The Doctrine of Satan

[William]

William wrote: ↑Mon Apr 12, 2021 10:08 pm

IF Jesus 'died that we may live" "For The Creator so loved the world...that whosoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life" THEN what does that actually mean, if all are eternal beings already?

Are you asking this rhetorically? Or is this really a question in your mind? It's a good question. Maybe you're asking it of myth-one so that he might re-think his position(s)?

It is a bit of both really.

It appears to me that the Bible is an outline of the story of human beings in relation to Satan.

It is not really so much a 'manual for life given to us from a God' so much as it is an "explanation of Satan and the effect that entity has in relation to other spirit beings"

Christians often invoke "The Devil" as a retort when it becomes obvious to them that those they are trying to convince that their particular religion is the one to follow, reject their cliam. Any opposition to their position, is regarded as "The Devil".

Indeed, it is apparent that without "The Devil" Christianity would cease to exist as a bunch of religions.

So never-to-mind the conflicting versions of The Creator they have imaged into the world...if we look at what they claim about Satan, are they united in those claims?

One thing I notice about the attributes of Satan is that he appears to be only slightly less powerful than the God of the bible...and for that, also appears to be working in a sort of congruent manner with the GotB. Certainly the GotB finds Satan extremely useful in relation to dealing with spirits incarcerated into human form.

So Satan is something of an accuser. He is also portrayed as someone who likes to seed doubt into the individual, and confusion as consequence.

The mythology as generally believed by Christians is that Satan wanted to "become like God" rather than just be a god.

Obviously he cannot make his fellow eternal beings follow along with his crazy notions as they are equal to him in every way. Satan has this weird image of The Creator which he wants to bring into the spirt realm...a being on a throne worshiped as The Creator of all that is.

However, according to Christian mythology, this being actually does sit on a throne being worshipped by spirit beings [Angels etc] which seems to contradict the prior story, which leads to confusion.

The main problem with the belief in the doctrine of Satan is that if Satan wanted to be above that image, simply replacing The Creator with himself on the throne, won't achieve that.

So now we are looking at spirit beings worshiping an image of The Creator on a throne and Satan wanting to be an actual representation of the image being worship. He wanted to fill that position with a real being [him] rather than the one conjured up by Angels [eternal spiritual entities]

"NO!" Shout the Christians! The Creator was already the real being on The Throne! Satan wanted that position!

But that contradicts the idea that Satan wanted to be in a position even better [higher] than simply being the one on The Throne.

According to the general mythology, some of the fellow Angels got on board with Satan's idea while others [the greater number of] rejected the idea.

Then there is some almost nonsensical claims that somehow the greater number of Angels overpowered Satan and his followers, and The Creator on the throne then created the physical universe as a sure way to imprison eternal beings away from them having any more disruptive influence in the none material universe of the Angels [Angelic Realm] and their Creator.

Satan - thus incarcerated - then found a way in which he could disrupt the Angelic Realm by creating human beings.

"NO" shout the Christians. The Creator created human beings!

"Okay" I reply, "If that is the case, why did The Creator place spiritual entities into the human domain [physical universe]?"

The general reply is that it was 'the other way around' The Creator placed human beings into the same Universe [!!] in which The Creator had created to imprison Satan and his followers in.

So then one is entitled [and wise] to ask "Why" The Creator did this.

The obvious answer reverts back to the idea that the Human Form - being part of the physical universe was designed to house Satan and his followers, which then implies that we human beings are Satan and his followers.

So then we enter the Garden of Eden Story...the whole bible is a story about Satan and his Followers.

Is there any reason why the above isn't true?

[myth-one.com]

Only two body types are described in the Bible, natural or terrestrial and spiritual or celestial:

You are going off on a tangent. I am arguing [and will continue to do so] that bodies are containers for Spirit.

You seem to be conflating 'spiritual bodies' with Spirits. These are different, not the same.

The body types are variable - indeed [if earth is anything to go by] myriad in form and function.

Good luck with it.

At least you know what the Bible states now.

What you mean is at least I know what your interpretation of the Bible is.

I have no "interpretation".

Yes you do.

I quoted Bible scriptures to support any claims I made.

So you know that those scriptures I quoted support my claims.

Read them again if you need to.

I think most of them are highlighted in Blue color, just in case you needed to locate and review them.

