Well, this dosen't seem to be a very often visited place!

SicPreFix · Sergeant Joined: Feb 21, 2004 Posts: 121 Location: Canada

Ya, BooRad's a wee bit of a wolf in faux lambskin.

But hey, that's the way the l'il round wafer crumbles.

Smile

ekrubtap · Posted: Tue Apr 06, 2004 8:22 am Post subject:

Hey BooRad...you seem to be a little preoccupied with your nether regions. This is not the first post in which you've made reference.

cavalier · Posted: Tue Apr 06, 2004 4:46 pm Post subject:

SicPreFix · Sergeant Joined: Feb 21, 2004 Posts: 121 Location: Canada

That's right too, it is truly.

Also it's verbiage, not verbage; emanate, not eminate; orifices, not orafaces; dost, not doest.

Unless, of course, the mispellings are intentional and meant to catch us up.

Smile

cavalier · Posted: Wed Apr 07, 2004 8:15 am Post subject:

HughDEEVILL · Cadet Joined: Apr 07, 2004 Posts: 6 Location: Burkinafaso

ekrubtap · Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2004 11:07 pm Post subject:

Hmmm, I guess I'd have to say that HughDeevill is a new one on me. I mean we've all heard of Beelzebub, the Devil, Lucifer, Satan, Baal, The Artist Who Used To Be Known As The Prince of Darkness, The Evil One, Abaddon, Apollyon, Mephistopheles, the Antichrist and Arthur Brown And His Band of Renown, but HughDeevil??

So tell me HughD, How is it that you failed to make an appearance on the world stage as God's archenemy until the advent of the New Testament?
As I understand it, in classical mythology, you, as Lucifer, were in fact the bright morning star (the planet Venus), personified as a muscular male bearing a lighted torch. Your name, in fact proclaims "Light Bearer", from the Latin "lux" (light) and "ferre", (to bear). You were one of the good guys, so how did the Xtians come to stigmatize your name?

Well, it seems the Xtian origin for Lucifer comes from two biblical lines that were written nine centuries apart, originally having nothing to do with each other.
"I beheld Satan fall as lightning from heaven"(Luke 10:18 )
"How art thow fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning" (Isa. 14:12)
Luke, in 65 CE is belatedly reporting on Jesus' alleged comment on the "disgraced" archangels blinding luminosity (something I would think you'd lose upon entering the Dark Side). Luke is of course refering here to the battle between loyalist and rebel angels, the occurence of which in itself speaks volumes re God's alleged omnipotence.

Isaiah, in the 8th century BCE, apparently metaphorically used "Lucifer" (he actually used the Hebrew word "helel", meaning "Shining One" or "Morning Star") in sarcastic reference to the recently fallen Babylonian monarchy, vanished like Venus from the daytime sky.

In the translation from the Hebrew to the Latin Vulgate (the Xtian scriptural language), "helel" was rendered as "Lucifer".and the whole misinterpreted as refering to the fall of the chief rebel angel. Isaiah may have been cracking wise at fallen Babylon, but the Holy Spirit, through divine revelation, had transmutated the prophets line into double entendre (ambiguous phrase), the literal meaning of the words, and the metaphorical puzzle of prophesy. So the Church Fathers said. And of course when the Church Fathers say black is white, you God'a know it's so.

Probably Lucifer's biggest popularity boost came in the 17th century via Milton's "Paradise Lost" -
"Farewell happy fields / Where joy forever dwells; hail horrors, hail / Infernal world, and thou profoundest hell / Receive thy new possessor." Satan as archetypical antihero.

Traditionally Satan's sin was that of hubris (arrogant pride), but today it would be seen as political ambition, or at worst, rebellion. Satan, today, would be (you'll love this) a mudjahedden ("mudjahedden" means "freedom fighter", one man's mudjahedden is another man's freedom fighter)

"Go, enquire of Baal'zebub, the god of Ekron, whether I shall recover of this disease". (2 Kings 1:2)
The speaker is the king of Ahaziah, the author probably a Jewish prophet in Babylon during the 6th century BCE Exile. Baal'zebub is the Phoenician pagan god at Ekron. The Hebrew phrase "Baal' zebub" means "god of flies" or "lord of dung" (Ever see the movie,"Lord of the Flies?) Baal was a fertility god, who, in some cultures, accepted children as sacrifices to ensure, what else, more children. The early Israelites, scorning idolatry and human sacrifice, linked the name "Baal" (which, at one time may have meant "Master of the Heavenly House") with the word "dung", to create a nasty slur, with which they cursed enemies and unblievers. Both Greeks and Romans adopted "Beelzebub as a master of evil.

