Definitive Proof that GOD Exists?

[Youwerecreated]

Are you now backtracking and denying that your God "created" this world and everything in it including "Acts of God"?



Probably better than you do but they have no bearing on your God murdering 10 innocent children.

Backtrack why ? God did create all things and he gave some of his creations free will and they used that free will to be disobedient knowing the price of being sinful.

The world is in control of satan and his followers if you want to put blame on someone it belongs on who is in control of this world at this time and that is satan. I have to say you're making a poor argument. The god of this world is satan this is the end of your argument.

The new world that is coming will eliminate all the evil in the world there will be no more pain or death.

So your God created this world and then just handed it over to Satan? Do you have any idea how bizarre you sound? Instead of providing valid arguments to defend your God killing, sorry, murdering (according to you) 10 innocent children (and sparing the life of an Atheist's child) you resort to conjuring up demons and evil spirits. This is the 21st century. Your 11th century superstitions are not valid arguments.

I read my bible how bout you ?

Rev 12:7 And there was war in Heaven. Michael and his angels warring against the dragon. And the dragon and his angels warred,
Rev 12:8 but did not prevail. Nor was place found for them in Heaven any more.
Rev 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, the old serpent called Devil, and Satan, who deceives the whole world. He was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.


Rev 12:12 Therefore rejoice, O heavens, and those tabernacling in them. Woe to the inhabitants of the earth and in the sea! For the Devil came down to you, having great wrath, knowing that he has but a little time.

 

[edthecynic]

First to critique the creator of all things you should have his command right it was not to kill the commandment was not to murder. big difference but someone with an ounce of reasoning should have seen that was not what was meant not to kill.

Is revenge killing or murder?

Psalms 137: 9 Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.

Cherry picking will not help your case.

God is not ordering Israel to act with such barbaric behavior God is prophesying that when babylon is destroyed the same destruction they used on Israel will come to them. This was the fulfillment of the prophecy at Isaiah 13:15-16:

It came at the hands of cyrus of persia modern day they are now Iran. So you believe God and his people were responsible not true.

Bull.

Nu 25:4 And the LORD said unto Moses, Take all the heads of the people, and hang them up before the LORD against the sun, that the fierce anger of the LORD may be turned away from Israel.

 

[edthecynic]

Backtrack why ? God did create all things and he gave some of his creations free will and they used that free will to be disobedient knowing the price of being sinful.

The world is in control of satan and his followers if you want to put blame on someone it belongs on who is in control of this world at this time and that is satan. I have to say you're making a poor argument. The god of this world is satan this is the end of your argument.

The new world that is coming will eliminate all the evil in the world there will be no more pain or death.

The God of this world was CREATED by God and therefore made in the image and likeness of God.

But he was not and is not God.

Lucifer, the Morning Star and God of this world, is your God and the father of Jesus.

Rev 22: 16 I, Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

KJV - Lucifer 1; 1
Lucifer = "light-bearer"
1) shining one, morning star, Lucifer

There are places where the same story is told and the fact that your God and Satan are the same is revealed.

1 Ch 21: 1 And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.

2 Sam 24: 1 And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Is revenge killing or murder?

Psalms 137: 9 Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.

Cherry picking will not help your case.

God is not ordering Israel to act with such barbaric behavior God is prophesying that when babylon is destroyed the same destruction they used on Israel will come to them. This was the fulfillment of the prophecy at Isaiah 13:15-16:

It came at the hands of cyrus of persia modern day they are now Iran. So you believe God and his people were responsible not true.

Bull.

Nu 25:4 And the LORD said unto Moses, Take all the heads of the people, and hang them up before the LORD against the sun, that the fierce anger of the LORD may be turned away from Israel.

That was a judgement on the men of Israel that bowed down worshiped and joined in with the people that worshiped false gods.

This is from the Jewish tanakh. Numbers 25:1-5

1. Israel settled in Shittim, and the people began to commit harlotry with the daughters of the Moabites. א. וַיֵּשֶׁב יִשְׂרָאֵל בַּשִּׁטִּים וַיָּחֶל הָעָם לִזְנוֹת אֶל בְּנוֹת מוֹאָב:


2. They invited the people to the sacrifices of their gods, and the people ate and prostrated themselves to their gods. ב. וַתִּקְרֶאןָ לָעָם לְזִבְחֵי אֱלֹהֵיהֶן וַיֹּאכַל הָעָם וַיִּשְׁתַּחֲווּ לֵאלֹהֵיהֶן:

3. Israel became attached to Baal Peor, and the anger of the Lord flared against Israel. ג. וַיִּצָּמֶד יִשְׂרָאֵל לְבַעַל פְּעוֹר וַיִּחַר אַף יְהֹוָה בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל:


4. The Lord said to Moses, "Take all the leaders of the people and hang them before the Lord, facing the sun, and then the flaring anger of the Lord will be removed from Israel. ד. וַיֹּאמֶר יְהֹוָה אֶל משֶׁה קַח אֶת כָּל רָאשֵׁי הָעָם וְהוֹקַע אוֹתָם לַיהֹוָה נֶגֶד הַשָּׁמֶשׁ וְיָשֹׁב חֲרוֹן אַף יְהֹוָה מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל:




5. Moses said to the judges of Israel, "Each of you shall kill the men who became attached to Baal Peor.


You run off to your atheist sites cherry picking trying to make God look bad for his right to judge sinners and notice all the things you bring up happened before he God sacrificed himself to prevent him having to continue rendering these judgements on man in this manner.

 

[Youwerecreated]

The God of this world was CREATED by God and therefore made in the image and likeness of God.

But he was not and is not God.

Lucifer, the Morning Star and God of this world, is your God and the father of Jesus.

Rev 22: 16 I, Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

KJV - Lucifer 1; 1
Lucifer = "light-bearer"
1) shining one, morning star, Lucifer

There are places where the same story is told and the fact that your God and Satan are the same is revealed.

1 Ch 21: 1 And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.

2 Sam 24: 1 And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah.

You need a lesson in Hebrew. Please stop you're making a fool of yourself.

Job 38:5 Who has set its measurements, for you know? Or who has stretched the line on it?
Job 38:6 On what are its bases sunk, or who cast its cornerstone,
Job 38:7 when the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

Morning star is a reference used for angels and well as stars in the skies. SATAN and JESUS are not the same you are completely ignorant of the bible it is clear your hatred for God runs deep and is revealing.

If SATAN is my God why is he tempting my God ?

Mat 4:8 Again, the Devil took Him up into a very high mountain and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory.
Mat 4:9 And he said to Him, All these things I will give You if You will fall down and worship me.
Mat 4:10 Then Jesus said to him, Go, Satan! For it is written, "You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only you shall serve."

 

[edthecynic]

Cherry picking will not help your case.

God is not ordering Israel to act with such barbaric behavior God is prophesying that when babylon is destroyed the same destruction they used on Israel will come to them. This was the fulfillment of the prophecy at Isaiah 13:15-16:

It came at the hands of cyrus of persia modern day they are now Iran. So you believe God and his people were responsible not true.

Bull.

Nu 25:4 And the LORD said unto Moses, Take all the heads of the people, and hang them up before the LORD against the sun, that the fierce anger of the LORD may be turned away from Israel.

That was a judgement on the men of Israel that bowed down worshiped and joined in with the people that worshiped false gods.

