|
|
Post by Os3y3ris on Feb 10, 2005 12:57:01 GMT -5
I don't mean my friends. I mean other people as in anyone but me.
Lets say that it is not inherently immoral. Taking that premise, it is STILL immoral based on a relativist ideology. How? Because its not intersocietal relations. Its the imposition of their supposed morality (they jsutified it as moral in various ways) on OUTSIDERS. It is therefore outside the realm of any relativist justification. In fact, as relativism is a philosophy that is AGAINST imposing ones moral values, doesn't that conflict wih the whole concept of slavery?
Now, as for the more general issue at hand. If society allows it, is it ok? Provided that is not an assault on another society or subsection of that society, yes. Now, whatever foolishness is in question may be moronic, disgusting, distasteful or whatever, but as it is not an attack on others, its fine. As long as their exists a social understanding, the action is morally neutral at worst.
No, thats not what I stand on. If anything, I recognize two systems. One is an absolute understanding if you will. Basically, its saying "In this context, this is how I carry myself. This is how I expect you to carry yourself.". There may stil be conflict, but thats to be expected depending on the culture. I know who I am and I know who you seem to be. I'll act accordingly.
The other system I base my actions on is utlitarianism. How can I do the least harm? How can I do the most good? How do I balance that?
|
|
|
|
Post by SAMURAI36 on Feb 17, 2005 12:50:52 GMT -5
I have to say, that this is one of those rare occasions (mark it on the calendars, ya'll!! ;D ) in which I find myself mostly within agreement with O.
I'll x-pound on some points when necessary.
PEACE U7:
Though I understand your intentions here, I however do not think that MUSA's LAWS (as reported in/from the BIBLE) are the best standards of measurements for gaining even the most basic understanding of Good and Evil.
I agree with this, however.......
I believe this to be only partially correct.
I'm glad that you sought to differentiate negative from evil, and positive from good in your previous statement.
Thus YIN and YANG are indeed responsible for positive and negative, and not *necessarily* good and evil.
However, therein lies the conundrum:
I do believe there to be an "agreement" of sorts, between GO(O)D and (D)EVIL: that being an unspoken, inherent, and universal agreement for one to oppose the other.
Do you not agree?
This is scientifically sound. And within this, lies the implicit understanding that things within CREATION cannot be "created nor destroyed", which you demonstrated further:
However:
These 2 statements rather serve as a bit of a contradiction of your previous assertion......
How does one destroy something that cannot be destroyed in the first place?
And further, is it righteous or evil, when a star gets destroyed, and takes sextillions of life forms into oblivion with it?
I agree with this, which leads me to a key word that I believe should be observed within this discussion, and others like it:
PERCEPTION.
To know something, is to perceive it.
To be wise about something, is to gain perception of it.
To understand something, is to create a perception for it.
As O said, I believe that there are low level MATHEMATICS ("simplistic"), and high level MATHEMATICS (complex), that always play a part in the phenom that is the universe, and in our perception of it.
Sometimes MATH is simple: What does 1 + 1 - 1 x 1 -/- 1 equal?
What does molesting a child equal?
And sometimes MATH is complex: What does 289,452,416 x 152,314,799 -/- 414,193,444 equal?
What does, as I asked earlier, the super nova of a star, killing sextillions of life forms equal?
I'll add-on further very soon.
Let's keep this cypher going!!
PEACE
|
|
|
|
Post by Os3y3ris on Feb 17, 2005 14:40:23 GMT -5
Sam made my point better than I did. One of them anyways. In terms of measuring good and evil mathematically and stating things in simplistic terms based on creation and destruction, one has to treat it as REAL mathematics and take into account the complexities of the situation.
On a side note, I also think that the realm of good and evil is restricted to sentinent beings and their conscious actions. Are acts of nature inherently evil? They may destroy the righteous and the wicked at once, not choosing. Good or evil? I say niether as there is no intent. Take forest fires for instance. They burn up the entire forest and everything in it, but clear the way for new growth. No good or evil involved, nor really good or bad in terms of effect.
