Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > Religion
Register FAQ Chat Social Groups Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-09-2008, 12:56 AM   #21
zero1
Inactive
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,716
Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by bendoon View Post
Sometimes the answer is the simplest, most obvious one, in fact it nearly always is. We all like to think we are smart and too intelligent, that there must be some really complicated answer. But there isn't, the answer is staring you straight in the face. Life, and the answer to the worlds problems is really simple. We know where the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow is, we have been there before, we just forgot the way back.
And this relates to the misidentification of Lucifer with Satan...how?
zero1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2008, 01:11 AM   #22
bendoon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 10,521
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zero1 View Post
And this relates to the misidentification of Lucifer with Satan...how?

It relates to your sarcastic reply to someone elses post.

As to the misidentification of Satan with Lucifer, it makes no difference, they are just analogies for the same thing wether they were originally used for that in times past is not really relevant.
__________________
Teenage mutant ninja atheists - the internets are full of 'em.

You can spot them a mile off, repeating over and over the tired old arguments as found on jesusneverexisted.com and thejoyofsatan.com
bendoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2008, 01:15 AM   #23
amethyst
Inactive
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: in the midst of mediocrity
Posts: 6,209
Default

Quote:
And anyway, if you're right and Lucifer/Satan/Ahriman is a Superhuman enemy of The God (trademark), then suddenly I like him loads! Because the God of the Abrahamic religions, if he is all the one, deserves a bit of defiance.
"Superhuman" meaning "supernatural"-beyond human. But he is a created being and does not have all power. Only God has all power.

Well Lucifer/Satan's goal is to be worshiped at all costs, (that's why he rebelled, and fell) so you are just making his job easier then.

But if that's what you want, then you go right ahead.

But it's naive.

In your first post, you did ask for people's opinions. That's my opinion.
amethyst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2008, 01:21 AM   #24
palehorse redivivus
Member
 
palehorse redivivus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: UK Countercolonist
Posts: 32
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by amethyst View Post
Well Lucifer/Satan's goal is to be worshiped at all costs, (that's why he rebelled, and fell) so you are just making his job easier then.
Where exactly does it say in the Bible that Satan seeks worship?
__________________
Beyond Within

For he who has not known himself has known nothing, but he who has known himself has at the same time already achieved knowledge about the depth of the all.
--The Book of Thomas the Contender
palehorse redivivus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2008, 01:31 AM   #25
bendoon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 10,521
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by palehorse redivivus View Post
Where exactly does it say in the Bible that Satan seeks worship?
"He" wants you to follow him rather than God which is the same thing. Worship is not getting down on all fours with your rear end stuck up in the air.
__________________
Teenage mutant ninja atheists - the internets are full of 'em.

You can spot them a mile off, repeating over and over the tired old arguments as found on jesusneverexisted.com and thejoyofsatan.com
bendoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2008, 01:36 AM   #26
eternal_spirit
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 31,276
Default

Maybe some clues amongst this thread

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=33582
eternal_spirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2008, 01:36 AM   #27
amethyst
Inactive
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: in the midst of mediocrity
Posts: 6,209
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by palehorse redivivus View Post
Where exactly does it say in the Bible that Satan seeks worship?

Isaiah 14:12-15:

"How you are fallen from heaven,
O Lucifer (Satan), son of the morning!
How you are cut down to the ground,
You who weakened the nations!

For you have said in your heart:
'I will ascend into heaven,
I will exalt my throne above the stars of God;

I will also sit on the mount of the congregation
On the farthest sides of the north;

I will ascend above the heights of the clouds,
I will be like the Most High.'