This is from the Jewish tanakh. Numbers 25:1-5

1. Israel settled in Shittim, and the people began to commit harlotry with the daughters of the Moabites. א. וַיֵּשֶׁב יִשְׂרָאֵל בַּשִּׁטִּים וַיָּחֶל הָעָם לִזְנוֹת אֶל בְּנוֹת מוֹאָב:


2. They invited the people to the sacrifices of their gods, and the people ate and prostrated themselves to their gods. ב. וַתִּקְרֶאןָ לָעָם לְזִבְחֵי אֱלֹהֵיהֶן וַיֹּאכַל הָעָם וַיִּשְׁתַּחֲווּ לֵאלֹהֵיהֶן:

3. Israel became attached to Baal Peor, and the anger of the Lord flared against Israel. ג. וַיִּצָּמֶד יִשְׂרָאֵל לְבַעַל פְּעוֹר וַיִּחַר אַף יְהֹוָה בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל:


4. The Lord said to Moses, "Take all the leaders of the people and hang them before the Lord, facing the sun, and then the flaring anger of the Lord will be removed from Israel. ד. וַיֹּאמֶר יְהֹוָה אֶל משֶׁה קַח אֶת כָּל רָאשֵׁי הָעָם וְהוֹקַע אוֹתָם לַיהֹוָה נֶגֶד הַשָּׁמֶשׁ וְיָשֹׁב חֲרוֹן אַף יְהֹוָה מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל:




5. Moses said to the judges of Israel, "Each of you shall kill the men who became attached to Baal Peor.


You run off to your atheist sites cherry picking trying to make God look bad for his right to judge sinners and notice all the things you bring up happened before he God sacrificed himself to prevent him having to continue rendering these judgements on man in this manner.

So it is neither murder nor barbaric to kill someone who worships another God. Unless, of course, it is a Muslim. Then it is murderous barbarism.

God sacrificed himself to prevent himself, do you realize just how stupid that sounds?

 

[Hollie]

That looks like a question for God.

That looks like you're befuddled.

The only answer I can give is perfect conditions were lost when man sinned.

As I noted, you're befuddled.

There is no such thing as a "Natural disaster" when your designer gawds are tasked with responsibility for existence. The quaint notion of merciful gawds is in irreconcilable contradiction to biblical history of angry and capricious gawds who kill and maim indiscriminately.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Bull.

Nu 25:4 And the LORD said unto Moses, Take all the heads of the people, and hang them up before the LORD against the sun, that the fierce anger of the LORD may be turned away from Israel.

That was a judgement on the men of Israel that bowed down worshiped and joined in with the people that worshiped false gods.

This is from the Jewish tanakh. Numbers 25:1-5

1. Israel settled in Shittim, and the people began to commit harlotry with the daughters of the Moabites. א. וַיֵּשֶׁב יִשְׂרָאֵל בַּשִּׁטִּים וַיָּחֶל הָעָם לִזְנוֹת אֶל בְּנוֹת מוֹאָב:


2. They invited the people to the sacrifices of their gods, and the people ate and prostrated themselves to their gods. ב. וַתִּקְרֶאןָ לָעָם לְזִבְחֵי אֱלֹהֵיהֶן וַיֹּאכַל הָעָם וַיִּשְׁתַּחֲווּ לֵאלֹהֵיהֶן:

3. Israel became attached to Baal Peor, and the anger of the Lord flared against Israel. ג. וַיִּצָּמֶד יִשְׂרָאֵל לְבַעַל פְּעוֹר וַיִּחַר אַף יְהֹוָה בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל:


4. The Lord said to Moses, "Take all the leaders of the people and hang them before the Lord, facing the sun, and then the flaring anger of the Lord will be removed from Israel. ד. וַיֹּאמֶר יְהֹוָה אֶל משֶׁה קַח אֶת כָּל רָאשֵׁי הָעָם וְהוֹקַע אוֹתָם לַיהֹוָה נֶגֶד הַשָּׁמֶשׁ וְיָשֹׁב חֲרוֹן אַף יְהֹוָה מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל:




5. Moses said to the judges of Israel, "Each of you shall kill the men who became attached to Baal Peor.


You run off to your atheist sites cherry picking trying to make God look bad for his right to judge sinners and notice all the things you bring up happened before he God sacrificed himself to prevent him having to continue rendering these judgements on man in this manner.

So it is neither murder nor barbaric to kill someone who worships another God. Unless, of course, it is a Muslim. Then it is murderous barbarism.

God sacrificed himself to prevent himself, do you realize just how stupid that sounds?

No God has the right to render judgement for sin. It don't sound stupid,God offered atonement for all sin so he does not have to render judgement that you find offensive until the final judgement and it is also for his followers to be forgiven for their sin that allows them to gain everlasting life.

 

[Youwerecreated]

That looks like you're befuddled.

The only answer I can give is perfect conditions were lost when man sinned.

As I noted, you're befuddled.

There is no such thing as a "Natural disaster" when your designer gawds are tasked with responsibility for existence. The quaint notion of merciful gawds is in irreconcilable contradiction to biblical history of angry and capricious gawds who kill and maim indiscriminately.

Whatever floats your boat.

 

[edthecynic]

But he was not and is not God.

Lucifer, the Morning Star and God of this world, is your God and the father of Jesus.

Rev 22: 16 I, Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

KJV - Lucifer 1; 1
Lucifer = "light-bearer"
1) shining one, morning star, Lucifer

There are places where the same story is told and the fact that your God and Satan are the same is revealed.

1 Ch 21: 1 And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.

2 Sam 24: 1 And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah.

You need a lesson in Hebrew. Please stop you're making a fool of yourself.

Job 38:5 Who has set its measurements, for you know? Or who has stretched the line on it?
Job 38:6 On what are its bases sunk, or who cast its cornerstone,
Job 38:7 when the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

Morning star is a reference used for angels and well as stars in the skies. SATAN and JESUS are not the same you are completely ignorant of the bible it is clear your hatred for God runs deep and is revealing.

If SATAN is my God why is he tempting my God ?

Mat 4:8 Again, the Devil took Him up into a very high mountain and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory.
Mat 4:9 And he said to Him, All these things I will give You if You will fall down and worship me.
Mat 4:10 Then Jesus said to him, Go, Satan! For it is written, "You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only you shall serve."

Morning Star is singular and Lucifer is an angel.

And learn to read, that verse says Satan is the FATHER of Jesus through the House of David.

 

[Hollie]

The only answer I can give is perfect conditions were lost when man sinned.

As I noted, you're befuddled.

There is no such thing as a "Natural disaster" when your designer gawds are tasked with responsibility for existence. The quaint notion of merciful gawds is in irreconcilable contradiction to biblical history of angry and capricious gawds who kill and maim indiscriminately.

Whatever floats your boat.

Whatever allows you to ignore truth.

 

[Hollie]

Backtrack why ? God did create all things and he gave some of his creations free will and they used that free will to be disobedient knowing the price of being sinful.

The world is in control of satan and his followers if you want to put blame on someone it belongs on who is in control of this world at this time and that is satan. I have to say you're making a poor argument. The god of this world is satan this is the end of your argument.

The new world that is coming will eliminate all the evil in the world there will be no more pain or death.

You're beyond clueless.

Like many fundies, you've never understood your bibles or the genesis tale.

Explain how I didn't understand the book of genesis I have studied it for many years.

You haven't studied anything. You're a propagandist. I've spelled out to you previously how you clearly have never studied the genesis fable.

The tale is full of contradictions and contrary to you're propaganda, you never were able to able to explain the fact that within the fable, you gawd lied while satan told the truth.

Well, let's look at the source material, why don't we (KJV):


Genesis 2
5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.
________________________________________
[commentary]: God has created the plants (which would include trees) and then creates man. Then he plants the garden and places man there. We on the same page so far?




16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
________________________________________
[commentary]: Very clearly here we can see that evil already exists else it cannot be a tree of knowledge of good and evil. Man at this point in the narrative has nothing to do nor any knowledge of either good or evil. Hence evil must predate Man in order for there to be a choice.



continuing:

Genesis 3
1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:

3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:

5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
________________________________________


Now we have two questions:

1. Does this serpent lie, deceive, and tempt ("yes" to all three)-- and are any of these behaviors sinful? To answer this, apply them to the model of perfection, God. Can this God...