I'd say that the basis of good and evil is much simpler and lies in several universal human values. I've forgotten them all, but the source I have for this goes on to prove that all of these values are essential. What goes against them is evil. What is for them is good. The author kills relativism like this: He claims that in terms of applying these values, different cultures have different balances and methods, but that all essentially hold them. Now, a relativist will see evil and say "Thats just how they do things". However, thats not the case as the action is wrong as it goes against their own values which all men hold essential at least for themselves.
Also, I like utilitarianism when possible, but the math is too complicated. The police come knocking. Where's your boy? Well, you turn him in, they go away. You don't, you and everyone around you is in trouble. You work things out mathematically, you need to give him up. But whats the mathematical value of loyalty?
Sam, whats your basis for deciding good and evil?
|
|
|
|
Post by SAMURAI36 on Feb 23, 2005 9:54:19 GMT -5
Damn O, I'm absolutely in AWE  Where's that "WORSHIP" smiley when I need it?? Everything you stated was all wise, right and x-act as I see it....... Especially this point: This reminds me of the 14TH DEGREE, as taught by the MSTA: TIME = The measurement for matter/energy in motion.That principle and yours tie in 2-gether quite well, especially if we strive to see GOOD and EVIL for standards of measurement, instead of labels. For x-ample......How far does raping a child measure on the "EVIL SCALE"?, instead of just labeling it "EVIL" (NOTE: I'm not saying that it wasn't evil here). I'd like for this to be x-pounded on more.......Any other thoughts? PEACE |
|
|
|
Post by UniverseSeven on Feb 23, 2005 12:36:12 GMT -5
P+E(AC)=E
"Though I understand your intentions here, I however do not think that Musa's Laws (as reported in/from the BIBLE) are the best standards of measurements for gaining even the most basic understanding of Good and Evil."
I never stated my opinion of the laws given to Musa at all, or passed judgment on their relavancy (as you apparently have). I simply stated that the vast majority of the western world finds its modern understanding of right and wrong from the ten commandments. Ofcourse there are better guides. These commandments were (more or less) specificly for the Jews (though they transcend), in that the commandments spoke to the specific iniquities or problems they were having. The commandments were a specific address based on the pre-existing LAW.
"I do believe there to be an "agreement" of sorts, between GO(O)D and (D)EVIL: that being an unspoken, inherent, and universal agreement for one to oppose the other."
The only agreement between God and Devil is that God has allowed Satan to rule Earth for a set time (6 days roughly) only to show and prove who God is and also punishment on us and our ancestors who abandoned God. This agreement extends from the fall of the Adamu. As we see in Genesis God has the Knowledge of Good and Evil, this does not imply God IS both good and evil; but that God recognises (or as the Bible puts it "to know", have knowledge of) the existence and reality of evil as a force (the first force to ever emerge that we know of) in opposition to Him. We know Iblis was cast down to Earth after rebelling he would not fall prostrate to the men God created. We know this battle likely happened in Mars. We know this (Iblis) is source for what we percieve as evil. Whethor or not evil is a constant in the Universe remains to be seen or proven though I would say it is not, since the Universe is God and He is inherently good. Certainly negative (electron) is a Universal constant in opposition to positive (proton) but neither is or can be associated with good or evil scientifically but are some of Gods buildng blocks. The association could be made spiritually but this would be a mis-represention as I stated earlier and legitimize evil.
"These 2 statements rather serve as a bit of a contradiction of your previous assertion......
How does one destroy something that cannot be destroyed in the first place?
And further, is it righteous or evil, when a star gets destroyed, and takes sextillions of life forms into oblivion with it?"
Destruction on a cosmic level always sees a transference of energy. The destruction I speak of is things man made, systems, beliefs, faiths, governments, civilizations, cultures etc..
The death of a Star in time (As long as it is a natural one) is detruction (8) on the Natural level. In the events of a stars death causing destruction to innumerable "life forms" this has no connotation of good or evil. It is the natural course of a stars life, and if life forms perish because of this, this is also Natural and thus not evil.... Also since we are not living in the respective solar systems in which the destruction of a star is occuring we cannot portend to know the qualities of the civilization and life forms it may be effecting or killing and thus cast judgment.
