Just exactly WHO is the "god" of the Old Testament

[flatblack]

Copied from Theology/Religion

<HERESY ALERT!!!>

If your faith in what you THINK you know is easily shaken, do not read further.

<HERESY ALERT!!!>


This may be a hard truth for the average reader from a Judeo-Christian background or upbringing to objectively examine.. There is so much lifelong dogma, faith, tradition, belief, self-worth and spirituality tied up in it, that many people will fight to remain ignorant, and obstinately blind themselves to this possibility.

For them, I imagine it must be kind of like finding out that Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy are all fake, and then finding out that you were adopted, (and that your "parents" never loved you anway) ALL ON THE SAME DAY! (only a thousand times worse)


But regardless of how shocking or profane this may seem to you personally, it's something that deserves some serious scrutiny nonetheless. If this is true, the implications are shattering, and everything we think we know is wrong.

The basic thesis is thus: Lucifer was the head angel of God, but coveted God's power and authority, and rebelled against Him. (Ezekiel 28:14-16)

He (along with one third of the Angelic host who rebelled with him) was defeated and cast down to the Earth (Isaiah 14:12)

At this point, burning with rage and shame, but filled with an even greater lust for the power that was denied him, Lucifer decided to set himself up AS] God.

I submit to you that the Abrahamic "god" of the Old Testament is none other than Lucifer himself.

Think about it. The god of the Old Testament was vengeful, and full of wrath. He demanded sacrifice, strict allegience, and blind obedience to his whims just to prove his power to mortal men. (Abraham....Exodus...The book of Job, anyone?)

There was none of that peacenick stuff from the New Testament, no 'turn the other cheek', or 'love thy neighbor'.... It was all about "An eye for an eye" (Deuteronomy 19:21) and stoning the sinners. (Leviticus 20:13)

Why would Satan go to the trouble? Well, he's not called the Father of Lies just because it sounds cool. In fact, the whole scheme fits his 'Modus Operandi" perfectly. In his guise as "The Bringer of Light", Lucifer could appear very majestic. He was, after all, God's head angel and right hand man.

By usurping God's place among men, Satan was able to realize his godly ambitions here on earth, if not in Heaven. Namely, to be worshipped and glorified and held on high by men; God's favorite and most dear creation. This is possibly the ultimate jab in the eye to his victor; a desperate and spiteful move by a defeated enemy motivated only by jealous rage and hate. This was perhaps his foulest deed, to corrupt the joyful news of God's love with his lies and distortions and perversions.

To men, Lucifer could be as a god. This was the thing he most desired.

And Satan was a fearful god, as the Old Testament easily recounts, with it's many stories of a wrathful heavenly patriarch that dealt closely in the affairs of men, enriching some, smiting others, and above all demanding worship, glory, and unwavering allegiance.

...

Now this is where it gets interesting.

God thought this situation was intolerable, so He personally sent His only Son down to earth to right the ancient wrong spread by the lies of Satan; To correct once and for all the iniquity and confusion sown by the Master of Deceit, and spread the good news of the TRUE gospel. That of love, forgiveness and salvation. Jesus embraced the sinner, taught tolerance and mercy, and showed all of those who would listen that his Father was a kind and loving God who would accept even the most wretched of sinners into his heavenly bosom, if only they renounced the lies of Satan, and accepted the Lord's divine truth and accepted Him as their personal savior.

This was a markedly different teaching than that of the Old Testament.
Hence, it is called The New Testament.

You know, as opposed to the older one it was replacing. Jesus' blood sacrifice and the miracle of His subsequent ressurection and ascention was a symbolic abolishment of the Old Testament, proof that the new gospel was via The One True God. God felt that it was important enough to personally come down amongst men and refute the lies of Satan by sacrificing his only son. (John 3:16)

But, as always, Satan corrupts. By overtaking the Papacy and gaining control of the early church doctrine, (Council of Nicea, King James edition, etc) he was able to control and distort the message, edit the documents, and exert his influence to the point where the two gospels have been irrevocably bound together, as well as managing to fool most of the world's "christians" into believing a pack of blatant lies, disinformation, and propaganda about his own role and place within the scriptures.

In summation, almost everything you know is wrong, and the old "God", pre New Testament, is actually The Devil.

...

I know, it's a lot to digest. What say you?

[Laura]

<HERESY ALERT!!!>This is the ONLY truth in this whole post!

This may be a hard truth for the average reader from a Judeo-Christian background or upbringing to objectively examine.. There is so much lifelong dogma, faith, tradition, belief, self-worth and spirituality tied up in it, that many people will fight to remain ignorant, and obstinately blind themselves to this possibilityIt is NOT Truth.
I agree there is too much tradition and pschyo babble in the church today.
However, this piece you have published, is a lie, from satan.

Isaiah 5:20 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah+5:20&version=NIV)
Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.
1 Corinthians 10:21 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians+10:21&version=NIV)
You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons too; you cannot have a part in both the Lord's table and the table of demons.


But regardless of how shocking or profane this may seem to you personally, it's something that deserves some serious scrutiny nonetheless. If this is true, the implications are shattering, and everything we think we know is wrong.

