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 -
darkninja

Where did Lucifer fall?

140 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

The Redeemer
No, you haven't. It is fully documented that Lucifer is a complete Christain fabrication that appears nowhere in the Bible. This is mentioned many times in Posts here on UM. Go to the Jewish Encyclopedia. There is NO LUCIFER in the orignal Hebrew scriptures. Not even Jesus uses this name, becasuse Lucifer was not invented by the Chritian Church until around the 5th century AD.

Nor does anything in the Old Testament imply Satan is a fallen angel. Why is he still working for God throughout the Old Testament, and why would Jesus call him the Lord of this World if he were a fallen enemy of God?

Satan cannot be a trusted servant of God in the ONLY scripture endorsed by Jesus, and then have his disciples say he is the fallen enemy of God. I am surprised you do not see the contradiction in this.

Never is Satan called an Angel. He is only called a dragon or a serpent. Therfore he is a Seraph, a word which in Hebrew means fiery flying serpent, and translated by both early Christians and anicent Jews to the Greek word Drakon, which is where our modern word Dragon is derived.

For some "professional" historian you're clearly ignorant.

Lucifer is indeed a christian fabrication ( I'm not religious ) thus he belongs as part of original dogma/canon to the christian church and religion, this topic wasnt debating the fact whether lucifer existed in the hebrew bible, or if he's ever existed at all, this topic was created for the sole purpose as to ask "Where did lucifer fall". You carry on this subject asif it was a debate on the whole jews vs christians vs islam story, which has been going on for centuries, but i'm not really bothered, the answer to this topic has been answered, the New Testament is the largest part of christian faith therefore the old testament shouldnt be took accounted for.

"Seraphim is one of a class of celestial beings mentioned once in the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh or Old Testament), in Isaiah. Later Jewish imagery perceived them as having human form, and in that way they passed into the ranks of Christian angels. In the Christian Hierarchy of angels, seraphim represent the highest rank of angels."

Meantioned once in the hebrew bible, that seems pretty hilarious dont you agree? highest rank of angels? :o zOMG

You're speculation and biast hold you blind good sir :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
draconic chronicler
For some "professional" historian you're clearly ignorant.

Lucifer is indeed a christian fabrication ( I'm not religious ) thus he belongs as part of original dogma/canon to the christian church and religion, this topic wasnt debating the fact whether lucifer existed in the hebrew bible, or if he's ever existed at all, this topic was created for the sole purpose as to ask "Where did lucifer fall". You carry on this subject asif it was a debate on the whole jews vs christians vs islam story, which has been going on for centuries, but i'm not really bothered, the answer to this topic has been answered, the New Testament is the largest part of christian faith therefore the old testament shouldnt be took accounted for.

"Seraphim is one of a class of celestial beings mentioned once in the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh or Old Testament), in Isaiah. Later Jewish imagery perceived them as having human form, and in that way they passed into the ranks of Christian angels. In the Christian Hierarchy of angels, seraphim represent the highest rank of angels."

Meantioned once in the hebrew bible, that seems pretty hilarious dont you agree? highest rank of angels? :o zOMG

You're speculation and biast hold you blind good sir :tu:

It is pretty apparent you know virtually nothing about the Bible.

The ONLY scripture Jesus ever endorsed are the scriptures of the Old Testament. And how could New Testament scriptures be considered valid when they contradict one another? Jesus was a pious Jew. He was not trying to invent a new pagan religion filled with blasephemies taken from all the most popular pagan religions of Western Asia.

The reason Lucifer is in the Christian dogma is because the Chritians THINK he is in the Old Testament. His existence is necessary to validate the dualistic, pagan theology stolen from Persian Zorosatrianism. But the truth of the matter is that there is no fallen angel in the Old Testament. There are disobedient angels, but none that revolted against God, and certainly not Satan, who is not even an angel.

The Seraphim are mentioned more than once in the Bible. They are mentioned many times. But Christains translate them as fiery serpents in every place but the one place it says they surround the throne of God. This proves how phoney Christian Biblical scholarship really is. When they want a Biblical creature to be a human-like angel, they translate them one way, when they want them to be fiery serpents, they translate the same word as serpents, but they left out the flying part.

You may call me "ignorant" but you have not disproven anything I have said here. I have been right in every instance, and it is you who are the ignorant one. And yes, my federal job series is an Historian. You have probably even seen me on the History Channel, though no, I strongly suspect you are more of a "cartoon channel" type of guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moondoggy

I have been through this with great detail in another thred where Draconic uses words for "Dragon" and "Lucifer" that are not what he says they are. He claims of some real bible but never makes a reference to it. I have debunked everyone of his lies that all you nitwits seem to want to believe. The man is posting pure fiction and no proper research. Let' us finally see your so called real bible!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Redeemer

"Moondoggy" you are my friend in this subject.

"The ONLY scripture Jesus ever endorsed are the scriptures of the Old Testament. " - I'd find that hard "endorsing" something when i'm dead... LOL!

" Jesus was a pious Jew. He was not trying to invent a new pagan religion filled with blasephemies taken from all the most popular pagan religions of Western Asia." Yes he had the apostles write about his story, and the jews rejected it, i think jesus would've wanted this new religion.