We know that some circumstance of our solar system (as is other Solar Systems) depend on and are reflections of the microcosmic events happening within its planets. Thus we see under the devil and the false system destruction of the sacred feminine (Earth/Planet) this in turn ensures cosmic events in our solar system that will (regardless of mens actions) alter the current course and correct it to a system in which civilization is developed in harmony with nature as oppsosed to conflicting with it. Mars was made desolate by war (though advanced life still dwells there)
The soul energy (of men) only advances in state if certain things in the physical life are realized. If these are not realized then that energy reverts to a more primitive uninformed state and in some cases may be canceled out altogether. This is hell beyond life on Earth, after physical death. The evolution of the soul or advancement of energy upon physical death ultimately lead to (usually after several lives lived) an existence in which no physical body is needed (a body of mass and matter) this is the evolution of the soul to the fourth (wave) dimension and allows for much easier travel.
When a Star dies naturally it is percieved as destruction, but it is only death. The energy is transfered and lives on. Our perception of Destruction is also associated with death, but it is Un-Natural death in which the Earthly connection is made.
Destruction of somthing righteous is evil
Destruction of somthing evil is righteous
is meant to be applied within the sphere of the Earth and Earth events relating to human families and their systems of government and civilization. This statement cannot be applied to cosmic events. A stars natural death and its effects on the life within its realm and if it is good or evil can only be percieved by those in which it is happening. To us it is inherently good nor evil,
|
|
|
|
Post by UniverseSeven on Feb 23, 2005 13:17:41 GMT -5
I would rate the acts (pedophilia and rape) as one of the highest levels of evil depravity an individual or group can perform deserving of death, unless forgivness is asked, and correction made and sustained. Leastly expulsion and or confinement for the initial transgression. We find that people who commit crimes like this usually couple it with murder, kidnapping and torture and thus are beyond repair and cannot be made or trusted to function correctly in society and should be executed humanely upon proof of guilt and a fair trial.
What I find is that evil tends to build within men depending on circumstance, enviroment, raising and teaching. This world enviroment, circumstance is a breeding ground for evil of all types, It is thoroughly subconciously and overtly embedded throughout the modern societies from the top down.
|
|
|
|
Post by SAMURAI36 on Mar 8, 2005 8:49:14 GMT -5
PEACE U-7:
Fair enough, however your initial statement did lead me to believe that MUSA's laws (or his interpretation of them) are intrinsic in one's understanding of the SUPREME MATH, which I believe that they are not.
Yes, I agree with this......The irony of this, being that the Western World is no more the better, neither for this source of understanding, nor inspite of it.
In otherwords, this goes back to me saying that I do not believe that the Laws of the Musa in a Biblical sense are the best representation(s) of any/all things pertaining to Ethereal Laws. If it was, then the Western World--and the world as a whole--would be a far better place/people as a result, or even in spite.
May I ask which ones you feel are superlative? And also, why you did not seek to utilize one of them as a better x-ample?
This is true; however, the problem with this, is that these laws did/do not take into account the cultural bias that serves as the source of these laws (both past and present, ancient and contemporary), as well as the myopic perception that derives as a result.
For x-ample: "Thou shalt worship no other GODS before me....."
What other "GODS"? And before who? The "Jewish GOD"? Isn't there only one "GOD"?
So, either worship the "JEWISH GOD", or don't worship any.......This is the precise mindset, that has us looking at the KEMETIANS and other AFRICANS as "pagan", when in reality they were anything but.
But I suppose all of that serves as digression.
Once again, all of this coming from MUSA's biblical interpretation.
I'm not certain as to whether you place literal (historical) stock in any of the analogies you just sited, but message behind them remains universal: GOOD universally opposes EVIL.
However, I must take issue with one of your statements:
You state above that there is no implication that GOD is both GOOD and EVIL, only that he KNOWS both.