The basic thesis is thus: Lucifer was the head angel of God, but coveted God's power and authority, and rebelled against Him. (Ezekiel 28:14-16)

He (along with one third of the Angelic host who rebelled with him) was defeated and cast down to the Earth (Isaiah 14:12)

At this point, burning with rage and shame, but filled with an even greater lust for the power that was denied him, Lucifer decided to set himself up AS] God.

I submit to you that the Abrahamic "god" of the Old Testament is none other than Lucifer himself.Wrong.
You do not know the Scriptures, and you have been sent to confuse.
Genesis 1.
God Created.
satan is a destroyer. he cannot Create.
1 Peter 5:8 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Peter+5:8&version=NIV)
Be self-controlled and alert. Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour.


Think about it. The god of the Old Testament was vengeful, and full of wrath. He demanded sacrifice, strict allegience, and blind obedience to his whims just to prove his power to mortal men. (Abraham....Exodus...The book of Job, anyone?)Exodus 3:13-15 (New International Version)
13 Moses said to God, "Suppose I go to the Israelites and say to them, 'The God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they ask me, 'What is his name?' Then what shall I tell them?"
14 God said to Moses, "I am who I am .This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'I AM has sent me to you.' "
15 God also said to Moses, "Say to the Israelites, 'The LORD, the God of your fathers—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob—has sent me to you.' This is my name forever, the name by which I am to be remembered from generation to generation.


YOU do not know Scripture and YOU do not know God. Therefore what you have said here, has no validity and is nothing but lies.
It would be like me trying to 'talk about budda'. I know NOTHING about him.....yet I am going to post something 'like I know something?" I think not!


But, as always, Satan corrupts.
I take back what I said at the beginning. There are only TWO truths in this whole post. First that this is Heresy and second satan corrupts. Which, by the way, is exactly what this post is......corrupt.
If someone posted false information on ANY of these boards, someone would come along and correct them.

This board is no different.

I know, it's a lot to digest. What say you?

[B]Matthew 16:23

"Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men."

[momma_to_seven_chi]

I know, it's a lot to digest. What say you?

I say the God we see in the Old Testament was a God of judgment. There was no perfect sacrifice to redeem the people then, judgment was all that could be seen with a few sprinklings of mercy when faith demanded it. The God of the New Testament, POST CHRIST, is still a God of judgment. But this judgment has been satisfied by the blood of the messiah, the perfect sacrifice, so we are judged as holy, unblamable, and unreprovable in perfect love. Same God, but we are seeing him from different sides of the blood line. There is only mercy and grace on this side of the sacrifice because the judgment was satisfied.

[Grizzy]

flatblack..

Continue to consider the things unseen.. the Creator.. Who He is and why you were called into His creation. Thrash about, ask questions, read and call out to I Am that I Am.. for He is real and you have only the moments of your lifetime to make your way to Him.. and then the door of Grace will be closed. The Gift of Life is extended to you.. It is your choice to receive it or to reject it.. to receive Life or not through the Lord Jesus.

John 3:16
16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

No well made argument nor accusation can dispute the personal relationship one can have with our Abba Father, who walked in the cool of the afternoon with His first children and walks today with His children.

John 14:6
6Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Matthew 24:35
35Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

The sad truth is that the father of lies whispers into the ears of mankind but the Good News is that the Father of Life woos the heart by His Holy Spirit so that there is a provision for us should we choose to rise up out of our arrogance, foolishness.. sin. At our worst moments He loves us. He loves you Now. But we can only come into His presence after being washed clean and made into a new creature through the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus.

My name is written in the Lamb's Book of Life. Your questions and words can not rip me away from my Father's arms.

Psalm 91
1He that dwelleth in the secret place of the most High shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty.

Every man is free to choose what he holds as truth. God waits for hearts to be tender that they may receive His Love and Grace.

Be Strong in the mercy and grace of our Lord Jesus
~Grizzy~

[Teg]

Not a christian, but it's an interesting theory.

[admin]

EVERYONE:

I caution all who care to take part in this thread to remain as civil as those who have so far participated.

flatblack has put forth an intellectually interesting theory that interprets biblical text from a different perspective. Perhaps it should have been posted in the Philosophy board, but it's here now.

This theory is not a challenge to anyone's faith. Please treat it as an intellectual exercise.

All are welcome to offer opinions and/or point out inconsistencies and/or offer alternate theories.

But in all cases, keep the discussion on topic. Personal comments, attacks, and/or other incivility is not welcome and will not be tolerated.

Thank you.


Oliver

[admin]

In Laura's post, above, she quotes scripture to refute the contentions in the original post.

However, if the theory put forth in flatblack's post is true, then the scripture Laura quoted has been carefully crafted by Satan to deceive us and so it cannot be relied upon as truth in order to refute the original contention.

Of course, if Laura's theory is correct, and flatblack's post is untruth inspired by Satan, then even considering it from a purely intellectual perspective would seem to rise to the level of sin. Or would it?