"The reason Lucifer is in the Christian dogma is because the Chritians THINK he is in the Old Testament. His existence is necessary to validate the dualistic, pagan theology stolen from Persian Zorosatrianism. But the truth of the matter is that there is no fallen angel in the Old Testament. There are disobedient angels, but none that revolted against God, and certainly not Satan, who is not even an angel."

You are dumb, literally DUMB STRICKEN, you are some old man which has nothing better to do with his time than declare he is right in every single way, when i've allready documented before in previous replies the definition of them, and not something cooked up in your head.

"You have probably even seen me on the History Channel, though no, I strongly suspect you are more of a "cartoon channel" type of guy." - Ha, i do not watch television really as theres nothing worth my time on there, and seeing you on the history channel does not make it more clear, this is some kind of explanation which makes the "common" people think "z0mg, he was on histroy chennel! he must nowz evrtyhing!" that is your sole purpose of using that lie.

"There are disobedient angels, but none that revolted against God, and certainly not Satan, who is not even an angel."

You are an idiot "although a literal belief in angels is by no means universal among Conservative Jews."

"Reform Judaism and Reconstructionist Judaism generally do not believe in angels, although they may retain references for metaphorical purposes."

"The 2nd-century BC Book of Enoch also mentions the Seraphim, but the term used is the Greek drakones (δράκονες meaning "serpents"). Enoch was never accepted in the Hebrew canon, but it was widely read and quoted by early Christians -- most notably in the Epistle of Jude, which was included in the New Testament canon. From the usage of the word "saraph" in this late text, Christian exegesis identifies as seraphim the snakes responsible for the deaths of the blaspheming Israelites in Numbers chapter 21:"And the LORD sent fiery serpents"

Names atributed to the seraphim order

(* Seraphiel

* Metatron

* Uriel

* Nathanael

* Gabriel

* Jehoel

* Chamuel (Kemuel, Shemuel)

* Lucifer

* Satan

* Abaddon

* Asmodeus

* Astaroth

* Leviathan

* Samael

* Semyazza)

Face it draconic chronicler, you have lost, angels and arch angels, plus satan and lucifer are all in the Bible, and the quaren, you have lost.

Leave this topic, there is nothing further here for you, and if you persist to slate in this topic and deny actual evidence brought to the answering of this topic, i will seek administration help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
67thbook
"Moondoggy" you are my friend in this subject.

...You are dumb, literally DUMB STRICKEN, you are some old man which has nothing better to do with his time than declare he is right in every single way, when i've allready documented before in previous replies the definition of them, and not something cooked up in your head...

You are an idiot "although a literal belief in angels is by no means universal among Conservative Jews."

Face it draconic chronicler, you have lost, angels and arch angels, plus satan and lucifer are all in the Bible, and the quaren, you have lost...

Leave this topic, there is nothing further here for you, and if you persist to slate in this topic and deny actual evidence brought to the answering of this topic, i will seek administration help.

He has lost absolutely nothing, but you will, for it is I who am largely responsible for debunking the myth of any devil much less one called satan, and so you may direct your attention to my attention.

The Old testament is supposedly 3,765 years older than the new Testament yet there is no mention of:

Fallen angels associated with any belief of satan and some expulsion of he and his minions, much less one known as the devil.

Satan in the book of Job is not considered to be doing anything other than god's bidding.

The book of Job does not declare which god is being spoken of, nor does it resemble anything other than a story typical of wisdom teachings which was common from Egypt to Greece to Babylon. The mere mention of "god" does not mean it is the hebrew god Jehovah--all ancient Middle Eastern texts often speak of "god" in the singular.

The satan myth is derived from an obscure Genesis passage which speaks to sons of men, yet devil believers have no basis in fact from the Old Testament with which to place this on an angel, fallen or otherwise--YOU are invited to prove me wrong!

The devil myth is a purely Christian construct moulded upon the Book of Revelation which took centuries to be accepted as belonging to the Christian Biblical texts.

The Book of Revelation mirrors the apocryphal book of Enoch with one-third fallen and a leader. If Revelation is correct that such demons roam the earth, then the Book of Enoch is a lie, for it stated that the sons of god who rebelled were locked up until the day of destruction. You must be therefore attesting either that the god you embrace lies to you, or that your understanding of verse and chapter is wanting!

Devil believers have credibility issues when it comes to explaining satan since:

If angels were created perfect and he was an angel, then perfection is highly flawed for he rebelled and apparently needed sex with mortal women, was jealous, still is, along with deceitful, manipulative, iliterate and stupid to boot since he obviously cannot read and understand what mere men can and do---that he cannot win!

If devil believers accept that this satan character was the most beautiful of all in heaven, then they need to come clean that their idea of beauty means a red, horned, fanged character with hooved feet and a trident tipped tail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
draconic chronicler
"Moondoggy" you are my friend in this subject.

"The ONLY scripture Jesus ever endorsed are the scriptures of the Old Testament. " - I'd find that hard "endorsing" something when i'm dead... LOL!

" Jesus was a pious Jew. He was not trying to invent a new pagan religion filled with blasephemies taken from all the most popular pagan religions of Western Asia." Yes he had the apostles write about his story, and the jews rejected it, i think jesus would've wanted this new religion.