Yes those quotations you used can be interpreted in more than one way, as I am demonstrating.

Not correctly, they can't.

But I have moved on to the examination of that particular type belief of biblical script [Emergence] and you are welcome to argue against my critique on that.

Thanks for the invitation.

I'll just remain a simple Christian who has studied the scriptures and believes what they state.

[William]

Yes those quotations you used can be interpreted in more than one way, as I am demonstrating.

Not correctly, they can't.

But I have moved on to the examination of that particular type belief of biblical script [Emergence] and you are welcome to argue against my critique on that.

Thanks for the invitation.

I'll just remain a simple Christian who has studied the scriptures and believes what they state.

Use of the one true [Christian] informal fallacy is a common way in which holding a pointless position is maintained by the individual using it.

The problem I have with accepting your position of belief is that not all Christians interpret the bible in the way that you do - [Link] and think of themselves as Spirit in human form, and - I myself have experienced leaving my body on at least 2 different occasions and the experience quiet clearly contradicts any beliefs that your interpretation is the correct one.

So yes - you can carry on being the "simple Christian" as you wish, but my experience trumps your biblical interpretations.

This is where I am, in relation to the thread topic.

[myth-one.com]

Yes those quotations you used can be interpreted in more than one way, as I am demonstrating.

Not correctly, they can't.

But I have moved on to the examination of that particular type belief of biblical script [Emergence] and you are welcome to argue against my critique on that.

Thanks for the invitation.

I'll just remain a simple Christian who has studied the scriptures and believes what they state.

Use of the one true [Christian] informal fallacy is a common way in which holding a pointless position is maintained by the individual using it.

The problem I have with accepting your position of belief is that not all Christians interpret the bible in the way that you do - [Link] and think of themselves as Spirit in human form, and - I myself have experienced leaving my body on at least 2 different occasions and the experience quiet clearly contradicts any beliefs that your interpretation is the correct one.

So yes - you can carry on being the "simple Christian" as you wish, but my experience trumps your biblical interpretations.

This is where I am, in relation to the thread topic.

Your experience trumps it for you, and I understand that. It is an obvious response to that experience.

I had a little "deja vu" experience that took me many years to figure out. It was a very strange experience.

But I finally figured out what happened, and my experience all occurred in the physical world.

===================================================

The problem I have with accepting your position of belief is that not all Christians interpret the bible in the way that you do.

There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. (I Corinthians 15:44)

How many type of bodies does the Bible define?

[William]

Yes those quotations you used can be interpreted in more than one way, as I am demonstrating.

Not correctly, they can't.

But I have moved on to the examination of that particular type belief of biblical script [Emergence] and you are welcome to argue against my critique on that.

Thanks for the invitation.

I'll just remain a simple Christian who has studied the scriptures and believes what they state.

Use of the one true [Christian] informal fallacy is a common way in which holding a pointless position is maintained by the individual using it.

The problem I have with accepting your position of belief is that not all Christians interpret the bible in the way that you do - [Link] and think of themselves as Spirit in human form, and - I myself have experienced leaving my body on at least 2 different occasions and the experience quiet clearly contradicts any beliefs that your interpretation is the correct one.

So yes - you can carry on being the "simple Christian" as you wish, but my experience trumps your biblical interpretations.

This is where I am, in relation to the thread topic.

Your experience trumps it for you, and I understand that. It is an obvious response to that experience.

I had a little "deja vu" experience that took me many years to figure out. It was a very strange experience.

But I finally figured out what happened, and my experience all occurred in the physical world.

Therefore, and for the sake of convenience, your position is what can be identified as "Christian Emergence" - you gravitate toward the biblical references to such things.

Depending upon what you are inferring with your comment "But I finally figured out what happened, and my experience all occurred in the physical world" because as it stands, the statement is fairly meaningless. Since we are experiencing the physical world, how is your statement relevant against my own argument?

===================================================

The problem I have with accepting your position of belief is that not all Christians interpret the bible in the way that you do.

How many type of bodies does the Bible define?

There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. (I Corinthians 15:44)

Again, I have not argued this isn't the case, so I am mystified as to why you mention that.

What I have argued is that it is Spirits which occupy 'bodies' - and that "Spirit" is not to be confused with "Spiritual bodies" as they are not the same thing.