Oliver

[flatblack]

if the theory put forth in flatblack's post is true, then the scripture Laura quoted has been carefully crafted by Satan to deceive us and so it cannot be relied upon as truth

Indeed. It is said that the Devil himself can quote scripture flawlessly. I wonder why that is? In order to properly deceive, one must have a good grasp of the underlying source material, no?

What better way for Satan to corrupt than by being there from the get-go, guiding the hand of man as he wrote "divinely" inspired passages, to twist them into hideous lies, to fill the Holy Book with his own inconsistencies, hate, and distortions.

The facts is, Satan wanted to be God, but was denied and cast to earth. What do you think he did then. sit around and pout, maybe twiddle his thumbs, and impotently curse his former Master?

Of course not. That's not his style at all. Lucifer immediately took up the mantle of Almighty God Himself, and began to parade around as the "god" of the earth. I believe he was quite successful in this. Man is easy to fool. Show him a few miracles, make a few threats....Bam. Godhood. Easy as that.

I think it is likely that Satan pulled off the ultimate lie; the conspiracy to end all conspiracies. What is more, he is getting away with it. See how the faithful froth and foam, and wail and gnash their teeth at the very mention of it. They are prisoners of his lies, and dare not even consider the alternative.

This is all according to Satan's master plan, and it seems to be working out in his favor.

I didn't say this was going to be an easy thing to consider.

[Laura]

In Laura's post, above, she quotes scripture to refute the contentions in the original post.

However, if the theory put forth in flatblack's post is true, then the scripture Laura quoted has been carefully crafted by Satan to deceive us and so it cannot be relied upon as truth in order to refute the original contention.

Of course, if Laura's theory is correct, and flatblack's post is untruth inspired by Satan, then even considering it from a purely intellectual perspective would seem to rise to the level of sin. Or would it?


Oliver

Respectfully said, double speak is the native tongue of satan.
God and sin do not mix, ever. Why do you think the man who tried to keep the Ark from falling on the ground died instantly when he tried to touch the Ark? To compare God to the evil one, or vise verse, is blasphemous at the least.....for those who have Faith in Christ.
It's just 'words' to everyone else!

God's Word is clear and to the point.
Upon reading His Word, you have two choices.
Believe Him or not.
I love simplicity!!

[flatblack]

To believe or not...(That is the question, eh?)

Have you ever considered that this may in fact be a false dichotomy put in place by the machinations of Satan himself, in order to manipulate Mankind into doing his bidding?

Satan is attempting to force the hand of Man to either outright reject the Word of God, or to accept the Word of God as he (Lucifer) has framed it. Either way, Man loses.

The only possible way out is to accept and believe the pure word of God as He has written it. This is difficult, as Satan has essentially written the Bible as we know it. There is not one copy of the Holy Book in print that does not bear the traces of his meddlings, if the "Satan/God swap" theory is true.

Even the words of Jesus, printed in red in some editions, are suspect, and dangerous to take as verbatim. Satan is the Master of Lies, and nothing is sacred to him. He has corrupted all forms of organized religion with this scheme, and the faithful and unfaithful alike are nothing more than pawns in his master plan.

Recall that false idols are an abomination to the Lord. Is not a corrupted scripture that glorifies Satan, and denies the real God, perhaps the ultimate false idol?
Imagine how Satan laughs as "the faithful" rabidly defend the very words he himself has written, and launch themselves in misguided rage against those who would bring the truth to them... I'm sure that he enjoys the irony of those who would "bring light" to his misdeeds being shouted down and denounced by the very people he has fooled and taken for mindless pawns.

They say The Devil is not without a sense of humor.

[Anon001]

I believe part of the job of the Holy Spirit is to protect the Word of God as it was placed on earth.

[Grizzy]

Paul.. in so few words.. you sure got alot said.

~Grizzy~

[flatblack]

I believe part of the job of the Holy Spirit is to protect the Word of God as it was placed on earth.

Interesting, Paul. I hadn't considered the possibility of continual divine help, a sort of 'nudging' of the scriptures in the correct direction by the Holy Spirit (God) Himself.

God would likely anticipate an altering or dimunation of his Sacred Word over the years, and take the occasional step to rectify this transmission error.

That may indeed be the case. It would make for a neat solution to the problem of possible Satanic corruption of the scriptures.


That however, has it's own implications,and presents another problem which tracks right back into the heart of the matter.. Many religions and sects have experienced various schisms over the years, or grown into a separate branch entirely, and have as a result developed their own versions of the Holy Writ, either 'discovering' previously lost writings, or re-translating, or even just emphasizing a different part more strongly than others.

As an example, there are a whole spectrum of Catholics, Protestants, Baptists, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, Unitarians, etc. who all profess to hold the true and unaltered Word of God. Yet they differ in a number of ways on some key points and aspects of the narrative, yet each hold SIMILAR, but not always exact, copies of the original ancient text.

So who's "right"? Who has the straight dope? Which sect, if any, holds the actual unaltered, divinely inspired writings of God Himself, uncorrupted and unfouled by the insidious lies of Satan, that ancient whisperer of falsehoods and sower of discord?

Each "christian" sect cannot hold, simultaneously, the official and correct Word of God, while at the same time, being different from each other. If God's word is absolute, then it is perfect, cohesive and non-contradictory, and not spread out peicemeal among a dozen different documents.