"The reason Lucifer is in the Christian dogma is because the Chritians THINK he is in the Old Testament. His existence is necessary to validate the dualistic, pagan theology stolen from Persian Zorosatrianism. But the truth of the matter is that there is no fallen angel in the Old Testament. There are disobedient angels, but none that revolted against God, and certainly not Satan, who is not even an angel."

You are dumb, literally DUMB STRICKEN, you are some old man which has nothing better to do with his time than declare he is right in every single way, when i've allready documented before in previous replies the definition of them, and not something cooked up in your head.

"You have probably even seen me on the History Channel, though no, I strongly suspect you are more of a "cartoon channel" type of guy." - Ha, i do not watch television really as theres nothing worth my time on there, and seeing you on the history channel does not make it more clear, this is some kind of explanation which makes the "common" people think "z0mg, he was on histroy chennel! he must nowz evrtyhing!" that is your sole purpose of using that lie.

"There are disobedient angels, but none that revolted against God, and certainly not Satan, who is not even an angel."

You are an idiot "although a literal belief in angels is by no means universal among Conservative Jews."

"Reform Judaism and Reconstructionist Judaism generally do not believe in angels, although they may retain references for metaphorical purposes."

"The 2nd-century BC Book of Enoch also mentions the Seraphim, but the term used is the Greek drakones (δράκονες meaning "serpents"). Enoch was never accepted in the Hebrew canon, but it was widely read and quoted by early Christians -- most notably in the Epistle of Jude, which was included in the New Testament canon. From the usage of the word "saraph" in this late text, Christian exegesis identifies as seraphim the snakes responsible for the deaths of the blaspheming Israelites in Numbers chapter 21:"And the LORD sent fiery serpents"

Names atributed to the seraphim order

(* Seraphiel

* Metatron

* Uriel

* Nathanael

* Gabriel

* Jehoel

* Chamuel (Kemuel, Shemuel)

* Lucifer

* Satan

* Abaddon

* Asmodeus

* Astaroth

* Leviathan

* Samael

* Semyazza)

Face it draconic chronicler, you have lost, angels and arch angels, plus satan and lucifer are all in the Bible, and the quaren, you have lost.

Leave this topic, there is nothing further here for you, and if you persist to slate in this topic and deny actual evidence brought to the answering of this topic, i will seek administration help.

Neither you, or previously Moondoggy, knows what you are talking about. As 67th has stated as well, you have made the false assumption that the "modern Christian popular mythology" believed in by most of mainstream Christianity about a beautiful fallen angel named Lucifer who would become a disobedient Satan in in the Bible. Well, it is not in the Bible. Christianity didn't even invent Lucifer until the 5th century AD. ALL the facts are on my side.

I never said there were "no angels in the bible". I said that SOME of the heavenly creatures in the Bible are indisputably Reptilian in form, and the ancient Christians themselves acknowledged this as we see in their genuine art and scriptures. They actually translated the word Seraphim to Drakones in ancient times. But later they didn't like that idea so they have turned them into swan-winged cartoon angels. But then, they also invented a fallen angel named Lucifer out of thin Air.

Yes, Satan is in the Bible, and he is in ancient Jewish scripture outside of the bible as well. Thoughout the Old testament there is nothing about him rebelling from God. On the contrary, he is constantly being sent on missions by God. The Hebrew scriptures never state he is an angel. The only physical descripton of him in Hebrew literature is the part taken out of the current Bible where God commands him to swallow Moses because he did not circumcise his son. And here is is a serpent-dragon, which is the correct translation for the Hebrew word Seraphim. But you probably have so little knowledge of the Bible that you have no idea what I am talking about.

I do recommend you get my book, for everything stated is backed up by copius footnotes of the original scriptures, not to mention genuine ancient Christian art that proves what these people (closest to Jesus), actually believed, and it is not your modern Christian fairytales. God in those ancient depictions is surrounded by Seraphim that look like dragons, swallowing up sinners, and not your fluffy cartoon angels. The real angels of the bible look simply like young men, that why people mistake them for normal men throughout the Bible.

You really should desist from your juvenile name-calling, brough on in your frustration because you cannot carry on a civil discussion in a subject you know absolutely nothing about. It is not my fault they never told you about the real Bible in Sunday School where you apparently recieved all of you Biblical knowledge, or rather, your "non-biblical modern Christian mythology", for that is what you are actuallly referring to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
NiCkC818

Draconic was just stating his opinion. Why must you seek administration help?

Edited by NiCkC818

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Redeemer
He has lost absolutely nothing, but you will, for it is I who am largely responsible for debunking the myth of any devil much less one called satan, and so you may direct your attention to my attention.

The Old testament is supposedly 3,765 years older than the new Testament yet there is no mention of:

Fallen angels associated with any belief of satan and some expulsion of he and his minions, much less one known as the devil.

Satan in the book of Job is not considered to be doing anything other than god's bidding.

The book of Job does not declare which god is being spoken of, nor does it resemble anything other than a story typical of wisdom teachings which was common from Egypt to Greece to Babylon. The mere mention of "god" does not mean it is the hebrew god Jehovah--all ancient Middle Eastern texts often speak of "god" in the singular.