How can One have an intimate knowledge of both, if One is not both? And where does one find the implication that GOD is all GOOD, even within these texts and teachings?
Also, I find a bit of a contradiction, regarding GOD's composition, within the next set of your statements:
If the "UNIVERSE IS GOD" (which I agree), does it not stand that all things within the UNIVERSE is GOD as well?
And if so, and since "EVIL" (and whatever the source of "EVIL" is, which I'll address momentarily) x-sists within the UNIVERSE and not outside or independent of it, then "EVIL" (and who/whatever creates it) is "GOD" as well?
This to me, is one of those "If A = B and B = C, then A must =C as well" scenarios in classic form.
We do know this? May I ask how "we" know this? Any of this? You mentioned a scientific criteria in your proceeding statements; may I request that you utilize the same criteria, in proving these events?
I agree with this, and:
I agree with this as well, and I pretty much said as much in my initial statements.
POS and NEG do not necessarily equal GOOD and EVIL.
I think that GOOD and EVIL are far too complex to me measured in such a sense, and that the measurement lies within the perception of the measurer.
However, your statement from earlier:
Did not speak for or against my initial statement, which was that the only agreement GOOD has with EVIL, is to eternally oppose one another........Do you agree with this?
Also, your statement seems to be an addendum of sorts, considering that you originally stated that GOOD and EVIL had no agreement of any sort.
Why do the same laws not apply to these phenomena as well?
Has there been a single culture or civilization on this earth that has been "Destroyed"? Do you really believe KEMET and SUMERIA ("EGYPT and BABYLON" of the BIBLE) to be gone?
Or did they simply have an "energy transference", as you stated?
That's the divine meaning of BUILD(CREATE) and DESTROY, in my opinion.....It's the Eternal conundrum.
The only time these cultures, systems, etc will cease to x-sist, is when the UNIVERSE itself, and the things that created those things within it, cease to x-sist.
|
|
|
|
Post by SAMURAI36 on Mar 8, 2005 8:50:07 GMT -5
I agree with at least most of this. However, I am not prepared to mix what I understand of Universal Science with conjecture; I'm not certain as to whether you are citing the war/destruction on MARS as actualized events, or metaphor to describe a Universal phenomena........I'm leaning 2-wards the latter, until such a time when you or someone else is able to provide a scientific criteria to substantiate the former.
True indeed; I agree fully with ALL of this..You'll get no agruments on this from me. ;D
I think the operative word here, is "PERCEPTION"......
Did you know, that neither the KEMETIANS, SUMERIANS, nor the KAOORI had a word for "DEATH" in their language?
That is why you'll never find the word "DEATH or DEAD" in any of the Scriptural writings.
Both the terminology and concept of "DEATH" is a wholly Western concept, that has no proper place in spirituality, or even science (2 sides of the same coin).
What if the "DESTROYER" in this case, is "GOD"?
You are aware that one of ALLAH's 99+1 attributes is AL-MUMIYT (The GREAT DESTROYER)?
Conversely, what if the "DESTROYER" in this case, is "SATAN/IBLYS/DEVIL"?
HITLER (do you believe to be EVIL?) destroyed a people who were claiming a false identity......Does that automatically imply that the DESTROYER in this case is "righteous", or that his act was intended as such?
Here is where I idea(l)s begin to converge a bit.....
I believe that is not necessarily a "Planetary" phenomena, restricted to Earth (didn't you say that they had the same issues on Mars?)......Remember, Humanity's reach is transcending confines of the planet, and reaching galaxial everyday (the only reason that we even know about MARS, is because Man's reach is grasping more and more of it).
If a human being can travel to another solar system, and commit a heinous act of murder there, what then happens to your principle?
Instead, I believe that it is not planetary, but the greatest struggle against GOOD and EVIL lies within the very same place as the perceptions about those things to begin with......
WITHIN THE MIND, BODY, AND SOUL OF MAN.
And as a result:
Once again, I agree with all of this as well.
