The Devil or Lucifer

[Thomas]

Hi Bruce ...

Originally Posted by Bruce Michael

You correctly state that the Devil is Lucifer - interesting the word Devil is meant to be derived from diabolos, but the Sanskrit Deva means "being of light", which could connect with Lucifer "Lightbearer".

The etymology of the term is pretty well sorted, as I posted above ... from the Greek verb diaballein, "to traduce" — and means a slanderer or an accuser, and thus it is the equivalent of the Hebrew 'satan', which signifies an adversary, or an accuser ... thus the term grew out of its parent tradition, rather than from any external source.

Originally Posted by Bruce Michael

This is difficult- it was a "Luciferic influence". The Serpent had a right to approach Man. Satan is a different being to Lucifer.

The right way round is Lucifer became subject to the Satanic principle, and fell — both Lucifer and Adam, according to esoteric tradition, made the same error in assuming that what was theirs by grace was theirs by nature.

The serpent in the Garden represents the satanic principle, which brought about the downfall of both Lucifer and Adam.

Thomas

[wil]

Originally Posted by Thomas

So not a Christian in any meaningful sense then?

Namaste Thomas,

Sure is meaningful to me. I believe in the adversary, but the adversary is within. Jesus is my elder brother and wayshower, I learn from that which has been wrote about his life and endeavors. I believe there is a power within each of us far greater than anything that exists outside of us. Now how we use that power, that connection to all that is, is upto us.

If I were of a mind to I could say I was tempted by the devil and assisted by angels, it is flowery language that avoids what I believe though. I believe the angels that assisted and the devil that tempted were within Jesus and not without, and until he found the truth in that fight, he wasn't ready to go on to his next challenge.

[Thomas]

Hi Wil —

Originally Posted by wil

Sure is meaningful to me.

That's not the point. The question is rather whether calling oneself a Christian is meaningful in the context of what Christianity stands for. I would argue it does not.

No supernatural, no miracles, no transcendant nor immanent deity, no Personal God, no Salvation History ... if you take out all that you take out, there's nothing left but humanism.

Originally Posted by wil

I believe there is a power within each of us far greater than anything that exists outside of us.

That is a humanism that is either pantheist, or atheist.

Frankly I don't understand, if you have to reject so much of Christianity before you find anything to believe in, that Buddhism hasn't attracted you towards a more meaningful conversion, as it seems to me your Christianity is fundamentally Jesus through a Buddhist lens.

Thomas

[flowperson]

Originally Posted by Pathless

Flow, is it true that the Devil went down to Georgia? I've heard rumors and legends.

Well my friend, one must consider the composition of fiddles. A fiddle is a resonating wooden form which is aurally animated when its cat gut strings tuned to certain frequencies are activated by drawing a bow strung with rosined horse hairs across them.

A very mystical process which when activated through the fingering and bowing skills of an adept musician may conjure all sorts of virtual beings and images. I also noted that the "devil's" fiddle appeared to have a gold body and form. Very materialistic, if I may say so.

BTW, the devil's name when he went down into Georgia before the revolutionary war was, I believe, Oglethorpe, and he was probably riding a horse and not a bike. Although later in the 19th century the names "tricycle" and "horse" were interchangeable quite often.

Interesting that the feature showed three chickens dancing to the tunes... not one, two, four...but three.

IMHO, the devil, in whatever guise he/she may be manifested for the past few decades is hanging out near Columbus, Ga and Fort Benning. That's only my opinion you understand.

flow....

[wil]

Originally Posted by Thomas

The question is rather whether calling oneself a Christian is meaningful in the context of what Christianity stands for. I would argue it does not.

No supernatural, no miracles, no transcendant nor immanent deity, no Personal God, no Salvation History ... if you take out all that you take out, there's nothing left but humanism.


That is a humanism that is either pantheist, or atheist.

Frankly I don't understand, if you have to reject so much of Christianity before you find anything to believe in, that Buddhism hasn't attracted you towards a more meaningful conversion, as it seems to me your Christianity is fundamentally Jesus through a Buddhist lens.

Namaste Thomas,

I like millions of others reject the Catholic version and the Evangelical version of Christianity. Doesn't mean we aren't Christians. Of course you may not deem us Christians in your mind, nor the Pope's mind, nor some fire and brimstone preachers mind, and it is absolutely wonderful that, none of you count! Now let me be clear, not that you don't count as loving, caring human beings, but not in regards to my salvation.

Speaking of salvation, I believe in it, and thru Jesus, as he showed me the path, I believe in G!d, but that my access is within, what you call supernatural I believe is natural, we've just lost access. Lastly I believe in miracles, it is all a miracle. (or if it isn't I believe in none).