A brief comparison of the holy text of each branch professing "Christianity" will reveal immediately that there are many contradictions and inconsistincies within the writings. It all rapidly devolves into a large game of "He said, She said".

So which one is true? They can't ALL be true, simultaneously. They say different things. Why hasn't God fixed them, if he continually strives to do so? Is the influence of Satan too strong, too entrenched, for him to do so?


...cont...

[flatblack]

...cont...

Was the Holy Spirit present at the Council of Nicea, where the early Papacy abandoned almost half of the early christian gospels from "The Official Version" of the bible? Remember, this is the Roman Catholic Church... the oldest, holiest church there was. The church that Peter the Apostle founded, after Jesus commanded that he was to be "the rock my church is founded upon".

That Roman Catholic Church. Anyway, they got together at the Council of Nicea, and had a little edit session. The result was the official version that carried the flame of the Word of God through the dark ages. Later (many centuries later actually) that version was ultimately edited down to became the "King James Edition", the version that we are largely familiar with. You know....the version that the entirety of modern-day Christianity is founded upon. Yeah, that one.

Did you ever wonder WHY it is called the "KJV"? Here's a hint: It's because King James edited the bible to what he(?) (or perhaps what his Satanic Master) considered or thought to be 'correct' or 'politically expedient'. He then subsidized the publishing of his version of the Bible, to get 'the word of god' to the masses. This is why the KJV has survived to this day. Mass distribution, the printing press....surely you're heard. It was in all the papers.

All levity aside, If that's not the work of Satan, I don't know what is. To change the Holy Word of God for trivial purposes and earthly power is ABSOLUTELY the calling card of Satan. You can bet your bottom dollar that King James sold to soul to Lucifer in return for earthly riches and power.

But Satan counted this transaction as a good deal. A bargain, in fact. For a pittance, he was able to influence, selectively edit, and ultimately corrupt the Word of God through his bought-and-paid-for pawns here on earth.

And so it goes.

Every self-serving king, evil pope, greedy preacher, and foolish unthinking believer that has ever spread his lies and furthered his agenda for power (even unknowingly) is a checkmark in Satan's box, and subject to the righteous Wrath of God.

Unfortunately, every single translation and interpertation is suspect, since we have no known good baseline to compare it too. Even the oldest Talmudic clay tablets that make up the Torah (That's the Old Testament, for you folks at home) are infected with the lies and deceits of Satan. It is HE that has usurped the mantle of the rightful God.

So what is the true word of God? How do we know that the ancient prophets, and authors of the "New International Version" of the bible alike have not been inspired by Satanic influences, corrupted and false? Have they been inspired by the Holy Spirit, or the foul whispers of the Prince of Lies?


If you never knew what the TRUTH was, your thought would be based on and fovever clouded by lies. I mantain that such is the case, and that the lies and falsehoods of Satan have been with us from that first fateful day in the Garden of Eden, and we will never truly know the REAL word of God, as Satan, the self proclaimed 'God of the Earth' has corrupted them, and continues to do so.

If God can continually fix them, then so can Satan continually corrupt them.

This has been his greatest victory; that men shall never truly know God, and that the common faithful among them have been led to worship HIM, instead of the rightful and true God, through his own deceitful and backhanded methods, using man against himself. Again, Satan appreciates irony.



Take your time. I know this is hard to accept.

[offgridbob]

An interesting thought unless you put it up against Scripture then it does not hold a thread of truth. Flatblack, you need to study your bible a little more and look at it as a whole story and not just a few verses

[admin]

An interesting thought unless you put it up against Scripture then it does not hold a thread of truth. Flatblack, you need to study your bible a little more and look at it as a whole story and not just a few versesI think flatblack's point is that, if the theory he put forth is accurate, then Scripture itself has been compromised to mislead the faithful so that real truth would appear to be false.

If the conjecture is true, how could we know? Or could we know?

In the real world, we can test claims and instructions. For example, a chemistry book contains this section:

How to Combine A, B, and C

Note: Follow these instructions carefully or the mixture will explode.

Carefully pour A into a container. Add B and mix well. After a minimum of thirty minutes, add C.

If a nefarious - or stupid - textbook editor altered the instruction to read

Carefully pour A into a container. Add B and mix well. Add C.

we'd know right away something was wrong when the mixture exploded.

But the spiritual world does not lend it itself to testing. If God's text book was altered over the centuries so as to mislead the faithful, and no original texts survive, the faithful would have no way of knowing and, in their innocence, would be following a false path.

That said, I have to believe that if God allowed his words to be altered, He wanted it so for some reason and would not punish those who follow those words, believing they are His.

Unless, perhaps, He wanted it so to see if anyone would figure out the truth.

But what do I know...


Oliver

[Grizzy]

With all due respect.. I take the Bible to be God inpsired, written according to His will.. Words of Truth.

It is written..
Matthew 24:35
35Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

Titus 1:2
2In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;

Revelation 22:13-15
13I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

14Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

15For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.

The OP suggests that God allowed the Old Testament to be an offering of deception.