Yet you shall be brought down to Sheol,
To the lowest depths of the Pit.
amethyst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2008, 01:38 AM   #28
eternal_spirit
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 31,276
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by palehorse redivivus View Post
Where exactly does it say in the Bible that Satan seeks worship?
Try Revelations (that's in the back of the New Testament)
eternal_spirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2008, 01:39 AM   #29
eternal_spirit
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 31,276
Default

Oops amethyst beat me to it and with reference pages

Your posts described how Lucifer became satan well IMO.
eternal_spirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2008, 01:47 AM   #30
amethyst
Inactive
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: in the midst of mediocrity
Posts: 6,209
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eternal_spirit View Post
Try Revelations (that's in the back of the New Testament)
Well the book of Revelations talks about how Satan will inhabit (completely possess) a man- that man will be known as the antichrist. A one world leader.

He will be appearing on the world stage shortly and will claim to be the Messiah but will really be the 'anti-messiah". This is the world con job the NWO folks have been planning for a long time. It's what they've all been working towards, ( the masons, the illuminati, the elite, the jesuits etc.) a few of them knowingly and many of them, unknowingly.

anti-christ means anti-messiah

because "christ" is another name for "messiah"

The jews will be longing for their "messiah'

The muslims will be longing for their "mahdi'

The rest of the world will be longing for the "One", who they think will the peace-bearer, world problem solver....but it will be the false christ...because the real Christ does not return to earth until the false christ has fooled the world.

Last edited by amethyst; 04-09-2008 at 02:01 AM.
amethyst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2008, 02:02 AM   #31
palehorse redivivus
Member
 
palehorse redivivus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: UK Countercolonist
Posts: 32
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by amethyst View Post

Isaiah 14:12-15:

"How you are fallen from heaven,
O Lucifer (Satan), son of the morning!
How you are cut down to the ground,
You who weakened the nations!

For you have said in your heart:
'I will ascend into heaven,
I will exalt my throne above the stars of God;

I will also sit on the mount of the congregation
On the farthest sides of the north;

I will ascend above the heights of the clouds,
I will be like the Most High.'

Yet you shall be brought down to Sheol,
To the lowest depths of the Pit.
If you're going to claim this passage refers to Satan, then in addition to the case I've already made against this interpretation (did you even read my previous post?), you have a few more questions to address.

Why did you add a word in parentheses that is clearly not in any of the original texts or translations?

Why, a few verses earlier, does the passage start with "take up this taunt against the king of Babylon"?

If you're going to say Satan is the king of Babylon, why, a few verses before that, does it talk about "stirring up the Medes" (another literal empire) against Babylon? Why would another Pagan empire want to fight a Satan they had no belief in?

Why, in the chapter after, is a similar taunt made against the Assyrians?

Why, in the chapter after that, is a similar taunt made against the Philistines?

Are these both metaphorical as well?

If not, then are we to assume all these references to literal empires, that were historicaly involved in literal military conflict with the Israelites, are to be taken literally while the reference to Babylon is symbolic?

Why do we need a symbolic interpretation of "Babylon" when there was a literal Babylonian empire that the Israelites were literally at war with? Doesn't that seem a bit superfluous and... weird?

If "Lucifer" is another word for "Satan," then why does no English translation after the KJV, which was published in 1611 and known to be one of the least accurate translations, use that term?

Why would Isaiah suddenly shift gears and stick a spiritual narrative in the middle of a string of political rants? Doesn't that seem a bit like if someone today wrote a text saying "I'm going to rant against the leaders of Russia, Iran and North Korea"... and a few centuries later, someone found this text and decided "leader of Iran" meant "evil mythological figure"... for some reason, even though all three were well known to have existed as nations? Why on earth would someone reach that conclusion?
__________________
Beyond Within

For he who has not known himself has known nothing, but he who has known himself has at the same time already achieved knowledge about the depth of the all.
--The Book of Thomas the Contender

Last edited by palehorse redivivus; 04-09-2008 at 02:18 AM.
palehorse redivivus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2008, 02:05 AM   #32
eternal_spirit
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 31,276
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by amethyst View Post
Well the book of Revelations talks about how Satan will inhabit (completely possess) a man- that man will be known as the antichrist. A one world leader.

