View Full Version : theological question: what are the other 'gods' that are talked about in the Bible?
09-27-2005, 10:49 AM
are they inherently evil, and where do they come from?
09-27-2005, 02:48 PM
Well, here's my two cenz:
Both Old and New Testaments are replete with caveats and warnings regarding sacrifice to foreign gods, as well as building altars to them or worshipping man-made images, etc. The warnings usually include a reference to the fallen angels who rebelled against the throne of Heaven. These angels are quite intelligent and powerful. Lucifer was at one time the highest archangel and was the choirmaster for Heaven itself! It is no wonder that Satan would seek human worship. His temptation of Jesus in the desert included an invitation to bow down before him with the promise of unlimited power over all of the earthly kingdoms. Jesus refused.
09-27-2005, 04:29 PM
Sometimes they are just too evil. If you have seen a deliverance session once, you would see how glad they are about the suffering they bring to people. They hate humans in a way that is difficult to understand...I mean, even evil humans need a break, but demons seem to work 24/7. They hate and envy us because they know they can't be redeemed as we can.
But since they are very hierarchical, I guess they would have their butts kicked by their chiefs if they don't work very hard with their evil actions.
A good book with deep study of those evil spirits is:
"Angels, Satan and Demons" by Robert Lightner.
A more practical one would be "Prepare for War" from Rebecca Brown.
09-28-2005, 08:21 AM
"And the Elhoim said, 'Let US make man in our image and after our likeness'; ONE of them said, "I will place enmity between thy SEED and the SEED of the woman.'" This latter statement stated to a creation of yet another "god" they called Satan (adversary) who was around concurrently.
Genesis, to me, says there were several/many whom the Bible referred to as "gods," especially where/when the creation of Earth man is concerned. Not all of them seemed to like each other. The duality of GOOD and EVIL, LIGHT and DAKNESS, has forever played itself out on the planet.
In addition, it would seem that we have at least two distince "seed lines" who are to be enemies until Gabriel toots his horn.
Since everything is relative and, amongst humans, subjective, besides the suggested differences between the creations, throw in the mix of religions and we can see how far that enmity has taken us.
There's some interesting stuff in the Popul Vu that bears on the "gods" and their creations, too.
09-28-2005, 08:39 AM
Thanks, Sat. Also remember that to rebuke or dispel demons requires the authority behind Jesus' name. On the other hand, the book of James merely tells us to resist. The name and the blood of Jesus are miraculously powerful against the enemy of souls. I believe that Lucifer hates and envies us because we are created in God's likeness. We are the only beings in God's creation who can create a new life. This is the basic purpose of sex, and look what's happened to it! Also, Lucifer hates and desparately tries to destroy anything that displays God's love for us, anything pure and innocent is ridiculed by him; anything that points us back to God and our need for him is a target for Luciferian organizations, as you can see in the news every week.
09-28-2005, 02:48 PM
Sorry Barbara, but the right interpretation of Elohim is the plural person of God, meaning the Trinity. God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit decided to create man. It has nothing to do with creation of other gods.
And when God says that he will put enemity between the seed of Eve and Satan, He was saying that eventually Eve would have a seed (a distant son, Jesus) who would defeat Satan. This is the first promise and prophecy about Jesus. The rest of the paragraph says that Satan would bite His heel, meaning he would hurt Jesus at the cross, but he would be crushed by Him (totally defeated at the end).
09-28-2005, 03:35 PM
Quite nifty little interpreting there, Sat... You don't have to explain, it's self-evident.;-)
09-28-2005, 07:59 PM
Sat, 3 "gods" in one is polytheism, poorly hidden. Monotheism is ONE god.
If the seed of the woman was Jesus, who is the seed of Satan? There has to be one for enmity to take place.
Best I can tell, there was only one group that were the declared enemies of Jesus and that was the jews of that day.
He threw them out of the temple for moneychanging, told them they were of their father, the Devil, a liar and the father of lies, and his works they would do. They chose Barabas to be set free and Jesus to be crucified. "GIVE US BARABAS!"
From what I have read of Christianity in Brazil, it is a mix of Voodoo, Catholocism, something like Santeria and pagan ritual. They keep the Catholic statuary on their altars but they use the blood of animals and chickens in their ceremonies.
09-29-2005, 07:29 AM
God is one, manifested in Three persons of the same character and substance. This is not politheism. It is the concept of the Trinity. Think about water in gas, ice and vapor states. No, I don't understand how it is possible, but that is really beyond my and your comprehension. Anyway, it is clear from the Bible.
Which seed of Satan are you talking about ? Which verse in Genesis ?
Yes, Jesus said that those who follow Satan had Satan as a "father", meaning they followed him, but this has nothing to do with that verse in Genesis.
What you said about Christianity in Brazil is totally wrong and prejudiced. You are talking about Macumba, which is really voodoo with Catholic syncretism, concentrated in the state of Bahia, where the African presence is strong. It would be the same as I told you that Christians in the US are ALL Mormons because they are Mormons in Utah or that they are voodoo followers because there is vooddo in New Orleans.
