Verbal Spark!

Here’s my humorous take on Joshua chapter 7:

Now I want to know is; what did the ass do to deserve this? I mean, ass was probably there minding his own business, chomping down on some grass or left over manna and the next thing he knows, he’s being stoned and then set on fire. I could just hear Eleazar, with stone in hand saying, “Move! Let me get summa that ass!” I’m sure they could not have done this to Shrek’s ass though. I mean, where’s the respect for the ass? Sheesh!

DISCLAIMER: The information below is rather lengthy. It is obviously not for everyone. I wrote it in part because it is very clear to me that the great majority of people have no idea what they are talking about when it comes to the figure we now call Satan, yet they speak with such authority on him. Hopefully the information below presents some clarity, though I am fully aware that some people are not interested in being confused by the facts.
==========================================

The concept of Satan (as enemy of God and man, and a separate entity from God all unto himself) did not arrive into Jewish theology until about 500 years before the alleged time of Jesus. Prior to that time, the Jews, in their religious thought, perceived Satan as nothing more than an agent of God, an adversary if you will. In fact, the word Satan was NOT a common name; rather, it was a description. The word meant “adversary” or an “opposer” or “accuser” so anything and anyone who opposed another person could be called a “Satan.” It had NOTHING to do with some great evil entity who went around tempting and trying to destroy God and man.

The very first place we find the word in Hebrew is actually in the book of Numbers and it actually is given as a description for an angel. When the angel met Balaam and his donkey (see Numbers 22), the Hebrew word used to describe the angel who stood in Balaam’s way to prevent him from moving forward was “Satan” and this angel was sent from the Lord. Again, it was NOT a common name for any single person or entity. It was a descriptive word.

To prove this even more, look at 1 Kings 11:14 where the Lord stirred up a Satan (translated into English as “adversary”) against Solomon. You can also look at 1 Kings 5:4 or 2 Samuel 19:22 and where you find the word adversary or adversaries, it is translated from the Hebrew root word for adversary, s’tn . Anyone thinking I am just making this up can refer to a Hebrew lexicon like the one below:

http://bible.crosswalk.com/Lexicons/Hebrew/heb.cgi?number=07854&version=kjv

As per early Jewish theology before and during the exile, in the divine heavenly court, the figure of Satan was seen as nothing more than an integral part of the divine assembly, one God used as an emissary of sought or like a court prosecutor. We find this in the book of Job (partly written or fully written AFTER the Babylonian exile) where Satan appears amongst the other ’sons of God’ in the presence of God, a strange place for the enemy of God (as believed today) to show up and be accepted don’t you think? Anyway, he is commissioned by God to attack Job to test him, yet another conundrum Christians are hard pressed to deal with - God and Satan, his alleged enemy, working hand in hand to break a man down to nothing. As far as the Jews were concerned, God was not evil, but he used evil to fulfill his will and evil spirits and Satan were the vehicles he used to accomplish this.

To prove the point even more, all one has to do is compare II Samuel 24:1 with I chronicles 21:1. Instantly a contradiction jumps out, or is it so? In one book (II Samuel), God is supposedly the one who leads David to number the people which then in turns incurs the wrath of God (the silliness in this is a whole other story) while in II Chronicles 21:1 we are told that it is Satan. So which account is correct? Well if you follow the evolution of Jewish theological thought, you realize the early Hebrews/Israelites/Jews believed ALL things, bad or god, ultimately derived from God. This is the reflection of the older book of II Samuel, however, in I Chronicles, most likely written after the Babylonian exile, but most definitely edited during that time or after, the Jews saw things a little differently. To disassociate God from being directly involved in evil acts, they reasoned that he commissioned agents to do such work which is what we see reflected in I Chronicles 21:1 and also II Chronicles 18:19-22 where God consults with a lying spirit and commissions him to go lie through the prophets of Ahab. From this process in the evolution, it was not a great stretch to begin removing Satan from God altogether and making him his own entity, independent of God setting the stage for the Satan many people have in mind today.

What spurred these changes in Jewish thought, and how Satan became associated with the serpent in the Garden of Eden and the great enemy of God and man in the New Testament and beyond is next.

