Satan's Losing War...?

[Space Commander Travis]

Yet didn't he fly to heaven after he came back to life?

i suppose there's not much point trying to suggest that it was metaphorical and not literal.

[Rlyeh]

i suppose there's not much point trying to suggest that it was metaphorical and not literal.

Not really since we're dealing with what the Bible states took place.

[Space Commander Travis]

Not really since we're dealing with what the Bible states took place.

oh yes, i'd forgotten how strongly people who don't believe in the Bible insist that every word in it must be believed literally and no other interpretations such as parable, metaphor or allegory can be countenanced.

[Rlyeh]

oh yes, i'd forgotten how strongly people who don't believe in the Bible insist that every word in it must be believed literally and no other interpretations such as parable, metaphor or allegory can be countenanced.

Apparently you also forgot I was responding to fullywired's post of what Jesus said.

So what if there are other interpretations? I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve.

[Space Commander Travis]

Apparently you also forgot I was responding to fullywired's post of what Jesus said.

So what if there are other interpretations? I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve.

Not sure what i'm trying to achieve? You said "didn't he fly to heaven after he came back to life?" in response to the comment that "Jesus .said it isn’t “Here” or “There,” It seems to me he is saying that heaven isn’t a place, it’s not somewhere we go. ", so clearly you were trying to say that it must be a literal place. That's what I was trying to achieve, trying to suggest that such language might be metaphorical or allegorical.

[Rlyeh]

Not sure what i'm trying to achieve? You said "didn't he fly to heaven after he came back to life?" in response to the comment that "Jesus .said it isn’t “Here” or “There,” It seems to me he is saying that heaven isn’t a place, it’s not somewhere we go. ", so clearly you were trying to say that it must be a literal place. That's what I was trying to achieve, trying to suggest that such language might be metaphorical or allegorical.

Why don't you pass off the life of Jesus as a metaphor and stop wasting my time with your cherry picking.

[J. K.]

The problem is that fullywired's comment was not entirely accurate. Heaven is considered by Christians to be a real place, but it is not the Kingdom of God. The Kingdom of God is not a location, it is a state of being. It is the collective whole of Christians living under God's authority.

[Leonardo]

i suppose there's not much point trying to suggest that it was metaphorical and not literal.

The ascension of Jesus is not so very different in how it is related than the death of Jesus [on the cross].

If considering the ascension of Jesus as metaphor, then should we consider the death [and resurrection] of Jesus also as metaphor? Should we even consider any of the events related in the bible happened, or that all it speaks of, it speaks in metaphor and allegory?

Once you start down the "that was metaphor" road, everything else becomes subject to the same perspective. I accept there are passages within the bible narrative that are obviously written poetically as metaphor or allegory, but the ascension of Jesus is not, imo, one of them.

Jesus is described variously as being "lifted up", "taken up", "carried up", etc, and "within the sight of his followers". The way this is related does not leave much wiggle room to suggest this was intended to be metaphorical, but a literal ascension - bodily [although, perhaps, a returned 'glorified' body] and in sight of witnesses.

Edited September 13, 2013 by Leonardo

[Purplos]

. I tried to explain this to a few westerners but they simply couldn't comprehend.

I often wonder about the people you talk to. (Well, not often really.) Tons of westerners don't believe in heaven or hell or eternal damnation at all. I can't name 1 person who couldn't comprehend the possibility of no eternal damnation. Maybe you live in a really odd part of the world.

[fullywired]

Yet didn't he fly to heaven after he came back to life?

Maybe you believe that but it is debatable,

fullywired

[fullywired]

The problem is that fullywired's comment was not entirely accurate. Heaven is considered by Christians to be a real place, but it is not the Kingdom of God. The Kingdom of God is not a location, it is a state of being. It is the collective whole of Christians living under God's authority.

Well John Paul 11 said. .. Heaven "is neither an abstraction not a physical place in the clouds, but a living, personal relationship with the Holy Trinity. It is our meeting with the Father which takes place in the risen Christ through the communion of the Holy Spirit,"

fullywired

[Space Commander Travis]

Why don't you pass off the life of Jesus as a metaphor and stop wasting my time with your cherry picking.

cherry picking? That's right, yes, anyone who doesn't do as you say they should, and take it absolutely literally, is just cherry picking, because you, of course, are the ultimate authority in what is true about the Bible. Sorry, i forgot that. And we mustn't waste your valuable time. It must be so tiresome to have to keep insisting to people that they must take the Bible absolutely literally, when there's so much that you could be doing.