Lie? No, it would be sinful of God to lie and God by definition is sinless.

Deceive? No, it would be sinful of God to deceive and God by definition is sinless.

Tempt? Well, perhaps towards good, but the context here is towards disobedience and thus would be sinful, and of course it would be sinful of God to tempt and God by definition is sinless.

So we can agree that the behaviors of the serpent are pretty much sinful and none of them could be applied to the perfection of God within the narrative.

Onto our second question:

Exactly who (or what) is this serpent? It can only be one of three things:

A. An actual flesh and blood serpent
B. Satan
C. God

If it is A., and if it sins (and it does) then sin has been introduced into the world by a flesh and blood creation of god, and man has not brought it into the world.

If it is B. and if Satan sins, then once again evil has been brought into the world by an agent other than Man (although not of flesh and blood)

If it is C. (and actually, as the Author of Everything then Everything is ultimately of God) then we have a very deep problem, and a nature that totally self-destructs as God is both perfect and imperfect at the same time (this is the core "proof" of God not existing that leads to an atheistic conclusion-- for all those endless demands that atheists prove that a nothing doesn't not exist, it is only this-- that God is a senseless mass of contradictory nonsense that can establish any sort of "proof". A senseless mass of contradictory nonsense is indistinguishable from "nothingness").

For arguments sake, let's not head down C at all since in question 1 we have eliminated God being able to sin.

Now, left with choice A or B: I have heard the argument (and it's not a bad one actually): "Well, nowhere does it say God told the serpent he couldn't be evil and it was the disobedience that is the sin, not the act of evil."

To this I would point out that if sin (disobedience) is not evil, then it must be good, and if it is good, it cannot be an act of disobedience, and once again we're in a feedback loop.

But let's even concede this point and see where it leads:

What we are left with is this: Evil is of God -- no way around that -- hence, God is all good and all evil at the same time and is completely self-contradictory. Sin is the failure of the test -- but if sin is evil, and man was kept from knowing what good and evil are (only the tree could supply that knowledge and he was told not to indulge), then he is precluded from being able to pass the test. God must know this, and God, being omniscient, must know which way Man would choose. Hence, free will is an illusion.

Hence, things are the way they are because God wants them precisely this way and the claim that God didn't set out to create Satan on purpose is disproved. And this includes a nasty and capricious nature which will kill people via floods and tornadoes and fires and earthquakes etc., none of which are essential to a world created by a God. He could have just as easily made it otherwise, he just didn't.

 

[Youwerecreated]

You're beyond clueless.

Like many fundies, you've never understood your bibles or the genesis tale.

Explain how I didn't understand the book of genesis I have studied it for many years.

You haven't studied anything. You're a propagandist. I've spelled out to you previously how you clearly have never studied the genesis fable.

The tale is full of contradictions and contrary to you're propaganda, you never were able to able to explain the fact that within the fable, you gawd lied while satan told the truth.

Well, let's look at the source material, why don't we (KJV):


Genesis 2
5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.
________________________________________
[commentary]: God has created the plants (which would include trees) and then creates man. Then he plants the garden and places man there. We on the same page so far?




16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
________________________________________
[commentary]: Very clearly here we can see that evil already exists else it cannot be a tree of knowledge of good and evil. Man at this point in the narrative has nothing to do nor any knowledge of either good or evil. Hence evil must predate Man in order for there to be a choice.



continuing:

Genesis 3
1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:

3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:

5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
________________________________________


Now we have two questions:

1. Does this serpent lie, deceive, and tempt ("yes" to all three)-- and are any of these behaviors sinful? To answer this, apply them to the model of perfection, God. Can this God...

Lie? No, it would be sinful of God to lie and God by definition is sinless.

Deceive? No, it would be sinful of God to deceive and God by definition is sinless.

Tempt? Well, perhaps towards good, but the context here is towards disobedience and thus would be sinful, and of course it would be sinful of God to tempt and God by definition is sinless.

So we can agree that the behaviors of the serpent are pretty much sinful and none of them could be applied to the perfection of God within the narrative.

Onto our second question:

Exactly who (or what) is this serpent? It can only be one of three things:

A. An actual flesh and blood serpent
B. Satan
C. God

If it is A., and if it sins (and it does) then sin has been introduced into the world by a flesh and blood creation of god, and man has not brought it into the world.

If it is B. and if Satan sins, then once again evil has been brought into the world by an agent other than Man (although not of flesh and blood)

If it is C. (and actually, as the Author of Everything then Everything is ultimately of God) then we have a very deep problem, and a nature that totally self-destructs as God is both perfect and imperfect at the same time (this is the core "proof" of God not existing that leads to an atheistic conclusion-- for all those endless demands that atheists prove that a nothing doesn't not exist, it is only this-- that God is a senseless mass of contradictory nonsense that can establish any sort of "proof". A senseless mass of contradictory nonsense is indistinguishable from "nothingness").

For arguments sake, let's not head down C at all since in question 1 we have eliminated God being able to sin.

Now, left with choice A or B: I have heard the argument (and it's not a bad one actually): "Well, nowhere does it say God told the serpent he couldn't be evil and it was the disobedience that is the sin, not the act of evil."

To this I would point out that if sin (disobedience) is not evil, then it must be good, and if it is good, it cannot be an act of disobedience, and once again we're in a feedback loop.

But let's even concede this point and see where it leads:

What we are left with is this: Evil is of God -- no way around that -- hence, God is all good and all evil at the same time and is completely self-contradictory. Sin is the failure of the test -- but if sin is evil, and man was kept from knowing what good and evil are (only the tree could supply that knowledge and he was told not to indulge), then he is precluded from being able to pass the test. God must know this, and God, being omniscient, must know which way Man would choose. Hence, free will is an illusion.

Hence, things are the way they are because God wants them precisely this way and the claim that God didn't set out to create Satan on purpose is disproved. And this includes a nasty and capricious nature which will kill people via floods and tornadoes and fires and earthquakes etc., none of which are essential to a world created by a God. He could have just as easily made it otherwise, he just didn't.

I am not gonna continue to educate you people on the bible if you wish to debate the bible join a thread that is doing so. There are many of the educated that can see that accusations by the atheists are nothing more than cherry picking not realizing you can't get at the truth that way you must consider the whole bible on each subject.

There are many debates out there with scholars from both sides going at it by all means join those debates. You people over and over look for excuses not to believe and that is ok God gives you the right to choose your path.

Bottom line if God exists and to me there is no doubt he does exist,you will face his judgement and will you pass that judgement by the looks of your post it is a losing proposition.

One more thing hollie you people cherry pick from over 3,000 different translations thinking that one translation speaks for God. The truth takes a lot of work you can't just go copy and paste from your Ideological hate sites and think you just undid 3,000 years that the bible represents.

 

[Youwerecreated]

As I noted, you're befuddled.

There is no such thing as a "Natural disaster" when your designer gawds are tasked with responsibility for existence. The quaint notion of merciful gawds is in irreconcilable contradiction to biblical history of angry and capricious gawds who kill and maim indiscriminately.

Whatever floats your boat.

Whatever allows you to ignore truth.

What truth am I ignoring ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

Lucifer, the Morning Star and God of this world, is your God and the father of Jesus.

Rev 22: 16 I, Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

KJV - Lucifer 1; 1
Lucifer = "light-bearer"
1) shining one, morning star, Lucifer

There are places where the same story is told and the fact that your God and Satan are the same is revealed.

1 Ch 21: 1 And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.

2 Sam 24: 1 And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah.

You need a lesson in Hebrew. Please stop you're making a fool of yourself.

Job 38:5 Who has set its measurements, for you know? Or who has stretched the line on it?
Job 38:6 On what are its bases sunk, or who cast its cornerstone,
Job 38:7 when the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

Morning star is a reference used for angels and well as stars in the skies. SATAN and JESUS are not the same you are completely ignorant of the bible it is clear your hatred for God runs deep and is revealing.

