Treatment of the Bible as a historical text

no.biblically, satan is tester of men, a servant of the lord. he's villified here and there, but ultimately only serves god (atleast up until the endtimes, but even this is up for debate, as the satan of revelation probably refers to a specific human being).lucifer is a mangled translation of heylel, which probably means "morning star" and was a title the hebrews gave the king of babylon. and since it was the child jesus that the babylonian magi bowed down before, lucifer is therefor the proper title of christ.although, there is much villification of jews in the new testament.This message has been edited by Arachnophilia, 06-30-2004 04:18 AM

music? i don't know.the other bit, nearest i can tell, comes from milton's "paradise lost." i sure can't find it in the bible.revelation does contain a bit that's similar, but it's at the endtimes, and likely not about the actual satan, but a different tester of christian faith.

book, chapter, and verse?i'm pretty certain you won't find that story anywhere in the bible. especially since lucifer = christ, not satan. (see my post above) doesn't follow. how is that an accusation?satan, or more properly, hasatan, translates as "the opponent" or "the tester [of men]." his purpose is to provide us with alternatives so choice is meaningful, and test our faith. ultimate, he must serve the will of god, otherwise you are indicating that god is not omnipotent.the dualism simply isn't there in the text. the earliest i can find it is in milton's "paradise lost." it re-appears also in joseph smith's "pearl of great price" in the book of moses.

yes, but you're thinking the wrong trinity. try reading up on the qabala's "trinity." this is likely the entities with whom moses spoke.although eloyhim could probably also be applied to angels, but i doubt it from the use of languag later. job 1, god gathers his angels, the sons of god, ben 'eloyhim. satan is there also. he proposes a test of job, because, well that's what he does. in now respect is taking power from god. god has to allow satan to do what he does... i'm looking at the text of exo. 20:3.it looks like it says something but having no other gods (or... even rulers?) shown to his face. or something.i'll look later.

this context?

quote:

---

Isa 14:4 That thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, and say, How hath the oppressor ceased! the golden city ceased!

​

Isa 14:5 The LORD hath broken the staff of the wicked, [and] the sceptre of the rulers.

​

Isa 14:6 He who smote the people in wrath with a continual stroke, he that ruled the nations in anger, is persecuted, [and] none hindereth.

​

Isa 14:7 The whole earth is at rest, [and] is quiet: they break forth into singing.

​

Isa 14:8 Yea, the fir trees rejoice at thee, [and] the cedars of Lebanon, [saying], Since thou art laid down, no feller is come up against us.

​

Isa 14:9 Hell from beneath is moved for thee to meet [thee] at thy coming: it stirreth up the dead for thee, [even] all the chief ones of the earth; it hath raised up from their thrones all the kings of the nations.

​

Isa 14:10 All they shall speak and say unto thee, Art thou also become weak as we? art thou become like unto us?

​

Isa 14:11 Thy pomp is brought down to the grave, [and] the noise of thy viols: the worm is spread under thee, and the worms cover thee.

---

thank you for playing along.see, it's a title they gave the king of babylon. after babylons fall, symbolically, their ultimate defeat (sort of predicted by this taunt) is that hebrew child should rule them. this is the significance of the magi, the babylonian astrological cult and advisors to the king seeking out jesus. the sign in the heavens was that the king had been born in galilea.if that's not the case, explain THIS to me:

quote:

---

Rev 22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, [and] the bright and morning star.

---

that's not exactly what mine says. but it's still addressing the king of tyre... it's called symbolism. i think he's equating the king of tyre with THE SERPENT, symbolically. but i'll get back to you this one. rev = endtimes, and is symbolic of a certain roman emporer... the name satan is often attributed to anything testing in the bible. in some passages, his name even gets mixed up with god, when god asks men to count the people, etc.the letters of paul... at some point, "devil" got associated with satan. i don't know how. but it's still not setting him as an opponent to GOD, just MEN.i think i covered job, before.This message has been edited by Arachnophilia, 07-01-2004 01:34 AM

looks to me like it's the christians mangling biblical doctrine: http://www.faqs.org/...FAQ/06-Jewish-Thought/section-36.htmli believe some of the bible. i take parts of it with a grain of salt. i disregard certain books of advice (like everything paul wrote)you may have issue with this, but why are you believing 17th century fiction as being biblical?

