Salty Booger
Royal Crown Cola (RC)
It appears to be more an opportunity to tear apart their own house. It also is a political tool. They were being used by the same system they thought they were fighting.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What Do You Like About The Devil?
- Thread starter Salty Booger
- Start date
Sirona
Hindu Wannabe
I don't believe in the devil per se, although there are "dark gods" (and goddesses) in Hinduism, but they embody the principle of (self-indulging) "ignorance" rather than evil. However, I like to watch religiously-inspired horror movies, and in those movies, the devil (if performed well by the actor) often makes the best, most dramatic, sometimes pityable, and in a way "human" appearance opposing a silent, hidden and often absurdly rigid God.
Heyo
Veteran Member
epronovost
Well-Known Member
I thought he lived New Jersey?
firedragon
Veteran Member
epronovost
Well-Known Member
Is it me or the jump from "I don't like tattoos" to "the Devil is taking over my city" is a tad bit worrying. It sounds histrionic to me.
CBM
Member
Interesting.
Judaism has a similar view on the devil. Duality is rejected.
Satan, demons etc are all creations of the one G-d, who serve Him by testing us so we can overcome the test.
I’ve heard that Satan is more satisfied when we overcome him (because ultimately his task is to bring us closer to G-d) - and generally the best way to do that is by channeling our evil inclinations towards positive pursuits (every trait or tendency can be used for positive or negative).
Beautiful young boys, typically with blond hair and smooth hairless bodies, get a lot of tattoos because they feel like people are staring at them as if they were girls. Tattoos also show that one is willing to endure great pain, to prove manliness.
For example, Justin Bieber has tattoos covering his body now. Leif Garret just warned Bieber that posing with his shirt off attracts what Leif described as "chicken-hawks" (old men who look for young boy-chicks).
It is true that sex sells in Hollywood. Chris Atkins was chosen by openly Gay producer, Randall Kleiser, who often posed with his arm around the back and bellybutton of Atkins.
If you Google "blonde" "tattoo" you will find mostly women. This reflects our society which would prefer to look at the scantily clad body of women.
Googling why women want tattoos, some conclude that they want to artistically express themselves. But what if they change their mind in the future? Often women think that something attracts men, and it doesn't. Stinky perfumes (especially among adolescent teen females) is used to lure men. Choking and gagging, men often "say" that they admire their perfume, so that they can maybe get a date, but in reality, it is all they can do to hold back a barf. Tattoos are similarly a real turn off to most men, but women don't seem to get that. Though it does provide a pretext for a man to ask a woman to lift her shirt.
Jonathan Lipnicki, et al, got a religious tattoo (star of David). This likely limited the ability of the muscular model/actor to play roles like Hercules, requiring extensive masking of the tattoo in every frame of the movie. All that discipline and hard work was partially negated by a tattoo. To some, tattoos show a love of God. Yet, I am pretty sure that God would not want people to tattoo themselves on his account. Yet, such religious markings are definitely not the work or symbol of the devil, as you intimated.
Intoxicants and cigarettes also negatively impact actors (and people in general). Yet, many use such things to appear more adult. Yet, the adults usually try to stop their addictions (often too late because addictions are hard to cure).
I don't know that the devil hates people. It seems that he uses them to get back at God and further his own ends.
The devil tells people that he is God, or is working for God or is "fighting the Axis of Evil" (a phrase that you can recognize as coming from the devil in modern times).
The devil motivates using greed (like tax cuts for the rich to worship mammon over God).
The devil motivates using lies (like phony Orange Alerts that were issued during the recent Persian Gulf War), or lies about Global Warming not being real, or lies about science being bad.
The devil uses sex to lure people into sin.
Bird123
Well-Known Member
What I like most about the devil is that the devil doesn't really exist. If the devil actually existed, he would go on my list of poor misguided souls I need to fix or at least work on.
Those that really know God know that no child is going to be left behind, not even a devil.
As for myself, I do not value Blame. I do not need to create someone in order to have someone to blame. The devil is only an idea in the minds of some people.
That's what I see. It's very clear!!
From where did the Jews get the concept of Satan?
According to Haaretz (link above), when Jews were polytheists, they borrowed a demon/God from Persians with minor power (called Belial, or Azazel).
I believe that Baal Zebub (Lord of the flies)...spelled Beelzebub by Christians) was a minor Arab God of mischief (perhaps evil, but still worshiped as a powerful God that should not be crossed). Iranians are quick to point out that they are Aryan (hence the name Iranian) which is not the same as Semites of Arabia, though their culture and appearance is somewhat similar.
Satan
Link: "in the Torah, the word Satan indicates “accuser,” “hinderer” or “tempter.” Satan is therefore more an illusory obstacle in one’s way - such as temptation and evil doings"
Christians and Jews view Satan differently. Jews consider it to be an evil influence, and Christians believe it to be an evil entity.
In many places of the new testament, it says not to be influenced by the devil. But those are mis-translations (which you can verify by looking at ancient Greek and Latin translations of the new testament. Really, those passages say, don't be corrupted by evil temptations (not by an evil entity, like the devil).