The satan myth is derived from an obscure Genesis passage which speaks to sons of men, yet devil believers have no basis in fact from the Old Testament with which to place this on an angel, fallen or otherwise--YOU are invited to prove me wrong!

The devil myth is a purely Christian construct moulded upon the Book of Revelation which took centuries to be accepted as belonging to the Christian Biblical texts.

The Book of Revelation mirrors the apocryphal book of Enoch with one-third fallen and a leader. If Revelation is correct that such demons roam the earth, then the Book of Enoch is a lie, for it stated that the sons of god who rebelled were locked up until the day of destruction. You must be therefore attesting either that the god you embrace lies to you, or that your understanding of verse and chapter is wanting!

Devil believers have credibility issues when it comes to explaining satan since:

If angels were created perfect and he was an angel, then perfection is highly flawed for he rebelled and apparently needed sex with mortal women, was jealous, still is, along with deceitful, manipulative, iliterate and stupid to boot since he obviously cannot read and understand what mere men can and do---that he cannot win!

If devil believers accept that this satan character was the most beautiful of all in heaven, then they need to come clean that their idea of beauty means a red, horned, fanged character with hooved feet and a trident tipped tail.

You talk out of turn without providing evidence, the qoutes about the book of enoch were taken straightly from a definition of the seraphim, this topic is about debating where lucifer fell, and you come on here to do battle as to judge whether he exists?

You're so naive yet so ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Redeemer
Neither you, or previously Moondoggy, knows what you are talking about. As 67th has stated as well, you have made the false assumption that the "modern Christian popular mythology" believed in by most of mainstream Christianity about a beautiful fallen angel named Lucifer who would become a disobedient Satan in in the Bible. Well, it is not in the Bible. Christianity didn't even invent Lucifer until the 5th century AD. ALL the facts are on my side.

I never said there were "no angels in the bible". I said that SOME of the heavenly creatures in the Bible are indisputably Reptilian in form, and the ancient Christians themselves acknowledged this as we see in their genuine art and scriptures. They actually translated the word Seraphim to Drakones in ancient times. But later they didn't like that idea so they have turned them into swan-winged cartoon angels. But then, they also invented a fallen angel named Lucifer out of thin Air.

Yes, Satan is in the Bible, and he is in ancient Jewish scripture outside of the bible as well. Thoughout the Old testament there is nothing about him rebelling from God. On the contrary, he is constantly being sent on missions by God. The Hebrew scriptures never state he is an angel. The only physical descripton of him in Hebrew literature is the part taken out of the current Bible where God commands him to swallow Moses because he did not circumcise his son. And here is is a serpent-dragon, which is the correct translation for the Hebrew word Seraphim. But you probably have so little knowledge of the Bible that you have no idea what I am talking about.

I do recommend you get my book, for everything stated is backed up by copius footnotes of the original scriptures, not to mention genuine ancient Christian art that proves what these people (closest to Jesus), actually believed, and it is not your modern Christian fairytales. God in those ancient depictions is surrounded by Seraphim that look like dragons, swallowing up sinners, and not your fluffy cartoon angels. The real angels of the bible look simply like young men, that why people mistake them for normal men throughout the Bible.

You really should desist from your juvenile name-calling, brough on in your frustration because you cannot carry on a civil discussion in a subject you know absolutely nothing about. It is not my fault they never told you about the real Bible in Sunday School where you apparently recieved all of you Biblical knowledge, or rather, your "non-biblical modern Christian mythology", for that is what you are actuallly referring to.

Again, you talk about subjects which are no reference to this topic, i believe that is what they call a troll?

You go on and on about "oh get my book, oo watch me on the discovery channel" yet you have no information regarding your name, your position and your qualifications, therefore i'm taking into effect that you've suddenely came across some webpage or forum with the information you have, and you're simply spreading the incorrect information from there.

"Yes, Satan is in the Bible, and he is in ancient Jewish scripture outside of the bible as well. Thoughout the Old testament there is nothing about him rebelling from God."

We're talking about Lucifer, not the satan of the hebrew bible, get your facts straight, and to talk further on the subject with providing more qoutes, you should read them without trolling further.

"Helel in Isaiah 14 is not equated with the Jewish concept of HaSatan (the adversary). Instead, the prophet is speaking of the fall of Babylon and along with it the fall of her false gods Helel and Shahar. There is satan which is a Hebrew word meaning "adversary" and in the Tanakh one will find many instances of the word used to describe human and angelic adversaries to man."

"Later Jewish tradition, influenced by Babylonian mythology acquired during the Babylonian captivity, elaborated on the fall of the angels under the leadership of Samhazai ("the heaven-seizer") and Azael (Enoch, book vi.6f). Another legend, in the midrash, represents the repentant Samhazai suspended star-like between heaven and earth instead of being hurled down to Sheol."

"The Helel-Lucifer (i.e. Venus) myth was later transferred to Satan, as evidenced by the 1st-century pseudepigraphical text Vita Adae et Evae, where the Adversary gives Adam an account of his early career and the Slavonic Book of Enoch (xxix. 4, ***i. 4), where Satan-Sataniel (Sataniel/Satanel "The Keeper of Hell") (Samael) is also described as a former archangel. Because he contrived "to make his throne higher than the clouds over the earth and resemble 'My power' on high", Satan-Sataniel was hurled down, with his hosts of angels, to fly in the air continually above the abyss."