He will be appearing on the world stage shortly and will claim to be the Messiah but will really be the 'anti-messiah". This is the world con job the NWO folks have been planning for a long time. It's what they've all been working towards, ( the masons, the illuminati, the elite, the jesuits etc.) a few of them knowingly and many of them, unknowingly.
Bendoon pointed this out about the Talmud
Quote:
Originally Posted by eternal_spirit


Look carefully at the flowery pattern, if you don't see it look again.

Looks like it says Satan IMO.
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10703 check out my babylonian Talmud thread will wise some of you up about some issues.

So I then thought Pan aka the Green man aka Lucifer aka Satan aka Yaweh/Jehova even.

Zionism is the NWO.

The letters at the points of the hexagram aka star of David aka Solomon's seal spell Mason


If anyone's the anti Christ it will be a Rothschild we know they've built new buildings in Israel/Jerusalem, and are the richest Family on the Planet which is in line with Satan's greed etc.

Although I think it's more symbolic than an actual human as in the anti-Christ meaning Satanists are sometimes referred to being of the Lucifarian conciousness which describes their mind set and state of being.

There's theories that when a Mason reaches the top levels rituals open him up to possession by entities the top of the pyramid is symbolic of the highest degrees/levels and also of Lucifer.

Last edited by eternal_spirit; 04-09-2008 at 02:08 AM.
eternal_spirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2008, 02:08 AM   #33
amethyst
Inactive
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: in the midst of mediocrity
Posts: 6,209
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by palehorse redivivus View Post
If you're going to claim this passage refers to Satan, then in addition to the case I've already made against this interpretation (did you even read my previous post?), you have a few more questions to address.

Why, a few verses earlier, does the passage start with "take up this taunt against the king of Babylon"?

If you're going to say Satan is the king of Babylon, why, a few verses before that, does it talk about "stirring up the Medes" (another literal empire) against Babylon? Why would another Pagan empire want to fight a Satan they had no belief in?

Why, in the chapter after, is a similar taunt made against the Assyrians?

Why, in the chapter after that, is a similar taunt made against the Philistines?

Are these both metaphorical as well?

If not, then are we to assume all these references to literal empires, that were historicaly involved in literal military conflict with the Israelites, are to be taken literally while the reference to Babylon is symbolic?

Why do we need a symbolic interpretation of "Babylon" when there was a literal Babylonian empire that the Israelites were literally at war with? Doesn't that seem a bit superfluous and... weird?

If "Lucifer" is another word for "Satan," then why does no English translation after the KJV, which was published in 1611 and known to be one of the least accurate translations, use that term?
It's a prophetic passage of scripture which has a duel meaning, talking of that time in which it was written but also a time in the future. Jesus spoke that way often times also. In parables and in metaphors.
amethyst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2008, 02:17 AM   #34
amethyst
Inactive
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: in the midst of mediocrity
Posts: 6,209
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eternal_spirit View Post
Bendoon pointed this out about the Talmud
Quote:
Originally Posted by eternal_spirit


Look carefully at the flowery pattern, if you don't see it look again.

Looks like it says Satan IMO.
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10703 check out my babylonian Talmud thread will wise some of you up about some issues.

So I then thought Pan aka the Green man aka Lucifer aka Satan aka Yaweh/Jehova even.

Zionism is the NWO.

The letters at the points of the hexagram aka star of David aka Solomon's seal spell Mason


If anyone's the anti Christ it will be a Rothschild we know they've built new buildings in Israel/Jerusalem, and are the richest Family on the Planet which is in line with Satan's greed etc.

Although I think it's more symbolic than an actual human as in the anti-Christ meaning Satanists are sometimes referred to being of the Lucifarian conciousness which describes their mind set and state of being.