If SATAN is my God why is he tempting my God ?

Mat 4:8 Again, the Devil took Him up into a very high mountain and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory.
Mat 4:9 And he said to Him, All these things I will give You if You will fall down and worship me.
Mat 4:10 Then Jesus said to him, Go, Satan! For it is written, "You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only you shall serve."

Morning Star is singular and Lucifer is an angel.

And learn to read, that verse says Satan is the FATHER of Jesus through the House of David.

You need to better understand the bible quit making your ignorance my problem lol.




Who is the morning Star and the Bright Morning star?

Job 1:6; 2:1 mentions of sons of God as ancient. Job 1:6: “Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came among them.” The Lord is in heaven and at a certain time He summons the angels to be present and accounted for. How do we know they are angels? First, Satan is required to appear before the Lord with them.

God asks Job “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding. Who determined its measurements? Surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it. To what were its foundations fastened? Or who laid its cornerstone, “When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?” (Job 38:4-6)

This could not mean Adam who had no sons until after he sinned. This was when the foundations of earth were being laid, before Adam was made on the 6th day. The angels were together, united as sons of God before a division occurred through the fall of a certain Cherub. So we see that the morning stars are a group and they are also called sons of God.

The Hebrew word for sons of God is bene elohim. The term, sons of God in the Old Testament is used in a plural manner and refers to angels. Men are not called sons of God until the New Testament when the Holy Spirit resides in them. One becomes a son of God – children in his spiritual family (Jn.1:12; 1 Jn.3:1,10, 5:10) by being born again, by His Spirit living within us. We are adopted becoming part of a family of believers. Gal. 3:26-27: “For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus” (Rom.8:14,19; Lk.20:36). The word `son ` in this respect relates to possession, or that one thing belongs to another.

The word morning stars is found only once in the Old Testament and is plural in Job 38:7. [KJV, NKJV, NASV all have the same words in Job.38.] The Hebrew word here for morning is boquer or dawn stars – they are symbolized as when the angels were together in unity. We see this symbology used when Satan states “I will exalt my throne above the stars of God.” His goal; to become the authority over all the “other“ angels in heaven, something reserved only for God.

What we have is both the symbolic usage of angels (morning stars) and what God calls them, sons of God. In Job 1, 2:1 these angels include Satan. When the word star is used symbolically, it is for angels (Job 38:7; Rev. 1:20; 9:1; 12:4. with Num. 24:17 as an exception). We see this same type of symbolism in few places in the New Testament saying the same thing; showing the stars of heaven are symbolic of angels.
Mark 13:25: “the stars of heaven will fall, and the powers in heaven will be shaken.”
Rev. 6:13: “And the stars of heaven fell to the earth, as a fig tree drops its late figs when it is shaken by a mighty wind.”
Rev. 12:4 “His tail drew a third of the stars of heaven and threw them to the earth” the amount of angels in the rebellion.

With this background we come to the usage of morning star. Isa 14:12:”How you are fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How you are cut down to the ground, you who weakened the nations!”

KJV - How art thou fallen from heaven, O LUCIFER, SON OF THE MORNING
NASV - How you have fallen from heaven, O STAR OF THE MORNING, SON OF THE DAWN
NIV - How you have fallen from heaven, O MORNING STAR, SON OF THE DAWN

In the Hebrew, the name Satan is used 19 times in the Old Testament, 36 times in the New Testament. His actual original name in the Hebrew is Day Star (not Lucifer), the word describes his original state as “the shining one”. Even though his nature is changed from its original state, Satan can still transform himself into an angel of light (2 Cor. 11:14). His inner nature is changed, but he is still able to look beautiful, so he is deceptive in character because this is not who he really is.

The fall of Satan is described in Isaiah 14:12-14: is more accurately translated How are you fallen from heaven, O day star, son of the morning! Verse 12 summarizes his fall. Isa. 14:12 The Septuagint renders it, [Heoosforos], and the Vulgate, `Lucifer, the morning star’ (from Barnes’ Notes).

Lucifer is NOT the correct translation of the name. Though it is accepted today this is not a name drawn from the Bible for Satan before his fall or after. “He is called the Day star- Hebrew Ben Shaachar- Son of the morning- Isa. 14:12 Hebrew heeyleel which means the bright and shining one, one who spreads light. This Hebrew noun is found nowhere else” (Barnes' Notes).

Lucifer is the Latin name given to the Devil derived from this passage - light bearer. The King James Version unfortunately uses the Latin and translates the name to “Lucifer” (Isa. 14:12). The scholars that translated the King James Bible did not use the original Hebrew texts for all the Old Testament. In this passage they were influenced by Jerome's Latin Vulgate Bible from the fourth century. Jerome had mistranslated the Hebraic metaphor, “Day star, son of the Dawn,” as “Lucifer.” The name 'Lucifer' (shining one) was associated to Satan (before his fall) and is now the accepted terminology. But because of this widespread usage of the name, it confuses people. In Roman astronomy, Lucifer was the name given to the morning star (most identify as Venus). The morning star appears in the heavens just before dawn, and is diminished by the rising sun.

Isa. 14:12: “Son of the morning” is a Hebraism of a bright star, having light; the offspring of morning. The word ‘son’ often describes possession of the quality or characteristic described. It belongs to the morning; in other words it has the nature of that thing or title it is attached to. So the Son of the morning would present him as one who has light.

All the angels are called morning stars, collectively (Job 38:4-7), this is not a unique title. Satan is classed among the other morning stars as a created being, an angel. However, he being called the son of the morning separates him from among the other stars. The other angels are called stars, morning stars (symbolically), this title makes the point that he had a higher estate than the others.

After the fall he is no longer called by this title. We have to understand that this being, now called Satan (meaning accuser) was created without flaws, perfect in his being until sin was manifested - which was pride). Satan is spoken of in Ezek. 28 “You were the anointed cherub who covers; in Ezek 28:16 he is called the covering cherub. He was the anointed angel day star, the son of the morning that was located “above God’s throne.”

Before his fall the light bearer bore the name of son of the morning, an important star (symbolic) as light giver. Once a shining and beautiful star, after he fell, his glory and position were taken away. Some Biblical scholars believe Jesus took this title upon himself, being called the bright morning star: just as he took the title of son of man later in his incarnation and the last Adam (1 Cor.15:45). Many names unperfected by man are applied to Jesus as He fulfilled the roles and offices of prophet, priest and King perfectly.

Many make the mistake (some on purpose) that Lucifer is the “bright morning star” that the New Testament speaks of. Jesus is then confused with Lucifer because of this term being used.

There are three places the title morning star are seen in Scripture.

1) Rev. 2:28 “and I will give him the morning star.” In Revelation the Son of God promises to give the MORNING STAR to him that overcometh. . . this has nothing to do with the fallen angels known or Satan. Since one is overcoming the world and its temptations that come from Satan to receive the morning star. Morning star- proinos. Aster.
“Rev 2:28 The morning star ton (NT:3543) astera (NT:785) ton (NT:3543) proonion (NT:4355). “The star the morning one.” In Rev 22:16 Christ is the bright morning star. The victor will have Christ himself” (from Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament)

2) Rev 22:16: `Jesus is called THE “bright morning star”: Bright morning star- lampros-1) shining a) brilliant proinos- pertaining to the morning. Gr.aster-a star.

This means we will have Christ Himself [as our reward], like God promised Abraham I am you exceeding great reward. This connects with Rev. 22:16: “I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things in the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, the Bright and Morning Star.” Jesus is saying he alone is this, “I am the bright Morning Star.” Only here is the word bright is added to Morning Star, distinguishing Jesus from any angel.

