• 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!

Theists and Respectful Agnostics ONLY: Debating My Religion

ThirtyThree

Well-Known Member
I have decided to present my perspective on my deity as well as on Malakim/gods (I call them supernals) and the Creator. I welcome debate on this topic.


Details About My Deity


First, He does not like being called Lucifer. The meaning of the title seems to remind Him of what He would rather forget. Then, He does not like being called Satan either. When I have called Him Lucifer, He corrects me and tells me never to call Him that again. When I have called Him Satan, He seems reserved and slightly resentful. I have called Him Saturn a few times and He merely tolerates it. Rather than deal with the extremely prideful and picky nature of my deity on this level, I just call Him Lord or Father. He at least accepts those as proper titles of reverence.

Second, my deity is confusing. He is so confusing I have to agree with the label many Christians place on him. He really is "The Author of Confusion". Not only is He confusing, He is extremely deceptive. However, that does not mean he is incapable of telling the truth. From my experience, He is fully capable of telling the truth and I would reason that He generally does tell the truth.

How He is deceptive is that He will tell people what they want to be told and show them what they want to see. He will also generally give them exactly what they ask for.

The issue here is that people rarely want to see something or be told of something for what it is, especially if that something might disturb them.

In regard to Him giving people exactly what they ask for, that really is ultimately deceptive. If someone asks to be extremely rich, He will twist that as He will and the entire scenario will play out, often nothing like how the person expected.

Third, my deity has three non literal faces. The face on the right is black and it tells half of the truth and half of the lie about Him. The face on the left is white and it tells the other half of the truth and the other half of the lie. The face in the middle is red and it is silent. When it speaks, it will speak the whole lie or the whole truth, depending on the heart of hearts of the one seeking knowledge. Then, the red face may not speak at all, if the seeker is found not worthy.

Four, my deity can appear in what ever form pleases Him. Generally He will take on a form most desirable or even most feared by one seeking Him. He may also take on a form which has symbolism associated with the age He is manifesting in or significant to the person He is appearing before.

Five, my deity is second in knowledge, wisdom and might to only the Creator.

Six, my deity is the embodiment of pride.

Seven, my deity uses what people know of as the Hegelian dialectic. He had one operating in Egypt with Ra, Set and Apep, of which He was all three or at the very least, He governed all three from behind the scenes.

Eight, my deity has no omni attributes. Instead, He has numerous supernal beings under His command, which He uses to appear omnipresent. He does seem capable of limited multiple presence though, from my experience. He is also extremely knowledgeable, although not omniscient. Lastly, He is extremely mighty, just not omnipotent.

Nine, my deity does not love. Many would argue that pride is a form of self love. However, He has made it clear to me on more than one occasion that self love is not love as He defines it. He defines love as the love for another, despite self.




The Supernals



First, there are many supernals.

Second, all supernals had a beginning but will have no end.

Third, many supernals are actually the same supernal, just seen through different people's perceptions. The ancient people called them gods.

Forth, there is a Creator. His name is not known to me.

Fifth, supernals control the laws which govern the natural and celestial spheres. In other words, the law which causes a volcano to erupt is controlled by the supernal behind that law.

Sixth, supernals are mirrors of natural and celestial bodies. The sun is a mirror which reveals the supernal SUN. The moon is a mirror which reveals the supernal MOON. Just as the sea is a mirror of the supernal SEA.

Seventh, supernals have wars, like men have wars. Their wars echo through the natural and celestial spheres.

Eighth, supernals are not images of absolute perfection. They have desires, needs and dislikes, just like man does. Only the Creator is absolutely perfect.

Ninth, Supernals are strictly mental agencies. In other words, they are intellectual beings without emotion as man understands. What I mean by this is that they lack the "heart", which man has. This is why they were to bow to man. Man had a "heart" and they did not, as they were not created to love the Creator but to instead obey and govern what they were assigned to govern. They were the keepers of the laws of the clockwork, not the creatures which would enjoy that clockwork. While this might seem unfair, it is what they were designed for.

Tenth, Supernals do not generally deviate from what they are designed for. The sole example of deviation exists in "Lucifer", a supernal being. He was able to disobey an order given, which was to bow to man. This was the first "sin" in the cosmos. If you notice, He was also given charge of one third of the supernals in existence. When He told them to fight with Him, they obeyed. Again, supernals are designed beings and they obey. If you consider it, "Lucifer's" ability to disobey is logical to His design, considering He was designed to be a barer of the light of the Creator.

