Debunking "the devil"... - Page 2

WiccanWade · 08-15-2003, 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WHKeith

I am dismayed, WiccanWade, to hear of your treatment on that other board.

Well, what this particular board did (other than that, frommy own experience, the actual relatively cruel message boards on-line foir pagans are Beliefnet.Com and DelphiForums!) was they moderated all of my messages, and allowed every member to openly attack me. Yet, would not allow me to respond to them. Yet, did not hold the other members by the same rules. So, I kindly E-Mailed the person who was attacking me. Who, in turn, reported me to the moderators, amnd was subsequantly banned. However, beforehand, they tore at my beliefs, mocking me and them, mercilessly. Now, I don't care who you are, that sort of behavior just doesn't fly!

Although...I id get a chuckle, in that the Owner of this particular Group, against the desires of the hundreds of members, deleted it! If this had happened toi you, too, I'm sure you would have been just as elated as I!

One pagan actually followed me to several groups, which culminated in her tearing me to shreads on-line, yet...if you'd ask her, she was only speaking "firmly". HA! There was nothing "firm" about it! She was acting cruel!

It shortly began after I had posted my "Recommended Reading List" on another Forum. She drudged up some very private things that she had uncovered about me...things that I do not recall ever meantioning about myself on any Wiccan or Pagan message board...private details! And, she uses them to defame my character, spouting them in a tone that leads others to suspect my very character! Even everything about my educatiuon she has, she says, personally checked up on!!! WTF?!?!?! What sort of person does this??? She even admitted to having personally contacted my old college professors, to check up on me!!!

What she found great fault with were my opinions after each title I recommended!!! Especially "Triumph Of The Moon", stating that I "haven't read the book" because I hadn't quoted from it in my opinion! Well, gee...I didn't think that one needs to quote from a book for it to be a valid opinion and review? At the end, she left off with, "Something stinks in your list..." She also said something which was an absolute lie! "A few months ago you didn't even know who the Farrars were and know you're recommending them?" at the time this occured, anyway. I don't know what her agenda is...but, it seems as though she is trying to shove me out of my beloved fporum by insiting the members against me!!! Sadly, however, it worked, as I haven't been back in more than 2 years due to her evil behavior!!!

She even made a crack at me, with, "Oh, and tantrums don't count" leaving all of the readers with the firm impression that all I'm going to be doing is throwing a fit!!! I swear to the Almighty Mother, there's NOTHING worse On-Line than a pseudo-inteligently-sounding-troll!!!

I still can't believe that she once ranted and raved about me publically for mispelling a word, making me look as though I had the IQ of a 3 year old! WHAT KIND OF PERSON DOES THAT?!?!?!?! WTF?!?!?!? SHe just kept at it and would *not* let up!! And, she continues this relentless behavior, too!

She was also spouting about how she's been a "pagan witch for more than 20 years", and rthat everything I say is utter crap, and that she's saing what she is to preserve the Craft from the likes of me? Because, she "cares about the future of paganism." Whew...sorry for ranting about this. But, I have run into quite a lot of very cruel pagans on-line, which is a tragedy, really. Heck, at the time, I told someone what she'd said, and they saw it with their own eyes, and said that she was the problem with paganism, and called her a b***h, all of which she was, from this account, IMNSHO, however, she laughed at what everyone was saying about her, due to her own behavior. She should learn to pick to someone her own size! Heck, on another Group, she mocked me and the Gods I worship! Stating that the Gods I honour, and how I honour Them, or what I believe about them (based on my research) is laughable crap!

However, know that above all, my words cannot, simply, do the reality of actually going through all of this, ANY justice! It was much worse than my words can convey... Paganism doesn't need people like this, I have come to believe. *sigh*

Quote:

Originally Posted by WHKeith

Usually, Wicca is more tolerant of divergent social and sexual views than is fundamentalist Christianity!