Main Entry: de·cep·tion
Pronunciation: \di-ˈsep-shən\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English decepcioun, from Anglo-French deception, from Late Latin deception-, deceptio, from Latin decipere to deceive
Date: 15th century
1 a : the act of deceiving b : the fact or condition of being deceived
2 : something that deceives : trick (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/trick) <a clever deception>
— de·cep·tion·al \-shə-nəl\ adjective
synonyms deception (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/deception), fraud (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fraud), double-dealing (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/double-dealing), subterfuge (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/subterfuge), trickery (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/trickery) mean the acts or practices of one who deliberately deceives. deception (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/deception) may or may not imply blameworthiness, since it may suggest cheating or merely tactical resource <magicians are masters of deception>. fraud (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fraud) always implies guilt and often criminality in act or practice <indicted for fraud>. double-dealing (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/double-dealing) suggests treachery or at least action contrary to a professed attitude <a go-between suspected of double-dealing>. subterfuge (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/subterfuge) suggests the adoption of a stratagem or the telling of a lie in order to escape guilt or to gain an end <obtained the papers by subterfuge>. trickery (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/trickery) implies ingenious acts intended to dupe or cheat <resorted to trickery to gain their ends

Proverbs 6:16-19
16These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:

17A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,

18An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,

19A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

The theory to this thread is perverse and does not line up with God's Word which is our manual given to us. We are given discernment by the Holy Spirit to know truth from lies.

It is written in Hebrews chapter 13 verse 8:
8Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

God's Word does NOT say:
"You thought I gave you truth but I allowed lies to see if you could find your way to truth thru deception by the Father of Lies.. it's all a lil game".

Oliver, I understand the intended excercise of the thread but.. I don't reckon I'm open minded enough to entertain the concept. It is not my intent for my words to be, in any way, inflammatory. I jus was trying to support my position. Thank You, for wading thru this thread with us.

Be Strong
~Grizzy~

[admin]

I think my first inclination was correct. This does belong in the Philosophy board.

It's not fair to ask those of faith to entertain conjectures that call into question the foundation of that faith.

My apologies.

I'm closing this here and will copy it to Philosophy for anyone who cares to continue the discussion.


Oliver

[Skyking]

I must give credit where credit is due and Oliver has shown tact and wisdom in this matter.Not so much for the subject matter but in the way he handled it.My hats off to you and respect has increased for you and this forum.

[flatblack]

I know that this is some pretty heavy subject materiel, and that a lot of people will have difficulty even trying to comprehend it. It's not easy to call into question your most basic assumptions; the very tenants that underpin your whole life's philosophy and purpose.

I initially posted this in "conspiracy" because I felt that in that context, perhaps people would be able to objectively analyze the source material, and examine the implications in the subtext of a "conspiracy"

It is, after all, the Ultimate Conspiracy. But now we are in the realm of Philosophy; that magical land of limitless possibilites and thought experiments where one can perhaps feel free to indulge in the "what if's" that plague us as a species. We are after "Homo Sapiens"...literally, "The Man that Thinks".

It would do our race no credit to shut our eyes to the dreadful possibilities that swirl around us like a howling storm. In that spirit, I am glad that this thread may be continued.

I see that this is controversial subject materiel. Interestingly enough, it seems that some people are not ready or willing to question their own faith, or even to objectively analyze it in it's own context. I figured that surely the kind of people who to spend a significant portion of their life following the doctrines of an ancient book would have at least READ the darn thing.

There is a lot of strange stuff going on in the Holy Bible. After all, if one is prepared to believe in a magical sky wizard and a jewish zombie of divine origins who are busily fighting another magical being for control of Mankind's soul, then perhaps it is not such a stretch to go a little further.

I see that many folks mind's are already set. I have been accused to being a Freemason, and Agent of Lucifer, and various other perjoratives. This is curious to me; that mere speculation on perhaps the most important topic in the history of mankind would bring such wrath from the "believers".

These folks have a lot to lose, however. If my theory is right, then they have been serving Satan all along, without ever knowing it. God does not forgive such a trespass. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Thus, Satan's victory is near complete. He has the hardest and most pious of believers in his right hand pocket, AND THEY DON'T EVEN KNOW IT. They gleefully do his bidding, thinking themselves the Victors in Christ.

The Roman Catholic Papacy is an excellent example of Satan masquerading in God's clothing. Remember a little thing called "The Spanish Inquisition"?
If you're just joining us, the Spanish Inquisition was a purge in the church over a matter of doctrine. See, the Pope decided that a lot of people believed entirely the wrong things, and thus needed to be cleansed. Cleansing involved torture, imprisonment, seizure of assets, and ultimately trial by fire of redemption by the sword. Neither of those were as pleasant as they sound.

To the heart of the matter, inquisitions, confessions, and executions were all carried out by members of the 'clergy'. Does that sound like the work of "God" or does that sound like the work of Satan.

They say God works in mysterious way. Satan doesn't however. He's motivated by plain old fashioned Jealousy, Greed, Wrath and Lust. He's not hard to decode. He is the ultimate hedonist and wastrel, a lying corrupted sack of filth. His ambitions are base and purile. Such a mindset is evident throughout the Old Testament.

