Missing Major Religion

[frekk]

http://www.beingjewish.com/basics/satan.html

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Orthodox-Judaism-952/Satan-1.htm

http://www.askmoses.com/article/224,2557/What-is-the-Jewish-view-on-Satan.html

http://www.outreachjudaism.org/satan.html

Suffice to say, the view among rabbis appears to be rather universal. Satan is not the source of evil nor is he a counterpart to God according to the religious authorities of Judaism.

 

[a4phantom]

So you don't know any Jews? Have you ever met one? Talked to one about your faith and theirs? Don't go pronouncing on what other religions believe in until you have actually talked to them personally or read something more accurate than Wikipedia can be. That was my point, I'm sorry you missed it.

Well no, I don't know many Jews. Unless you count my mother. And my father and sister. My grandparents, aunts, uncles and most of my cousins. My rabbi and cantor. The members of my synagogue. The people I know from my Birthright trip to Israel. The people I know from Jewish summer camp, youth groups and Hebrew school. That was my point, I'm sorry you missed it.

Also, I'm a she, that's why I'm Crowqueen and not Crowking and have a boyfriend. Not all Civ players are blokes.

I apologize.

a4, in your last post, you miss the point. Satan to the Jews is indeed a fallen angel, and is evil. You are right, he is not God's adversary, but the source of evil, and therefore was excluded from God's presence.

What are you talking about? You can judge Satan evil if you want, he's certainly a jackass (although God plays along, so what do you think of Him?) but "source of evil?" "fallen angel" isn't even a concept in Judaism (although it's one I quite enjoy in Christianity, big Milton fan). Of course Satan is not excluded from God's presence, where did you get that idea? They're gambling buddies.

Just because you are uncomfortable with the idea of evil versus good does not allow you to go round pronouncing on what world religions do or don't believe.

I thoroughly enjoy the the idea of evil versus good. Stop making things up.

Satan (aka Lucifer) was indeed cast down for disobeying God, but he isn't God's "bookkeeper" or however you want to cast him.

Lucifer in the OT has nothing to do with Satan or any immortal being, Lucifer (essentially "Shining One") is Isaiah's mocking name for Nebuchadrezzar the King of Babylon! Have you read the chapter of Isaiah you think you're citing? And Satan is neither disobedient nor "cast down." I'm a big fan of Paradise Lost but it has no bearing on Jewish theology.

Satan is the rough equivalent of the Devil in Christianity, he is not the ruler of Hell so much as G'henna, which is different and more of a state of unbeing or being away from God's presence rather than punishment for sins.

In Judaism Satan is not the ruler of anything or anywhere. Where are you getting this from? As for Gehenna, I don't believe it's ever described in detail enough to tell us who if anyone rules there.

But he is still the embodiment of evil,

No, he is not. Do you have any evidence for this at all?

not just someone who looks after sinners, as Gnostic Christians and the New Age movement sometimes believe (in a genuine but misguided attempt to prove there is no such thing as evil and therefore no need for humanity to have a concept of sin or retribution for it, which leads us into the debate about moral relativity which is going slightly off-topic even for this thread).

I have a vague idea of the Gnostic beliefs you are referring to but they are utterly irrelevant (although I certainly won't judge them "misguided" solely on my own authority) to this debate since I'm not arguing that Jews somehow don't believe in evil. As if we haven't seen enough of it, from Agag to Haman to Hitler.



UPDATE: I see you've changed your post substantially and now it is mostly a claim that I am somehow trying to prove that Jews don't believe in evil. Where did you get that? You really are just making this up as you go along aren't you? I proved you wrong on a matter of fact, that the Jews don't believe in The Devil. The fact that I am aware of the facts of Jewish belief and don't try to twist them to resemble a pale imitation of Christianity does not give you reason to invent an entirely new debate out of thin air just so you can invent a false position and attribute it to me.

 

[frekk]

Of course Satan is not excluded from God's presence, where did you get that idea? They're gambling buddies.

Oh geez ... you're really gonna set them off now.

As for Gehenna, I don't believe it's ever described in detail enough to tell us who if anyone rules there.

No need to describe something that was on the edge of town, in Jerusalem. Everybody already knew what the city dump looked like. The passage says everything there is to say about it; it's in Jerusalem, there's always fires and worms, and it's repulsive.

Seems also that at one time, it was used as a place of human sacrifice (with fire) for Canaanite rituals, before the Yahweh group had achieved ideological/religious supremacy among the Hebrews. King Manasseh etc. There's actually alot of references to it in various contexts, if you go by the other name (Hinnom). Fire comes up alot, but not in any spiritual context - just earthly rituals or burning garbage. Also known as Topeth. The bodies of executed criminals were also disposed here, which sheds some light on the Isaiah passage.

 

[a4phantom]

Oh geez ... you're really gonna set them off now.

