So it was really Satan, eh?

No

It was Gabriel

Who only talks to Hebrews

Muhammad was a Jew so Gabriel could speak to him

File: IMG_0164.jpg (63KB, 600x658px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 600x658px

But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men. (Matthew 16:23)

2 Corinthians 11:14
And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.

Looks like a tang dynasty buddhist monk's robe/head gear

lol wat angels dont exist in islam

And the Lord said to Gabriel: "'Proceed against the bastards and the reprobates, and against the children of fornication: and destroy [the children of fornication and] the children of the Watchers from amongst men [and cause them to go forth]: send them one against the other that they may destroy each other in battle: for length of days shall they not have." —1 Enoch 10:9

So did (Allah) convey the Inspiration to His slave [Muhammad SAW through Jibrael (Gabriel) ].

19 And the angel answering said unto him, I am Gabriel, that stand in the presence of God; and am sent to speak unto thee, and to shew thee these glad tidings.

20 And, behold, thou shalt be dumb, and not able to speak, until the day that these things shall be performed, because thou believest not my words, which shall be fulfilled in their season.
(Luke 1:19-20 KJV)

>>2229025
Actually it's a part of the basic beliefs that if u dont believe you aren't muslim, just as the resurrection

>>2229116
But Muhammad was able to speak to his wife.

>>2228542

no, it was opium probably

>>2229025
I love it when totally clueless people and make a statement embarassing themselves like that.

File: St-Michael-stomping-Satan.jpg (229KB, 933x1280px) Image search: [Google]

229KB, 933x1280px

>>2228542
Yes. Very accurate depiction desu.

Islam is literally a gospel of "angels" (that is fallen angels aka demons) the Bible warns us about.

>>2228542

Yes.

And Mohammad knew it was satan.

>>2229025
They do, but they "don't have free will", so no angel could have chosen to lie to Mohammad.

This is crucial to understand their psychosis, because they know that angel was satan too.

They invented "djinns" to explain evil spirits away; if they were fallen angels, then angels had the free will to rebel against God.

And to lie to men.

>>2231497
>implying he did not have 14 wives, among them a 6 year old

>>2232133
Yeah it is.

Galatians 1:8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed.

>>2228542
If that's Gabriel, why does he have those colorful wings? Gabriel's wings are white.

Looks like the coloration of Melek Taus to me, and he's totally Satan.

>>2232173
you do realize that angel wings in art don't reflect on how angels looked in the OT, right? the stereotypical white angel wings predate the christian era in Roman and Greek art

>>2232191
>implying angels do not predate humanity

>>2228542

Ibn Ishaq records Muhammad was concerned he might be demonically possessed. He was so disturbed by this possibility that three times he threatened to commit suicide by jumping off the mountain side, and three times he was stopped by someone claiming to be Gabriel.

So I read it, and he departed from me. And I awoke from my sleep, and it was as though these words were written on my heart. Now none of God's creatures was more hateful to me than an (ecstatic) poet or a man possessed: I could not even look at them. I thought, Woe is me poet or possessed—Never shall Quraysh say this of me! I will go to the top of the mountain and throw myself down that I may kill myself and gain rest. So I went forth to do so and then when I was midway on the mountain, I heard a voice from heaven saying, "O Muhammad! thou art the apostle of God and I am Gabriel." I raised my head towards heaven to see (who was speaking), and lo, Gabriel in the form of a man with feet astride the horizon, saying, "O Muhammad! thou art the apostle of God and I am Gabriel." I stood gazing at him, and that turned me from my purpose moving neither forward nor backward; then I began to turn my face away from him, but towards whatever region of the sky I looked, I saw him as before. And I continued standing there, neither advancing nor turning back, until Khadlja sent her messengers in search of me and they gained the high ground above Mecca and returned to her while I was standing in the same place; then he parted from me and I from him, returning to my family. And I came to Khadija and sat by her thigh and drew close to her. She said, "O Abii'l-Qasim,2 where hast thou been ? By God, I sent my messengers in search of thee, and they reached the high ground above Mecca and returned to me." I said to her, "Woe is me poet or possessed."