Some have told me to "read my bible" and seek the truth. I say to you Sir, I have READ my bible. HAVE YOU? The truths are there for anyone to see. They are ugly and malignant, but they are writ large for those who have eyes to see them! The truth is not easy, and knowledge of the truth is not without it's price.

Shall that price be your naivete or your " spiritual innocence" as you deem it? If you are a self professed "christian" I challenge you to dig deeper into your 'Holy Book', and read beyond Matthew, the first book in the New Testament. There are many dark and ugly secrets that your "god" (Satan) has set before you in the guise of his 'holy word'..

Beware to you, seeker of knowledge. Nothing is as it seems, and even those would would set themselves up as 'guides' will decieve you in the name of the faith!

[admin]

Of course, the one overarching problem with these kinds of conjectures, and with all the arguments offered from all sides, is that all of it is based on individual and personal interpretations of text that was written millennia ago and revised, purposely and, perhaps, by accident in transcription and translation, an unknown number of times.

As such, absent proof to the contrary, almost anything is possible. There is no way to know correct from incorrect.

These folks have a lot to lose, however. If my theory is right, then they have been serving Satan all along, without ever knowing it. God does not forgive such a trespass. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Thus, Satan's victory is near complete. He has the hardest and most pious of believers in his right hand pocket, AND THEY DON'T EVEN KNOW IT. They gleefully do his bidding, thinking themselves the Victors in Christ.If the God of the New Testament is a construction of Satan, then it is possible, even likely, that Christ himself was either Satan or one of his minions. Would God permit such a thing to take place? If so, to what end? He would be allowing a deception that could not reasonably be detected by the creatures he created. He would be purposely arranging for their failure.

To my mind, that is the weak spot in this conjecture. We'd have to assume an omnipotent and omniscient God who is willing to go to the trouble of creating a universe to contain sentient beings just so he could arrange to trick mankind into failure. Possible? Sure. Probable? Who knows, but I'd guess the probability of no supreme being to be significantly higher than one that would behave so.

I find it far easier to imagine a God who would create the universe and then sit back to see what happens. It would go a long way toward explaining the world around us.


Oliver

[LottieDa]

<HERESY ALERT!!!>

If your faith in what you THINK you know is easily shaken, do not read further.

<HERESY ALERT!!!>


This may be a hard truth for the average reader from a Judeo-Christian background or upbringing to objectively examine.. There is so much lifelong dogma, faith, tradition, belief, self-worth and spirituality tied up in it, that many people will fight to remain ignorant, and obstinately blind themselves to this possibility.

For them, I imagine it must be kind of like finding out that Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy are all fake, and then finding out that you were adopted, (and that your "parents" never loved you anway) ALL ON THE SAME DAY! (only a thousand times worse)


But regardless of how shocking or profane this may seem to you personally, it's something that deserves some serious scrutiny nonetheless. If this is true, the implications are shattering, and everything we think we know is wrong.

The basic thesis is thus: Lucifer was the head angel of God, but coveted God's power and authority, and rebelled against Him. (Ezekiel 28:14-16)

If you read Isaiah 14:1-11 and 14:12. It tells you exactly who/what the "morning star" is. A parable about the king of Babylonia. Your reference to lucifer comes from a mistranslation in the Christian Vulgate Bible from the Hebrew. "Morning star" was mistranslated as "Lucifer." Satan means adversary or opposition. It is one perspective that Satan was a created angel made to be the "opposition" to people in order to strengthen them in their practice of free will and making righteous choices. Here is a parable: Your son comes to you and declares that his soccer team won the game. He describes how he personally shot the winning goal and how well the team performed together. You then ask him who he played and he looks at you puzzeled. Played? We had no opponent. Where there is no opposition, there is not struggle, there is no reward for a job well done.

He (along with one third of the Angelic host who rebelled with him) was defeated and cast down to the Earth (Isaiah 14:12) See above. Parable for King of babylon.

At this point, burning with rage and shame, but filled with an even greater lust for the power that was denied him, Lucifer decided to set himself up AS] God.

I submit to you that the Abrahamic "god" of the Old Testament is none other than Lucifer himself.
I don't see it.
Think about it. The god of the Old Testament was vengeful, and full of wrath. He demanded sacrifice, strict allegience, and blind obedience to his whims just to prove his power to mortal men. (Abraham....Exodus...The book of Job, anyone?)
The prophets of this "god of the Old Testament" did not chastise the people for failure to keep strict religious laws, but instead admonished the people for not performing justice for the down trodden, the stranger, the orphan and the widow. They were chastised for a failure to show kindness and mercy, too often the prophets spoke to the people, "What is it that the Lord your God requires of you, but to act justly and walk humbly". It is a popular, although incorrect, assumption that this "Old Testament God" is as you describe, but it can only be asserted if one focuses on only parts of the actual scriptures and not on their entire essence. The entire book of Deuteronomy reasserts that the commandments are connected to love and to service and a higher calling, ultimately. They were meant to inspire toward righteous behaviors, not self-righteous attitudes.