[Space Commander Travis]

The ascension of Jesus is not so very different in how it is related than the death of Jesus [on the cross].

If considering the ascension of Jesus as metaphor, then should we consider the death [and resurrection] of Jesus also as metaphor? Should we even consider any of the events related in the bible happened, or that all it speaks of, it speaks in metaphor and allegory?

Once you start down the "that was metaphor" road, everything else becomes subject to the same perspective. I accept there are passages within the bible narrative that are obviously written poetically as metaphor or allegory, but the ascension of Jesus is not, imo, one of them.

Jesus is described variously as being "lifted up", "taken up", "carried up", etc, and "within the sight of his followers". The way this is related does not leave much wiggle room to suggest this was intended to be metaphorical, but a literal ascension - bodily [although, perhaps, a returned 'glorified' body] and in sight of witnesses.

really? They were literally saying that he rose up into the clouds like in a lift or elevator? And to question whether this was literally true is just wiggling now, as well as cherry picking? Heavens*, it's like the Inquisition round here. You have to be so orthodox in your beliefs.

*sic

[J. K.]

Well John Paul 11 said. .. Heaven "is neither an abstraction not a physical place in the clouds, but a living, personal relationship with the Holy Trinity. It is our meeting with the Father which takes place in the risen Christ through the communion of the Holy Spirit,"

fullywired

Not all Christians revere the words of a Pope.

[Frank Merton]

I often wonder about the people you talk to. (Well, not often really.) Tons of westerners don't believe in heaven or hell or eternal damnation at all. I can't name 1 person who couldn't comprehend the possibility of no eternal damnation. Maybe you live in a really odd part of the world.

The real question is not those who can't comprehend a real Hell but those who can.

[+and-then]

Back in my Christian days some of my fellow churchgoers brought up an interesting question: Why wouldn't Satan just surrender?

Usually the answer from the pastors is that Satan is incapable of doing that. And I really didn't question their solution. But things changed.

The whole rebellion of Satan thing is nothing but a product of some poor transmissions of traditions. Actually, the whole story has so many plot holes that the entire Hell's army designed by Wayne D Barlowe can march through them.

The whole rebellion in Heaven simply doesn't add up. And that Milton guy made the whole thing even uglier. Now the fervent side of Christianity came up with a plethora of fanfictions. And I bet some of them faithfully abide to Rule 34. (heh)

But in non-Christian cultures, such massive tripping is virtually non-existent. In East Asia, there was no traditional doomsday myth at all. Even the closest one is about everything going well and no one gets thrown into Hell. I tried to explain this to a few westerners but they simply couldn't comprehend. Or, more like what I said simply passed through the other ear.

So let's pretend this Satan's rebellion is based on what really happened. It's not unreasonable to think Satan has a pretty good intellect. And he is willingly fighting a losing war? If you try to fit this into the traditional setup of God vs. Satan thing, it really doesn't make any sense.

See guys, please listen to me. Outside of Christianity this kind of thing is not so common. Even in Hinduism those evil deities are just...another deities going on their lives. Seriously guys, listen to me. This whole versus thing is nowhere near universal around the world. Why would you guys still hang on to such bleak and non-sensical idea?!

Question really is why do YOU? The obsession you have with this is sad, man. And I mean this kindly, not to insult you. I hate to see anyone struggle so much. My daughter grew up in church, was baptized when she was a pre teen and promptly left the faith when she became an older teenager. I expect she will find her answers and possibly gravitate back in her 20's or 30's. But if she doesn't, if she even became an Atheist I would still love her and accept her (as long as she was civil to me and my beliefs) the love would be unconditional but not the respect if she acted out against me in my home. But when someone agonizes over this question relentlessly it is disconcerting. I've been praying for you and I hope that doesn't offend.

[Rlyeh]

cherry picking? That's right, yes, anyone who doesn't do as you say they should, and take it absolutely literally, is just cherry picking, because you, of course, are the ultimate authority in what is true about the Bible. Sorry, i forgot that. And we mustn't waste your valuable time. It must be so tiresome to have to keep insisting to people that they must take the Bible absolutely literally, when there's so much that you could be doing.