Less than 1% (ONE) of the population follows this voodoo stuff in Brazil. And I am surely NOT one of them ! :-D
On the other hand, more than 25% are evangelicals and the rest is probably Catholic.
09-29-2005, 08:44 AM
San, this applies to you so I am copying it as my last word on the subject. For my part I am satisfied to say that you and I can agree to disagree.
This was written regarding another article but it applicable here.
One last effort to make my position clear and then I am leaving the subject of religion.
1. I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU BELIEVE, that is up to you. I disregard Kaminski's rants on Christianity and Judaism - taking that which interests me and skipping the rest. He has his reasons for being anti-religion, you have your reasons for being pro-religion. FINE, both ways.
2. To understand what is written, whether it be an article that I post or the replies that others post, I try to understand where those who commit their thoughts to words are coming from, whether it be Kaminski or Freeman or TrueBeliever.
More than anything, I try to recognize the difference between the facts that they are offering as opposed to their opinions. The only basis for debate is of the facts, not opinions. I would have to know everything about a person and what contributed to his/her particular belief system. NO THANKS.
3. While I am irreligious, IT IS FINE WITH ME if you or the whole world is not. There are enough religions out there for everybody that wants one to have one. Be my guest.
DO NOT USE THOSE RELIGIONS which hinge on one's belief system to argue facts because it becomes a vicious cycle. I was not there when "God said...," so I don't know if that is what he said or not or even what he might have meant IF he said whatever - or who's god said it.
From having studied the Bible I have a fair knowledge of what is written and can talk with you concerning it, offering quotes for your consideration as a counterpoint in a discussion. Past that, forget it.
4. According to the writings of Albert Pike to his peer in Italy, Gusippe Macinni (sp?) they intend to "wear out" both religion and athiesm, no doubt through wars, so that they can establish their One World Religion which is Luciferian. (I will reject that one, too, if I am still around)
5. I BELIEVE that you cannot have a creation without a creator. I do not know if he/she/it has a name. If I ever knew it I have forgotten. Every religion has a name for this entity or force. Along with the name comes all the rhetoric and dogma that is attached. That is where I opt out.
6. When I open my eyes in the morning I am grateful for another day in which to maybe do some good or at least do no harm to any living thing. I am better at "a hand up" than "a hand out," although I have been known to do that on occasion, too.
I love the pursuit of knowledge and the open exchange of ideas. I detest petty bickering and "nit-picking." I do not "agitate" for anything, staying with a subject only as long as reason, logic and interest dictate.
My "cause," if you could call it that, is for the return and furtherance of individual rights and freedom - both of action, thought and expression. Anyone or group who sets about to curb or destroy those rights and that freedom are in my crosshairs, as you can see from my posts and comments.
Now, let's move on.
09-29-2005, 10:05 AM
What the heck does this text has to do with the discussion ?
You could as well have said that you don't want to discuss anymore.
People post the most bombastic afirmations and then when challenged get all pissed. :-(
09-29-2005, 10:35 AM
I remember Dr. Makow wrote something once about the 'Synagogue of Satan' and the seed thereof. I think it makes more sense that it applies to a spiritual lineage, i.e. the Pharisees and the learned class (humanists), and not a genetic thing.
09-29-2005, 10:35 AM
San, I am not pissed, I just don't see why we should keep "discussing" in a circle; neither one of us is going to agree with the other, so we just need to agree to disagree and move on.
I pulled the rest of my post from another area where the discussion had mired down in religion, I figured it would save me some typing time.
My whole reason for joining this group was to be able to exchange ideas, learn something new and enjoy the "company" of thinking individuals who are interested and informed on a wide variety of topics.
Because we ARE all individuals, there will be times when we disagree. Each will state their own "case" for believing as they do, some discussion will follow, and that is it. I detest belaboring any subject.
We can always find common ground to be civil and when I am perceived as being uncivil or rude, I will appologize immediately.
There is an old saying, "You go to your church, I'll go to mine." In my case I have to change it a little bit, to wit, "You go to your church, I'll sit under a tree, but we'll meet at the park and talk about the New World Order."
09-29-2005, 03:14 PM
Agreed Barbara. I enjoy your posts.
by PAUL RUDNICK
Issue of 2005-09-26
Day No. 1:
And the Lord God said, “Let there be light,” and lo, there was light. But then the Lord God said, “Wait, what if I make it a sort of rosy, sunset-at-the-beach, filtered half-light, so that everything else I design will look younger?”
“I’m loving that,” said Buddha. “It’s new.”
“You should design a restaurant,” added Allah.
Day No. 2:
“Today,” the Lord God said, “let’s do land.” And lo, there was land.
“Well, it’s really not just land,” noted Vishnu. “You’ve got mountains and valleys and—is that lava?”
“It’s not a single statement,” said the Lord God. “I want it to say, ‘Yes, this is land, but it’s not afraid to ooze.’ ”
“It’s really a backdrop, a sort of blank canvas,” put in Apollo. “It’s, like, minimalism, only with scale.”