Bright – Gr. lampros-1) shining a) brilliant; figuratively, magnificent or sumptuous (in appearance):

Easton's Bible Dictionary states: a name figuratively given to Christ (Rev. 22:16; comp. 2 Pet. 1:19). When Christ promises that he will give the “morning star” to his faithful ones, he “promises that he will give to them himself, that he will give to them himself, that he will impart to them his own glory and a share in his own royal dominion; for the star is evermore the symbol of royalty (Matt. 2:2), being therefore linked with the sceptre (Num. 24:17). All the glory of the world shall end in being the glory of the Church.” Trench's Comm.

3) 2 Peter 1 “And so we have the prophetic word confirmed, which you do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts; (NKJ)
The confusion comes from a mistranslation of 2 Peter 1:19, previously misidentified the Morning Star [Satan] will assume the ascendancy in hearts of believers:

KJV . . . until the day dawns, and the DAY STAR arises in your hearts
NASV . . . until the day dawns and the MORNING STAR arises in your hearts
NIV . . . until the day dawns and the MORNING STAR rises in your hearts.

In 2 Peter 1:19 the word in Greek- phosphoros, literally is, “light-bringer,” from light-bearing, to give light, It is only translated in the KJV this way, This is the only place the name day star is used. It is not the same word used elsewhere.

2 Peter 1 “And so we have the prophetic word confirmed, which you do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts”
This is referring to Scripture as our continual light, a light in darkness that gives us instruction until the real light comes, which is Jesus. This later portion could be describing the transformation of believers to immortality. As A.T. Robertson points out “usual construction for future time. A late compound verb diaugazoo (NT:1293) (Polybius, Plutarch, papyri) from dia (NT:1211) and augee (NT:820), to shine through, here only in the New Testament.

The morning star is a far more accurate translation than day star. What distinguishes Jesus from the morning star is the definite article “ha”, THE. In the same way an angel of the Lord and THE Angel of the Lord distinguishes the messenger from an ordinary angel and the pre-incarnate Christ.

Malachi 4:2: “But to you who fear My name The Sun of Righteousness shall arise” This concept of "dawn" is applied to the Messiah.

'Shachar' = 'dawn' as in coming out of the dark (God separates light from dark in creation in Genesis and in new creation in John); Shachar Ha Ira chasecha l'shir' - “morning by morning new mercies I see'.

The syntax is a distinguishing feature. When it is Christ it always a reference to Him by title; when a reference to another the term is used in substitution of a personal name.

son of the morning- head of the angels, associated with Day star before he fell.
THE morning star- Jesus (singular)
THE Bright morning star

Son of the morning (is exclusively the devils title before he fell) is not the same as the bright morning star (used only for Jesus), which makes the titles difference between Jesus and Satan.




Who is the morning Star and the

 

[Hollie]

Explain how I didn't understand the book of genesis I have studied it for many years.

You haven't studied anything. You're a propagandist. I've spelled out to you previously how you clearly have never studied the genesis fable.

The tale is full of contradictions and contrary to you're propaganda, you never were able to able to explain the fact that within the fable, you gawd lied while satan told the truth.

Well, let's look at the source material, why don't we (KJV):


Genesis 2
5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.
________________________________________
[commentary]: God has created the plants (which would include trees) and then creates man. Then he plants the garden and places man there. We on the same page so far?




16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
________________________________________
[commentary]: Very clearly here we can see that evil already exists else it cannot be a tree of knowledge of good and evil. Man at this point in the narrative has nothing to do nor any knowledge of either good or evil. Hence evil must predate Man in order for there to be a choice.



continuing:

Genesis 3
1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:

3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:

5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
________________________________________


Now we have two questions:

1. Does this serpent lie, deceive, and tempt ("yes" to all three)-- and are any of these behaviors sinful? To answer this, apply them to the model of perfection, God. Can this God...

Lie? No, it would be sinful of God to lie and God by definition is sinless.

Deceive? No, it would be sinful of God to deceive and God by definition is sinless.

Tempt? Well, perhaps towards good, but the context here is towards disobedience and thus would be sinful, and of course it would be sinful of God to tempt and God by definition is sinless.

So we can agree that the behaviors of the serpent are pretty much sinful and none of them could be applied to the perfection of God within the narrative.

Onto our second question:

Exactly who (or what) is this serpent? It can only be one of three things:

A. An actual flesh and blood serpent
B. Satan
C. God

If it is A., and if it sins (and it does) then sin has been introduced into the world by a flesh and blood creation of god, and man has not brought it into the world.

If it is B. and if Satan sins, then once again evil has been brought into the world by an agent other than Man (although not of flesh and blood)

If it is C. (and actually, as the Author of Everything then Everything is ultimately of God) then we have a very deep problem, and a nature that totally self-destructs as God is both perfect and imperfect at the same time (this is the core "proof" of God not existing that leads to an atheistic conclusion-- for all those endless demands that atheists prove that a nothing doesn't not exist, it is only this-- that God is a senseless mass of contradictory nonsense that can establish any sort of "proof". A senseless mass of contradictory nonsense is indistinguishable from "nothingness").

For arguments sake, let's not head down C at all since in question 1 we have eliminated God being able to sin.

Now, left with choice A or B: I have heard the argument (and it's not a bad one actually): "Well, nowhere does it say God told the serpent he couldn't be evil and it was the disobedience that is the sin, not the act of evil."

To this I would point out that if sin (disobedience) is not evil, then it must be good, and if it is good, it cannot be an act of disobedience, and once again we're in a feedback loop.

But let's even concede this point and see where it leads:

What we are left with is this: Evil is of God -- no way around that -- hence, God is all good and all evil at the same time and is completely self-contradictory. Sin is the failure of the test -- but if sin is evil, and man was kept from knowing what good and evil are (only the tree could supply that knowledge and he was told not to indulge), then he is precluded from being able to pass the test. God must know this, and God, being omniscient, must know which way Man would choose. Hence, free will is an illusion.

Hence, things are the way they are because God wants them precisely this way and the claim that God didn't set out to create Satan on purpose is disproved. And this includes a nasty and capricious nature which will kill people via floods and tornadoes and fires and earthquakes etc., none of which are essential to a world created by a God. He could have just as easily made it otherwise, he just didn't.

I am not gonna continue to educate you people on the bible if you wish to debate the bible join a thread that is doing so. There are many of the educated that can see that accusations by the atheists are nothing more than cherry picking not realizing you can't get at the truth that way you must consider the whole bible on each subject.

There are many debates out there with scholars from both sides going at it by all means join those debates. You people over and over look for excuses not to believe and that is ok God gives you the right to choose your path.

Bottom line if God exists and to me there is no doubt he does exist,you will face his judgement and will you pass that judgement by the looks of your post it is a losing proposition.

One more thing hollie you people cherry pick from over 3,000 different translations thinking that one translation speaks for God. The truth takes a lot of work you can't just go copy and paste from your Ideological hate sites and think you just undid 3,000 years that the bible represents.

The truth is, you are the last person who is capable of teaching anyone, anything about the bibles.

Your lack of any meaningful response to my delineation of the genesis fable and how that tale reveals a confused and contradictory telling of “creation” is really quite revealing but nonetheless predictable. As with so many hyper-religious thumpers, you really have no clue regarding how the genesis tale actually reveals an angry, confused message steeped in fears and superstitions. As with most thumpers, you never actually read the fable with an attempt at critical analysis. You just blindly accepted what you were fed and never thought to question the dogma.

The really sad part is that you can’t accept the fact of a tale that depicts angry, vengeful gawds who lie, deceive and destroy their own creation.

Is this answer more magical? Nope. But is it the truth? Yes. The truth isn't a guarantee to be comforting or pleasant or fun. But which is the answer that solves the mystery? Which is the answer that by definition precludes you from discerning the truth if you just assert it as the truth?