The main difference between physical and metaphysical forms is in the functioning of said forms. Physical forms "are a little lower" than spiritual ones, in relation to function. And function in relation to what the Spirit within the form is able to accomplish with said form.

Paul is not teaching that spiritual forms cannot exist without physical forms first evolving. That is the doctrinal belief in Emergence [aka "The Brain Creates Consciousness"] and does not even require a Creation or Creator, so is incompatible with theism and with Paul's teaching.

Paul too, would have known what it is I am arguing as "the truth of the matter" as he also had metaphysical experiences while he was still in the physical world. Some of those experiences he used as a means to bear witness to his particular ... shall we agree to say..."Walk With Christ".
However, Paul is teaching novices - beginners. "Sheep", as Jesus referred to them... and Paul wasn't one for dwelling in the shallows longer than realistically necessary. [Hebrews 5:11...]

[Tcg]

Paul too, would have known what it is I am arguing as "the truth of the matter" as he also had metaphysical experiences while he was still in the physical world.

Your claims about Paul's (assuming that is who wrote 2 Corinthians) experience is very different from his. He only reported one singular experience and he himself was unsure of the nature of that single experience:

2 Corinthians:
2 I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven—whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows. 3 And I know that this man was caught up into paradise—whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows— 4 and he heard things that cannot be told, which man may not utter.

This author was wise enough to not claim that he had an out-of-body experience. Experiences can be interpreted in ways that don't match reality. He was careful not to make claims he couldn't support. He had one odd experience and was careful not to make too much of it. We'd all be wise to follow his example.


Tcg

[myth-one.com]

There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. (I Corinthians 15:44)

How many type of bodies does the Bible define?

Again, I have not argued this isn't the case, so I am mystified as to why you mention that.

So you don't have a clue as to how many types of bodies are defined in the Bible?

What I have argued is that it is Spirits which occupy 'bodies'

You have argued ineffectively that spirits occupy human bodies -- thus giving spirits "form."

. . . - and that "Spirit" is not to be confused with "Spiritual bodies" as they are not the same thing.

So you are admitting that spiritual bodies do exist.

That's a step in the right direction.

Since there are natural and spiritual bodies, it would seem logical that spirits would occupy the spiritual bodies.

The main difference between physical and metaphysical forms is in the functioning of said forms.

No, the main difference is longevity. Spiritual forms live forever, while physical forms perish.

Paul is not teaching that spiritual forms cannot exist without physical forms first evolving.

Sure he is:

Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. (I Corinthians 15:46)

The natural body comes first and for Christians the spiritual body comes second and last!

That's my "interpretation" because that is what that verse states!!

That which is first is natural!

And afterward (after the natural body) comes the spiritual.

Let me "interpret" why it is done that way.

Man (you know -- Plan B) was created to eventually replace those earthly angels who rebelled against God.

Why would God create man as immortal spiritual beings and risk being stuck with more rebels for eternity?

Thus He created man as a mortal natural bodied being, and provided a pathway for man to gain immortality through faith in man's creator.

Man gains immortality by being born again of the Spirit (God) as a spiritual bodied being.

That which is born of the Spirit is spirit!

Once one becomes a spiritual bodied being, the physical body is no longer needed.

[myth-one.com]

[Replying to Tcg in post #46]

Hi Tcg,

This is an aside, but Paul has always interested me. Maybe I can feel his pain. Paul was originally known as Saul, and was one of the most notorious persecutors of Christians. Along the road to Damascus God confronted Saul, and Saul turned from persecuting Christians to become the great apostle Paul!

Others chosen by God for special assignments possessed some human frailty which made them unlikely candidates for the mission ahead. Paul apparently had none. He was originally a strong, powerful, persuasive, decisive, energetic persecutor of Christians. Incredibly, when God chose him to spread the gospel to the Gentiles, He gave Paul a "thorn in the flesh":

And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure. (II Corinthians 12:7)

This thorn in the flesh could indicate pain caused by some physical problem. However, it may also indicate pain caused by some psychological problem. In Galatians, Paul describes his infirmity as a temptation:

And my temptation which was in my flesh ye despised not, nor rejected; but received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus. (Galatians 4:14)

Consider the following verse written by Paul:

For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that I do. (Romans 7:15)

Now, compare that verse with the definition of "compulsion" as used in psychology:

Compulsion: a strong usually irresistible impulse to perform an act that is contrary to the will of the subject.

