The Devil or Lucifer

[Bruce Michael]

Hi Bruce ...
The etymology of the term is pretty well sorted, as I posted above ... from the Greek verb diaballein, "to traduce" — and means a slanderer or an accuser, and thus it is the equivalent of the Hebrew 'satan', which signifies an adversary, or an accuser ... thus the term grew out of its parent tradition, rather than from any external source.

Hello Thomas,
The feminine of deva is devi. I am more inclined to believe the derivation from "Devi", firstly sounds right (diabolos is quite a jump), secondly, it menas "shining one" (like Lucifer), and lastly the name of "devil" in Zend is "dev":

Etymological Meaning of Devil - The Biggest Secret Forum

The Teutonic words devil, teufel, diuval, djofull, djevful, may all be traced back to the Zend dev,[97] a name in which is implicitly contained the record of the oldest monotheistic revolution known to history. The influence of the so-called Zoroastrian reform upon the long-subsequent development of Christianity will receive further notice in the course of this paper; for the present it is enough to know that it furnished for all Christendom the name by which it designates the author of evil.

To the Parsee follower of Zarathustra the name of the Devil has very nearly the same signification as to the Christian; yet, as Grimm has shown, it is nothing else than a corruption of deva, the Sanskrit name for God.

The right way round is Lucifer became subject to the Satanic principle, and fell — both Lucifer and Adam, according to esoteric tradition, made the same error in assuming that what was theirs by grace was theirs by nature.

The serpent in the Garden represents the satanic principle, which brought about the downfall of both Lucifer and Adam.

Thomas[/quote]

Lucifer/Iblis/Devil Satan/Shaitan/Ahriman

You see the serpent which became snake, was of Man and of Man's past, of his making. The serpent was given a freedom to expression, which then double-backed upon Man.

-The Brothers

The Serpent was a Luciferic expression of Man's ancient past. That is why he was permitted to tempt Adam and Eve. Woman connects to the Past, Man to the Future.

Since Satan is "Old Evil" (as opposed to Lucifer's "Young Evil") you could say that it has a Satanic component.

Lucifer will be redeemed whereas as Satan has to be expelled as he is beyond reform (certainly at this stage).

Lucifer is a creative being- which necessitates freedom and free expression. Freedom also can involve rebellion and the possibility of evil.

Best Wishes,
Br.Bruce

 

[mee]

And I saw an angel coming down out of heaven with the key of the abyss and a great chain in his hand. And he seized the dragon, the original serpent, who is the Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years. And he hurled him into the abyss and shut it and sealed it over him, that he might not mislead the nations any more until the thousand years were ended. After these things he must be let loose for a little while.”—Rev. 20:1-3.


the devil influences the nations, but soon he will be locked up for a 1000 years .


and the one who has the key to lock him up is Jesus .


And the fifth angel blew his trumpet. And I saw a star that had fallen from heaven to the earth, and the key of the pit of the abyss was given him. REVELATION 9;1


(Revelation 22:16) “‘I, Jesus, sent my angel to bear witness to YOU people of these things for the congregations. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright morning star.’”

 

[Thomas]

Hi Wil —

I like millions of others reject the Catholic version and the Evangelical version of Christianity.

And millions more reject it altogether. I have no problem with that — my issue lies with one who professes Christianity, yet so much being rejected that nothing of any distinction remains. As I said, what you're left with is basically humanism.

If Christianity means anything it means the recovery of an intimate relation with the Divine, how one chooses to express that is subsidiary, but the over-arching principle is that of the utter distinction between creature and creator, and the union of the two.

Christianity is a Mystery religion, by any sense of the term ... but the world seeks to rationalise the mystery away, to make it manageable. What's left is an intellectual exercise.

Doesn't mean we aren't Christians.

Doesn't mean you are.

I believe in G!d, but that my access is within, what you call supernatural I believe is natural, we've just lost access. Lastly I believe in miracles, it is all a miracle. (or if it isn't I believe in none).

That's very poetic, but it's also the opposite of what you said yesterday.

Your calling me an atheist, pantheist, or humanist is no different than anyone looking down their collective noses and calling you and catholicism a polytheist cult of idol worshippers.

Not really ... that's a mispresresentation of Catholicism ... I'm only going on what you claim.

