Who here believes Lucifer and Satan are the same?

[Super Universe]

One day in heaven is like a thousand years on the earth.

The Lucifer Rebellion actually began before Adam and Eve. Christ in heaven had not yet completed His bestowal mission upon the earth and thus He allowed the rebellion to continue. He certainly had the power to dismiss it outright but He did not yet have the title as God's representative and leader of the universe.

As the rebellion began all angels on the earth were cut off from the universe. Those on the earth chose sides. Lucifer's assistants, Satan, the devil, Beelzebub, and many others on one side while on the other side angels chose to follow Van. The two sides separated. The angels following Van had the Tree of Life and could sustain their immortality.

The angels on Satan's side did not have access to the Tree of Life so they knew they were going to die a mortal death. They mated with primitive humans, something they were not supposed to do. Those angels following Van had the Tree of Life so they did not mate with the humans.

Part of Adam and Eve's later mission was to identify and breed out certain genes that had been bred into the primitive humans that cause genetic disease and retard human progress. Think of a roller coaster, some of the genes bred in by the angels increased cognitive ability, some decreased cognitive ability. This was not the original plan.

I do not have the specific time for when the angels following Van were removed from the earth but the Lucifer Rebellion was allowed to continue it's course until all those involved had chosen sides and Christ completed His bestowal mission on the earth. All rebel angels were offered mercy, most accepted it but Lucifer did not and will go to trial at some point in the next thousand (earth time) years.

 

[Super Universe]

Nowhere does scripture say Lucifer was an angel, or even a title for one. Lucifer is never the name of the adversary either. And, although Jesus calls himslef the morning star, he doesn't actually call himself Lucifer

I hate when people tell me to read / study scripture when they apparently haven't themselves.

Your scripture is a bunch of ignorant men trying to figure out the universe, angels, Creator Sons, and God. The writers of the Old Testament hadn't even invented the wheel yet. The writers of the New Testament didn't know the cause of rain, wind, earthquakes, disease, they didn't even know why the seasons changed.

You and others are promoting the bible to a position that it does not warrant. It's not the Word of God, it's the word of men who were afraid of comets.

 

[Super Universe]

Belief in God itself is kind of primitive, SU. So are all these fantastic stories you are telling, which are as without evidence or logic as belief the earth is flat. At least tell us where you are getting these tales from. Not only have I never in all my studies heard anyone claim this story, but , as I said, where's the support for it? You criticize other writers for their primitive knowledge, but what does your story here have to do with anything in reality?

If belief in God is primitive then how primitive is belief in Satan or Lucifer or whatever you want to call him?

I'm telling fantastic stories? And you thought the universe was simple?

My stories are without evidence or logic? There not "my" stories. And where is the evidence that Adam and Eve existed, or Satan? All from books written long after the events themselves transpired.

Logic has nothing to do with truth. Logic simply classifies arguments, it does not attempt to say whether an argument is true or not.

At least tell you where I am getting these tales from? I already did, the Lucifer Rebellion is detailed in the Urantia Book. You can read it free online or download it as a PDF to read on your computer when you wish.

What does this story have to do with reality? For one, it has to do with degenerative genes still in human DNA that would have been bred out long ago.
　

 

[1137]

If belief in God is primitive then how primitive is belief in Satan or Lucifer or whatever you want to call him?

I'm telling fantastic stories? And you thought the universe was simple?

No, definitely not. The universe is ridiculously complex, and it's probably just a part of reality. But intricate mythologies don't help in understanding it when taken at face value.

My stories are without evidence or logic? There not "my" stories. And where is the evidence that Adam and Eve existed, or Satan? All from books written long after the events themselves transpired.

There is no evidence Adam, Eve, and Satan existed, and they most likely never did. They are more likely as fictional as the Egyptian Gods or other mythologies. Using their stories as more than symbolic fiction is counter productive. We can learn from all stories, just have to look through them.

Logic has nothing to do with truth. Logic simply classifies arguments, it does not attempt to say whether an argument is true or not.

You need to study logic. Using it shows if arguments are valid or sound. Logcic is highly important when seeking truth, some must be infered.

At least tell you where I am getting these tales from? I already did, the Lucifer Rebellion is detailed in the Urantia Book. You can read it free online or download it as a PDF to read on your computer when you wish.

I'm reading Lord of the Rings right now, actually. Hope it can stand up to Tolkien's fiction.

What does this story have to do with reality? For one, it has to do with degenerative genes still in human DNA that would have been bred out long ago.

They obviously wouldn't be bred out, since they weren't. You cannot magically breed out disease and such, doesn't work that way.