I like some Buddhist principles. I enjoy the concepts, but it is the teachings of Jesus I follow.

Your calling me an atheist, pantheist, or humanist is no different than anyone looking down their collective noses and calling you and catholicism a polytheist cult of idol worshippers. Now again, that is not what I believe, simply an analogy.

My question would be, why do you desire to chase me away from Christianity?

[Bruce Michael]

Originally Posted by Thomas

Hi Bruce ...
The etymology of the term is pretty well sorted, as I posted above ... from the Greek verb diaballein, "to traduce" — and means a slanderer or an accuser, and thus it is the equivalent of the Hebrew 'satan', which signifies an adversary, or an accuser ... thus the term grew out of its parent tradition, rather than from any external source.

Hello Thomas,
The feminine of deva is devi. I am more inclined to believe the derivation from "Devi", firstly sounds right (diabolos is quite a jump), secondly, it menas "shining one" (like Lucifer), and lastly the name of "devil" in Zend is "dev":

Etymological Meaning of Devil - The Biggest Secret Forum

The Teutonic words devil, teufel, diuval, djofull, djevful, may all be traced back to the Zend dev,[97] a name in which is implicitly contained the record of the oldest monotheistic revolution known to history. The influence of the so-called Zoroastrian reform upon the long-subsequent development of Christianity will receive further notice in the course of this paper; for the present it is enough to know that it furnished for all Christendom the name by which it designates the author of evil.

To the Parsee follower of Zarathustra the name of the Devil has very nearly the same signification as to the Christian; yet, as Grimm has shown, it is nothing else than a corruption of deva, the Sanskrit name for God.

Originally Posted by Thomas

The right way round is Lucifer became subject to the Satanic principle, and fell — both Lucifer and Adam, according to esoteric tradition, made the same error in assuming that what was theirs by grace was theirs by nature.

The serpent in the Garden represents the satanic principle, which brought about the downfall of both Lucifer and Adam.

Thomas[/quote]

Lucifer/Iblis/Devil Satan/Shaitan/Ahriman

You see the serpent which became snake, was of Man and of Man's past, of his making. The serpent was given a freedom to expression, which then double-backed upon Man.

-The Brothers

The Serpent was a Luciferic expression of Man's ancient past. That is why he was permitted to tempt Adam and Eve. Woman connects to the Past, Man to the Future.

Since Satan is "Old Evil" (as opposed to Lucifer's "Young Evil") you could say that it has a Satanic component.

Lucifer will be redeemed whereas as Satan has to be expelled as he is beyond reform (certainly at this stage).

Lucifer is a creative being- which necessitates freedom and free expression. Freedom also can involve rebellion and the possibility of evil.


Best Wishes,
Br.Bruce

[mee]

And I saw an angel coming down out of heaven with the key of the abyss and a great chain in his hand. And he seized the dragon, the original serpent, who is the Devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years. And he hurled him into the abyss and shut it and sealed it over him, that he might not mislead the nations any more until the thousand years were ended. After these things he must be let loose for a little while.”—Rev. 20:1-3.


the devil influences the nations, but soon he will be locked up for a 1000 years .


and the one who has the key to lock him up is Jesus .


And the fifth angel blew his trumpet. And I saw a star that had fallen from heaven to the earth, and the key of the pit of the abyss was given him. REVELATION 9;1


(Revelation 22:16) “‘I, Jesus, sent my angel to bear witness to YOU people of these things for the congregations. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright morning star.’”

[Thomas]

Hi Wil —

Originally Posted by wil

I like millions of others reject the Catholic version and the Evangelical version of Christianity.

And millions more reject it altogether. I have no problem with that — my issue lies with one who professes Christianity, yet so much being rejected that nothing of any distinction remains. As I said, what you're left with is basically humanism.

If Christianity means anything it means the recovery of an intimate relation with the Divine, how one chooses to express that is subsidiary, but the over-arching principle is that of the utter distinction between creature and creator, and the union of the two.

Christianity is a Mystery religion, by any sense of the term ... but the world seeks to rationalise the mystery away, to make it manageable. What's left is an intellectual exercise.

Originally Posted by wil

Doesn't mean we aren't Christians.

Doesn't mean you are.

Originally Posted by wil

I believe in G!d, but that my access is within, what you call supernatural I believe is natural, we've just lost access. Lastly I believe in miracles, it is all a miracle. (or if it isn't I believe in none).

That's very poetic, but it's also the opposite of what you said yesterday.