My question would be, why do you desire to chase me away from Christianity?

I'm not chasing you away ... I'm saying until you put your reservations down, you'll always be sitting on the fence.

Thomas

 

[Thomas]

Hi Wil —

I like millions of others reject the Catholic version and the Evangelical version of Christianity.

And millions more reject it altogether. I have no problem with that — my issue lies with one who professes Christianity, yet so much being rejected that nothing of any distinction remains. As I said, what you're left with is basically humanism.

If Christianity means anything it means the recovery of an intimate relation with the Divine, how one chooses to express that is subsidiary, but the over-arching principle is that of the utter distinction between creature and creator, and the union of the two.

You seem to have rejected all of that.

Doesn't mean we aren't Christians.

But in the end it does mean that the term is meaningless. You've rejected all that makes Christianity distinct and recognisable. Being a good person is not what Christianity is about.

I believe in G!d, but that my access is within, what you call supernatural I believe is natural, we've just lost access. Lastly I believe in miracles, it is all a miracle. (or if it isn't I believe in none).

That's very poetic, but it doesn't actually say anything — and it certainly doesn't accord with what Christ preached.

Your calling me an atheist, pantheist, or humanist is no different than anyone looking down their collective noses and calling you and catholicism a polytheist cult of idol worshippers.

Not really ... that's a mispresresentation of Catholicism ... I'm only going on what you claim.

My question would be, why do you desire to chase me away from Christianity?

I'm not chasing you away ... I'm saying until you put your reservations down, you'll always be outside, looking in.

Thomas

 

[Thomas]

Sorry ... double posting.

Thomas

 

[Thomas]

Hi Bruce —

I am more inclined to believe the derivation from "Devi", firstly sounds right (diabolos is quite a jump)...

Not if you're Greek — diabolos is then the Greek equivalent of a Hebrew term. Nothing could be simpler, in fact.

Thomas

 

[wil]

That's very poetic, but it doesn't actually say anything — but it's also the opposite of what you said yesterday...and it certainly doesn't accord with what Christ preached.

Not really ... that's a mispresresentation of Catholicism ... I'm only going on what you claim.

While you claim misrepresentation of Catholicism, many claim Catholicism is a misrepresentation of Christianity, much as you do my beliefs. I can agree to disagree, but I would like you to identify where I contradicted myself one day to the next.

Not if you're Greek — diabolos is then the Greek equivalent of a Hebrew term. Nothing could be simpler, in fact.

I play with a chinese toy we call a diabolo, tis an oversized yo-yo that isn't connected to the string, we've always been told diabolo is greek - to throw?

 

[17th Angel]

No supernatural, no miracles, no transcendant nor immanent deity, no Personal God, no Salvation History ... if you take out all that you take out, there's nothing left but humanism.

lol...... That couldn't be further from the truth.... ;/ The only thing you have to do/believe is jesus... and follow in his footsteps/actions... Simple as that really, christian..... :| I could claim that there are 3ft elephants of a bright pink colour on the planet neptune, and at the same time try to follow the examples of jesus as best I can, I could officially state that I am a christian...... Who is anyone, to tell me what to believe?

 

[China Cat Sunflower]

Christianity is a Mystery religion, by any sense of the term ... but the world seeks to rationalise the mystery away, to make it manageable. What's left is an intellectual exercise.

The problem is that when the Mystery is dragged into, and forced to conform to the realm of rationality the result is superstition. But that superstition is reinforced, nurtured, and abetted by the power structure of organized religion as a means of maintaining control over the rank and file. Catholicism is one of the worst offenders in this regard.

Chris

 

[China Cat Sunflower]

To clarify Thomas: If we accept the idea that rationalizing the Mystery leads to spiritually bereft humanism where the mystery, as you rightly said, becomes merely an intellectual exercise, then the flip side is that mystifying the rational leads to an intellectually bereft, pseudo rational form of superstition which functions as a self-perpetuating mechanism for preserving a mindset of ignorance that feeds the authority of the power structure. If you separate the two: Mystery and Rationality, you may succeed in undermining secular humanism, but you will also destroy the mechanism by which the Institution of the Church derives its authority. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Chris

 

[China Cat Sunflower]

I think of Satan, or the Serpent as the principle of terrestrial electricity, or friction. The positive pole of the opposing forces that generate the life animating spark of electrical energy must have an opposing force, or negative grounding point that sets up the friction. But friction causes things to wear out, or die. Thinking of Satan in this electrical context as the "Prince of this World" makes for an interesting muse.

