Larsguy47

Oh, is that how the average married couple behaves where you live? What part of ___________ did you say you came from?


It's a suppressed concept but it's not a stretch. That is, Satan is depicted as a snake-woman in the Garden of Eden during the Rennesaiance times quite a bit:



Now the above is in the Sistine Chapel and anyone who reads the Bible knows that Satan tempted Eve and Adam. Yet here you have this woman-snake doing it. So the idea of Satan being a woman and the rivalry between she and Adam/Christ is well founded in Eden folklore, especially among the Jews and their concept of Lilith. But technically, yes the angel who became "Satan" is called "the woman" at Genesis 3:15 and is associated with a snake. Thus in Revelation, again, you find the "original serpent" depicted as a dragon dragging a third of the stars out of heaven. That fulfills "her seed"" vs Christ and his seed, the faithful angels. Thus, ironically, the folkloric traditions which likely were based on the original Noachian stories handed down are more accurate than the watered Christian version that does not explore the relationship between Jesus and Satan before the fall. As far as Christ being married, we know he gets a new Bride in the form of the church who basically replace Satan's position in heaven.

Perhaps so without explanation. But now think, the average Christian apologist or commentator will apply "he will bruise you in the head and you will bruise him in the heel" as how Satan will kill Jesus, temporarily, when he comes down to the Earth, but that Satan will be killed by Jesus permanently with a fatal bruise to the head in the end, when Jesus destroys Satan in the lake of fire.

Thus it is presumed that Satan is behind the serpent and is being addressed invisibly. Thus while the literal serpent, Adam and Eve are addressed specifically, the invisible angel Satan is addressed being present there. But note that an important player in this whole thing is Christ! Christ is the principal player in all this. So why wouldn't he have been addressed as well? That's why if God says, "I will put enmity between you and the woman and between your seed and her seed" to Jesus, then he is addressed. Otherwise, to whom is God addressing this to? Competition between snakes and women?

Oh, no, no, no. Whoever told you that is mistaken and obviously don't know what they are talking about, nor can confirm it. No, this is meant to be literal and actually happened. Satan is definitely a real angel and was once considered married to Christ and that's the basis of the folklore that Satan was once married to Adam, etc. It plays out in folklore that Satan was jealous of Adam and all that, but that's a loose and distorted reference to how jealous Satan was of Jesus and likely upset he didn't join in the rebellion. Thus Satan, the wife, was betrayed by Jesus who loved his father/God more.


LG47

sharrock

Oh yes, yes, yes, yes.... The setting of the Babylonian creation myth, Enûma Elish, has clear parallels with the Genesis narratives. After its actual decline, beginning about 1500 BC, Dilmun developed such a reputation as a long-lost garden of exotic perfections that it may have influenced the story of the Garden of Eden. Some interpreters have tried to establish an Edenic garden at the trading-center of Dilmun.

RED DAVE

RED DAVE
Right. You know all this for a fact.

From RED DAVE:
From Larsguy47:
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! That explains it.

In that case, take four reality pills and don't post until Labor Day.

From Larsguy47:
Correction. Six reality pills and abstain until New Years Day.

RED DAVE

Larsguy47

There are always two choices when there are similar stories. One, of course, is that one comes from the other. The other is that they are different versions from a common source. That common source was Noah. Noah and his three sons knew these stories and they got passed on. That's the similarity. That's it.

I hope you wrote that down. :>

Thanks for your views.

LG47

RED DAVE

You, of course, know this for a fact? maybe you have possession of Noah's secret log book just like you have a secret book claiming to prove that Socrates and Aristotle were lovers.

Produce at least one of them, and you might have a drop of credibility.

RED DAVE

pob14

Of course! Don't you remember "that pussy Chris" that Saddam was so pissed off about?

Or . . . wait, am I getting South Park and the Bible confused again?

Atheos

Okay, so I said ...
... to which LarsGuy47 replied...
So on the one hand I use little else but reason and observe that the Babylonians, the Egyptians, the Chinese, the people of India, the Native Americans, the Greeks, the Norse, the Ugaritic people and dozens of other civilizations throughout history have developed origin myths. These origin myths incorporate extrordinary claims of creatures gifted with magic, immense size, power and other super powers. These origin myths do not agree in any way with what we eventually discovered through scientific inquiry about the origins they describe. Instead, they offer traditional (often religious) explanations for why things are the way they are. I also observe that the Judaeo/Christian tradition has elements of the fantastic and magical in the Genesis creation myth. Like other origin myths these tales don't seem to agree with the facts of science.

Snakes don't talk, childbirth does not have to be painful anymore, women don't have to submit to men, with modern commerce it's possible for people eat by other means than the "sweat of their brow", and snakes don't eat dust. All women are not necessarily afraid of snakes and there's no flaming sword with cherubim guards barring entrance to the Garden of Eden.

On the other hand LarsGuy47 tells me "whoever told me that is mistaken... nor can confirm it". Nobody had to tell me that. I found it mind-bogglingly simple to figure that one out for myself. I suppose it's true that I can't confirm that a talking snake didn't talk to Eve around 8000 years ago, but I can't confirm that the tooth fairy didn't actually slip a quarter under my pillow when I was 5 years old. I have to admit that I'm just using reason to separate fact from fantasy. Sue me.

JoeWallack

JW:
The self-proclaimed Prophet Michael Night has created a brilliant article, based on proof-texting, that Jesus was actually the prophesied False prophet per the Jewish Bible (enjoy!):

http://www.fortunecity.com/greenfield/bp/890/match.html

I especially like:

"Lastly: Lucifer takes 1/3 with him in deception and we see that (BASED ON 1995 STATISTICS Total Christians 1,869,751,000 33.53% exactly 1/3 the population)"

which Nazaroo in particular should appreciate. I also foresee a critical response from Ben that since it's not 33 & 1/3 % the statistic is meaningless.

Night's argument is exponentially better than the Christian Bible argument that the Jesus of the Christian Bible was the predicted and logical conclusion of the Jewish Bible. Considering though that this Christian Assertian is probably the most dishonest of the Christian Bible (and there are a lot to choose from) constructing an argument that Jesus was in league with Satan is about as hard as teaching a dogma how to bark up the wrong stauros.



Joseph

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page