 

[Super Universe]

Belief that Lucifer and Satan exist is as primitive and silly.



No, definitely not. The universe is ridiculously complex, and it's probably just a part of reality. But intricate mythologies don't help in understanding it when taken at face value.



There is no evidence Adam, Eve, and Satan existed, and they most likely never did. They are more likely as fictional as the Egyptian Gods or other mythologies. Using their stories as more than symbolic fiction is counter productive. We can learn from all stories, just have to look through them.



You need to study logic. Using it shows if arguments are valid or sound. Logcic is highly important when seeking truth, some must be infered.



I'm reading Lord of the Rings right now, actually. Hope it can stand up to Tolkien's fiction.



They obviously wouldn't be bred out, since they weren't. You cannot magically breed out disease and such, doesn't work that way.

Believing that Lucifer and Satan exist is silly? Okay, fine. Your religion title says Luciferian Mystic so, I guess, to you Lucifer no longer exists but did exist at one time or what?

Intricate mythologies don't help in understanding the universe? If they're not true, then I agree. If they are true then they actually do.

There is no evidence that Adam and Eve, or Satan ever existed? Depends on what you consider evidence. I bet I can do a Google search and find millions more references to Adam and Eve and Satan than I can about you.

I had to take a logic class in college, got an "A". The validity of an argument has nothing to do with truth, it has to do with the stated conclusion fitting with the premise. The premise could be false: Jane wears long coats. All long coats are heavy, thus Jane wears heavy coats. This is a valid statement even though it is untrue, not all long coats are heavy.

As for the Urantia Book standing up to Tolkein's fiction. I think it's a toss up.

The process by which Adam and Eve were supposed to breed out the degenerative genes was to impose breeding restrictions on the human population. They would identify those with retardation and genetic diseases and place a limit on the amount of children. A couple with degenerative genes might only be allowed to have two children whereas most couples had as many as possible because there was no birth control.

 

[1137]

Believing that Lucifer and Satan exist is silly? Okay, fine. Your religion title says Luciferian Mystic so, I guess, to you Lucifer no longer exists but did exist at one time or what?

Symbolism and archetypes, my friend. I wasted enough of my life believing fiction.

Intricate mythologies don't help in understanding the universe? If they're not true, then I agree. If they are true then they actually do.

Mythology is never reality.

There is no evidence that Adam and Eve, or Satan ever existed? Depends on what you consider evidence. I bet I can do a Google search and find millions more references to Adam and Eve and Satan than I can about you.

Google "Darth Vader" or "Jedi Order", I bet we know more about them than Adam and Eve.

I had to take a logic class in college, got an "A". The validity of an argument has nothing to do with truth, it has to do with the stated conclusion fitting with the premise. The premise could be false: Jane wears long coats. All long coats are heavy, thus Jane wears heavy coats. This is a valid statement even though it is untrue, not all long coats are heavy.

The process by which Adam and Eve were supposed to breed out the degenerative genes was to impose breeding restrictions on the human population. They would identify those with retardation and genetic diseases and place a limit on the amount of children. A couple with degenerative genes might only be allowed to have two children whereas most couples had as many as possible because there was no birth control.

So this story supports Naziism; let those we do not think worthy die out. Makes your posts in my other thread make more sense.

 

[muhammad_isa]

I always thought Lucifer was his name and satan the nickname..

Yes .. not far off..

Lucifer (or Iblees .. much like Jesus/Yeshua) was his name, and he used to be very pious.
That was before he disobeyed God due to his envy of mankind. He vowed to lead them all astray,
so as to destroy them, just as he's destroyed himself!
ie. strayed from the righteous path that Almighty God teaches us

 

[1137]

Yes .. not far off..

Lucifer (or Iblees .. much like Jesus/Yeshua) was his name, and he used to be very pious.
That was before he disobeyed God due to his envy of mankind. He vowed to lead them all astray,
so as to destroy them, just as he's destroyed himself!
ie. strayed from the righteous path that Almighty God teaches us

They are both titles. Lucifer is light-bearer and Satan is adversary. Neither is a name. Besides that, Lucifer and Satan are not the same entity anywhere in scripture, it is a connection born of ignorance.

 

[muhammad_isa]

They are both titles. Lucifer is light-bearer and Satan is adversary. Neither is a name..

I beg your pardon???
Most 'names' have meanings/origins .. some have good ones, and some not!

So .. Lucifer means 'bearer of light' .. that figures .. he was extremely pious once upon a time.

 

[Super Universe]

Symbolism and archetypes, my friend. I wasted enough of my life believing fiction.