Chris

 

[Thomas]

Hi Wil —

When I asked if you reject anything supernatural, you replied:

At this juncture I'd say yes. I categorize it all as descriptions of our condition, choices, consequences. Supernatural, it is all natural, we simply have yet the 'science' to prove or understand it.

Well that's a denial of the supernatural.

I believe in G!d...

And then you express a belief in something — which for some reason you can't bring yourself to spell the word ... something which by any Christian definition is super-natural...

what you call supernatural I believe is natural, we've just lost access.

So that brings everything back within your sphere of comfortability ... and I'm sorry, but I have no idea where you actually stand. As I said, it's either athiesm (God just covers physical principles we don't yet understand) or pantheism (everything is God).

Thomas

 

[Thomas]

Hi Chris —

If we accept the idea that rationalizing the Mystery leads to spiritually bereft humanism where the mystery, as you rightly said, becomes merely an intellectual exercise, then the flip side is that mystifying the rational leads to an intellectually bereft, pseudo rational form of superstition which functions as a self-perpetuating mechanism for preserving a mindset of ignorance that feeds the authority of the power structure.

That's why you cannot separate the two. But the Church does not separate the two, as the document "Fides et Ratio" says, faith and reason are the two wings on which man ascends.

The implicit assumption, that the Church's authority rests purely on ignorance, can be easily dismissed. Some of the world's mmost profound philosophy was the product of Christian ... dare I say Catholic ... thinkers.

Thomas

 

[Raksha]

Being a good person is not what Christianity is about.

Thomas,

And there you have it in a nutshell--the reason so many people have rejected Christianity. If "being a good person" isn't at least an absolute prerequisite for being a Christian--and I do mean absolute here!--then all the rest is worthless. I've run into too many self-described Christians lately who think being "saved" (whatever the hell that means) and "saving" others is the important thing, and that being a good person is "nice" but optional.

This mindset has always existed within Christianity, and in every single case, when it has predominated historically--such as during the Inquisition--it has given Christianity one more black mark that never washes out. It becomes one more atrocity for the apologisits to rationalize and lie about and indulge in endless revisionism over, but they still fail to convince anyone but the most gullible no matter what kind of intellectual contortions they indulge in.

Secular humanism is my bedrock, my default position, and absolutely and without apology--my litmus test. For example: I would never consider voting for any candidate for public office who was not a secular humanist first and foremost. Whatever else they might believe, or what role religion plays in their lives, is a personal issue. But if they are stealth theocrats, or if I even suspect they MIGHT be, I don't give them the benefit of the doubt. We have too many of that kind in public life in the U.S. already, and it simply isn't safe for the majority to ignore their theocratic agenda, which is not and never has been innocuous or "personal." They have every intention of imposing it on the rest of us when and if they get into power no matter what they say.

If "being a good person is not what Christianity is about" than it simply isn't safe for Americans who cherish the Bill of Rights to vote for self-described Christians. A lot of Christians would disagree with you, however, which is a good thing since Christianity is very much the majority religion in this country.

--Linda

 

[Raksha]

If we accept the idea that rationalizing the Mystery leads to spiritually bereft humanism where the mystery, as you rightly said, becomes merely an intellectual exercise, then the flip side is that mystifying the rational leads to an intellectually bereft, pseudo rational form of superstition which functions as a self-perpetuating mechanism for preserving a mindset of ignorance that feeds the authority of the power structure.

Chris,

Very well stated. "Mystifying the rational" is an excellent characterization of so-called "intelligent design" aka "creationism." By trying to "harmonize" them without applying proper intellectual rigor you end up with something that is neither mystery nor rationality.

--Linda

 

[Azure24]

Hello, Raksha.

May I say to you what is a good? To be a good person? Is it to keep everyone happy? Is it to be joyful and to give everyone kisses? No and No.

"…come to you in SHEEP’S clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves" (Matt. 7:15).

But you could spot one of these "wolves" a mile off, couldn’t you? Just look for the GIANT TEETH that Little Red Riding Hood encountered, right?

