Daniel

The defense calls to the stand : "The resting soul of Galileo" For those who have a visceral reaction to the "Jewish Defense Attorney" imagery ( you know who you are... ) just consider this mood music. The devil is invoked in the video. So... yes, @Nungali, yes, it's officially on-topic. Please enjoy, everyone. We're allowed to argue and disagree. Arguing doesn't mean that I don't love you all. It's for a good cause. Sincerely,

It's not enlightened. It's the product of research and contemplation. I had almost completed wrapping this up yesterday evening, but, as most of us have experienced from time to time here on the forum, I switched to a different tab on my browser, and when I returned, the tab "refreshed" and all that Ihad typed was lost. It was quite a lot of words. I'll need to type it again. I had left the the tab to locate and include a picture of "Satan" which I think explains a lot. Here's the picture I was planning to use. This is "Satan". Do you understand what I mean by choosing this and why I think this is a good choice for clearing misconceptions on who or what is "Satan"?

Of course. It happens all the time. Not just for me, but, for many eccentric passionate individuals. There's two reasons to work to avoid "evil" in this thread: 1) The concepts of "Evil" and "Satan" are conflated in error. I think correcting this misconception has a lot of benefits. That's tthe whole point of this thread. "Evil" is also a difficult concept to define. It would be useful to define both, Satan and Evil, for a more comprehensive treatment of this subject, but, I think it's best to define Satan first. Of the two, Satan is the easier concept to understand. 2) The individual who had inspired this thread is deconstructing from Christianity. The word "evil" for them is very likely... for lack of a better word ... "painful" or "uncomfortable" because of the psychological hooks that Christianity uses to persuade. When one is raised in a community which teaches that not being a Christian is "evil" and "sin" and sends someone to a "lake of fire", that leaves a sharp impression on a young mind. When an individual is leaving Christianity, they will need to also distance themself from the notion that they are "evil" in the eyes of their family and friends who are still Christian whom they love. Untangling that mess is not easy. I was discussing this matter with a dear friend yesterday, an ex-Christian. They advised avoiding using the word "evil" if at all possible. And. Since that was specifically what my friend, @NaturaNaturans, has said, his preference is to use words like, digusting, deranged ( I think ), or messed-up, it would be good for all of us to respect that in this thread. Thank you,

Evil is not the topic

nice come-back

@NaturaNaturans, I still intend to fully answer the question posed at the beginning of this thread.

The remainder of your reply was distracting and unnecessary to quote.

Differences and distinctions inherently exist. Diversity is the spice of life. Forcing everything to be equal is ... boring.

Did I say this or imply it? No evil? I argued that evil absolutely and objectively exists in at least one form: Rape.

Because it is undeniably and objectively evil. Very few things are pure evil. Rape is one of them. When someone denies that evil objectively exists, it's the easiest way to prove that it does.

@Maddie Sorry, it's not Doyle... it's Boyce.

It's not dishonest. To the contrary. If there is a fault, of mine, I am being too honest. Words have meanings. You said what you said. No problem. It don't understand your objection, but I don't need to understand it. Have you had time to digest what I wrote? The 2 foundational concepts: 1) Satan is not inherently disgusting, disturbing, or messed-up? 2) Anything occurring in the the immaterial realms is an event which is happening, not an object? How do you feel about these two ideas?

That's not political. The man said he cannot see any objective difference between good and evil. I have used the same Rape example to prove there is an objective difference between good and evil to @NaturaNaturans in the past. This time it's different because, Natura has clarified his point of view. It's great that this cleared that up. In order for Natura and I to have a real discussion, a meeting of the minds, so to speak on this topic, "Who/what is Satan", we need to understand each other. We need to be relating, accurately, to each other ideas. Otherwise we are not communicating and this is futile. This issue of "non-objectivity" could be a serious road-block in this discussion. It either needs to be avoided or resolved. That's precisely what I did. It doesn't need to be an issue. Unless, it does.

It's the rules of the forum. This is not a place for political discourse. It's toxic and threatens the TheDaoBums.com.

It's not allowed on this forum. @zerostao stated it rather clearly in one of your threads, maybe, 3 months ago? Maybe less.