Did Paul have a compulsion? Someone suffering from a compulsive behavior will recognize themselves in Romans 7:15 as listed above. That is, what they desire to do (stop the compulsive behavior) they do not. What they do not desire to do (the compulsive behavior) they do. Most, if not all, compulsives desire to stop. Paul may have been an alcoholic, a womanizer, or something more serious, if indeed he suffered from some compulsion. Whether compulsive behavior or a physical condition, Paul prayed for God to remove it:

For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart from me. (II Corinthians 12:8)

Describing his affliction as a "thing" or "it" further indicates Paul may have had a psychological problem. Physical ailments are generally accompanied by obvious symptoms. But mental problems are difficult to comprehend since we cannot "see" them. Therefore, we describe these problems as abnormalities, things, weird, crazy, etc.

If Paul did indeed have a compulsion, then he made two great discoveries which are today part of all twelve step rehabilitation programs. He realized that he was powerless to stop, and that he needed help from a greater authority.

Those discoveries were that he was not sufficiently powerful to stop the behavior on his own, and he needed help from a higher authority! Therefore, he prayed to God three times asking that it be removed from him:

For this thing I besought the Lord thrice... (II Corinthians 12:8)

God refused to remove it.

Paul's escape from his "temptation" was the realization that his weakness made him a stronger witness for Jesus. He realized that God made him weak so that others could see what God could accomplish through such a weak person! Regardless of how weak due to physical or mental problems, we are all here for a reason. No one is ever too weak to fulfill their mission! The weaker we are, the more spectacular our accomplishment will be for God's glory.

This is one of many things in the scriptures which testify to their being inspired by God. That is, the scriptures tell us the first two steps to recovery from addiction -- which were not codified until thousands of years later.

[William]

Paul is not teaching that spiritual forms cannot exist without physical forms first evolving. That is the doctrinal belief in Emergence [aka "The Brain Creates Consciousness"] and does not even require a Creation or Creator, so is incompatible with theism and with Paul's teaching.

Paul too, would have known what it is I am arguing as "the truth of the matter" as he also had metaphysical experiences while he was still in the physical world. Some of those experiences he used as a means to bear witness to his particular ... shall we agree to say..."Walk With Christ".
However, Paul is teaching novices - beginners. "Sheep", as Jesus referred to them... and Paul wasn't one for dwelling in the shallows longer than realistically necessary. [Hebrews 5:11...]

Your claims about Paul's (assuming that is who wrote 2 Corinthians) experience is very different from his. He only reported one singular experience and he himself was unsure of the nature of that single experience:

Strawman.

My argument isn't about how many metaphysical experiences Paul may have had while he was in the physical universe, or even that he had OOBE.
That he had even the one metaphysical experience, and such was it that it changed his whole personality and he stopped murdering Christians, it the significant aspect of my argument against Myth-one's position as an apparent Christian who believes in the theory of Emergence.

[It is bad form to quote out of context in order to create a strawman - It surprises me that you have attempted this Tcg.]

[tam]

Peace again to you all,

Peace to you all.

......the whole bible is a story about Satan and his Followers.

Is there any reason why the above isn't true?

I would say there is simply no reason for it to be true. I think it is obvious for everyone who reads the book.

Then let us examine the book to see if your claim is correct...I have already used script from the book to support the assertion...

You study the Scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the very Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life. John 5:30, 40 (see also Luke 24:27)


Obviously the Adversary (the one being called Satan) is written about in that book - he is our (man's) adversary, but that does not mean that the bible is a story about him and his followers.

In addition to the above, which does indeed give reason why the claim "the whole bible is a story about satan and his followers" is untrue, this thread has claimed:

Then there is some almost nonsensical claims that somehow the greater number of Angels overpowered Satan and his followers, and The Creator on the throne then created the physical universe as a sure way to imprison eternal beings away from them having any more disruptive influence in the none material universe of the Angels [Angelic Realm] and their Creator.

Who claims the physical universe was created to imprison eternal beings?

Satan - thus incarcerated - then found a way in which he could disrupt the Angelic Realm by creating human beings.

