Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Debunking


E -Elle

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Rlyeh said:

Who also has names like Yahweh/Jehovah/El and developed from ancient Semite polytheism.

 

Satan is never once called Lucifer in the Bible.

What's your point?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, E -Elle said:

What's your point?

Read it again you might get it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, E -Elle said:

Do you mean you trust polytheists to make your religion? Or to base your life?

How did you get that?  I'm saying Judaism has roots in polytheism.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, E -Elle said:

Ok why do people comment when they don't believe in God? Isn't that just a waste of your supposed blasphemous better than God time?

Dissing God is never a waste of time. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, E -Elle said:

Yeah! Although people go about life as if God doesn't exist, yammering why they can't solve their gordian knot of problems with some bound from ignorance and denial- God. Submittance to the one higher power.

So are you saying you have no problems or that your problems are solved magically by calling on your deity to solve them?

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, E -Elle said:
5 hours ago, joc said:

Not everyone shares your belief.

Is that informative or a half-step towards you and other pagans' long-sought-after not possible manifesto?

This:

20 hours ago, rashore said:

Welcome to UM :st

What is it that you are debunking with this?

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, E -Elle said:

As many words as you use, a person informed as you are should not seek dark. Go investigate and expose the baby eating illuminati, not troll topics because you fear the creator.

P.S. next time, just ask the speaker if they mean capital G or lower case g. I've seen kindergarteners do better.

Did people get tired of "fighting" with you in the god forums or what?  Why are you here if you think everyone  who doesn't think like you do is a pagan?  If you have all your explanations at hand why come to a forum called Unexplained Mysteries????  You don't present yourself like someone trying to get brownie points for "saving" pagans, you present yourself like someone looking for a fight.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, E -Elle said:

As many words as you use, a person informed as you are should not seek dark. Go investigate and expose the baby eating illuminati, not troll topics because you fear the creator.

P.S. next time, just ask the speaker if they mean capital G or lower case g. I've seen kindergarteners do better.

Why are you angery, you should expect to be tested isn't that the path of a Christian. Currently you certainly don't have a Christian Attitude.

Peace

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, rashore said:

My goodness, there's nothing wrong with being a pagan.

Most pagans are probably more mentally balanced that those who strictly adhere to a monotheistic religion. At least the few I've come across were. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I usually debunk at 5 am then make breakfast, pack lunch then go to work. After work I do chores read here watch a show or two then rebunk til 5.

jmccr8

  • Like 3
  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Tuco's Gas said:

You heretic! How dare you! LOL 

Anyway, seriously,  Rleyah: since I've only been here for a few weeks, I'm wondering if that type of religious fundie trolling like Elle is doing is common around here? Do you guys get peoples who just pop in and troll and trot out their angry dogma for a few days and then vamoose? Just curious.

Usually there's not too many preachers.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/24/2020 at 1:02 PM, E -Elle said:

As many words as you use, a person informed as you are should not seek dark. Go investigate and expose the baby eating illuminati, not troll topics because you fear the creator.

P.S. next time, just ask the speaker if they mean capital G or lower case g. I've seen kindergarteners do better.

Baby Eating Illuminati! 

New band name! I called it!

First single :"Kindergarten god"

  • Like 2
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/23/2020 at 4:10 PM, E -Elle said:

So apparently people get confused about lucifer (never capitalize the name of the enemy, even if not literarily sound (!!!! Yes!!!!). Always capitalize God and any name of Him), it being still called as such, confusing it with (the) watchers, who was holding the flaming sword against in the garden's protection. But don't "ad-lib" opinion to be truth, gnostic or otherwise foolish. Whether you are happy to call satan lucifer, his former name, the bane should be called what it is, "adversary", the translation of satan. Obviously no one should fall to his idiot schemes no matter how "all" of it (and all is it) it is. 

You haven't read any Greek mythology I take it, so you don't know pre-Bible back story of Lucifer and why he called the Light bringer.  To bad, it a good story of courage and sacrifice. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 2/24/2020 at 5:59 PM, E -Elle said:

So they comment when they don't believe because the topic was not God based but meant to question the darkness into light?

Wow. You've also blasphemed and, such wasted time.

Blasphemy "the act of insulting or showing contempt of lack of reverence to a deity."  God "a being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe." If this being is indeed omnipotent, omniscient etc, it probably doesn't care about someone showing a lack of reverence.  Blasphemy always struck me as an absurd accusation. 

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Border Collie said:

Blasphemy "the act of insulting or showing contempt of lack of reverence to a deity."  

 

The real reason why blasphemy is so terrible and unforgivable is because blasphemy is "the act of insulting or showing contempt of lack of reverence to" yourself.