ah, got it, i think."devil" first appears in this verse, actually. (it's nowhere in the old testament, btw). the word is of greek origin, diabolos, meaning "one who accuses falsely or slanders."it seems to be referring to satan in the passages, but is a relatively new word to describe him. however, it does not only describe him. it's a lower-case title, and means anyone who slanders.it in no way sets him up as the mythical "The Devil" who is an opponent to god. it seems to be mocking the king of tyre, the more i look at it. the chapter starts out in the first section, talking about the claims of the king of tyre: "I [am] a God, I sit [in] the seat of God, in the midst of the seas"there's a couple of problems, and why it CAN'T be talking about satan. number one is that satan isn't human. the verse above (2) as well as 9 say the person being addressed is human, and trying to take the place of god.second, the person being addressed is a MERCIFUL person, "though thou set thine heart as the heart of God" says verse 2. the description of calling him an annointed cherub was to provide the image of someone wealthy (and literally covered in gold and such) stretching his wings over the people of israel in mercy, as the cherubs of the mercy seat on the ark of the covenant, so as to take the place of god. annointed means he's a king. satan was never annointed anything, nor is he a cherub. he's an angel, a son of god (as job says) worthy enough to have a title, and a name.third, it's said that satan was power hungry, not money hungry. the description is of someone surrounding himself with riches, repeatedly. "By thy great wisdom [and] by thy traffick hast thou increased thy riches, and thine heart is lifted up because of thy riches" "By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned" "Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick"the sin is greed, not pride, as the first part might have indicated.satan can't die, as the verse predicts of the king of tyre."eden" is figurative, as it often is in the bible. he's saying the king has been made powerful by god. the created bit is similar to what jesus says of his roman captors, that they have no power but what god gives them. the mountain of god, however, is literal. heaven is never described as a mountain. christianity isn't greek mythology, at least until the new testament (rimshot). and god certainly isn't zues. he's talking about the king of tyre encrouching on holy territory, the temples, and mt zion, and god being displeased, and punishing tyre for it.tyre seems to get confused with satan a lot, i've noticed.but uh, you gotta read a little more carefully, because that's not what the verse is talking about at all.here's some more info, including some of the stuff i've written here: http://www.bbie.org/...iptures/B07Satan/Ezekiel28v13-15.html(a correction to the page, however. it states that tyre no longer stands. in fact, it has a rather booming tourist industry today, apparently. you can find pictures of it on the web, even)This message has been edited by Arachnophilia, 07-01-2004 04:13 AM

no porblem. poke around on the rest of the site, everything else makes a lot more sense too. makes me wanna convert. lol.but yeah, i dunno how it's not a problem. i guess most christians are polytheistic, really. i mean, most churches i've been too spend their time worshipping this guy named jesus, who was flesh and blood. since man was made in the image of god, that breaks the whole "not worshipping graven images" commandment.

oh, trust me, i know.my girlfriend is mormon, she's taken me to her church twice so far. no staind glass, no crosses, no pictures of jesus. they didn't even pass around a collection plate. i don't agree with all of their teachings, but i agree with even less from the standard christian church. all in all, the most level-headed bunch i've been in.although, i'm still thinking about judaism. i'd just never be able to keep the laws...

interesting.

the rest of the post, that you must have missed:

quote:

---

the chapter starts out in the first section, talking about the claims of the king of tyre: "I [am] a God, I sit [in] the seat of God, in the midst of the seas"

​

there's a couple of problems, and why it CAN'T be talking about satan. number one is that satan isn't human. the verse above (2) as well as 9 say the person being addressed is human, and trying to take the place of god.

​

second, the person being addressed is a MERCIFUL person, "though thou set thine heart as the heart of God" says verse 2. the description of calling him an annointed cherub was to provide the image of someone wealthy (and literally covered in gold and such) stretching his wings over the people of israel in mercy, as the cherubs of the mercy seat on the ark of the covenant, so as to take the place of god. annointed means he's a king. satan was never annointed anything, nor is he a cherub. he's an angel, a son of god (as job says) worthy enough to have a title, and a name.

​

third, it's said that satan was power hungry, not money hungry. the description is of someone surrounding himself with riches, repeatedly. "By thy great wisdom [and] by thy traffick hast thou increased thy riches, and thine heart is lifted up because of thy riches" "By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned" "Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick"

​

the sin is greed, not pride, as the first part might have indicated.