>>2228542

The interesting confession of this image is that the angel is wearing a crown.

The real angel Gabriel has no such crown and would have no such crown.

Satan, the god of this world and the ruler of this age, would have a crown.

More importantly, the real angel Gabriel never left anyone in a state of fear as told above.

File: serveimage.jpg (242KB, 733x547px) Image search: [Google]

242KB, 733x547px

>>2232173
>>2232191
Here's how angels looked like in the OT.

File: serveimage.jpg (54KB, 630x495px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 630x495px

>>2232237
Except more like this.

>>2232142
>And Mohammad knew it was satan.

What do you mean? Did he make a deal with Satan for earthly power and riches? Kinda the same thing that Jesus refused

File: serveimage.jpg (114KB, 587x489px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 587x489px

>>2232249
And this.

File: serveimage.jpg (23KB, 595x289px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 595x289px

>>2232257
And this.

>>2232213
well as a creation of human imagination they don't, but that that has nothing to do with my post. it's a simple fact that artistic depictions of angels aren't how angels looked according to Old Testement descriptions, it's simply a stylistic continuation from Roman and Greek tradition

File: serveimage.jpg (22KB, 250x173px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 250x173px

>>2232261
And this.

>current year
>believing in bronze age metaphysical entities

>>2228553
But Arabs are Hebrews (Ishmaelites). They don't have to be Jews.

>>2232237
Those are artistic renditions of the four living creatures before the throne of God. They are unique. That does not look like them in reality, and that is not a depiction of "every day" angels.

>>2232249
No, never pagan, not even once.

>>2232231
What's wrong with being a poet? Is it haram?

>>2232251

Yes.

>>2232273
Hebrews and Ishmaelites are two separate tribes of people. Both semetic. And at war with each other.

>>2232237
that´s an allegory of the four gospels

>>2232278
I do not understand the arabic implications of "poet or possessed", only that Mohammad thought he was possessed by demons, and in that regard, he was eventually correct.

>>2232285
Hebrews: descendants of Abraham (Ishmaelites included)
Israelites: descendants of Jacob
Jews: descendants of Judah

>>2232277
says the guy trusting pagan greek art as accurately depicting angels in his religion

>>2232286
It's tied together as the four faces of Jesus, yes.

Revelation 4
The first living creature was like a lion, the second living creature like a calf, the third living creature had a face like a man, and the fourth living creature was like a flying eagle. The four living creatures, each having six wings, were full of eyes around and within. And they do not rest day or night, saying:

“Holy, holy, holy,
Lord God Almighty,
Who was and is and is to come!”

>>2232296

Hebrews: Those who crossed over (the river Jordan). Children of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

Not just Abraham.

The children of the handmaiden (Hagar) are not the chosen people of God.

>>2232298

I don't trust any art. Or artist.

The picture of seraphim in the bible are six winged creatures of light.

The tales of seraphim on earth are large armed warriors, with six wings, made of light.

>>2232303
>those who crossed over
Meme myth. It actually comes from Eber who was Abraham's ancestor.

>>2232312

It's the definition of the word "Hebrew".

If you want to fight the dictionary, be my guest.

>>2232303
according to one book that's taken up on faith. according to another book that's taken up on faith it was actually Ishmael's descendants whom God chose.

and yes, you're an idiot for thinking one is more credible than the other, but we tolerate you anyway so have at it.

File: serveimage.png (583KB, 800x477px) Image search: [Google]

583KB, 800x477px

>>2232274
They are cherubim. The Bible says that God placed cherubim also at the entrance of the garden of Eden. There were two on top of the Ark of the Convenant as well, so they are no unique. Cherub is an Akkadian word, and whenever an ancient Israelite would have used the word he would have one of these in mind, not a chubby baroque cupid. You must read the Bible in its proper historical and cultural context.

