quoudam72 Posted May 14, 2003 Posted May 14, 2003 Edric we could all learn something let's not get too emotional (ironic isn't) let his explaintion be his witness of his anti-religious fever.
Khan Posted May 14, 2003 Posted May 14, 2003 Could we not just accept his point of view, that he believe if Satan actually existed, that he may not be the bad guy we all think he is. Besides you only have books to tell you that he is bad.
Davidu Posted May 14, 2003 Posted May 14, 2003 Believe in anything what you like, ok? But don't try to convert me. Don't try to say that your god is better than mine. Don't try to convince me that evil is good. Evil is the animalic impulse within us, as good is the reason of the mind. You may call these as you like: God, Satan, Allah, Buddha, etc. I don't believe 'cause I search for scientific answers, for logical, comprehensive answers. Therefore you might call me a atheist. Ok, so I am. But I don't switch sides to the dark side. I know what the Satanist cults do. You've seen it as well: the mass sinucides in Swizerland and other countries. Acriku - with that statement I think you've lost your faith in humanity. Don't do that - don't give up.
Edric O Posted May 14, 2003 Posted May 14, 2003 *looks around*I'm getting emotional? Ummm... actually, no.Khan: Acriku's argument is that Satan is "not such a bad guy" because he's the rebel against the authority (God). But by that logic, terrorists are nice guys too...Yes, we only have books to tell us that he is bad. On the other hand, we have nothing to tell us that he is good... Gee, that's a hard decision. ::)
Edric O Posted May 14, 2003 Posted May 14, 2003 I have heard some say that the Devil's greatest accomplishment was to get man to believe that he didn't exist. Quite an accomplishment, granted. But I say, what if the Devil's greatest accomplishment was to make the world believe that he is God?What if it was Satan that spoke to Moses? What if Jesus was Satan emboddied? The Bible was then inspired by Satan, in which intolerance, persecution and enslavement to it's truth would result. Of course, people would not believe a totally evil document to follow, I don't think people would have followed a Bible that says kill 'em all (although fundamentalist Muslims make me wonder) so the very clever and devious devil put subtle evils in his Bible, knowing that it's ambiguity would lead to misinterperetaion resulting in splits within Christianity itself, and great atrocities done as a result of honest misinterperetation. He knew that it would lead to intolerance, mistrust and hatred towards other denominations and other religions in which He created in other parts of the world. Keeping humanity from uniting and forming peaceful coexistance.He knew that by giving us his version of truth and threatening against questioning that truth, he would keep us from fulfilling our potential. Many would denounce science and any search of truth that did not fit into his nice little box. Through this he controls humanity, and inflicts his wrath on God.Well, what do you know? You've just made a statement of faith! Faith that Satan exists, faith that he is fighting against Mankind, and faith the he plans to make us all hate each other by telling us to love each other.Now that might sound strange to me, but unlike some atheists, I don't measure other people's intelligence by how much they agree with me. So, if you want to start a new religion, be my guest! :)
Navaros Posted May 14, 2003 Posted May 14, 2003 you know, i see a lot of you so-called (so-called, because your own words in this board over time make it abundantly clear that you have no regard at all for what the Bible really says) Christians attacking what Acriku said, but as of yet none of you has said anything logical or sensible to refute what he presented. Acriku made a well-presented argument that Satan didn't really do anything all that bad based on what the Bible says of him. guys such as EdricO are using a Fallacy to respond which consists of nothing other than: "the Bible says Satan is evil, therefore that makes him evil!". the problem with such Fallacies is that they don't address anything that Acriku said. you can't refute what you refuse to and/or are incapable of addressing.so i challenge all the "so-called"s to actually ADDRESS Acriku's points as he stated them without bringing in external factors. Address it like a Court of law: the Judge never considers anything which is not presented to him. i'd like to see someone refute Acriku with logical and reasonable points which do not bring in irrelevant materials which his words did not encompass
Dante Posted May 14, 2003 Posted May 14, 2003 God is all good and all powerful. Yes? But there is also evil in the world. Here we have two possilbe conclusions. That God is all good, but cannot right evil, and is thus not all-powerful. Or he is all-powerful, but chooses not to intervene, meaning he is not all good. Since both of these directly contradict the first statement it means that it must be false and therefore God is neither good nor all powerful. Thus God is say, similar to Lucifer in that he/she is not all good and not all powerful. Logical conclusion: Either they are one and the same or neither exists. In either case this argument is illogical and pointless.