Yes, how could I have failed to realize that Jews are just proto-Christians, hence our beliefs line up with Christian views except that we're waiting for that one missing piece.

At least these two haven't claimed that Jews regard Jesus as a prophet, yet. I've heard that one too.

Seems also that at one time, it was used as a place of human sacrifice (with fire) for Canaanite rituals, before the Yahweh group had complete control. King Manasseh etc.

Child sacrifice, I believe. Yuck.

 

[frekk]

Child sacrifice, I believe. Yuck.

Ah well ... it was before 600 BC ... nothing the Phoenicians and Greeks and Celts and proto-Germanics and the rest of them weren't doing at the time. And the Yahweh group appears to have been opposed to it early on, although there might be a little revisionism happening there.

Makes sense that it was dropped after the return from Babylon, though. The whole Molech thing probably seemed quite provincial and backwards after that.

 

[a4phantom]

Ah well ... it was before 600 BC ... nothing the Phoenicians and Greeks and Celts and proto-Germanics and the rest of them weren't doing at the time. And the Yahweh group appears to have been opposed to it early on, although there might be a little revisionism happening there.

Makes sense that it was dropped after the return from Babylon, though. The whole Molech thing probably seemed quite provincial and backwards after that.

King Manasseh . . . more proof that Jews aren't oblivious to the existence of evil. And sacrificing children to Molech is explicitly outlawed, under penalty of death followed by excommunication, in the Torah. Unfortunately, Israelite fealty was a sometimes thing.

 

[sylvanllewelyn]

I see some -9 religious modifiers affecting the relationships of this forum. Therefore I shall adopt "free religion".

Oh BTW, if 7 is the optimal number of religions, and you really want to add an extra one in, I'd vote to take out Taoism. It's sigificant enough theologically (philosophically?) to be one of the big 7, but in the way the rituals are practiced, today, it's a minor religion that's syncretic with confucianism. But I don't believe Zoroastrianism should be added in just because of its influance, just like Hinduism rather than Jainism or Sikhism is included.

 

[a4phantom]

I see some -9 religious modifiers affecting the relationships of this forum. Therefore I shall adopt "free religion".

A wise foreign policy, although I think the game should impose a temporary but large "Apostasy" penalty to relations with empires whose religion you just dumped. Think Spain and England after Henry VIII.

And people's religion doesn't modify my relationships with them. It's the odd insistence on making up ridiculous nonsense about my religion and then trying, without sources or logical argument, to convince me.

 

[frekk]

I'd actually be alright with merging Confucianism\Taoism. Though I'd probably retain it as Taoism rather than Confucianism, since Taoism remains more like a religion in its trappings, whereas Confucianism is much less so in the modern world.

The one I'd be making room for wouldn't be Zoroastrianism ... its importance is somewhat exaggerated by Iranian nationalists, it has so few practitioners it is not really relevant. What I'd be making room for probably wouldn't be a modern religion at all, but simply some sort of pantheon worship as the ancient Romans, Greeks, Persians, Norse, Celts, Sumerians, Egyptians and Germanics practiced - since these religions were all generally the same and could be easily "translated", so to speak, from one to the other. This was a very widespread and important set of beliefs at one point, so I would in fact be making room for organized paganism, though not of the sort promoted in head shops. What's currently called paganism in the game I would replace with Animism or Folk Religion.

 

[ramatheson]

It is included in the Rise of Mankind mod.

 

[a4phantom]

I think the lucky seven we have now are fine.

 

[a4phantom]

Was that too much? Ok, let's start smaller.

Satan (aka Lucifer) was indeed cast down for disobeying God, but he isn't God's "bookkeeper" or however you want to cast him.

When did Satan (who is in no way related to Lucifer in the Old Testament except by Christian mistranslation) disobey God? What was the nature of that disobedience? That is what Christians believe, but Jews are not obligated to edit our beliefs to better fit as a foundation for yours. So in Jewish theology, when and how did Satan disobey God?

 

[ramatheson]

Was that too much? Ok, let's start smaller.



When did Satan (who is in no way related to Lucifer in the Old Testament except by Christian mistranslation) disobey God? What was the nature of that disobedience? That is what Christians believe, but Jews are not obligated to edit our beliefs to better fit as a foundation for yours. So in Jewish theology, when and how did Satan disobey God?

Supposedly, his sin was pride. He thought he could do things better than God, and so rebelled. Basically, he was a free-thinker, lol. This set the precedent for religious people to persecute those with new and different ideas, i.e.: free-thinkers.

 

[a4phantom]

Supposedly, his sin was pride. He thought he could do things better than God, and so rebelled. Basically, he was a free-thinker, lol. This set the precedent for religious people to persecute those with new and different ideas, i.e.: free-thinkers.

That's Christian doctrine. I want to know what Crowqueen thinks the Jews believe about Satan's disobedience, since she's lecturing me on our beliefs. There's nothing in Judaism about Satan (who she bizarrely conflates with Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon) disobeying God or being cast out of heaven.

