Go to bottom

One small question about Heaven7

category: general [glöplog]
The first quote was from Thessalonians which you can find here (chapter 2):


The second was from Isaiah (chapter 45):


Or you can search for the entire quotes on google or yahoo - if they've been quoted correctly. :)
added on the 2003-10-18 23:04:22 by Wade Wade
It's interesting that many Satanists believe that it was Satan who offered people free will (eg. tempting Adam and Eve) while God wanted humankind to serve and praise him. "True" Satanists are not necessarily followers of evil, but rather followers of free will.

Personally, I consider myself a determinist and don't believe in free will at all. But that's a whole different matter. :)
added on the 2003-10-18 23:12:17 by Wade Wade
MRI: I am sorry, but even if the bible is lying on my desk now, I can not give you the citations. Why? Cause I Forgot all the numbers. In additition my sources are not only biblical, but also gnostics, some sataniistics, some I found accidently, some have just came as my expirience thru my rought spiritual life. Moreover, I am not living at home now and I do not remeber the authors by heart as well as some references, so as a result, it is impossible to give the 'proper credits'.

Wade: Adam and Eve. IF you read the sumerian myths you will know that the Adam was not a one man but a breed of genetic experiment (I hardly believe in it, but when I saw the emobsses and some pictures I was shocked). The scientists claim that during some period ( I do not know if it was sumerian r long before), the human beings have made a big 'jump' over the evolution. Sth, that looked as a god's boost.
In addition in the 'forgotten knowledge' the snake was representing not by evil, but science and knowledge (the symbol of medecine f.e.). Why in the bible it is a symbol of evil? I dunno.

What is silly with those 'true satanists' that they claim there is no god, you follow your own will. But they worship Baphome, STN and all the fallen ones as a (almost) divine beings. What is more funny is that BA PHO METH stands for knlowledge, love, light (I might be wrong with the letters, cause I have not any referency by my side, only my memory!!!). Those things were worshiped by templars. Misspeled not by mistake, served as a capital proof of their connection with the (d)evil and final extinction.
You have a 'free will', BUT it is better for you to do good things. I also think we do not have much free will. but as you wrote- it is a totally different matter.

Ok. Gotta go to drown my sadness in some drips of beer and music...=(. But it has nothing tpo do with the topic.
added on the 2003-10-19 01:25:31 by sim sim
There's only one religious point this thread hasn't touched upon - if god is everywhere, why has no-one sued for invasion of privacy ;) Sorry, American crack there!
added on the 2003-10-19 14:23:25 by dotwaffle dotwaffle
sim: You point about "true satanists" is quite wrong. "Modern" Satanists (starting from A. Crowley but most prominently found as LaVey followers) deny the existence of (a) god, but don't believe in Satan and the various other older deities either. Satan himself is more like a theoretical construct, the projected impersonation of their views on the world and on religion, used for nothing but making a point against the established western religions and their one god.

The other gods come into play if you follow the path of the original creation of Satan by the catholic church. Back then the Christians found themself in the situation that a merciful god isn't good enough to scare (and thus control) people and created an evil adversary to drive everyone toward their path.

In this process of creation, they mixed everything they could find they disagree with. They took the Lucifer myth. They created a place that he reigned by taking the Hebrew word "chellu" (sp?) which originally stood for "far from god", and, well, "exaggerated it a bit" by making it Hell, the perpetual version of the purgatory myth. The name "Satan" stands for "the accusant" and originally meant someone who disagrees with the church's views. Good strategic move indeed to make that name the incarnation of evil.

Satan's looks are loosely based on Pan (look at the goat hooves) and other ancient deities, and over the time almost every other belief the Christian missionaries came across further shaped the image.

So the irony is that Satanists "believe" in a figure which was completely created by the Christian church. Only that Satanists know that and it's not really a belief, but more a mocking of the Christians. The "usual" beliefs of Satanists are Atheism mixed with a strange (but not self-contradicting) mixture of humanism and egoism. What counts is the world we're living in, free will and that your own life is as good as possible. Interestingly modern satanism says that this is easiest to achieve by being as nice as possible to all others, only that in case of confrontation the way to go is "three teeth for a tooth", or "if he slaps your cheek, kick him in the nuts so he learns that he should better not to that to you again".