OK. Sorry it took me a while to return here, this Sunday. There are two, very important foundational concepts which are needed for knowing who/what is "Satan" in all its forms from its manifestations here and now in and among the material realm as well as it is existing in the nearly infinite spiritual realms extending all the way back to the source, the one and only, which is referred to as "The Most High". 1) You've got this already. Satan is not evil. That's something that Christianity came up with in order to make things simple. But, if one reads the gospels carefully, I think it's apparent that Jesus understood what I intend to share with you. Jesus is Jewish. So, it makes sense that Jesus would be teaching and preaching Judaism. Albeit, it would be Jesus' version of Judaism. So that's it. The first piece of the puzzle is simply abandoning the "Satan is evil, obviously" assumption that most people hold to religiously. That is not it. You're already doing that, or at least you have a head start. However, friend, if you cannot figure out that Rape is objectively evil. Something is clearly wrong. Seek help. Professional help. Your prior enlightenment experience has scrambled your mind. I've mentioned this before. About Rape. But not this strongly. I had hoped your confusion was a phase and you'd work it out. Professional help, dude. If you cannot objectively label Rape as evil, that's a red flag. A big one. I hope this will be the last time this "objectivity problem" is raised. OK? I won't talk about it, if you won't talk about it. It's a distraction. But I feel obligated to direct you to mental health care professionals, for your own well being, as your friend, when I see something like this. 2) OK, this is the second foundational concept. This one is difficult. But. If it can be held in thought. Consistently, the entire remaining conversation will go quickly, easily and smoothly. If not, it will be herky-jerky like a new driver on a stick-shift ( manual transmission ) if you know what I mean. Bro. Clear your mind with me, OK? Let's do this together. ~Deep-breath~ OK. Good. Every "thing", here and now, in the material realm can be divided into two and only two very general categories: Objects and Events. OK so far? Objects <------- What is it? Events <-------- What is happening to it? That's it. This is why nouns and verbs are the fundamental building blocks of all languages. Words are powerful. Objects <------- What is it? = NOUN Events <-------- What is happening to it? - VERB So far so good? Pretty easy, right? OK. Now, ~deep-breath~ Ask yourself, I am asking myself, "What is a "thing" if there is nothing material?" Without matter? What's left? Every "thing" = ALL Objects + ALL Events, right? If there is no matter, nothing material, what happens to the equation above? Can an Object exist without matter, without any material? No. It can't. The implication here, is that beyond the material realm, there are no objects, there are only events. Only "happenings". It's best to using the present-progressive conjugation. It really helps, I promise. Happenings. Present-progressive. INGs. OK. So... What is "Satan". Really? Spiritually ( beyond the material realm ). It's something which is happening. Present-Progressive, always-and-forever, just like any other spiritual entity. And... it's not Evil. I'm going to leave it here. To allow for questions and to allow these ideas to settle. Blessings to you,

Not originally. It was polytheistic with many gods and devils.

... which is inherently inaccurate.

Nope. Common misconception.

...is bogus. Academics. The problem there is no one has the balls to stand up to their teacher and say: "That's wrong and here's why." They want their diploma. They want to join the ivory tower club. It's a game. Accuracy is not actually valued as much as people ( outsiders ) tend to assign to them. Errors are permitted because their peer-review process is deemed to be inerrant. I'm exaggerating regarding that inerrancy, but, once something is published in academics, people think it MUST be correct. Then they site it, and site it, and site it... pretty soon the error has inertia and nothing can challenge it. If you need examples, recall what happens anytime I try to correct someone false conceptions which they "heard somewhere was Academic". The truth is, most of this stuff comes from YouTube videos which are "reporting" that an Academic said, X,Y,Z. And even if they did actually find something written by an Academic, Academics do not live, eat, and breathe Judaism. They enjoy making discoveries. And the more novel and/or scandalous the discovery the more they enjoy it. "Hey, Jew, did you know you're practicing Zoroastrianism... hahaha". The Academic expert most cite is Doyle, if I recall. Mary Doyle? Anyway. I've read large sections of her book. She makes so many mistakes regarding Judaism, it's ridiculous. People, Academics, don't know our religion. But they think they're experts.

Uuuuuuh-huh. In the book of revelations? How many serpents are there? In the Torah how many serpents are there?

Satan and evil are two totally different concepts.

Hell no, bro. That's the point that needs clarity right away. Satan is NOT evil.

The dates don't add up. You'd need to review the the Avestas and compare them to the older Zoroastrian texts to see what I mean. The Persian religion was adapting over time. They borrowed from Judaism and the others, not the other way around. The trend is clear when looking at their texts in chorological sequence. There was no singular "Satan" in Zoroastrianism, just like there was no single monotheistic God in Zoroastrianism until the Jews went into exile there. Not before. And then post Christianity... there emerges a divine savior in their theology... Originally, if I recall, ( I haven't read the Avestas in probably 6 years, it was pre-covid, for sure ) they had Devas, I think they were called. One of them, the enemy of Zoroaster was called "The Big Lie", if I recall. That's the one which is assumed to be the source of the Christian "Satan". And then, there's an assumption, by many that the Christian Satan is the "Satan" of Judaism. It's not. The situation with the Persian source theories is that their coming from academics who LOVE the Persian religion. So, they are trying to prove that it is significant. Also, academics love to kick Judaism. We're everyone's favorite scape-goat. We claim to be different from the others, but, the others don't like this. "You're just like us, Jew, you're just like us. Stop being so... you know... Jewish." If folks would just let us, Jews, define ourselves, accept our identity as we choose to identify ourselves. Our world, as Jews, would be so much easier. Hopefully you can see the analogue I'm trying to make.

"Satan" in all it's various forms madrega to madrega, all the way to the aibeshter. Translation: from tip to tail all the way to the most-high