Originally Posted by wil

Your calling me an atheist, pantheist, or humanist is no different than anyone looking down their collective noses and calling you and catholicism a polytheist cult of idol worshippers.

Not really ... that's a mispresresentation of Catholicism ... I'm only going on what you claim.

Originally Posted by wil

My question would be, why do you desire to chase me away from Christianity?

I'm not chasing you away ... I'm saying until you put your reservations down, you'll always be sitting on the fence.

Thomas

[Thomas]

Hi Wil —

Originally Posted by wil

I like millions of others reject the Catholic version and the Evangelical version of Christianity.

And millions more reject it altogether. I have no problem with that — my issue lies with one who professes Christianity, yet so much being rejected that nothing of any distinction remains. As I said, what you're left with is basically humanism.

If Christianity means anything it means the recovery of an intimate relation with the Divine, how one chooses to express that is subsidiary, but the over-arching principle is that of the utter distinction between creature and creator, and the union of the two.

You seem to have rejected all of that.

Originally Posted by wil

Doesn't mean we aren't Christians.

But in the end it does mean that the term is meaningless. You've rejected all that makes Christianity distinct and recognisable. Being a good person is not what Christianity is about.

Originally Posted by wil

I believe in G!d, but that my access is within, what you call supernatural I believe is natural, we've just lost access. Lastly I believe in miracles, it is all a miracle. (or if it isn't I believe in none).

That's very poetic, but it doesn't actually say anything — and it certainly doesn't accord with what Christ preached.

Originally Posted by wil

Your calling me an atheist, pantheist, or humanist is no different than anyone looking down their collective noses and calling you and catholicism a polytheist cult of idol worshippers.

Not really ... that's a mispresresentation of Catholicism ... I'm only going on what you claim.

Originally Posted by wil

My question would be, why do you desire to chase me away from Christianity?

I'm not chasing you away ... I'm saying until you put your reservations down, you'll always be outside, looking in.

Thomas

[Thomas]

Sorry ... double posting.

Thomas

[Thomas]

Hi Bruce —

Originally Posted by Bruce Michael

I am more inclined to believe the derivation from "Devi", firstly sounds right (diabolos is quite a jump)...

Not if you're Greek — diabolos is then the Greek equivalent of a Hebrew term. Nothing could be simpler, in fact.

Thomas

[wil]

Originally Posted by Thomas

That's very poetic, but it doesn't actually say anything — but it's also the opposite of what you said yesterday...and it certainly doesn't accord with what Christ preached.

Not really ... that's a mispresresentation of Catholicism ... I'm only going on what you claim.

While you claim misrepresentation of Catholicism, many claim Catholicism is a misrepresentation of Christianity, much as you do my beliefs. I can agree to disagree, but I would like you to identify where I contradicted myself one day to the next.

Originally Posted by Thomas

Not if you're Greek — diabolos is then the Greek equivalent of a Hebrew term. Nothing could be simpler, in fact.

I play with a chinese toy we call a diabolo, tis an oversized yo-yo that isn't connected to the string, we've always been told diabolo is greek - to throw?

[17th Angel]

Originally Posted by Thomas

No supernatural, no miracles, no transcendant nor immanent deity, no Personal God, no Salvation History ... if you take out all that you take out, there's nothing left but humanism.

lol...... That couldn't be further from the truth.... ;/ The only thing you have to do/believe is jesus... and follow in his footsteps/actions... Simple as that really, christian..... :| I could claim that there are 3ft elephants of a bright pink colour on the planet neptune, and at the same time try to follow the examples of jesus as best I can, I could officially state that I am a christian...... Who is anyone, to tell me what to believe?

[China Cat Sunflower]

Originally Posted by Thomas

Christianity is a Mystery religion, by any sense of the term ... but the world seeks to rationalise the mystery away, to make it manageable. What's left is an intellectual exercise.

The problem is that when the Mystery is dragged into, and forced to conform to the realm of rationality the result is superstition. But that superstition is reinforced, nurtured, and abetted by the power structure of organized religion as a means of maintaining control over the rank and file. Catholicism is one of the worst offenders in this regard.

Chris

[China Cat Sunflower]

To clarify Thomas: If we accept the idea that rationalizing the Mystery leads to spiritually bereft humanism where the mystery, as you rightly said, becomes merely an intellectual exercise, then the flip side is that mystifying the rational leads to an intellectually bereft, pseudo rational form of superstition which functions as a self-perpetuating mechanism for preserving a mindset of ignorance that feeds the authority of the power structure. If you separate the two: Mystery and Rationality, you may succeed in undermining secular humanism, but you will also destroy the mechanism by which the Institution of the Church derives its authority. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Chris