|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Nov 13, 2023 16:08:20 GMT
What if Christians gather to kill the devil? Indeed, maybe the power of many Christians would be enough to destroy it. Is it possible at all, or this cannot be done? I just wonder what if Christians could pray and God would sent angels to join Christians, and then together to destroy devil.
|
|
|
Post by MAYA-EL on Dec 17, 2023 3:03:59 GMT
See the thing is is he references other Scholars and even says that his opinion is the consensus among scholars. You should really watch the rest of his videos on this topic it really does refute you perfectly. May you link his videos that refutes me? I, a few days ago, looked up all of his videos that had to do with the subject of Satan and didn't find anything that I think refutes what I'm saying. There were only two things that may address it. First he repeated that Helel or Lucifer refers to the Morningstar or Venus, and not a divine being. The thing is thought that ancient Near Easterners and Israelites conceptualized the stars as divine beings, which is why angels and pagan gods all throughout scripture are referred to as stars. So how much more the Morningstar, or the brightest star in the sky? Likewise he went into the development of angelogy and demonology during the Second Temple Period, especially the Hellenistic period. But no one is denying that, they are only denying that the development was based on nothing, and note that its really an elaboration on what is already present in the Old Testament. I also watched a video of his on hell, and he mentioned that the Lake of Fire in the Book of Revelation taught annihilationism, which is quite strange because the text referring to it actually says this about it, Revelation 20:10 " And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever." This is puzzling to me, because as a biblical scholar, you would think that he would have read the text for himself so that he wouldn't make such bold assertions that could be disproved so easily simply by reading it. Likewise the Book of Revelation was written by John the Elder to the Seven Churches in Asia Minor to warn them of coming Roman persecution under Domition, and that they needed to persevere and not bow to the Roman Empire or they'd, "burn in the prescience of God and his Holy Angels for eternity." Which means that if the Book of Revelation taught annihilationism, the entire purpose that the book was written for would be undermined. This is an example of why I am a little weary of Dan McLellan. He has mentioned scholars. I am very sure he has, but so have I. He says that his opinions are the scholarly consensus, and yet it must be a pale consensus indeed if so many well credentialed people disagree with it. The mention of the scholarly consensus actually peaked my interest to look up what it actually means. I've heard the term thrown around, but how many scholars must agree for it to be a legitimate consensus? So I looked it up and the best I could find was some discussions on it on Reddit, ironically in the Biblical studies Academic Subreddit. www.reddit.com/r/AcademicBiblical/comments/wdkx7i/when_we_talk_about_scholarly_consensus_what_does/ and www.reddit.com/r/AcademicBiblical/comments/7td0ok/roughly_what_does_consensus_mean_in_the_field_of/ Fascinatingly, it seems as mysterious to them as it does to me. It seems the concept comes from the scientists where there is a "Scientific Consensus" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_consensus#:~:text=Scientific%20consensus%20is%20the%20generally,study%20at%20any%20particular%20time. And they try to translate this to textual and other such studies. Well, in science you test hypotheses like when you Radiometrically date the earth, or test genetics, or run experiments, and the results are usually very consistent because the laws of nature don't really change. (That's actually a fascinating thing in it of itself. Nature has laws. Why does it have laws? Why would it have laws? That's a very counterintuitive thing to happen if we live in a meaningless chaos with no designer. And if you think that it isn't its only because you live in a Post Enlightenment world which basically took Thomas Aquinas's idea that God is a rational being a made the universe to follow certain laws and so to learn more about God we need to study his creation by experimenting with those laws, and took a personal God out of it. The universe having laws, making sense, and being intelligible in this manner was certainly not a commonly held belief throughout history.) What this means is that scientists can very easily come to a consensus on many things, but with textual analyzers? Well, that takes some doing, and its going to be painted by peoples biases. Many will ignore what's written right before them like Mr. McLellan in the Book of Revelation for example. Actual consensus in hard to reach and in these studies, they don't really have a true consensus on anything (except surprisingly, considering our previous conversations that Jesus Christ was a real historical person, but this is a matter of history, not textual analysis) and such is mostly use as an apologetics or rhetorical device to give some kind of weight to their point. Anyhow, below is my favorite scholar Michael Heiser arguing his point about the Serpent in Eden being Satan. The book of revelation was not written by john from the gospels that is just an assumption that Christians have because of what is written in the beginning of revelation but the reality is that we dont know who wrote revilation but it definitely wasn't any of the gospels writer's thats a fact based on writing style And it is an apocalyptic story about nero in that time that they were in and it has nothing to do with now or any time in the future its not an end times prophecy and that is the opinion of the leeding biblical scholars . Its pointless talking about this with someone that believes the stories in this story book because they will go to no end to try and save it from being shown for what it is. Its kinda sad actually seeing as i remember when i too believed in the same hogwash
|
|
Clovis Merovingian
Prestige/VIP
Elder
Posts: 2,696
Likes: 1,757
Meta-Ethnicity: Anglo-American
Ethnicity: Deep Southerner
Country: My State and my Region are my country
Region: The Deep South
Location: South Carolina
Ancestry: Gaelic (patrilineal), English, Ulster Scots/Scots Irish, Scottish, German, Swiss German, Swedish, Manx, Finnish, Norman French/Quebecois (distantly), Dutch (distantly)
Taxonomy: Borreby/Alpine/ Nordid mix
Y-DNA: R-S660/R-DF109
mtDNA: T1a1
Politics: Conservative
Religion: Christian
Hero: Andrew Jackson, Thomas Jefferson, James K. Polk
Age: 30
Philosophy: I try to find out what is true as best I can.