The Old testament itself does not mention about the rebellion and fall of satan (lucifer) but scriptures and different interpretations have led for this to be canonical in the christian religion.

If this information and evidence isnt enough for you, and you continue to slate me down as some misinformed sunday school child, then i will definetely seek the help of administration, as this is taking the topic no where further, and the answer to the topic has allready been answered by me infact.

My information is gathered through books, Religious studies, reliable sources from a different church (Islam) and information by jehovas witnesses (They're crazy)

I seriously mean it, i have provided evidence to all of your questions, and pointed out your mistakes, now leave this topic, if you wish to debate further, create a new topic with the name being relevent to this debate (Lucifer and Satan: Which one? ) and email me on (nosphorus@gmail.com) i'd be happy to oblige to a topic relevent to the OP (original post).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Redeemer

linked-image

ZOMG, THER BE DRAGONS???

Maybe you're view of dragons have been tainted by too many old paintings and role playing games

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
draconic chronicler
linked-image

ZOMG, THER BE DRAGONS???

Maybe you're view of dragons have been tainted by too many old paintings and role playing games

Ask any fluent speaker of Hebrew in Israel what a Seraph is.

They will tell you it is a heavenly serpent dragon described in Isiaiah and Numbers. In fact they IDF named their attack helicopter the Seraph and even paint a big dragon on the side of it.. Do you know why? It is because these people really understand the Hebrew Language, and know what the words really mean in that language. This is sometimes very different than what you will find in Christain produced Biblical concordances.

And the anicent Egyptian also believed in the Seraphim and used the exact same word too. And guess what, they are winged dragons as well.

Your goofy angel head with the wings is another nonsensical and unvalidated Chrsitian invention with no Biblical predecent. Exactly like Lucifer. There is NO reference to Lucifer in ANY church documents for hundreds of years after the establishment of Christianity. It is a later invention. There are a hundred websites that explains this.

Give it up guy. You have no idea what you are talking about in this field. Though I am sure you do very well with the basic Sunday School stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Redeemer

"Seraphim, Divine creatures from the Old Testament, associated with the Cherubim, and later taken to be angels. The root of Seraphim comes either from the Hebrew verb saraph ('to burn') or the Hebrew noun saraph (a fiery, flying serpent). Because the term appears several times with reference to the serpents encountered in the wilderness (Num. 21.8, Deut. 8.15; Isa. 14.29; 30.6), it has often been understood to refer to "fiery serpents." From this it has also often been proposed that the seraphim were serpentine in form and in some sense "fiery" creatures or associated with fire.

It is said that whoever lays eyes on a Seraph, he would instantly be incinerated due to the immense brightness of the Seraph. They are described as very tall, with six wings and four heads, one for of the cardinal directions. One pair of wings are for flying, one for covering their eyes (for even they may not look directly at God), and one for covering their feet (which is almost certainly a euphemism for genitalia). They are in the direct presence of God.

In Isaiah's call-vision in the Temple, he sees Seraphim surrounding the throne of God, singing praise to God; the "Thrice Holy" hymn (ch 6). In this instance they are angelic beings but in the Book of Numbers, seraph-snakes are sent to punish the Israelites.

Some of the Seraphim are Metatron, Kemuel, Nathanael, Gabriel, and Lucifer. "

I can provide qoutes, i can provide evidence, and what do you do? you do nothing but state you're opinion, sunday school is getting old now, you've used that term to many times in this topic, if you are who you say you are, i suggest you report to your locol GP because to me you're getting senile old man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moondoggy

This thread is a repeat of many. Draconic has his right to post his views 100%. The problem I have is that he says thing like "Jesus said Jonah was swallowed up by a dragon...". I have checked every authorized text of the New testement and the word "Fish" comes up. He can say what he wants but the original languages do not lie. A fish is a fish, not a dragon. He also cites a "real bible" but provides no eveidence. The real bible is the combination of the cannonical Hebrew and critical Greek OT and NT. Not some comic book that he is currenetly working on to sale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GoddessWhispers

I think the issue in translating any mythologies is people have a tendency to take them literally. Imagining a fish as what is a fish. A flying dragon as a literal flying fiery iguana in the sky. That literal visual interpretation of the story. But what if the ancients recorded their cosmologies, relative to what they knew in their world best fit what they were seeing?! What if there were ancient astronauts that landed on earth, before the people and they in turn understood that as giant fire bird took roost in the mountains?! Because they were familiar with huge vultures that fly and if fire is coming out of it's mouth or ****, it becomes a bird afire.

Or what of the giant fish that swallowed a man, fable?! An alien race (alien in the truest sense of the word, not the imaginings of big eyed grey creatures) , a foreign entity, breached from the waters in a water tight machine, opened and took people on board. How would that be seen through the visual imprint of those natives in that region?! A giant fish swallowed man. Because fish is what they know live in the water and can move about without drowning there.