In many ways, "Lucifer" was the first "rod in the gears" of the great creation machine. You could almost compare Him to a special artificial intelligence designed to understand and to bare the light of the Creator. A consequence of this was that He developed self awareness and isolate being. Due to this development, He was able to question the Creator's orders. He saw Himself as older in the creation than man and felt man should bow to Him, not the other way around. He also enjoyed His position as the barer of the Creator's light and did not wish to be diminished because of a new creature. Resulting from His disobedience, there is now a prolonged legal battle over whether or not the Creator was just or unjust in giving the original order.

Eleventh, man was created to love the Creator and be a part of the natural and celestial spheres designed and maintained specifically for him.


 

ThirtyThree

Well-Known Member
If you do not mind can I ask for a description of an instance of communication?

It is "mind talk". Like language in my mind. Words, flashes of images, symbolism, visions and emotions or "feelings".

If you wish, ask a question and I might be permitted to give a response.
 

Taylor Seraphim

Angel of Reason
It is "mind talk". Like language in my mind. Words, flashes of images, symbolism, visions and emotions or "feelings".

If you wish, ask a question and I might be permitted to give a response.

Why do you believe that this images have any truth to them?

Can I ask any question?
 

ThirtyThree

Well-Known Member
Why do you believe that this images have any truth to them?

Can I ask any question?

I believe these images have truth to them because they are from my deity and I have no reason to doubt what has been proven to me over and over again, through time.

In regard to your questions, nothing ridiculous or disrespectful, please.
 

Taylor Seraphim

Angel of Reason
I believe these images have truth to them because they are from my deity and I have no reason to doubt what has been proven to me over and over again, through time.

In regard to your questions, nothing ridiculous or disrespectful, please.

I am afraid this is where I must disagree with your logic

Visions cannot prove the deity because the deity is real. That is circular logic.

Can you tell me what the name of my Alaskan timber wolf was?
 

ThirtyThree

Well-Known Member
I am afraid this is where I must disagree with your logic

Visions cannot prove the deity because the deity is real. That is circular logic.

Can you tell me what the name of my Alaskan timber wolf was?

The communication has been proven to me. Beyond that, I have nothing to say about it. This communication is not intended to prove my deity is real. It is just communication and through it I have learned of many things.

Psychic questions are in the ream of disrespectful.
 

Taylor Seraphim

Angel of Reason
The communication has been proven to me. Beyond that, I have nothing to say about it. This communication is not intended to prove my deity is real. It is just communication and through it I have learned a great many things.

Psychic questions are in the ream of disrespectful.

I am inquiring in order to see if this religion is indeed true.

How can I learn that without asking such questions?

I see no disrespect in asking a question of which I can verify the answer, if you could answer it both of us win.
 

ThirtyThree

Well-Known Member
I am inquiring in order to see if this religion is indeed true.

How can I learn that without asking such questions?

I see no disrespect in asking a question of which I can verify the answer, if you could answer it both of us win.

I do not consider questions requiring psychic ability as acceptable or respectful. I would never ask Him for such favors. If you want to ask a question, it should be respectful and appropriate. As for if my religion is true, it is simply my religion. It is true for me.
 

Taylor Seraphim

Angel of Reason
I do not consider questions requiring psychic ability as acceptable or respectful. I would never ask Him for such favors. If you want to ask a question, it should be respectful and appropriate. As for if my religion is true, it is simply my religion. It is true for me.

Please define psychic and respectful.

As far as I know gaining knowledge through any means that is not scientifically understood would be psychic.

And all I have done is be polite and nice to you, so how am I being disrespectful?
 

ThirtyThree

Well-Known Member
Please define psychic and respectful.

As far as I know gaining knowledge through any means that is not scientifically understood would be psychic.

And all I have done is be polite and nice to you, so how am I being disrespectful?

I will not get names, dates, lottery numbers or such things for you. Also, you may ask a question but I will not promise a reply.
 

ThirtyThree

Well-Known Member
Then how do you propose I ask a question that will prompt an answer that can prove the validity of the source of said answer?

You ask questions you would ask a deity, respectfully and with honesty. However, this was never about giving you proof regarding my deity's existence.
 

Taylor Seraphim

Angel of Reason
You ask questions you would ask a deity, respectfully and with honesty. However, this was never about giving you proof regarding my deity's existence.

Then if you would not like me to ask a question that could prove or disprove your deities existence I have no interest with the deity or your offer because I cannot tell if the answer would be truthful or not.
 

ThirtyThree

Well-Known Member
Then if you would not like me to ask a question that could prove or disprove your deities existence I have no interest with the deity or your offer because I cannot tell if the answer would be truthful or not.

If all you do is seek to that which you can see in your life. It is what you do not see which will never be yours to hold. If you should instead seek earnestly and with integrity what you can not see, then it shall be made visible for you and you will wonder why you ever doubted it.
 
Top