Acriku Posted May 14, 2003 Author Posted May 14, 2003 Hehe Edric, putting the old "Satan is doing it!" label on me? I'm flattered to be of the millions that were burned and stoned and killed for the same accusation. Actually, I'm not.Davidu, you're putting too much into this. This is something that I've been thinking of for a single day (two counting today, to reply to the posts here). Am I going to start killing people, or eating their children? No...Edric, if I solely based my view on Satan rebelling, then yes you could say that. But, alas! I have not only that reason. It's sad that you put so much trust into a book of one side just because the other side of the story has been silenced.
Miles Posted May 14, 2003 Posted May 14, 2003 See, now you are basing this on an argument against faith. You cant do that miles. If you understood what christians believe indepth and understand that the bible in many times says that it is written "God breathed" which means it was directly inspired by him, then we wouldnt have this argument.Hehe :P I love christian fundie logic. :-*Fundie: God inspired the Bible.Me: oh yeah, how do you know?Fundie: because it says so.I know emprworm would appreciate that logic. ;)You point out flaws that only exist because you havent really read with as much detail the bible.No, I point out the results. oppression, persecution, torture, intolerance, murder, ignorance, etc.... many of us have who are believers, so why are others suddenly the expert now? You only question the authority because you resent it, and I ask why that is? If you are arguing for no other reason than just because you dislike christianity, then thats kinda silly. I hope there is some good reason behind it.It seems that extremist writings give birth to more and more. some people on this site have shown their true colors.Hehe... ;) touched a nerve didn't I. Can you prove that your scenerio that God wrote the Bible is ANY more credible than mine that Satan did? This is merely a hypothetical, and it seems that whenever I pose it, christians get extremely defensive. What this very clearly demonstrates is the absolute refusal to see other possibilities and the hostility that is created when anything threatens their precious dogma. This is fanatical blindness, and the root of all religious or idealogical hostility, and is what they apply to the evolution/creation debate.Please notice that I never said that these were my beliefs, only "what if". Notice the personal attack from TMA indicative of any religious fanatic.Religion supresses creative thought, as is demonstrated in the hostility caused by my hypothetical. Fortunately, at least in western culture, this hostility is less likely to manifest itself into atrocities such as the spanish inquisition, the salem witch trials, or the many, other horrific acts done to suppress heresy(creative thought). However, the desire and intention to silence these threats still exists and manifests itself into legislation that forbids schools to require the teaching of evolution, or christians telling their young disciples that anything that does not fit with Biblical truth is spoken by Satan. They propogate their disease of misinformation and lies until it infects those not knowledgeable enough to see through the B.S. It's disgusting and is why I argue against it.
Davidu Posted May 14, 2003 Posted May 14, 2003 Maybe I overreacted a bit, but trust me man - you don't want to believe in Satan.
Acriku Posted May 14, 2003 Author Posted May 14, 2003 You can rest assured any supernature that lacks the evidence will not find me a candidate for believing. :)
DjCiD Posted May 14, 2003 Posted May 14, 2003 What's wrong with believing in Satan? I believe in him, I don't worship him but I believe he exists. Even God believes in Satan. ;)
Davidu Posted May 14, 2003 Posted May 14, 2003 I don't. That's quite assuring. Being an atheist, you don't have the confort of believing in God, but you can't be temptated to believe in satan either.
Khan Posted May 14, 2003 Posted May 14, 2003 *looks around*Khan: Acriku's argument is that Satan is "not such a bad guy" because he's the rebel against the authority (God). But by that logic, terrorists are nice guys too...But it does depend on the authority figure in question. Surely some one who rebelled against an evil oppressive leader, is a force for good.
sneezer3 Posted May 14, 2003 Posted May 14, 2003 Ok, i know the refute for this but right now i don't have time to post it. :-[ Tonight (about 4 hours from now 8 EST) i'm going to make a post for this and another one in a new thread.
Acriku Posted May 14, 2003 Author Posted May 14, 2003 I am open to your attempt of a refutation, sneezer. :) In other words, bring it on.
Hawat Posted May 14, 2003 Posted May 14, 2003 If you research the roots of the christian religion (i make a clear difference between religion and faith) you will see that it soon got mixed with various "pagan" (the biblical word pagan refers not to other religions but to non-jew people, just for information. In the new testament there are "paganchristians" and "jewchristians" mentioned). The Romans introduced christianity as the national religion, but in order to satisfy the people, who were still used to worship various gods, they introduced the saints (catholic tradition). So it went on, watering the original christian belief with various traditions, ripped from animistic cults. What i want to point out is, that the terms "church" or "religion" and "christian belief" don't go hand in hand today. I can understand your disgust about the cruelties religion caused over all the history. I feel exactly the same. But that goes not to the account of god or the christian belief. The Crusades, the inquisition, all the persecutions were always mere politics. If you remember history, you will see that the church also oppressed other christians (Reformation, the protestant church, the baptist movement and so on. It's sad to see that these movements ended in the same stagnation. well except baptism). There are some scriptures from the early stages of the church, in which you can clearly see that their motivation moves from spiritual concerns to political concerns ( in this stages the infallability dogma of the pope was introduced, imho a big bullshit).So if you want to fight religious blindness and intolerance, don't choose the wrong enemy, Miles.
