I'm afraid the entire scientific community disagrees with you. My avatar pic is not of a bat it is of the Abrahamic Lucifer.
Actually I read some scientific evidence recently about bats really being birds that over the years have lost their feathers ect. I know who the picture is of but his true name is Lucifel not lucifer. The light of god doesnt harm it transforms into the archangel he used to be. I think hes afraid of the light.
There were pics on the internet about him that were a big lie. I know the true ones that show his anatomy just like a regular male not some guy looking like a female. Thats a big lie and so is the name. His heavenly name is Lucifel and when its used hes true not the devil or satan.
You are probably referring to Baphomet Lucifer is not Baphomet, and according to Abrahamic lore is an Angel, and Angels are neither male or female.
No they were pics of old plates on tablets but were false ones of the anatomy of his pre fallen self. They tried to make him look anatomically abnormal. However the true plates show him anatomically as a normal looking male.
Not true. Each archangel has a female counterpart called an archeia. The anatomy is opposite just like man and woman. The concept of a non gender heaven is wrong , human was created in the image of , look around at reality.
The unfortunate thing is that not all books science are actually scientific. One thing that I feel, donnann, is that you often take everything you read as facts. Instead of saying that bats are birds, as a fact ( which non of us will believe), instead link to this evidence, say that you believe in it and then all of us can discuss that topic.
The anatomy is yes somewhat complex but the male looks just like a human male from the outside. And yes lucifel looks just like a human male. I know a lot about this stuff.
If you were to see his prehuman diviine self though he would have wings though but still look male anatomically.
anthropomorphism & metaphor Wil exquisite creature sampling threads in various sections of this website i'm noticing that u (typically) come off as being a pretty mellow guy except when it comes to the issue of "anthropomorphism" i have always had u'r same knee-jerk reaction when it comes to anthropomorphizing the Divine (this , the way my parents raised me) Pa (like u) is pretty laid-back most of the time , but when he gets going on his hobbyhorses (pet-subjects) his scoffing sarcasm sounds amazingly like u'rs , Wil except he punctuates it at the end with the only thing , the only Vital thing is the Light Within as a child , i accept this "Inner Light" without question not just because my parents tell me that this is where u find the Divine , but this experience of the Divine (personally) comes to make sense to me though i eventually realize that "light" is not literal photon-particles (bouncing around my chest-cavity) that (instead) the word "light" (or its image in my imagination) represents a spiritual quality realize that "light" is a metaphor a metaphor , Wil a metaphor to help a person understand what they are feeling , spiritually & if u personally introspect far enough , Wil u will undoubtedly locate (deep in u'r brain) one or a number of metaphors u use to explain u'r spiritual feelings to u'rself how is anthropomorphizing the Divine any different ? any different , for religious people who find it useful (or necessary) do this ? it is just their metaphor , which helps them understand the Divine (am i wrong , here ?) this is a realization which i (long ago) have come to uncomfortable as it is , to admit to (though that old knee-jerk reaction persists, is still burned deep into my brain) xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Rodney Stark somewhere points out that the reason that science (real science in our modern sense , the testing of hypotheses) begins to develop 800 years ago , not in Song China nor in the Islamic lands (not within the two highest civilizations on the planet , back then) but develops (instead) within the scholastic monasteries of (a relatively backward) Catholic Europe why ? because the Divine is conceived-of (by these Scholastics) in anthropomorphic terms (no , not hands & feet nor eyes & mouth) the Divine is seen as a "rational" being (not an arbitrary or fickle or infinitely-mysterious entity) thus Creation is explainable , its laws consistent & discoverable) the right metaphor at the right time has its utility , historically xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx but metaphors can take on a life of their own is is is the being verb "is" is the most problematical word in any language (it is the first bit of grammar which children learn the deepest "deep-structure" of all human languages it is primordial knowledge , & primordial illusion) problematical , because it connects one concept to another concept ("the dog is brown") this kind of identification-process is where "metaphors" come from & is how concepts get "idealized" (from Plato thru Kant & beyond) first , this is an attempt to understand something (make simple something which is inordinately complicated) make a metaphor but (eventually) ideals (metaphors) take on a life of their own Gyd is not an ideal if Gyd is an ideal , Gyd is an illusion (a linguistic construct , child-logic) u need to stay real (as my friend Stevi says to me , this past summer the meaning of life is not metaphorical) the real question u , Wil (& others) should be asking , is what Gyd does
Nice post, salishan. You asked what Gyd does. What evidence is there that Gyd actively does anything? (divine intervention)
Isnt the evidence documented in religious history through miracles? There are so many religious texts and accounts throughout history and that is evidence of divine intervention.