The early Jews were familiar with satan, but not with Satan. The Hebrew noun "satan" means merely "enemy", and as a verb it means "to plot against". Almost nowhere in the Hebrew bible is the word "satan" used as a proper name referring to a demonic being, or as God's archrival. Hell, they didn't even have a clear concept of hell. They, in fact, didn't require a devil, the god of Abraham was devilishly capable of plagues, pestilence, famine and heartache without any outside influence. It wasn't until the third century BCE that an archenemy of Yaweh emerged, and even then it as a competition between Mastemah, Semyaz, Beliyaal, and the Devil for top honours.

Satan, as a particular angel, first appears around 520 BCE in the book of Zachariah, being rebuked by God (not yet mortal enemies). Next, appearing in the book of Job (1:2) Satan questions Job's integrity
and suggests God test the prophet. Satan is still clearly subordinate to God, unable to act without God's permission, and a member in good standing in the celestial court; "bene ha-elohim", "one of God's own"
.
During the 6th century BCE Exile, the Jews came under the influence of Persian Dualism (black/white, good/bad, cold/hot. yin/yang) Zoroaster taught them that a devine being could only do good. Thus, some Jewish scribe went back to the post census massacre scene (death of 70,000 Israelites) in 1 Chronicles 21:1-14, deleted "the Lord" and inserted "Satan".
Compare 2 Samuel 24:1 where God incites King David to take a census of the people with the later ! Chronicles 21:1, where the king is provoked by Satan.
"The anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go number Israel. (2 Sam. 24:1) "And Satan rose up against Israel, and provoked Davidto number Israel. (1 Chron. 21:1)
We'll never know how much revision of this (and other) sort(s) was done, but in a short time all evil doings were laid at Satans door.

Of course, the early Christians loved dualism. Good/bad, black/white, virtue/sin, God/Satan, celibacy/sex. It would be the basis of their early theology. It would be Xtians who would look back at Genesis and recognize the nameless serpent as "Satan" It was St. Paul, two decades after JC, who drove home the dualist view that had been spawned in late Old Testament writings. We are told that God's forces are clothed in "an armor of light" whereas Satan rules "the dominion of darkness". Dualism: light/dark, cool/hot, above/below, heaven/hell. Easy, eh.

The Muslims had a number of names for the devil, the main one being Shayton (yes, they're related) Funny thing about Shayton, after the Prophet Muhammad gained supreme control, he no longer recieved revelations about Shaytan, and the emphasis seems to have shifted to angels. Though Shaytan has had somewhat of a resurgence lately with the appellation "the Great" attached to his name.

The early Xtians took the crucifiction (sic) and resurrection as a sign that Satan's final defeat was at hand in the same vein that the second coming was imminent. Paul, the author of Hebrews, James, Peter, John (quotes JC "Behold I come quickly") all spoke of the second coming as reality in their time. (Are you paying attention here, Mrs. Hoppes? Smile

And don't try that "one day with the Lord is as a thousand years" excuse that the author of 2 Peter came up with when the locals started in with the queries as to JC's whereabouts and was he coming again or not. Apparently not. I can't believe Xtians are still waiting, still thinking it's imminent. Still prophesizing the end times, the signs are auspicious. Can anyone tell me what the difference is between prophesy and astrology?

I guess, though, in a way Christians have no choice but to stick it out for the long haul. Too much invested now. And of course one day the world will end. Then we'll hear the "I told you so's" Up until the world actually does end, that is. Once the lights go out, that'l be the end of that, and all other arguments.

Sources (and recommended reading);
The Origin of Satan, Elaine Pagels
Sacred Origins of Profound Things, Charles Panati
Holy Bible, St. Joseph Textbook Edition
KJV


	Home ˇ Topics ˇ Submit News ˇ Top 10 This entire site, Cops Themes, and Computer Cops are Š 2002 - 2004 Computer Cops, LLC. All rights reserved. You can syndicate our news using the file RSS 0.91, ultramode.txt, or RSS 1.0. Acceptable Use Policy. Use signifies your agreement. Engine Copyright Š 2002 by PHP-Nuke, GNU/GPL Licensed. ICRA Member. Paul Laudanski, Member of Computer Cops, LLC Server Load: 608 pages served in previous 5 minutes. Page Rendered: 0.370 seconds.