[quote=“daneel, post:21, topic:54058, full:true”]But even then God was his boss[/quote]Well, was God really his boss, or was he just manipulating Satan into unwittingly doing what he wanted? (And really, isn’t that even worse? This way God gets what he wants, and doesn’t even have to pay Satan anything, like he would if he were an employee!)
1 Like
I think of their Satan as being just like a sort of “state prosecutor”.
Much of the contradiction is that these Middle Eastern religions are based upon syncretic processes over thousands of years and very loosely attempt to reconcile many different philosophies. The whole creation-deity-makes-everything angle is very much an exercise in monism. While the eternal-struggle-between-good-and-evil business is pure dualism, very strongly influenced by Zoroastrianism. Attempts to reconcile these yielded the notion of trinity, which is mostly based upon misunderstanding of Hebrew mythos. Close examination of these shifting identities over time shows attempts to crowbar monotheism into older pantheistic systems. For example, “The Holy Spirit” is often considered cognate with the Jewish “Elohim”, which is often assumed to mystically embody the female counterpart to their god, aka the goddess Asherah. The many angels/demons mentioned in the literature are referred to as pieces of one “divine intelligence” but have their origins as being their own separate deities.
So, the Holy “Thou shalt have no other gods before me” Bible actually mentions more than a hundred gods - depending upon which books one considers canon. But then explains them away be saying that they aren’t. Even the Big Players suffer from some amazing identity crises. The “one god” is a composite of El, Yahweh, and Jehovah - who represent related concepts, drawn from different times and places. The identity of “the other” shifts as needed with little consistancy. Are Satan, Lucifer, Beelzebub, et al really the same thing? (Beelzebub is a corruption of Baal, El’s brother FFS) They haven’t been, but likewise people often use them interchangeably.
4 Likes
Who gives a rats a*se it’s all make believe.
2 Likes
Like these people who are said to be unable to organize a piss-up in a brewery, this Pastor is making a very poor job of demonizing the devil.
I wonder what numbnuts thought that was a good idea?
Yeah, RuPaul never gets to sleep in a steel roll-away in sub-freezing weather like those straight white guys I found out back last night. Sure sucks to be denied all those rights… in fact I just don’t know how Barack Obama and Eric Holder can survive with all the rights deprivation they suffer.
1 Like
Baptist Barnacle is a great band name, or at least a name for a drink.
1 Like
But Ha-Satan first shows up under that title in the Book of Job, where he works as God’s agent and under God’s instruction to test Job: it’s fairly clear that he is the adverary or accuser of Job, not of God.
[quote=“SheiffFatman, post:29, topic:54058”]But Ha-Satan first shows up under that title in the Book of Job, where he works as God’s agent and under God’s instruction to test Job: it’s fairly clear that he is the adverary or accuser of Job, not of God.[/quote]I’ve always understood that to be Satan and God having an argument, and God basically just says, “go ahead and torture the fuck out of this guy - you’ll see I’m right”. Satan isn’t working as God’s agent, he’s trying to win an argument (one that was simply philosophical before God decided it’d be a good idea to murder the guy’s whole family and then go downhill from there).
2 Likes
That seems a reasonable analogy for his role in Job, at least.
Isn’t that the Shekinah, rather than Elohim?
I was under the impression that Jehovah was a faulty Latinisation of Yahweh, rather than an originally distinct entity: is that not the case?
1 Like
So maybe more like the Duke brothers’ bet in Trading Places?
1 Like
that sign brings to mind that the christians who first settled the country were shameless blood thirsty land stealing racists. they had guns to enforce white supremacy while the founders legitimized it in the constitution.
Maybe I should talk to my to favorite kid, and warn him!
Thatan.
4 Likes
So are they admitting Satan was right?
I would say that the first human beings, according to biblical accounts, respectfully asked for equal rights. Adam and Eve were doing alright weren’t they? But they had to be tested. And then the angry man in the sky played ‘house’.
I am not terribly well-versed in Jewish mysticism, but my impression is that there is a bit of an overlap. Referring to the feminine as “the divine presence of God” strikes me as being analogous to the Yogic conception of Shakti. I’d guess that Elohim would be a more universal thing, while Shekinah would be more personal.
It does seem to be certainly the case. But the Latinisation occurred in a different region, a thousand tears later. So I think it has its own distinct connotations. Not unlike comparing Yahweh to El - they are mostly the same, except when they aren’t.
1 Like
Thanks, Kyew! I updated the photo!
1 Like