"O foolish Galatians, who has bewitched [Gk: ‘to fascinate by false representations] you…" (Gal. 3:1).

The "wolves" COME IN SHEEP’S CLOTHING! You don’t see their teeth. They don’t show their teeth. They only show you a huggie huggie kissie kissie pious religious smile. THAT my friends, that pious front, IS the "sheep’s clothing." Wolves BITE, and their bite can be deadly...

[34] "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. (Matthew 10:34)

[16] ...and out of his mouth [Jesus] came a sharp double-edged sword... (Revelation 1:16)

This 'Sword' is the word of God which saves people.

 

[17th Angel]

[16] ...and out of his mouth [Jesus] came a sharp double-edged sword... (Revelation 1:16)

This 'Sword' is the word of God which saves people.

Sorry, swords save? I thought they took life, not gave life....?

 

[Azure24]

Sorry, swords save? I thought they took life, not gave life....?

You are being sarcastic aren't you?

Let us read this again but S-L-O-W-L-Y

This 'Sword' is the word of God...

The Whole Bible is not to be taken literally

Is this literal?

"Now at their eating, Jesus, taking the bread, and, blessing, breaks it, and, giving to the disciples, said, ‘Take eat [this bread], This [bread] ISmy body" (Matt. 26:26).

In this metaphor, the bread is a symbol. Is there anyone who cannot recognize that Christ used bread from the table as a "symbol" of something?

No. I hear?

"I am the BREAD OF LIFE..." (John 6:35).

"For we, who are many, are ONE BREAD, ONE BODY, for we all are partaking of the ONE BREAD" (I Cor. 10:17).

"The Jews, then, murmured concerning Him, that He said, ‘I AM the Bread which descends out of heaven." (John 6:41).

"I am the living Bread ... Now the Bread also, which I shall be giving for the sake of the life of the world IS MY FLESH" (John 6:51).

That says it all of course it is symbolic...

Is the 'sword' i mentioned the same one that kills people? Let's see shall we...

[3]They sharpen their tongues like swords... (Psalm64:3)

Did you notice the 'like' in the above passage...

[13]So Joshua overcame the Amalekite army with the sword.(Exodus 17:13)

Did you notice how it says 'the' sword and not 'a' sword in the above passage...

[15]He saves the needy from the sword in their mouth; he saves them from the clutches of the powerful. (Job 15:15)

Do real swords come out of people's mouth's? Or do words? Like say the word of God? I'll let you answer that one...

Here's more:

[7]See what they spew from their mouths— they spew out swords from their lips, and they say, "Who can hear us?" (Psalm 59:7)

[2]He made my mouth like a sharpened sword...(Isaiah 49:2)

[16]In his right hand he held seven stars, and out of his mouth came a sharp double-edged sword. (Revelation 1:16)

[16]Repent therefore! Otherwise, I will soon come to you and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth. (Revelation 2:16)

[15]Out of his mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. (Revelation 19:15)

[21]The rest of them were killed with the sword that came out of the mouth of the rider on the horse... (Revelation 19:21)

Need I say more if you believe i was speaking of a literal sword...

 

[17th Angel]

The Whole Bible is not to be taken literally

Obviously, if we did, it would mean donkey's could talk, dragons are real, god will kill everyone, we'd all become eunuchs for god, I would use hardened human crap to help cook my food, be out there killing fortune tellers aaaand so on

You are being sarcastic aren't you?
Let us read this again but S-L-O-W-L-Y

Not really..... Why is the word sword used to describe the word of god which saves? That I do not understand... As you said yourself...

[21]The rest of them were killed with the sword that came out of the mouth of the rider on the horse...

Was that the word of god?

Also why did they die? If it was only words?

 

[Azure24]

Obviously...

Oh, so you konw...

Not really..... Why is the word sword used to describe the word of god which saves? That I do not understand... As you said yourself...

I did not say i didn't understand?

Was that the word of god?

Also why did they die? If it was only words?

If you believe that they were killed by a real sword, then you should also believe that "...the kings of the earth and their armies..." (with guns and all)
were killed by "...the rider on a horse (Jesus)..." (with only a sword)

Was that the word of God? Yes it was!

[17]Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. (Ephesians 6:17)

and another...

[12]For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. (Hebrews 4:12)

This is God's explanation not mine. I know nothing.