Lastly, it's comically tragic that you falsely hurl the "copy and paste" accusation as a means to defend your inability to offer any relevant commentary of your own.

What's the matter, Harun Yahya doesn't have something you can cut and paste as a means to defend your angry, vicious gawds?

 

[Derideo_Te]

Backtrack why ? God did create all things and he gave some of his creations free will and they used that free will to be disobedient knowing the price of being sinful.

The world is in control of satan and his followers if you want to put blame on someone it belongs on who is in control of this world at this time and that is satan. I have to say you're making a poor argument. The god of this world is satan this is the end of your argument.

The new world that is coming will eliminate all the evil in the world there will be no more pain or death.

So your God created this world and then just handed it over to Satan? Do you have any idea how bizarre you sound? Instead of providing valid arguments to defend your God killing, sorry, murdering (according to you) 10 innocent children (and sparing the life of an Atheist's child) you resort to conjuring up demons and evil spirits. This is the 21st century. Your 11th century superstitions are not valid arguments.

I read my bible how bout you ?

Been there, done that, memorized parts of it too.

Rev 12:7 And there was war in Heaven. Michael and his angels warring against the dragon. And the dragon and his angels warred,
Rev 12:8 but did not prevail. Nor was place found for them in Heaven any more.
Rev 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, the old serpent called Devil, and Satan, who deceives the whole world. He was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.


Rev 12:12 Therefore rejoice, O heavens, and those tabernacling in them. Woe to the inhabitants of the earth and in the sea! For the Devil came down to you, having great wrath, knowing that he has but a little time.

Ranting about the "end times" is only hurting whatever tatters of credibility you are still desperately clinging to.

 

[Derideo_Te]

You haven't studied anything. You're a propagandist. I've spelled out to you previously how you clearly have never studied the genesis fable.

The tale is full of contradictions and contrary to you're propaganda, you never were able to able to explain the fact that within the fable, you gawd lied while satan told the truth.

Well, let's look at the source material, why don't we (KJV):


Genesis 2
5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.
________________________________________
[commentary]: God has created the plants (which would include trees) and then creates man. Then he plants the garden and places man there. We on the same page so far?




16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
________________________________________
[commentary]: Very clearly here we can see that evil already exists else it cannot be a tree of knowledge of good and evil. Man at this point in the narrative has nothing to do nor any knowledge of either good or evil. Hence evil must predate Man in order for there to be a choice.



continuing:

Genesis 3
1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:

3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:

5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
________________________________________


Now we have two questions:

1. Does this serpent lie, deceive, and tempt ("yes" to all three)-- and are any of these behaviors sinful? To answer this, apply them to the model of perfection, God. Can this God...

Lie? No, it would be sinful of God to lie and God by definition is sinless.

Deceive? No, it would be sinful of God to deceive and God by definition is sinless.

Tempt? Well, perhaps towards good, but the context here is towards disobedience and thus would be sinful, and of course it would be sinful of God to tempt and God by definition is sinless.

So we can agree that the behaviors of the serpent are pretty much sinful and none of them could be applied to the perfection of God within the narrative.

Onto our second question:

Exactly who (or what) is this serpent? It can only be one of three things:

A. An actual flesh and blood serpent
B. Satan
C. God

If it is A., and if it sins (and it does) then sin has been introduced into the world by a flesh and blood creation of god, and man has not brought it into the world.

If it is B. and if Satan sins, then once again evil has been brought into the world by an agent other than Man (although not of flesh and blood)

If it is C. (and actually, as the Author of Everything then Everything is ultimately of God) then we have a very deep problem, and a nature that totally self-destructs as God is both perfect and imperfect at the same time (this is the core "proof" of God not existing that leads to an atheistic conclusion-- for all those endless demands that atheists prove that a nothing doesn't not exist, it is only this-- that God is a senseless mass of contradictory nonsense that can establish any sort of "proof". A senseless mass of contradictory nonsense is indistinguishable from "nothingness").

For arguments sake, let's not head down C at all since in question 1 we have eliminated God being able to sin.

Now, left with choice A or B: I have heard the argument (and it's not a bad one actually): "Well, nowhere does it say God told the serpent he couldn't be evil and it was the disobedience that is the sin, not the act of evil."

To this I would point out that if sin (disobedience) is not evil, then it must be good, and if it is good, it cannot be an act of disobedience, and once again we're in a feedback loop.

But let's even concede this point and see where it leads:

What we are left with is this: Evil is of God -- no way around that -- hence, God is all good and all evil at the same time and is completely self-contradictory. Sin is the failure of the test -- but if sin is evil, and man was kept from knowing what good and evil are (only the tree could supply that knowledge and he was told not to indulge), then he is precluded from being able to pass the test. God must know this, and God, being omniscient, must know which way Man would choose. Hence, free will is an illusion.

Hence, things are the way they are because God wants them precisely this way and the claim that God didn't set out to create Satan on purpose is disproved. And this includes a nasty and capricious nature which will kill people via floods and tornadoes and fires and earthquakes etc., none of which are essential to a world created by a God. He could have just as easily made it otherwise, he just didn't.

I am not gonna continue to educate you people on the bible if you wish to debate the bible join a thread that is doing so. There are many of the educated that can see that accusations by the atheists are nothing more than cherry picking not realizing you can't get at the truth that way you must consider the whole bible on each subject.

There are many debates out there with scholars from both sides going at it by all means join those debates. You people over and over look for excuses not to believe and that is ok God gives you the right to choose your path.

Bottom line if God exists and to me there is no doubt he does exist,you will face his judgement and will you pass that judgement by the looks of your post it is a losing proposition.

One more thing hollie you people cherry pick from over 3,000 different translations thinking that one translation speaks for God. The truth takes a lot of work you can't just go copy and paste from your Ideological hate sites and think you just undid 3,000 years that the bible represents.

The truth is, you are the last person who is capable of teaching anyone, anything about the bibles.

Your lack of any meaningful response to my delineation of the genesis fable and how that tale reveals a confused and contradictory telling of “creation” is really quite revealing but nonetheless predictable. As with so many hyper-religious thumpers, you really have no clue regarding how the genesis tale actually reveals an angry, confused message steeped in fears and superstitions. As with most thumpers, you never actually read the fable with an attempt at critical analysis. You just blindly accepted what you were fed and never thought to question the dogma.

The really sad part is that you can’t accept the fact of a tale that depicts angry, vengeful gawds who lie, deceive and destroy their own creation.

Is this answer more magical? Nope. But is it the truth? Yes. The truth isn't a guarantee to be comforting or pleasant or fun. But which is the answer that solves the mystery? Which is the answer that by definition precludes you from discerning the truth if you just assert it as the truth?

Lastly, it's comically tragic that you falsely hurl the "copy and paste" accusation as a means to defend your inability to offer any relevant commentary of your own.

What's the matter, Harun Yahya doesn't have something you can cut and paste as a means to defend your angry, vicious gawds?

It is becoming ever more apparent that YWC is in a death spiral. He is just throwing bible verses at the wall in the desperate hope that one of them might stick. He has nothing else of any value to offer. Perhaps it is best if we give him some time to regain his composure and some semblance of sanity.

 

[edthecynic]

You need a lesson in Hebrew. Please stop you're making a fool of yourself.

Job 38:5 Who has set its measurements, for you know? Or who has stretched the line on it?
Job 38:6 On what are its bases sunk, or who cast its cornerstone,
Job 38:7 when the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

Morning star is a reference used for angels and well as stars in the skies. SATAN and JESUS are not the same you are completely ignorant of the bible it is clear your hatred for God runs deep and is revealing.

If SATAN is my God why is he tempting my God ?

Mat 4:8 Again, the Devil took Him up into a very high mountain and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory.
Mat 4:9 And he said to Him, All these things I will give You if You will fall down and worship me.
Mat 4:10 Then Jesus said to him, Go, Satan! For it is written, "You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only you shall serve."