There's theories that when a Mason reaches the top levels rituals open him up to possession by entities the top of the pyramid is symbolic of the highest degrees/levels and also of Lucifer.
Yeah, it does look like it says "satan". The Talmud is a satanic book- The pentatuch, (on the other hand, ) -the 1st five books of the Old testament are not. Neither is the Torah (books that make up the Old testament) The Torah contains the 10 commandments and the other prophetic books and historical books of the Old Testament.
amethyst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2008, 02:57 AM   #35
palehorse redivivus
Member
 
palehorse redivivus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: UK Countercolonist
Posts: 32
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by amethyst View Post
It's a prophetic passage of scripture which has a duel meaning, talking of that time in which it was written but also a time in the future. Jesus spoke that way often times also. In parables and in metaphors.
What exactly was it a prophecy of? What do the Medes, Assyrians and Philistines symbolize? What basis do we have for this interpretation?

When Jesus was speaking in parables, the text makes that clear with a phrase like "...and then he spoke this parable." He would also explain the meaning to his inner circle in private... where one meaning would be given, not several. Further, parables generally have nothing to do with literal history.

Why does it seem like so many people go by a "strict literal interpretation"... just until they need to crowbar in a few more interpretations in order to fit their own prior assumptions?
__________________
Beyond Within

For he who has not known himself has known nothing, but he who has known himself has at the same time already achieved knowledge about the depth of the all.
--The Book of Thomas the Contender
palehorse redivivus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2008, 03:06 AM   #36
eternal_spirit
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 31,276
Default



“Fair enough,” you say, “but what does any of that have to do with Laurel Canyon? Clearly the Stones were not a Laurel Canyon band.” True enough, but as Barney Hoskyns has written (in Hotel California), “In the summer of 1968 the English band was flirting heavily with Satanism and the occult … and spending a lot of time in Los Angeles.” A lot of time, that is, in and around Laurel Canyon – and during that time, Mick Jagger was involved in two occult-drenched film projects: Kenneth Anger’s Lucifer Rising and Donald Cammell’s Performance.

Jagger was the first musical superstar tapped by Anger to compose a soundtrack for his Lucifer Rising project, which at the time was to star Mansonite Bobby Beausoleil (who had, as we all remember, replaced Godo Paulekas). Anger would later solicit a soundtrack for the long-delayed film project from Led Zeppelin’s Jimmy Page, the proud owner of one of the world’s largest collections of Aleister Crowley memorabilia, including Crowley’s notorious Boleskine estate on the shores of Scotland’s Loch Ness. When ultimately released, however, the film featured a soundtrack by neither Jagger nor Page, but rather one that was composed, recorded and arranged inside a prison cell by convicted murderer Bobby Beausoleil. The pre-prison footage that Anger had shot of Beausoleil, meanwhile, ended up in a different film: the aforementioned Invocation of My Demon Brother. Starring in Lucifer Rising, as Osiris, was Performance writer and co-director Donald Seaton Cammell.

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showp...0&postcount=17
eternal_spirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2008, 04:28 AM   #37
snoopsnuffleopagus
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Alkashic Cocktail Lounge & Piano Bar
Posts: 4,447
Default Hillel

As has been Posted prior; the word LUCIFER is an interpolation, an addition.

The consensus of the original Hebrew name is Hillel,

yet another Translation, as found in The Book of Yahweh

Isayah(Salvation is YHWH) 14:12-13

12: How you have fallen from heaven, O Hillel, child of the light! How you are cut down to the ground, you who weakened the nations!

13: For you have said in your heart; I will ascend above the heavens, "I will raise my throne above the stars of Yahweh. I will sit in the highest place on the holy mountain of the congregation.





Quote:
Strongs Concordance; Hebrew Lexicon:
Quote:
Result of search for "lucifer":
1966 heylel hay-lale' from 1984 (in the sense of brightness); the morning-star:--lucifer.
Quote:
Result of search for "1984":
1947 howlelah ho-lay-law' feminine active participle of 1984; folly:--madness.

1948 howleluwth ho-lay-looth' from active participle of 1984; folly:--madness.

1966 heylel hay-lale' from 1984 (in the sense of brightness); the morning-star:--lucifer.