Too sad that Crowley as well as Lavey strongly disagree with dogmatism (esp. that of the established religions) but then both consider rituals a necessary way to be successful and set up really dogmatic rules how those rituals have to take place. Damn. Isn't there ONE religion without glaring selfcontradictions?
added on the 2003-10-19 15:31:24 by kb_ kb_
Atheism lacks self contradictions.
added on the 2003-10-19 21:26:28 by Ger Ger
gem: So what are the dictions of the atheistic people?
Is there a "atheistic religion"?
My prejudice about atheistic people: They are too lazy to think about the things so they say "there is no God".
Your comment..? :-)

kb: ok.. seems like you've read quite a bunch of books..! respect..
added on the 2003-10-19 22:03:13 by phred phred
phread your prejudice can be returned on believers equally. Accusing sombody of intellectual lazyness in those matters is a quite weak accusation.
added on the 2003-10-19 22:58:29 by _-_-__ _-_-__
phred: wait... "They are too lazy to think about the things" is normally the argument against people who believe. I mean, that's the second-oldest thought of all mankind (right after "i want sex"): I don't understand it, it must be supernatural.

It's not that atheists deny to think about things they can't explain. They rather say "well, I don't know the reason yet, but there probably is one", and some even start researching.
added on the 2003-10-19 22:59:45 by kb_ kb_
I should have written 'satanist' not 'true'. I have not studied so deeply the books of Anton Szandor Lavey nor Allister Crowley. I found them a little biased. The so-called 'bible of satan' was for me a Bible but rewritten upside down with a goat and pentagram on the cover. So I do not see any sense in it.
Magick by Allister Crowley is nothing more like some old incantations and 'holy gemometric' powerfull symbols rewritten in his own point of view. All those mystical expiriences we might obtain by following the numbers, are true and this is only a question of time and practice.

I agree i what you wrote, but not in 1oo%.

It is clear that it is easer to rule the mankind just making them afraid of sth. I was brought up in the words:'Do not do it, cause it is a sin', or 'Behold, cause the God will punish you'. Fool me... The only person who can punish me in the toughest way is me, myself and I.
"One tibetan monk said: You see the lake out there? I can freeze it (as he showed a small ice form in a cup of water)easely. But what is the sense in it and does it bring some good to us? Nope. In addition the cold reflected from the lake frozen by me, will kill me in a minute."
The same thing happen as a reaction to our 'sins', all in genraly our deeds.

Rituals are necessary. If anyone have just tried to meditate(pray) with visualisation and breathing techniques, he will find out why. Those rituals depends on every individual and there are no definition for a good ritual.Never the less, considering the theory of resonance (as I wrote b4 too) those who were practiced for ages are more 'powerfull'.

And STN (as I wrote some on page b4) is come kind of Xtian definition of objection (I will not serve) against God. Instead, it ought to be Therion cause in the Hebrew this name is equal to 666 (but do not think it is a number of the beast..)

By 'chellu' you mean 'szeol' (sheol, scheol ?).

...They rather say "well, I don't know the reason yet, but there probably is one", and some even start researching....
Well does it mean I am an atheist?.. Nahh. =)
added on the 2003-10-20 00:45:52 by sim sim
It's interesting to note that in the book of Job, Satan (which was apparently the Hebrew word for adversary, as in a legal sense?) seemed to be working for God, trying to prove or disprove Job's loyalty to God. As I recall, God did all the punishing. The same for all of the Old Testament.
Granted, I haven't taken a theology class for a while, but in my philosophy classes we studied some Catholic theologians who didn't believe that evil really exists at all, that every evil is counterbalanced by good. No, not crackpots, Saint Augustine.
So as for what Satan is, I'd say what we think of as Satan isn't as based in Theology as it is on our own fears and superstitions of the ultimate evil.
added on the 2003-10-20 03:19:49 by crusader crusader
Here is another view on satan.