True, a lot of Wicca is. But, not most of it. Meaning the very purist sort of Traditional Wiccans. Because, there is a great deal of homophobia in The Craft. Some will not perform a hand fasting for a same-sex couple, because there's a Goddess and God in the herios gamos, only! And, some of it also stems from Old Gerald, who was homophobic. But, him I can forgive, because of the era in which he grew up! But, you will find that this is often times still prevailant in many modern traditional craft Groups. Randy P. Conner, in his book "Blossom of Bone" relates the following account, when he attended a Neo-Pagan Circle in Austin, TX.:

"Shortly after I arrived, I overhjeard one of the men say that he didn't think homosexuals had any place in their Circle, as they didn't understand the importance of heterosexual love & the family in neopaganism; beyond this, homosexual acts were repulsive to him. When the man conversing with him agreed, and no one near by challenged him, I began to think I must be the only gay person in attendance. Normally, I would have spoken up to him, but not really being a part of the group, I felt it inappropriate to do so. Instead, I did the only thing I could think of; I asked the Circle's leader what he felt about homosexuality. Whewn he asked me why, I explained that one of the group's members had been making anti-gay remarks. He responded by ketting the man know that the Circle held no place for homophobia. The Circle's leader, as it turned out, had previously been a woman, had sexual reassignment surgery, and was now man."

Others even believe that two of the same gender cannot create a magick current, much like a battery, and would fizzle themselves out. Well, if this were true, than magick as a solitary practitionber would not work, and we know that this is far from true!

All of this is, however, antithetical to what we know of gay and lesbian history in our ancient past whenn we were revered as gifts of the gpds, and to harm one of us would be a self-imposed death sentence.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WHKeith

One of the things that attracted me most strongly to Wicca early on was the relatively relaxed sense of do your own thing. The Wiccan Rede, after all, stresses "an it harm none, do as you will."

I agree, to a point. Albeit I do not disagree with the Rede [saxon for "advice or copunsil"], because I believe that the true Will is to, actually, not cause malicious harm, and to avoid such cruelty or actually hjarming someone, whenever possible. Keeping in mind, also, that we as a species, are govorned by an act of self-preservation. Although, I do not believe that Wicca is a pick-and-mix religion, per se. Because I pull so much of my beliefs (albeit not all of them, fir sure) from Traditional Craft and Traditional Wicca. Although, some I just view as common sense.

Especially where The Gods are concerned.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WHKeith

In my experience, WIcca is generally EXTREMELY tolerant of gays and lesbians both. All four of the young men in the class I'm currently teaching on the Craft are gay, and one of the women is lesbian with a touch of bi. Two of the six men in my coven are openly gay, and a third only recently left to follow another spiritual path. It's a topic of occasional ribald good humor, but mocking or cruelty would NOT be tolerated, ever.

Wonderful! And, one thing which never made sense to me is that, according to Traditional Wicca, in liue of a Piest, a Priestess is able to strap on a sword and parade around as HPs for a day! Yet...the same of a priest would be unheard of. Mewaning, he cannot take the place of the priestess. And, while 2 priestesses may stand side-by-side in a coven in case of an odd numbered gathering, 2 men are never allowed to do similarly. I've never agreed with this. Also, all gay, or all lesbian (or all one gendered) covens is, actually, purely a U.S. invention, according to the Farrars. How interesting! I was unaware that it was a U.S. "thing".

Quote:

Originally Posted by WHKeith

Having worked in-circle with gay men many times, I can definitely say that their magical energy is quite different!

Really? HOw fascinating! How so... I, personally, enjoy doing the solitary thing, myself. And, have no desire, for the forseeable future, to join (or start) any coven. Although, I would like to start an all-gay male coven, if at all possible- one day!

Quote:

Originally Posted by WHKeith

Not bad, just different.

I never assumed you meant anything bad by it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WHKeith

Also, some Dianic circles include lesbian elements and deliberately exclude men; this usually has more to do with their need to address the historical imbalance of male-dominated forms of worship.

Very true!

Quote:

Originally Posted by WHKeith

I'm so sorry you had that bad experience! Based on what I've seen, read, and experienced for myself, that kind of behavior within Wiccan groups is a definite exception, not the rule!

Well, they weren't even Wiccan. They were non-Wiccan pagans. I've only very rarely experienced the same sort of cruelty from actual Wiccans! Oh, and I thought I'd send a long a list of some wonderful books which every gay Witch ought to have in his library!

* "Blossom of Bone", by Randy P. Conner
* "Cassell's Encycloipedia of Queer Myth, Symbol & Spirit"
* "A Gay Men's Myth Book", by Will Roscoe (a gay anthropologist! However, ya' know those pagans whom lambasted me about Mystery Hill? Well, they did the same thing for taking Will seriously, for anything! According to them, nothing he publishes should be believed, simply because he IS gay! Because of their behavior, I'm tempted to feel that they are fairly homophobic!)
* "Witchcraft & The Gay Counterculture", by Arthur Evans
* "Another Mother Tongue", by Judy Granh (an excellent book!)
* "Gay Witchcraft", by Christopher Penczak (the author thanked me, personally, in his acknowledgements!)