|
Post by Clovis Merovingian on Dec 17, 2023 6:41:12 GMT
May you link his videos that refutes me? I, a few days ago, looked up all of his videos that had to do with the subject of Satan and didn't find anything that I think refutes what I'm saying. There were only two things that may address it. First he repeated that Helel or Lucifer refers to the Morningstar or Venus, and not a divine being. The thing is thought that ancient Near Easterners and Israelites conceptualized the stars as divine beings, which is why angels and pagan gods all throughout scripture are referred to as stars. So how much more the Morningstar, or the brightest star in the sky? Likewise he went into the development of angelogy and demonology during the Second Temple Period, especially the Hellenistic period. But no one is denying that, they are only denying that the development was based on nothing, and note that its really an elaboration on what is already present in the Old Testament. I also watched a video of his on hell, and he mentioned that the Lake of Fire in the Book of Revelation taught annihilationism, which is quite strange because the text referring to it actually says this about it, Revelation 20:10 " And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever." This is puzzling to me, because as a biblical scholar, you would think that he would have read the text for himself so that he wouldn't make such bold assertions that could be disproved so easily simply by reading it. Likewise the Book of Revelation was written by John the Elder to the Seven Churches in Asia Minor to warn them of coming Roman persecution under Domition, and that they needed to persevere and not bow to the Roman Empire or they'd, "burn in the prescience of God and his Holy Angels for eternity." Which means that if the Book of Revelation taught annihilationism, the entire purpose that the book was written for would be undermined. This is an example of why I am a little weary of Dan McLellan. He has mentioned scholars. I am very sure he has, but so have I. He says that his opinions are the scholarly consensus, and yet it must be a pale consensus indeed if so many well credentialed people disagree with it. The mention of the scholarly consensus actually peaked my interest to look up what it actually means. I've heard the term thrown around, but how many scholars must agree for it to be a legitimate consensus? So I looked it up and the best I could find was some discussions on it on Reddit, ironically in the Biblical studies Academic Subreddit. www.reddit.com/r/AcademicBiblical/comments/wdkx7i/when_we_talk_about_scholarly_consensus_what_does/ and www.reddit.com/r/AcademicBiblical/comments/7td0ok/roughly_what_does_consensus_mean_in_the_field_of/ Fascinatingly, it seems as mysterious to them as it does to me. It seems the concept comes from the scientists where there is a "Scientific Consensus" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_consensus#:~:text=Scientific%20consensus%20is%20the%20generally,study%20at%20any%20particular%20time. And they try to translate this to textual and other such studies. Well, in science you test hypotheses like when you Radiometrically date the earth, or test genetics, or run experiments, and the results are usually very consistent because the laws of nature don't really change. (That's actually a fascinating thing in it of itself. Nature has laws. Why does it have laws? Why would it have laws? That's a very counterintuitive thing to happen if we live in a meaningless chaos with no designer. And if you think that it isn't its only because you live in a Post Enlightenment world which basically took Thomas Aquinas's idea that God is a rational being a made the universe to follow certain laws and so to learn more about God we need to study his creation by experimenting with those laws, and took a personal God out of it. The universe having laws, making sense, and being intelligible in this manner was certainly not a commonly held belief throughout history.) What this means is that scientists can very easily come to a consensus on many things, but with textual analyzers? Well, that takes some doing, and its going to be painted by peoples biases. Many will ignore what's written right before them like Mr. McLellan in the Book of Revelation for example. Actual consensus in hard to reach and in these studies, they don't really have a true consensus on anything (except surprisingly, considering our previous conversations that Jesus Christ was a real historical person, but this is a matter of history, not textual analysis) and such is mostly use as an apologetics or rhetorical device to give some kind of weight to their point. Anyhow, below is my favorite scholar Michael Heiser arguing his point about the Serpent in Eden being Satan. The book of revelation was not written by john from the gospels that is just an assumption that Christians have because of what is written