• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

RUBBISH... I honestly don't know where you get the information from. But it is all lies. Satan the Father of all lies... Which is worse the fact he exists and is a liar or the fact people are still responding as Eve did and believing them.?
Not sure we can have a serious conversation about something so wrong.???
That's fine with me. Your problem is you have no evidence to support what you believe.

There is evidence that Satan is the Sumerian God Enki/Ea, there was also SATA the Serpent aka Osiris in ancient Egypt. It simply had nothing to do with this conversation and I didn't think it'd even be bought up. It just means others have a lack of knowledge.
 

RESOLUTION

Active Member
The church taught that any infant that wasn't baptized, and died, would end in hell, some thought purgatory.

This is a ridiculous thing to think about babies, - and a supposedly loving God.

Show me where Christ, the disciples of God, taught the above in the bible?
You can't because manmade teachings do not count.


So then why baptize babies without their consent, or belief, - into YOUR religion?

Which religion are your referring to? I think, as I have said before, you need to read the bible and know the faith before making uninformed statements and
unable to sustain them with factual evidence.


A matter of opinion over time. I'm guessing a whole lot of indigenous peoples found them to be pure evil.

I assume you guess so much you believe others do the same. Neither is of value to this debate.


Again, matter of opinion. Tanakh has NO evil Satan. Christians picked up that idea from other religions.
What no mention of the adversary? Physical being or entity?

Obviously there is.



What demons? Christians added that to the Satan story.

Keep making it up as you go along. P



Why in the world would you say something that ridiculous?
 

RESOLUTION

Active Member
There is evidence that Satan is the Sumerian God Enki/Ea, there was also SATA the Serpent aka Osiris in ancient Egypt. It simply had nothing to do with this conversation and I didn't think it'd even be bought up. It just means others have a lack of knowledge.
The facts are not facts. You see a lot of things are assumed and not factual evidence. Set, Seth, Shaitan, Molech or Saturn are believed to other names for Satan and the Set/Seth the egyptian god who is believed to be Satan. Satan (Set) is the Deity, who is the adversary of truth, wisdom, love and light, who seeks to destroy all that is good.

The one God belief can be traced back over a million years to China. In fact wise men came from the east who studied the stars and knew about the birth of Christ.
If we look hard enough we can see why lies creep in because people do not look far enough into belief to understand what the truths actually are which exist.
I would study all and not what you are told.
 

The Kilted Heathen

Crow FreyjasmaðR
The one God belief can be traced back over a million years to China.
Mmm... no. Ancient Chinese beliefs (dated at 1766 BCE - 3,783 years, not millions) was more panetheistic, not monotheistic. Heaven, the highest attainable existence, was revered as the supreme being. It's not quite monotheism in that there is no "one true god", and in fact there were several lesser gods.

The first known instance of true monotheism was the short-lived religion of Amenhotep IV, named Atenism, in the years 1348 - 1346 BCE.
 

omega2xx

Well-Known Member
There is evidence that Satan is the Sumerian God Enki/Ea, there was also SATA the Serpent aka Osiris in ancient Egypt. It simply had nothing to do with this conversation and I didn't think it'd even be bought up. It just means others have a lack of knowledge.

There is no evidence that Satan is a real God. If you are not going to Believe what the Bible says about Satan, why do you believe what Sumerian writings say?
 

omega2xx

Well-Known Member
Which means you all have no proof, you just agree with each other. That's called circular logic.

We agree with each other based on what Scripture says- --All things have been handed over to Mme(Jesus) by My Father and no one knows the Son except the Father; nor does anyonw know the Father except the Son. and to anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal Him.
 