I have a few others, but cannot think of them off the top of my head, because my library's a little messy, now.

ladyphlegethon · 08-16-2003, 04:05 AM

We have Zoroastrism to thank for the first real "Satan" concept and without Zoroastrism a lot of mainstream religions as we know them simply would not exsist today.... The first evidence of the belief of/in the Satan concept can be found in the text of the Rabis of the Hebrew after their exposure to Zoroastrism.

I, Brian · 08-16-2003, 09:31 AM

Hi ladyphlegethon - and welcome to comparative-religon.com!

Certainly I'm under the impression that Zoroastrianism was feeding Mithraism, which in itself really spread and populised the ideas across Europe.

Interesting that you appear to link the idea moving into Judaism during the Babylonian captivity - am I right there? Certainly a very formative period, especially in consideration of the "Document's Hypothesis" (aka "Redaction Theory"), of which we have a specific article on this site here.

Iacchus · 08-16-2003, 12:23 PM

Recommeded reading: Emanuel Swedenborg's - Heaven and Hell. Might consider posting a couple of excerpts at some point? ...

While here are a couple of good links on Zoroastrianism:

Encyclopedia Mythica - Zoroastrianism / Ahriman

Why Ask Why? - How Persia Created Judaism

dhisbrook · 08-19-2003, 07:00 PM

Good day. I am totally new to your community. I sense that it's a very scholarly and (mostly) civilized place. Blessings to all. In this thread I hve no scholarship or history to add -- only what makes sense for me in my Christian faith. [That was your signal to scroll down or click out Christian perspective] Satan or the Devil is in no way a diety to me or anyone I know. Satan or the Devil is a being - once angelic in nature - whose surrender to his own darkness (fear, anger, pride, arrogance, rage, intolerance, selfishness) led him to make a god of himself and reject his, and our, Creator. How is this useful to me? The real and practical existence of the evil one is a lightening rod, I suppose, or a point of clarity around which I might begin to understand the possibility of unspeakable evil in the world; something we have plenty of. Oddly, I don't think my Christian friends or the Christian mainstream really believes in the devil. My experience is a kind of "squishy," New-Agey, Christianity that posits "I'm O.K. and You're O.K." and talk of the devil implies the existence of Hell. I find most of my Christian brethren uncomfortable with the notion of Hell. Quite honestly, I find this baffling. I cannot embrace the notion of Redemption without it, although some apparently can. Anyway, God bless you all.

dhisbrook
http://spiritualprogress.blogspot.com

I, Brian · 08-19-2003, 08:33 PM

Hi dhisbrook, and welcome to comparative-religion.com!

I sincerely hope this place remains civlised - and also that people visit to actually discuss general issues of belief and theology.

But you do make an important point, that I believe WHKieth touched particularly upon on another thread. If I may risk misapplying his comments, a point to make is that we what actually believe is not important - except to ourselves.

Whilst this may sound stunningly obvious to some - and heretically small-minded to others, the principle in application here is that Satan means only what we allow the word to mean.

Hence those who see Satan as a literal figure, do so because it helps their world view make better sense.

And those who see Satan as a metaphorical (or allegorical) figure, do so because it helps their world view make better sense.

While some would object that either Satan is obviously real, or else that Satan is obviously metaphor, on this forum it actually doesn;t matter. The diversity of belief is welcome.

No matter our gifts and talents, none of us truly knows the mind of God. We are limited mortal vessels who cannot claim omniscient knowledge. Therefore we go for a second best - best fit, according to personal tates and experience. In that itself there is no "wrong" answer.

Or is that myself simply hiding from an Objective Truth?

dhisbrook · 08-19-2003, 08:57 PM

I, Brian: Amen.
dhisbrook

Iacchus · 08-19-2003, 09:19 PM

Lucifer is the opportunist ... Satan is the liar ... and the Devil is evil ... And what do you get? ... LSD! ... LSD! ... LSD!

And here, where Lucifer corresponds to the "world of spirits" that exist between Heaven and Hell, Satan and the Devil correspond to the upper and lower regions of Hell, respectively. Whereby the Devil - through these three degrees - becomes the "embodiment" of Hell itself. Indeed, there are lots of "devils" (evil spirits) in Hell.