Morning Star is singular and Lucifer is an angel.

And learn to read, that verse says Satan is the FATHER of Jesus through the House of David.

You need to better understand the bible quit making your ignorance my problem lol.




Who is the morning Star and the Bright Morning star?

Job 1:6; 2:1 mentions of sons of God as ancient. Job 1:6: “Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came among them.” The Lord is in heaven and at a certain time He summons the angels to be present and accounted for. How do we know they are angels? First, Satan is required to appear before the Lord with them.

God asks Job “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding. Who determined its measurements? Surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it. To what were its foundations fastened? Or who laid its cornerstone, “When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?” (Job 38:4-6)

This could not mean Adam who had no sons until after he sinned. This was when the foundations of earth were being laid, before Adam was made on the 6th day. The angels were together, united as sons of God before a division occurred through the fall of a certain Cherub. So we see that the morning stars are a group and they are also called sons of God.

The Hebrew word for sons of God is bene elohim. The term, sons of God in the Old Testament is used in a plural manner and refers to angels. Men are not called sons of God until the New Testament when the Holy Spirit resides in them. One becomes a son of God – children in his spiritual family (Jn.1:12; 1 Jn.3:1,10, 5:10) by being born again, by His Spirit living within us. We are adopted becoming part of a family of believers. Gal. 3:26-27: “For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus” (Rom.8:14,19; Lk.20:36). The word `son ` in this respect relates to possession, or that one thing belongs to another.

The word morning stars is found only once in the Old Testament and is plural in Job 38:7. [KJV, NKJV, NASV all have the same words in Job.38.] The Hebrew word here for morning is boquer or dawn stars – they are symbolized as when the angels were together in unity. We see this symbology used when Satan states “I will exalt my throne above the stars of God.” His goal; to become the authority over all the “other“ angels in heaven, something reserved only for God.

What we have is both the symbolic usage of angels (morning stars) and what God calls them, sons of God. In Job 1, 2:1 these angels include Satan. When the word star is used symbolically, it is for angels (Job 38:7; Rev. 1:20; 9:1; 12:4. with Num. 24:17 as an exception). We see this same type of symbolism in few places in the New Testament saying the same thing; showing the stars of heaven are symbolic of angels.
Mark 13:25: “the stars of heaven will fall, and the powers in heaven will be shaken.”
Rev. 6:13: “And the stars of heaven fell to the earth, as a fig tree drops its late figs when it is shaken by a mighty wind.”
Rev. 12:4 “His tail drew a third of the stars of heaven and threw them to the earth” the amount of angels in the rebellion.

With this background we come to the usage of morning star. Isa 14:12:”How you are fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How you are cut down to the ground, you who weakened the nations!”

KJV - How art thou fallen from heaven, O LUCIFER, SON OF THE MORNING
NASV - How you have fallen from heaven, O STAR OF THE MORNING, SON OF THE DAWN
NIV - How you have fallen from heaven, O MORNING STAR, SON OF THE DAWN

In the Hebrew, the name Satan is used 19 times in the Old Testament, 36 times in the New Testament. His actual original name in the Hebrew is Day Star (not Lucifer), the word describes his original state as “the shining one”. Even though his nature is changed from its original state, Satan can still transform himself into an angel of light (2 Cor. 11:14). His inner nature is changed, but he is still able to look beautiful, so he is deceptive in character because this is not who he really is.

The fall of Satan is described in Isaiah 14:12-14: is more accurately translated How are you fallen from heaven, O day star, son of the morning! Verse 12 summarizes his fall. Isa. 14:12 The Septuagint renders it, [Heoosforos], and the Vulgate, `Lucifer, the morning star’ (from Barnes’ Notes).

Lucifer is NOT the correct translation of the name. Though it is accepted today this is not a name drawn from the Bible for Satan before his fall or after. “He is called the Day star- Hebrew Ben Shaachar- Son of the morning- Isa. 14:12 Hebrew heeyleel which means the bright and shining one, one who spreads light. This Hebrew noun is found nowhere else” (Barnes' Notes).

Lucifer is the Latin name given to the Devil derived from this passage - light bearer. The King James Version unfortunately uses the Latin and translates the name to “Lucifer” (Isa. 14:12). The scholars that translated the King James Bible did not use the original Hebrew texts for all the Old Testament. In this passage they were influenced by Jerome's Latin Vulgate Bible from the fourth century. Jerome had mistranslated the Hebraic metaphor, “Day star, son of the Dawn,” as “Lucifer.” The name 'Lucifer' (shining one) was associated to Satan (before his fall) and is now the accepted terminology. But because of this widespread usage of the name, it confuses people. In Roman astronomy, Lucifer was the name given to the morning star (most identify as Venus). The morning star appears in the heavens just before dawn, and is diminished by the rising sun.

Isa. 14:12: “Son of the morning” is a Hebraism of a bright star, having light; the offspring of morning. The word ‘son’ often describes possession of the quality or characteristic described. It belongs to the morning; in other words it has the nature of that thing or title it is attached to. So the Son of the morning would present him as one who has light.

All the angels are called morning stars, collectively (Job 38:4-7), this is not a unique title. Satan is classed among the other morning stars as a created being, an angel. However, he being called the son of the morning separates him from among the other stars. The other angels are called stars, morning stars (symbolically), this title makes the point that he had a higher estate than the others.

After the fall he is no longer called by this title. We have to understand that this being, now called Satan (meaning accuser) was created without flaws, perfect in his being until sin was manifested - which was pride). Satan is spoken of in Ezek. 28 “You were the anointed cherub who covers; in Ezek 28:16 he is called the covering cherub. He was the anointed angel day star, the son of the morning that was located “above God’s throne.”

Before his fall the light bearer bore the name of son of the morning, an important star (symbolic) as light giver. Once a shining and beautiful star, after he fell, his glory and position were taken away. Some Biblical scholars believe Jesus took this title upon himself, being called the bright morning star: just as he took the title of son of man later in his incarnation and the last Adam (1 Cor.15:45). Many names unperfected by man are applied to Jesus as He fulfilled the roles and offices of prophet, priest and King perfectly.

Many make the mistake (some on purpose) that Lucifer is the “bright morning star” that the New Testament speaks of. Jesus is then confused with Lucifer because of this term being used.

There are three places the title morning star are seen in Scripture.

1) Rev. 2:28 “and I will give him the morning star.” In Revelation the Son of God promises to give the MORNING STAR to him that overcometh. . . this has nothing to do with the fallen angels known or Satan. Since one is overcoming the world and its temptations that come from Satan to receive the morning star. Morning star- proinos. Aster.
“Rev 2:28 The morning star ton (NT:3543) astera (NT:785) ton (NT:3543) proonion (NT:4355). “The star the morning one.” In Rev 22:16 Christ is the bright morning star. The victor will have Christ himself” (from Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament)

2) Rev 22:16: `Jesus is called THE “bright morning star”: Bright morning star- lampros-1) shining a) brilliant proinos- pertaining to the morning. Gr.aster-a star.

This means we will have Christ Himself [as our reward], like God promised Abraham I am you exceeding great reward. This connects with Rev. 22:16: “I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things in the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, the Bright and Morning Star.” Jesus is saying he alone is this, “I am the bright Morning Star.” Only here is the word bright is added to Morning Star, distinguishing Jesus from any angel.

Bright – Gr. lampros-1) shining a) brilliant; figuratively, magnificent or sumptuous (in appearance):

Easton's Bible Dictionary states: a name figuratively given to Christ (Rev. 22:16; comp. 2 Pet. 1:19). When Christ promises that he will give the “morning star” to his faithful ones, he “promises that he will give to them himself, that he will give to them himself, that he will impart to them his own glory and a share in his own royal dominion; for the star is evermore the symbol of royalty (Matt. 2:2), being therefore linked with the sceptre (Num. 24:17). All the glory of the world shall end in being the glory of the Church.” Trench's Comm.