1974 hilluwl hil-lool' from 1984 (in the sense of rejoicing); a celebration of thanksgiving for harvest:--merry, praise.

1984 halal haw-lal' a primitive root; to be clear (orig. of sound, but usually of color); to shine; hence, to make a show, to boast; and thus to be (clamorously) foolish; to rave; causatively, to celebrate; also to stultify:--(make) boast (self), celebrate, commend, (deal, make), fool(- ish, -ly), glory, give (light), be (make, feign self) mad (against), give in marriage, (sing, be worthy of) praise, rage, renowned, shine.

1985 Hillel hil-layl' from 1984; praising (namely God); Hillel, an Israelite:--Hillel.

3094 Yhallel'el yeh-hal-lel-ale' from 1984 and 410; praising God; Jehallelel, the name of two Israelites:--Jehalellel, Jehalelel.

4110 mahalal mah-hal-awl' from 1984; fame:--praise.

8416 thillah teh-hil-law' from 1984; laudation; specifically (concretely) a hymn:--praise.

8417 toholah to-hol-aw' feminine of an unused noun (apparently from 1984) meaning bluster; braggadocio, i.e. (by implication) fatuity:--folly.

so this is a Feminine Name of a Being named Hillel, she is 'known' by many, many Names. She is: The Queen of Heaven.

The Lexicon In Veteris Testamenti Libros, By Koehler & Baumgartner, page 235 provides this definition: a beautiful woman, a wife who is praised by her husband, a woman whose work praise her.

The New Wilsons Old Testament Word Studies, page 506, provides these meanings: to be given in marriage, worthy to be praised.


Yechetzqyah(ezekiel) 28 refers to Hillel as the prince of Tyre, and proceeds to present explicit detail as to the nature and persona of this Being. She is YHWHs estranged Wife.

The phrase: "son of the morning" bears closer scrutiny also. The word 'BEN' is usually translated 'son'. but not always, the hebrew phrase is: Ben Shachar

The Analytical Hebrew Lexicon, by Benjamin Davidson, page 95; reveals that 'Ben', may also be used in the plural as 'children, and also as pupils

The Hebrew & Chaldee Lexicon, by Julius Furst, page 215 informs us: the word ben when connected with abstract nouns denotes possession of a quality or virtue, or vice. the abstract noun is Shachar=Light this is the word used in Isayah 8:20

The Analytical Hebrew & Chaldee Lexicon, by Benjamin Davidson, page 709 informs: shachar means light

Isayah 8:20 To the Law and to the Prophecy: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no Light(shachar) in them


dozens of Verses refers to YHWHs Laws as Light. eg. Proverbs 6:23: ...the Commandments are a Lamp, the Law is Light...

so the phrase Ben Shachar may be read as: A pupil trained in the Laws of YHWH, which would be appropos for her role as The Queen of Heaven.


Yechetzqyah 28:1-19

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showp...&postcount=113

The Queen of Heaven

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showp...&postcount=364

Last edited by snoopsnuffleopagus; 04-09-2008 at 04:59 AM.
snoopsnuffleopagus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-09-2008, 11:25 AM   #38
bendoon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 10,521
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by palehorse redivivus View Post
What exactly was it a prophecy of? What do the Medes, Assyrians and Philistines symbolize? What basis do we have for this interpretation?

When Jesus was speaking in parables, the text makes that clear with a phrase like "...and then he spoke this parable." He would also explain the meaning to his inner circle in private... where one meaning would be given, not several. Further, parables generally have nothing to do with literal history.

Why does it seem like so many people go by a "strict literal interpretation"... just until they need to crowbar in a few more interpretations in order to fit their own prior assumptions?
[1Cor 10:11] Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, uponwhom the ends of the world are come.
__________________
Teenage mutant ninja atheists - the internets are full of 'em.

You can spot them a mile off, repeating over and over the tired old arguments as found on jesusneverexisted.com and thejoyofsatan.com
bendoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:24 AM.