Lonelygirl15

Whe the creator of the thread comes back I think he can insert the word "puzzle" in the name of this thread. But that's what this thread was made for, to figure it out. We don't want too many threads floating around.

Sorry about that guys, long day at work I'll put the word puzzle in now...just for you kids

I lied. I don't know how. Maybe only a mod can do it.


PLEASE ALL MIGHTY MODERATES HELP MEEEE

I found this earlier and posted it on a different thread

Okay, so check this out. I found Abenezra on wiki, followed a link and found this

http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Pentateuch

has to do with 5/5

maybe something, maybe nothing

Ziola wrote:I found this earlier and posted it on a different thread

Okay, so check this out. I found Abenezra on wiki, followed a link and found this

http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Pentateuch

has to do with 5/5

maybe something, maybe nothing

IMO don't get hung up on the name, the Pentateuch is just the old testament.

Yes, I know that, but the basis behind his biblical intelligence is founded on his commentary on it. And it is the five-fifths of the Torah. Maybe I'm just really tired (east-coaster) and reaching here. Who knows, I'll keep looking.

Just to clarify the pentateuch is the first 5 books of the Old Testament and are attriuted to be authored by Moses.

I'm going to bed. I'm going around in circles here and it ain't pretty. don't work too hard. We've been sanctioned to get some rest, after all.

With the new update to the text, she's telling us that what ever Baudlaire means is contrary to what the other two have in common.

They were all thinkers and writers. Perhaps they disagreed on a certain intellectual point? We need to understand each of these figures better.

Unless it's an anagram...but I doubt it.

what if the two that agree are the astablished athorities, and the lone one is trying to show he is right?

this would go back to something that i don't know is ok to talk about yet, but maybe it will help us choose a side for real.

Here is where I am at with this...

The first two, Rambam and Abenezra, being Neoplatonists, denied the existence of evil. Evil was merely the absence of "good". So essentially, either there was good, or nothing.

Baudelaire, on the other hand, being a Gnostic, believed that good and evil coexist, but evil hides itself and its true identity.

This quote is very interesting:

"To be effective against the enemy you must know your enemy so you can be prepared to effectively counter his attacks. For this reason alone, the doctrine of Satanology is a very important study, and one which is often filled with opposition because Satan, the deceiver, never likes to be revealed for who and what he is and how he operates. As Baudelaire the french poet says "The Devil's deepest wile is to persuade us that he does not exist." "


Too much Wiki'ing maybe, but it seems interesting nontheless.

Thinking about this further, cuz it might be useful:

The first two were right, in that there is good and not good, but believed it was controlled by one being (God). Evil was merely the absence of good.

Baudelaire on the other hand, believed that evil coexists with good (God and the Devil), but evil hides its true form from us. And maybe he is correct?

Does this tie into invocation?

Invocation means:
a prayer asking God's help as part of a religious service;
an incantation used in conjuring or summoning a devil;
conjuring: calling up a spirit or devil;
the act of appealing for help

So if my theory holds true, if Rambam and Abenezra were right, we summon God, or "good".

But perhaps Baudelaire is correct instead, and we summon evil in disguise

If Baudelaire was right, maybe it means that evil wants us to believe that it doesn't exist so that it can work while being ignored.

Then the other two not acknowledging it would work in evil's favor.

Given the Jewish outlook on evil though, it is interesting that you don't hear about Jews being possessed by demons or anything. Ignoring that seems to have worked in their favor!