HOTEP
|
|
|
|
Post by UniverseSeven on Mar 8, 2005 20:24:00 GMT -5
P+E(AC)=E THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD www.fctp.co.uk/theresurrectionofthedead.aspMarduk: Literally, "bulf calf of the sun". The son of Ea, and leader of the gods. He was a fertility god, but originally a god of thunderstorms. His consort was Sarpanitu According to Enuma Elish, an ancient epic poem of creation, Marduk defeated Tiamat and Kingu, the dragons of chaos, and thereby gained supreme power. Acknowledged as the creator of the universe and of humankind, the god of light and life, and the ruler of destinies, he rose to such eminence that he claimed 50 titles. Eventually, he was called simply Bel, meaning "Lord." www.pantheon.org/articles/m/marduk.htmlFrom The Hidden Passage One of the greatest folk epics in Armenian History is the Epic of Haik, forefather and establisher of the first Armenian kingdom in ancient times. The so called Father of Armenian History, Movses Khorenatsi wrote the epic from the oral tradition of the troubadours in the Fifth Century AD. The epic story tells us of Haik, the chieftain of the tribe of Armens one of the most powerful, organized and biggest of the Armenian tribes in Armenian Highland and as well as Northern Mesopotamia. Haik organizes Armens against the invading forces of Bel (Baal) of Babylon. Bel/Baal were the primary names by which other nations were introduced to the worship of Marduk. Baal means "lord" or "master".The ancient Babylonian deity Marduk was associated with the planet Mars as was Haik. Marduk originated as the apotheosis of the biblical Nimrod. There is one common element to Nimrod/Marduk in all his manifestations and that is the symbol of the snake/serpent/dragon. Nimrod took the dragon as his personal emblem, so that from him spring various dragon myths and their special association with apocalyptic events. Strikingly the only favourable accounts of dragons are found among the Hamitic peoples of the world, like Nimrod including the Ethiopians, Hittites, Chinese, Japanese and American Indian.The thread of serpent lore is evident in all of Marduk's guises regardless of nation, pantheon, or role. Poseidon was accompanied by creatures who were half man and half snake as well as by the sea serpent Leviathan. It is remarkable that there is in Sumerian dialect a syllable with the consonant value "M*R" which is found everywhere in connection with the planet Mars, the god of Mars, and its associated emblem, the dragon. The source of all these words is to be found in the Semitic root "marah" (M*R) which in Hebrew means bitterness as well as disobedience. From this root is derived "marad" (M*R*D), or rebellion, which is the original both of Nimrod or (N*M*R*D), as well as Marduk/Merodach (M*R*D*K). The Bible mentions that Nimrod was the founder of Ninevah, and Ninevah's own half-legendary history ascribes that honour to one Ninur or Nimur (N*M*R).Marduk was the original in both name and character of the gods Mercury (M*R*K*R) and Mars (M*R*TS) from which of course we derive the current names of these planets. It is notable that Mercury, like Mars, is also "battle-scarred". Tibetan legend tells of the fall of the "land of seven cities" by earthquake and eruption at the fall of the star Bel, known to us as Mars. Haik,s destruction of Bel/Marduk/Mars has many interesting notions contained in it when it is viewed as an actual celestial even namely an impact event on the actual planet Mars. anomalyhunters.com/articles/Glass_Onion/The_Hidden_Passage.shtmlNIMROD, MARS AND THE MARDUK CONNECTION by Bryce Self www.ldolphin.org/Nimrod.htmlAn Anthropologist Looks at the Judeo-Christian Scriptures In the Semitic religions of the Ancient Near East the visible sky was simply the first of seven consecutive heavens, or realms between the earth and the thron of El. To ascend to the seventh heaven was to approach the very presence of El, the Almighty, himself, for that was the heaven in which he resided. The plurality of the heavens is asserted in the first verse of Genesis: "In the beginning Elohim created the heavens . . ." In the Hebrew tradition, the first heaven was shemayim, the dome of the sky which covered this earth. It was occupied by seven camps or armies of angels, including the "wandering stars" (i.e., the planets), who (like the other