Miles Posted May 14, 2003 Posted May 14, 2003 If you research the roots of the christian religion (i make a clear difference between religion and faith) you will see that it soon got mixed with various "pagan" (the biblical word pagan refers not to other religions but to non-jew people, just for information. In the new testament there are "paganchristians" and "jewchristians" mentioned). The Romans introduced christianity as the national religion, but in order to satisfy the people, who were still used to worship various gods, they introduced the saints (catholic tradition). So it went on, watering the original christian belief with various traditions, ripped from animistic cults. What i want to point out is, that the terms "church" or "religion" and "christian belief" don't go hand in hand today. I can understand your disgust about the cruelties religion caused over all the history. I feel exactly the same. But that goes not to the account of god or the christian belief. The Crusades, the inquisition, all the persecutions were always mere politics. If you remember history, you will see that the church also oppressed other christians (Reformation, the protestant church, the baptist movement and so on. It's sad to see that these movements ended in the same stagnation. well except baptism). There are some scriptures from the early stages of the church, in which you can clearly see that their motivation moves from spiritual concerns to political concerns ( in this stages the infallability dogma of the pope was introduced, imho a big bullshit).So if you want to fight religious blindness and intolerance, don't choose the wrong enemy, Miles.Whether these things are the intention of christianity or not, they were an inevitable by-product since an energy source as powerful as religious ideology would sooner or later be used by one who saught power. It set the stage for the masses to be controlled by the one who controlled the word. Perhaps Satan saw this potential and subtly mixed the ingredients that would both look virtuous, and would give rise to evil consequences. This may be why we see evil coming from religion even though religion itself doesn't appear to be malicious in nature. The devil is much to smart not to cover his tracks well. I will try to make it more clear though, I do not believe in this hypothesis, although I do believe that it is just as logically valid as the Christian version. I am an agnostic atheist, so like Acriku, I need some evidence to believe in ANYTHING supernatural.I would like the rational ones here, like Hawat it seems, to notice how these revolutionary and creative ideas that Akriku and I have put forth get attacked so viscously. It demonstrates the fact that the desire to silence the heretics still persists as it did hundreds of years ago, and the closed mindedness of the christian fanatics.
Apollyon Posted May 14, 2003 Posted May 14, 2003 I'd just like to point out that to me (if I were a believer) it would seem more sensible to regard the story of Satan's rebellion as perhaps a little "untrue". I would rather believe Satan to be an ally of God, after all he is "The Bearer of Light".
Hawat Posted May 14, 2003 Posted May 14, 2003 I served you just facts, no thesis. Everything i wrote is historically proved. Pure information. Of course is my intention of christian nature, but i never included the presence of anything supernatural. Yes i clearly see the "attacks" on your "revolutionary and creative ideas" (quote, btw. you're not the first ones to come up with this :)). Though im always trying to be as rational as possible, i can understand them. Try one time to look through the eyes of a christian who reads your ideas. This ideas are "attacking" the basic ground of your beliefs, something you experience daily, something you really discovered for yourself. Of course it's not the right reaction to attack the author (what actually did not happen, as i see, but perhaps i missed something), but wouldn't you try to fend off that theories or at least show your disapproval ? I see no fanaticism in that.
TMA_1 Posted May 14, 2003 Posted May 14, 2003 edric, its hopelesss to stop acriku's extremism. I mean he wont even listen to me anymore, even though I bring up decent arguments. he is full of himself and ideas that he has taken off the internet. ::)by the way miles, I love how you express yourself, you slandor with names and indecent ideals, calling me a fundimentalist. That is only because some christians are more liberla then I. They take the bible and take things out of it according to what looks bad to others. I dont, and so since I am steadfast in my beliefs, I am a bad guy? lol And how is a fundimentalist a bad guy when you are just as annoying? with your "free thinking" mind, your just the exact opposite of jerry falwell, whcih makes you just as foolsih to me.