There was none of that peacenick stuff from the New Testament, no 'turn the other cheek', or 'love thy neighbor'.... It was all about "An eye for an eye" (Deuteronomy 19:21) and stoning the sinners. (Leviticus 20:13)
Love thy neighbor comes straight from the Old Testament from the book of Leviticus 19:18. It was Jesus repeating it in the New Testament. He didn't originate it. An "eye for an eye" was never applied as it's most commonly interpreted by Christians and Muslims by the people with whom the book originated. It traditionally refers to a monetary compensation. You are totally correct that "turn the other cheek" isn't an ethic from the OT.

Why would Satan go to the trouble? Well, he's not called the Father of Lies just because it sounds cool. In fact, the whole scheme fits his 'Modus Operandi" perfectly. In his guise as "The Bringer of Light", Lucifer could appear very majestic. He was, after all, God's head angel and right hand man. Both Jesus and Satan are referred to as the bright and morning star according to many Christian commentaries. I am not making implications and have no idea what this does imply, but it is a fact.

By usurping God's place among men, Satan was able to realize his godly ambitions here on earth, if not in Heaven. Namely, to be worshipped and glorified and held on high by men; God's favorite and most dear creation. This is possibly the ultimate jab in the eye to his victor; a desperate and spiteful move by a defeated enemy motivated only by jealous rage and hate. This was perhaps his foulest deed, to corrupt the joyful news of God's love with his lies and distortions and perversions.

To men, Lucifer could be as a god. This was the thing he most desired.

And Satan was a fearful god, as the Old Testament easily recounts, with it's many stories of a wrathful heavenly patriarch that dealt closely in the affairs of men, enriching some, smiting others, and above all demanding worship, glory, and unwavering allegiance.
Satan wasn't the only powerful "angel" that functions in the OT. Also, he was not "all powerful" and enjoyed restrictions and permissions like any other angel and created thing.
...

Now this is where it gets interesting.

God thought this situation was intolerable, so He personally sent His only Son down to earth to right the ancient wrong spread by the lies of Satan; To correct once and for all the iniquity and confusion sown by the Master of Deceit, and spread the good news of the TRUE gospel. That of love, forgiveness and salvation. Jesus embraced the sinner, taught tolerance and mercy, and showed all of those who would listen that his Father was a kind and loving God who would accept even the most wretched of sinners into his heavenly bosom, if only they renounced the lies of Satan, and accepted the Lord's divine truth and accepted Him as their personal savior.
Jesus' teachings normally echoed the same message as the prophets from the OT. The ideas of forgiveness and mercy were repeated many many times through the OT. Even with the first story of murder, we see the message begins that righteousness depends on our choices. The choice was given to Adam regarding the tree and then as Cain contemplated murder, God reminded him that he sin was croutching at his door but that he had the power to rule over it and to choose life. The OT is full of refrences to personal choice (choose this day who you will serve, choose life...) and it's connection to righteous living. There isn't an all powerful equal to God.
This was a markedly different teaching than that of the Old Testament.
Hence, it is called The New Testament.
I disagree.

You know, as opposed to the older one it was replacing. Jesus' blood sacrifice and the miracle of His subsequent ressurection and ascention was a symbolic abolishment of the Old Testament, proof that the new gospel was via The One True God. God felt that it was important enough to personally come down amongst men and refute the lies of Satan by sacrificing his only son. (John 3:16)

But, as always, Satan corrupts. By overtaking the Papacy and gaining control of the early church doctrine, (Council of Nicea, King James edition, etc) he was able to control and distort the message, edit the documents, and exert his influence to the point where the two gospels have been irrevocably bound together, as well as managing to fool most of the world's "christians" into believing a pack of blatant lies, disinformation, and propaganda about his own role and place within the scriptures.

In summation, almost everything you know is wrong, and the old "God", pre New Testament, is actually The Devil. Based on the words of the prophets, the call for repentance over sacrifice and the stress on personal choice, justice, and mercy all throughout the OT, I would disagree with you on your assumptions.

...

[cubcadet]

EVERYONE:

I caution all who care to take part in this thread to remain as civil as those who have so far participated.

flatblack has put forth an intellectually interesting theory that interprets biblical text from a different perspective. Perhaps it should have been posted in the Philosophy board, but it's here now.

This theory is not a challenge to anyone's faith. Please treat it as an intellectual exercise.

All are welcome to offer opinions and/or point out inconsistencies and/or offer alternate theories.

But in all cases, keep the discussion on topic. Personal comments, attacks, and/or other incivility is not welcome and will not be tolerated.

Thank you.


Oliver

There`s nothing intellectual in it. Any Bible student worth his salt could knock him down with the simple truth that is in Scripture. He`s just as deluded as most of whom he refers to in his opening delusional diatribe, as judeo-christians. Just to take an "intellectual" jab at his allusion to lucifer- there is only one reference to lucifer in the Bible. Isaiah 14 refers to lucifer, in the Authorized translation. Lucifer is a word that is used to translate a reference to the king of Babylon, describing him as the morning star. Even in those days, morning star refers to the planet Venus. When Venus appears in the western sky in the early morning, it is washed away and disappears when the "sun" comes over the horizon, referring to the Son of God. It has nothing to do with the devil or, satan.