TO me satan is a Jhinn... a spirit. Spirits are like us, they get married, they love, they hate, thet belive, they dont etc. They have free will. But are as race much, much more powerfull than we are. They get 1000's of years old, they move faster than the eye can see, they have knowledge of the afterworld etc..
Satan was God's favorite. He was very enlightened, good, brave and even the angels (that has no free will at all) liked Satan. But when God created man, satan was proud, and refused to acknowledge humans as a "strong" liveable breed, thus he indirectly said to God...You dont know what you're doing.
The whole thing got out of hand, and out of respect for satan God said :" Ok, here is the deal, i have made you a home of fire and brimstone, and you may take as many humans with you as you can get to turn away from me, and the path i have chosen for them."
Satan and a lot of jinns agreed to this, because they belived they knew better than God. But God already knows he has won, and how many will join him and how many will join satan, even knows who they are. So satan is on a fools erand. jinns are unseen to us (they live in a world in ours, they can see our world, we can barely sense theirs.)
Jinns will do anything to get us astray, and were all likely to "carry" a few of them around at all times. No need to worrie though, because God knew we would be easy targets to the powerfull jinns, so we all have angels around us too. CAll it the good and the bad consciousness... The jinns wispers to you:"go ahead, steal it...the store have so much, and make enough allready" and the angel in the other "ear" says :"It's not right..they made it big, because they make fair deals. Buy it instead". But the choice is ours to make.

Gods will was to give us the ability to prove ourselfes to God. And with or without Satan, this test would still have been made.

As jinns hgave a free will, a lot of them are good, or neutral in the matter aswell as evil. But im still sceptic towrds them, because i cant tell wich are wich. So when people visit fortune tellers, mediums and the likes, i believe jinns do the actual work. If an evil jinn can make you belive you was a boy living in the 12th century france, it has effectively pulled you off the path. Because now you suddenly belive in "magic" and fortune telling, or view it as something potentially true. But to a jinn thats 5000years old, it is no trouble finding a real indentity from way back, and tell you it was yours. You can even check it our if this boy excisted.

God is not mad at satan as i see it. God just give satan a chance to prove his point, while testing us, as he wanted to, at the same time...that optimised process for you right there :D

But what is really important is how much God loves you and belive in you. Test it for yourself. Pray wholeheartedly.
heres a hadeeth that i really like:
"If you take a single step towards God, God will come running your way"
And it is how i even started to belive in something bigger at all. I was a happy atheaist untill one night i was out looking at the stars. I was amazed with the sight, because it was a very clear night. And silently within myself asked :"Are you there? or is it all a big joke?"
and BAM!!! i got hit in the head and body with a truckload of emotions i have never ever felt before. I was so happy i cried, but at the same time so afraid and humbled, i wished i could just turn to dust and blow way in the wind. I couldnt stand up, and nearly passed out. After 20 mins like this, with a 2-3 min peak i stood up and realised, when God speaks...YOU LISTEN!!!...Never felt anything like it again, but im pleased the way i feel about God today.

About satans looks in the Catholic Church..need i remind you ,that for a long time they were speaking latin, wich nobody understood so all kinds of drawings turned up in the churches to get peoples attention. Jesus(saw) is today a tall slim white male, wich i find interresting, as he was from the caussian area, and thus would be a short, muscular, darktanned guy.
added on the 2003-10-20 11:12:50 by NoahR NoahR
kb: It's not that atheists deny to think about things they can't explain. They rather say "well, I don't know the reason yet, but there probably is one", and some even start researching.

in fact, it's the agnostics who think they couldn't possibly know if there is a god or not, and won't bother pondering on it any more. i'd count myself as such.
atheists specifically deny the existence of god.
added on the 2003-10-20 13:15:24 by reed reed
In that case, count me as a doubting atheist with agnostic tendencies ;)
added on the 2003-10-20 13:28:28 by psonice psonice
Yes, one can be atheist agnostic, theist agnostic, or "pure" agnostic.
Agnosticism deals with knowledge, not god. (I'm counting myself as an
areligious, skeptic agnostic ;)
added on the 2003-10-20 13:37:53 by _-_-__ _-_-__
iblis: Are you there? or is it all a big joke?"
and BAM!!! i got hit in the head and body with a truckload of emotions i have never ever felt before.