miracles Donnann exquisite creature near the top of the list of my father's hobbyhorses which riles him into a testy huff , is the subject of "miracles" nonsense , utter nonsense ! ! Pa says , with clenched jaw evidence of the senses , where is the evidence of the senses ? ! to Hicksite Quakers , the Bible is a collection of inspirational tales hardly a single one of which are to be taken literally my personal view is more nuanced , regarding what (the tales of) "miracles" in sacred scriptures are really about (but these things i am still working out , personally) miracles their "meaning" is important in the context of Judeo-Christian faith & are interesting to me , as such not as Gyd's flashy (Wizard of Oz) magic show (for unsophisticated readers/believers) but as a side-commentary upon scripture (a veiled parable) , for those with more sophisticated sensibilities but , miracles (as actual physical events interjected into this world) ? (like Pa) i don't (for one second) believe in them , as raw (as "sensible") truth xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Donnann , regarding "evidence" try thinking like a journalist (the writers of scriptural accounts certainly did not do so) have a little trust in what scientists & historians tell u if this rocks u'r faith , then u'r faith is based upon "metaphors" not upon deep sacred "meanings" these deep meanings exist within Judaism & Christianity & (i'm guessing) within all major religions which have survived centuries (& yes , these meanings are not always easy to locate) but meaning is meaning (the religious pursuit) & truth is truth (the secular pursuit) & (to me , anyway) it is best to stay very clear about this distinction & to keep u'r feet planted securely in both worlds
divine intervention Allelyah exquisite creature i cannot pretend to comprehend the process u are describing (above) but it intrigues me , profoundly so i hope u won't mind my breaking-up u'r phraseology into manageable units to help me get-at its logic two things i get (so far) 1) there is a sacred space (where the real-action goes down) 2) Gyd's intervention is subtle (so "natural-seeming" that the target of the intervention feels changed but she or he hasn't a clue what's hit them) xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx sacred space there is a point at which (before i make love to a boy) where the secular (everyday world) drops away he has moved just inside my "comfort-zone" & i have moved just inside his each of us are vulnerable (like two starships inside each-other's forcefields) yet strangely "free" his & my combined forcefields create a unique space isolated from the rest of reality which only the two of us inhabit our private space , real to us & no one else (generating its own moral laws , relevant only to him & to me) & in this moment in the blink of an eye , everything is changed changed in my life (& hopefully in his) (for an hour or a day , or for a lifetime) this is the rarest of the rare a space of no ego (this is where u are touched by the Divine) xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx subtle intervention the Taoists are very shrewd about how ecosystems actually work (particularly regarding the human social-ecology) u try to use force , push hard (overt-force , an act of "will") to get u'r way & yes , u may succeed & actually get u'r way for awhile but (at some point) someone (or something) is going to push back , hard if u are a "wise ruler" u (instead) play by nature's rules , but bend them slightly (subtly) (the Taoists call this wu-wei , "avoid-force") a willful act (overt-force) is a destructive act , whereas a subtle act (wu-wei) bends reality starts an (under-the-radar) chain-of-events which (over time) changes everything every thing (but the transformation is virtually invisible) a person feels the change , but isn't quite sure where it came from & i (for one) cannot imagine Gyd intervening in the world , in any other way
GOD is JEHOVAH the body looks simular to a man but is much much bigger made up of much more light tightly packed and he does have wings as do all heavenly beings. Now Michael JEHOVAH his son his huge but not quite as big and has wings as do all heavenly beings.
I think this is a commentary on donnann's poem. If so it is totally inappropriate, one does not criticize poetry for being vague or contradictory ("nibble again fish nerves"). If you are trying to say something about G!d, break up the chunks. For I cannot follow you.
There really is flying. Heavenly beings really do have wings. The bodies are more spread out and yes they do fly.
