
The phrase, “hated me without a cause” was used on several occasions by King David.
And David would then be full of crap. He was hated because he was a corrupt asshole who belonged on Jerry Springer.
Christ was perfect and without sin.
Only if you close the NT and refuse to read it. We have some threads on this.
I’ve demonstrated that the common view of Satan is wrong, and that Christ witnessed the hatred of Satan and this revelation will lead to the end of the world.
Considering we only HEAR of what Satan has supposedly done, since any scene where he actually APPEARS has him being, at most, a jerk who dares to call people out on their flaws, I bet I can demonstrate a better conclusion: that Christianity lied about how evil Satan was (he was just God's employee, by Job's account) to distract from its own issues. I say Jesus/God need(s) to put the money where the mouth is: if forgiveness is divine, then why hasn't the Big Bad been forgiven already?
If I show you all the trees you still won’t be able to see the forest.
While I think you've made the interesting point here and there, the fact remains you haven't shown us a forest. Instead, you've shown us a tree lot.
Knock and the door shall open. It's not my fault if you don't like the decor.
You're still just blathering on. Please give reasoned responses to the points I made -
1. Where and when was Yahweh before he made time?
2. Without time, how was he able to change things so as to create time?
3. Why do you bother with Satan? An omnipotent god is 100% responsible for evil as well as good.
4. The OT doesn't portray a loving god. Nor does the NT - why would Yahweh send his son to be tortured to death when with a snap of his omnipotent fingers he can achieve any relationship with humans that he wants?
5. You said God established a Law that will cause all hatred and evil to be destroyed in the end. State the bible reference where this is set out.
And I pointed out to you that Isaiah 14 refers expressly and out loud to the king of Babylon and not to Satan.
You're still just blathering on. Please give reasoned responses to the points I made -
1. Where and when was Yahweh before he made time?
The Godhead....Father, Son and Holy Ghost..were outside of time.
2. Without time, how was he able to change things so as to create time?
The Word spoke it into existance.
3. Why do you bother with Satan? An omnipotent god is 100% responsible for evil as well as good.
Why would that be true?
4. The OT doesn't portray a loving god. Nor does the NT - why would Yahweh send his son to be tortured to death when with a snap of his omnipotent fingers he can achieve any relationship with humans that he wants?
The OT and NT present a just God. I bet you call all judges...not loving.
5. You said God established a Law that will cause all hatred and evil to be destroyed in the end. State the bible reference where this is set out.
I too would like to see that reference...or atleast a line of theology. Keep in mind I do believe hatred and evil will be destroyed...but not by a law but rather by Jesus Christ.
And I pointed out to you that Isaiah 14 refers expressly and out loud to the king of Babylon and not to Satan.
I didn't know the king of Babylon was consider the "star of the morning, son of the dawn". How could a person who was on earth...be cut down to earth? Riddle me that Batman.
Then again, just who is the king of Babylon? What is Babylon? The Babylon of revelation?
The Godhead....Father, Son and Holy Ghost..were outside of time.
I'd have thought 'outside of time' was a synonym for 'non-existence'. Where is 'outside of time' exactly, and how do you know?
The Word spoke it into existance.
No, in the absence of time nothing can change, nothing can move. Hence my question. Describe to me how change can occur in the absence of time.
Why would that be true?
Because all power is with the omnipotent god so he MUST be the only source of evil. It can't exist, either in particular or in general, except according to his all-powerful will.
The OT and NT present a just God. I bet you call all judges...not loving.
I see nothing just about killing all breathing creatures bar a boatload just because some humans annoyed him. Nor do I see justice in the slaughter of women and children who haven't done anything worse than anyone else. He never speaks against slavery. And so much more.
I didn't know the king of Babylon was consider the "star of the morning, son of the dawn".
As the author of Isaiah plainly states, it's a taunt against the king of Babylon. There he was, vaunting himself, thinking he was as visible and significant as the morning star, but nah, down he comes tumbling. So the taunt is, That'll teach you to think you're so great!
The Godhead....Father, Son and Holy Ghost..were outside of time.
I'd have thought 'outside of time' was a synonym for 'non-existence'. Where is 'outside of time' exactly, and how do you know?
The bible speaks of it.
2nd Tim 1:9 who has saved us and called us to a holy life--not because of anything we have done but because of his own purpose and grace. This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time,
The Word spoke it into existance.
No, in the absence of time nothing can change, nothing can move. Hence my question. Describe to me how change can occur in the absence of time.
So much for the Big Bang then.
Why would that be true?
Because all power is with the omnipotent god so he MUST be the only source of evil. It can't exist, either in particular or in general, except according to his all-powerful will.
It can exist where God is absent...pulled back from
The OT and NT present a just God. I bet you call all judges...not loving.
I see nothing just about killing all breathing creatures bar a boatload just because some humans annoyed him. Nor do I see justice in the slaughter of women and children who haven't done anything worse than anyone else. He never speaks against slavery. And so much more.
God would be just to wipe everyone out. It is only because of His love, grace and mercy we can breath....and you find great joy in mocking such a just God.
I didn't know the king of Babylon was consider the "star of the morning, son of the dawn".
As the author of Isaiah plainly states, it's a taunt against the king of Babylon. There he was, vaunting himself, thinking he was as visible and significant as the morning star, but nah, down he comes tumbling. So the taunt is, That'll teach you to think you're so great!
This is obviously a reference to Satan because of what Jesus said in Luke 10:18 and because of the inappropriateness of the expression of Isaiah (14:13-14) on the lips of any but Satan. (1st Tim 3:6) and weaken the nations as expressed in Rev 20:3.
Reading that verse alone might not be 100% confirmation for some but when the rest of the bible is used it becomes quite clear it is a reference to Satan.
This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time
But my question was, what does outside of time actually refer to, if not to non-existence? Where and when is outside of time?
So much for the Big Bang then.
Perhaps, but it seems likely that energy pre-existed the origin of our universe.
The problem in hand is that Stash makes express claims that our universe was created from a point when time didn't exist.
Describe the process by which that's possible.
It can exist where God is absent...pulled back from
There's no way he can pull back from it.
He's already omnipresent throughout the past, present and future.
And he's omnipotent and omniscient too, so everything in it, past, present and future, is exactly in accordance with his will and never needs to change.
This is obviously a reference to Satan because of what Jesus said in Luke 10:18
The NT isn't capable of re-writing the OT - that would be the naivest of anachronisms.
And the OT says unambiguously that it's a taunt against the king of Babylon. No mention of Satan there at all.