Egeides Posted May 14, 2003 Posted May 14, 2003 Acriku, can you counter this?:In my view of the Bible, what you say is false:God doesn't take the choice from you. He is just like a parent which was showing what he knew as right (he KNEW, if we consider him perfect which is a requirement to be God). There is only ONE truth, should it be theist or not. Thus God, in a theist model, is the one who wishes to lurn others good (=true) things (it's not imposed, we got the choice from the moment we chose soemthing else). It is not because of God that people doing bad things get unhappy, but simply because he cannot force us to a true way of happiness and keep us free.Thus, Satan (if he exists, I still did't concluded) is not like you said.
Edric O Posted May 14, 2003 Posted May 14, 2003 Acriku made a well-presented argument that Satan didn't really do anything all that bad based on what the Bible says of him. guys such as EdricO are using a Fallacy to respond which consists of nothing other than: "the Bible says Satan is evil, therefore that makes him evil!".Seeing how the Bible is the ONLY source we have that tells us about Satan, that "fallacy" is actually a perfectly good argument.Sure, you're free to start your own satanist religion if you want to, just like you're free to worship George Bush as God if you so desire, but what does that have to do with anything?Acriku's arguments are based on wild guesses about events which he believes never happened. Now how much sense does that make?I would like the rational ones here, like Hawat it seems, to notice how these revolutionary and creative ideas that Akriku and I have put forth get attacked so viscously. It demonstrates the fact that the desire to silence the heretics still persists as it did hundreds of years ago, and the closed mindedness of the christian fanatics.Oh, excuse me for not bowing down to your supreme and divine wisdom, enlightened one! ::)I understand that not agreeing with your revolutionary and sensational assumptions consists an act of extreme intolerance and bigotry. ::)Please forgive me for not being "open minded" enough to realize that you are absolutely right and I am absolutely wrong, master! ::)
Edric O Posted May 15, 2003 Posted May 15, 2003 Hehe Edric, putting the old "Satan is doing it!" label on me? I'm flattered to be of the millions that were burned and stoned and killed for the same accusation. Actually, I'm not.Actually, Acriku, I'm afraid you're one of the millions who did the burning and stoning. You show utter intolerance for any other point of view than your own...And now for the long-awaited refutation of Acriku's arguments. (don't get me wrong, Acriku, I love making up "what if" scenarios too, but I never take them seriously, like you did)For starters, he rebelled (and convinced 1/3 of the angels, so it had to be good) against the Supreme, the AlMighty, the One, and the Lord. He was fighting against the monopoly (I am the Lord, your God, you shall not have any other God besides me.), the bully, and the United States of all that is heavenly. I respect him for that. But that's not all.Ah, so Satan is the Osama Bin Laden of heaven... so how does that make him a nice guy again?Adam and Eve. An interesting story. God says, nay commands to Adam, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:...But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it . Of course, Eve is left out of this peptalk. She was created after he commanded Adam, and it does not say that God commanded Eve at all (just to clarify). Now comes the ssss-nake that is Satan. He asks a few questions, and urges Eve to know the knowledge of good and evil. He wanted Eve free of God's grasp, and of the robotic slavery to His command! That deserves a great deal of merit.You've completely twisted the original meaning of the story... Adam and Eve were in a state of innocence and bliss. Like happy children with no responsibilities. By giving them knowledge of good and evil, satan took away their innocence and burdened them with responsibilities. He didn't "free" them - on the contrary, he placed a heavy burden on their shoulders.Now God, being the bully He is, punishes the snake for Satan's righteous deed, not Satan himself. It wasn't the snake's fault that Satan had possessed it and used it for good deeds, but God didn't want that of course. Now one good thing that God did as a consequence, was to give plants defense mechanisms (Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee), but it had bad intentions indeed (this was a mild curse).You really hate God, don't you? ::)Anyway, the point was that the snake, just like Adam and Eve, had willingly done what Satan told him. He was not a victim.Ah, I am getting offtrack. Back to that guy, Satan. In Revelations of the New Testament, Satan was a Great Dragon. In Chinese tradition, a Dragon was the symbol of happiness, immortality, procreation, fertility and activity. With these descriptions in mind, Satan was indeed very great. This is not so with Christian tradition, but Christian tradition portrays Satan as bad, evil, and horrible, so I choose a different perspective on the Dragon.WTF...? Chinese tradition? Okay, so the Chinese use different symbolism... So what? What does Chinese tradition have to do with Judeo-Christian beliefs??My conclusion is basically: I would worship Satan anyday over God. If I believed in either of them, of course. Satan is portrayed unfairly, and is really put into stories with only one side to them, and all of them from God's side (or Michael's side, if you include the battle against the Great Dragon). I say, give Satan a chance. He doesn't seem that bad at all. Really. :)My conclusion: You've got waaaaay too much time on your hands. ;)Really, Acriku, you should have posted this in the Joke thread... You're not actually serious, right?
Recommended Posts