 

 

Edited by Will Due
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/28/2020 at 12:28 PM, Grandpa Greenman said:

You haven't read any Greek mythology I take it, so you don't know pre-Bible back story of Lucifer and why he called the Light bringer.  To bad, it a good story of courage and sacrifice. 

"Lucifer" in the OT was a descriptive term of the King of Babylon. Not "Satan". The King James Bible is a translation of a translation in Latin written by somebody whose Hebrew sucked and that's how that brain fart happened. 

 Then Cyrus Schofield twisted the King James even more and his bad ideas were adopted by most American Evangelicals. 

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/16/2020 at 3:29 AM, Piney said:

"Lucifer" in the OT was a descriptive term of the King of Babylon. Not "Satan". The King James Bible is a translation of a translation in Latin written by somebody whose Hebrew sucked and that's how that brain fart happened. 

 Then Cyrus Schofield twisted the King James even more and his bad ideas were adopted by most American Evangelicals. 

 

Actually the king of Tyre :) but the language  titles and descriptions used in that passage  go beyond describing  a human and extend at least metaphorically to Satan/lucifer 

quote

However, some of the descriptions in Ezekiel 28:11–19 go beyond any mere human king. In no sense could an earthly king claim to be “in Eden” or to be “the anointed cherub who covers” or to be “on the holy mountain of God.” Therefore, most Bible interpreters believe that Ezekiel 28:11–19 is a dual prophecy, comparing the pride of the king of Tyre to the pride of Satan. Some propose that the king of Tyre was actually possessed by Satan, making the link between the two even more powerful and applicable.

Before his fall, Satan was indeed a beautiful creature (Ezekiel 28:12–13). He was perhaps the most beautiful and powerful of all the angels. The phrase “guardian cherub” possibly indicates that Satan was the angel who “guarded” God’s presence. Pride led to Satan’s fall. Rather than give God the glory for creating him so beautifully, Satan took pride in himself, thinking that he himself was responsible for his exalted status. Satan’s rebellion resulted in God casting Satan from His presence and will, eventually, result in God condemning Satan to the lake of fire for all eternity (Revelation 20:10).

Like Satan, the human king of Tyre was prideful. Rather than recognize God’s sovereignty, the king of Tyre attributed Tyre’s riches to his own wisdom and strength. Not satisfied with his extravagant position, the king of Tyre sought more and more, resulting in Tyre taking advantage of other nations, expanding its own wealth at the expense of others. But just as Satan’s pride led to his fall and will eventually lead to his eternal destruction, so will the city of Tyre lose its wealth, power, and status. Ezekiel’s prophecy of Tyre’s total destruction was fulfilled partially by Nebuchadnezzar (Ezekiel 29:17–21) and ultimately by Alexander the Great.

https://www.gotquestions.org/King-of-Tyre.html

quote

In verse 15, the being is described as perfect in all his ways—until iniquity was found in him. This means that this being was created (not born) perfect, and remained so until he sinned. This statement could only apply to Adam, Eve, Satan, or demons, not to any earthly king. The king of Tyre was “shaped in iniquity and conceived in sin,” 

https://answersingenesis.org/angels-and-demons/satan/lucifer-and-sin/

 

Again, not my own belief, but a common, scholarly, biblical understanding of the writer's intent. 

 

 

 

Ignore all the above :)  It relates to a different controversy 

https://www.blueletterbible.org/faq/don_stewart/don_stewart_79.cfm

Lucifer evolved as the name for satan because of the similarity between satan's original state as a glowing champion of god, and the description of a bright star or light 

The point is that  (in the biblical narrative) satan was once a good/ glowing angel  (Lucifer) but fell/rebelled, and became Satan (the adversary) He led a rebellion of one third of the angels against god's rule and led humans into temptation and their own fall (in the  genesis creation story) He remains at loose on earth (parts of the of the old  testament like job and the gospels)  but will be defeated and killed (in the  narrative of revelations) in the final conflict .  

To me it is a morality tale about the duality of human nature. Our fall from spiritual beings  as we gained knowledge  and our potential for spiritual   "resurrection"  and reconnecting to our spiritual side. 

We are beings of light and dark, and only we can choose which to follow and what to become.  

Edited by Mr Walker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr Walker said:

Actually the king of Tyre :) but the language  titles and descriptions used in that passage  go beyond describing  a human and extend at least metaphorically to Satan/lucifer 

"Lucifer" in Koine is a "adjective-adverb". Not a noun and "satan" wasn't a title/ name either but a descriptive term. 

But then again, nobody in your links knows Koine Greek.......

1 hour ago, Mr Walker said:

Ken Ham??????Really????? 

Yeaaaahhhhh.......