Mythology is never reality.



Google "Darth Vader" or "Jedi Order", I bet we know more about them than Adam and Eve.



Apparently they did not teach you about soundness.



So this story supports Naziism; let those we do not think worthy die out. Makes your posts in my other thread make more sense.

Mythology is never reality? True, if it's proven to be correct it's no longer myth but fact. We're not there yet.

Darth Vader or Jedi Order would come up with a lot of Google hits? Sure they would because they exist in many fashions. Is there a real Darth Vader being? Perhaps not but no one should be so sure until we've checked every part of the universe.

Apparently they did not teach me about soundness? Soundness is mathematics logic.
The problem with using a "logical", or better yet, a scientific approach towards proving God or Satan or even angels is that they pretty much defy testability.

In selective breeding, no one would have died out. Humanity would have continued on, just without any genetic disease. The degenerative genes were not supposed to have been bred into us as they were.

 

[McBell]

They are both titles. Lucifer is light-bearer and Satan is adversary. Neither is a name. Besides that, Lucifer and Satan are not the same entity anywhere in scripture, it is a connection born of ignorance.

Agreed.
Nowhere in the Bible does it refer to satan or lucifer as the name of a specific entity.

 

[1137]

Mythology is never reality? True, if it's proven to be correct it's no longer myth but fact. We're not there yet.

Mythologies like the one you are presenting are not and never will be supported by evidence. Bring out the logic or accept it is not true. By definition alone it is false, as Satan and Lucifer are titles not entities, and Adam was not one man but mankind.

Darth Vader or Jedi Order would come up with a lot of Google hits? Sure they would because they exist in many fashions. Is there a real Darth Vader being? Perhaps not but no one should be so sure until we've checked every part of the universe.

No, we know Vader was a made up charater. Same with the scriptures, we know thay they were written by many different people as primitive explanations of the universe.

Apparently they did not teach me about soundness? Soundness is mathematics logic.
The problem with using a "logical", or better yet, a scientific approach towards proving God or Satan or even angelsis that they pretty much defy testability.

If logical inference based on fact does not support God's existence, God does not exist.

In selective breeding, no one would have died out. Humanity would have continued on, just without any genetic disease. The degenerative genes were not supposed to have been bred into us they were.

It's not what was supposed to happen, nothing was supposed to happen or not, it just does or doesn't.

 

[Super Universe]

Mythologies like the one you are presenting are not and never will be supported by evidence. Bring out the logic or accept it is not true. By definition alone it is false, as Satan and Lucifer are titles not entities, and Adam was not one man but mankind.



No, we know Vader was a made up charater. Same with the scriptures, we know thay they were written by many different people as primitive explanations of the universe.



If logical inference based on fact does not support God's existence, God does not exist.



It's not what was supposed to happen, nothing was supposed to happen or not, it just does or doesn't.

Mythologies like the one I am presenting will never be supported by the evidence? So you know everything that science is going to discover in the future?

What facts are against God?

 

[1137]

Mythologies like the one I am presenting will never be supported by the evidence? So you know everything that science is going to discover in the future?

No, I know science is not going backwards. Thanks to science we no longer need these ideas of Gods, angels, demons, intricately wound stories that have absolutely no support in reality.

What facts are against God?

Facts against something that does not exist? Doesn't work that way. There is no evidence for God, there is no logic supporting God, and there is no reason God, in this sense, needs to exist for anything we know true to be true. God is an idea people throw in for comfort, ease of mind, hope, sense of control, etc. The burden of proof is on the believers and, thankfully, there is nothing to present.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

I believe Lucifer was generally considered a satan (note the use of the indefinite article and lack of capitalisation) and this has over time (and the need to attribute phenomena to a God of whom the depiction of its nature has vastly altered though it remains claimed that it is an entity that is unchangeable) become the Satan (note the definite article and the capitalisation). Over time and the influences of other societies, we have seen the nature of 'satan' alter to incorporate additional elements (such as the absorption of 'Beelzebub', a God of a people whom the Jews hated, so came to label their god part of or perhaps another facet of 'satan') to enable the term to refer to a broader concept...

This change in the nature of a satan to the Satan comes at a time when the depiction of God's nature changes; it is unsurprising the former's prominence and attributed powers grow vastly beyond anything traditionally associated with the being since it comes at a time when a significant portion of God's own nature is torn from the narrative.


Edit: I chose 'Yes' because they are traditionally related; though the accuracy of that relation is poor at best

 

[1137]

I find it bothersome that 31+% of people voting willingly and knowingly accept and believe a misunderstanding.