Daniel · 08-27-2003, 07:02 PM

Hmmm...First, Hello Mr. Keith. Sorry I've been away for so long. Been trying to buy a house. LOL. So I am quite busy.

As to the subject of these posts. I have a strong opinion of Wiccanism and modern Christianity.

First, I'll touch on the treatment of WiccanWade on the other board, and the fact of the "gay-bashing" on a Christian site.

First, no one can point a finger at God for man's actions. I do not support people who discriminate against anyone for their sexual preferences. Or their philosphical belief, and/or religous background. As far as bheing a Christian going into Wiccanism, I cannot seem to understand why one who was born again, would turn their back on the one who first loved us. However, that is not a decision I shall point a finger at, or justify it. It was a decision you made for yourself, and like me, you are the one that will live with it. I neither judge you, or hate you based on that info. As I am fond of saying: "God has a lot of patience, and he will call to you when he wishes to."

As far as debunking the devil/god/Jesus, and such.

Man knows of the existence of God due to various reports by men. The greatest example is the bible, the Koran(sp?) and like-items that point to a deity.

Now, man cannot know of things that are spiritual. The bible says this. If man were to gaze upon the face of god, they would die. That is in the Old Testament. Sin cannot live in the presence of the Almighty. We were born in sin, and cannot gaze upon god without something to go through. I.E. Christ.

We cannot debunk god, or the Devil based on evidence. Why? Because the REAL hard facts of evidence does not exist. We cannot talk to a person who has "Seen" the devil. Because then the question would then be, "What did this person really see?" In case of possesion, "Was it really an evil spirit?" Or, "How do I know this person did not make things up to get attention?" These questions and a lot more have been brought up for the last two-thousand yrs.

Satan/The Devil/and various other names he has gone by, is none as "The Deceiver." "Slanderous" was used to describe a person who at that time, was appointed by the "courts" of that time. We call them Prosecutors nowadays.

The greatest thing a person is aware of in their life is that there is more going on in the world, both physical and spiritual that can be seen, or explained. God is God. The Devil is The Devil. I for one, do not need physical proof of Satan's existence. Nor do I need proof of God's. Faith is key to survival in this world, whether you believe in a god/goddess is up to the said individual.

I know what I know about the Spirirual Realm due to my own experience. Were I to go into details about that, you guys would just conclude the same previous questions. So rather than defend my position, I'll just say one thing more, and let you all think for yourselves.

As far as Christian's "thinking for themselves," we do. Or, I do. And most Christians I know do. We base our belief not on just faith. But knowledge in it from experience in the field of religous belief. In other words, I've seen more than I am saying.

I think that the greatest lie the Devil ever told to man, was the one that convinced man he didn't exist. So, how can we prove something exists when there is no solid proof? One cannot prove that a god/goddess exists, nor can we prove that a devil or the like, exists. We can however, use various research techniques available to prove our case. But a friend of mine who is a Psychologist, likes to say that when a person does research on a subject, that results will be 98% opinion-filled and biased. Meaning, it will lean to what we want to believe. In other words, when scientists have a theory and set out to prove it, they have to do it a certain way, so as not to pollute the findings. This results a lot in research done in the third and fourth person. With as little human help as possible. So how can a person research how to "debunk" the devil and not pollute their findings? It can't be done. We believe what we will. Whether their is proof of it or not. People are people.

So rather than giving advice on how to write this book, or giving you a reference for it, I would say this to you instead.

If you REALLY want to know whether the devil, or god exists, than take a chance and ask him. Ask God to reveal to you the truth. Keep asking him until something happens. When it does, you'll know. I know that the God I believe in will reveal himself to the one seeking, when he is sought. The bible says that when a person cries out, he will meet us half way. So if you want the truth, the REAL answer, the one unbiased by man, then ask Him. Sit down. Ask God (Whether you believe in him or not) to reveal to you the truth about Him and the Devil. I can promise you that eventually, if you are really serious about it, you'll get an answer. But be warned: The answer may not be one you want to hear. Good Luck with your book, as I am an author myself, although I do not have near as many things written as our good friend Bill.

I wish you well, and hope your results will prove to you the way things really are. if not, well....that is what Prayer is for.