Close to 600 years before the time of Christ, the Babylonians under command of Nebuchadnezzar invaded the kingdom of Judah, home of the Jews. Not only was the kingdom invaded; its people were hauled off into exile in Babylon, capital of the growing Babylonian empire. This one event was a national disaster for the Jewish people, one of total humiliation for one key reason. In ancient times, it was believed that the gods fought one another and these battles were played out in the respective nations where they were worshipped. In other words, when a nation went to war with another nation, it was believed their respective gods also went to war. If a nation lost in war, it was reasoned that their god also lost and rendered inferior and insignificant. For the Jews this was unthinkable and it was up to their prophets and holy men to make sense of this. They concluded (in their retelling in the books of II Kings and II Chronicles) that the reason their people were defeated, humiliated and hauled off into captivity was because they failed to honor their national god Yahweh in favor of serving other gods. This idea helped to remove any notion that the Jewish god was actually a failure to his people.

The Jews hated their Babylonian captors. This is reflected in Psalm 137, a mournful Psalm penned in Babylon, which expressed the anguish of the Jews in captivity. There is mention of the Babylonians mocking them and requesting them to sing their joyful songs of Zion knowing full well the Jews had nothing happy worth singing about. In the latter portion of that Psalm, we read the depth of the hatred the Jews had for their captors. They considered anyone blessed who would take Babylonian children and smash them against stones.

Half a century later, a new power was emerging to the east of Babylon. They were the Persians under the command of one of history’s greatest rulers, Cyrus the Great (Persia being modern day Iran). It appears his reputation of being a fair and benign ruler preceded him because the Jews gushed over him. They saw him as a savior, their deliverer, the one who would rid them of Babylonian rule. In 538 B.C.E, Cyrus invaded Babylon and took control of the city and the Jews came under Persian rule. It is said that the people of Babylon, including the many Jews, did not even put up a resistance and actually welcomed Cyrus with opened arms. Within one year, Cyrus issued a decree that allowed the Jews to return back to their ancient land and this began a very amicable relationship between the Jews and Persians for the next 200 plus years as Persian retained dominance in the region.

On the religious front, the Persians had a rather complex and interesting religious system. Their religion was based on the teachings of a Persian holy man by the name of Zoroaster (Zarathustra in Greek). While there are many things he taught that could be found in the later religions of Judaism, Christianity and Islam, I want to focus on his concept of the evil one - Angra Mainyu. It was his belief that the universe was ruled by an all-pure, all-powerful being, the father of light, righteousness and truth, by the name of Ahura Mazda (Ormazd). The righteous of the earth was governed by his commands. Conversely, the master of darkness and evil - Angra Mainyu, rivaled him. The wicked were under his control. He was responsible for all things evil including death, disease and havoc. According to Zoroaster, the two were at constant war with each other, played out in the hearts and minds of humans. When men did or thought evil of evil and bad things happened, Angra-Mainyu was to be blamed and when they did good and lived righteous lives and good things, Ahura Mazda was glorified. This was to go on until the end of time when the forces of good, led by Ahura Mazda would go into battle against Angra-Mainyu and the forces of evil for one final, ultimate and great battle in which the forces of good would triumph.

The Jews lived under these religious influences for over 200 years, well past the closing of the Old Testament going into the time of the Greek domination of the area who conquered the Persians. Around this time, Jewish writings began to appear that showed heavy influence of Persian religious ideas and concepts. For the Jews, the Persian concept of good and evil, embodied in two separate entities was very appealing. It allowed the idea of only “good” to apply to God while evil and all things bad could be pinned on an evil one, a concept that was not found in Jewish theology. With the driving influence of Persian Zoroastrianism, the Satan of Jewish theology took on a whole new identity. He no longer would be God’s court prosecutor, someone under God’s control, someone used by God to carry out disaster. Now, Satan would be the embodiment of evil, the evil one, separate from God, having his own kingdom, powers to tempt, kill and destroy, no longer under the control of God. This evolution developed over a 500 year period from the days in Babylon all the way through to the Greeks and into the New Testament. By this time, we read far more about Satan (the devil) than we do in the Old Testament. At no point in the Old Testament is Satan EVER associated with the serpent in the Garden of Eden, but by the intertestamental period, Jewish theologians, with Babylonian and Persian influences instilled, were slowly making such connections despite any evidence to that effect. By New Testament times, we have the writer of Revelation referring to him as the Great Dragon, something we NEVER read in the Old Testament. In fact no matter how hard you look, you will not find any great messages on Satan in the Old Testament, no descriptions, no warnings, no prophets warning the people to beware of him or even God detailing his actions. You have to wait until you get to the New Testament to even gain an idea of the concept many people today cling to.

