- This topic has 82 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 3 months ago by
.
- Posts
Hi Proclaimer, thanks for your detailed replies on my post on Hell. But I am not defending anything based on the NT here. Please don’t mistake me. The very concept of Hell is a new invention by the NT writers and not based based the Hebrew Bible.
You repeatedly make claims that the New Testament says this and teaches that and causes confusion due to mixed messaging. Whether you believe these statements are true or not, I am debunking the statements as not even being taught in the New Testament to begin with.
Whether you believe in revelation or not, the New Testament is harmonious.
Sorry for the confusion. I am only investigating the deviation of the NT with its primary source the Hebrew Bible. Hope that will clear your doubts on my queries.
Would you consider today’s view of the cosmos a deviation of the ancient Hebrew view? Or do we just have greater revelation today?
Would you consider today’s view of the cosmos a deviation of the ancient Hebrew view? Or do we just have greater revelation today?
I think you are confusing the interpretations with revelations. This is where I am against such ideas of Christianity. The ancient man not expected to understand the recent scientific knowledge. I am not for such non-scientific interpretations of the Hebrew Bible.
Satan appears in both the Old and New Testaments of the Bible. Surprisingly, however, most of what people believe about Satan doesn’t come from the Bible. For instance, the common image of Satan as a forked-tailed, horned demon with a goat’s body from the waist down derives more from the Greek god Pan than anything biblical. What, then, does the Bible say about Satan?
The Hebrew name Satan (pronounced SA-tan) actually means “adversary,” and most often in the Hebrew Bible it is prefaced by the direct object, meaning “the adversary” rather than a distinct personal name. Satan’s role grows more developed both in scope and magnitude through time, and, thus, in the earlier writings of the Hebrew Bible, Satan exists not so much as an individual character but as an adversarial position occupied by both humans and angels.
For example, the word satan is used for a human potential adversary in the Philistine army (1 Samuel 29:4), and two kings God raise to be Solomon’s adversaries (1 Kings 11:14, 23). An angel of the LORD is called satan when he blocks the path of Balaam (Numbers 22:22, 32). Satan becomes more developed as a character in later writings of the Hebrew Bible, though he appears only a few times. He at times causes humans to do bad things, as he incites King David to conduct a census (1 Chronicles 21:1).
Satan also acts as a heavenly prosecuting attorney, bringing charges against sinners before God’s heavenly court. For example, in Psalm 109:6 the author asks Satan to bring an enemy to trial. Also in Zechariah 3:1-2, Satan stands at the right hand of an angel to bring charges against the High Priest. Satan has a similar role in the opening chapter of Job, where he appears in the heavenly court with the sons of God to bring charges against Job.
In the New Testament, Satan plays a much larger role. Here Satan, also frequently called the Devil (from Greek diabolos, also meaning “adversary”) is a proper name for the one who opposes God. Satan is also identified in the New Testament with the deceitful serpent in Eden, as well as many other names including Belial, the evil one, the ruler of the demons, the enemy, the ruler of this world, and Beelzebul (Beelzebub, meaning “Lord of the flies,” is a pun on the name Beelzebul, meaning “Prince Baal”).
Many scholars attribute Satan’s development from an adversary to the archenemy of God to the influence of the Persian religion Zoroastrianism. This religion is a lot like Star Wars, in which two opposing forces, one good and the other evil, struggle for control of the universe. Yet, the New Testament preserves the Hebrew Bible’s notion of Satan as far inferior to God and needing to get God’s permission before “raising hell” on earth (see, for example, Luke 22:31). Following the biblical period, Medieval theologians reinterpreted passages such as Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28, in which Babylonian and Phoenician kings are condemned for pride, as descriptions about Satan. In fact, the name Lucifer comes from a Latin translation of Isaiah 14:12, in which the Babylonian king is linked to a fallen Morning Star, called in Latin lucern ferre (“bearer of light”).
I think you are confusing the interpretations with revelations. This is where I am against such ideas of Christianity. The ancient man not expected to understand the recent scientific knowledge. I am not for such non-scientific interpretations of the Hebrew Bible.
Armed with the OT and culture of the day, the earth was flat despite the OT not even saying it was.
Obviously, there is room for revelation and progression that may even shatter established understanding.
Your whole argument lies in the idea that the OT is a complete revelation of some kind (whether you agree or not), and any revelation or progression from there must be wrong. Further, you assume that the understanding that Jews had of the OT is the correct one. This is why I bring up their flat earth model. It shows that their understanding was flawed there, so could be possible elsewhere too.
Anyway, I think you are just struggling with your own carnality. When you are born from above, your whole perspective changes. Your mind is renewed and for the better. Having God’s spirit compels you to do right, listen to truth, and love God.
Now think for a minute. If the God of the cosmos is the God of the Jews, then why would this God only focus on one nation? It makes more sense that he started his plan through one man, then a nation, then all men and creation.
A small seed can grow into the biggest tree.
Jesus said:
“The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and planted in his field. Though it is the smallest of all seeds, yet when it grows, it is the largest of garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds come and perch in its branches.”
The explanation as to what is going on in this and other discussions involving yourself is simple. Some hear the voice of the messiah, but not all. This would obviously lead to debates like this one.
Satan appears in both the Old and New Testaments of the Bible. Surprisingly, however, most of what people believe about Satan doesn’t come from the Bible. For instance, the common image of Satan as a forked-tailed, horned demon with a goat’s body from the waist down derives more from the Greek god Pan than anything biblical.