The Kilted Heathen

Crow FreyjasmaðR
Because my proof is not verifiable to a non-bliever, but it is still proof.
It's astounding how you can't see just how this example is not proof, and is essentially absolutely useless. I'll try to illustrate:

I have absolutely irrefutable proof that Presbyterianism is a false religion; Odin told me so, and there's just no arguing with a God who is all-wise as he is.
 

omega2xx

Well-Known Member
It's astounding how you can't see just how this example is not proof, and is essentially absolutely useless. I'll try to illustrate:

I have absolutely irrefutable proof that Presbyterianism is a false religion; Odin told me so, and there's just no arguing with a God who is all-wise as he is.

If you want to put you faith in Odin, be my guest. You better buy some asbestos underwear in case he lied to you.
 

Ingledsva

HEATHEN ALASKAN
Show me where Christ, the disciples of God, taught the above in the bible?
You can't because manmade teachings do not count.

Which religion are your referring to? I think, as I have said before, you need to read the bible and know the faith before making uninformed statements and unable to sustain them with factual evidence.

The Pagans and Jews had spiritual cleansing baptism with water before the Christians.

Eze 36:23 And I will sanctify my great name, which was profaned among the heathen, which ye have profaned in the midst of them; and the heathen shall know that I am the LORD, saith the Lord GOD, when I shall be sanctified in you before their eyes.

Eze 36:24 For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land.

Eze 36:25 Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.

The Jews were baptizing with water before the Christians, and of course Jesus the Jew was baptized by John the Jew - before Christianity became a religion.

Jesus was JEWISH and says to baptize but gives no age.

The oldest known church, The Roman Catholic Church, taught infant baptism to free from original sin.

The Eastern Orthodox split from Roman Catholicism didn't happen until A.D. 1054. “The Great Schism”

Protestants A.D. 1523

Irenaeus, c. A.D. 185: "He came to save all through means of Himself—all … who through Him are born again to God—infants, and children, and boys, and youths, and old men. He therefore passed through every age, becoming an infant for infants, thus sanctifying infants; a child for children, thus sanctifying those who are of this age, being at the same time made to them an example of piety, righteousness, and submission …" (Against Heresies II:22:4)

"But the prophets, who have given some wise suggestions on the subject of things produced by generation, tell us that a sacrifice for sin was offered even for newborn infants, as not being free from sin. They say, "I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me;" Ps. 51:5 also, "They are estranged from the womb;" which is followed by the singular expression, "They go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies." Ps. 58:3 (Origen, Against Celsus VII:50, c. A.D. 225)"

Gen 17:10 This is My covenant, which ye shall keep, between Me and you and thy seed after thee: every male among you shall be circumcised. 11 And ye shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of a covenant betwixt Me and you. 12 And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every male throughout your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any foreigner, that is not of thy seed.

"Memory of this tradition has been preserved in traditional Christian churches according to the Gospel of Luke.[3][4] The Feast of the Circumcision of Christ is kept as a feast eight days after Nativity in a number of churches including the Eastern Orthodox Church, Catholic Church, Lutheran and some Anglican Communion churches.[5] In Orthodox Christian tradition, children are officially named on the eighth day after birth with special naming prayers.[6][7]

Significantly, the tradition of baptism universally replaced circumcision amongst Christians as the primary rite of passage as found in Paul's Epistle to the Colossians and in Acts of the Apostles.[8]" Brit milah - Wikipedia

Col 2:11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:

Col 2:12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

Jesus and first disciples were Jews and the circumcision was at eight days old.

This is where the earliest church gets the idea of infant baptism.

Another holdover from Jewish circumcision - now baptism by water in the Roman Catholic church -- Godparents.

"The title of kvater (male) or kvaterin (female) among Ashkenazi Jews is for the person who carries the baby from the mother to the father, who in turn carries him to the mohel. This honor is usually given to a couple without children, as a merit or segula (efficacious remedy) that they should have children of their own. The origin of the term is Middle High German gevater(e) ("godfather").[21] Brit milah - Wikipedia

I assume you guess so much you believe others do the same. Neither is of value to this debate.
What no mention of the adversary? Physical being or entity?
Keep making it up as you go along. P

Ask any Jewish member on this site about Satan.

