I have no words to explain this, other than that it is weird on several levels I could never imagine.
I never knew ādemonologyā was a thing.
People can be really weird.
Well at least you learned something
As soon as they used Satanael or whatever the hell that was, you can kind of tell where this goes plain dumb.
The etymology doesnāt really support this modification of this word.
As you can see, itās a transliteration: Satan comes directly from the Hebrew.
So, pulling up from Greek/Hebrew apps on my phoneā¦
This is Acts 5:3
Peter asked, āAnanias, why has Satan filled your heart so that you should lie to the Holy Spirit and keep back some of the money you got for the land?
But looking at the Greek:
G4567
Original: Ī£Ī±ĻĪ±Ī½Ī±ĶĻ
Transliteration: Satanas
Phonetic: sat-an-asā
Thayer claims:
Origin: of Aramaic origin corresponding to G4566 (with the definite affix)
Strongās claims:
Strongās Definition : Of Chaldee origin corresponding to G4566 (with the definite article affixed); the accuser , that is, the devil: - Satan.
G4566 pulls up:
Original: Ī£Ī±ĻĪ±ĶĪ½
Transliteration: Satan
Phonetic: sat-anā
Thayerās:
Origin: of Hebrew origin H7854
Strongās:
Strongās Definition : Of Hebrew origin [H7854]; Satan , that is, the devil: - Satan. Compare G4567.
In Hebrew, BDB is the stronger translation source:
H7854
Original: ש×××
Transliteration: sĢaĢtĢ£aĢn
Phonetic: saw-tawnā
BDB Definition:
- adversary, one who withstands
- adversary (in general - personal or national)
- superhuman adversary
- Satan (as noun proper)
Origin: from H7853
H7853
Original: ש×××
Transliteration: sĢaĢtĢ£an
Phonetic: saw-tanā
BDB Definition:
- (Qal) to be or act as an adversary, resist, oppose
Origin: a primitive root
TWOT entry: 2252
Part(s) of speech: Verb
Basically, this is as bad as changing Satanās name to Satin.
On top of that, itās really a generic word for adversary, only occasionally meant as a specific entity. Itās way more used for meaning āone who is against Godā without it being a specific special creatures.
I mean, people can believe what they want, but this word and itās use has been far more stably used than such stories like this.
Good thing that Gnosticism never caught on.
Some say that Samael is also Satan, but I donāt know, I interpreted him more as Godās Left Hand.
Itās flared up a good half a dozen times. In fact, one of the latest letters in the NT was directly addressing one of the Gnostic waves.
Donāt tell that to Tik Tok, itāll doom us all!
Each iteration of Gnosticism that the church butted heads against was the idea of God becoming man (coming to earth in the flesh). Not an argument for Christ to not have walked the earth, but an argument of Him not being a physical human being.
Itās because people either:
- Canāt wrap their mind around God giving up power to become a man, for anything.
- They are looking for excuses for how God could live as a perfect humans and want to remove temptation.
In reality, none of that type of argument is necessary. Perfectionāif and when there is anyārelies on knowing the ultimate outcome of an action, weighing the most benefits and risks and choosing the path that offers the best outcome. Once you get to q point like that, āFree Willā is no longer a real option. The reason choice works out or is a freedom is because we donāt know the full repercussions of anything we do, so thereās more semblance of choice.
I mean, any of us who have played morality video games knows that if your goal is a fuller world to interact with, that you donāt get to be the bad guy, even when youāre a morally ambiguous gamer. It wouldnāt be any different for a Creator God. That added on top of āthe flesh causes sinsā is a huge counterbalance against acting up for indulgenceās sake.
Too bad most Gnosticism never got stuck playing a video game with those kind of consequences. They might have got why the reasoning was very flawed and not went through all these bells and whistles.
Just remember, it isnāt the first time I thought about it.
Godās āLeft Handāā¦
Tis not for us mortals to say, unless visited by an entity of the heavens to say what, or who Samael/Satan or Samur (as he is also known in modern times) isā¦ Nor his realm within the voids of the confines of reality may be in likeness.
Could Samael/Satan or Samur have indeed been bitten by the serpent? Could God have cut the limb from himself? The āLeft Handā. We do not know how many hands God has, nor if each are self aware, or if they are physically present, or spiritually bound lesser Godās under his will.
But, if severed, is it that which may have āfallen from graceā?
Could that violated form āGodās left handā have grown into some form of twisted malice, that indeed became self aware and crafted the realm of a universe of hatred, simply known as Hell?..
Iām freaked out right now thinking about thisā¦
SD
I meant it more metaphorically, seeing as he was responsible for killing the firstborn sons in Exodus. No other angel is that violent.
Well this is dark and twisted. But fr the image of Adam being lifeless for 300 years why this bro walks about feasting on animals then feeding that to Adam like he was a bird will forever be engrained in my brajn. Gives me Weekend at Bernieās vibes.
How strange.
I think all angels are able to be that violent. But after what happened to Samael, they dare not now go against the will of God.
SD