 

[ramatheson]

That's Christian doctrine. I want to know what Crowqueen thinks the Jews believe about Satan's disobedience, since she's lecturing me on our beliefs. There's nothing in Judaism about Satan (who she bizarrely conflates with Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon) disobeying God or being cast out of heaven.

Ahh, I thought you were just wondering what Satan did according to the Christian mythology. You are correct in what you say though; there really is no mention of Satan being cast out.

 

[caketastydelish]

I'd actually be alright with merging Confucianism\Taoism. Though I'd probably retain it as Taoism rather than Confucianism, since Taoism remains more like a religion in its trappings, whereas Confucianism is much less so in the modern world.
------------------------------------------------------------------
I disagree. A common argument is "Confucianism is a philosophy, not a religion". But you know what? Buddhism is the same way. Should they merge that as well?
The one I'd be making room for wouldn't be Zoroastrianism ... its importance is somewhat exaggerated by Iranian nationalists, it has so few practitioners it is not really relevant. What I'd be making room for probably wouldn't be a modern religion at all, but simply some sort of pantheon worship as the ancient Romans, Greeks, Persians, Norse, Celts, Sumerians, Egyptians and Germanics practiced - since these religions were all generally the same and could be easily "translated", so to speak, from one to the other. This was a very widespread and important set of beliefs at one point, so I would in fact be making room for organized paganism, though not of the sort promoted in head shops. What's currently called paganism in the game I would replace with Animism or Folk Religion.

Have you been paying even remote attention to anything I said? I said you could still have the perfect number (7) and have more religions. How? In the settings, before you play, you can choose which seven religions you want. Or, if you are the first to research a techonology that would unlock a religion, you choose which one you want to unlock. The others would not be included in the game.

But either way, you are wrong. I'm really sick of you calling the religion a "pagan" one. Do you even know what that means? But oh, who am I kidding? Look at todays society. Modern, polythiestic religions such as Hinduism are "modern" yet a more monotheistic(ish) religion like Zorastranism ISN'T. Wow. You people make a LOT of since.

Gnostism is a mystery religion, no one knows were it was founded. It could of been Persia, could of been Rome... Who knows? Anyways, it seems like your idea of "pagan" is any religion extinct, or almost. If all the Christians were wiped off the globe, 100 years from now, should they call Christanity a "pagan religion"? Do SOME research before you make your argant remarks. Thank you, and have a nice day.

 

[a4phantom]

Do SOME research before you make your argant remarks.

Is that really a line of attack you want to follow?

 

[ramatheson]

The one I'd be making room for wouldn't be Zoroastrianism ... its importance is somewhat exaggerated by Iranian nationalists, it has so few practitioners it is not really relevant.

Yes, it has few followers. However, it was an imperative religion for tying East/West religions together. Scholars often cite Zoroastrianism as being one of the most influential religions in history, even more so than Judaism, Christianity, or Islam.

While it may have few followers nowadays, in the scope of civilization, it is very important, and is probably a great religion to be used in an "alternate history" type of game.

 

[frekk]

I disagree. A common argument is "Confucianism is a philosophy, not a religion". But you know what? Buddhism is the same way. Should they merge that as well?

No, I'm not saying that I prefer Taoism because of the "philosophy" angle ... it's because it has more of the trappings of religion. Rituals etc. The same can be said for Buddhism. Confucianism doesn't really have any rituals of its own, it merely prescribes that the rituals of folk religion in China be maintained as a way of promoting social harmony.

I'm really sick of you calling the religion a "pagan" one. Do you even know what that means? But oh, who am I kidding? Look at todays society. Modern, polythiestic religions such as Hinduism are "modern" yet a more monotheistic(ish) religion like Zorastranism ISN'T.

What the hell are you talking about?

I never called Zoroastrianism a pagan religion.

I called Roman, Norse, Greek etc religions "pagan" ... which is a fair description, in the sense they were folk religions as opposed to ideological religions like Judaism and Zoroastrianism. All "pagan" means is a religion of the countryside ie folk practices.

Have you been paying even remote attention to anything I said?

What an ironic comment, considering!

 

[frekk]

Yes, it has few followers. However, it was an imperative religion for tying East/West religions together. Scholars often cite Zoroastrianism as being one of the most influential religions in history, even more so than Judaism, Christianity, or Islam.

You might be overstating things a bit, but yeah, it had alot of importance. Probably influenced Christianity and Islam quite a bit.

My personal preference, though, would be to take the folk pantheon religions like Roman, Germanic, Celtic, Slavic, Sumerian and all of those and elevate them (generically) to the status of a religion. These religions had a huge impact as well, both in their time and on later religions. I think it's something of a disservice to exclude them from the benefits of the other religions like temples etc.