So as we can see, the concept of Satan evolved in Jewish theology over time and the Jewish ideas were in turn borrowed by Jewish Christians and incorporated into their writings (what we call the New Testament), which were then passed on to European Christians (who edited the Jewish writings for their purposes) and Arab Muslims. Those two faiths were responsible for imposing their will and religion upon much of the world from Africa to northern Europe and Indonesia to North and South America. What some of you believe today about Satan can be directly traced back through them, then back to the ancient Jews and then back to the Babylonians and Persians. So when you walk around blaming Satan for this and that or referring to people as “the devil” and so forth, you now should be more aware of what you are really talking about.

On July 19th, 64 C.E a massive fire broke out in Rome during the reign of Nero. The fire was contained six days, but was re ignited and burned for another three.

Now the popular understanding that has come down to us comes from the writings of Tacitus, a Roman historian and aristocrat. He was just a boy when the fire occurred. In his account he claimed Nero set fire to Rome while playing a fiddle miles away and that armed thugs roamed the city preventing locals from trying to put out the fire. Incidentally, during the fire, Nero happened to be in the resort town of Antium, away from any personal danger to himself. It was said that Nero wanted to tear down half of Rome and build a grand city that he wanted to name after himself. What seems to support this is that in the wake of the fire Nero built a series of villas and pavilions set upon a landscaped park and a manmade lake. Before the fire, the Roman senate shot down Nero’s grand plan so it appears it stands to reason that Nero set out to get his way by burning two-thirds of Rome in order to have the perfect excuse to build his dreams.

Nero on the other hand blamed the Christians and used it as a basis to intensely persecute them. So what exactly is the truth? It is easy to believe Nero was the villain in all of this because of his track record of being a mad man, but is there a possibility the Christians could have had a hand in starting the fire or at least re igniting them? Just to be fair, there are some who simply conclude that the fire was just an accident, but biases on both sides point fingers at each other, in this case Nero’s toward the Christians and popular history toward Nero.

Some have found evidence that the Christians were circulating vengeful texts predicting that a raging inferno would to reduce the city to ashes. “In all of these oracles, the destruction of Rome by fire is prophesied,” explains German Professor, Gerhard Baudy. “That is the constant theme: Rome must burn. This was the long-desired objective of all the people who felt subjugated by Rome.”

Furthermore, the Book of Revelations, written a mere 30 years later, seems to equate evil with Rome. The ***** of Babylon, the source of this evil according to Revelations, is described as having seven heads. “The seven heads are seven mountains,” Revelations says. Rome, of course, is famously known as the city of seven hills.

What’s more, an ancient Egyptian prophesy that would have been well-known in the Christian quarters of Rome foretold the fall of the great evil city on the day that the dog star, Sirius,* rises. In 64 AD, Sirius rose on July 19, the very day the great fire of Rome began. Bearing this prophetic date in mind, some of the Christians, maltreated and embittered, may have started the fire — or perhaps lit additional fires, adding fuel to the larger conflagration — in hopes of realizing their prophesies. Many Christians also believed the end of the world was at hand, borrowing from the common belief amongst the more radical Jews of the day who saw Rome as the great evil empire. Those Jews would go on to incite war with Rome which would end with the destruction of the temple in 70 C.E.

Considering what other cults have done when caught up in end time euphoria, there is that remote possibility there may be some truth to the fact that some fanatical Christians may have aided the great fire of Rome or even started it figuring the great evil empire had to burn in anticipation of a returning savior.

*Sirius is a constellation seen best in the summer months in the northern hemisphere and is associated with the dog, hence the term, “Dog days of summer.”

I’ve always maintained that you can get the best jokes from family reunions and church. Since I grew up in church and spent just about half my life in it, I have butt loads of hilarious experiences and I am willing to share some here.

The story of the woman barking like a dog and claiming she was speaking in tongues is a whole other story.

I certainly hear it all from some Christians and/or those who pay lip service to that belief system because of some of my articles that challenge that faith. I have been called a “devil worshiper,” “atheist,” “God hater,” an “anti-christ” and some other pleasantries. LOL!!! I can even recall one Christian telling me in a private message on one message board that I’m “going to hell.” Personally I find it hilarious.

First of all, I am not an atheist in the classic sense of the word, but I do not ascribe to any god or any religion though I was raised in a Christian environment and even considered myself a Christian once upon a time. What confuses a lot of people, notably those who are Christians and those from my end of the world, is that they confuse my disbelief in the god of the Bible with believing in no divinity at all. My belief is that there may just be some god out there, one who may have sparked this universe into existence, however, I don’t claim to know who or what it is nor do I make claims that he/she/it and I have any “personal relationship.” There is always the possibility that the universe was always here and may have always been all that there ever was. Knowing the human mind, many of us would not settle for such a notion, however. Still, the idea that all things began with some god has its problems too. If all things must have a beginning, then who or what is the beginning of god? Is god an atheist in that he does not believe in a being higher than him/her/it? Does he/her/it sit around wondering where he/she/it came from? You see, where does it stop?