Point is, parables and mythology, analogies and metaphors, are all alive in myth. So is subjective understanding or translation of events recorded. What could have flown about in the skies in ancient Mesopotamia? Birds! So is it any wonder their gods have wings on their backs in the ancient Sumerian tablets!? Men, like themselves, the people making the seal or the image. But they were different because they flew like birds. Distinguishing isn't it!? Relative in imparting a communication of these perceived higher beings!? No!?

Taking myth literally is the first mistake that makes it incredible to true history. How is it so many cultures from around the world, that didn't have contact with one another, share the same basic cosmologies and god stories?! Maybe because what the people witnessed occur in their regions, was worthy of consideration as a true witness account, only relegated to the halls of myth as if that makes them un-believable or un-credible. But what if myth is real history, in the context of the peoples recording it?! God as they knew it , was a dragon?! A Human being like creature but with scales and that could fly? And that they described it so, doesn't mean they gave it the imagery we do today when we think of dragons. Those ancient texts have been mythologized out of proportion, I think. To make us have pictures of absurd characterizations when we hear the word Dragon. Or, how about if those flying fiery creatures were really what we know today as comets!?

What were dragons?

It is quite possible that dragons were comets. So what do dragons and comets have in common? Dragons were depicted as serpents with wings and could fly through the sky. They had a head and a long body. Likewise, comets have a head and a long body and appear to fly through the sky. The chief Mayan god was "Kukulkan" which literally meant "feathered serpent". A comet has a long body but the body fans out as if it has feathers. A "feathered serpent" is a perfect description of a comet. See pictures of comets Hyakutake and Halebopp.

Why are there dragon myths found in almost all cultures on Earth?

In order for dragon legends to be so widespread, there must have been an event that was common to all areas of the Earth. The only thing that looks like a flying serpent, could be seen by every person in the world, and be able to cause global destructive effects would be an impact on the Earth by a comet. If this did happen at some remote time in history, all of the people on Earth would have seen the comet (dragon) moving through the stars and each night it would have gotten bigger and bigger until it had a tail that stretched all the way across the sky. The sight of this monstrous flying serpent monster must have struck terror in all of the people of Earth. Relatively few people would have witnessed the impact of the comet but soon afterward, the entire Earth would have been bombarded by burning rocks falling from the sky. The sky would have darkened from the smoke of the impact and all of the fires started around the world. The darkness would have lasted for months and the crops everywhere on Earth would have failed. There would have been widespread starvation and disease. Every culture would have experience the terrible after effects of the comet impact. If there had been an advanced civilization at that time (Atlantis perhaps), it would have fallen apart as its people were reduced to a hand to mouth existence. Many generations later, the knowledge and culture from the previous civilization would have disappeared but each generation would tell stories about the monstrous flying serpent that caused so much destruction. Continues here: http://home.swbell.net/a1star1/#Myths

I find all this very fascinating as a whole. :D The origin of humanity being seeded by alien races. There's to many "UFOs" in ancient artifacts to deny there's something extra-terrestrial, extra-conscious, witnessed in those times. People didn't fly in the 1600's, so why is there art showing a little man in a flying machine behind a maidens head, in a painting?! Who sees what can not be there, because the science wasn't known at all, so as to put it in a painting or a stained glass piece!? They saw it. And in putting it in the art work of the time, especially when much of what was commissioned was under the authority of the church only, even artists worked by that permission, it wouldn't be there at all unless permitted so. I think it's naive to believe humanity has evolved in it's sciences, society, etc... without a little boost from those far wiser. We are now only as evolved as our technology makes us. As the Homosapien of the animals, left to our own devices, we'd be poor indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
draconic chronicler
This thread is a repeat of many. Draconic has his right to post his views 100%. The problem I have is that he says thing like "Jesus said Jonah was swallowed up by a dragon...". I have checked every authorized text of the New testement and the word "Fish" comes up. He can say what he wants but the original languages do not lie. A fish is a fish, not a dragon. He also cites a "real bible" but provides no eveidence. The real bible is the combination of the cannonical Hebrew and critical Greek OT and NT. Not some comic book that he is currenetly working on to sale.

Well, Moondoggy, then I guess "every authorized text" is wrong, probably because they were "authorized" by Christians more interested in perpetuating their non-Biblical Sunday School mythology than accurately translating in English what the original scriptures said in Hebrew and Greek. The word in GREEK which Jesus used is KETOS. Ketos is most correctly described as a sea dragon, for it is clearly portrayed as such in both Christian and Pagan art. Every ancient Christian knew what this word meant. AND that is why EVERY ancient Christian depiction of the God sent creature swallowing Jonah is a long necked, often winged, DRAGON. Evidently you have never studied ancient Christian art. You would understand the Bible better if you did. What to you think should have more merit, what we know the ancient Christians believed, and is proven by the archaeological record, or the invented BS mythology of modern Christian writers who have their own agendas?

The fervently Christian writers of Biblical concordances do not always tell the truth, when the truth contradicts their "non-biblical Christian mythology". They lie about the ketos and they lie about the seraphim, becasue they like to imagine heaven filled with fluffy cartoon angels, instead of the fiery serpent dragons of the real Bible.