Flip Wilson....."the devil made me do it."
I think that you are right. Ancient transcripts of the new testament clearly show that the evil is within us (not an external being that tempts us). Those passages of the bible, correctly translated, say "don't let evil tempt you." That is, we have the capacity of doing wrong all on our own without some external influence. Remember, we have free choice, and that is usually the choice of doing good or bad. And, those are the things by which we are judged by God.
QuestioningMind
Well-Known Member
I like the way he gives Christians an excuse to not take responsibility for their own actions.
CBM
Member
1. When Jews were polytheistic? Jews, as a nation, were never polytheistic. Were there kings etc who led many people astray? Yes. But the identifying factor, and historic constant, for those who remained Jews was adherence to Torah and the one G-d.
2. Satan as an entity vs an influence.
No, I would not say that is the primary difference in the Christian vs the Jewish view.
Yes, Satan’s primary function in Judaism is as you said - an influence, hindrance etc. But that certainly does not preclude that from taking shape in a being - as it did in the very beginning of the Bible as the snake.
I would say the main difference between the Jewish view and the Christian view is whether or not it is essentially an independent malevolent force (Christianity) or not (Judaism).
If I am mistaken on how Christianity sees it, please let me know.
epronovost
Well-Known Member
Ancient Hebrews were polytheistic, more particularly henotheists, until at least the 9th century BC. The Temple of Solomon famously contained a shrine dedicated to Asherah, Yahweh's spouse. Ancient Hebrews, according to all archeological and historical evidences, emerged from the wider family of Canaanites and held the same religious beliefs, but in a henotheistic manner, worship Yahweh as their national deity and chief deity, enemy of the lesser ones. They probably became fully monotheistic during their Babylonian exile.
CBM
Member
I consider the Torah to be a valid source of Jewish history whereas you obviously don’t.
It’s hard to imagine, therefore, that two people with two vastly different reference points will reach an agreement - agreed
?And based on my frame of reference, I strongly disagree with you on Judaism’s origins.
I do want to say that in general, there is a strong archeological bias against using the Bible as a source or guide for where to dig. Take archeologist Eilat Mazar -who could not find financial sponsors for her dig based on extensive biblical sources - because finding archeological evidence of King David’s palace would have political ramifications.
Archeological evidence that polytheism was practiced during the first temple lines up with what the Torah says.
One of the reasons the first temple was destroyed was because of idolatry.
Solomon was held accountable for marrying wives who practiced idolatry etc...
But I maintain my point that monotheism is intrinsic to Judaism. When they served idols they went astray. It wasn’t a part of Judaism, no matter how widespread it may have been.
Yazata
Active Member
I once participated on a discussion board where there was this sweet old lady, a Catholic of the older-sort that one rarely sees today. She took a liking to me and knew that I was an agnostic. And she worried a great deal about the eternal fate of my soul.
So she would post these incredibly horrible accounts supposedly by Catholic saints who had been granted visions of hell. They told of people doomed to spend eternity in boiling vats, with their flesh boiling off their bodies as they screamed, screamed and screamed for mercy. Without the pain stopping. Ever. While Christ walked by them with his face hardened as if he couldn't hear or didn't care.
And I thought that was about the most horrible thing that could possibly be imagined. It reduced God to a rapist, with God telling humanity -- "Love Me! Love me, baby, or I'm going to hurt you! I'll hurt you so bad..."
And if that's God, and if the Devil is the only one in heaven with the courage to say 'no' to even infinite power, in full knowledge that his rebellion would ultimately be doomed to failure...
Then Satan becomes the most inspiring, virtuous and brave character in the whole story!
So she would post these incredibly horrible accounts supposedly by Catholic saints who had been granted visions of hell. They told of people doomed to spend eternity in boiling vats, with their flesh boiling off their bodies as they screamed, screamed and screamed for mercy. Without the pain stopping. Ever. While Christ walked by them with his face hardened as if he couldn't hear or didn't care.
And I thought that was about the most horrible thing that could possibly be imagined. It reduced God to a rapist, with God telling humanity -- "Love Me! Love me, baby, or I'm going to hurt you! I'll hurt you so bad..."
And if that's God, and if the Devil is the only one in heaven with the courage to say 'no' to even infinite power, in full knowledge that his rebellion would ultimately be doomed to failure...
Then Satan becomes the most inspiring, virtuous and brave character in the whole story!
epronovost
Well-Known Member
No, I'm an historian and a history teacher. No historian worth their salt consider the Torah as a historical source on Jewish history, only on Jewish culture at the moment of its compilation (between the 8th and the 5th century BC). It hasn't been consider remotely historical since the late 19th century.
You are, unfortunately, factually incorrect. You have the right to your beliefs, but not to your facts. All evidence points to Judaism having emerged from a polytheistic tradition.
Who is the ' he ' that gives Christians an excuse.....__________
It is Not the ' He ' of genuine ' wheat ' Christians because as Hebrews 4:13 says all is exposed to God to whom we must give an accounting, or as Romans 14:12 says each shall give an account to God.
We are all free to act responsibly toward the God of the Bible.