As stated up top, I grew up in a Christian environment and at one point even committed myself to the principles of that faith. I applied myself to it wholeheartedly but what I gravitated toward was more along the line of Christian apologetics. I committed myself to studying the Bible from cover to cover. I surrounded myself with lexicons, concordances, bible dictionaries, chain reference bibles and tons of apologetic books. I was not satisfied with just reading a chapter a day or just casually reading the bible. I had to dissect words, names, places. So in other words, I was not your average strolling along Christian. I made it a serious business to KNOW the Bible. I had a pretty good grasp on the arguments from the critics and the responses often given by well read Christians.

Meanwhile, I encountered many puzzling things in the Bible on my way to the pearly gates. I also found some very troubling things, however, like most Christians, I told myself that it was not my place to question the Bible or the god it presents. I told myself that “his ways were higher than our ways” and that “his ways were passed finding out.” In quiet moments, however, those puzzling questions would gnaw at me. One that kept cropping up in my mind was why in my studies I kept coming across so many myths of virgin born, dying and rising savior gods just like Jesus, long before the time of Jesus. In other words, why wasn’t the incredible stories of Jesus unique? Instead, if I was honest with myself, his story was more like a copy of far older stories. Still I suppressed the doubt because I was taught that doubt was of the devil and to be avoided at all cost.

While there were always these questions, my moment of breaking away came about when one day I re-read the story of Job in the Bible. For years I looked at the story through rose colored lenses always seeing the god of the bible as faithful. The happy ending was always the focus, however, on this re-reading I saw some things I never looked at before. First of all, there is no way around it. God practically made a bet with Satan. But how could this be? God had conversations with his supposed enemy? What was Satan doing in his presence? Why was God allowing Satan to buffet his faithful servant just to prove a point? These questions obviously fanned out in my mind. If this was the case, could I safely say that Christian suffering was directly due to behind the scenes bets God was making with Satan? While I could pin the blame on Satan for all the grief Christians had to endure, where was God in all of this? Was he to be held responsible in any form or fashion for children dying by murder (as Job’s children were), painful suffering (as Job endured), broken marriages (as Job’s was) and other troubles and turmoils, internal or external? Was this the “good God” I was serving?

My contemplations on the book of Job and his troubles caused a crack in my smug beliefs I once held. Now I began to really question some of the things I read in earlier parts of the Bible, accounts of mass genocide and orders of extermination allegedly ordered by God. Why would the alleged God of the universe have a need to have people mercilessly kill other people? Was I really reading a book truly inspired by God or was I really reading a book written by men who incorporated a god that was a reflection of their own selfish, prejudiced, biased, bloodthirsty, covetous ways? All things considered, the latter seemed to have been the case. I eventually drew my conclusion after further studies that the bible was really the biBULL.

Now, I am well aware some people NEED the bible and church. Some people lack discipline and a healthy fear of some fire and brimstone god coupled with the notion that if they just serve him they will live in eternal bliss keep them in line. For others, they need that social club, that is church. They need that sense of belonging, that feeling that they are part of a group that holds their interest at heart. For others, it is all they really ever knew and to walk away from it would be like leaving familiarity. Church, God, Jesus, the bible is useful for them. For [some] of these people it makes them better people. it works for them and more power to them. For a person like me, it does not. The bible is clearly (at least to me) a product of a people (the Israelites/Jews) and their view, comprehension and opinion of a god they called their own. It is up to me to believe their concepts of this god and their opinions of who or what they think he is as opposed to say, the concepts the Indians have of their god or gods. When all things are considered, I see NO reason to feel their ideas, presented in the bible are worthy of the pedestal.

There are people who have tried to convert me or are trying to convert me. They are obeying the commission of Jesus, as mentioned in the Gospel of Mark, to try to make me a disciple. Clearly they labor in vain. My articles presents reasons why I cannot buy into that fantasy anymore and my clear justifications. My choice applies to ALL religion(s). I’m not interested in Islam because I have objections to their belief system also, nor Hinduism, Judaism, Taoism, rastafarianism nor any cults of any flavor. No, I’m not a child sacrificing atheist nor some tree hugging, rock worshipping, orgy and revelry attending heathen pig. In fact, I live by a simple principle that existed long before Jesus and it states that I should not “do to others what I do not want done to me.” A few religious folks need to try that.