1 hour ago, Mr Walker said:

Stewart is about the same education level as Ham.......zero......

But he's got one thing right...which you got wrong

Quote

In the context of Isaiah, Helel is possibly used as proper name for the king of Babylon. Therefore his name would be translated as "day star," or "bright one."
 

But what he got wrong is "helel" is a adjective. 

Edited by Piney
Urantia is Dreck
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The original Hebrew term sâtan (Hebrew: שָּׂטָן‎) is a generic noun meaning "accuser" or "adversary",[7][8] which is used throughout the Hebrew Bible to refer to ordinary human adversaries,[9][8] as well as a specific supernatural entity.[9][8] The word is derived from a verb meaning primarily "to obstruct, oppose".[10] When it is used without the definite article (simply satan), the word can refer to any accuser,[9] but when it is used with the definite article (ha-satan), it usually refers specifically to the heavenly accuser: the satan.[9]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satan

Lucifer (UK: /ˈlsɪfər/ LOO-si-fər; US: /-sə-/; 'light-bringer', corresponding to the Greek name Ἑωσφόρος, 'dawn-bringer', for the same planet) is a Latin name for the planet Venus in its morning appearances and is often used for mythological and religious figures associated with the planet. Due to the unique movements and discontinuous appearances of Venus in the sky, mythology surrounding these figures often involved a fall from the heavens to earth or the underworld. Interpretations of a similar term in the Hebrew Bible, translated in the King James Version as "Lucifer", led to a Christian tradition of applying the name Lucifer, and its associated stories of a fall from heaven, to Satan. Most modern scholarship regards these interpretations as questionable[citation needed] and translates the term in the relevant Bible passage (Isaiah 14:12) as "morning star" or "shining one" rather than as a proper name "Lucifer".[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucifer

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/23/2020 at 4:10 PM, E -Elle said:

So apparently people get confused about lucifer (never capitalize the name of the enemy, even if not literarily sound (!!!! Yes!!!!). Always capitalize God and any name of Him), it being still called as such, confusing it with (the) watchers, who was holding the flaming sword against in the garden's protection. But don't "ad-lib" opinion to be truth, gnostic or otherwise foolish. Whether you are happy to call satan lucifer, his former name, the bane should be called what it is, "adversary", the translation of satan. Obviously no one should fall to his idiot schemes no matter how "all" of it (and all is it) it is. 

Welcome to the forum:st

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Piney said:

"Lucifer" in Koine is a "adjective-adverb". Not a noun and "satan" wasn't a title/ name either but a descriptive term. 

But then again, nobody in your links knows Koine Greek.......

Ken Ham??????Really????? 

Yeaaaahhhhh.......

Stewart is about the same education level as Ham.......zero......

But he's got one thing right...which you got wrong

But what he got wrong is "helel" is a adjective. 

Idont know the people from  the references.  I presented them as one pov.

It is a view shared by many biblical scholars and some parts (churches)  of christianity 

Seems you  have a prejudice against those writers .

Plus one can find and read similar explanations everywhere 

Basically it is a part o f the  story (which is all a made up narrative, anyway) that lucifer was the brightest angel of god That he rebelled against god.  That he then became satan.That he caused the fall of man

  People who deny this are generally trying to blame god for the evils of the world, when biblically it is clear that those evils come from the independent free-willed  acts of  lucifer/satan, and the temptation of humanity . (again a narrative to explain why and how humans are as we are, not an actual history of the world :) 

This is clear from  reading the bible from genesis to  revelations. Of course it is all a constructed storyline.  However if you  don't get the storyline and characters right, it is easy to misinterpret the lessons being told.  The way i understand it s that   Satan is an adjective which became a  noun/name  ie the adversary or deceiver  Lucifer, likewise, is an adjective which became a noun/name 

The story of lucifer/satan and his fall is  (probably) borrowed from  earlier (babylonian) religious beliefs, which the jews incorporated into their theology during their captivity in Babylon,   It is also  connected to other stories about Venus, and its cosmology, from the biblical period  

ps ijust looked up Ken Ham. He is technically as well educated as i am (Degree and postgraduate diploma  in science and education)

  When it comes to biblical studies and theology etc. I am not sure how much an education can help anyone.

  You read as widely as you can, gather facts and opinions, and form your own views.     I dont believe his creationist views, but his description of the narrative of the bible fits the general understanding i have seen among biblical  scholars. 

More significantly it is a perfect fit for an understanding  of the total narrative of the bible as a teaching story  

The bible simply makes no sense as a story if you see satan as an agent of god rather  than an adversary.   The story of   Lucifer explains the origins of satan, and how and why he behaved as he did . 

Edited by Mr Walker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.