stars) were thought to be heavenly beings, not just inorganic objects. The most important of these was Jupiter, the star of kingship (and therefore the planet of whichever local god was the equivalent of Israel's YAHWEH). The second heaven was shemai-shemayim, the "heaven of heavens" referred to in Psalm 148:4 ("Praise him, ye heavens of heavens, and ye waters that be above the heavens"). The beings who occupied this sphere resided on 12 steps, each of which was the domain of from 9 to 12 angelic armies. The 12 "steps" of the second heaven may have represented signs of the zodiak (which, by the way, was commonly portrayed in mosaics in the earliest synogogues that have been excavated by archaeologists). The constellation Pisces was particularly associated with Palestine. Astrology was well known to the Hebrews of the Monarchy, and it was commonly believed that God controlled happenings on earth through the movements of the stars. But that's another story. The third heaven was divided into three groups of angels. This is the heaven into which the man ascended to whom Paul referred in II Cor. 12:2 ("I knew a man in Christ. . . such an one caught up to the third heaven.") The fourth heaven was the sphere across which the Sun (Shamash) was drawn in his chariot by a team of 31 angelic armies in daylight and by another team of 31 at night. The fifth heaven was occupied by the "Princes of Glory" who ruled the 12 months of the calendar and who made known what will happen in each month of the year. The sixth heaven was the domain of two warlards. One occupied the east with his 28 armies, and the other resided in the west with 31 armies. Finally came the seventh and highest heaven, the realm of El, the father of those gods who formed the Assembly of the Gods. The earth on which we reside beneath these layers of heaven was created by the King of the Assembly of Gods. He was called Marduk by the Babylonians. The Canaanites called him Baal, which simply means "Lord" or "Master" in their language (while his true name, Hadu, was known only to his initiated priests, a practice similar to that of the Hebrews). cc.usu.edu/~fath6/worldview.htmlAsteroids, Comets, Rahab & Mars Cherubim & the Megaliths of Cydonia The " Stones of Fire " and Pre-Adamite Civilizations "By His wisdom the heavens were beautiful", then rebellion came and with it, corruption and death. Psalm 89:10 : Satellites sent to Mars in 1976 collected information concerning the geologic nature of Mars, and it's atmosphere. The images from the orbiters mapping sequence made it clear that Mars had experienced nearly unimaginable catastrophic episodes. With the evidence of oceans of water having once flowed on Mars' surface in huge quantities, it was apparent that the Martian atmosphere was once more dense, the climate much more hospitable. Sometime in the remote past, for reasons still being debated by astrophysicists, there was a cataclysm on Mars. The Martian oceans washed over the surface of the planet, inundating continents. The vast atmosphere was ripped away, and the once Earth-like environment was laid waste. www.mt.net/~watcher/stones.html---------- In Arabic, "Cairo" means "victorious" and is the same name used for the planet Mars. ---------- Peleg and Nimrod Dr. Neville T. Jones www.midclyth.supanet.com/page18.htmgroups.msn.com/UFOsTheHiddenTruth/mars.msnw |
|
|
|
Post by UniverseSeven on Mar 8, 2005 21:42:22 GMT -5
—Critical View: Two prominent theories are now held in regard to Nimrod's identity: one, adopted by G. Smith and Jeremias, is that Nimrod is to be identified with the Babylonian hero Izdubar or Gishdubar (Gilgamesh); the second, that of Sayce,Pinches, and others, identifies Nimrod with Marduk, the Babylonian Mercury. The former identification is based on the fact that Izdubar is represented in the Babylonian epos as a mighty hunter, always accompanied by four dogs, and as the founder of the first great kingdom in Asia. Moreover, instead of "Izdubar"—the correct reading of which had not yet been determined—Jeremias saw the possibility of reading "Namra Udu" (shining light), a reading which would have made the identification with Nimrod almost certain. Those who identify Nimrod with Marduk, however, object that the name of Izdubar must be read, as is now generally conceded, "Gilgamesh," and that the signs which constitute