>>2232323
I mean specifically that Jordan part, it's horseshit.
Let me guess you're either a kike, or an American evangelitard.

>>2232301
some Islamic customs being coming from the talmud =/= observing the talmud. that shows religious influence, not that they are one and the same. you might as well call Judaism neo-ugaritic for its use of motifs from the Baal cycle

>>2232336
oops, replied to wrong post

>>2232329

You should just say the OT.

The NT has no historical significance.

>>2232325

Yes, I'll stick with the Holy Word of God.

You can stick with whatever you like.

>>2232329
Cherubim are seraphim are unique, as is everything God created. Those four are a special set confining the four horsemen of the apocalypse.

>>2232336
The Hebrews were suitably punished every time they left the one true God and worshiped arab gods.

>>2232352
>The NT has no historical significance.

kek

File: serveimage.jpg (103KB, 498x544px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 498x544px

Ezekiel saw God on a throne with wheels surrounded by Cherubim. The Cherub throne/chariot is a common theme in ancient Canaanite and Mesopotamian art.

If however a modern amerifat evangelical protestant were to go back in time to Ancient Israel he would accuse them of being pagan/satanic illuminati.

File: serveimage.jpg (96KB, 597x413px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 597x413px

Pic related how the Ark of the Covenant probably looked like. No, no Greco-Roman "angels" (actually depictions of gods) on top of it, just good old, historically accurate, Mesopotamian cherubim.

File: serveimage.jpg (19KB, 274x432px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 274x432px

>>2232392

>>2232392
You do realize those are just representations too?

You're like the guy who thinks God looks like a bearded guy just because Michelangelo painted him as such.

It's a imaginative representation of something metaphysical.

File: Solomon-Temple.jpg (219KB, 700x500px) Image search: [Google]

219KB, 700x500px

Solomon's Temple, built by architects sent by Hiram I, king of Tyre, (according to the Bible) in the architectural style of the time.

File: Solomon-Temple.jpg (43KB, 744x296px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 744x296px

>>2232417
Real cherubim.

File: P21.6BIris.jpg (31KB, 309x419px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 309x419px

>>2232428
vs. Christian "angel" (actually the Greek goddess Iris).

>>2232414
Yes I realize that, I just find hilarious that Amerifat evangelicals see paganism in everything when the very Israelites would have seemed pagan for them.

>>2232414
>It's a imaginative representation of something metaphysical.

In the case of the early semitic depictions, it's likely what they actually thought he looked like. This whole "god is an abstract metaphysical being" thing is a modern invention to put God into more inaccessible gaps.

>>2232428
You do know that we have pretty good description how cherubim looks like in the Bible? Ezekiel 1 to be exact. They had form of a man, had six wings and four faces. They didn't look like human with wings but they were not lion with wing either.

>>2232451
ahh alright
>>2232455
If by modern invention you mean 2000-3000 years old, then yes maybe

>>2232456
Except the Hebrews didn't invent the concept of cherubim, it was was all over the Near East and predated them. They also came in many shapes and forms, with bull, lion, eagle heads, n pairs of wings, etc. Ezekiel's is just one instantiation of them.

>>2232478
>If by modern invention you mean 2000-3000 years old, then yes maybe

I mean modern as in the sense of having contact with Greek philosophy. So something like that actually.

>>2232456

Here you have four heads and two pairs of wings >>2232261

File: serveimage.jpg (18KB, 380x256px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 380x256px

Here's a Mesopotamian cherubim throne/platform with wheels exactly how Ezekiel described it. This is what he had in mind.

Evangelicals would denounce Ezekiel as a pagan occult illuminatus.

Tfw.