God's Peace be With you.
Daniel Cox.

dhisbrook · 08-27-2003, 07:17 PM

My thanks to Daniel for his thoughtful and well-considered post on this thread. The rich variety of Christian thought and faith-experience is so interesting and spirit-enriching to explore, that I hope Daniel's and my brethren will find a comfortable home here.

May the words that we type and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable in His sight.

Peace,

Skeptic44 · 08-31-2003, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel

>> Man knows of the existence of God due to various reports by men. The greatest example is the bible, the Koran(sp?) and like-items that point to a deity.

Now, man cannot know of things that are spiritual. The bible says this.
>> If man were to gaze upon the face of god, they would die. That is in the Old Testament.

>> Sin cannot live in the presence of the Almighty. We were born in sin, and cannot gaze upon god without something to go through. I.E. Christ.

>>If you REALLY want to know whether the devil, or god exists, than take a chance and ask him. Ask God to reveal to you the truth. .

______________

As Brian said earlier, this must be regarded as your take on a question that has many possible answers.

My concern is with the overwhelming number of false reports on this subject.

Let's take an OT example:

Exodus 25:1 Then the YHWH spoke to Moses, saying, "Speak to the children of Israel, that they bring me an offering... and let them make me a sanctuary, that I may dwell among them."

The literal reading of this (and it goes on for several pages, if you're interested, a list of things God expects from the children of Israel)... say that we can "know" God exists because of this report about Moses speaking to him.

How do we know whether this is a fabrication? A con game? A scam?

It seems that buying into the idea that god exists, based on the proofs you mentioned, doesn't leave enough room for something essential to everyone in today's society.

Carl Sagan called it a "Lie Detector."

There are so many dishonest people, we all need to develop some kind of a flexible test for separating "Legitimate" from "Con." If we're hard-nosed about it, we write down some rules and think about whether they're good enough. If not, we just say, "Oh, it's a gut instinct thing."

When the con artists send you an e-mail, saying they have had a conversation with the YHWH and YHWH wants you to send them a check for $100, how do we know whether to believe them or not?

What is the test? YOUR test?

Surely it has to be something other than "if it is in a report written by men, then we can know that it was actually a conversation with God."
__________

Second, your idea about men not being able to look at God because we are born in sin... if I had to identify one piece of dogma that is obviously a con game, that people should be able to put into Column B and say, "This is an example of someone making up a lie in order to fool you," this would be it.

The idea that God could create human beings, and then because we are sinful, God cannot ... whatever the specifics of the con, I don't buy it.

IF God created us, and God planned for us to die, then why would we absolutely, necessarily have to die if we look God in the face??

It just doesn't make any sense to me. Can you help explain it so I can understand? If God wanted to make us so we could look at him, even though we are sinning at the time, why couldn't God do that?

Skeptic44 · 09-01-2003, 06:42 PM

More or less on this same subject, the Boston Globe published this article about voodoo practicioners gaining legal rights in Haiti:

http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/21...concern+.shtml

Legitimizing voodoo has strengthened Aristide's image as a man of the people and probably has enhanced popular support for the rumored bid by the former Roman Catholic priest to amend the constitution so he can seek a now-prohibited third term as president...Haiti's Catholic clergy has reacted with alarm at the moves to empower voodoo practitioners to conduct rituals with legal significance, especially baptisms, which the church contends are an exclusively Christian domain. The bishop of Port-au-Prince, Monsignor Joseph Lafontant, issued a statement shortly after the government decree deeming the status accorded voodoo ''excessive'' and its application to civil ceremonies ''an obvious mistake.''
______________________

Comment: The Catholic clergy considers "baptisms" to be an exclusively Christian domain... hmmm.
_________________

Voodoo is deeply intertwined in the two strands that have shaped Haiti: African slavery and French Christian colonization.

Practitioners meet to invoke spirits -- called ''loa'' or ''lwas'' in Creole -- who give advice through the often frenzied voices of their worshipers.
________________________

Comment: Christianity isn't the only religion that includes conversations with demonic spirits... but Voodoo takes it a step further, encouraging their followers to consider the words of the spirits - the "Ioa" - as credible advice.
_____________________

It is a religion based on prayer, music, dancing and sacrifice, often bloody.

While traditional religions such as Catholicism and Protestant denominations are prevalent through most of the Haitian population, about half of Haiti's 8.1 million people also practice voodoo, according to the CIA World Factbook. Voodoo followers have been able to throw off the secrecy and shackles since Aristide's proclamation two months ago that as an ancestral legacy, ''voodoo is an essential part of national identity.''