​

satan can't die, as the verse predicts of the king of tyre.

​

"eden" is figurative, as it often is in the bible. he's saying the king has been made powerful by god. the created bit is similar to what jesus says of his roman captors, that they have no power but what god gives them. the mountain of god, however, is literal. heaven is never described as a mountain. christianity isn't greek mythology, at least until the new testament (rimshot). and god certainly isn't zues. he's talking about the king of tyre encrouching on holy territory, the temples, and mt zion, and god being displeased, and punishing tyre for it.

---

the verse cannot be talking about satan. it, and the previous few cahpters, (and i think the next few) all address the king of tyre. chapter and verse? revelation talks about the end-times, not the ezekiel-times. chapter and verse?it portays tyrus as a cherub. not decieved by an angel. the angel of the lord addressing ezekiel tells him to tell the people to mock and then lament for tyrus. it says nothing about satan at all, or anything behind tyrus's actions other than his greed. contrary to popular belief, "the devil made me do it" is hardly biblical. this is exactly what got man and woman kicked out of eden, blaming something else. b@liya`al, sure.it means "worthless" and is NOT a proper noun. it's not a name, it's a word meaning "without worth" and is almost always used as "ben b@liya`al" -- "worthless children" or "'adam b@liya`al" -- men of no worth."corinthians may well ascribe the name to the devil/satan/whatever, but that's not the way it's being used in the ot. the word is beelzeboul, which means "master of the house." however, it is a play on the aramaic "baal-zebub" which means "lord of the flies." sort of figuratively "amounting to nothing." the name is however, usually attributed to a lesser demon, such as azazel is. satan tests. that's what the name means. study the scripture a bit, without preconceptions. it'll clear a lot up for you.

from the post before it:

quote:

---

revelation talks about the end-times, not the ezekiel-times.

---

also "that ancient serpent" may indeed refer to the serpent in the garden of eden, as that could have been a test. it more likely refers to the leviathan of job, which is borrowed from earlier religions, and is a symbol of chaos and pride.however, john is speaking metaphorically about the fall off the roman empire. nothing in revelation is literal, it's a coded message to church of rome. at the MOST it says that satan WILL decieve two specific nations -- gog and magog. not that he was decieving the king of tyre in ezekiel's time. and the satan in question is most likely rome, not "hasatan" of the old testament.and "hasatan" still doesn't mean accuser, it means "the opponent [of men]." devil means false accuser, or slanderer. it shifts between a taunt and a lamentation. lamentation tend to talk about former glory (past tense) and present ruin. and you ignored the whole part about why it can't be talking about satan. read it a little more carefully.god looks at man and says, why'd you do it? man says "she made me do it." god goes to woman, and she says "snake made me do it."and so god only curses the snake. right? no, he curses man and woman also. the message is that you can't shift blame. you're responsible for your own actions, whether or not you were tempted or tested.although, i must admit, my post was misleading. god doesn't kick them out of eden because they shifted blame. they stay for a bit after that. god even makes them clothes in that time. if it was just the sin -- well, he could have killed them instantly, right?here's the reason they get kicked out:

quote:

---

And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

---

so they didn't also eat of the tree of life, and become gods. this man, becoming god. not satan. and this is the same problem god has with tyrus, that he's putting himself in the place of god, and so they lament his fate in a manner similar to expulsion from eden.get it?

hahaha best post ever.

no prob. good luck with real life, hope everything's alright.

i am apalled at you.not only is that a gross distortion of reality and history, but outright offensive and ignorant.muslims learn about jesus and his teachings. they do. they just consider him a prophet, more credit than the jews give him. allah is their title for yhvh. they are a sister religion, sons of the same god.it is sad that two families of the children of the same god have to fight such a bitter battle, yes. but no one is winning, and neither side is without blame or without claim to the land.israel tends to do well in wars because it has big brother america on its side, even when they are in the wrong (such as with the wall being built). but to imply that god has bastard children is insulting to a whole set of beliefs, and insulting to my god. kindly do not blaspheme this way again, as it does not look good for those who claim to be christian.and i would hardly say the jews came out of the holocaust better off than the nazis. at least we agree on one thing.