Satan is a servant of YHVH. He is NOT an autonomous evil being - as Christianity later turned him into.

His job is to put stumbling-blocks in peoples paths to see if they stay on God's path; and if not - he brings them before YHVH to condemn them = God's prosecuting attorney.

Zec 3:1 And he shewed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the LORD, and Satan standing at his right hand to accuse him.

Psa 109:6 Set thou a wicked man over him: and let Satan stand at his right hand. Psa 109:7 When he shall be judged, let him be condemned: and let his prayer become sin.

Christians decided the serpent in Genesis was Satan - even though the text says the serpent was condemned to be a serpent crawling on the ground tasting dust for the rest of his life.

Gen 3:14 And the YHVH Elohiym said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:

Christians decided Isaiah 14 - a verse about the fall of a King and kingdom of Babylon - was actually about Satan as "Lucifer", which it obviously isn't. It tells us this is a MAN and says it is the King of Babylon.

Isa 14:4 That thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, and say, How hath the oppressor failed! the golden city failed!

Isa 14:16 They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;

Christians have come up with things that are NOT in Tanakh, and run with them, claiming they are there.

Why in the world would you say something that ridiculous?

You don't think telling him baptizing his child into Satanism (which baptism you claim doesn't exist,) might lead to demonic possession, and his child killing him, isn't ridiculous?

Babies are innocent, - and baptizing them into ANY religion, - does not make them part of that religion, nor imply they will be possessed.

*
 
Last edited:
What evidence? The most I've seen is attempted linguistic connections that do not follow.

*"The Serpent Lord was Enki but in parts of Chaldea he had been called Shaitan."* - Genesis of the grail kings by laurence gardner. Shaitan is arabic for Satan. In ancient Sumeria the epithet "SAT-AN" refers to "supreme chieftain of the Annuna; Hence God" who appears to be Enki according to the Eridu Scriptures.
Also, in the Yezidi Scriptures Melek Ta'us is Shaitan. The yezidis came from India, where Melek Ta'us is Murugan, which is another aspect of Sanat Kumara, which is an anagram of "Satan" and also an eastern name for Lucifer.

Some of the Yezidi Scriptures are shown here:
The Doctrines of Satan
 

The Kilted Heathen

Crow FreyjasmaðR
Some of the Yezidi Scriptures are shown here: The Doctrines of Satan
Linking to Joy of Satan doesn't do much for this case, factually. JoS is well-known for being very "out there" with several tall claims and theories.

Genesis of the grail kings by laurence gardner
Reading reviews of this book online, they are not that favorable. It seems about as reliable as Ancient Aliens.

Shaitan is arabic for Satan.
Here's something interesting. Yes <<Shaytan>> (شيطان) is the Arabic typically used for Satan, or the devil. Yet it has a plural - شياطين (<<shayatin>>). This is a word similar to "god", in where it applies to a large spectrum of evil forces. Just as in Christianity, how Satan's name is Lucifer (and satan can apply to a wide range of beings), in Islam Shaytan's name is Iblis.

In ancient Sumeria the epithet "SAT-AN" refers to "supreme chieftain of the Annuna; Hence God" who appears to be Enki according to the Eridu Scriptures.
I am literally finding nothing on this. Where is the source for it?

Also, in the Yezidi Scriptures Melek Ta'us is Shaitan.
No, they are separate beings. Muslims in the 16th Century accused the Yazidi of worshiping Iblis because of the "similarity" of their mythologies.

The yezidis came from India,
No, the Yazidi are native to the area that was once Mesopotamia, modern day Iraq.

where Melek Ta'us is Murugan, which is another aspect of Sanat Kumara, which is an anagram of "Satan"
Anagrams, really?

and also an eastern name for Lucifer.
I highly doubt this as well, as prior to the Middle Ages, Lucifer was (is) a Roman deity of the twilight.
 