By bestowing legitimacy on the African-origin religion, Aristide, the beleaguered president of this poorest of Western countries has signaled to his people that they should be proud of their African heritage, not forced to subvert it under the religious practices of the European Christians who once repressed them.

...The religion, which is closely entwined with nature, also offers some hope of halting the rapacious harvesting of trees for making charcoal -- a desperate means of making a meager living that has shorn Haiti of most of its forests.

Evonie Auguste, from the Carrefour suburb of Port-au-Prince, the Haitian capital. ''In voodoo, trees are living things that God put here to be respected. Nature is the place where the spirits live.''

______________

Comment: Please ignore my lack of expertise about voodoo. It is a legitimate religion, recognized by the government of Haiti, and it deals with spirits that live... in trees, it seems - and gives credibility to people who pass on messages from these spirits.

Daniel · 09-07-2003, 11:20 PM

Skeptic 44--Once again, I am amazed by your posts. Your posts on here are well thought out, and prevocative, and they make me think. So this is definitely a good thing. However, I find that the most common mistake among people when talking about god, the devil, and heaven and hell, they tend to forget that the world of the Spirit does not operate the way ours does.

When I said "Ask God for the truth" I meant just that.When you do ask god about it, leave your mind out of it. Why? Because the Mind is the enemy of God. Why? Because it hurts us in the fact that it tries to tell us things like "how do I know this is real and not a fabricated lie?" You do not know. And that is the point. If you want to know then you can take the same test I took a loooong time ago.Do not rationalize the experience, because if you do, it will ruin it. Just sit down, and say---"Okay God, I need the truth. You tell me whats real." He will. And you will know beyond any kind of doubt that what is said to you is true. But do keep in mind that the Devil can also appear as an angel of light, just as the bible says. So in that regard, ask God---"LOrd, if you are truly there, and you truly exist, reveal to me your love, and reveal to me your truth." That is the test I took---Since then, there is no going back for me.

bananabrain · 09-09-2003, 01:08 PM

sorry if this is a bit of a hijack, but some of the things you mention on the "jesus and hell" page are a leetle controversial. for a start, the story of the 'good samaritan' is, from our PoV, an attack on the human consequences of the system of ritual purity - at least at first glance. as we know, kohanim and levi'im are prohibited from coming in contact with a corpse (the injured guy could have died) apart from that of a close relative by leviticus 21:1-3. however, a small amount of research - if you know how jewish law works - reveals that the Oral Law that goes with the Written Law of the Torah states that quite apart from the fact that a kohen can become tamei (usually mistranslated as 'ritually impure', but properly understood as making him ineligible for Temple service for a period of time) for *anyone who has no relatives or friends to help* (tractate Sukkah 25b) - such a corpse is known as a "met mitzvah" and it is incumbent on anyone - even a kohen or levi if there is noone else - to help to bury it. from this we can understand that the kohen and levi mentioned in the parable did not observe this law of "met mitzvah" so they were in fact wrong to behave as they did - which jesus points out. alternatively, it is also possible that jesus is making a point about the great disputes between those referred to in the NT as 'sadducees and pharisees', where the Temple "establishment" (ie kohanim and levi'im) rejected the more complex rulings of the rabbis and making the point that the Oral Law is required for the Written Law to function as an integrated, complete human system. in the long run, of course, the "sadducee" tendency lost out. similarly, there are plenty of accounts contemporary with jesus that make the point that the jews are behaving improperly and will be punished for it by G!D. but i digress..

now, back to the "adversary". please see my post in http://www.comparative-religion.com/...read.php?t=338 for the comparatively minor role played by "ha-Satan" in judaism.

Quote:

Identification with the serpent in the Garden of Eden came MUCH later.

correct. there is a certain conflation that happens in talmudic times (2nd-5th century) between the angelic figure of ha-Satan and the 'yetzer ha-ra' or 'evil inclination', who is a figure rather like that little guy that appears hovering by your shoulder in cartoons. anyway, according to us, the YH-R is responsible not only for selfishness, but also for competititiveness, our desire to reproduce and build houses - in other words, all the stuff that wouldn't happen if we were all perfect, saintly angelic creatures with no free-will - hence it is said "the evil inclination is 'very good'" - because without it we would not be humans, capable of making the right choices. it is only at the point that H-S and YH-R get rolled in together - as well as with the other angelic figure of Sama'El - that we start finding stuff in there about the serpent. similarly, as is correctly pointed out bu WHKeith, evil also comes from G!D, because everything, by definition, comes from G!D.