the name of Marduk, who also is represented as a hunter, are read phonetically "Amar Ud"; and ideographically they may be read "Namr Ud"—in Hebrew "Nimrod." The difficulty of reconciling the Biblical Nimrod, the son of Cush, with Marduk, the son of Ea, may be overcome by interpreting the Biblical words as meaning that Nimrod was a descendant of Cush. Two other theories may be mentioned: one is that Nimrod represents the constellation of Orion; the other is that Nimrod stands for a tribe, not an individual —In Arabic Literature: By the Arabs Nimrod is considered as the supreme example of the tyrant ("al-jabbar"). There is some confusion among Arabian historians as to Nimrod's genealogy. According to one authority he was the son of Mash the son of Aram, and consequently a Semite; he built the Tower of Babel and also a bridge over the Euphrates, and reigned five hundred years over the Nabatæans, his kinsmen. But the general opinion is that he was a Hamite, son of Canaan the son of Cush, or son of Cush the son of Canaan (Ṭabari gives both); that he was born at the time of Reu, and was the first to establish fire-worship. Another legend is to the effect that there were two Nimrods: the first was the son of Cush; the second was the well-known tyrant and contemporary of Abraham; he was the son of Canaan and therefore a great-grandson of the first Nimrod. According to Mas'udi ("Muruj al-Dhahab," ii. 96), Nimrod was the first Babylonian king, and during a reign of sixty years he dug many canals in 'Iraḳ. Nimrod and Abraham. The author of the "Ta'rikh Muntaḥab" (quoted by D'Herbelot in his "Bibliothèque Orientale") identifies Nimrod with Daḥḥak (the Persian Zoḥak), the first Persian king after the Flood. But Al-Kharizmi ("Mafatiḥ al-'Ulum," quoted by D'Herbelot) identifies him with Kai Kaos, the second king of the second Persian dynasty. Nimrod reigned where Bagdad is now situated, and at first he reigned with justice (see Nimrod in Rabbinical Literature); but Satan perverted him, and then he began to persecute all the worshipers of God. His chief vizier was Azar (Terah), the father of Abraham; and the midrashic legends of Abraham's birth in which Nimrod is mentioned, as well as those concerning Nimrod's persecution of Abraham—whom he cast into a furnace—are narrated also by the Mohammedans (see Abraham in Apocryphal and Rabbinical Literature and in Mohammedan Legend). Nimrod is referred to in the Koran (xxi. 68-69). When Nimrod saw Abraham come unharmed from the furnace, he said to him: "Thou hast a powerful God; I wish to offer Him hospitality." Abraham told him that his God needed nobody's hospitality. Nevertheless Nimrod ordered thousands of horned and small cattle brought, and fowl and fish, and sacrificed them all to God; but God did not accept them. Humiliated, Nimrod shut himself in his palace and allowed no one to approach him. According to another tradition, Nimrod challenged Abraham, when the latter came out of the furnace, to fight with him. Nimrod gathered a considerable army and on the appointed day was surprised to find Abraham alone. Asked where his army was, Abraham pointed to a swarm of gnats, which routed Nimrod's troops (see, however, below). Nimrod assembled his ministers and informed them of his intention to ascend into the heavens and strike down Abraham's God. His ministers having told him that it would be difficult to accomplish such a journey, the heavens being very high, Nimrod conceived the idea of building a high tower, by means of which he might accomplish his purpose (comp. Sanh. 109a). After many years had been spent in the construction of the tower, Nimrod ascended to its top, but he was greatly surprised to find that the heavens were still as remote from him as when he was on the ground. He was still more mortified on the following day, when the tower collapsed with such a noise that the people fainted with terror, those that recovered losing their speech (an allusion to the confusion of tongues). Undaunted by this failure, Nimrod planned another way to reach the heavens. He had a large chest made with an opening in the top and another in the bottom. At the four corners of the chest stakes were fixed, with a piece of flesh on each point. Then four large vultures, or, according to another source, four eagles, previously fed upon flesh, were attached to the stakes below the meat. Accompanied by one of his most faithful viziers, Nimrod entered the chest, and the four great birds soared up in the air carrying the chest with them (comp. Alexander's ascent into the air; Yer. 