3) 2 Peter 1 “And so we have the prophetic word confirmed, which you do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts; (NKJ)
The confusion comes from a mistranslation of 2 Peter 1:19, previously misidentified the Morning Star [Satan] will assume the ascendancy in hearts of believers:

KJV . . . until the day dawns, and the DAY STAR arises in your hearts
NASV . . . until the day dawns and the MORNING STAR arises in your hearts
NIV . . . until the day dawns and the MORNING STAR rises in your hearts.

In 2 Peter 1:19 the word in Greek- phosphoros, literally is, “light-bringer,” from light-bearing, to give light, It is only translated in the KJV this way, This is the only place the name day star is used. It is not the same word used elsewhere.

2 Peter 1 “And so we have the prophetic word confirmed, which you do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts”
This is referring to Scripture as our continual light, a light in darkness that gives us instruction until the real light comes, which is Jesus. This later portion could be describing the transformation of believers to immortality. As A.T. Robertson points out “usual construction for future time. A late compound verb diaugazoo (NT:1293) (Polybius, Plutarch, papyri) from dia (NT:1211) and augee (NT:820), to shine through, here only in the New Testament.

The morning star is a far more accurate translation than day star. What distinguishes Jesus from the morning star is the definite article “ha”, THE. In the same way an angel of the Lord and THE Angel of the Lord distinguishes the messenger from an ordinary angel and the pre-incarnate Christ.

Malachi 4:2: “But to you who fear My name The Sun of Righteousness shall arise” This concept of "dawn" is applied to the Messiah.

'Shachar' = 'dawn' as in coming out of the dark (God separates light from dark in creation in Genesis and in new creation in John); Shachar Ha Ira chasecha l'shir' - “morning by morning new mercies I see'.

The syntax is a distinguishing feature. When it is Christ it always a reference to Him by title; when a reference to another the term is used in substitution of a personal name.

son of the morning- head of the angels, associated with Day star before he fell.
THE morning star- Jesus (singular)
THE Bright morning star

Son of the morning (is exclusively the devils title before he fell) is not the same as the bright morning star (used only for Jesus), which makes the titles difference between Jesus and Satan.




Who is the morning Star and the

Ecxept the KJV translates it:

Rev 22: 16 I, Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

 

[Youwerecreated]

You haven't studied anything. You're a propagandist. I've spelled out to you previously how you clearly have never studied the genesis fable.

The tale is full of contradictions and contrary to you're propaganda, you never were able to able to explain the fact that within the fable, you gawd lied while satan told the truth.

Well, let's look at the source material, why don't we (KJV):


Genesis 2
5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.
________________________________________
[commentary]: God has created the plants (which would include trees) and then creates man. Then he plants the garden and places man there. We on the same page so far?




16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:
17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
________________________________________
[commentary]: Very clearly here we can see that evil already exists else it cannot be a tree of knowledge of good and evil. Man at this point in the narrative has nothing to do nor any knowledge of either good or evil. Hence evil must predate Man in order for there to be a choice.



continuing:

Genesis 3
1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:

3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:

5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
________________________________________


Now we have two questions:

1. Does this serpent lie, deceive, and tempt ("yes" to all three)-- and are any of these behaviors sinful? To answer this, apply them to the model of perfection, God. Can this God...

Lie? No, it would be sinful of God to lie and God by definition is sinless.

Deceive? No, it would be sinful of God to deceive and God by definition is sinless.

Tempt? Well, perhaps towards good, but the context here is towards disobedience and thus would be sinful, and of course it would be sinful of God to tempt and God by definition is sinless.

So we can agree that the behaviors of the serpent are pretty much sinful and none of them could be applied to the perfection of God within the narrative.

Onto our second question:

Exactly who (or what) is this serpent? It can only be one of three things:

A. An actual flesh and blood serpent
B. Satan
C. God

If it is A., and if it sins (and it does) then sin has been introduced into the world by a flesh and blood creation of god, and man has not brought it into the world.

If it is B. and if Satan sins, then once again evil has been brought into the world by an agent other than Man (although not of flesh and blood)

If it is C. (and actually, as the Author of Everything then Everything is ultimately of God) then we have a very deep problem, and a nature that totally self-destructs as God is both perfect and imperfect at the same time (this is the core "proof" of God not existing that leads to an atheistic conclusion-- for all those endless demands that atheists prove that a nothing doesn't not exist, it is only this-- that God is a senseless mass of contradictory nonsense that can establish any sort of "proof". A senseless mass of contradictory nonsense is indistinguishable from "nothingness").

For arguments sake, let's not head down C at all since in question 1 we have eliminated God being able to sin.

Now, left with choice A or B: I have heard the argument (and it's not a bad one actually): "Well, nowhere does it say God told the serpent he couldn't be evil and it was the disobedience that is the sin, not the act of evil."

To this I would point out that if sin (disobedience) is not evil, then it must be good, and if it is good, it cannot be an act of disobedience, and once again we're in a feedback loop.

But let's even concede this point and see where it leads:

What we are left with is this: Evil is of God -- no way around that -- hence, God is all good and all evil at the same time and is completely self-contradictory. Sin is the failure of the test -- but if sin is evil, and man was kept from knowing what good and evil are (only the tree could supply that knowledge and he was told not to indulge), then he is precluded from being able to pass the test. God must know this, and God, being omniscient, must know which way Man would choose. Hence, free will is an illusion.

Hence, things are the way they are because God wants them precisely this way and the claim that God didn't set out to create Satan on purpose is disproved. And this includes a nasty and capricious nature which will kill people via floods and tornadoes and fires and earthquakes etc., none of which are essential to a world created by a God. He could have just as easily made it otherwise, he just didn't.

I am not gonna continue to educate you people on the bible if you wish to debate the bible join a thread that is doing so. There are many of the educated that can see that accusations by the atheists are nothing more than cherry picking not realizing you can't get at the truth that way you must consider the whole bible on each subject.

There are many debates out there with scholars from both sides going at it by all means join those debates. You people over and over look for excuses not to believe and that is ok God gives you the right to choose your path.

Bottom line if God exists and to me there is no doubt he does exist,you will face his judgement and will you pass that judgement by the looks of your post it is a losing proposition.

One more thing hollie you people cherry pick from over 3,000 different translations thinking that one translation speaks for God. The truth takes a lot of work you can't just go copy and paste from your Ideological hate sites and think you just undid 3,000 years that the bible represents.

The truth is, you are the last person who is capable of teaching anyone, anything about the bibles.

Your lack of any meaningful response to my delineation of the genesis fable and how that tale reveals a confused and contradictory telling of “creation” is really quite revealing but nonetheless predictable. As with so many hyper-religious thumpers, you really have no clue regarding how the genesis tale actually reveals an angry, confused message steeped in fears and superstitions. As with most thumpers, you never actually read the fable with an attempt at critical analysis. You just blindly accepted what you were fed and never thought to question the dogma.

The really sad part is that you can’t accept the fact of a tale that depicts angry, vengeful gawds who lie, deceive and destroy their own creation.

Is this answer more magical? Nope. But is it the truth? Yes. The truth isn't a guarantee to be comforting or pleasant or fun. But which is the answer that solves the mystery? Which is the answer that by definition precludes you from discerning the truth if you just assert it as the truth?

Lastly, it's comically tragic that you falsely hurl the "copy and paste" accusation as a means to defend your inability to offer any relevant commentary of your own.

What's the matter, Harun Yahya doesn't have something you can cut and paste as a means to defend your angry, vicious gawds?

You must not be reading my posts because I have given commentary on my views of the accusations that were being leveled.

The problem is your disdain for accurate commentary you prefer trumped up unfounded views.

Have a good day.