Amazing..! That was EXACTLY my encounter with God too! In 1997 when I wrote into my diary about God "mehr nach der Werbung" that is like "more after the advertisment".
Well.. I think, God made some advertisment to me.. :-), actually, he courted me..
Well, I havn't had any of this encounters again, I tested it again and again, but no more sign from God.. :-)

kb and knos: sure it is a common argument against christians that they don't think. Or actually, it WAS..
Nowadays it seems that the atheistic people (correct me if I am wrong) mainly believe in science and want to explain everything to science. If something is not explainable (i.e. why is the world how it is today), they often answer with "random".
I mean, nowadays, the nonchristians are superior in number to the christians. And thus the christians need to give the explanations..

Btw: just a thought: if "random" is mostly the joker for the atheistic people, why don't they pray to random? I mean, random created the universe and you and me and is the only one that really can do something. We therefore cannot decide, it is random, and so on..
Ah yeah, sorry, there we are at free will again.. :-)
added on the 2003-10-20 13:40:19 by phred phred
First point, in the world the majority is by far for the religious

Second point, and that's something that religious people often bring up,
science is *not* a religion. One cannot "believe" in science. One can
hold the dogma of the "scientific method", which is the way scientists
evolve science but that's another thing altogether. It's a
starting principle, weaker but a bit like saying that "reality is
real". You don't call people believers of a religion because they
believe they are really merely existing.

About your comment "And thus the christians need to give the
explanations..". First this discussion is not just about christians.
Secondly, religious people used to be the ones that explained the world.
(and still are in some religions) When religion and science separated,
the religions we occidental people are more accustomed were lead to
concentrate on the *faith* And since faith is personal and mysterious,
religion started to lose its power of explanation.

"If something is not explainable (i.e. why is the world how it is
today), they often answer with "random"."

Hm? Who is saying that and what are you talking about? The people I know
usually answer by "we haven't found the answer yet" rather than "it just
happened to be that way" (which is what religious people would say,
after all)

The other answer being "We can't know for sure". But it all depends on
the object of the question.

As for free will, I'm surprised you bring it, because the compatibility
of monotheistic religions and free will is far from clear.

added on the 2003-10-20 14:35:40 by _-_-__ _-_-__
I'd just like to point out that the original topic title is damn funny when you see the posts. And this thread will probably last longer than pouet ;)
added on the 2003-10-20 14:50:13 by psonice psonice
knos: so did I get something wrong? I always thought that the central point in the evolution theory (and that is the central theory how this world became how she is today?) is randomness.
I mean otherwise I can say: God created through evolution and then it is just a word: Some say random, some say God..

Sorry, I always heared this explanation about how the world began:
Take LOOT of time, take LOOT of random.
I am seriously asking..! Is this really the way the atheistic/scientific people try to explain the world or is it different?
added on the 2003-10-20 16:46:04 by phred phred
Phred: there's a theory that if the universe is chaotic, and it's infinite, then anything is possible, and anything can happen (including the start of the universe leading to the world as we know it). Quite what that means, I don't know. Seeing as humans are uncapable of understandy either chaos or infinity (except as abstractions), it doesn't mean a great deal.

But then, any explanation of how things started and how we got to where we are is either incomplete (eg. the big bang scientifical theorological explanation) or sounds a bit made-up (eg. the 'theres a man who lives in the sky, and knows what you're doing at all times, so you'd better be a good boy or you'll burn forever' religions type). So maybe it's true.
added on the 2003-10-20 16:53:07 by psonice psonice
'Gott wurfelt nicht'. (or 'God does not play dice.') - Albert Einstein (*1879 - +1955)
I agree.
added on the 2003-10-20 16:56:39 by sim sim
He used that to dismiss quantum physics. A model which is still
considered valid today, and still produces results.

A good example of how beliefs can blind the brightest.

added on the 2003-10-20 17:12:29 by _-_-__ _-_-__
Phred, evolution is not what explains how the world became what it is,
but how animals and species came to the state we know now. It doesn't
apply to planets, worlds, minerals, atoms, stars.
added on the 2003-10-20 17:15:08 by _-_-__ _-_-__
knos: you should read more science fiction ;)
added on the 2003-10-20 17:20:46 by psonice psonice
Quantum physics produces results, that is true (as relativity). But even if the majority of our life events seems to be probabilistic, between them there is a deterministic point (seen after some time). But I am not a physician and do not know many things about quantum and relativity co/existence.

I do not remember A.E. was blind by his beliefs (after reading his biography).
added on the 2003-10-20 17:26:28 by sim sim


Go to top