Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In the world of biblical theology I expected nothing else, however, this is the same theology the doom and gloom crowd run wild with today. In one breath they will tell you that Satan does all these bad things and then in another breath tell you that god is in control of everything and is the one punishing and smiting folks with earthquakes, AIDS and other destruction all over the place.
You see, the story continues by telling us god chopped down 78,000 Israelites with death while David walks away with his life. So if god orchestrated the whole thing, he killed 78,000 people for...? All David had to deal with was making a tough decision.
LOL indeed. Actually I've been using blue for all direct scripture quotes for a long time... makes the scripture pop out from the commentary. Makes it easier to read IMHO.
Yes it does... sometimes I italicize them. I'm lazy about that... but have OCD when it comes to spelling and grammar.... the mind is a funny thing....
Also, do you think giving credence to these primitive ideas of gods and devils is sacrilege in a way? I mean that acknowledging a false god such as Helel would be proclaiming it worthy of being a god?
I find it funny that even the Pharisees said that Jesus was casting demons out by Beelzebub when that too was a primitive false god.... Did they really believe Beelzebub was real? If so then I guess they were indeed guilty of spiritual adultery....weren't they?
If that is the case and satan is derived from these false gods then believing in satan would be spiritual adultery too...right? I found that when I believed in satan (and hell) it was as if a wall was up in front of God... My focus was on keeping satan away and myself out of hell rather than on God where it should have been....
Yes, the Pharisees were steeped in pagan tradition - probably picked up while Israel was captive to pagan nations. Just like the "two compartments in Sheol" story which Jesus told (upside down) to bust on the Pharisees in Luke 16. Instant eternal punishment/reward at death was a pagan belief while the scriptures spoke of no thought or action in Sheol/Hades and a later post resurrection judgment (Daniel). But again - theologians take this one Lk. 16 parable and build an entire belief system about the afterlife which is in contradiction to all the other scriptures (which teach no activity or thought in Sheol/Hades).
Now - the theologians DO need to develop a story for who Shahar the father of Lucifer really is. That book should make a great fantasy fiction thriller!
In the world of biblical theology I expected nothing else, however, this is the same theology the doom and gloom crowd run wild with today. In one breath they will tell you that Satan does all these bad things and then in another breath tell you that god is in control of everything and is the one punishing and smiting folks with earthquakes, AIDS and other destruction all over the place.
You see, the story continues by telling us god chopped down 78,000 Israelites with death while David walks away with his life. So if god orchestrated the whole thing, he killed 78,000 people for...? All David had to deal with was making a tough decision.
EXACTLY! This is why the Hebrew transliteration, satan (7854), should never have been treated as a proper noun... it should be translated and read "an adversary".... The way transators minds work... sometimes I wonder.
gehenna IS a proper noun, they translate hell....
satan is not a proper noun, they translate Satan....
I believe if you read it as adversary then God being the adversary at least makes sense.. but then we have the other side saying we are making God into Satan or something...
1 Chr. 21:1 An adversary rose up against Israel and incited David to take a census of Israel. (The katjonjj version is not copyrighted yet btw .)
See.. much better.
Although that doesn't address why David wasn't punished... *shrug*
EXACTLY! This is why the Hebrew transliteration, satan (7854), should never have been treated as a proper noun... it should be translated and read "an adversary".... The way transators minds work... sometimes I wonder.
gehenna IS a proper noun, they translate hell....
satan is not a proper noun, they translate Satan....
I believe if you read it as adversary then God being the adversary at least makes sense.. but then we have the other side saying we are making God into Satan or something...
1 Chr. 21:1 An adversary rose up against Israel and incited David to take a census of Israel. (The katjonjj version is not copyrighted yet btw .)
See.. much better.
This certainly would make more sense, Kat, but it still leaves that unsavory story out there that leads to the death of 78,000 people at the hands of 'the angel of the lord."
I think I have a better explanation, however, but it completely undermines all forms of Christianity so it is not going to go over well here. When I get back, I will share it.
This certainly would make more sense, Kat, but it still leaves that unsavory story out there that leads to the death of 78,000 people at the hands of 'the angel of the lord."
I think I have a better explanation, however, but it completely undermines all forms of Christianity so it is not going to go over well here. When I get back, I will share it.
Please do or if you would rather.. DM me... I'm curious now.
Oh.. and either way.. I still believe I am right.. satan should be translated "adversary" to be readable.
Please do or if you would rather.. DM me... I'm curious now.
Oh.. and either way.. I still believe I am right.. satan should be translated "adversary" to be readable.
Oh, I am in total agreement with you that "satan" should NOT be a personal name and was originally nothing more than a common name for ANY adversary. This can easily be found in the bible. One mention relates to Solomon and his satan.
What I think we have in I Chronicles is an evolution in theology though.
I will post my thoughts here so all can see. I know you are speaking with the enemy (me), but I actually enjoy interacting with you and Firstborn. You guys put a little more thought into your theology and I can respect that even if I don't agree with the overall religion.
Have to run for a minute. It's 60 in NYC. Gotta go out and enjoy it a bit.
Oh, I am in total agreement with you that "satan" should NOT be a personal name and was originally nothing more than a common name for ANY adversary. This can easily be found in the bible. One mention relates to Solomon and his satan.
What I think we have in I Chronicles is an evolution in theology though.
I will post my thoughts here so all can see. I know you are speaking with the enemy (me), but I actually enjoy interacting with you and Firstborn. You guys put a little more thought into your theology and I can respect that even if I don't agree with the overall religion.
Have to run for a minute. It's 60 in NYC. Gotta go out and enjoy it a bit.
I sent you a message about what I think you will say... check that before you post...
Have you ever wondered who was at the pinnacle of the temple (can't really stand there in reality BTW) with satan and Christ recording this? I take this more as hyperbole than reality... The point is that Jesus was tempted as WE are tempted and I can't rightly say that a being tempts me so again I don't think this is a literal depiction of what actually happened in the wilderness... JMO tho.
I believe there is a spirit of deception that qualifies as "satan" but not an actual created being. Again JMO.
Job also cannot be a literal story as satan is called by God and is in God's presence.. I would agree more with Lego's stance that satan is a tool of God. We see in the OT that God sent evil spirits to people as well as good spirits. So I could agree that if there was a created being named satan, that he would be a worker for God not against God.
I don't think our flesh is satan but our fleshly desires show the spirit of the adversary.. just like a child in rebellion could be said to have the spirit of rebellion.
Anyway.. this (as well as other stance's on satan) is speculation and would take a literal book to explain with scripture, and quite a bit of dancing and twisting.. right?
Either way.. I cannot see one being trying to damn people and another trying to save them without those beings both being God.
Like I said previously.. this is a very interesting topic.
If Satan is just a figment of the imagination, some sort of figure for something else, then Christ is too. You can't have one without the other.
If Satan is just a figment of the imagination, some sort of figure for something else, then Christ is too. You can't have one without the other.
HUH? You'll have to explain that one to me... why can't you have Christ without satan?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
the mind is a funny thing....
.)
I'm curious now.