in the beginning of revelation but the reality is that we dont know who wrote revilation but it definitely wasn't any of the gospels writer's thats a fact based on writing style And it is an apocalyptic story about nero in that time that they were in and it has nothing to do with now or any time in the future its not an end times prophecy and that is the opinion of the leeding biblical scholars . Its pointless talking about this with someone that believes the stories in this story book because they will go to no end to try and save it from being shown for what it is. Its kinda sad actually seeing as i remember when i too believed in the same hogwash Yeah, um. I never claimed any of those things you're saying that Revelation was not. Anyhow, may we end these discussions here? You're responding with very short, one or two, or otherwise very brief responses that are not really addressing the points I'm making, ignoring completely what I've actually said in the past as if I'm saying anything at all new or bringing beliefs that I hold out of nowhere when I'm not, and in the very statements you're responding to changing or diverting the point completely, or similarly just ignoring statements clearly and concisely made by me in previous posts as if they've never been made, or just simply saying the exact opposite of what I've said as if just saying the opposite negates it like a magic curse, or just repeating a point that has already been addressed by me in your responses when such has been asked and answered, or putting statements and beliefs upon me that I have not expressed nor do I hold. Now, don't take this as a criticism or me trying to be rude here or anything, or me insulting you. I'm not trying to. I simply think that the part of our discussion that is fruitful has ended. Thank you very much though for engaging in the part that was fruitful, I did rather enjoy my conversation with you. Have a good rest of the day. Shouldn't be hard, Texas is a nice state.
|
|
|
Post by MAYA-EL on Dec 17, 2023 12:16:48 GMT
The book of revelation was not written by john from the gospels that is just an assumption that Christians have because of what is written in the beginning of revelation but the reality is that we dont know who wrote revilation but it definitely wasn't any of the gospels writer's thats a fact based on writing style And it is an apocalyptic story about nero in that time that they were in and it has nothing to do with now or any time in the future its not an end times prophecy and that is the opinion of the leeding biblical scholars . Its pointless talking about this with someone that believes the stories in this story book because they will go to no end to try and save it from being shown for what it is. Its kinda sad actually seeing as i remember when i too believed in the same hogwash Yeah, um. I never claimed any of those things you're saying that Revelation was not. Anyhow, may we end these discussions here? You're responding with very short, one or two, or otherwise very brief responses that are not really addressing the points I'm making, ignoring completely what I've actually said in the past as if I'm saying anything at all new or bringing beliefs that I hold out of nowhere when I'm not, and in the very statements you're responding to changing or diverting the point completely, or similarly just ignoring statements clearly and concisely made by me in previous posts as if they've never been made, or just simply saying the exact opposite of what I've said as if just saying the opposite negates it like a magic curse, or just repeating a point that has already been addressed by me in your responses when such has been asked and answered, or putting statements and beliefs upon me that I have not expressed nor do I hold. Now, don't take this as a criticism or me trying to be rude here or anything, or me insulting you. I'm not trying to. I simply think that the part of our discussion that is fruitful has ended. Thank you very much though for engaging in the part that was fruitful, I did rather enjoy my conversation with you. Have a good rest of the day. Shouldn't be hard, Texas is a nice state. Well you did say that Revelation was written by John but I will admit I got our conversation mixed up with a conversation I'm having a on the same topic with somebody else and confuse the two of y'all partially so my bad on that. And as to why I'm not answering every single point in your replies is because you write the most ridiculously long replies as if you have nothing else to do and you're very fast typer and you have a keyboard I have carpal tunnel and I'm using a cell phone and I have lots of things to do I don't have time to sit here for 14 hours addressing all 400 of your cookie cutter debunked points that you think are valid so I touch on just a few of them before my ADHD kicks in and tells me it's pointless so as you were saying have a good day
|
|