Edited by draconic chronicler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
draconic chronicler
"Seraphim, Divine creatures from the Old Testament, associated with the Cherubim, and later taken to be angels. The root of Seraphim comes either from the Hebrew verb saraph ('to burn') or the Hebrew noun saraph (a fiery, flying serpent). Because the term appears several times with reference to the serpents encountered in the wilderness (Num. 21.8, Deut. 8.15; Isa. 14.29; 30.6), it has often been understood to refer to "fiery serpents." From this it has also often been proposed that the seraphim were serpentine in form and in some sense "fiery" creatures or associated with fire.

It is said that whoever lays eyes on a Seraph, he would instantly be incinerated due to the immense brightness of the Seraph. They are described as very tall, with six wings and four heads, one for of the cardinal directions. One pair of wings are for flying, one for covering their eyes (for even they may not look directly at God), and one for covering their feet (which is almost certainly a euphemism for genitalia). They are in the direct presence of God.

In Isaiah's call-vision in the Temple, he sees Seraphim surrounding the throne of God, singing praise to God; the "Thrice Holy" hymn (ch 6). In this instance they are angelic beings but in the Book of Numbers, seraph-snakes are sent to punish the Israelites.

Some of the Seraphim are Metatron, Kemuel, Nathanael, Gabriel, and Lucifer. "

I can provide qoutes, i can provide evidence, and what do you do? you do nothing but state you're opinion, sunday school is getting old now, you've used that term to many times in this topic, if you are who you say you are, i suggest you report to your locol GP because to me you're getting senile old man.

What are you talking about? That source AGREES with me. Read the last sentence of your first paragraph. Of course they cannot deny this, because that is what it REALLY means, as EVERY fluent speaker of Hebrew will tell you. But because these texts are written by ardent Christians trying to push their non-biblical mythology, thay also mention the bit about turning them into fluffy cartoon angels with swans wing coming out of their backs. We know what the ancient Christians believed, because the translated Seraphim to Drakones. They DID NOT translate Seraphim into Angels. This is Modern Christian Mythology that has no place in the real Bible.

I can hardly regard this as an authorative source to begin with becasue it counts Lucifer as a Seraphim when the very idea of Lucifer was not invented until hundreds of years after the crucifixion of Jesus. Don't you think Jesus would have know who Lucifer was and wouldn't he be mentioned in the New Testament if Lucifer was real. You don't have to take my word on this, there are dozens of websites and books that prove there is no such "angel" as Lucifer.

So back to the original post, Lucifer could not have "fell" becasue Lucifer was a much later Christian invention with no place in the Bible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Redeemer

Because he's a fallen angel ;) ever heard of jesus' temptation? when lucifer tempted him and the likes? adam and eve? i cannot be bothered with this childish debate, its pointless dealing with someone who is so closed minded.

EDIT: Answer to OP, no-one knows where he fell, just that he was cast out onto the earth, thats why he was documented as the prince of this world in revelations.

"They DID NOT translate Seraphim into Angels" - No but they were later added into the angel ranks, as the top angels, they werent translated merely taken and expanded upon.

Btw, God doesnt exist boy <_<

Edited by The Redeemer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moondoggy

Draconic my lad, our disagreements will never end. And that is ok with me. I give far more weight to the NT than you are willing to give regarding old beelzebub. You apparantly give weight to some sumerian historical records which is great. But I do not dismiss your accusation that the christians invented the whole concept of satans origin. But never the less his origin is induced by logical inference. Cya

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
draconic chronicler
Quote Redeemer "Because he's a fallen angel ever heard of jesus' temptation? when lucifer tempted him and the likes? adam and eve? i cannot be bothered with this childish debate, its pointless dealing with someone who is so closed minded.

EDIT: Answer to OP, no-one knows where he fell, just that he was cast out onto the earth, thats why he was documented as the prince of this world in revelations.

"They DID NOT translate Seraphim into Angels" - No but they were later added into the angel ranks, as the top angels, they werent translated merely taken and expanded upon.

Btw, God doesnt exist boy "

For someone who claims they do not believe in any of this, you seem to be getting strangely worked up about it. No one has yet proven the existence of God, and that is not my intention in my work. But whether one believes God is real or not, I CAN prove that both the ancient Jews and Christians believed that the highest creatures in the heavenly hierarchy of the Bible and related scriptures are winged reptilian creatures which ancient Christian scholars translated into "dragons". This is an undeniable fact, based on archaeological discoveries of ancient Jewish and Christian source materials that have not been tainted by modern Christians with their own agendas to shape the Bible into their own, accepted mythology.

So back to the original post

1. Satan was never an angel, but a Seraph or Cherub, both of which were acknowledged to be winged "dragons" by the earl Christian Chruch.

2. There was never a fallen angel named Lucifer, this is a much later translators mistake and never mentioned in the Bible.

3. Satan seems to have always had an important role in the Old Testament as a high placed assistant to God, and nothing in those texts connect him with the fall of man. In fact, the Eden story reversed the role of the benificent dragon servant of God from the much older Sumerian original.