[LottieDa]

There`s nothing intellectual in it. Any Bible student worth his salt could knock him down with the simple truth that is in Scripture. He`s just as deluded as most of whom he refers to in his opening delusional diatribe, as judeo-christians. Just to take an "intellectual" jab at his allusion to lucifer- there is only one reference to lucifer in the Bible. Isaiah 14 refers to lucifer, in the Authorized translation. Lucifer is a word that is used to translate a reference to the king of Babylon, describing him as the morning star. Even in those days, morning star refers to the planet Venus. When Venus appears in the western sky in the early morning, it is washed away and disappears when the "sun" comes over the horizon, referring to the Son of God. It has nothing to do with the devil or, satan.


You made the same point as I did in regards to who the bright and morning star refers to in the Old Testament, that being the king of babylon.
Revelation 22:16 is a reference where Jesus refers to himself as "The Bright and Morning Star".

Hence my statement that both lucifer and Jesus are referred to as "the bright and morning star".

I'm not sure " He`s just as deluded as most of whom he refers to..., as judeo-christians" is a necessary attack on people he may have been referring to. I don't think it's possible for you to know how many people who identify as "Judeo-Christians" are knowldegable or deluded. And I'm not sure why the insult was necessary. You can't just address the topic at hand or stay silent?

Some people might call rabid, antisemtic, hate filled, white supremicists, deluded also. I guess it just depends on your perspective.

[kammisue]

The Old Testament “God” was/is Jesus Christ… Yahweh/Yahshua..
The Abrahamic Covenant runs from Genesis to Revelation.
The only thing that was done away with at Christ’s crucifixion was the “Old Covenant under the Law” Gal 3:23-29 …. II Cor 3:6-18 … I Cor 7:16-24
The Abrahamic Covenant (Genesis, Deuteronomy, Isaiah, Micah) carries throughout the entire New Testament … Luke 1:68-80 … Hebrews 8:7-13 (just to point out a few references)
There is a reason Paul admonished Timothy to “study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the Word of Truth”
There is nothing philosophical about it. Reason and logic do not work with Yahweh’s Holy Scriptures. And if one knows the Scriptures, to whom they are written, and how to rightly divide there aren’t any contradictions in the Old and New Testaments.
I Cor 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
I Peter 4:11 If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion forever and ever. Amen

[cubcadet]

LottiDa, I didn`t insult anybody. You are the one who insults, referring to antisemites and white supremists. I call that extreme hate. Prejudice. Most in judeochristianty will fry. That, from the word of God, Jesus. Matt 7:21-23- " Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.“ A remnant will be saved. An extreme minority. I am not a white supremist, but a white minorist.

[offgridbob]

I love it when people refer to themselves as white this or white that. If you look at your skin tone were all just various shades of brown. But with that said, CubCadet, sometimes you do come across as a skin head. or a white minorist. Just what is a white minorist anyhow?

[cubcadet]

It strikes me as rather strange that when someone who attacks heresy with truth, he himself gets attacked. Especially when he gets called things that are merely media buzz words and specious catch phrases designed to get the people to react a certain way. Jesus Christ said that those who live His way will be persecuted. So, I should thank you all because you attack me instead of the ignorant unbeliever. When a sane person finds himself in an insane asylum and gets all sorts of strange looks from those in there and someone shouts out, "You are crazy" , he should be grateful, though he feels kind of isolated and left out of things. Frankly, I have met some very intelligent, clean cut, sober, well dressed, polite skins and white nationalists and I can say, they conduct themselves with more decency and high morality than most Christians do. They are very devoted to their cause and aren`t afraid to let their particular light shine. Jesus said that it is better to be hot or cold. He vomits out of His body those pucilanimous, do-nothing, lukewarm Christians.
So, thanks for the labels. I don`t deserve your attention, but I feel that I am getting heard by some people with a spark of truth in them.

[offgridbob]

Well that pretty well explains everything in a nut shell.

[LottieDa]

LottiDa, I didn`t insult anybody. You are the one who insults, referring to antisemites and white supremists. I call that extreme hate. Prejudice. Most in judeochristianty will fry. That, from the word of God, Jesus. Matt 7:21-23- " Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.“ A remnant will be saved. An extreme minority. I am not a white supremist, but a white minorist.

Cubcadet you said, " He`s just as deluded as most of whom he refers to in his opening delusional diatribe, as judeo-christians." This is what I was referring to as an insult. I don't think you have the ability to determine that the entire group he is referring to as Judeo-Christians is "delusional".

The lower-case J and C in Judeo and Christains is usually a tactic used by anti-semites to undermine others.

In any event, I didn't call anyone an anti-semite or a white supremicist. Please, go back and read what I said.

Happy Sunday.

[LottieDa]

It strikes me as rather strange that when someone who attacks heresy with truth, he himself gets attacked. Especially when he gets called things that are merely media buzz words and specious catch phrases designed to get the people to react a certain way. Jesus Christ said that those who live His way will be persecuted. So, I should thank you all because you attack me instead of the ignorant unbeliever.

Someone disagreeing with you doesn't qualify as persecution.