>>2232481
Lamassu that you spam in this thread is called shedu in Hebrew. Cherub in hebrew is Keruvim. They may look similar but they aren't the same. Ezekiel centrally knew how Cherubims looked like in Temple. He was from from preist line and he himself was priest. So you theory is nothing more than assumption that in substance is "X done Y. Z, whom lived close by, done V. V and Y are similar. Thefore X done V". You have no archological proovs, nor adecute text sources.
I presented interbiblical source on Cherubin apperance (inb4 "something is in Bible thefore is not true/evidence"), we had shittone of early Christian art and if you would read Jewish mysticism or other related texts, or visited syngogue or two you would know it.
>>2232502
Did you even read Ezekhiel?

>>2232495
Find me one with six wings.

And it's not look like Ezekhiel desciption.

>>2232557
>visited syngogue
Lol really?

>>2232569
>Find me one with six wings.
Grasping for straws much?

Relax guys. It's iconography, not theology. So what if God's angels look like bizarre-looking creatures? It doesn't change anything now does it?

But it's sure hilarious to see how butthurt you get when you find out the ancient Israelites weren't iconoclastic fundamentalist protestant evangelicals.

>>2232608
>hilarious

Not sure you know what that word means, or if you're aware of the timing between ancient Israel and Christianity. Or the link.

File: serveimage.jpg (37KB, 468x440px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 468x440px

>the soles of their feet were like the soles of calves’ feet

>>2232608

The same demons that ruled over Babylon are still alive, and they're still ruling over Babylon.

People see them. People draw them. Unfortunately, people heed their advice. Because as it turns out, the 1/3 of the angels who fell from grace are the active ones people see and worship as gods.

Not the 2/3 who retained their first estate, and remained holy.

File: serveimage.jpg (16KB, 222x319px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 222x319px

>and their rims were full of eyes, all around the four of them

>>2232626
Yeah, demons were once angels, so it makes perfect sense that they look the same.

>>2232608
>Lol really?
Yeah really. Look on the walls. They have art in it. Old ones especially.
>Grasping for straws much?
No you illiterate faggot. I gave you description on X. You gave me Y. Sure they look similar but I wanted X and I ask you for X again. Six wings. Not four. Six.
> It's iconography, not theology. So what if God's angels look like bizarre-looking creatures? It doesn't change anything now does it?
I know. But you keep pushing something, that looks dangerously close to New Age faggotry. Plus it's about objectivity. When we have description how X look we want X not Y.
> iconoclastic fundamentalist protestant evangelicals
I am Catholic fyi. Evangelicals are not only heretics but faggots too. But semi-Newageism is even worse then those kikelovers

>>2232659
U mad? U mad. You're also not particularly bright ;^)

>>2229025
Yes, they do.

>>2232669
Not an argument.

>>2232710
Ok here we go.
>synagogue
You're comparing current existing synagogues with the first temple. Do you realize how retarded is that? It assumes that Rabbinical Judaismis the same religion as First Temple Judaism. But Rabbinical Judaism slowly evolved from Pharisaism. You say you're a Catholic? Jesus himself didn't think that the Pharisees were of the same religion as Moses, let alone their modern successors. It also assumes that, even that one is a continuation of the other, there can be no significant changes in theology and iconography; that a temple built in by a Phoenician king thousands of years ago, in the architectural style fo the epoch is comparable to a current existing synagogue. Try to find a star of David in any Hebrew artifact dating from antiquity. Protip: you can't. Let me ask you something: you probably think that Moses, Solomon and David knew what the Kabbalah and the Talmud were, don't you?
>six wings
I already answered this in >>2232481
>New Age faggotry
I'm discussing the ancient historical and cultural context of the Ancient Israelites lived, and you say this is New Age faggotry? You can't make this shit up. Look up the word of Dr. Michael Heiser PhD for more on the context of the OT.

>>2232747
>even if*

>>2232380
>>2232451
Baptized Baptist converting to Catholicism or Orthodoxy here. I was aware of how biblical angels were described before I even converted to Christianity. Sermons and Bible studies in Baptist churches discuss Ezekiel regularly. Evangelical theologians are well aware of the differences between the history of angels in European art and in ancient Hebrew texts. You're straw manning.