A - this is untrue (this is the response you know you will receive, though I am not shouting.) God is the One who created mankind (from God through Christ, the other part of the 'us' in Let us create man in our image), beginning with Adam (male and female). Genesis 1:26-28; 2:7

B - Satan was not incarcerated at the time that man was formed. Satan was free to come and go, as we can see from the account in Job (Job 1:6, 7). He was not kicked out of heaven until much later. Rev 12:10-12. Men already existed and lived upon the earth before the Adversary (who is our accuser, not God's accuser) was cast down.

"Okay" I reply, "If that is the case, why did The Creator place spiritual entities into the human domain [physical universe]?"

The general reply is that it was 'the other way around' The Creator placed human beings into the same Universe [!!] in which The Creator had created to imprison Satan and his followers in.

I have not heard anyone say that God created the physical universe to imprison Satan. Satan is (eventually) imprisoned in the Abyss. Rev 20:1-3, 7.

He is hurled to the earth (at Rev 12), then eventually imprisoned in the Abyss (Rev 20), but mankind existed loooooong before either of those two things occurred.

So then one is entitled [and wise] to ask "Why" The Creator did this.

The obvious answer reverts back to the idea that the Human Form - being part of the physical universe was designed to house Satan and his followers, which then implies that we human beings are Satan and his followers.

So that this so-called 'obvious' answer is based upon NUMEROUS false premises. I'm not sure how this even follows the false premise, but for certain it does not follow the actual premises.

There is no reason to accept that 'answer', but there are multiple reasons to reject it. Including the fact that Christ - the Truth - never taught it.

[William]

Since there are natural and spiritual bodies, it would seem logical that spirits would occupy the spiritual bodies.

Yes. But this does not mean that Spirits do no occupy physical bodies. I pointed that our re Jesus, who also was Spirit within a physical body. The difference [between him and most others] was that he either had memory of his prior existence from the beginning of his human incarnation, or that he gained that knowledge in some other manner.

The main difference between physical and metaphysical forms is in the functioning of said forms.

No, the main difference is longevity. Spiritual forms live forever, while physical forms perish.

Are you arguing that Longevity is not a "function"? If not, then your comment is pointless.

Paul is not teaching that spiritual forms cannot exist without physical forms first evolving.

Sure he is:

Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. (I Corinthians 15:46)

The natural body comes first and for Christians the spiritual body comes second and last!

That's my "interpretation" because that is what that verse states!!

That which is first is natural!

And afterward (after the natural body) comes the spiritual.

Let me "interpret" why it is done that way.

Man (you know -- Plan B) was created to eventually replace those earthly angels who rebelled against God.

Why would God create man as immortal spiritual beings and risk being stuck with more rebels for eternity?

The God did not create Spirit Beings. They have always existed as an aspect of The Creator. For Christians of his time, Paul was attempting to explain to newbies who had beliefs that death of the body was the end of it all for the individual, was that this wasn't the truth.

When we understand that we have always existed and that we are "The Breath of The Creator" [re biblical mythology aka "In Gods Image"] and that the forms - human forms - which were created [and which we chose to be placed into] had the effect of blocking us off from that prior knowledge, [as we knew would happen, prior to incarnating into them], then the confusion dissipates significantly and the knowledge has the potential power to seal the fractal riffs.

[link]

Newbies on the "milk" resist wanting to know this fuller knowledge [ the "meat"] and thus remain "Sheep". [1 Corinthians 3:2]

Thus He created man as a mortal natural bodied being, and provided a pathway for man to gain immortality through faith in man's creator.

Not so. That only came about after Adam had proved to be unworthy. That is why Adam was prevented from having any more access to the fruit of the Tree of Life.
The God had obviously decided [this time around - plan "B"] not to place Spirit into eternal form and so Adam had to get longevity for his form through eat the fruit of The Tree of Life.

Man gains immortality by being born again of the Spirit (God) as a spiritual bodied being.

Born Again is something of a state of mind in relation to self identity. One moves from the fictitious self identity [that you currently have] that one is flesh, into the true self identity that one is Spirit. "The Breath of The Creator" [re biblical mythology aka "In Gods Image"]

That which is born of the Spirit is spirit!

Exactly. Until one realizes that, one is bound with the identity of the flesh and can only identify as being the flesh.

Once one becomes a spiritual bodied being, the physical body is no longer needed.

Once the physical body dies, whether it is 'needed' or not, is besides the point. The Spirit moves on to the next phase.