ladyphlegethon is also correct to point out that the jews were exposed to a considerable amount of external influences following the babylonian exile in 586 BCE and more zoroastrian and mithraic stuff during the talmudic period. some of these ideas did indeed get coopted into a jewish framework, but how much is debatable. as for the documentary hypothesis, it is not compatible with our traditional understanding of the Torah - but more of that anon.

now, on to the Shechinah. although the Shechinah is female, we must not confuse her with "Mrs G!D". the Divine Is a Unity and transcends gender. gender is only used to explain stuff, because the only way the mystical tradition can explain just how stuff really fundamentally happens is in terms of sexuality, the most mysterious and complicated process known to humans. it's a way of describing the deepest mysteries through symbolic analogy. and the supernal triad of KeTeR-ChoKhMaH-BINaH is one of the most complicated bits and the most hedged about with qualification, because of the danger of misinterpreting it in dualistic terms that are incompatible with monotheism. remember - the sefirot are not G!D, not even keter. they can only be described as a conceptual model of the interface between the Infinite Divine and the universe. and the Shechinah is not the only female-flavoured interface of the Divine - sometimes in the more traditional liturgy G!D is addressed in the feminine and there is at least one Divine Name - "El-ShaDaY" - that shares the three letter root Shin-Dalet-Yod for "breasts". G!D Is *not* male. the Big Beard In The Sky is a creation of freud, not jewish tradition.

in reference to skeptic44's point about "how do we know this message is from G!D", this is an extremely important point and well made. it is addressed at several points, but the prevailing opinion is based upon that of the RaMBa"M (maimonides, C11th) who states in the 'YaD, his monumental codification of halacha, that although a prophet (ie someone who is receiving messages directly from G!D) outranks a sage, "1001 sages outweigh 1000 prophets" because all jewish law is human-interpreted and majority-rule and cannot even be overruled by a heavenly voice (viz. the talmudic episode of the 'oven of achnai', bava metzia 59b). we don't consider the mind the 'enemy of G!D'. ramba"m presents a number of tests which a prophet has to pass before being accepted as such - which are punishable by death if the prophet is proven to be a fake. and once you're a prophet, you are subject to continual assessment. anyway, we also consider that there has been no prophecy since the destruction of the Temple and there won't be until the Moshiakh (messiah) shows up. this means no new sacred texts - the books are closed and all we can do is interpret what we already have.

to address skeptic44's other points, i can only say that judaism does not believe in "original sin". humans have free will. obviously if you do not have the freedom to make the wrong choice as well as the right one, you are not truly free. there is always a subsidiarity of choice operating. essentially, since we left eden, a different set of rules have applied - but it is hard to argue that the adam and eve of the garden were truly human - in fact one midrash says that they were 600 feet tall and covered with scales! more importantly, the RaMBa"N (nachmanides) suggests that eve did not experience sexual pleasure until she left the garden - sex being previously an entirely mechanical, routine process rather like, say, going to the toilet. mindfulness and delight in the things that make us human are no less part of the expulsion from eden as all the stuff like having to work for a living. you can't have one without the other.

incidentally, as a one-time scholar of early french literature (among other things) i've always had a soft spot for baigent & leigh, but they do tend to show off a bit in an attempt to sell more books - "THE BOOK THEY DON'T WANT YOU TO READ!!!! THE STUFF THEY TRY TO HIDE!!!" and so on. their scholarly credentials are not universally respected, i'm afraid. deary me.

b'shalom

bananabrain

I, Brian · 09-09-2003, 04:24 PM

Certainly there's a lot inf the "Jesus and Hell" that is controversial - but it's written principally as an exploration of Jesus from a non-typical perspective.

The notion of the Good Samaritan being a violation of ritual purity seems a little weak as an argument. The idea is interesting, though, and perhaps the specific reference to Levites makes for a wider context within Christian ideas.

I was personally taking my cue from Josephus, principally his comments on the factionalised nature of Judea, and the complete disunity of the population, up towards the time of the Seige of Jerusalam. It is worth noting particularly that Josephus makes a point of stating Gallilee a place of particular lawlessness. How that may relate to a wider theological picture with reference to the Levites is certainly something for further consideration.