>>2232747
>You're comparing current existing synagogues with the first temple.
I never did. I just claimed that Jews now in far greater manner than you, how their angels looked like. Especially old, medieval synagogues. But maybe you live in USA, then my condolences for not haveing rich history.
Also, for rest of your rant (funny how you accused me of being mad) I know that modern judaism is based mostly upon pharisaism. But Talmud and portions of Kabbalah were written shortly after destruction of Temple (I didn't mean that David or Salomon used it mind you. Stop projecting). They knew how it looked like from eyewitness. And it didn't look like Mesoptamian winged lion or Egyptian one.
>I already answered this in
You didn't though. Show me "design" of "Cherubin" with six wing, human shape, four faces and feet (not legs, only feets) like ox then I'll belive you. Until then I will trust Church more than you.
>New Age faggoty
You sound like them, act like them and argue like them.
>Look up the word of Dr. Michael Heiser PhD for more on the context of the OT.
Note here that he do not claim the Ancient Israel were blank copy of Mesopotamian culture. You did. So with kind regards, stop.

>>2228553
>Who only talks to Hebrews
That's racist

>>2232502
>Ezekiel tripped balls on some fucking desert plant and thought some random portable table is the manifestation of God's power talking to him
>2500 years later people believe him

File: serveimage.jpg (91KB, 1108x768px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 1108x768px

>>2233472
God you're denser than a black hole. Here, here. Pic related is how cherubim really looks like. Shush, the big scary biblical monsters are gone now.

>>2233886
>scary beings personifying the sheer terrible power of God turned into naked little boys so it's more suitable for a homosexual pedophile pagan cult
Fucking shit I hate Catholics so much

File: IMG_0174.jpg (30KB, 578x420px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 578x420px

>The ancient Roman Cupid was a god who embodied desire, but he had no temples or religious practices independent of other Roman deities such as Venus, whom he often accompanies as a side figure in cult statues.[13] A Cupid might appear among the several statuettes for private devotion in a household shrine,[51] but there is no clear distinction between figures for veneration and those displayed as art or decoration.[52] Roman temples often served a secondary purpose as art museums, and Cicero mentions a statue of "Cupid" (Eros) by Praxiteles that was consecrated at a sacrarium and received religious veneration jointly with Hercules.[53]

>>2232639
Aye, they were not disfigured or changed in any manner but their residence and allegiance.

They lived with God, saw the glory of God, and lost it forever.

They're pissed off.

>>2232296
>Jews: descendants of Judah

Wrong

File: annunaki.png (898KB, 800x590px) Image search: [Google]

898KB, 800x590px

>>2232435
Sumer predates Greece by seven thousand years.

Genesis Chapter 2; Verse 10-15
The name of the third river is the Tigris; it runs along the east side of Ashur. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.

Mesopotamia (direct translation means land in the middle of two rivers) is located between the Tigris and Euphrates river.

File: annunaki.jpg (41KB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 400x300px

>>2234116
I didn't post the entire verses.

Genesis Chapter 2; Verse 10-17

10 A river watering the garden flowed from Eden; from there it was separated into four headwaters.

11 The name of the first is the Pishon; it winds through the entire land of Havilah, where there is gold.

12 (The gold of that land is good; aromatic resin[d] and onyx are also there.)

13 The name of the second river is the Gihon; it winds through the entire land of Cush.

14 The name of the third river is the Tigris; it runs along the east side of Ashur. And the fourth river is the Euphrates.

15 The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it.

16 And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden;

17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”

>>2233985
Nah, it's mostly correct. Technically they also interbred with the Levites to keep the priestly line going, but they're historically Judah's descendants.

File: khazaria.gif (10KB, 416x349px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 416x349px

>>2234180
https://youtu.be/x8OmxI2AYV8?t=3317

>>2233886
Those are putti not cherubs

>>2228542
Yep

>>2232296
Hebrews are the descendants of Isaac, Edomites included