“But—brown?” Buddha asked.
“Brown with infinite variations,” said the Lord God. “Taupe, ochre, burnt umber—they’re called earth tones.”
“I wasn’t criticizing,” said Buddha. “I was just noticing.”
Day No. 3:
“Just to make everyone happy,” said the Lord God, “today I’m thinking oceans, for contrast.”
“It’s wet, it’s deep, yet it’s frothy; it’s design without dogma,” said Buddha, approvingly.
“Now, there’s movement,” agreed Allah. “It’s not just ‘Hi, I’m a planet—no splashing.’ ”
“But are those ice caps?” inquired Thor. “Is this a coherent vision, or a highball?”
“I can do ice caps if I want to,” sniffed the Lord God.
“It’s about a mood,” said the Angel Moroni, supportively.
“Thank you,” said the Lord God.
Day No. 4:
“One word,” said the Lord God. “Landscaping. But I want it to look natural, as if it all somehow just happened.”
“Do rain forests,” suggested a primitive tribal god, who was known only as a clicking noise.
“Rain forests here,” decreed the Lord God. “And deserts there. For a spa feeling.”
“Which is fresh, but let’s give it glow,” said Buddha. “Polished stones and bamboo, with a soothing trickle of something.”
“I know where you’re going,” said the Lord God. “But why am I seeing scented candles and a signature body wash?”
“Shut up,” said Buddha.
“You shut up,” said the Lord God.
“It’s all about the mix,” Allah declared in a calming voice. “Now let’s look at some swatches.”
Day No. 5:
“I’d like to design some creatures of the sea,” the Lord God said. “Sleek but not slick.”
“Yes, yes, and more yes—it’s a total gills moment,” said Apollo. “But what if you added wings?”
“Fussy,” whispered Buddha to Zeus. “Why not epaulets and a sash?”
“Legs,” said Allah. “Now let’s do legs.”
“Are we already doing dining-room tables?” asked the Lord God, confused.
“No, design some creatures with legs,” said Allah. So the Lord God, nodding, designed an ostrich.
“First draft,” everyone agreed, and so the Lord God designed an alligator.
“There’s gonna be a waiting list,” Zeus murmured appreciatively.
“Now do puppies!” pleaded Vishnu. “And kitties!”
“Ooooo!” all the gods cooed. Then, feeling a bit embarrassed, Zeus ventured, “Design something more practical, like a horse or a mule.”
“What about a koala?” asked the Lord God.
“Much better,” Zeus declared, cuddling the furry little animal. “I’m going to call him Buttons.”
Day No. 6:
“Today I’m really going out there,” said the Lord God. “And I know it won’t be popular at first, and you’re all gonna be saying, ‘Earth to Lord God,’ but in a few million years it’s going to be timeless. I’m going to design a man.”
And everyone looked upon the man that the Lord God designed.
“It has your eyes,” Zeus told the Lord God.
“Does it stack?” inquired Allah.
“It has a naïve, folk-artsy, I-made-it-myself vibe,” said Buddha. The Inca sun god, however, only scoffed. “Been there. Evolution,” he said. “It’s called a shaved monkey.”
“I like it,” protested Buddha. “But it can’t work a strapless dress.” Everyone agreed on this point, so the Lord God announced, “Well, what if I give it nice round breasts and lose the penis?”
“Yes,” the gods said immediately.
“Now it’s intelligent,” said Aphrodite.
“But what if I made it blond?” giggled the Lord God.
“And what if I made you a booming offscreen voice in a lot of bad movies?” asked Aphrodite.
Day No. 7:
“You know, I’m really feeling good about this whole intelligent-design deal,” said the Lord God. “But do you think that I could redo it, keeping the quality but making it at a price point we could all live with?”
“I’m not sure,” said Buddha. “You mean, what if you designed a really basic, no-frills planet? Like, do the man and the woman really need all those toes?”
“Hello!” said the Lord God. “Clean lines, no moving parts, functional but fun. Three bright, happy, wash ’n’ go colors.”
“Swedish meets Japanese, with maybe a Platinum Collector’s Edition for the geeks,” Buddha decided.
“Done,” said the Lord God. “Now let’s start thinking about Pluto. What if everything on Pluto was brushed aluminum?”
“You mean, let’s do Neptune again?” said Buddha.
BBC NEWS WORLD EDITION
Foetuses found at Bogota airport
Police said the foetuses might have been meant for Satanic rituals
Colombian police have found the bodies of three human foetuses hidden in statues destined for the United States.
The discovery was made by officers searching for contraband at Bogota Airport on Tuesday.
The corpses were wrapped in plastic and concealed inside statues of Christian icons, which were smashed open.
Colombian police chief Gen Jord Alirio Varon said the four- to five-month-old foetuses could have been intended for use in Satanic rituals.
Gen Varon said the foetuses were found alongside crucifixes and medals.
He said officials are trying to find out who sent the packages, which came from Barranquilla in Colombia and were destined for Miami in the US.
vBulletin® v3.6.12, Copyright ©2000-2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.