VioletVortex

Well-Known Member
I think that the mentality of wanting to force children into a religion, or a philosophy otherwise, is ****ed up, and it is also what allows the problems plaguing our world to perpetuate themselves from generation to generation. The act of the baptism itself would not be bad, especially if it is into a more natural religion like Satanism, but it indicates the above-mentioned mentality of wanting to indoctrinate your children.

I'd say to discourage them from any religion you know to be unsafe, but to give them the chance to explore all of the faces of the natural essence.
 

VioletVortex

Well-Known Member
Linking to Joy of Satan doesn't do much for this case, factually. JoS is well-known for being very "out there" with several tall claims and theories.


Reading reviews of this book online, they are not that favorable. It seems about as reliable as Ancient Aliens.


Here's something interesting. Yes <<Shaytan>> (شيطان) is the Arabic typically used for Satan, or the devil. Yet it has a plural - شياطين (<<shayatin>>). This is a word similar to "god", in where it applies to a large spectrum of evil forces. Just as in Christianity, how Satan's name is Lucifer (and satan can apply to a wide range of beings), in Islam Shaytan's name is Iblis.


I am literally finding nothing on this. Where is the source for it?


No, they are separate beings. Muslims in the 16th Century accused the Yazidi of worshiping Iblis because of the "similarity" of their mythologies.


No, the Yazidi are native to the area that was once Mesopotamia, modern day Iraq.


Anagrams, really?


I highly doubt this as well, as prior to the Middle Ages, Lucifer was (is) a Roman deity of the twilight.

You may be wrong about the Yezidis, there was a lot of interaction and travel between Eastern Europe and India, with Mesopotamia in the middle, so the notion of the Yezidis being a Far Eastern tribe is not an absurd one.

Lucifer was certainly a Latin name later applied to both Jesus and Satan.

This argument reminds me of the one you had with me a few months ago...
 

RESOLUTION

Active Member
Mmm... no. Ancient Chinese beliefs (dated at 1766 BCE - 3,783 years, not millions) was more panetheistic, not monotheistic. Heaven, the highest attainable existence, was revered as the supreme being. It's not quite monotheism in that there is no "one true god", and in fact there were several lesser gods.

The first known instance of true monotheism was the short-lived religion of Amenhotep IV, named Atenism, in the years 1348 - 1346 BCE.
It was
Mmm... no. Ancient Chinese beliefs (dated at 1766 BCE - 3,783 years, not millions) was more panetheistic, not monotheistic. Heaven, the highest attainable existence, was revered as the supreme being. It's not quite monotheism in that there is no "one true god", and in fact there were several lesser gods.

The first known instance of true monotheism was the short-lived religion of Amenhotep IV, named Atenism, in the years 1348 - 1346 BCE.

Ragin Pagan,

Just look up the concept google it.
It was on a program by the 700 club in America.
 

RESOLUTION

Active Member
The Pagans and Jews had spiritual cleansing baptism with water before the Christians.

Eze 36:23 And I will sanctify my great name, which was profaned among the heathen, which ye have profaned in the midst of them; and the heathen shall know that I am the LORD, saith the Lord GOD, when I shall be sanctified in you before their eyes.

Eze 36:24 For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land.

Eze 36:25 Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.

The Jews were baptizing with water before the Christians, and of course Jesus the Jew was baptized by John the Jew - before Christianity became a religion.

Jesus was JEWISH and says to baptize but gives no age.

The oldest known church, The Roman Catholic Church, taught infant baptism to free from original sin.