Good to see you acknowledging that it is not the fault of the NT.
The Hebrew name Satan (pronounced SA-tan) actually means “adversary,” and most often in the Hebrew Bible it is prefaced by the direct object, meaning “the adversary” rather than a distinct personal name. Satan’s role grows more developed both in scope and magnitude through time, and, thus, in the earlier writings of the Hebrew Bible, Satan exists not so much as an individual character but as an adversarial position occupied by both humans and angels.
The easy explanation here is that there is a difference between satan and The Satan. Or use of the definite article.
It’s the same argument I have made here about god and The God.
No big deal so far.
Many scholars attribute Satan’s development from an adversary to the archenemy of God to the influence of the Persian religion Zoroastrianism…………
So what?
Personally, I think you are just struggling with your own carnality. When you are born from above, your whole perspective changes. Your mind is renewed and for the better.
I think this is going little personally as your posts are attacking on personal spirituality which is not warranted on these unending debates. I have also asked you to study the Torah and get enlightened which you seem to ignore and take it so lightly. Please stop this black mailing with words like ‘carnal’ and ‘born from above’ which are simply a Christian jugglery.
You are forgetting that Old Testament was the primary source for the NT. The NT writers struggled hard to place Jesus in the Hebrew Bible as Messiah by twisting the scriptures and often taken them out of their original context.
If the God of the cosmos is the God of the Jews, then why would this God only focus on one nation? It makes more sense that he started his plan through one man, then a nation, then all men and creation.
Then you question your Old Testament my friend. If the NT writers claimed to have got new secret revelation as often quoted by you here they could have very well done without quoting the so called Old Testament. If you want a new revelation and a new religion we have plenty here in our India. We need not look to the Christian one.
I think this is going little personally as your posts are attacking on personal spirituality which is not warranted on these unending debates. I have also asked you to study the Torah and get enlightened which you seem to ignore and take it so lightly. Please stop this black mailing with words like ‘carnal’ and ‘born from above’ which are simply a Christian jugglery.
You are attacking doctrine and teachings in the New Testament and I am defending such using scripture itself. You are free to disagree as always. This is a free speech platform.
The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit.
Let’s face it. It does explain your stance. I offer it as an explanation along with many other scriptures and ideas.
Then you question your Old Testament my friend. If the NT writers claimed to have got new secret revelation as often quoted by you here they could have very well done without quoting the so called Old Testament. If you want a new revelation and a new religion we have plenty here in our India. We need not look to the Christian one.
I’ve already explained it to you. New revelation fits with old revelation as long as it is not contradictory. Simple. It’s called progress. The God of the cosmos reached out to man through a righteous man called Abraham. His offspring and nation were blessed by God. Through this nation, God reached out to the other nations who were ruled on high by other spiritual principalities.
Abraham > Israel > Gentiles > All creation.
A God of the cosmos can easily work with all creation and even us gentiles. I do not find this a stretch at all like you do. In fact it would be expected if their was a God of the cosmos and he created man and loved man.
I’ll explain it another way.
First came the law, then came grace.
You are free to not believe.
For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.
By the way, the plan is still in action. There is further revelation to come.
Your view appears to be more about the constraints of your own mind than what the Old Testament set down.
It’s simple. In order to understand grace, your first need to see your sin.
This is why the law was given. So that when grace came, it would be understood and appreciated.
Who is going to appreciate that their fine was paid if they did not think they were in the wrong to begin with?
I’ve already explained it to you. New revelation fits with old revelation as long as it is not contradictory.
This is what I am questing on the writings and the new secret revelation of the NT as they had deviated much from their primary source the Hebrew Bible on Messiah.
The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit.
The same thing applies to any one here as they are sticking to their age old myths which are not based on the Hebrew Bible. I too can quote the same logics for you too my friend.
This is why the law was given. So that when grace came, it would be understood and appreciated.
This was purely Christian misinterpretation of the Torah, first by Paul then by his followers.
The same thing applies to any one here as they are sticking to their age old myths which are not based on the Hebrew Bible. I too can quote the same logics for you too my friend.
It is obvious to anyone that the NT is based on the OT. For a start, it quotes the OT more times than I know. Same goes for other books too. The question is not whether it is based on the OT. Try to come up with a better question.
As for myths being weaved into the NT that are not present in the OT. What is the first myth that comes to mind?
This was purely Christian misinterpretation of the Torah, first by Paul then by his followers.
I see. What is the correct interpretation? That the law condemns and we pray forever and ask for forgiveness? If so, how do we know your interpretation is not a misinterpretation? Do you have special revelation or something?
This is what I am questing on the writings and the new secret revelation of the NT as they had deviated much from their primary source the Hebrew Bible on Messiah.
Newton physics then Theory of relativity. A deviation or a progression? I guess you would say deviation given that Newton did not mention many things that Einstein did.
You are entitled to your mental constructs. It’s just that I think they are inadequate.
Newton physics then Theory of relativity. A deviation or a progression? I guess you would say deviation given that Newton did not mention many things that Einstein did.
You are entitled to your mental constructs. It’s just that I think they are inadequate.
Your comparison of two different concepts (Newton and Einstein) is no where related to what I am questioning here on the concepts Messiah. Yes you are also entitled to close your eyes to such deviations.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
