Dear Mervin,
What you consider wild fancies are well researched minority positions that logically follow. You brought up the testing of Jesus in the desert, but He had and advantages that Abram did not. He was able to see into the souls of His tempters and Abram was not. This was also the downfall of Moses, who was not able to always know who was speaking with him. That is why he was barred from entering the promised land.
Best Wishes, Shawn
I didnât say he made the religion, I said he raised up an Arab empire. See also deuteronomy 13
If all of this were masterminded by God, then the Quran must have been masterminded by God.
If the 1st Caliphate made the Arabs a great nation, are the Jews a great nation?
When you say, âmastermindedâ Do you mean predetermined; allowed as opposed to caused the Islamic faith?
The distinctions between Abraham and Jesus have not ever been in question here.
Iâm trying to help you see a distinction between God and Satan. Which you seem to have trouble doing. Whatever it is that you are considering âwell-researchedâ in this regard has not served you well.
1 Like
Dear Mervin,
I know we have had friction on this point, and I have ineffectually communicated my thoughts. Satan is called the adversary, but better, the usurper for good reason. Satan is a spiritual (ethereal) being who has the capability to manifest himself in many forms, but only for limited time. He can appear to someone and claim to be Jesus, Michael or God, and the average human being today would believe such a revelation without question - many do.
The modern world is very materialistic without much time for the spiritual world, but this was not always the case. But even in OT times, people were were not perfectly clairvoyant as Jesus is. Moses regularly talked to God, which opened the opportunity for Satan to impersonate Him, and lead Moses astray. The OT does not tell us which god to whom Moses or Abram was speaking, and it is up to us to use our logic to determine if this is the god of the dead or Our Father.
There is a great spiritual battle being waged on Earth, as there always has been. It is clear that the usurper is often able to gather followers and does great harm to humanity, often in the name of god.
⌠This isnât âfrictionâ. Itâs just plain old outright disagreement.
Nobody doubts that Satan masquerades as lots of things - even things that appear good. But until you have it sorted out that the Christian narrative we are bequeathed today includes testimonies from both testaments helping to sort out for us who all God has chosen and used to bless the world - until youâve shown yourself even just a basic student of that and able to avoid simple confusions that almost nobody else has - you wonât be in a position to help others gain clarity on these things. You need to abandon these obsessions with archangel intrigue, clairvoyance, reincarnation, etc. before you can be taken seriously on whatever valid points you may incidentally have.
I do wish you success to achieve better clarity of your own.
-Merv
1 Like
Dear Mervin,
This exchange is fitting for the thread topic âHow do we explain the origin of religions?â You have pointed out all the topics that off-limits for modern orthodox Christians. Various groups of men have made the selection of what parts of the Bible they are willing to accept, forming the basis for many Christian sects.
I do not belong to any religion becuase I do not accept narrowing of the Word of God by any degree.
Best Wishes, Shawn
This may not be the place for it but Iâve always been curious about Satanâs status. Does it perform the function for which God created it or has it overpowered God or perhaps outsmarted Him? Christianity with Satan has always struck me as being borderline polytheistic depending on how those questions are answered.
Polytheistic it is not - Shawnâs protestations notwithstanding. That isnât to say there were not parts of Hebrew history (Moses and after) where there wasnât something like âMonolatrismâ involved where there are many deities acknowledged, but only one acknowledged as the greatest. But even in the old testament this view is challenged at various points (read Isaiah 46) and the view that these âgodsâ are anything of the sort is scorned and mocked. Now the principalities and powers (such as mammon) that we see mentioned much more in the New Testament seem to have a different status than the mere idols of old. These gods, while still false, are at least real in a more seductive sense than the explicit idols of old were. But Iâm not sure that this counts as monolatrism in the historical sense.
What classic Christianity definitely does not do, however, is give any credance whatsoever to the whole âyin/yangâ complementarity that would have good and evil or God and Satan being equal opponents locked in eternal struggle as peers. God has no peer. Neither among spirits nor among humans. Neither the Hebrews (as they developed under Moses and after) nor the Christians later viewed God as one among others. The original creation accounts as well as the later gospels are all unequivocal on this testimony.
Dear Mark,
It is not the best place to discuss the nature of Satan, but he is responsible for the fragmentation of Christianity. He is the adversary, not of God, but of the King of Heaven, Jesus. He is not on par with God, nor Jesus - he is a fallen angel - yet is he is powerful enough to influence man.
I place so much emphasis on the adversary becuase he is the one responsible for the discord in religion. He is fighting a battle to maintain his power. Yahweh and Jesus are the greatest threats to his power, so he uses weak-willed or power-hungry people to weaken Christianity. The most effective terrorist tactic is âdivide and conquerâ, and he a master of it. Without recognizing the adversary you cannot recognize his fingerprints on those he corrupted.
Best Wishes, Shawn
This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.