Ofcourse not, the Bible only really means what it says if you agree with it. If you don't agree with it, everyone needs to accept your interpretation.

Your arbitrary arguments are tiring and self-defeating.

[Mikko-kun]

All-powerful god who doesn't just beat up satan makes sense to me, because "mysterious are the ways of the lord". For pretty much the same reason god allowed Jesus to die on a cross and allowed Judas to betray him, and allowed all the other bad stuff. It would be all lillies and dandelions and flowery fields of paradise if god just fixed everything, but it should be a plain fact for anyone observing what's happening in the world that god doesn't fix everything for us.

We're born with things that make us feel challenged when certain things happen. Without challenges there would be no reason to make the effort and push. If survival wasn't a challenge, we'd just sit on our butts all day long and let survival work itself out. If relationships wouldn't be a challenge, we wouldn't see marriage councelors nor fight nor ask psychologers and astrologers what's wrong, but we do. We wouldn't feel like having our backs against the wall and would see no reason to make the effort for it. You dont become a boxer if you see no reason to start punching. Liking it can be a reason.

I find the arguments that lean on something being said in the bible stupid, if you lean on to them too much. Bible is a book, it can burn and it's words can be forgotten by humanity. Bible is just a pile of information put to human language, information that is believed to be related to god. If you personally dont know that god gave us the bible, if you haven't asked god and god didn't answer, how can you really really know the bible is all exact and nothing wrong with it? God gave us brains so we'd use them, not that we'd let books dictate all of our thinking.

And Rlyeh, you can't decide other peoples' beliefs for them, you'd do good for yourself to get that through your thick head and stop beating that dead horse.

Edited September 14, 2013 by Mikko-kun

[fullywired]

Not all Christians revere the words of a Pope.

But quite a lot of Christians do ,so it seems that there are differences in where (if anywhere ) heaven is ...So different Christians are hoping for different things in the life to come and the claim that they all believe in the basics is false, if they can't even agree on the place they hope to go to

fullywired

[Leonardo]

really? They were literally saying that he rose up into the clouds like in a lift or elevator? And to question whether this was literally true is just wiggling now, as well as cherry picking? Heavens*, it's like the Inquisition round here. You have to be so orthodox in your beliefs.

*sic

Yes.

Acts 1:9 "And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight."

This is not a poetic passage. It is not metaphor, but is written in a literal style. The ascension of Jesus is/was believed to be a literal, bodily, ascension to a heaven somewhere "above".

If you wish to argue for this event to be metaphor or allegory, you have to change the style of the narrative at this point to be poetic - but it isn't.

[ambelamba]

Yes.

Acts 1:9 "And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight."

This is not a poetic passage. It is not metaphor, but is written in a literal style. The ascension of Jesus is/was believed to be a literal, bodily, ascension to a heaven somewhere "above".

If you wish to argue for this event to be metaphor or allegory, you have to change the style of the narrative at this point to be poetic - but it isn't.

many people, even devout ones, have trouble accepting the fact that ancient people took it pretty literally. Back in the days folks were profoundly stupid and only a very few people had a knowledge of geology and astronomy that is remotely relatable to our own. Although a few people knew that Earth is round, it was never a common knowledge back then.

[Rlyeh]

many people, even devout ones, have trouble accepting the fact that ancient people took it pretty literally. Back in the days folks were profoundly stupid and only a very few people had a knowledge of geology and astronomy that is remotely relatable to our own. Although a few people knew that Earth is round, it was never a common knowledge back then.

Little has changed.

[ambelamba]

Little has changed.

Stop it man. truth hurts.

[Frank Merton]

Most people find devils and Satan and so on absurd. The story of a rebellion against God just does not fit the later picture of God as an omnipotent omniscient being. It was invented when God was perceived in a much more anthropomorphic way and the religion was then stuck with it.

Satan himself, as I understand it, derived from Persian religious ideas of two eternal forces, one good and one bad. The Jews picked that up during the Captivity but had to demote Satan to the old "Shatan" from their own folklore to just an angel, as by this time they were monotheists.

[MorbidVampireica]

I guess the christians just wanted alittle entertainment lol but seriously who really believes in heaven and hell