'Ab. Zarah iii. 42c; Num. R. xiii. 13). The vizier opened alternately the upper and lower doors of the chest in order that by looking in both directions he might know whether or not he was approaching heaven. When they were so high up that they could see nothing in either direction Nimrod took his bow and shot arrows into the sky. Gabriel thereupon sent the arrows back stained with blood, so that Nimrod was convinced that he had avenged himself upon Abraham's God. After wandering in the air for a certain length of time Nimrod descended, and the chest crashed upon the ground with such violencethat the mountains trembled and the angels thought an order from God had descended upon the earth. This event is alluded to in the Koran (xiv. 47): "The machinations and the contrivances of the impious cause the mountains to tremble." Nimrod himself was not hurt by the fall. After these adventures Nimrod continued to reign wickedly. Four hundred years later an angel in the form of a man appeared to him and exhorted him to repent, but Nimrod declared that he himself was sole ruler and challenged God to fight with him. Nimrod asked for a delay of three days, during which he gathered a considerable army; but this was exterminated by swarms of gnats. One of these insects is said to have entered Nimrod's nose, reached the chambers of his brain, and gnawed at it. To allay the pain Nimrod ordered some one to strike with a hammer upon an anvil, in order that the noise might cause the gnat to cease gnawing (comp. the same story in connection with Titus in Giṭ. 56b). Nimrod died after forty years' suffering. www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=295&letter=N&search=nimrodSTAR MEN AND SECRET SOCIETIES com1.runboard.com/bundergroundvoices.fthereturnofnibiru.t105"Annunciation, with Saint Emidius" Carlo Crivelli (1430-1495) www.nationalgallery.org.uk/cgi-bin/WebObjects.dll/CollectionPublisher.woa/wa/largeImage?workNumber=NG739&collectionPublisherSection=workJesus' Alien Ancestors? jcolavito.tripod.com/lostcivilizations/id6.htmlMars Images xfacts.com/mars_sub.htmWisdom Of The False Prophets Or The Magicians of Pharaoh You can decide for yourself, but it looks to me like profoundly basic truths come out during these Third Days, and those truths are, sure enough, applied or acted upon during the Third Nights.During the first Third Day in the Cellular Cycle (10 billion years ago), the first clouds of matter were gathering; eventually, they would become galaxies.During the second Third Day of the Mammalian Cycle (500 million years ago), the Cambrian explosion occurred, and the truth about calcium as a survival tool emerged. This is when soft-tissue organisms began developing shells of calcium around themselves as a survival tactic.During the third Third Day of the Family Cycle (15 ½ million years ago), a new development in the evolution of man occurred. Pliopithecus, a tail-less ape, walked the earth on hind legs.During the fourth Third Day in the Tribal Cycle (1,200,000 years ago), Homo Erectus, the first man of our genus, appeared. During the fifth Third Day in the Cultural Cycle (69,200 – 61,300 B.C.), the first tools, scrapers made of bone and stone were used.During the sixth Third Day in the National Cycle (1538 –1144 B.C.), Egyptian obelisks, the first clocks, were erected. Through trade and sea travel, the Egyptian and Phoenician cultures expanded in influence. The Iron Age began. Beer was invented in Egypt. And it was declared by Amenhotep that Aton was the “One God”—the first time in recorded history that god had been conceived of as a single entity. At the very end of the sixth Third Day in the National cycle, Moses received the Ten Commandments. During the seventh Third Day (1834 – 1854) in the Planetary Cycle, the abolitionist and women's suffrage movements swept through consciousness among industrialized nations.During the eighth Third Day (Dec. 14, 2002 – Dec. 9, 2003), com1.runboard.com/bundergroundvoices.fthereturnofnibiru.t89---------------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
|
|
Post by UniverseSeven on Mar 9, 2005 15:42:35 GMT -5
|
|