The Eastern Orthodox split from Roman Catholicism didn't happen until A.D. 1054. “The Great Schism”

Protestants A.D. 1523

Irenaeus, c. A.D. 185: "He came to save all through means of Himself—all … who through Him are born again to God—infants, and children, and boys, and youths, and old men. He therefore passed through every age, becoming an infant for infants, thus sanctifying infants; a child for children, thus sanctifying those who are of this age, being at the same time made to them an example of piety, righteousness, and submission …" (Against Heresies II:22:4)

"But the prophets, who have given some wise suggestions on the subject of things produced by generation, tell us that a sacrifice for sin was offered even for newborn infants, as not being free from sin. They say, "I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me;" Ps. 51:5 also, "They are estranged from the womb;" which is followed by the singular expression, "They go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies." Ps. 58:3 (Origen, Against Celsus VII:50, c. A.D. 225)"

Gen 17:10 This is My covenant, which ye shall keep, between Me and you and thy seed after thee: every male among you shall be circumcised. 11 And ye shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of a covenant betwixt Me and you. 12 And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every male throughout your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any foreigner, that is not of thy seed.

"Memory of this tradition has been preserved in traditional Christian churches according to the Gospel of Luke.[3][4] The Feast of the Circumcision of Christ is kept as a feast eight days after Nativity in a number of churches including the Eastern Orthodox Church, Catholic Church, Lutheran and some Anglican Communion churches.[5] In Orthodox Christian tradition, children are officially named on the eighth day after birth with special naming prayers.[6][7]

Significantly, the tradition of baptism universally replaced circumcision amongst Christians as the primary rite of passage as found in Paul's Epistle to the Colossians and in Acts of the Apostles.[8]" Brit milah - Wikipedia

Col 2:11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:

Col 2:12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

Jesus and first disciples were Jews and the circumcision was at eight days old.

This is where the earliest church gets the idea of infant baptism.

Another holdover from Jewish circumcision - now baptism by water in the Roman Catholic church -- Godparents.

"The title of kvater (male) or kvaterin (female) among Ashkenazi Jews is for the person who carries the baby from the mother to the father, who in turn carries him to the mohel. This honor is usually given to a couple without children, as a merit or segula (efficacious remedy) that they should have children of their own. The origin of the term is Middle High German gevater(e) ("godfather").[21] Brit milah - Wikipedia



Ask any Jewish member on this site about Satan.

Satan is a servant of YHVH. He is NOT an autonomous evil being - as Christianity later turned him into.

His job is to put stumbling-blocks in peoples paths to see if they stay on God's path; and if not - he brings them before YHVH to condemn them = God's prosecuting attorney.

Zec 3:1 And he shewed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the LORD, and Satan standing at his right hand to accuse him.

Psa 109:6 Set thou a wicked man over him: and let Satan stand at his right hand. Psa 109:7 When he shall be judged, let him be condemned: and let his prayer become sin.

Christians decided the serpent in Genesis was Satan - even though the text says the serpent was condemned to be a serpent crawling on the ground tasting dust for the rest of his life.

Gen 3:14 And the YHVH Elohiym said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:

Christians decided Isaiah 14 - a verse about the fall of a King and kingdom of Babylon - was actually about Satan as "Lucifer", which it obviously isn't. It tells us this is a MAN and says it is the King of Babylon.

Isa 14:4 That thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, and say, How hath the oppressor failed! the golden city failed!

Isa 14:16 They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms;

Christians have come up with things that are NOT in Tanakh, and run with them, claiming they are there.



You don't think telling him baptizing his child into Satanism (which baptism you claim doesn't exist,) might lead to demonic possession, and his child killing him, isn't ridiculous?

Babies are innocent, - and baptizing them into ANY religion, - does not make them part of that religion, nor imply they will be possessed.

*

Unless you can start with the Premise that the Christian faith is Jewish in that they believe in the true Messiah and that the roots are in Judaism then really you are just barking up the wrong tree.
Paganism has it's basis in the root of Satan as does all false religions. Age of it, matters not and neither does misuse of the bible or any scriptures for that matter.
Pagans those who worship false gods are not part of Gods people. When you can bring an argument based exactly on what the OT is teaching then let me know.
Right now we have broken eggs which have no shape or purpose.
 
Top