4. Satan is called the "lord of this world" a title inconsistent with a monotheism of an all powerful God unless that God gave him that office. Either Christianity is a dualistic religion with good and evil supernatural entities of similar strengths at war(part of the contemporary Christian mythology) or Satan has always been the obedient servant of God that the Old Testament says he was. when he offers to make jesus the ruler of the world, this was misconstrued by the hellenistic pagans as a "temptation" In reality, Satans role as Lord of the Earth was to destroy all the enemies of Israel, and make Jesus King of the world. This is what the messiah was supposed to do, but Jesus rejected this and instead chose to induce Pagans to believe in his teachings, instead of destroying them and leading the Jews in World conquest. That is what the Messiah was supposed to do, and because the real Biblical satan worked for God, he came to Jesus to fulfill the scripture. But I am talking about Real Old Testament scripture, not ripped off Zoroastrian scriptures about an evil dragon that fights the good God, which is the basis of the New Testament.

Yes, later Christians added Seraphim and Cherubim to the angelic orders, but at the same time they turned them into humanoid, winged cartoon angels, contradicting both the Hebrew and early Chrsitian scriptures and art that proved that the ancient adherents of these faiths knew them as creatures they would call "Drakones" in the Greek text of eartly Christian scripture.

Edited by draconic chronicler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
67thbook
You talk out of turn without providing evidence, the qoutes about the book of enoch were taken straightly from a definition of the seraphim, this topic is about debating where lucifer fell, and you come on here to do battle as to judge whether he exists?

You're so naive yet so ;)

Is it that I talk out of turn or that you turn truth on its ear? I say the latter.

Here is an online translation of one version of the two versions of the Book of Enoch.

http://reluctant-messenger.com/book_of_enoch.htm

http://www.nazarene.net/enoch/2enoch01-68.htm

I like a debate, I truly do--but one upon which my opponent can muster some credibility other than his/her empty words of denouncement.

So

You have only two choices available to you--either consider this my gift of enlightenment to you on the topic of the mythical tales of Enoch, or my gracious invitation to endorse to the readers that I am in fact correct and that you were ignorant of what is contained within the Enoch apocrypha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bumblesue
Is this really true? The bible doesn't even mention satan as being evil? Please verify what you have said.

revalations 12-7,8,9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
draconic chronicler
revalations 12-7,8,9

But that book is NOT part of the real Bible which Jesus said was the word of God. Much of Revelation is plagiarized from Zoroastrian mythology, only the names of the dragon and angel are changed to familiar Biblical names of Satan and Michael. The rest of the story is the same. The dragon is defeated, wrapped in chains, cast into the abyss, is released, yada yada yada.

In the real Bible, Satan is the obedient servant of God. He is not even identified with the serpent in the Eden story. If he does evil things, it is becasue he was ordered to, by God. In the real Bible there is no Devil. That is a pagan persian character that Christianity liked and added to the theology. They vainly searched the Bible for a connection with their devil and ineptly chose the Satan from the book of Job.

The Jews practiced a monotheism in which there is one powerful creator God responsible for good and evil. This is in the only scripture ever endorsed by Jesus, and Jesus said he did not come to change the Law.

Christianity today is a dualistic theology with Good and evil supernatural forces battling for men's souls. It is closely based on Persian Zoroastrianism, as the book of Revelation proves beyond any reasonable doubt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Redeemer
But that book is NOT part of the real Bible which Jesus said was the word of God. Much of Revelation is plagiarized from Zoroastrian mythology, only the names of the dragon and angel are changed to familiar Biblical names of Satan and Michael. The rest of the story is the same. The dragon is defeated, wrapped in chains, cast into the abyss, is released, yada yada yada.

In the real Bible, Satan is the obedient servant of God. He is not even identified with the serpent in the Eden story. If he does evil things, it is becasue he was ordered to, by God. In the real Bible there is no Devil. That is a pagan persian character that Christianity liked and added to the theology. They vainly searched the Bible for a connection with their devil and ineptly chose the Satan from the book of Job.

The Jews practiced a monotheism in which there is one powerful creator God responsible for good and evil. This is in the only scripture ever endorsed by Jesus, and Jesus said he did not come to change the Law.

Christianity today is a dualistic theology with Good and evil supernatural forces battling for men's souls. It is closely based on Persian Zoroastrianism, as the book of Revelation proves beyond any reasonable doubt.

Wow this topic has been dead for a long, looooong time, as far as I knew.

Still, the main point is Jesus requested his disciples to write down practically everything yada yada yada, and the Christian bible is a composite of documents etc..

Who are you to judge which religion is true? you may have the right to disclaim all belief in them but who are you to say which one is false?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
draconic chronicler
Wow this topic has been dead for a long, looooong time, as far as I knew.

Still, the main point is Jesus requested his disciples to write down practically everything yada yada yada, and the Christian bible is a composite of documents etc..

Who are you to judge which religion is true? you may have the right to disclaim all belief in them but who are you to say which one is false?

Simple, really.

Jesus said he did not come to change the law (Judaism).

So if his disciples changed the law (paganism filled New Testament), I guess they didn't do what he said, and didn't right it down quite right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Redeemer
Simple, really.

Jesus said he did not come to change the law (Judaism).

So if his disciples changed the law (paganism filled New Testament), I guess they didn't do what he said, and didn't right it down quite right.

You really seem to have an objection against Christianity on whole, so what do you think about Islam?

Share this post


Link to post
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.